815
816

Red Pill TheoryDistrust that Particular Flavour (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by TRP VanguardWhisper

I'm here today to talk about the blue pills.

Note the plural.

It's easy enough now to understand what many people call "THE" blue pill, especially since others have done all the hard work for you. Just read the sidebar. What's harder to come by is an understanding of just how those others came to say those things, and how that might apply to other things.

Grasping the truth about women and sex is one thing. Grasping the truth about grasping the truth is quite another.

But does anyone out there think that women are the only thing in life you've been lied to about? There are many, many Blue Pills in life, and nobody's going to make a discussion group for each and every one. So without the ability to do what others did, the ability to spot blue pills yourself instead of merely understanding someone who points them out to you, you're going to remain vulnerable to a lot of nonsense of all sorts.

Now, it's easy enough to see a lie when you already know the truth. And it's easy enough to discern lies when you can test a proposition for yourself. But that doesn't cover all of reality. How can you avoid being bluepilled when you don't have the resources to test, or access to the data, and can only hear what others tell you about it?

When you can't find out the truth, you need to learn to spot the lie by its own characteristics. That won't tell you what the truth is, of course, but it will tell you when to skeptical, and suspicious. Lies have distinguishing features.

Blue pills have an aftertaste. Learn to distrust that particular flavour.

A selection from Whisper's bullshit blue pill detection tools:

  • Lies are told by those who want them believed. Be suspicious if the person telling you a thing profits from you believing that thing, or learned it from someone who profits from you believing that thing.

  • Truth can be observed many times from the universe, but lies spread from their authors. Be suspicious if every person who tells you an idea uses the same words. Odds are they all heard it from each other.

  • Lies are told to get you to do something. Be suspicious if the man telling you something to believe also has something he wants you to do because of that.

  • People are defensive about lies. Be suspicious if proponents of a narrative get mad that you don't believe them.

  • Liars hate the burden of evidence, and want to shift it. Be suspicious of any speaker who demands justification for your skepticism.

  • Liars don't like competition. Be suspicious of anyone who tries to silence other narratives, instead of ignoring or criticizing them.

  • Profitable things justify investment. If someone is spending a lot of money to spread a story, be suspicious. They expect to profit from that investment.'

  • People tend to believe what they want the truth to be, but the universe is perverse. Be suspicious if a story contains no bad news. Since when did the universe become friendly to our desires?

  • Liars love language. Those who have no evidence can't show you anything... they have only words. Be suspicious of anyone who tries to change the words you use... they are trying to influence how you think. (Thanks, /u/Heathcliff--)

  • Liars rely on reverence. If you're afraid to have your story questioned, you attach it to the coattails of that which it is socially unacceptable to question. This might be JESUS (as opposed to just the moral traditions of our culture) in some communities and SCIENCE! (as opposed to just plain old science) in others. Remember that liars want to stop the argument, not settle it.

  • Liars make compound assertions. Be suspicious of someone who doesn't want to let you pick and choose what to believe from his story. Anyone can start with an obviously true statement, but truth is not contagious. It doesn't infect the rest of this narrative.

You can sample any story, from religion to late-night television commercials, from these characteristic tastes, and for others like them. But even more important is the process of tasting again to find them in what you already believe. The lies you never notice are the ones that hurt you the most. Learn to recognize the distinguishing smells of a lie in the things you know to be lies. Then look for them elsewhere.

Remember that skepticism is free.


[–]2Dmva100 270 points271 points  (35 children)

  • 'Liars hate the burden of evidence, and want to shift it. Be suspicious of any speaker who demands justification for your skepticism.'

When someone tells you something, simply say 'that's bullshit, I don't believe that.' The first thing they ask is why. This must be ignored and say 'it's up to you to convince me otherwise.'

Hold frame and watch them relentlessly attempt to probe you further to get you to reveal why you disagree so they can gaslight and fuck with your beliefs/use shaming tactic etc, RATHER than providing more evidence to their claim.

Almost none will.

[–]zyqkvx 83 points84 points  (14 children)

'Liars hate the burden of evidence, and want to shift it. Be suspicious of any speaker who demands justification for your skepticism.'

Feminists have flipped the burden of evidence on it's head. If you argue with them they do shit like this:

M=Men's Rights activist

F=Feminist

M: About half of domestic abuse is done by women

F: Haha incel. Do you have any Proof of this or basing this on your dreams.

F: <will over and over ask you to prove it>

M: <Spends 20 min compiling links from FBI, NYT, etc / writes elaborate post>

F: Know what all of those articles have in common? They are written by MEN.

They wear reasonable people down like Muhammad Ali did when fighting, then they pull a 'KenM' and leave.

[–]1ozaku7 41 points42 points  (9 children)

Why do you even argue with extremists? Ditch them out of your life.

[–]Zippy1776 22 points23 points  (8 children)

Yep, only way to go. I have a roommate who is 20-something college kid and he's tried the whole shame game on me over blue pill bullshit. Needless to say we don't talk unless it's me calling him out for not cleaning up his messes anymore. They ALWAYS try to pull this bullshit and then shame others instead of running on evidence. My roommate tried to push the whole "You need to accept homosexuality" line with me and it didn't go well. Now he won't even stay in the room if I'm around, which is a win for me. I'm going to enjoy the place I live in that I pay rent for. If he wants to skulk away because he can't bear the presence of an honest person who runs on logic that's his loss.

[–]1ozaku7 16 points17 points  (6 children)

I mean, do you have anything against homosexuality? For all I care it's totally fine by me as long as they don't try to push it down my throat like they try to push their dick through their boyfriends throat.

[–]Zippy1776 17 points18 points  (5 children)

Yep, keep it out of my life and I don't care what others do behind closed doors. I'm not okay with naked dudes walking around the "public" area of the house I live in, hetero or homo. Have some decency, which is what sparked this conversation with the roommate.

[–]EPArt 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Better not leave your shit out or have your room unlocked. Probably do something fucked up like fuck on your bed naked or fart on your toothbrush e.t.c

[–]Zippy1776 9 points10 points  (3 children)

I expect as much. I have a motion detect camera in my room and the toothbrush in the restroom is a decoy for exactly that situation. Not the first shit-head roommate I've had, but may be the first one I actually endeavor to get kicked out of the house.

[–]thetotalpackage7 18 points19 points  (2 children)

a fucking decoy toothbrush? holy shit... this is ingenious. however living on defcon 1 is no fun

[–]Zippy1776 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Agreed! It's just so darn hard to find decent people as roommates anymore. The plus side here is that myself and the other gainfully employed roommate ride motorcycles, so I was able to keep my bike when I had to move. Also, as the clean and highest paid roommates we're the most respected by the landlord. Roommate 3 is about to go overseas on a PMC gig, so it's only the one left who is getting told by everyone to clean their messes.

[–]jordanbadland 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Ye you always have to accept things just because society's down with those things. And just for not accepting things you are considered hateful - by people who will then treat you in the most toxic dehumanizing way.

Buddy, I got different values -- to me LGBT stuff isn't on the agenda. I don't appreciate it. But if it's high in your values and you will judge me, at least judge me on how I treat these people, not by my own value structure. Do I treat someone unfairly because he's xyz? Okay, judge me. Do I have values that place them in the minus for me, but I still treat them like humans? Then get off my dick you bigot, not everyone has to have the one world view you have! That's what people (i.e. lefties) don't get.

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt[M] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Ah, the classic bad faith argument. Be definition you cannot reason with someone who's being unreasonable.

[–]edge_lord_super_17 3 points4 points  (1 child)

can you provide for me a link to rollo tomassi's rational male please

[–]1Yakatonker 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is something people do often, especially when the position of argument is perceived to be "MSM" or mainstream. These special dipshits don't ever feel the need to justify themselves or even have a researched understanding on the point of argument. Maybe 1/25-50 people in an argument will have actually researched the topic and when pressed might add something of value to conversation.

Overall argumentation is largely a waste of one's time. General public is stupid and ignorant of many things including MSM agendas which are often blatant falsehoods.

Easy one being transsexual agenda targeting children. 98% of boys will be fine with their sex, their sexual identity yet look at the disproportionate amount of money, MSM air time, public response to the repetition of the lie. Yet a significant portion of population actually thinks there's nothing wrong with this. This is how stupid and ignorant the general populace is.

[–]redblueninja 95 points96 points  (11 children)

Being dismissive all the time will isolate you from others in the long run.

[–][deleted] 153 points154 points  (7 children)

A man that always tells the truth has no friends. -African Proverb

[–]Wabbajak 116 points117 points  (0 children)

" Absolute honesty isn't always the most diplomatic nor the safest form of communication with emotional beings."

-TARS, Interstellar (2014)

[–]TheReformist94 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Thank you for this. Truly. I lost 1/3 of my friends. Maybe for the better. But for the remaining,its about self preservation and power

[–]Zippy1776 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Same here, but the benefit is more time to pursue your career, success and then find other like-minded successful people who aren't trying to drag you down. Never look back when removing those people from your life. You chose improvement and they chose destruction. You ever need someone to help you remember that, just PM me. I got your back.

[–]Seamanteries 14 points15 points  (1 child)

AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE!

[–]zyqkvx 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Free of a pulse

[–]harryhorss 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Taken from the book: "How to lose friends and alienate people"

[–]Avertus 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Just holding a dissenting opinion in certain contexts already causes you to be alienated

[–]p3n1x 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't think the intent was to be dismissive 100% of the time. If you are good at the things you do and know, obviously you can decide more easily whether to question or not.

Come at me about sports and I will determine when to push or pull. Come at me about a "flat earth" and you might not even get the first polite step of "that's bullshit".

If you feel that isolated, maybe it is time to question who you choose to spend your time with.

Somebody is sure to respond with "what about dark triad" and buying their lie to gain leverage or use it against them later. Guess what, that means you are in their frame, not your own.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So be dismissive of bullshit and acceptive of the believable

[–]systemshock869 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I had this fuck on reddit make some assumptions about my political beliefs, so I asked him to explain himself. He went on to start to grill me about my beliefs. I held frame, told him that he is continuing to refuse to answer my initial question. We probably exchanged 10+ messages, fucker never backed down on his frame. Refused to qualify his initial statement (because he knew he was full of shit) and continued to shame me for not explaining my political beliefs so that he could shoehorn in some bullshit. Even tried to tell me that I was the one being difficult and that he had already explained himself (he hadn't even come close). Fuck gaslighting shit stains like that.

[–]musclemuseum47 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This, I'm so sick of their biased narratives and their religious beliefs, their half truths and fake positivity and fake happiness, the truth is holistic and complete not . .. so close to outright being delusional and question my sanity every single day because of the abundance of stupidity around .

Finding and seeing truth is not an algorithm, its a reward from your personal journey

[–]Spilledmychips 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Funny enough this was every woman’s strategy that I’ve been in a relationship with. So it makes sense a beta would be using it.

[–]Zerwas 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is a good tactic for incidents where you 100% know the person is not telling the truth, aware of it or not.
For example if someone talks about the wage gap or another already disproven "theory". The probability of you convincing them is very low but they really cant make a well established case for their claim.

[–]ten-bible 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Burden of proof is a complicated thing. I'm an atheist, but I don't accept the simplified logic that "any positive assertion requires evidence -- otherwise the negative assertion stands as reasonable" -- as is often the case with God.

With God -- the logic is further enhanced by the idea that this specific God, with specific rules and specific afterlife, is so narrow a possibility within all possibilities --- that it requires a greater burden to prove the 1% than the other 99% outcomes. But even still, you haven't "proved" he doesn't exist either.

But there are other assertions where positive/ negative is not so simple, and can often be flipped.

Like take the assertion "eating eggs is unhealthy." That can be rephrased "eating eggs IS health" "eating eggs it NOT unhealthy" etc etc. Now who is the burden of proof on? The assertions are contradictory, yet none has been proved (hypothetically, I haven't studied this). Lack of solid evidence doesn't clarify either position. The answer is you simply don't know. Maybe that conclusion merits its own path of action. For instance -- you don't know, so don't eat eggs to be safe. Maybe the potential pros outweight the potential cons. This is a fictitious example but there you go.

The idea that someone asserts "eating eggs is unhealthy" and you say "prove it" and the person fails --- doesn't mean they are wrong, or that they are suddenly proven healthy.

Also, YOU are partly responsible for gathering evidence and putting pieces together. If you actually care about the truth. Expecting another person to do all the leg-work ... well it's a complicated matter. They will if they care. You will if you care.

And by the way, none of us are the "stoic, emotionless, rational intelligent geniuses" we all imagine ourselves to be. There is a LOT you take on faith, just to different degrees.

Have you ever been to Antarctica? How do you know it's there?

Well a lot of people told you it was there, and no one called them out on their bullshit. Respected people. Well, same thing happened with "Jesus" until you were 12 years old, likely. Like it or not, even though I too believe Antarctica is there, it's taken on faith, albeit very minor faith is required.

Scientific study in a respected scholarly journal like Cell? You're STILL taking the methodology and "untampered" results of the scientists on a degree of faith. It's all about likelihoods, probabilities, etc. We create systems but a LOOOOT of our day to day experiences and knowledge are taken on varying degrees of trust and faith and probability. To believe otherwise (or be overly skeptical) will hamstring yourself. Yes be skeptical towards bullshit -- of course --- kick the tires until the probability of truth is high enough. But requiring "HD Video evidence with criminal CSI post-editing analysis + open-source timestamps" to believe a trusted advisors advice or wisdom or assertion? Yeah ...

It's easy to play "lazy skeptic" - expecting the reality of the universe to be spoon-fed to you by a stranger who could give two fucks most of the time. That's doesn't mean you're Mr. Superior Stoic. It's just as retarded as being gullible in many cases.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

There is no probability involved when you need to prove something exist.

If you cannot define a repeatable protocol to show the it's existence then you just cannot say anything about it. It might exist or not.

But then you have the question of unprovable statements but that's a different story.

[–]ten-bible 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of all science is probability. The social sciences for sure.

I don't think you understood my statements. You take a LOT of ALL knowledge on faith. Just different levels of faith. That is the reality.

I'm not talking about mathematics and philosophy (which are not empirically derived knowledge) --- but mostly science and related aspects which are.

Again, saying Antarctica exists. I mean, most won't dispute that it does. But you are taking that on faith. You haven't proven it yourself. You trust the credibility of those that say that HAVE seen it themselves or have repeated the experiment.

Other, less blatantly apparent scientific facts are taken with a higher degree of faith and judgment.

The highest level of confidence would be repeating an experiment yourself and hoping you are free of bias and methodological design and confounders and fully understand the issue. And even then, some philosophers would say even trusting your own senses (even extended by scientific instruments like microscopes and telescopes) -- is a degree of faith. And certainly that is a consideration - take the Stroop test.

Knowledge itself --- it's about honing your bullshit detector -- your analysis of heuristics of what fits with all your macro knowledge and who sounds like they know what they're talking about and what journals are respected and surely validated well enough (hopefully) and etcetera. You will never have a 100% "truth detector" or you'd be richer than God. You would BE a God (if God exists, which he very likely doesn't). So yes, empirical knowledge is a set of probabilities and trust. It's easy to take an "Extreme skeptic" approach on just about anything beyond the blatantly obvious. Like whether eggs raise cholesterol levels or not.

Again, if your skepticism levels are so high that even a trusted expert on say ... venomous snakes ... cannot be trusted enough to validate the dangers of a King Cobra without HD video evidence and an orgy of physical evidence and a live experiment in front of your very eyes ... your ability to acquire and wield knowledge will be quite garbage.

[–]CensorThis111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When someone tells you something, simply say 'that's bullshit, I don't believe that.' The first thing they ask is why. This must be ignored and say 'it's up to you to convince me otherwise.'

You realized that educated people will see this as disrespectful and just not bother to explain anything further.

It's not my job to convince you otherwise, I provide information as a gift.

If you want to spit in my face or your cup is too full to accept more, I got nothing to say to you.

There's too many ignorant combative idiots like this to waste time on every person that wants to believe the world is flat.

[–]General_Queipo 22 points23 points  (4 children)

One of the most common blue pills is that everyone is equal. Many other blue pills stem from that one.

[–]Lib3rtarianSocialist 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Tell me what you think about this proposition: All conscious beings are metaphysically equal, but physical unequal in every respect.

[–]General_Queipo 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Depends on how metaphysically equal is defined. For example, all shall be judged before God, all are lacking and need God's grace and all are loved by God. So in those respects yes. But while all are sinners, different people shall spend different lengths of time in purgatory, and some shall go to Hell, so in that regard no.

That's regarding humans. Not all conscious beings are metaphysically equal. God, for example is superior.

In sum, metaphysically all humans are equally loved by God and possess certain dignity, but some are more holy and sanctified by God than others.

[–]ten-bible 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Legally equal. That's the idea. Equal before the law.

Even that technically has caveats.

Age and criminal history and residence are all caveats.

Physically equal? Mentally equal? Of course not.

But hell in 2018, saying men have penises and women have vaginas? We can't even agree on that anymore .... if we can't agree the ocean is blue, what the fuck can we agree on from there that's actually complicated?

[–]OfficerWade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In other words. We’re all created equal under god. Indeed, there is a difference between being and behavior.

[–]Mr_KenSpeckle 85 points86 points  (3 children)

When in danger of being exposed, con men often accuse you of the very thing that they are doing.

[–]1redhawkes 38 points39 points  (1 child)

Yea, it's called projecting and it's a great indicator for cheating in relationships if she brings it up suddenly.

[–]PM_ME_UR_NAKED_TITS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Never thought about projecting that way. Thanks for the tip

[–]Quo210 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This resounds with the way many government representatives behave.

[–]PoppinChlorine 74 points75 points  (5 children)

This is fantastically organized and verbalized. I think a lot of us would find that we instinctually distrust stories with characteristics appearing on your list, but verbalizing the reasons for that distrust is a different matter. Well done.

[–]p3n1x 7 points8 points  (4 children)

It works both ways. Detect your own bullshit too. Most of the RP is against the grain of what a newly introduced person believes. There are a lot of people out there that don't believe they fit into "the liar" group because they believe their own internal lies so heavily.

One can learn sexual strategies and still try to argue the Earth is flat.

[–]kurdishpower01 -1 points0 points  (3 children)

If you believe it to be true it's true. Those flat earthners believe with all their heart that the earth is flat. You can't argue truth against truth.

[–]Disobedient_Citizen1 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Truth and reality is one and the same. Belief is not truth, if you were to believe what is false you would be delusional. If the earth is a sphere, believing it is flat will never make it so. it is delusion. On the other hand if the earth is in fact flat, believing that it is spherical is delusion all the same. Belief is social reality, and is not aligned with actual reality.

In so saying one could infer that everyone, even the greatest minds of our time is deluded to some extent, and that would be accurate. The reality is that we can really only be certain of what we can verify ourselves, everything else is simply what others tell us to believe.

There is misinformation, propaganda, lies, fallacies, hidden agendas and betrayals of numerous kinds and variation around most corners, out of most mouths and on every screen. We have a personal responsibility to be skeptical, to question, to verify and decide based on evidence.

And even after all that it is still nothing but a calculated guess from a position of limited perspective.

[–]kurdishpower01 1 point2 points  (1 child)

That wasn't my point. Blue-pill is a reality. Red-pill is a reality. Black-pill is a reality it just depends how you look at it.

Flat earthners believe with all their heart and soul that the earth is flat. You simply cannot argue with someone like that. Can you argue with a blue-pilled person about Red-pilled things? No because he will snitch you and gather people to remove your misogyny by white knighting the shit out of a girl

[–][deleted]  (34 children)

[deleted]

[–]buddhadarko 37 points38 points  (8 children)

Great post. Your examples are spot on.

I think one of the biggest problems is that many generations have been taught, indirectly, to ignore their gut/natural intuition that tells them something may be off or even to question things they are told by authority figures. The medical world has mastered this as have many sectors of the government. I used to be shocked at how many full-grown adults, both men and women, take 99% of the things they hear a face value without even thinking of an alternative perspective for the sake of finding the truth via balance.

Much like large corporations who have earned the loyalty of millions of people with brand recognition, certain sources in our lives have been able to establish brand recognition of being correct/honest/truthful no matter what the topic at hand is. The result is that people hear things and they trust without even the slightest attempt at verification. This is a very subtle but very powerful and dangerous thing. The RP community is just one sector of the world of knowledge that a small percentage of the population has been able to peel back and expose the truth for what it is - simple, but harsh, yet it is the truth.

It starts with the children. Teaching them critical thinking and the importance of having a core set of values goes a long way in my opinion. I talk to a lot of people who have values that are as stable as a plastic bag in the wind - it twists and turns without putting up a fight and thus moves without having a sturdy foundation to draw upon.

Learning to look at things the way they actually are is hard if you've spent half your life or more looking at them the way someone else tells to.

[–]zyqkvx 3 points4 points  (6 children)

Everything you said has a chilling effect on those who do think. In a simplistic transaction dealing with a retail worker at an office store I can't ask two questions without inadvertently exposing them as a liar. Bonus if there are people watching. So I rarely ask them anything, yet sometimes it's inescapable. I'm 99% surrounded with lies at all times. Lies are now melded with non-verbal actions or omissions of actions. If I go to a coffee shop and ask for a $4.50 latte, then ask how much it would be to get an extra shot. Then they say $0.80. Then I say, "Nevermind, I'll take it standard", like clockwork they will say nothing, hit the till and say "That will be $5.68" almost every time. I'll do this on purpose sometimes and watch. The gypsies are now employees of corporations. I know you are thinking that's not a lie, that's fraud. The thing is their verbal lies are tightly coupled to their fraudulent actions or omissions of actions.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm 99% surrounded with lies at all times.

This is how I feel. I'm reminded of Col Kurtz from Apocalypse now and his hatred for the "stench of lies." He is the only truth teller in a world of liars and he is called crazy for it. I'm not sure if you're supposed to identify with and sympathize with that character, but I do.

[–]buddhadarko 4 points5 points  (2 children)

You're absolutely right about fraudulent actions and people lying about simple/transient things. I think it's part of the collective "let's avoid anything that brings about discomfort" covert contract that 99% of the population has with each other.

Discomfort brings about change and change is the only constant. People unconsciously wade in misery because they lie to themselves which makes it easier for them to accept lies from others. The lies feel good because the truth isn't warm and fuzzy.

[–]zyqkvx 8 points9 points  (1 child)

I think it's part of the collective "let's avoid anything that brings about discomfort" covert contract that 99% of the population has with each other.

Well worded. There's also another side of it. They are pressured to upsell so much they their ethics cave. They internalize the upselling, then start defrauding people by not applying member discounts knowing it helps the companies bottom line, knowing if the managers see them cheat customers they get covert praise. In the end retail workers do it for lutz. It's their only outlet of power.

I look decent, groom well, and can be friendly. I have 3 types of relationships with retail workers.

  1. Some give me free shit.. get a Diet caffeine free Diet Coke from a gas station... clerk "You're good". This sort of thing happens all the time because Millennials have no work ethic to their employers.

  2. Some give me lutz because they don't like me. Tell a retail person they carted out the wrong color [overpriced] laser printer? They cart it back, cart out the right one. Next thing I know it I'm looking at the receipt and find the 20% Office Depot coupon wasn't applied. Again will just tell you the total without the coupon and hopes it will fly. If you ask about the coupon they will say "It didn't work" and dismiss you with body language. Then I have to call the manager to apply a 20% off coupon to a printer that is 30% overpriced. No-one wants to talk about this shit because no-one wants to talk about coupons, and petty shit. It's everywhere though.

  3. Normal customer

I am good at handling this new world, it just rips at my soul. Live and let Die / Enjoy the decline shit. I'm in California, I wish I knew what state to move to.

[–]Lib3rtarianSocialist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reading this from Pakistan and the current condition of the West sounds unfortunate. The decline.

[–]Lib3rtarianSocialist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well said. I did not understand what you meant by gypsies.

[–]Lib3rtarianSocialist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well said, but I don't understand what you mean by gypsies.

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Great post. Your examples are spot on.

What post? Looks like it was deleted by the person you replied to.

[–]1redhawkes 15 points16 points  (2 children)

Those are called labels. Same thing with homophobia.

With that logic in mind, if you go down the street and see a shit then decide that you don't want to eat it, does it makes you shitphobic?

It works with everything.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (1 child)

The "phobic" thing is one of the left's most tried and trued tactics. It is gaslighting 101. Phobia is an irrational fear or aversion. By labeling various political beliefs as a "phobia," they turn the opposition opinion into a psychiatric condition.

Homophobia literally doesn't even make sense. I'm not scared of them. Why is this called a phobia? I just don't want to see effeminate gay men in bikinis making out on the street. That isn't fear. It is disgust. Same with transphobia. The emotion that I feel when I look at a tranny is disgust, not fear.

[–]1redhawkes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Indeed, couple a years ago, one of the most popular djs in the world, Ten Walls was fucked up by sjws and bloops. He posted some RP truths about fags on fb, then immediately the internet brigade jumped on her and withing hours, he's career was done using the same tactics mentioned above. Club stopped booking him, festivals cancelled his gigs etc.

Lesson learned. Keep RP to yourself.

[–]liteTheNite 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I understand why this particular system/rule-of-thumb might be useful- there are plenty of people who speak a lot but say nothing. They can and should be screened out as reliable data sources. But I would be careful.

There are people who I call "reality modelers", aka people who observe repeatable patterns in the universe and then map language onto those patterns. You can call these patterns "red pills", since they stray from mainstream knowledge (with the way I'm using the terms, you can think of **mainstream knowledge** as patterns that almost-everyone integrates and **red pills** as patterns that you only integrate if you look for them and find them, aka they require more active effort on your part since they won't be "given" to you through school, social norms, etc.) .

So my concern with this rule-of-thumb is that, there are *too many* useful patterns. Like the OP said, TRP has a set of patterns that approximate the "truth" of sex, dating, etc. But there are infinitely many other domains, a few of which are just as important as dating patterns. And there are just too many patterns to be able to communicate them in simple, easily digestible verbal terms (I think you'll get an appreciation for this if you just take bleeding edge physics as a quick example- these are complex realities being explored and nothing about what we *know* so far is simple to communicate).

And all this to say- a pattern I've noticed with people exploring "reality" at the bleeding edge is they are forced to cultivate their own vocabulary for patterns. Their exploration is way too fast to wait for mainstream, easily-digestible integration (in the software domain, the C2 wiki is a *perfect* example of this, but again, it's lucky that these particular patterns are even communicated; lots of explorers don't publish the concrete patterns they have found- no time, no interest, no opportunity, do you want to spend your time teaching or exploring attitudes, etc.).

And so the proposed rule-of-thumb screens them out easily. Think about it. Would you wait for science or the mainstream to integrate TRP patterns before you proceed with your exploration of dating dynamics and discover other insights? *Hell no.* TBH, we're lucky that we even get TRP since so many people are interested in dating dynamics; so this large interest affords us *easy patterns* to integrate since a community emerges, and that community is dedicated to simplifying and communicating the ideas; but if you want to get ahead of the curve, you're gonna have to roll up your sleeves, dig, and then use the real world to validate whether or not the patterns you observe are real.

Okay. So you can choose to screen that out. Fine. But you are missing a universe of "other red pills" due to lack of willingness to put in the work. I believe you need to be able to develop curation/screening skills to the point where you can figure out "useful 'word salads'" (aka custom vocabulary mappings by explorers) backed by actual substance vs. meaningless word salads (which are a more common sales tactic). Or, put another way, you need to get good at differentiating useful data sources from useless data sources. Determining who's *genuinely* exploring reality, and who's not. A system of "if an idea is not concise, the person proposing it is probably trying to manipulate you" is one that I think is not as nuanced as I think we must be. Truth can be beautiful, but it can also be messy. And it can be really god damn complex.

Approximation of reality is pretty much our value prop as a species. May as well get good at it.

[–]upupvote2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Disagree slightly on the last point about truth. I've often found truth to be ugly, hard to swallow, and complicated. I think the allure of a beautiful truth is seductive.

As humans we have an inherent bias towards accepting the simplest or most appealing explanation as the truth in situations that require deeper thought. I highly recommend 'thinking, fast and slow' by Daniel Kahneman or the 'The Confidence Game' by Maria Konnikova if you're interested in what we scientifically know about truth acceptance and behavioral biases.

[–]GodOfDinosaurs 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Going to have to disagree here slightly. Sometimes technical jargon is justified because it helps experts in the field communicate more effectively. This is accepted in the hard-sciences de facto, but social science and philosophy is no different.

The problem is when jargon is used to communicate esoteric ideas to your average person. This is mainly a reflex because academics are used to speaking to other academics in those terms. Sure it can be used deceptively, but that's no reason to reject ideas outright. Sometimes you have to do a little work.

[–]Narcius 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I don't think the person is against the use of jargons. I think the person is against the definition of the jargons made to suit the need of the wicked person.

What many define as a creep is what they find unattractive or if the guy downright rejects the girl. The word is not creep. But, they use the word creep in order to say that the person is someone who is most likely to be a predator or a rapist.

Here, creep is a common word many would understand. But, if that was a jargon then many people, especially not those related to the field, would believe definition of the word attributed to it by the person who was trying to deceive you.

[–]ebaymasochist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Creep is the male version of bitch or crazy. A man could just say she is a bitch or she's crazy.. It's really lazy thinking and feminists rejected it as sexist... Now I haven't seen a single one give a shit that guys are being called creeps by women with no justification beyond wanting to shut the man down. They think "creep" is something beyond an insult, which is bullshit 80% of the time

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is true to a degree. I've found however that in general, the people who use industry jargon the most (been in academia, military, and corporate), tend to be the people who drink the kool-aide the most and have zero capability for independent thought. They adopt and overuse the buzz words of the organization far more than their intended purpose as a signal to leadership that they enthusiastic supporters of the organization's goals and will conform to whatever social norms and expectations are laid out.

[–]ten-bible 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jargon is a tool. It can be used and misused.

Using well-understood jargon to technical experts makes communication more efficient and easier. It often distills complex/ abstract ideas, or specifies details in a world of vagaries.

Using jargon to people who do not understand the jargon --- either standard jargon to people not in the field --- or more frequently "made up corporate jargon" that is used nowhere outside your company ... 10 letter acronyms some autistic "engineer" created who never studied linguistics or User design ... the BDPSSHL ... of course! (not exaggerating). They are folly.

They do the opposite of precise communication.

They obscure, obfuscate, and confuse. Often intentionally.

Maybe a technical guy has an agenda --- and thus obscures his plans with complicated jargon to try to "brow beat" stakeholders into trusting him. Hide behind the "technical bullshit" so to speak (this occurs frequently).

Maybe a technical guy sucks ass, and wants to protect his turf. So document everything poorly, use bad design, and give everything random DFELL names. Databases, scripts, financial terms, codes of conduct, etc. People will constantly come to you for answers, confused out of their wits ... looks like Skeeter is a valuable engineer! No one wants to go into his "crap wasteland" jargon world, so I guess we won't fire him or let anyone in on his "fiefdom."

Part of it relies on people not wanting to look stupid, so they don't ask for clarification. Another is that it makes "Tech Asswipe" seem like he IS trying to answer in earnest, but is just too damn nerdy/ autistic, so I guess the true answer remains avoided. IE, how a politician answers a tough question they don't want to answer.

So it's simple. If the jargon is well understood, it's good.

If the jargon is not well understood by most, it sucks ass. It's either stupidity or malice.

[–]bot256 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should probably make this into an actual post, it really brings to our attention stuff that oftentimes goes unnoticed.

[–]EmotionalProblem -1 points0 points  (9 children)

not defending the pedos here you should get help if you have a fetish for children however pedophile does not mean child rapist. “A love for children” is also pretty creepy though.

[–]tanlkula 8 points9 points  (5 children)

Some teachers I know just love children. Pedophilia is sexual love for children. They think about fucking kids. And if they take it too far, in right conditions they won't EVER shy away from rape, because animal instincts come before morals. Pedophile = Future child rapist.

Then there is your mainstream media portraying them as innocent people who happen to adore children. Fucking disgusting.

[–]BotLukas 3 points4 points  (3 children)

I'm actually curious about where you've seen mainstream media portray pedophiles as innocent people. I'm in no way defending pedophiles when I say this but it seems as if you're letting a very small quantity of information get you to that conclusion.

[–]Incel9876 3 points4 points  (2 children)

I'm actually curious about where you've seen mainstream media portray pedophiles as innocent people. I'm in no way defending pedophiles when I say this but it seems as if you're letting a very small quantity of information get you to that conclusion.

(New York Times, 2014) Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/pedophilia-a-disorder-not-a-crime.html

(Salon, 2015) I’m a pedophile, but not a monster:

https://archive.is/ttVNy

" I’m so glad that younger folks are flocking to Virtuous Pedophiles, where they can get the coaching and support that was not available to us older pedos at their age. It’ll make all the difference as they settle into themselves and learn to accept who they are."

"VirPed itself has become the go-to place for support for non-offending pedophiles and has been mentioned and endorsed everywhere from NPR, Salon and the Atlantic to the New York Times and Toronto Star. As its popularity increases, so too does its effectiveness. There are still holdouts, people who believe that pedophilic feelings should be crammed down into the most subterranean recesses of ourselves, never to be discussed in the open, but these folks are going the way of the dodo bird. Anyway, we’ve tried that. Take it from someone who has firsthand experience: it not only doesn’t work, it tends to make things far worse. Please repeat this mantra to yourself: a repressed, unhappy pedophile is a pedophile at risk."

[–]nimbuskingsean 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Let me start this rant by saying I fucking hate and can never relate to any pedophiles, that being said...

Tbh I actually agreed with everything that article said up to a point. I think as a society we gotta try and seek out help for these people. I have no plausible reason to think a non-offending, self described “pedophile” who is seeking treatment is in the wrong. The point where I stopped agreeing with that article is when they started promoting self acceptance for what is clearly a cognitive malfunction.

TLDR; We should be more accepting of non-offending Pedophiles that are seeking treatment and liberation from this cognitive malfunction.

We should continue the same “fuck you” attitudes towards all other “self accepting” pedophiles and lock them up for good

[–]ten-bible 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a tricky one.

What if you're a sociopath who has a fetish for killing people?

I mean --- if you're born that way --- who knows --- maybe Hitler was --- I mean ... yes --- you can "never act on it"

But in other ways, you're a time bomb waiting to happen. Society would never accept you, presumably. At least outside a padded cell.

It's complicated.

The easy solution is --- if you will never "act on it" -- then why even "come out" at all? To explain creepy shit you DID ACT ON?

If you really will never act on it, best advice? (if you're a pedo or sociopath) -- hide it at all costs. Take it to the grave. Because if you will never act on it for one second, then it will never come to light. Anyone you tell will always look at you with suspicion.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 5 points6 points  (1 child)

If you want to put your dick inside a child then yeah you are pretty much a child rapist. Or a wannabe child rapist. Neither of them is a good look.

[–]EmotionalProblem 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If you want to you’re a pedo. if you actually do you’re a rapist

[–]1-Fidelio- 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There is a whole blue pill push going on to accept pedo's as people who need help. This destigmatization will make it easier for pedo's to hide behind. Don't help the destigmatization if you like children; it will end up having cost measurable in number of raped kids.

[–]zyqkvx -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

People definitely do all the things you described as Neurolinguistic programing, however, wikipedia said Neurolinguistic programing has been debunked.

Comment on this if you wish.

Also, if that isn't Neurolinguistic programing, then what is it called(?). In there are no terms it should have terms.

[–]awakenedspirit1 52 points53 points  (35 children)

Ever since I found TRP I've been trying to think of the other major lies in my life.

  • The government is helping people
  • Humans are monogamous
  • Humans are special and different from other animals
  • Good tends to win over "evil"
  • A higher power cares about my me (my ego)
  • Universities prepare students for adulthood / jobs
  • The rules protect you

In fact


  • The government requires you to work for them
  • We are not naturally monogamous
  • We are A LOT like the other animals. Way more similar than not.
  • There is only power
  • My ego dies with me
  • Universities are basically a money scheme
  • The rules enslave you

It is so helpful to follow another person's advice. We only have the one go, so shortcuts are appreciated. This way I dont make the same mistakes over and over. Thankfully we got this sidebar...

[Edit: formatting]

[–]furcryingoutloud 34 points35 points  (14 children)

  1. The government requires you to work for them
  2. We are not naturally monogamous
  3. We are A LOT like the other animals. Way more similar than not.
  4. There is only power
  5. My ego dies with me
  6. Universities are basically a money scheme
  7. The rules enslave you

I would like to add something to number 1 and number 6.

-1. Governments encourage you to buy a house. Mortgage is the accepted norm. Why? Think about it, a 30 year mortgage guarantees them a tax paying family at that house for 30 years. After 30 years, why would you want to leave there? So you are pretty much guaranteed to be paying your taxes until you die, in that one spot. Bang! Correct, working for the government. Avoid mortgages unless you can pay them off soonish.

-6. This also fits into number one. Show me a college or university that prepares you for entrepreneurship and I will show you an illusion. When did anyone ever learn to balance a checkbook in school? When did anyone ever learn to open a business? Manage said business? The few you may think of are exceptions to the rule. Colleges and universities are meant to pump out worker bees to apply for jobs and mortgages and live out the rest of their lives making those tax payments.

Nothing wrong with participating. But know what you are participating in. It is not your game. Your game is the grinder, the little wheelhouse, the 9-5. Happy? Awesome! But at least you know. Me, I like to do things my way.

[–]omega_fat 11 points12 points  (6 children)

Disagree with the mortgage bit. How can anyone save enough money to start a business if you rent and put half your wages up the landlords arse forever. At least with the mortgage that house will be yours one day. Will be able to remortgage, rent it out, etc.

[–]ParanoidKasparov 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Renting makes you mobile, with a house your committed to one spot and the liabilities there of. Live in a high tax area or a country/state that is in shit finances?(I.E. almost all of them) your a fat fucking pig just waiting to be butchered. Example: Illinois and Cali and a few other states are a year or 2 away from jacking prop taxes up double what they are now.

Renting a house is similar to prostitution in that your paying a 200 buck premium to be able to have it and walk away. Also with maintenance costs factored in buying a home isn't necessarily cheaper than renting. Let alone all the rationalizations you make when walking into the tool section of your hardware store.

[–]alexway66 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How can anyone save enough money to start a business if you rent and put half your wages up the landlords arse forever.

Note: Don't take my word for it. Actually test it. and actually start a business if that's your thing. However, Your viewpoint seems misguided by untested intuition.

Start with a service base business (i.e consulting advice, cleaning business, etc.) They have exceptionally lower starting costs than say a brick and mortar retail store. If you are actually serious about having more control and money, you'll find a way. Most don't start a business because they don't believe that it will actually work.

You're lying to yourself if you think you can't save enough money, for example, 5+ years to start a business while renting. And it would be another lie to say that success in business is rare. People that push through the pain to build themselves and a successful business is rare. People bitching about how they could never start a business and that it would never work is a lie people tell themselves to stay complacent and avoid pain.

If you don't believe me, test it yourself, and start a business.

[–]drty_pr 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Sure half of a mortgage goes to someone else, but half goes towards your purchase. With renting, 100 goes to someone else.

[–]reyaan7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How can anyone save enough money to start a business if you rent and put half your wages up the landlords arse forever.

It's not that simple. Sometimes renting is beneficial. You are not just paying the mortgage you are also paying interest on it for 30 years. If you calculate maintenance, mortgage payments, property taxes and total interest then you will get the idea which is better for you.

[–]Skywave28 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Also funny how colleges and shops nearby up charge for everything knowing people will buy it just because there's no other choice. On campus locations are more expensive than others.

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

    [–]furcryingoutloud 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Time for a small lesson here. The word government does not derive from "mind" "control". Here is a nice little forum post to give people an idea of how it was put together.

    https://www.quora.com/Does-the-word-government-really-come-from-latin-words-meaning-to-control-and-the-mind

    While the -ment ending does come from a Latin word meaning mind, it is used in English as one of the standard ways of converting a verb to a noun. Try, for example:

    advertisement, ailment, disappointment, encouragement, enlightenment, embankment, embellishment, endowment, enrollment, judgement, commencement, adjustment, amendment, appointment, announcement, argument, assignment, assortment, attachment, development, employment

    We all need a little more google in our lives.

    [–]furcryingoutloud 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    And just to expand a little on what I think is the real meaning of your post. From my point of view, the Red Pill is NOT just about gaming women and getting pussy. It covers all of life. Red Pill is a mentality that produces and brings wealth, respect, status, and yes, pussy, but these are just results of the lifestyle. Most definitely not the goals.

    For me, it is all about self respect. If you become the man that you can respect, the world has no choice but to respect you. THIS is the true goal of the Red Pill.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]furcryingoutloud 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      You are very right. Words are very powerful tools, which is why I google a lot. lol

      [–]the-ape-of-death 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      You might find the book Sapiens interesting, as it goes into the evolutionary background behind your points 2-4.

      [–]Senior Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 3 points4 points  (12 children)

      “Good” and “Evil” depend on your point of view. “Good” certainly can win, provided it is prepared to do whatever is necessary.

      [–]reyaan7 12 points13 points  (11 children)

      Whoever wins in the end, is 'Good'.

      [–]riot2100 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      This is true, as the winner gets to write in the history books.

      [–][deleted]  (9 children)

      [removed]

        [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (6 children)

        In AD 2018 if someone sacked a city and burned all the buildings, killed all the men, raped all the women, and sold the survivors into slavery, presumably this would be considered evil.

        In AD 18 if someone did the same, it would be considered just part of life. Whichever side won would do the same to the other. So was everyone evil? They also had their own ideas of morality back then. If the besieged city surrendered before the first battering ram or ladder touched the wall, it was generally considered moral to spare it from being sacked and accept the surrender. If they tried to surrender after the ram touched the wall, sacking was considered morally justified.

        It seems pretty clear to me that morality (AKA good and evil) is invented by civilizations to promote the types of behaviors that they want.

        [–][deleted]  (5 children)

        [removed]

          [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children)

          Raping a child, in any culture, good or evil?

          Ancient Greece. Modern Islam.

          Cruelty for no discernable reason. For example, torturing someone fror the pleasure of it. Good or evil?

          I guess this one is tougher. But we can still look at it from a non-moral stance. If someone is torturing people for no reason, something has gone wrong in their brain and they are acting in a way that is contrary to even their own self interests. This could be classified as a mental illness or antisocial behavior.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [removed]

            [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            Doesn't change the fact that morality is something that is created by the people in the society to increase cohesion and functionality. It is not an immutable natural law like the laws of physics.

            I mean, full-on, hold the child down and rape your brothers daughter while she struggles because you can't control your sexual lust.

            If some things are considered immoral by all societies, then that is because these things are so detrimental to the health of the society that it died our or never coalesced in the first place. This is considered immoral by every society on Earth because it is so obviously bad for everyone involved.

            And again this action is irrational and does not benefit the individual doing it, and anyone who did this would have to be mentally ill. Raping your brother's daughter is incest, which is evolutionarily counterproductive. It is also harming your kin, which is evolutionarily counterproductive. Even if we had no moral code to stop us from doing this, our own disgust for incest and love for our kin, driven by evolution, would be enough to police mentally sound people from raping their own brother's daughter. Chimpanzees obviously do not have morality, yet male chimps do not rape their close female relatives.

            A society would, however, need to develop a moral code to stop you from holding down and raping the woman across the street. This is done by beating into people that rape is wrong. Actually it's much more specific than that. It is beating into people that raping people who are part of your own community is wrong. There have been many armies throughout history where groups of men holding women of their enemy down and raping them would not be considered wrong by the people of that sub-culture.

            [–]1roadmaptonowhere 8 points9 points  (0 children)

            However, "good" and "evil" are not good filters to analyze and understand reality, because reality is fundamentally amoral.

            Objective good and evil derived from the necessity to transcende nature. Human beings, as social animals, have understood how to design a functional society, navigating the hierarchies and benefiting from them.

            From the collective standpoint, good is whatever helps to maintain the cohesion of a society; evil is whatever destabilizes its order. Those are objective measures.

            If you change the perspective to that of the individual, objective social good is not necessarily the same as objective individual good, because maintaining social order implies that the individual must obey and believe certain social narratives that do not necessarily benefit him.

            I agree with you on the premise that there is an objective measure to "good" and "evil", but reality does not operate on them. It doesn't give a fuck about morality. So, good and evil are objective to the extent of your perspective on those concepts.

            [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            So does subjective.

            [–]Endorsed Contributorvandaalen -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

            Humans are special and different from other animals

            I am fucking special and different from all other animals. You can think of yourself as an ape or monkey or even a pig, but I do not.

            [–]frooschnate 0 points1 point  (3 children)

            In what way?

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            Language, culture, sentience, art, higher reasoning, tool use (chimps do use tools also), religion, ability to organize and control larger and more complex societies than we are evolved for. Should I go on?

            [–]frooschnate 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            So we are smarter and have a shit ton of distractions. Is that it?

            Are we actually separate from the animal kingdom when it comes to our deep rooted nature and behaviour. I ain’t so sure bout that

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            In some ways yes, in some no.

            [–][deleted]  (5 children)

            [deleted]

            [–]zyqkvx 14 points15 points  (3 children)

            Music, movies and TV are also huge promoters of blue pilled programming.

            A year after I swallowed the pill, to my disappointment, I realized how many songs I loved all my life were shilling bluepill. Song example: Radiohead - Creep

            [–]ChrimsonChin988 14 points15 points  (1 child)

            So true, an incredible amount of (often very popular) songs are in reality faggy bluepill music whining about a broken heart, love etc.

            My personal favorite example of this is from Shawn Mendes, "treat you better". AFC anthem as I like to call it.

            [–]HannibalBacara 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            That's why I only listen to misogynistic rap /s

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw3IiyXZJds

            [–]geo_gan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            I was actually stunned when I heard the old Spice Girls - Wannabe song that made them famous years ago the very first line of it where one says "If you want my future, forget my past", literally telling beta chumps to not question her CC riding past...

            [–]Endorsed ContributorKeffirLime 40 points41 points  (3 children)

            Lies have their place in our evolution. Infact we are the only species capable of doing it. Without them we wouldn't be where we are today.

            Our belief in religion for example. Allowed massive groups of people to cohesively work together based on common faith.

            Money is a complex lie. The belief that a coloured piece of tree holds value. Any other species would see through this. You could put a million dollars and a single banana next to a chimp, any takers on which one he would go for? Yet money forms the bedrock of civilization.

            What these lies allow us to do is get to our biological purpose of eating,sleeping and fucking(procreation) easier. A society of cohesive individuals leads to a more abundant supply of sex, food and sleep.

            The paradox that we often face is that what's best for our species is not necessarily whats best for the individual, infact they are often at odds. When you bring the individual enjoyment of life into the equation many of us would opt away from procreating.

            This is where the ability to distill bullshit from truth comes in. Often the truths are not whats best for society, lies are. Imagine a world where we were all Christian/Islam etc. How much easier it would be to operate.

            In contrast imagine a world where each and every person got to decide a path or meaning for themselves.

            Truth benefits the individual. It allows him to see what is, female nature for example, and navigate his living experience as best as possible. Collective lies benefit the masses.

            We believe these lies because, they bring us unity, they bring us closer to the rest of the species, they bring us comfort. When I used to frequent church it made me feel great to be apart of this great big family, all with a common purpose.

            Truths are far more harsh to swallow. They are often uncomfortable. They are certainly lonelier. You are often at odds with the majority of your species.(Think Red Pill-Blue Pill dynamic) However it takes the power away from the masses and puts it in the individuals hands. Who now manufactures his own purpose. If everyone did this it would probably not be good for the future of our species.

            This is why lies are comforting and truths are harsh.

            [–]Tempered_Realist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            That's one of the greatest comments I've ever seen on the Reddit platform. Thank you! What you've said is exactly what I suspected the last few months of my life.

            [–]thekiddd23 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            Sir you are so right!!! Especially the bit about religion.

            [–]RedVelocitiy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Truth is for those who want power.

            [–]2Dmva100 21 points22 points  (1 child)

            Fuck society. It just wants your money.

            Fuck women (that's what they are there for)

            [–]satlinrabbow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            I like this.

            [–]hrshin 8 points9 points  (0 children)

            Tell the truth or at least don't lie- JP Rule #8

            [–]Endorsed ContributorMetalgear222 14 points15 points  (0 children)

            Awesome post. Had some fun with this;

            Lies are told by those who want them believed. - Donating 10% every month to the church cause "god" said so.

            Truth can be observed many times from the universe, but lies spread from their authors. - Carbs turn to fat after 6pm.

            Lies are told to get you to do something. - I'm on birth control daddy, cum in me!

            People are defensive about lies. - "Everytime I walk in the room you put you're phone away." 'You're just being paranoid! God! Why don't you trust me?'

            Liars hate the burden of evidence, and want to shift it. - Every r all post ever.

            Liars don't like competition. - SJW and feminist mentality

            Profitable things justify investment. - Can you ever look at advertising and marketing and think "Good job! So glad I saw that!"??

            People tend to believe what they want the truth to be, but the universe is perverse. - "Your soulmate is out there somewhere, looking up at the stars." Also "Nature isn't brutal. Animals in the wild don't instinctually maul/kill other species for fun or pleasure. That's just a lie to get you to be cynical!"

            Liars love language. - This fucking guy...

            Liars rely on reverence. - Anything any religious idol ever said. Plus this fucking asshole

            [–]redblueninja 11 points12 points  (0 children)

            This is a very good post. Maybe it's outside the scope of this post, but a lot of these tools can be used to identify the lies you tell to yourself, in a way to escape reality like believing the blue pill fantasy even after getting no positive results from it for years.

            It helps to develop a "bullshit-meter" from a young age. There was a comment here some time ago which mentioned your world view as a jigsaw puzzle, with each piece being a tried and tested belief, and as the jigsaw puzzle grows you can judge new information coming at you by checking if the piece fits the jigsaw.

            [–]Aggressive_Beta 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            Here’s a good way to recognize if someone is full of shit:

            http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html

            Learn to recognize these fallacies when someone is trying to convince you of something that you are skeptical of.

            [–]technoH0B0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Check out http://www.triviumeducation.com and learn the logical fallacies. You'll be surprised by how much of our culture is taught with the authority fallacy and the bandwagon fallacy. It's amazing.

            [–]Coroshi 6 points7 points  (0 children)

            The art of critical thinking and evaluation. Reading Nietzsche helped me immensely to develop in that direction. Great post as always Whisper.

            [–]hardhair 6 points7 points  (1 child)

            I would highly reccomend the book 'weaponized lies' written by Daniel Levitin. It explores some of these points in great depth.

            [–]uebermacht 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Ordered!
            Appreciate the recommendation :)

            [–]DancesWithPugs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            This is fantastic. Kill your trust in conventional authority, study logic, fallacies, and critical thinking, and apply this guide: real skepticism.

            [–]ebaymasochist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            This is what I thought TRP was all about; finding the truths of the world in all forms.. I was a little disappointed to find it was primarily focused on sexual strategy and is perfectly fine with the blue pills of politics, money, material success, etc..

            [–]TunedtoPerfection 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Would just like to add a few as I've dealt with an emotionally manipulative mother and father by whole life and have become very good at not only detecting lies and persuasion techniques but have become extremely persuasive myself.

            • Appealing to your emotions: Especially in this day an age where social media has become the favored weapon of the masses. A good way to spot a novice liar is they will almost instantly try to appeal to an emotion they want to incite in you. The profession panhandlers and homeless do this all the time. Have you ever noticed your always asked for "gas" by a gas station, or for "some change to get a meal" by restaurants? This is why begging in movie and mall parking lots never works and it's so easy for people to tell others to fuck off at those places. Once you can incite emotions into your audience they will usually forgo logic and critical thinking of the idea for that emotional state. Those more advanced in the art of lying will generally cultivate the emotions they desire in you with their language over the course of the conversation which brings me to the second point.

            • It will seem like your ideas: This is more of a persuasion technique but it relates to the art of lying. If you want someone to do something it always best to make them think they thought of the idea. Telling someone to do something has a required set of limited circumstances for it to be effective and more and more people are being told by social media to question those circumstances. Just think about it, who can honestly effect you enough right now that you would ask how high if they said "JUMP". Maybe your boss, if they could actually fire you for such a silly request? Maybe the government if they could haul you off to jail for noncompliance? But really if any random Tom or Sally started to shout "JUMP" at you, hopefully, you would just ignore them as they are a crazy person or tell em to fuck off.

            • An overabundance of facts: A personal favorite of mine when I'm partaking in the art of persuasion is loading up the conversation in a startling number of facts and figures. If anyone you are talking to in a normal conversation starts to just out of the blue turn to numerous facts and figures, they are trying to disarm your critical thinking. Persuaders will usually front load an argument like this to make it seem like they how thought of everything as it will disarm your desire to question anything about the argument. This is most effective when they want you to believe a small half truth of a largely truth argument that would benefit them. Very popular among GOOD sales people as well. An easy way to railroad this behavior is to ask them to stop and repeat something they spouted off a few minutes ago. If they don't wish to clarify, get angry about your requests, or just repeat the same "fact" verbatim they are most likely trying to persuade you.

            Lastly, you want want to get great at sporting lies and liars, become one. Learn how to persuade people and the common tactics used to do so. Many rely on developing and inciting emotions so once you become good at doing that yourself, it is very easy to target in when someone is trying to do the same to you. I warn you, you will become extremely stoic after a few years in this game of lies. But becoming king of emotions and the emotions that you allow other to incite in you is just another step in this quest.
            Cheers,

            [–]Rebe1Ye11 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Fact-based evidence is slowly being replaced by feeling-based whineing. Now its sexist or bigoted to point out the facts to people even when the facts provide the truth. People dont want the truth, they want to bathe in the ignorance that the blue pills provide.

            [–]Endorsed Contributorredpillcad 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            Honor parents...even if they mistreated you! Don't covet they neigbor...even if she creams her sticky panties when gazing at you as she is sickened by her obedient chubbyhubby....Do onto others......you get my point.

            This life is yours and yours alone. You answer to you so take what you want and need as the overseers will never reward you for compliance

            [–]rromero26 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            "You can never see past the choices you don't understand" the matrix

            [–]1redhawkes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            Liars rely on reverence. If you're afraid to have your story questioned, you attach it to the coattails of that which it is socially unacceptable to question.

            This is pretty common around hoes when they try to manipulate into something, but don't want to be the bad guy or take responsibility. What they do is think of some story that includes moral bullshit and guilt trip.

            Happened to me couple of times, especially when you call her out on some bullshit.

            I've seen this pretty often on askTRP, when a bitch flakes and gives some excuse that someone 'close' got accident or sudden death on the day of the meeting. It's a perfect excuse and it makes you the bad guy if you try and call her on her bullshit.

            [–]coolredpill 3 points4 points  (5 children)

            great post, hope i can get out of the blue pill for every other aspect of society

            on a side note, omg climate change is a scam?

            [–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor 12 points13 points  (2 children)

            climate change is a scam

            Everything is a scam when someone grabs a bullhorn to tell you what to think about it. Climate change/global warming/whatever they call it this week may or may not be well formed science in part or in full. That's irrelevant. When people attempt to use something to control how you think, that's when you have to be suspicious. Just look at the frothing we get around here when you use it as an example without even involving the science. Blow the whistle and here come the barking dogs.

            [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            There are two barriers to me accepting what they want me to on climate change.

            1. I know how corrupt and leftist that academia is. Obviously climate scientists are smart and are authorities in their field, but I just don't trust them. If the left can force an entire country to pretend that dudes that chop off their cocks are actually women or that we should always believe rape accusations, then suddenly is doesn't seem like that big of a conspiracy to use social ostracization, fear of funding or job loss, and gaslighting to force a few thousand climate scientists to pretend that climate change is real.

            2. It would take a globally coordinated government with control of all carbon producing economic activity on the planet to pull off what they say they want to pull off. This government would by default have the power to enact massive wealth redistribution given the nature of its task. Globalism and wealth redistribution also just happen to be major leftist planks independently of the climate change issue. How convenient.

            [–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            I know how corrupt and leftist that academia is.

            A fundamental reality of everything--credibility counts. No one gives a fuck if you are right or not, if they can't trust you.

            [–]Endorsed Contributorleftajar 11 points12 points  (1 child)

            It is.

            We are actually in the middle of a predictable, cyclic warming period, that always comes before a severe DROP in temperatures.

            The real danger is not of runaway warming, but that we will cycle back to glaciation, which could severely fuck over crop yields and create widespread famine.

            [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            How can you avoid being bluepilled when you don't have the resources to test, or access to the data, and can only hear what others tell you about it?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earth_and_atmospheric_sciences_journals

            Here.

            [–]SelfTaughtPiano 1 point2 points  (10 children)

            How can we learn to identify the truth then? As distinct from lies.

            I've become particularly fascinated by the ideas of eastern philosophy, especially concerning mindfulness and presence and meditation.

            But the prominent works in that category often match your charactaristics. They use new-agey language, and talk about "enlightenment", and "being", "presence", "surrender", etc.

            I'm talking all the way from respected meditation guides like "Mindfulness in Plain English" and "Mind Illuminated: A Complete Meditation Guide" all the way to extremely respected self-help books like "The Power of Now" all the way to respected yet new-agey books like "Conversations with God".

            They seem like such a scam. They're selling promises of "divine nature", "enlightenment", "new reality", "freedom from suffering".

            Yet no one on this subreddit would frame them as a scam.

            [–]donkeydodo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            You’ll have to apply skepticism to everything you read and hear, to not fall for lies; what you always should do for any situation is listen to the argument for something, and really give it a thought. Does it align with your perception of it? Can you come up with a counter argument to it? What’d it mean if it was true? Never take for granted that people speak the truth, people will generally speak out of an agenda. Always seek out the truth, no matter where you stand in your opinion. If you think e.g your country take in too many immigrants, what’d be the pros and cons to it? How does it affect society, who can make money out of it etc. This is literally the biggest problem today with politics, neither right/left wings apply skepticism to their own side; they are biased because something in their normal day lives tell them to be so. Pro-immigration would say that immigration is good for the country because people you import will suit as workers, con-immigration will state that immigration on a too high level is dangerous for a society out of a socoeconomic perspective. You have to know all perspectives of something to do your objective judgement of it.

            [–]TRP VanguardWhisper[S] 4 points5 points  (5 children)

            Yet no one on this subreddit would frame them as a scam.

            Wrong.

            Buddhism is a scam.

            [–]reyaan7 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            Buddhism is a scam.

            It is.

            Buddha himself predicted that allowing women into the Sangha would cause his teachings to survive only 500 years instead of 2000 because Mahaprajapati, the Buddha’s aunt request him to allow women into their group. Buddha did not, at first, allow women.

            So based on that Buddhism have long finished. lol

            [–]redblueninja 4 points5 points  (1 child)

            Buddhism is a scam.

            Can you explain what makes you say so?

            [–]Wabbajak 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            Obviously I'm not him, but it has to with the fact that Buddhism is a religionized philosophy. There is nothing wrong in following its teachings and integrating practises into your life, as long as you can derive a benefit out of it. Regardless of mindfulness training and meditation being actually useful practices that help the individual, the spiritual reasoning behind is most probably nothing but bullshit. A Buddhist believes in the core principle that life is suffering (dukkha) and only someone who can break the endless cycle of rebirth (samsara) through enlightenment can reach a state of freedom from suffering (nirvana). Like the biblical stories of Genesis and Heaven, there is no empirical truth to it and no reason to believe that anything of this is true. However, there always exists at least a tiny amount of truth in any of those written records, even when it was more a means to an end (sense of community, ideological control, actual wisdom that is permitted through religious stories). What I am trying to get at is that religions, like any other ideologies, are instruments of power. The world is divided into believers and non-believers, hate is spread and panic can ensue. Any member of a religion can be deceived by words and persuaded to do unspeakable atrocities. If you do not buy it, you are immune. Even though Buddhism is a relatively peaceful religious tradition, people commit violent or even terrorist attacks in the name of Buddhism just like the followers of any other religion.

            [–]cumfortably_dumb -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

            You are giving a few examples of books and condemning the whole ideology. Its like judging TRP after reading a few shit posts.

            All these books are horse shit and have nothing to do with Buddhism or any other such philosophy.

            Its the inability of the west to understand most of this stuff.

            Buddhism is the Eastern counterpart of Stoicism as Chanakya Niti is the counterpart of Machiavellism.

            call out on these books not the thinking

            [–]SelfTaughtPiano 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            You are giving a few examples of books and condemning the whole ideology.

            I actually adore these books. They help find peace and have strengthened my frame. They have literally saved me.

            But inside them, the promises of additional benefits they make are so astronomical... that it is unbelievable. And I sometimes wonder if there's a scam inside.

            [–]mrnuttty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Any thoughts on how to counter these points or is it just the awareness then not acting on their intentions

            [–]RedPilledRoaster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Victim mentality = blue pill. You’ll spot most blue pills this way.

            [–]Matacks607 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Some of what you're decribing seems to be about ad hominem arguments.

            [–]SKRedPill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Paul Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement : https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hierarchy_of_disagreement

            Ad hominem attacks, aka shaming tactics are Level 2 on the pyramid.

            There are in fact a few more levels below Name calling

            Level 0 : Full Blown Trolling.

            Level -1 : Histrionics and creating a scene.

            Level - 2 : Soft power disagreement, social media, causing agitation, fueling collective rage, rumor mongering, etc. to shut him down with democracy.

            Level - 3 : Hard power disagreement. Getting violent and coming to blows.

            Level - 4 : Hard power ruthless disagreement. By which I mean -- Off with his head!

            Level - 5 : Not sure who you are or how you managed to get here, but you just set off WW3...

            [–]greenSixx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Complex translation of common logical fallacies

            [–]edargham 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            The only truth you need to know is that "Nothing is true, and everything is permitted."

            The truth is that there is no truth - anyone who tells you he has the truth is a damn liar.

            Whatever action you take won't make a monster appear and choke you while you sleep.

            [–]I_BET_UR_MAD -3 points-2 points  (20 children)

            What is this goofy ass shit. So you're going to insinuate that religion, socialism, and climate change are all "total blue pills" without providing any actual arguments? And them act like people getting pissed off by that means their opinion has the "characteristics of a lie"?

            The guy who commented on your other post was right, your "gut feeling" is not a reasonable method to dispute a claim. Which is exactly what you're suggesting. Saying that peer reviewed, publicly available studies should not be critiqued on factual grounds but instead "spotted as lies" by their (vague, entirely opinion based) characteristics is the epitome of feels over reals.

            Your attempt to justify this by saying "oh, i don't mean deny them... just be skeptical of them" is total bs too. You should be skeptical of everything, not just stuff that fits on the "list of characteristics". The fact that you want to level extra skepticism on certain ideas based on an arbitrary list of traits makes it pretty obvious that you don't actually care about skepticism, you just want to discredit certain ideas without providing actual arguments against them. You are trying to use "skepticism" as a euphemism for "flat out deny and ignore".

            [–]ZeroSixNiner 16 points17 points  (3 children)

            I'll isolate socialism here since that's one of the items you seem to be defending. I'll assume you're either a young, idealistic American or are from a socialist country. Socialism is based on the idea that all contribute to some nebulous "greater good" to ensure equitable distribution of resources.

            Bullshit.

            Any forcible taking of my resources for which I paid in blood and sweat equity in order to lift someone else up who lacks the wherewithal to earn their own way in the world is anathema to me. The inventor came up with his idea. The entrepreneur devoted major parts of his life to build and grow a business. The skilled carpenter put his knowledge and creativity into creating a thing. To say a part of that belongs to the people for their greater good is complete and absolute bullshit.

            [–]I_BET_UR_MAD 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            The inventor came up with his idea.

            And under capitalism his idea will be forfeit due to NDAs and copyright law. Companies don't invent shit, 99% of the time you hear that phrase what actually happened is some employee invented something on his own and the company got the copyright for it via his employment contract. And maybe they were nice and gave him a little plaque next to "Employee of the Week".

            Many great inventors have been shafted out of their inventions under capitalism. From an individualistic standpoint, copyrights make no sense.

            And if you think about copyrights from a collective standpoint, they're even stupider. If some guy invents a better motor, why should everyone else be forced to use the less efficient old ones? You're literally decreasing the economic productivity of the entire human race so one guy can make more money. Copyrights are dumb from a collective standpoint.

            The entrepreneur devoted major parts of his life to build and grow a business.

            Some of them. But a lot of them essentially just inherited their businesses. And they're the ones who make the most money, too, so you're basically just rewarding nepotism and neo feudalism.

            The skilled carpenter put his knowledge and creativity into creating a thing.

            And he is paid an hourly wage of $15 for it. Because if he started his own business he wouldn't have enough market share and hed be run out by the big players.

            To say a part of that belongs to the people for their greater good is complete and absolute bullshit.

            "the greater good" is the most important good. Humans are short lived. You will die and be forgotten. The success of the human race is your only opportunity to live on.

            They have a term for what happens when a cell in the body ignores the "greater good" of the body and turns against the other cells for its own benefit. It's called cancer. And when the cancer of capitalism metastatizes and the last drop of blood is leached from the productive classes by the idle rich, society will die just as surely.

            You're right, redistributing money from the workers is bullshit. And that's exactly what the rich have been doing. How else could they get rich?

            [–]ZeroSixNiner 3 points4 points  (1 child)

            So you support the forcible confiscation of an individual's idea or invention to serve this greater good? He's not allowed to profit from his ingenuity?

            [–]I_BET_UR_MAD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            So you support the forcible confiscation of an individual's idea or invention to serve this greater good?

            "Forcible confiscation"? If i copy a meme from you does that mean i forcibly confiscated it? The only force being used here is the force necessary to enforce copyrights, which I don't support.

            He's not allowed to profit from his ingenuity?

            There are plenty of ways to reward inventors besides giving them exclusive ownership of an idea and forbidding reuse of the idea with force.

            I wonder what would have happened if the guy who discovered fire copyrighted it. I guess we would have just had to swing around on vines and shit for eternity so as to not violate his right to profit from it

            [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            Remember that skepticism is free.

            And thus can be applied freely to anything.

            [–][deleted]  (12 children)

            [removed]

              [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 12 points13 points  (10 children)

              Science is your God, and you blindly follow him down false paths.

              Honestly that's just pejorative garbage association not an argumented opinion.

              Who owns the science? Who funds the institutions? Who are the peers that review? Who taught you that science is infallible?

              Apparently not the person who thought you. Science is not to be trusted like you trust in god. The most basic tenet of science is falsifiability which basically boils down to "why this theory is wrong" mindset.

              People who believe in science don't believe in it like someone believing in god would. We believe more like hypergamous women loves - this theory is great until we find better a one. It's not blind faith in unfallibility, it's the belief that sooner or later the right explanation will be found.

              As you grow older you begin to realise that your gut feeling is one of the only things you can ever truly trust.

              Context matters. Rejecting global warming on the basis that it feels fake is stupid, not RP. Context matters.

              [–]EdmondDaunts 0 points1 point  (8 children)

              You reject Global Warming as a field that produces actionable results because it isn’t even a scientific hypothesis (no testable outcomes and the other atmospheric processes are not fully characterised) as well as the source data (overwhelmingly the temperature data) does not have the sufficient low levels of uncertainty to meet the hypothesis’ needs.

              As a theoretical exercise it’s fine. As something you use it’s unethical. Most people didn’t read the papers where they produce temperature anomalies. They average samples to produce “better” resolved anomaly values using the Central Limit Theorem yet don’t demonstrate that each sample has the same type of distribution (identically distributed). They ASSUME the source data captures this.

              Like I said, all good for theoretical musings. But it fails the first steps for verification.

              [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 0 points1 point  (7 children)

              Right, so IOW the Earth is not warming up?

              [–]EdmondDaunts 1 point2 points  (6 children)

              Over what timescale? How long have you had decent measurements? 30 years? Less. Most temperature measuring stations were not continuously characterised and maintained. Bucket measurements for sea temperatures. suffer from unknown process. And then there’s coverage.

              At best the uncertainty is +- a Kelvin/Degree for temperatures which means we know nothing. The 1940s could well have been hotter. And even if the Earth is warming what is the baseline?

              The whole thing is an idealist circle jerk. Which is perfectly fine as long as actions are not based off the results. You wouldn’t step in a car based on these methods.

              The red pill is verification and repeatability is very hard. You need the right tools from the start.

              [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 1 point2 points  (5 children)

              [–]EdmondDaunts 2 points3 points  (4 children)

              As something actionable yes. It’s like reading tea leaves. Signal to noise ratio for the source data is terrible.

              As a field of study and creating theoretical papers and what ifs, trying to possibly understand things, it’s fine. But then it won’t get the same money. And advocates can’t get to change the world.

              [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 2 points3 points  (3 children)

              Right, so this exchange of ours is pointless b/c you keep redirecting from the obvious yes/no answers to my questions.

              [–]EdmondDaunts 3 points4 points  (2 children)

              I’ve answered your questions.

              Climate science has no grounding in anything verifiable. It is a hypothetical field.

              The temperature anomaly record is a hypothetical dataset. The real data has much larger uncertainty, so much in fact that it should have been obvious from the basic scientific method that it can only be used for theory not to drive policy.

              It is also bunkum as a verified standard. It has been continuously adjusted to make the anomaly trend look bigger for one thing but the more obvious flaw is the uncertainty in the source data.

              [–]GodOfDinosaurs -1 points0 points  (0 children)

              it's the belief that sooner or later the right explanation will be found.

              I agree with your whole comment except this part. I don't think this can actually be an aim of science. Instead, we just develop more useful and consistent theories until the next revolution in thought happens. I think Kuhn showed this pretty convincingly.

              [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              When are they going to take away Skepp's endorsed tag? He is the absolute worst person that posts regularly on this forum. I usually can't even make it to the end of his posts. The other endorsed contribs should go to the mods.

              [–]lorum_ipsum_dolor 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              religion, socialism, and climate change

              Interesting choice of topics.

              [–]I_BET_UR_MAD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Those are the three things he linked in his intro

              [–]Seven_Veils 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Great post, we need more content like this around

              load more comments (6 replies)