830
831

Men's RightsKaren Straughan (Girlwriteswhat) succinctly discusses that men don't hate women, and defends TRP. Good read! (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by Modredpillschool

First of all, /u/girlwriteswhat, I just want to publicly thank you for your comments, they're fantastically written and spot on as usual. You're always welcome in discussions here if you've got anything to add! Now, onto the meat and potatoes: Archive Here

Via PPD from GWW (I hope you don't mind me reproducing your text here)


I don't think there is a universe that could exist where men, in general, hate women.

So maybe the first thing would be to stop accusing men of hating women? And to call out the women in positions of power who accuse men of hating women? And to call out the women like Quinn Norton who claim that men are raised to hate women, or Chloe Angyal of Feministing who claim that our entire society hates women?

Honestly, the Nazis hated the Jews. The Hutus hated the Tutsis. The KKK hated blacks. And yet this male dominated society, where men hold the majority of the positions of power, somehow HATES women despite not a single lynching of a woman for wronging a man, despite NOMAAS and the White Ribbon Campaign and HeForShe and a male feminist president, despite Boko Haram's sparing of girls while burning boys in their dormitories, despite the unbelievable (and unbelievably unspoken-of) gender gap in executions and criminal sentencing in Islamic countries, despite males being the primary receptacles of violence by both males and females from infancy to old age GLOBALLY, despite not a single genocide in history that DIDN'T begin with the systematic extermination of almost exclusively men and boys.

And you think men hate women. If men hate women, then how do men feel about men? On any given day, any given male is more likely to assault a male, undermine a male, ignore a male in need, murder a male, celebrate the suffering of a male wrongdoer, hit his male child, make a decision to mutilate his male child, arrest a male, convict a male, and sentence a male to incarceration or death, than he is a female.

And yet women--yes, women--have allowed a narrative to become entrenched in all our systems and institutions that males favor other males at the expense of females. That somehow, there is a "team men" that has been oppressing, subjugating and subordinating women since the dawn of human history. That men have waged a "war on women" since we descended from the trees and first tottered on two legs on the African Savannah.

Men have bled for their women, fought to protect their women, died for their women, and admonished each other for millennia to love their virtuous women as Christ loves the Church, to treat their honorable women as queens and as jewels, to present to them the heads of the men who displease them, and to duel to the death to defend their honor. The literary canon, written primarily by men, has always lauded a masculinity that protects women--the villains identified by their willingness to harm women, and the heroes identified by their willingness to avenge those harms.

And you think men hate women?

Men have never hated women. Men will never hate women.

What you see as hate is fear and frustration. Fear of what you have the power to do to any given man on any given day, just by virtue of being female. Frustration that no matter how far men bend to your whims, it's never enough to prove to you that they don't hate you and have never hated you.

For god sake, have you ever gone on a conservative website and seen what the people there write about Islam and misogyny? These men couldn't care less that for every 1 woman executed for adultery in Saudi Arabia, 500 men are executed for less serious crimes. They couldn't care less that 80% of women in Saudi Arabia DON'T want the driving ban lifted, because it would mean giving up the privilege of being waited on by male family members. Those conservatives say, "OMG, look at how those horrible Islamists treat their women! They objectify and sexually exploit them!" And what do you think the Islamists are saying about Americans? "OMG, look at how those horrible Americans treat their women! They objectify and sexually degrade them!"

And somehow, a minority of women (feminists) have convinced all of society that men hate women.

No wonder men are afraid of you. If you [women] can convince society that it hates women, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, then you have a power that is unfathomable to the average man. A power that is unfathomable to the most powerful man. You have the power to convince society that men hate you because they don't love you 10 or 100 or 1000 times as much as they love other men, and you have the power to convince society to enact legislation an policy based on that completely stupefying false belief, and these powerful men who supposedly hate you and are in charge of everything will do it. They'll lie and they'll cheat and they'll throw less privileged men under the bus just to prove to you that they're not misogynists.

Putting your foot down and saying, "what you're doing is abuse" is not hate. Drawing a boundary and saying, "this far, no further" is not hate. Saying, "I choose not to have anything to do with women unless necessary" is not hate.

It's self-preservation, HSW.


I officially recognize The Red Pill's right to exist?

Frankly, I don't mind the red pill (either the philosophy, or the subreddit). I think it has value to offer men who are looking for individualistic solutions to the current social problems re gender. I like Jack Donovan. I like Roosh V. I like Barbarossaaaa and Stardusk. I like all kinds of men and their perspectives, even when I don't agree with everything they have to say. I like the idea of criticizing women (men too) and holding them accountable.

You'll notice in my comment, I said "yes, women". This debacle of a gender war is not just on the minority of women who are feminists--it's on most women who've not just tolerated it, but viewed the social and legal changes the way looters view a race riot. Sure, they might not care about the issues, but they'll happily take advantage of the measures feminists have managed to enact, or to ignore the way those measures unjustly harm men until the moment they feel personally victimized through the men they care about. The average woman will be 100% in favor of child support right up until her own kids have to go without figure skating lessons so her husband can make child support payments to his ex for kids he's never allowed to see. They'll collectively cheer the "advance" of women in education right up until their daughters can't find a man worth marrying. They'll laud efforts to make "rapists" more easily convicted until the unforeseen day their own son is falsely accused.

And she'll nod along when all men throughout history are unjustly maligned as oppressors and rapists because she's never, for whatever reason, realized that among the maligned is her beloved grandfather who taught her how to make daisy chains, encouraged her to climb that tree when she was little, started a college fund for her, and sat unsleeping next to her grandmother's deathbed for 72 hours with tears pouring down his face. For some reason, she just never made the connection that when feminists were talking about evil, patriarchal rape-machines, they were also talking about the men she loves and the men who sacrificed so she could have a better life than they did.

If the red pill is a response to anything, it's a response to the apathetic, pragmatic, mercenary nature of most women, who don't even notice the harm done to men until they're forced to personally suffer a portion of it.

And then this question in the OP, so typical. Okay, so women have been kicking you guys in the testicles for 50 years and you're finally starting to object to it in ways that affect me personally. So what should we women do?

Well, first thing would be to stop kicking men in the testicles, and try to convince other women to stop. Second thing would be to stop interpreting "OW! My testicles! Fucking hell, WTF?" as misogyny and aggression. Third would be to stop buying the trite rhetoric of a Cenk Uygur, and a Theodore Roosevelt, and a William Blackstone, which derides men of past generations as behaving abominably toward their women, as fact, rather than as a way to distinguish themselves as superior to "those bad men over there, or back then". Fourth would be to put a little bit of effort into understanding the male experience rather than judging it.

Red pill seems to be the one area that demands these things of women in general.


[–]newls 217 points218 points  (19 children)

This is the mature self-awareness that manifests when women see feminism hurting their sons and men they care about. She's doing a good thing here.

[–][deleted]  (8 children)

[deleted]

    [–]sonnesatt 8 points9 points  (4 children)

    I get the idea (through this sub) that American women are driving men mad.

    I'm from Germany and know quite a few ladies that are more self-aware and responsible. So it's not all lost ;)

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

    This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, harassment, and profiling for the purposes of censorship.

    If you would also like to protect yourself, add the Chrome extension TamperMonkey, or the Firefox extension GreaseMonkey and add this open source script.

    Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possible (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

    [–]sonnesatt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Exactly what my parents taught me and exactly what I will pass on to my daughter. I know there are more and more American attitudes coming over but still I have the impression of most women that they know they have to offer something despite just being female if they want a healthy relationship

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Not just Americans; I'm a Brit who has found it is exactly the same there, but then, the Americans export their culture there so here came the crazy.

    But in China, things are a lot more balanced, and women and men are both willing to sit down and listen, or at least defend both sides.

    [–]sonnesatt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I'm half English half German so I know what you mean. Living in a town where army forces are stationed I see a lot of soldier wifes and most of them are batshit crazy and disrespecting their men in public. I find that Germans have a weird view of the British because of that.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorTheRedPilsner 7 points8 points  (2 children)

    Actually, there are more women like her than you think.

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

    Read Rollo's rational male, he explains why some women decide to become anti-feminist.

    [–]chinawinsworlds 20 points21 points  (7 children)

    I have always seen her as pretty logical and reasonable; that's not to say I never disagree, but she is no feminazi.

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]RedPillProphet 20 points21 points  (5 children)

      Yeah, that part bothered me. The woman is an antifeminist hero. She was the ONLY voice of reason I found when I started looking a few years back. Been donating to her here and there since, great to see shes increasingly getting mainstream coverage.

      [–]Pornography_saves_li 6 points7 points  (4 children)

      U/girlwriteswhat stands on the shoulders of giants. Ask her yourself, she will agree.

      [–]human_bean_ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

      It's funny how different the reaction is when it's a woman instead of a man talking about this stuff. Even among the MRA and red pillers. There really is no escaping the strong pull of our natural tendencies. They are buried deep.

      [–]RedPillProphet 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      As someone who owns a number of books by Warren Farrell, trust me I know. But she was still the most prominent and effective voice at the time. Fantastic to forward to others as well without telling them "read this book".

      [–]ECoast_Man 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      I don't understand this comment.

      Everyone stands on the shoulders of giants, if they adopt views of others? What possible view do you have that is purely original? I beg that answer.

      I'm not even necessarily fan girling GWW, I just don't understand your comment. Her acts on youtube, in real life, etc make GWW into what she is? Just because she has read and agreed with the opinions of others doesn't delegitimize anything?

      [–]the99percent1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Honestly, women do not see it as such.. To them, feminism is one big shit test.

      If you can't pass it or just 'get it', in her eyes, you aren't fit to be her man/son..

      As for her, she's just a very red pill aware woman.

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

      Their men they care about?

      Come on.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

      [–]rpscrote 16 points17 points  (0 children)

      mercenary nature of most women

      That's the best way I've heard it put. Mercenary is exactly right.

      [–]rpscrote 51 points52 points  (13 children)

      Ridiculously well written. Bravo to her

      [–]Endorsed ContributorRedPillDad 55 points56 points  (11 children)

      I admire Karen's intelligence, courage and way with words. She keeps getting better.

      Not sure what prompted her to see the world through a man's eyes. I think she mentioned raising sons has played a big part. Whatever the case, glad to have her voice supporting the plight of men and boys.

      [–][deleted]  (10 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]Endorsed Contributorzyk0s 8 points9 points  (7 children)

        Can you explain? Are people more likely to see feminism as bullshit or the contrary?

        [–][deleted]  (6 children)

        [removed]

          [–]girlwriteswhat 20 points21 points  (5 children)

          I think it's because most people know a man who does a job like that--rig-pig, mechanic, lineman, etc. Edmonton is still a hub for men who work in camp, so not like Toronto or even Calgary where men living in the city work in the city.

          That makes male disposability kind of... well, obvious and impossible to ignore, and you just have more people acknowledging that it exists and that everyone's bread and butter depends on it.

          [–]roycocup 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Which can link demographic and technology to scarcity and demand and the beginnings of feminism in big cities you reckon? In other words, should we all live in smaller groups / communities, situation would obviously not have gone down the same direction?

          [–]Planner_Hammish 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          Do you know if she does events? I would be interested in meeting her.

          [–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

          Probably the most succinct piece of writing I've seen on the topic, she certainly has a way with words. The perfect blend of logic and emotion, quite powerful.

          [–]_whistler 97 points98 points  (18 children)

          A refreshing, rousing read. Brilliant.

          What you see as hate is fear and frustration. Fear of what you have the power to do to any given man on any given day, just by virtue of being female. Frustration that no matter how far men bend to your whims, it's never enough to prove to you that they don't hate you and have never hated you.

          Absolutely. This is my problem with acceptance of the "anger phase" - as a wizened old muppet-Jedi once said: Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. We men must become self-aware enough to recognize fear and refuse to be ruled by it.

          [–]RPthrowaway123 81 points82 points  (10 children)

          Even in the anger phase, we don't hate women - we hate the lies we've been told about women. We hate the misdirections and the proverbial wool pulled over our eyes. We hate that we we're tricked into chasing something that was never there.

          [–]The_BeardedGentleman 42 points43 points  (7 children)

          If anything I'm angry at men of the past for not doing something earlier.

          [–]girlwriteswhat 34 points35 points  (3 children)

          Doing something? They were. They were busy claiming that men of past generations were horrible to their women, but we "enlightened men" are different. And women were busy profiting on their impulse to throw other men under the bus.

          As I said in my quoted comment, this has been going on at least as far back as Blackstone, probably much farther.

          [–]Divided-Line 7 points8 points  (2 children)

          The white knighting goes back as far as anyone wants to look. That is the very mechanism of traditional masculinity. It's always been about sacrificing for women. This is why people find modern feminism's demand for equality so confusing, because it never had anything to do with equality whatsoever, even if feminists legitimately believed that it did. Were feminists asking to be made equal with violent rapists and monsters?

          It is in fact just a modernization of yesterday's chivalry and feminists themselves wouldn't even recognize this because they had never, in fact, uprooted their own assumptions about gender, let alone recognized how those assumptions contributed to this or any other set of gender norms.

          All feminists have done is replaced an original set of male obligations for new ones. Instead of positive masculinity and male acceptability being tied to providing for and protecting women, it is now tied to towing the liberal feminist egalitarian line.

          In either case, the male is always on the hook to protect the damsel from the bad guys in order to prove that he himself is not the bad guy. Only now we've traded in yesterday's bad guys (who were very often racial, national, and religious tribal out groups of other men) for "misogynists" and imaginary hoards of salivating frat jock rapists.

          Beneath both the old set of rules for men and the new set is the original logic of gynocentrism, which essentially makes male value and acceptability contingent upon their ability to bend over backward for women and save them from whatever boogeyman while the license that women retain to judge acceptable male identity, behavior, and belief is never questioned, but simply assumed.

          That is what being a "real man" means. It is not, as feminists claim, the obligation men feel to differentiate from the supposedly lesser or inferior feminine; it is the obligation of the good men, the winners, to differentiate themselves from the bad men, or the losers. In other words, it is the obligation to conform to a standard of conduct that women themselves have imposed. By persecuting the bad guys, men prove to women and to each other that they are the good guys. It's the tribal logic of any lynch mob. The in group defines itself by persecuting what it believes it is not.

          The irony in all this is that feminism does not challenge traditional ideas about gender but in fact is a product of them and powerfully re-enforces them.

          [–]girlwriteswhat 9 points10 points  (1 child)

          What, exactly, is the difference between this image:

          https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2009/01/img/ledbettersigningc3_onpage.jpg

          And this one:

          http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ojZRV-rw6t4/SwwHtBgBF4I/AAAAAAAACQ4/HoQvfLPzMOY/s1600/Wikipedia+-+South+American+Sea+Lions_harem.jpg

          I mean, other than the capacity for the male in question to badmouth all the males who came before him as being inadequate to women's desires and requirements...

          Though I would argue that some of masculinity involves differentiating from the feminine. Part of traditional masculinity is about being able to perform tasks women can't, don't want to, or shouldn't have to.

          If a girl doesn't "throw like a girl", then what does she need a boy for?

          [–]Echelon64 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          This sub gets accused of sexism quite often, they conveniently ignore that we are an equal opportunity sexism subreddit.

          Hell, I think more hate is spewed on here for so-called Beta men and white knights who enable shitty behavior.

          The most distasteful parts of the SJW movement for example are the men, not the women by and far.

          [–]asdfghjkltyu[🍰] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          We hate the enablers. I don't hate women for taking advantage of it.

          [–]NikoMyshkin 9 points10 points  (0 children)

          Also, we hate the thought of the years and opportunities lost. But that makes us all the more eager to capitalise on our new, improved understanding of reality.

          [–]ilphae 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Angry that you were ignortant in the past or angry that you can never unknow the truth?
          When you play poker with a weak player, do you not take advantage of the situation? Does that make it wrong that you could see what they could not? The weak player does not deserve some special treatment and neither did you. Be grateful for lessons learned before you're dead.

          [–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 15 points16 points  (6 children)

          Funny that it's often Muppet jedis that are the most red pill of all ...

          In all seriousness though, the refusal to be driven by anger, hate, victimization, and/or the blaming of others is one of the defining characteristics of TRP. We try to see reality for what it is, but take ownership of our role in it. It is what sets us apart from feminism and the like.

          [–]_whistler 11 points12 points  (4 children)

          We try to see reality for what it is, but take ownership of our role in it. It is what sets us apart from feminism and the like.

          This is also the difference between Men's Rights and The Red Pill. They are different responses to the same set of conditions.

          [–]Endorsed Contributorgekkozorz 6 points7 points  (3 children)

          I stopped giving a shit about MRA stuff when I realized no one else did.

          "I think we should talk about men's issues, guys!"

          "Why do you hate women?"

          It's like the Kobayashi Maru - unwinnable by design.

          The only winning move is not to play.

          [–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face 5 points6 points  (0 children)

          It's the fact that women aren't arguing in good faith that makes an individualized solution to the problems of gender necessary. Much like you can't reason your way into a woman's pants, you can't reason your way into being respected by women generally.

          [–]1REDPILLRECKONING 43 points44 points  (6 children)

          I'd really like to see her post here more often. She is exactly the kind of intelligent, sane and grounded type of person that we should be heralding. The best part about her is that she is so calm and sound in everything she says, tumblrnazi's look completely insane when discussing otherwise. She speaks in such plain truths its tough to argue otherwise. I think this is her real strength.

          On top of that it's a woman who is actually standing up for men, so you can't jump to all the normal, neckbeard, fedora, virgin insults. Shes just being honest.

          So I am down for as much KarenKontent on here as possible.

          Hell, maybe if we're lucky and play our cards right, we can get her to do an AMA for us.

          [–]my_redpill_account 18 points19 points  (2 children)

          While the sub doesn't put the pussy on the pedestal, if we made her a very respected, highly regarded figure in TRP philosophy it would take the hamster wheel to new heights, and I think it would go to show that we don't hate women.

          [–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 11 points12 points  (1 child)

          if we made her a very respected, highly regarded figure in TRP philosophy it would take the hamster wheel to new heights, and I think it would go to show that we don't hate women.

          Nope, won't change a thing.

          Germany's equivalent of Gloria Steinem, Alice Schwarzer, argued that she isn't a single-minded supporter of women, in fact, her most nasty fights had been with other women (like Esther Vilar). The thing is: women who had been in favor of men's rights have been there ever since that was an issue. Demonstrating that you can show appreciation for individual members of the group you're critical of (as long as they confirm your narrative) doesn't prove a thing except that you are willing to look beyond your aversion in individual cases. And feminists (or feminist-minded people) will simply dismiss them as a sellout who parrots MRA lines and liken the redpillers' attitude towards her to that of Calvin Candle towards Django.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [removed]

            [–]TRP VanguardtrpSenator 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            I've always had a great deal of respect for her. The way she words things, you really can't argue against it. I've seen people try to rebute her points, but it almost always devolved into either a cherry picked straw man, or just complete ad hom.

            [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 31 points32 points  (45 children)

            Here's the thread on this from yesterday as well. Some good talking points in there IMO.

            /r/TheRedPill/comments/36nvnr/for_the_girl_writes_what_fan_boys_karen_straughan/

            Calling /u/girlwriteswhat. Would you be interested in an AMA?

            [–]girlwriteswhat 92 points93 points  (14 children)

            Sure. Just give me an idea as to when, and we can line something up.

            [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 10 points11 points  (0 children)

            I'll be in touch. I need to run it past the other mods and figure out how we'll structure and schedule it, assuming they're all on board.

            [–]bustanutmeow 8 points9 points  (0 children)

            It is refreshing to see a woman write and identify the real reason this sub exists. Thank you very much for speaking up, and acknowledge the way that the worlds works minus the ridiculous PC component. Have a great day.

            [–]my_redpill_account 4 points5 points  (4 children)

            Quick question, I've been meaning to get into your videos and such, where should I begin? It's appreciated. Seriously, keep doing what you do.

            [–]girlwriteswhat 12 points13 points  (1 child)

            Depends on what you want.

            I've just created two new playlists today, one called "is feminism hate?" and the other called "evo-psych". There are other, older playlists, and some of the videos overlap between one list and the other, but I'd consider starting with a playlist.

            [–]freebytes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            I remember reading your articles a long time ago on your website. I have intended to return at some point when I had the time and have never forgotten name. (I mean "girlwriteswhat", not your real name.) If I had only a single criticism, it would be that your original videos simply had you reading what you wrote, and it would be better if you simply had index cards with the talking points and just went over what you wrote from what you recall and any new epiphanies that pop into your head. (Please take this as a positive criticism.) I have not read anything or watched anything from you in over two years or so, but I will get back to my binge reading eventually.

            [–][deleted]  (1 child)

            [deleted]

              [–]my_redpill_account 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Thanks. Also if your username is a reference super Saipan 4, you're awesome.

              [–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face 6 points7 points  (1 child)

              Wow, that's pretty legit. I'm actually somewhat excited to see this.

              [–]2wiseclockcounter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

              all the manly men of TRP gather around Karen indian-style with their eyes sparkling and chins in their hands.

              [–][deleted]  (3 children)

              [removed]

                [–]girlwriteswhat 7 points8 points  (1 child)

                Pfft, I wish my kitchen was usable for the purpose. Since I moved, I'm stuck recording from our home office (which is nice and all, but the whole kitchen thing was charming).

                [–]Pornography_saves_li 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                That product placement is, as i recall, paid for. But likely would be given for free.

                [–]TRP VanguardWhisper 57 points58 points  (28 children)

                I wouldn't go that route.

                Karen doesn't exactly need to distance herself from us to be effective, but close association might be counterproductive.

                You notice how PPD gushed at being noticed, when she showed up? She has successfully positioned herself as an important voice in this debate, and she has several assets working for her in this respect (in addition to her actual merits as a writer and speaker).

                First of all, she's a woman, which renders her immune to many of the silencing tactics used against men fighting the same fight.

                Secondly, and this is my real topic here, she has us. The Red Pill. What we do is present a visible scary ogre of an "extremist" faction. And this makes her, and other MRAs like her, look like the safe, sober, moderate option. We lend them legitimacy and insulate them from the charge of extremism or dangerousness.

                It's sort of an unplanned good cop / bad cop routine. But the good cop can't pal around with the bad cop in full view of the suspect.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 27 points28 points  (21 children)

                I definitely agree that you are Malcolm X to the MRM's MLK. But I've never been one to snub people based on them being unpopular...

                [–]TRP VanguardWhisper 25 points26 points  (19 children)

                I definitely agree that you are Malcolm X to the MRM's MLK.

                There are definitely some parallels. Martin's role was to appeal to white people, so he needed to be nonthreatening, moderate, reasonable. Malcolm's role was to unite black people, so he needed to provide an outlet for their (largely justified) anger and frustration.

                However, we have an additional obstacle to deal with. Humans, both black and white, are not hardwired to be more sympathetic to white people than black people. The civil rights movement and its outcomes might have looked very different if it did.

                But I've never been one to snub people based on them being unpopular...

                True.

                And I often do say that letting the opposition control the discourse with their feels is a strategic mistake. So I could go either way on what I said earlier.

                But there's more to it than that. One of the first things I tell hurt, angry young men who come here looking for answers is "Abandon any hope of changing society, or saving it from its self-destructive neglect of men and masculinity. Only when you cease looking for others to give you a fair deal can you learn what need to survive and prosper in the world that is."

                Ultimately, one of the basic tenets of TRP is that we are not here to save society, we are here to save ourselves, and teach other men how to save themselves. Trying to hold back this glacier is just another form of self-sacrifice, and we are already in a state where our culture eats self-sacrificing men for breakfast, and then demands of their bones that they buy it lunch. Our long term strategy is wait for society's disrespect for the very masculinity that builds and sustains civilization to trigger an economic crisis which we inevitably restore respect for the same.

                This is the cycle of civilization. Men with guns and shovels build something, make it better and better, until the women no longer even have to see the men with guns and shovels. Then the women believe the safety, the well-being, and the prosperity just fall like rain from the sky, and start asking why we have all these men around, anyway. Then the men try to indulge the women, until the point where the invisible men with guns and shovels can no longer keep up. Then the economy collapses, safety and prosperity vanish, and women realize what men with guns and shovels are for, and begin to once again love and respect men who wield guns and shovels for the safety and prosperity of others, instead of regarding them as losers who couldn't get a better job. And men pick up their guns and shovels again, and something new is built. And the cycle begins again.

                I appreciate your efforts to hold back this glacier for my benefit. Really, I'd give you a big hug if I could.

                But ultimately, the young men here can't afford to give in to the false hope that isolated voices like you give them. If they allow themselves to be sucked into the MRM's brand of windmill-tilting, they will simply be burning themselves out in a new way. Because women, in general, do not understand what men are for until the moment they experience real cold, real hunger, real fear. At that moment, and not an instant before, are they able to value men.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 22 points23 points  (5 children)

                I knew there was a reason why I like you.

                You ever see that animation some idiot SJW made?

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abZmFCs-ltY

                Funnily enough, it never occurred to any of them to ask where the ice cream comes from. Who invented and built the ice cream machine, who generates the ingredients and the fuel and transports them to the machine, who puts in the hours and effort to construct and maintain the infrastructure necessary for it to work?

                Who cares? There's ice cream falling from the sky, and women deserve their fair share.

                [–]wellitsajob 5 points6 points  (1 child)

                Holy motherfuck, I think I finally understand the definition of "triggered." That video (and the lovely comments below) almost make me feel like women want men to be afraid of them. "Anyone who disagrees or has any problem with the video is afraid of women." Because this is definitely a healthy ideology to have about any topic, ever, right? That anyone who disagrees is an inferior? I don't even care if men died for their women to build that ice cream machine (and I suppose that's my internalized misandry), there's no reason that only men should be able to use that machine even if only men built it, and of course there are people (men and, shockingly, women) who believe they are nice but who are actually selfish assholes ("nice guys" who are sexist and "good girls" who are sexist), but to jump from an example of a sexist guy (even though this example would work just as well with a sexist girl upset that her man is sleeping in late or still attracted to other women) being from an angry asshole, to being afraid of women? Just seems like projection. Women are unnecessarily afraid of men raping and beating them at every turn, like some kind of defense mechanism to convince themselves they draw unstoppable attention from dirty pervy men from which they crave attention so much. Men are very necessarily afraid of women turning them down, or worse, taking advantage of them, in the millions of ways that's possible for women to do, that isn't possible for men. I like to think of myself as not a sexist, so let me know if anything I've written is problematic. If I'm actually a sexist, I'll own up to it. But I know that there would be know way to post these thoughts on youtube without being accused of being the fearful for random nonsense. Like I said, the main thing I'm getting from that video is that women want men to be afraid, because the women themselves are afraid.

                [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                Funnily enough, it never occurred to any of them to ask where the ice cream comes from.

                Kinda funny to me, because I mark the begin of a society's decline when the average person doesn't know where their food comes from.

                When the average person thinks food comes from markets, then the society is far enough removed from what really makes it work that the collapse is inevitable.

                [–]Skank_of_America 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                One thing that I've constantly complained about on the internet is the fact that I've noticed the labor market to be highly gender-segregated. This is a result of many factors, including feminism, but does not bode well for society. The book, 'Men on Strike', highlights this in great detail. In the couple of cities in which I've lived, I wonder sometimes about where all the men are that women are supposedly married to. I mean, I see the ring on their finger but not so often do I see them with their men. Surely they can't all be faking being married as a sign of independence. lol.

                It's just a product of our times, culture, media and the way the labor market requires different things of different people, I suppose, but I don't like it very much, as this fosters misunderstandings, alienation and disrespect of others' contributions.

                [–]Bortasz[🍰] 14 points15 points  (1 child)

                So in short:
                Men notice that game is rig.
                MRM: We will FIX THE GAME!
                MGTOW: We will not play until you fix the game.
                TRP: I WILL FUCKING LEARN THE RULES OF THIS CHEATING GAME AND USE THEM AGAINST YOU!

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

                drops mic

                people still soaking in what's just been said, things they've probably been thinking of for a while, but could never adequately formulate into words and sentence. God bless your ability (and patience).

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

                However, we have an additional obstacle to deal with. Humans, both black and white, are not hardwired to be more sympathetic to white people than black people.

                Actually, they are--or at least white people are. There's a biologist at my university doing work in group selection he's distinguished. One of the things he talks about is that racism is innate just because if you've got a blue group and a green group and the blue's evolve to hate the greens but the green's don't, then the greens go down. As an armed race, we evolve to hate the other groups.

                Now, going both ways makes it different than the male-female dynamic but at least we're not as much of a minority by numbers as the blacks were to the whites.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 4 points5 points  (3 children)

                This is why I detest the discussion around racism and privilege.

                By focussing on differences between what people experience, we are essentially hindering the expansion of the in-group.

                Humans are limited by biology. There will always be the concept of the in-group and the out-group--there's no way to get around that. So the best strategy toward acceptance and tolerance of other races or cultures is to concentrate on what makes us similar. Behaviors and experiences and tendencies that are universal. That is, expand the in-group to encompass more and more people.

                Focussing on "invisible knapsacks" and the differences in what people experience and all that only reinforces divisions between groups.

                What is most frustrating to me regarding the idea of "white guilt" is that it was whites who first expanded their concept of the in-group to include blacks. It was Britain and other white cultures, including the US, who, for the first time in history said, "wait a minute, these are human beings. Slavery is kinda wrong, yo".

                As such, they seem to be the people held most responsible for it. Blacks in Mauritania who still practice slavery? Meh. Brown people in Qatar who still practice slavery? Meh. It's all the fault of whites, because whites were the first to realize, from the position of owners rather than slaves, that it was morally not okay.

                By taking the high road, they make themselves vulnerable to criticism. Why didn't you end it sooner? Why did you do it in the first place? You bastards!

                As far as whites being more sympathetic to blacks than whites, that's an explicit attitude, not an implicit one.

                [–]1CowardlyPetrov 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                Wait, are you saying white people (USamericans, English, anglo-saxons, not sure what word is most accurate) were the first ones to consider the idea that slavery was wrong from the perspective of power rather than suffering?

                I'm not a particular fan of hating every white kid ever born just because of what some white people have done, but I don't think they invented anti-slavery opinions as non-slaves.

                I want to say Darrius the Great (or Cyrus the Great?) wrote the first bill of human rights which included freedom from slavery. Off the top of my head, I can't swear on details but I have read many times of anti-slavery positions from power that were much older than plantation USA.

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

                Quite possibly, although there were slaves in Iran later. Similarly, there was a period in European history when slavery was absent (although there were bondsmen for quite a bit of that time). When the european powers spread out over the rest of the world, they did not take slaves (as it was not European culture at that time) other than some part of the Spanish colonies in South American (eg the silver mines) and, conspicuously, Africa. Why Africa? Because when they went there they encountered a slave-owning and slave-trading society. They did not, on the whole, capture slaves, they bought them. It is to their great discredit that they took part in this, but they did not introduce it.

                As Karen said, there were then anti-slavery movements in both the US and UK. The Royal Navy did a lot to stop the slave trade, they would stop ships of other nations carrying slaves, and it was a rule that if any slave stepped foot on board a Royal Naval vessel that slave was immediately free. They took direct action against Zanzibar, which was the centre of the arab slave trade.

                So yes, it was a shameful part of history, but far from unique, and Europeans/N Americans did more than anyone to put a stop to it.

                [–]1CowardlyPetrov 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I find both a particularly malevolent or benevolent telling of it as hard to believe and would expect the truth to be somewhere in between. (Whether it is influenced by bias for or against.)

                Moral views are not exactly like advances in technology. People do not go back to using less advanced technology unless resources force them to. But people do fail to learn lessons of the past or become descendant over and over. No poeples seem particularly unique in this.

                [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                This is the cycle of civilization. Men with guns and shovels build something, make it better and better, until the women no longer even have to see the men with guns and shovels. Then the women believe the safety, the well-being, and the prosperity just fall like rain from the sky, and start asking why we have all these men around, anyway. Then the men try to indulge the women, until the point where the invisible men with guns and shovels can no longer keep up. Then the economy collapses, safety and prosperity vanish, and women realize what men with guns and shovels are for, and begin to once again love and respect men who wield guns and shovels for the safety and prosperity of others, instead of regarding them as losers who couldn't get a better job. And men pick up their guns and shovels again, and something new is built. And the cycle begins again.

                I owe you an alpha mark for this when I'm on a keyboard which has a numpad.

                This is it. Successful societies are transitory. They eventually advance to the point where the average person doesn't understand what makes society work. And when a patriarchal religion is not there to keep them behaving in ways which benefit society, they start focusing on stupid bullshit which will matter more to them than what actually enables their easy bullshit existences.

                How may people in our western society know what life is like when they don't have electricity to power them or clean water on demand out of the tap? Do they have any fucking idea of what life is like outside of their ivory towers? "Chop wood; Carry water" indeed.

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

                There's good arguments to be made that white people prefer white people and black people prefer other blacks. It's a cultural thing but I would agree it is not as heavily ingrained as male-female relations.

                [–]1CowardlyPetrov 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I wish I was living through struggle and prosperity instead of decadence/decay and collapse.

                [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                ♂ There's the alpha mark I owe you.

                [–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face 4 points5 points  (5 children)

                The thing is, TRP is growing and it is growing rapidly. It's a different faction away from MRAs and while I don't support individual evangelism, I think "consciousness raising" (I hate that term) and legitimization are an important aspect. 100k+ people isn't a small number, and if the people here actually follow the guidelines to be high SMV and on their shit - our influence will be far higher than numbers alone would indicate.

                I don't feel outright endorsement would be a good idea (and I don't think she supports that anyway), but I definitely feel this is a step forward.

                [–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus 2 points3 points  (4 children)

                I agree with you in that her acceptance of TRP lends weight to our legitimacy but I also think that /u/Whisper is right in saying that we should stop short of full association with her.

                There's a reason why we don't talk about TRP outside of the manosphere; because very often people will not listen nor are they ready to do so.

                Full association with GWW (as much as I want that to happen) would 'taint' her image as a level-headed intermediate and quite possibly reduce her level of influence to those still on the fence.

                Is widespread consciousness (hate that term too) not something worth sacrificing her association with us for? I believe it is.

                [–]2wiseclockcounter 3 points4 points  (3 children)

                I somewhat agree with your point about association, but I figured most people don't talk about TRP irl because it would be too personally risky. If TRP is an individualistic solution in a widespread problem, willingly rendering yourself vulnerable in that setting doesn't match up. It's about each of us covering our own back. That's really what's keeping TRP out of public discussion.

                Honestly, though, while it does hold some risk, I find myself poking subtle trp truths into conversations, just as unremarkable side comments. And mostly it seems people follow. I guess it's a matter of time.

                Back to Karen though, she can engage with us and still remain critical. She said herself that she doesn't agree with everything said around here but that she acknowledges our reasons for existing. IMO, it's the best approach.

                [–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                An individualistic solution to a widespread social problem? No TRP is a response to the culturally marxist conditioning our society is undergoing today. At it's core, TRP is about reaffirming those rules that nature has set for us. The rules that through social programming, our society is attempting to violate.

                You're right in that it is is about covering our own back but it's not because our philosophy is individualistic. It's because our philosophy antagonizes and undermines the very social programming the bulk of society is party to. To go out and exclaim TRP truths marks you out as a pariah because of your refusal to assimilate. You identify yourself as a 'threat to the matrix' as it were.

                That doesn't mean that people cannot be made TRP aware subtly though. As you said you poke subtle truths into conversations and people follow. Honestly I do the same as well. But that just goes to show that TRP is in line with nature and at odds with contemporary social programming. That's why TRP is more than an individualistic solution to a widespread problem. It is in fact a response to cultural marxism.

                All in all though I agree that Karen should engage with us. The benefits of having a non-TRP perspective weigh in are many, both for her and for us as a collective. But full association? I think that would be one step too far.

                [–]2wiseclockcounter 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                You'd have to admit we're both right. The act of each subscriber here reading TRP represents an individualistic solution. The total sum of these individual solutions represents the cultural response you're talking about. We read this largely for each of ourselves, but the content is such that a greater goal is available.

                [–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Apart from telling you to lift, approach and be more aware of yourself, there's nothing really individualistic about TRP though. That's why I stay away from defining it as an individualistic solution - because there is no 'manual' so to speak. It's simply a set of guidelines that are set to restore to us that inherent masculinity which we have lost sight of thanks to years of social conditioning.

                Yes the sum of our responses may represent a greater collective action. But the fact is we are not presented with a 'solution' to solve our individual problems. That comes from within us. TRP is merely the guide. The journey is our own.

                At the end of the day though it doesn't matter what paths we take so long as we do something which is what TRP is all about. Not some special directive that applies to each of us individually, but one that we can all relate to on an instinctual level. It's for that reason why I believe looking at TRP as an individualistic solution misses the point.

                TRP isn't going to solve your problems. That burden rests on you and you alone. What TRP will do though is help you see that problems exist which warrant your attention. It makes you aware of the 'matrix' that surrounds us all.

                [–]Modredpillschool[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

                Thanks, I'll leave this one stickied for now since it has the full text in it.

                [–][deleted] 43 points44 points  (10 children)

                Women are branch swingers. As soon as someone comes along with higher SMV, women go after that guy instead of sticking to the one they are with. Now imagine the guy that got stiffed is married, has kids, is beta, and has a well paying job. To the woman, he is nothing more than a provider and someone who will be supporting her even after the divorce.

                If there is anything that makes men hate women, it is mostly rooted in how modern feminism, liberal legislators, SJWs, and activist judges have stacked the deck against men based on the outdated idea that the man is the primary provider. Yet we have women now who are making more money than men amd are able to afford to take care of themselves who still go after a man for his wages and then turn around and try to deny visitation or custody of their kids. Basically the man exists as a slave, giving the woman unearned income.

                Then there are the cases like the one with Paul Nussenger (sp) and Emma Sulkowicz where a woman can decide 8 months after a string of consensual sex episodes that it is rape when she sees him with a new girlfriend and he no longer has any interest in her. So now his reputation gets trashed and she won't end up in jail or anything for these false allegations.

                So even with all the above, I think it is less hate and more resentment, Anger phase stuff. Most here are reading up on how AWALT, shit testing, keeping a frame of amusement and basically learning how keeping a woman as a plate and at the same time at arms length is how to handle women. More and more men are seeing what a losing proposition marriage is.

                In regards to Karen Straughan, I find value in what she says and it is certainly a welcome message. She "gets it" and the whole problem with that is...

                Imagine if Red Pill Women became more of a thing? The whole modern feminism narrative crumbles and those that profit off of professional victimhood would have to work when their supply of neckbearded beta SJW males dries up and is no longer donating to their Patreons. There won't be as many speaking engagements, no fame, no one to pay attention to the charlatans and their "triggered" TwoX experiences. They will be left with a circle jerk of their own misery because they failed to adapt.

                That last part, adapting, is precisely why we are all here. TRP is a response to all the shit we see everyday and it attempts to shift the power dynamic back our way by providing us with the wisdom and tools neccessary to succeed and become the best version of ourselves.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 13 points14 points  (5 children)

                In regards to Karen Straughan, I find value in what she says and it is certainly a welcome message. She "gets it" and the whole problem with that is...

                Imagine if Red Pill Women became more of a thing?

                I'm not sure how that's a problem? Could you elaborate?

                [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (3 children)

                It's a problem because you are one of a very few that "gets it". It's a numbers thing, I should have phrased that better, but I was basically saying we need more women that share your views, and we do not, hence the problem.

                The next thing I was talking about was RPW being more of a thing (solution to the aforementioned problem).

                [–]1CowardlyPetrov 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                What is red pill women though? In what way are they RP? I looked over there and I can't tell the difference between them and normal women.

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

                They're Traditionalists. Unlike the strong independent women of today.

                [–]ECoast_Man 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I think he is expressing the fact that for many of us, we are troubled by the fact that you are the exception, not the norm? Or not even 'not the norm' but you are a very big exception.

                If I go on youtube and look you up, or type in anti feminist, aside from you there are really no other wildly popular videos that understand our issues. Joe Rogan, Tom Leykis, maybe, but those are dudes.

                It's frustrating that there are so few women doing awesome work like you and HBB do.

                [–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 5 points6 points  (1 child)

                Women are branch swingers. As soon as someone comes along with higher SMV, women go after that guy instead of sticking to the one they are with.

                I'd argue that point. A woman who is sincerely happy with her man just doesn't trade him in for the next better guy who comes along.

                The fact that this nevertheless happens seemingly out of the blue on a pretty regular basis is more a sign that women aren't happy with their choice of men for whatever reason (whether it's justified or not), but that they're just good at hiding it. This even applies to those women who do branch-swing at every opportunity - their problem is simply that they are incapable of being happy.

                [–]1Jaereth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I've seen this a few times in my circle of friends, and suddenly, I got a buddy who is destroyed when his girl is seen fucking Chad in his car outside the bar two weeks later after a three year relationship.

                The thing is, ask yourself are these guys really being men? Pretty cut and dry here that not holding frame in a relationship will repulse a woman faster than anything else. They will test, and you have to respond appropriately.

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

                Imagine if Red Pill Women became more of a thing? The whole modern feminism narrative crumbles and those that profit off of professional victimhood would have to work when their supply of neckbearded beta SJW males dries up and is no longer donating to their Patreons.

                While I agree with your assessment of how this situation would play out should it happen, I highly doubt it ever would. They start teaching their shit at the high school level now. It's in the public schools and universities.

                [–]Black-Pill 9 points10 points  (1 child)

                I think this line points to the heart of the failure of Feminist Imperative;

                If the red pill is a response to anything, it's a response to the apathetic, pragmatic, mercenary nature of most women, who don't even notice the harm done to men until they're forced to personally suffer a portion of it.

                By lowering the bar in the Socio-Sexual dynamic to an almost purely transactional basis, Feminists have created an antagonistic, even brutal , sexual marketplace. Each side trying as hard as possible (and by any means) to Gain as much by this/these transactions while Giving as little as possible.

                tl;dr: The Feminist Imperative has become nothing but a shady used car dealer. Turning back the odometer, using bondo on the dents, slapping a cheap coat of paint on the whole thing and trying to sell it at premium prices.

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

                What feminism has done is absolutely trashed women's reputation. This is why there is this painful awakening to the red pill, right? Because we actually believed that women were different from this. How could such a belief have ever been possible, given that women's nature hasn't fundamentally changed? Because that nature was moulded by society restrictions, and we mistook conforming to external constraints with internal psychological nature. When the restraints were removed, we were pretty shocked.

                To be fair, men are pretty shitty if you remove society's restraints too, although in different ways. However, they have not been removed for men, they have been tightened.

                [–]CropDuster33 7 points8 points  (1 child)

                I love Karens writing, i always read it in her voice like im watching one of her videos, she has a destinct dialogue.

                [–]2wiseclockcounter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                very unique look and posture. Then just casually smoking a cigarette sometimes. (i'm marathoning Mad Men atm, so I appreciate it right now, lol)

                [–]TRP VanguardCyralea 14 points15 points  (0 children)

                Gender aside, her writing is quite good. She's an excellent blogger. I've always been a fan of her rhetorical style.

                [–]RationalistFaith1 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                Please continue this trend. TRP is always about objective truth. And truth is always fair. Here's to hoping the ying and yang is restored.

                [–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                This debacle of a gender war is not just on the minority of women who are feminists--it's on most women who've not just tolerated it, but viewed the social and legal changes the way looters view a race riot. Sure, they might not care about the issues, but they'll happily take advantage of the measures feminists have managed to enact, or to ignore the way those measures unjustly harm men until the moment they feel personally victimized through the men they care about.

                Perfect. The stance of most feminism-approving women in a nutshell.

                [–]Roshambo_USMC 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                I love Women. I have all their albums.

                [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 10 points11 points  (1 child)

                If Christina Hoff Sommers is based mom, then Karen is our Oracle. If it weren't for her, we'd either not exist, or look very different as a community as it's been her influence that's helped shape our guiding principles. At least that's my perspective on the matter as I know she's helped shape my ideas on what it means to be be "Red Pill".

                [–]brothernate76 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                While I respect Karen and have followed her videos and activities for years, calling her an "Oracle" is pretty fucking beta.

                [–]save_the_rocks 2 points3 points  (6 children)

                Didn't realize Cenk Uygur was mainstream enough to get a mention like that. What a neat concept for news that fell so far short of its aspirations...

                [–]girlwriteswhat 20 points21 points  (3 children)

                I was interviewed by him. I annoyed him so bad he started shouting and demanding I thank the suffragettes or stop voting and make him a ham sandwich. Because, according to him, 70% of British women polled in the 1860s who said they didn't want the vote just didn't know any better, and because men would never have given women the vote without suffragettes bombing post offices and train stations. You know, because those men back then were horrible, but not Cenk. Cenk's a good guy...

                [–]Pornography_saves_li 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                I would have loved if, when he did that, you yelled "Armenian Genocide" back just as loud. Now THAT would have been comedy.

                [–]1CowardlyPetrov 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                Can you explain this joke please?

                Much like a dissected frog, I think understanding it will only make things better.

                [–]Pornography_saves_li 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Its sort of a 'universal trigger' for Turks. They massacred hundreds of thousands of Armenian Christians, and nw you can go to rison for even mentioning it in Turkey.

                [–]2undead_keyboard 10 points11 points  (1 child)

                Here's Karen's interview with Cenk. It starts out reasonably enough, and he even seems a bit swayed by the circumcision argument, but skip to about 25:00 if you want to see Cenk lose his shit.

                The funny thing is, less than three weeks after this interview, the TYT team publicly announced their change on the circumcision issue from being pro-circumcision to anti-circumcision. Hmm, I wonder what event filled with numerous facts that challenged their long held beliefs could have been responsible for that?

                [–]epixs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Not sure what to say here really after reading the comments. Most of what has been said is sidebar stuff and/or been stated before by great posters here. TRP has always been a male only space and I hope it stays like that in the future-though I wonder after reading the comments posted here...

                [–]desmay 4 points5 points  (7 children)

                I'm always amused when people talk about MRAs like Rollo does without having the guts to talk to any of us. (Hi Rollo.)

                [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 11 points12 points  (1 child)

                Well, some of us got banned from AVfM forums because

                "However, using any such discussion as the basis for arguing that women's suffrage is in any way responsible for social inequality, whether real or perceived, is not okay"

                Some of us question the priori that men and women are equal and interchangeable.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 9 points10 points  (0 children)

                Yikes, glad I haven't commented on women's suffrage at AVFM. I'd have put them in something of a dilemma.

                [–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi 5 points6 points  (4 children)

                I dunno, maybe because your forums are overseen, edited and censored by anti-feminist feminists?

                [–]Modredpillschool[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                Surely you don't mean the mods are feminists..

                [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                /u/sillymod has some very leftist tendencies from what I've seen, but I don't think they're being "feminist". They're just playing nice by the left's rules so they can be more mainstream acceptable. TRP on the other hand doesn't play that game. Instead we're more like...

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvozGpMu_p8

                Political correctness has no power here.

                [–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi 6 points7 points  (1 child)

                Sorry, meant AVfM's comment threads, not TRP. Let's just say there are a lot of overseers in the locker room there.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 8 points9 points  (0 children)

                I've heard that. I'm not pleased about it.

                My policy on my channel is that what's below the line is not my responsibility. Anyone can say almost anything (incitements to violence are pretty much the only thing I'll delete/ban over). I've deleted less than 10 comments since 2011, and have only banned 3 or 4 users.

                This is partly a practical decision. If you moderate comments, you are indicating that any comments that do stay up are comments you either agree with or find acceptable/appropriate. You're taking responsibility for what is said in your channel comments. Frankly, I don't have the time or energy for that.

                It's partly about principle. I can't be pissed off when my own comments get deleted on other sites sympathetic to the opposition if I do the same thing, can I?

                The comment/forum moderation there bothers me.

                [–]srsly_forever_alone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                What an amazing woman, what an amazing human being.

                [–]Billybob25112 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                A lot of people here are putting her on a pedestal which is only natural considering most of us are reformed bluepillers. Karen is a woman and she will act in accordance to her nature. The fact that she shows a modicum of self awareness regarding the current discrepancy between the prevailing social narrative and reality is laudable, but not extraordinary.

                Maybe she proves that nurture plays a much more important role in creating the modern woman. On the other hand, she could also just be bored and is using her aquired status as a means of validation. The woman who destroyed her family for the chance to bail a convict out of prison comes to mind. Nobody expected it but it should come as no surprise to any terper that it happened.

                tl;dr: You're all trying to project your BP fantasies onto her. Stop it, go read the sidebar, which I'm sure 99% of you skipped, and stop posting.

                Also, you people need to shut the fuck up and listen. Since when the fuck has TRP become a place for people to massage their precious little egoes? You're all a bunch of losers with no idea what you're doing in life, which is why you came here in the first place, and yet instead of showing a little bit of humility and maybe learning a thing of two you think so highly of yourselves that you'd go toe to toe with accepted wisdom and fucking Rollo of all people.

                Downvoting what you don't agree with and one-upping doesn't make you smarter, in fact it makes you look like a little bitch.

                [–]wearnocrowns 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                I understand the zeal it prompts when reading such pure gold statements trumpeted by a woman but there's no point in sort of embracing her. TRP is a strategy for making men's lives better. I don't think it needs any friends. Any activist, no matter how enlightened, associated with TRP can only make for giving greater publicity to the RP ideas and thus, as the end result, do actually a disservice to men.

                That's not to say I don't appreciate what she says just that proclaiming loudly some of the harsh truths won't make my life any better in the current environment. And I think none of us aspires to stir up some revolution any time soon.

                In other words, no amount of someone else's rhetoric can bring about a significant global change in terms of gender dynamics. I am here to understand the real situation, adapt to it and try to turn it to my advantage as well as to improve and elevate myself. My take on any kind of SJW is that he / she has yet to reach the point at which he / she will grasp that focusing on yourself is the only way to change anything.

                [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (4 children)

                If 40 years of life have taught me anything about woman, its that most of them are 100% entirely full of bullshit and will say anything at all to get their way. I do not even trust my own mother. 40 years have also taught me that a man can live his whole life alone and be very happy, all he needs is sex once every week or two. A 20-60 minute session of sexual pleasure. That's it, beyond this a man does not need a woman. And you know what else? The same applies for woman themselves, all they need a man for is some cock, and often his wallet. No need to shack up awkwardly and risk messy divorces and break ups. I've said in other posts, the greatest strength of the North American man is his ability to be able to turn his back and walk away. I suggest more men exercise that ability. The more woman left single and alone in old age, the better. Give them what they want, their independence. Besides, the world is overpopulated and our species needs to start managing its breeding responsibly.

                [–]vitringur 4 points5 points  (2 children)

                The world is not overpopulated. The population wouldn't have grown in the first place if we hadn't invented ways of sustaining the bigger population.

                Hans Rosling has given great lectures on this matter.

                [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                The population wouldn't have grown in the first place if we hadn't invented ways of sustaining the bigger population.

                So few people understand even what the key technology is: it's oil.

                Why is oil so important? Power? Pshaw! Power is nothing.

                Plastics? Plastics are important. Pretty much all of modern medicine relies on plastics. It's a key technology, but it's nothing.

                Fertilizer. How few people realize that the #1 game changer that oil has made on human existence is fertilizer? Without oil, there's no way we could feed the mouths we have on this planet.

                We can replace power, we can deal with lower levels of medicine. But we have to feed people and we simply can't do that without fertilizer derived from oil.

                [–]theDarkAngle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                most of them are 100% entirely full of bullshit and will say anything at all to get their way.

                While I think saying "100% entirely full of..." is a bit repetitive, I fully agree 100% entirely.

                Think about it. Men have some pretty obvious advantages over women... do people really think that women - the population bottleneck, as it were - wouldn't have advantages of their own?

                They are fucking effortless liars and manipulators. This isn't a diss... game recognize game.

                [–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi 2 points3 points  (78 children)

                I wonder how awesomely Red Pill everyone will think Karen is when she throws TRP under the bus after the next Eliot Rodger incident?

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

                (2:00)

                Thanks for the compliments, but MRAs are still just underserved feminists.

                [–]648262[🍰] 6 points7 points  (67 children)

                This whole "praise-Karen" thing caught me by surprise. I did not know about her before this post, so I only have a few short snippets to base anything on.

                But isn't she getting an extreme amount of lady-points for saying more or less exactly what all the posters in this and related subs say? She's a woman, but isn't RPW-posters also women? This isn't really groundbreaking.

                I don't mean to take a shit on her, but this all sort of smells funny. Though it's always refreshing to see some truth being said.

                [–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 8 points9 points  (1 child)

                But isn't she getting an extreme amount of lady-points for saying more or less exactly what all the posters in this and related subs say?

                Yes. The same way Norah Vincents or Christina Hoff Sommers got even more points for their publications because they wrote them originally coming from a feminist position.

                And that's good. Because you can guess who I would quote to outsiders if I wanted to convey the problems men face in our society.

                [–]648262[🍰] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                And that's good. Because you can guess who I would quote to outsiders if I wanted to convey the problems men face in our society.

                Sure, I see your point - but I guess my issue is that I don't see the need to convey mens problems to others.

                [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                But isn't she getting an extreme amount of lady-points for saying more or less exactly what all the posters in this and related subs say? She's a woman, but isn't RPW-posters also women? This isn't really groundbreaking.

                Karen predates TRP by a couple of years, and it was her writings and videos that helped create this sub in the first place by informing our views and opinions and helped shape what it means to be Red Pill.

                If this were the Matrix, then she's the Oracle.

                [–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi 5 points6 points  (54 children)

                This is just another MRM recruiting effort. Karen gives us her MRA blessing? She can keep it.

                AVfM has been overrun by female overseers. They want a bigger tent until the MSM negatively associates TRP or PUAs with MRAs and then they throw them under the bus.

                MRAs leech whatever Red Pill truths are least offensive to their anti-feminist female endorsers to convince TRP it has their back until it gets inconvenient. Then you'll see them suck up to the MSM and get faux-offended for being lumped in with TRP riff raff while they try to plead their case that all they want is the same equality feminists have been crying over for decades.

                I agree with a lot of what Karen is selling, but you need to ask yourselves why she's so accommodating of TRP now.

                [–]girlwriteswhat 27 points28 points  (16 children)

                AVfM has been overrun by female overseers.

                Agreed. Don't let my name on their masthead fool you--I have zilch to do with their day to day operations, have no job description, and don't do anything other than contribute the odd article. I have zero interest in running any organization, or telling other people what to do.

                However, if you'd actually watched my video, I didn't throw PUAs under the bus. I said MRAs and PUAs are not the same, and then said Elliot Rodger was neither.

                I've never not been accommodating of PUAs or Red Pillers or MGTOWs. I've quoted from Heartiste and No Ma'am in my videos, done several interviews with Stardusk, praised Barbarossaaaa, and even defended Ferdinand Bardamu's most provocative article ("the necessity of domestic violence"), something for which I still, years later, receive heat. I adore Demonspawn, and could even manage a civil conversation or two with "Jeremiah" (who was the closest I've ever come to meeting an actual misogynist, at least before he found Jesus).

                Surely there's nothing wrong with saying PUAs aren't MRAs, and anti-PUAs are also not MRAs, and none of us was responsible for the debacle that was Elliot Rodger. Did I blame TRP for Rodger? Nope. I came closer to blaming the Young Turks and Kelly Blue Book.

                Do PUAs WANT to be falsely associated with MRAs when some nutter shoots a bunch of people and everyone is screaming that he was an MRA?

                And this latest debacle of the rugby team and the murdered girl, and the claim that "MRAs are celebrating her death". My commentary revolved entirely around the fact that the blogger in question wasn't celebrating her death at all. I don't know that I even mentioned he was, by his own definition, not an MRA. Just that his prediction that feminists would descend on her body like buzzards to pick it clean of every last scrap of political meat was not "celebrating" her death.

                I have never not been accommodating of TRP. I've taken heat from MRAs for saying I have no problem with TRP (or PUAs). Hell, I was even defending RooshV and his "rape should be legal on private property" thought experiment yesterday--not agreeing with it, but pointing out that it probably doesn't come from a place of hate, and regardless, it's just an idea with some reasoning behind it.

                I've been giving you guys my blessing all along. If you don't want it, that's fine, but I won't stop giving it.

                [–]Modredpillschool[S] 16 points17 points  (4 children)

                I've always been a fan of Karen's because she's well spoken and tends to be better spoken than myself on a lot of issues. But I'm curious, do you really believe she's being more positive towards TRP because of our popularity now?

                I don't give her extra points for having tits, only for saying things better than most are able.

                [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                [deleted]

                  [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                  As I stated up thread, TRP probably wouldn't exist, or at least would look at lot different, if it weren't for her influence. She is to TRP what the Oracle was to The Matrix.

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

                  From what I remember, she had no problem with TRP long before this forum existed, I dont see why she would have one now.

                  [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  But I'm curious, do you really believe she's being more positive towards TRP because of our popularity now?

                  GWW has been TRP for a damn long time, since before TRP existed. There has been a running joke between the two of us that I'd say something on MR that would generate downvotes and hate (usually something in line with men and women actually being different) and around two weeks later she'd say the same thing and get upvotes and praise.

                  This is not any kind of a conversion, it's simply that it's finally being noticed. GWW has long held that she's an anti-feminist first and MRA second.

                  [–]TRP VanguardtrpSenator 8 points9 points  (24 children)

                  Well I honestly do believe there is a lot of overlap with MRM and TRP. They have the same foundation, but one camp is filled with idealists and the other is realists. One says, "This is how it is, but it's hard, so let's fix it and change it to make it easy for me." While the other camp says, "This is how it is, so that's the game. I'm focused on now, and right now, this is how I get ahead and make more out of my life."

                  [–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi 6 points7 points  (23 children)

                  MRAs are making a concerted push to get all of the manosphere under one tent. The problem with that is their tent poles are based on the misguided notion that egalitarian equalism is an ideal state between the sexes. They seem more than happy to invite the FI regulating influence of women into that Male Space because they believe the same lie that feminists have spewed for a long time – that an equal state of gender parity is in any way achievable or preferable. They’re happy to co-opt the elements of Red Pill awareness (the elements that rate the least offensive to their female support) they previously despised if it means they can pull in new (donating) members.

                  Once the next Eliot Rodger incident happens you’ll see how quick the story will be “MRAs are NOT PUAs” and they wipe that association off on anything conveniently Red Pill.

                  I will never fully endorse the MRM because their core ideology is one that’s still based on the idealistic hope that an egalitarian equalism can ever be possible between men and women. In my estimation the majority, the leadership and certainly the female MRAs (really anti-feminists) fundamentally want to be more ‘perfected’ feminists in that they want the balanced equalism feminists initially promoted as a goal, which is at odds with the complementary, evolved nature of the sexes.

                  Every time there is a social gender crisis in the MSM that reflects on the manosphere the MRM exposes it’s true attitude towards the red pill by either distancing itself, throwing certain elements under the bus (PUA caricatures) or they make it an effort in a recruitment drive. Many are white knights, and many reject the core truths of evo-psych. So you’ll forgive me for finding that disingenuous.

                  [–]girlwriteswhat 17 points18 points  (5 children)

                  I came out well over a year ago as not an egalitarian equalist. Just FYI. I clearly stated that I have no goal in mind for society.

                  You seem to be conflating me with AVFM or "MRAs in general". I have no goals in mind. I've stated that numerous times over the last couple of years, whenever anyone asks me what my ideal society would look like. My answer has been I don't know, because 1) I don't know what's possible; 2) having goals inevitably leads a person to dismiss or ignore evidence that might contraindicate those goals; and 3) having a utopian vision of how things should be never amounted to anything nice. I'm more interested in what is than what should be.

                  In my estimation the majority, the leadership and certainly the female MRAs (really anti-feminists) fundamentally want to be more ‘perfected’ feminists in that they want the balanced equalism feminists initially promoted as a goal,

                  I'm not an anti-feminist because I want balanced equalism. I'm an anti-feminist because feminism is a steaming pile of hooey. Right from the beginning. From the proto-first wave. It has nothing to do with a conflict of goals, and everything to do with hypocrisy, lies, and an examination of what is. Think of two prosecutors. One wants a conviction. The other wants to know the truth. I'm the latter. Whatever goal I might be said to have is the goal of revealing the truth. Even if it isn't what I want to hear.

                  Again, I'm not AVFM or the MRM in general. I'm just me. I oppose feminism because it's a pack of lies. That doesn't mean I have some pipe dream of what I want society to look like. It just means I don't like lies.

                  And given that, yes, the next Elliot Rodger incident will see me saying again that "MRAs are not PUAs are not anti-PUAs are not the "manosphere" and BTW, none of them were involved in this bullshit." Is there any statement of fact in there that you object to? You know, on the grounds of actual reality? Should I lie? Do you want to be lumped in with everyone else?

                  "Rollo Tomassi: PUA, MRA, TRP, incel. You are the manosphere, and the manosphere is responsible for every woman who's murdered, no matter the circumstances. Because reasons. We're in this together, Rollo. Why don't we set down for a spell and share a two-six and get to know one another?

                  the MRM exposes it’s true attitude towards the red pill by either distancing itself, throwing certain elements under the bus (PUA caricatures)

                  Well, last time this came up (Elliot Rodger) it was MRAs getting blamed. Did you WANT us to say, "yeah, the pick up artists are all culpable because they're MRAs!" Did you want us to lie and say the entire manosphere is MRA--to say YOU are MRA? What did you want us to do? Given what PUAs say about MRAs, why would you think we'd be interested in protecting you? Given that MRAs have been the go-to scapegoats, why would you think we could protect you?

                  As far as throwing PUA caricatures under the bus, or rejecting the core truths of evo-psych, can I have some links? I'm actually curious. I can't speak for the deeds of every member of the MRM, I can only speak for myself, but I don't think I've ever thrown a man under the bus. A woman, yes, but that's dirty laundry...

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                  Well, last time this came up (Elliot Rodger) it was MRAs getting blamed. Did you WANT us to say, "yeah, the pick up artists are all culpable because they're MRAs!" Did you want us to lie and say the entire manosphere is MRA--to say YOU are MRA? What did you want us to do? Given what PUAs say about MRAs, why would you think we'd be interested in protecting you? Given that MRAs have been the go-to scapegoats, why would you think we could protect you?

                  It's not that MRAs are PUAs or that they should pretend they are. It's that appeasing feminists by saying so helps feminists divide and conquer while doing absolutely nothing to help the MRM. Do you think they convinced anyone that they aren't PUA Elliot Rodgers? No. The only people who were convinced, didn't believe that in the first place.

                  It's about not turning your back on your "friends". Red Pillers, PUAs, MGTOWs and manospherians in general are the ones sympathetic to MRAs who will support them, even if we rib on them. Throwing the manosphere under the bus just makes them lose credibility. It's failing a feminist shit test and nothing else. What they should have done isn't say that they're PUAs, defend us, or throw us under the bus. They should have passed the shit test by not playing.

                  [–]girlwriteswhat 7 points8 points  (2 children)

                  While I would agree that feminism is a giant, society-wide shit test, there's a problem in the idea of "not playing".

                  Society is not a romantic relationship. Feminism is a shit test yes, but the problem is that the men in power repeatedly, perhaps intentionally, fail the test. They can afford to do so because their status is virtually unassailable. They don't HAVE to be red pill. They can indulge the "blue pill alpha" mentality from their offices at the capitol and all it will get them is more female votes. Same with mainstream media. Every time they call us misogynists, they get more female readers. Same with ad companies. Every time they portray men as bumbling dolts, they get more female cash.

                  THOSE men are playing. Not playing as a single red pill man is no biggie. Not playing, as a movement seeking attention for male issues when we've been essentially called murderers, isn't really an option. If we choose not to play, well, others will. Other women, and other men, and not just any men and women, but the ones in control of the narrative. The ones who cast votes on legislative floors.

                  Differentiating between MRAs and PUAs (and incels) is not "appeasing" feminists. They would like nothing more than to paint the entire manosphere with the same brush. Exposing them as cynical, politically motivated morons who are using the actions of a man who had nothing to do with any of us in order to paint all of us as malfeasant or evil or violently misogynist is something we need to do. Every time the MRM does that, we grow.

                  You can pass the shit test by not playing. Or you can pass it by maintaining frame.

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

                  What you're missing is that a two second look at the front page of mensrights is enough to differentiate them from PUAs. There's no need for them to make a thing out of it. The world would respect them more if they held frame by ignoring the shit test.

                  [–]girlwriteswhat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  People need to have a reason to go look.

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

                  I'm not an anti-feminist because I want balanced equalism. I'm an anti-feminist because feminism is a steaming pile of hooey. Right from the beginning. From the proto-first wave. It has nothing to do with a conflict of goals, and everything to do with hypocrisy, lies, and an examination of what is. Think of two prosecutors. One wants a conviction. The other wants to know the truth. I'm the latter. Whatever goal I might be said to have is the goal of revealing the truth. Even if it isn't what I want to hear.

                  I find a lot of what you have to say is more RP than a lot of RP guys even.

                  I agree with you. Or I should say, it was YOU who led me to this opinion. Feminism didn't become bad with the "third wave" or whatever. It was always garbage. Women didn't want the vote because they thought it might mean the responsibility and danger of fighting in wars. They wanted their privileges. When they collectively understood there was no risk to gaining more privileges, they decided to get them. Men didn't suddenly go from being a pack of marauding rapers and slavers to the woman worshiping pussies today in the last hundred years. Men have always loved women. Men have given everything for women. They have died for women.

                  I can't say I know everything, but I find these things easier to believe than that all men are in the evil patriarchy club and that feminism has only recently run out of "real problems" because of how successful they were in the past.

                  [–]2undead_keyboard 7 points8 points  (12 children)

                  many reject the core truths of evo-psych

                  Karen has an entire playlist devoted to evo-psych, the contents of which line up nicely with RP theory, so that's one thing you'd be hard pressed to accuse her of.

                  And maybe Karen can correct me, but I believe she's always identified more as an anti-feminist than an MRA. But because many of her beliefs align with MRA ideology, they've picked her up and carried her on their shoulders. Yes, many men and women take up the MRA banner after watching Karen's videos, but many find themselves gravitating toward TRP instead. An example.

                  I will never fully endorse the MRM because their core ideology is one that’s still based on the idealistic hope that an egalitarian equalism can ever be possible between men and women

                  You know, I'd bet Karen would agree with you that that hope is pretty damn idealistic and pretty damn unrealistic. She seems to be in this more for the intellectual joy of figuring out why things are the way they are.

                  [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  I will never fully endorse the MRM because their core ideology is one that’s still based on the idealistic hope that an egalitarian equalism can ever be possible between men and women

                  That's only been the case for the last 5 years after the liberal influx. Before then, TRP and MRA were very similar. Old MRAs accepted that men and women were different and equality was impossible. It was more focused on rolling back Feminism and Bureaugamy (before we came up with the term for it) than any fantastical equality beliefs. MRAs like Zed, Lee, Rob Fedders, and Angry Harry knew that egalitarianism was feminism 2.0.

                  [–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                  MRAs are making a concerted push to get all of the manosphere under one tent.

                  Honestly, that's been my goal for a long time now and I think we've beat them to the punch. Although I can't say for certain if that's actually be anyone's goal other than my own, to see a unified front for the manosphere.

                  TRP has become the closest thing to that, and as such it serves as a collective clearinghouse on a variety of subjects. We still have the stated goal of being about male sexual strategy, but we're so much...bigger...than that now. I think that's why we have such widespread appeal to men who are waking up to the world that surrounds them.

                  [–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  I think that's why we have such widespread appeal to men who are waking up to the world that surrounds them.

                  I think one of the biggest reasons for TRPs success is that it is a philosophy rather than an ideology. TRP is about the truth, no more and no less. It does not subscribe moral values or "should" statements. It's not a movement trying to accomplish anything. It has no unfalsable priori. It's simply an examination of what really is vs what we've been fed.

                  [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (1 child)

                  I agree with a lot of what Karen is selling, but you need to ask yourselves why she's so accommodating of TRP now.

                  Why not listen to her ideas and point out what is and what's not fundamentally at odds with TRP? Where she is correct her contribution can provide clarity; where she is mistaken writers like you can respond.

                  We're all about approaching truth here, no?

                  [–]kaiwanxiaode 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  I agree. I feel like in this case /u/Rollo-Tomassi is being unnecessarily aggressive.

                  [–]TRP VanguardWhisper 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  In any group with non-mainstream political or social views, it's always easy to score points by accusing others (especially the relative moderates) of "going soft" or "selling out". Since moderates have no easy defense against this, such groups tend to "extremify" over time.

                  I can't help but wonder if you're going that route here.

                  Why would you be concerned if MRAs in general, or Karen specifically, public disavows us at some later date? One of the basic things we are about here is not caring what the mainstream thinks. If AVfM takes out a Superbowl TV spot specifically to make an announcement about how Whisper is a dangerous problematic triggering rapey misogynist, it won't make me blot one word.

                  On the flip side, I won't let the fact that Karen is female, or has a very different strategy for tackling the problems we agree are there, or disagrees with me about many things, stop me from being welcoming to someone who has made me feel like I want to be.

                  I understand where you're coming from. Sometimes men need to be very vigilant about standing up to women, because it's not easy to be angry at women or hate them. We are hardwired to love and protect them. Being the misogynist civilization needs right now takes some effort.

                  But fear of going soft is just another kind of fear.

                  The hope the MRM offers is a false hope. We need to make TRP aware of that, yes. But the MRM doesn't know that. They think they can win this fight. I'm not going to spit on them for being wrong, or treat them with the contempt I would reserve for an enemy. I'm just going to keep telling the truth.

                  [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children)

                  Not really. For one, she's very articulate and makes points better than about 90% of the men on this site. Did you even read the OP? That was fantastic.

                  Two. She has the guts to make videos and put her face out there for everyone to see while the rest of us hide behind a computer screen and tell each other "not to talk about TRP."

                  Give credit where credits due.

                  [–]648262[🍰] 0 points1 point  (7 children)

                  Did you even read the OP?

                  Why would you even indicate something like this?

                  Give credit where credits due.

                  I agree. Like I said, I had never heard of her before this, but apparently she's been around longer than most.

                  [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children)

                  Because she deserves praise and not for being a woman. She deserves praise for thoughts and ideas she expresses so eloquently. If this were a man writing it, he would receive nothing but praise. No one would be questioning it.

                  The fact that she is a woman is just icing on the cake. Gives me a little hope for humanity.

                  [–]648262[🍰] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

                  This might be going over your head, but my original point was a question of why she was getting so much praise when there is about 100k subscribers in this sub alone, and who knows how many in RPW. Some of these are expressing thoughts that are identical to hers - and some of them are great writers as well.

                  Your point is that she's a good writer alker. Yes, she is, but I was surprised why she was highlighted as someone special. One of the reasons, which is a very good one, is that she expressed her thoughts and opinions on this matter before TRP existed. I did not know that, so I am happy to learn that - and it makes more sense.

                  [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

                  And she doesn't hide behind a computer screen. She's made herself into a public figure and faces the consequences for what she has to say. That takes guts and that's more than pretty much everyone of us can claim.

                  [–]648262[🍰] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

                  I'm not sure if I agree that is such a smart thing, but if she gets something out of it then good for her.

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

                  It's not necessarily a smart move but not necessarily dumb either. I'm sure she's made many enemies as well as new friends. However, the fact that she puts herself out there for what she believes is the truth is what makes her special. That's why I said, give credit where credit is due.

                  [–]648262[🍰] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                  What is it, in your mind, that is accomplished by putting her face out there?

                  [–]NSA_web_spider 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Damn. That's cool. She's taking accountability in a specific way and looking for ways to fix the overarching problems. She's totally going to lose her woman card.

                  You go girl. I hope your enlightened view empowers you.

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

                  Guards!!! Seize her ovaries!!!

                  [–]Hennez 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Somehow I feel I've regained a bit of hope for humanity and specially women by reading this.

                  Honestly, with more people (women) like /u/girlwriteswhat I think many of the problems inherent to gender dynamics could be avoided completely. I'm not saying some men deviate and actually act the way you describe (there are always that kind of people).

                  I think you could start The Rational Male counterpart, /u/Rollo-Tomassi might have something to say about the name though. But the idea remains.

                  More rational women would really be a great thing. It's the ability to carefully think and observe the world around us that empowers humans to achieve things.

                  Great comments. Keep them up!

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

                  I was alone at home, and I stood up and gave a standing ovation.

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

                  She was spot on about men's "hate" is really just fear and anger. Men fear who women really are. Are angry that women are not really what they have been told they are. The Disney hypnosis on men and society has blinded men everywhere.

                  What TRP has done is make men become self responsible and to see the truth.

                  The fear and anger is so deep that there is even a group called MGTOW. Not saying those men are full of fear and anger but many are. To the point where they don't want anything to do with them and just don't accept the real nature of women.

                  TRP is about coming full circle in understanding and accepting the nature of women. But it is a process. A process of many experiences with women.

                  When you understand them then you accept them as they are. You are no longer trying to control the outcome and change who they are.

                  You are also not ignorant in jumping into any kind of commitment with them or giving your power away to them. Because you understand that and accept that deep down they want to earn it and want you to keep your power. It's what makes you who you are.

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

                  Why is there a sudden need to solidify, and put structure to both redpill and mgtow. I want to see what happens when we let this evolve organically without all the labels.

                  [–]ECoast_Man 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  I think many of our recruits found Karen's youtube videos along the way. I am one of them.

                  I remember in particular her video on 'why men don't marry' or something to that effect. That was excellent.

                  [–]anacardo01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  As a man (Man, if we prefer to indulge in the Tomassian conceit) who identifies his masculinity along the Omega->Gamma->Sigma spectrum rather than the Omega->Delta->Beta->Alpha spectrum, I see all the major snits ITT as correct. /u/Rollo-Tomassi is, in fact, AMOGing Karen; he does the same with his male competitors who can be 'had' on some grounds of doctrinal impurity; Frame Uber Alles.

                  /u/girlwriteswhat is, of course, LDO, AWALT etc., doing some mugging for the crowd and eating up the Coin of the Realm, male attention, in a niche space (what an interesting new adaptation for the Feminine Imperative, no?), primarily IMO through her rather exaggerated patience / humility in the face of criticism.

                  The boys are sure as shit putting her on a pedestal, associating her with goddess-esque characters, probably imagining what their babies might be like, etc. etc., as though they fell off the turnip truck yesterday.

                  Ideologically I come closer to Karen's position of knowing-skepticism, this is what we're seeing, the evo-psych models that Rollo et al have pioneered are far superior to anything that blank-slate cultural Marxism have offered us, et cetera, but that ultimately all models are wrong, some are just less wrong than others, and we don't actually know what's possible within the range of human ingenuity (who the hell ever would have 100 years ago that we could have what we have now as prevailing cultural programming?) than to Rollo's, which in many ways strikes me as quite similar to that of someone like B. F. Skinner.

                  [–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi -4 points-3 points  (2 children)

                  Funny how full of compliments Karen is about TRP now that subscribership has outpaced the MRM sub.

                  Beta bait. Don't take it.

                  [–]girlwriteswhat 9 points10 points  (1 child)

                  Honestly, I hadn't noticed. Then again, I have no idea how many subscribers I have. 90k maybe?

                  [–]Pornography_saves_li 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Would you two like to do a youtube discussion? Ill moderate....

                  -factory

                  [–]innibinni 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  *slow clap, wipes tears. This is beautiful

                  load more comments (11 replies)