MetaReminders of Myself (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi




The Gestalt Feminine vs. The Gestalt Masculine

In 2018 the stakes are much higher, the game has changed and the tolerance for challenges to an ideology intrinsic to our feminine-primary social order is at its breaking point. There is now a presumption of authority to go along with the presumptions of entitlement for women and default guilt for men. The very platforms that made our coming together possible are ruled by the world views we’ve always warned against.

I once wrote a post called Appeals to Reason and in it I made a rational case as to why it is never in a good idea for a man to try to reason his way into intimacy or sex with women. Most Beta men subscribe to a very literalist mindset. Our Rational Interpretive process evolved to make men natural, deductive, problem solvers. As such, we evolved different strategies and different communication methods apart from those of women. We believe in the statistics, the empirical data, the proven methods, the ‘science’ behind the processes to make informed decisions. We prioritize information when we communicate.

To the contrary, women prioritize the context of communication – they feel the communication before they apply a rational interpretation to what’s been communicated. Even when confronted with a succinctly reason position founded on empirical facts, their first priority is to personalize how that data makes them feel. Their Emotional Interpretive Process is their evolved default.

What I see happening today on a larger meta-social scale is a collective gestalt of the masculine trying to assert their deductive reasoning to assess the disposition of the meta-female gestalt which is firmly founded in how issues of monumental social importance make the whole of the feminine feel.

In Appeals to Reason I used a guy’s petition of women as an example of this. The kid had created a list of questions for women to fill out as to why they didn’t want to go out with him on a date and to assess what it is that women want. This is classic male deductive reasoning. For millennia men have tried to apply reason to dealing with women only to find themselves confounded by what women say and what they do. The same is now true in a social scope and about decisions that have global importance today.

However, in today’s scenario it is women who presume an authority that is just on the cusp of totalitarianism. It’s like we’re collectively, as Beta, Blue Pill conditioned men, attempting to logically deduce what it is women want in order to satisfy their desire for a total authority. And when that woman doesn’t get what she wants, when men try to reason her into bed, she reacts like a violent child having a tantrum. She says what she feels, not what she needs.

And the gestalt of men turn on one another and blame the other for setting her off. “If only you assholes would give her what she wants we wouldn’t be in this mess” they say. Then to make matters worse we pander to her tantrums, we believe her insanity, we take her feelings as facts and the other half of the gestalt masculinity wonders why the other can’t see the real story while the other is swept up in female hysterics.

Then the gestalt female is pandered to so thoroughly that we come to the point that we follow their Emotional Interpretive process as the only measure of legitimate discussion. This is where we are today, only, to compound things, we’ve collectively approved for the gestalt feminine a universally effective means of destroying the parts of the gestalt masculine who would dare to challenge their feelings, their emotional priorities. We’ve given the feminine the power to wish us away to the cornfield if we upset the child.

And so here we are, at the figurative mercy of the gestalt feminine (and their Vichy male “allies”) keeping our collective heads down for fear that they’ll deny us our bread if we upset the insane, collective female Id.

[–]Endorsed ContributorKeffirLime 17 points18 points  (1 child)

There is a more prominent backlash now than a few years ago.

The anti-feminist movement is growing. The “Facts over feelings” phrase has gathered some momentum. The amount of public figures opposing feminism has increased.

The nature of the feminist movement is based on emotional as opposed to factual foundations. For this reason in public debates they end up damaging the movement, as opposed to garnering support. This has been happening for a while now and has aided the continued growth of their opposition.

Personally, I think their support is far less than they(even we) think. As you say, they are the child in the room throwing a tantrum. It’s all we can hear, so there must lots of support for it? But in reality it’s just the loudest human being in the room, and most people would love for it to shut up but are too polite to confront the situation.

Edit: When the child first started making a scene, people were concerned, worried, maybe something is wrong?After further inspection, the child is simply upset because it's irrational demands are not being met. The longer it keeps whining the more of a brat it is, and the less sympathy/tolerance people will have for it.

[–]Imperator_Red 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope you are right but I think you are wrong. Either way it doesn't matter much. The left loses plenty of battles but they never lose the war. If they lose this one they will just take their foot off the gas for a while and try again when the smoke has cleared.

[–]snowdenlaydying 7 points8 points  (1 child)

"Men control the conversation with silence, women control the conversation with histrionics". Although the long-term strategy of completely ignoring this shit test is likely to result in chaos, I can understand why a great deal of men, for example the MGTOW folk, are increasingly choosing to turn away or as is often preached here: to sit back and "enjoy the decline". What other options are there that don't risk being beheaded by the feminist mob? I say this as a man who works in an incredibly female dense industry (work that I happen to love and don't wish to abandon). Law 38 is the option I've taken.

[–]StrifePrevails 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Law 38-ing was fine when fourth-wave feminism was in it's infancy but now it's actively making life harder for us men. In an age where anyone can get MeToo'ed and even Superman faced backlash for making a perfectly reasonable statement, we can't be keeping our heads down, hoping it'll blow over.

They're testing our boundaries and will keep escalating and escalating until we're turned into literal chattel slaves à la the Belgian Congo, as "reparations" for our centuries of oppressing women (hyperbole but you get my point). A line must be drawn somewhere.

[–]EdmondDaunts 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have recently wondered why the story is called The Boy Who Cried Wolf rather than the Child or the Girl. Maybe it is just the common indefinite article.

Or maybe it is because the contrast is more prominent with males. A lying boy should know better and is held to a higher standard. And the effect has a greater consequence on the town.

The Emotional Imperative is analogous to humans denying Nature. It’s built on a Pyramid of Beta Thought. But like the markets, it can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

[–]BurnoutRS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hippie environmentalist types really have capitalist greed to thank for their entire movement. Put more simply, if there never was a problem, there would never have been need of a solution.

Throughout history there are examples of times where women were given too much power, the only issue is that these events have largely been generational. When determining the scope of influence that a societal event has, you need to look largely at how the information disseminates and how much staying power it has. Nowadays you can share video evidence with people at the drop of a hat.

What im really trying to say is that we are finite, and because of that finality, we eventually come to lose all that we have gained in life. However, as time has gone on, we have built mechanisms to preserve human knowledge. Every subsequent generation should ideally be pushing the species a bit further forward.

Think of society as a child. Letting women have too much power is like putting your hand on a hot stove. The child cannot truly understand why it sucks to burn yourself until he has been burned. What if you showed the child a video of another child burning himself on the stove? What if we could put a stopper on senescense? What if we could halt the breakdown of information?

Anyways Im babbling but essentially I believe we are taking part in an inevitable process. The gaurdians did their jobs so well that they thought they had put a stop to evil for good. Evil grows while good sleeps or some shit like that. So feminism is rearing its ugly head again, but the form the debate is taking, the amount of people involved, the amount of information that will be archived and the formats it will be archived in...

Assuming everything works itself out, the lesson is gonna have a lot more staying power this time. If times are getting harder, so too are the men

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil 1 point2 points  (2 children)

So what your saying is that the west has shifted from a masculine Logos to the Femanine Logos of Cybele

[–]Skuggasveinn 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This video is way too long. In laymen's terms, what's the difference between this Logos and the classical Greek/Western one?

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's the difference between a high level math class and an Oprah show.

[–]Imperator_Red 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is why women (and only a few of them) are only now starting to question the most absurd overreaches of feminism. For years rational men have been looking around in shock, not understanding why women were unable to see rationally how insane that this has become. It was only when a few people said to them, "But how would you FEEEEEEEEEEEEL if your brother or son were falsely accused?" that some of the message started to get through. Turns out they wouldn't feel very good.

A woman is not really capable of abstract thought in these matters. I don't need to place myself into the shoes of a falsely accused defendant to know that it is wrong. I don't need to imagine myself being raped to know that it is wrong. And when I say wrong, I mean not only morally wrong (if you're into that sort of thing), but wrong from a self interested "our society will collapse if run shit like this" sort of way. I simply understand these things. A woman's brain must literally feel the emotion of a thing by imagining herself going through it though.

Conversely, just because millions of migrants have suffered terribly in their home countries, I know that it is wrong for our country to accept them. I know abstractly that they have suffered, but I don't spend a whole lot of time imagining what their lives must be like because it simply is not relevant. The woman's brain on the other hand, is bombarded with pictures of refugees and suddenly she imagines herself in their place and FEEEEEEEEEEELS that we must help them.

You can bombard her with logic all day but it simply does not matter. Her brain is not wired that way. There was a #walkaway video that I watched recently where some died in the wool feminist leftist talked about being a leftist her whole life, but it was only when her child's school started to become overrun by illegals and ruined did she suddenly understand, because she could go to the school, look around, and FEEEEEEEEEEEL how much this situation sucks.

[–]DeontologicalSanders 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Their lack of internalized capacity to reason is why a man should never, ever capitulate to a woman as described here.

She has strong feelings. She is reacting to those feelings. She doesn't know why she is having those feelings. She has not reasoned through it, or even consciously thought about it. She is doing what weak beings instinctively do: creating a loud and out-sized reaction to a negative stimulus in order to shock those around her into providing a positive outcome. Like a small dog barking up a storm.

The same framework applies when you kow-tow to a woman's tantrum. She sees your reaction. She perceives you lowering yourself to her. It doesn't matter why; she hasn't reasoned through it or even consciously thought about it. It doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong; all that matters is that she sees a weak man, and that weakness elicits feelings of disgust and disrespect in her.

[–]Tripletag 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Save for a few exceptions, I don't know any of these women. Trying to avoid applying my bubble to the rest of the world, but I know very few raging 'feminazis' even though I know they're out there. Usually, they are fat or undesireable in other ways, so I understand why they do what they do. I do, however, know a shitton of plugged in Beta males who keep running into the same problems with women.

You are 100% correct in that these men try to rationalise themselves into a girls pants, I see it as them trying to use their intellect as their main selling point when all it does is make her bored and keep looking for a guy who doesn't feel he has anything to prove to her.

[–]Imperator_Red 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but I know very few raging 'feminazis' even though I know they're out there.

Right, but like the Islamic world where you have terrorists and "moderates," the great mass of non-feminazis are still passive supporters of the movement. They are behaving perfectly rationally. Let the feminazis, who aren't desired by men anyways, do the work and take the heat, while they reap the benefits and support them at the voting booth, and by joining in the hive-mind that shuts down any opposition to the accepted narrative with public shaming.