TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

68

In 2013, a guy named Jared Rutledge had a blog titled Holistic Game in which he posted details of his dating life and descriptions of women (with no personally identifiable information). Some of the negative ways he described women included, “damaged goods”; “headed towards cat lady status”; “not very hot.”

Jared published all of this under a pseudonym, but one of the women he dated found his blog, and found this description of her own date: “Frisky little redhead, early twenties. Not very hot and talked too much … I bailed on her because I wasn’t that into it. I see her from time to time, and she’s letting herself go a little.”

Insulted by that, she doxed Jared. Protesters picketed his business, forcing it to close down. NY Mag devoted an article to him.

In 2016, a woman named Cathy Smith is performing a "social experiment" where she'll date 31 guys in 31 days. Her goal is to for all 31 guys to pay for the dates. She keeps track of how much money is spent on her - that's her score (because getting the dates is the easy part). She has a blog too.

Some of the negative ways she describes men include: "pretentious frat boy"; "ethnic" (which she prefaces with, "not to sound racist, but"); "loser" (because when she showed up 15 minutes late, he sat down and had a drink by himself); "shorter than me. Too short" (which I include here as a parallel to Jared's "not very hot")

Cathy doesn't publish any of this under a pseudonym. She has no need to hide. Her professional life will not be threatened by any of this. Nobody is going to protest outside her place of business. There will be no mainstream press criticism of her. Indeed, coverage is positive and oh so typically sympathetic, letting us know how "annoying" it is that, "some men seem to want to keep messaging her back and forth for days before they ask her to dinner" (a free dinner, keep in mind - it's annoying to have to wait days for that free dinner) and "no matter how many times the man might reach out to her to talk, the fact that it’s through online dating just makes it all seem lazy."

...and you know what, all of that is fine. There should be no protests. She shouldn't have to hide. She's free to do what she wants. She's not hurting anyone. She's not forcing these men to pay. She is entitled to her opinions of these men, even the "ethnic" ones.

As a member of TRP, the word I use for Cathy is, "reality." This is how the world works. TRP doesn't seek to change the world, we seek to maximize our own success and happiness within it. By contrast, when men behave the way that Jared behaved, blue pillers wail and gnash their teeth and demand that society change.

Topic for discussion: the TRP worldview (accept reality, maximize your happiness) is fundamentally more healthy than the blue pill worldview (boo hoo, this is unjust, someone fix it).

A guy living in a culture where most women resemble Cathy needs to understand that the dinner date is over. Go ahead and be on Tinder if you like. Try to hook up with women. But if they insist on dinner, just move on. Cathy has a few guy friends that she occasionally has sex with. She met them through other friends. Your goal is to have a healthy social circle so that you can be those guy friends. Because "dating" and pretending that "courting" is still a thing is a recipe for failure.

Women could do the same thing with regard to Jared. Jared fucked women and then didn't call them the next day - that's his real crime here. He didn't actually hurt the woman who doxed him when he anonymously described her as "not very hot." He hurt her when he rejected her after sex. Instead of whining that men are like Jared, women could accept it, and change their behavior so that they get what they want anyway. But noooo.


[–]Archwinger46 points47 points  (20 children) | Copy Link

This is really just another illustration of the general concept that men value sex, women value resources.

"I'm going to pretend I'm interested in a real relationship, but after a woman has sex with me, I'm going to stop calling her back. Alternatively, I'll keep having sex with her over a period of time while never committing, then once she pushes the issue, I'm going to stop calling her back. Since other women are willing to have sex with me, this woman doing so doesn't get her anything." -- man

"I'm going to pretend I'm interested in a one-time or ongoing sexual relationship, but after a man takes me out and buys me dinner, I'm not going to call him back. Since other men are willing to take me out and buy me dinner, this man isn't getting anything." -- woman

The TRP view is, hands down, a winner. Primarily due to its sage advice to completely disregard anything a woman says and just watch what she does.

Look at her. Look at women. Look at who they're fucking. Look at the types of guys they fuck and the types of circumstances under which they fuck them.

If you're paying the least bit of attention, then when a woman wants you to take her out to dinner and buy her meal, you'll notice that none of the men women fuck seem to do that. You'll spot the ruse early and tell her to go to hell, then find a woman who's actually down to fuck.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red5 points6 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Eh, I think that's bullshit. I watch what women do, and what this woman is doing is out of the ordinary.

I have a friend like her. Every item of clothing she wears is a different name brand, filters men by salary. Gets offended if men don't pay. She stands out because she's the only girl I know who does it. I also know women who won't even let a man pay for their dinner, and some who will always pick up the tab.

You're looking at an egregious example and saying "See! This shows how women act!" You are actively ignoring how most women, who aren't extreme, act. You aren't even following your own advice.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

This style of argument always leads to a dead-end. In general, RP demands a working social model to explain social realities and gender dynamics.

If you can provide an explanation for the behavior of these women either within the RP model or provide a better social model that encompasses terrible women and good ones, we can at least debate under the same frame that patterns exist within what women/men like and what they dislike.

I hope you don't choose to have no social model altogether as that's not a stable argumentative position.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Do you have a model for what caused the Big Bang? I hope you don't choose to have no model for it because that's not a stable argumentative position.

If you claimed the Big Bang was caused by Papa Smurf shoving a firecracker up his butthole, it isn't correct simply by virtue of the fact I don't have an alternative. "We don't know" is a perfectly reasonable position.

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but...comparing social interactions with the big bang? Sure there are plenty of bad puns you can make about social interactions and the big bang (people getting laid nudge nudge, wink wink).

But it is far easier to observe peoples' behaviour and begin to draw conclusions. Or should we not bother at all?

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure what your criticism is. I'm saying their understanding is wrong, not that we shouldn't attempt to understand things.

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

But his response was valid. Your point was basically "well...some women are bad" which is pretty much the end of attempting to understand trends, attitudes and behaviour. Media and marketers spend tons of money attempting to understand trends. Using the big bang as a way to compare social interactions is inaccurate. For example, we understand there is a hierarchy of needs, that humans are by nature social and isolation over long periods of time sucks.

It isn't wrong to say "well some people are not social" but you actually haven't addressed anything beyond stating an outlier or an exception that doesn't disprove the trend. If someone says "men like boobs" and you add "well, not all men" it contributes little. You have not added a model or actually disproved it. It is why you got the response that what you said kills discussion because arguing exceptions over a trend people are trying to analyse makes it harder to bring in further analysis.

Now, you said their understanding is wrong. But why? Secondly, what models do you propose? I mean they could say your understanding is wrong too. I like to think of it this way: is it possible that their understanding might be at least somewhat accurate given modern trends within society? Are the exceptions wide enough to disprove it? Is there some basis on what people talk about?

Example: a man cheats on his girlfriend. Present perception from women is that men are dogs. Data says women cheat at the same rate. Then why are women not...uh...bitches? Exceptions exist. Most people don't cheat. But in the context, we can discuss the perception of only men being cheaters. To say "but I know men who didn't cheat" or "well treat it as an individual case" when there is a trend just stifles discussion and starts to derail the conversation, like I have just done.

The big bang is a bad analogy for something we can analyse today.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

But his response was valid. Your point was basically "well...some women are bad" which is pretty much the end of attempting to understand trends, attitudes and behaviour.

No, my point was "you have been provided with the most egregious example of a woman doing X, Y and Z and are claiming it is a representative example." He's implying the tail end of the bell curve is the average, which is moronic.

I pointed out if you actually observe women's actions, you realise:

  1. The bell curve is very wide.
  2. She is on the tail end.

That contradicts his model.

Now, you said their understanding is wrong. But why? Secondly, what models do you propose?

In this discussion, none. If their model is wrong, it is wrong. That is that, regardless of my alternative.

I mean they could say your understanding is wrong too.

Sure they could. So what?

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

And how is the guy going to find a woman who's actually down to fuck him if he's not alpha? The guys Cathy Smith is fucking are probably a combination of being tall, handsome and muscular. Yeah, yeah, lifting will get the guy the muscular part, but what about the handsome and tall that most men lack?

And she's nothing special! I don't know what her face looks like, but her body is meh, look at her legs and arms and no boobs. Yet in the western world because of how overweight and ugly most women are, this entitled kid is a 10/10 lol. How are guys going to get laid at all when most women are just another Cathy?

Women's sex drive is so low you couldn't light a candle with it, which is why they can do this nonsense of making guys pay for dates and for attention without even giving a handjob in return and the few women who are sluts(high sex drive) are still alpha-access only

[–]FalkorDRed Pill Man16 points17 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

And how is the guy going to find a woman who's actually down to fuck him if he's not alpha?

Fake it, women are dumb.

The guys Cathy Smith is fucking are probably a combination of being tall, handsome and muscular.

Way to give up before you start - not RP.

And she's nothing special! I don't know what her face looks like, but her body is meh, look at her legs and arms and no boobs.

You sound like you'd jump over a bunch of hoops to fuck her. You're hamstering like a girl pretending you don't. You just don't think you can because you don't want to try.

Women's sex drive is so low you couldn't light a candle with it,

That's just something beta men say. She wants to fuck. She just doesn't want to fuck you.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Men can't fake height(elevator shoes are retarded) and a chiseled face like David's, let alone his body lol. Lets be honest here. The red pill is a novelty. I'm sure there are several red pillers getting laid like its going out of style, but the few red pillers who are doing it are men who've suffered from low self-esteem or body image for some reason, or they had an unfurtonate case of fat.

I'm not red pill. I don't believe alphas are made. No one taught casanova or lord byron how to be red pill. Their divine good looks is what allowed them to be red pill, to be greater than the cmoon man.

Yes, that's what I meant. Her sex drive is so low that a man needs alpha looks for her to want to fuck. Same can't be said about men. i've seen decent men with plenty of fatties, but the opposite I don't see.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Have you read descriptions of Casanova's looks? He was 6'3'', not only was he already very tall by our modern standards, but he was a giant compared to the men from his time. He had a natural muscular build, broad-shoulders, a very handsome face, a perfect smile and he had dark hair and blue eyes, and a tanned skin.

Where do you think the saying, ''tall, handsome and dark'' comes from?

Casanova slept with hundreds of women because of his looks. He was probably the most physically attractive man in the world. He had no game. He might have had charm but that alone wouldn't have made him sleep with 10 women had he been born with te same looks the other men had.

Game doesn't exist. That is why I was banned from the seduction sub. I called them out on their shit and they banned me because I reminded them that women aren't seduced by words or behaviors or mindsets. Women are only seduced by a man's alpha looks.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Without his alpha looks Casanova would have not been the most popular womanizer who ever lived. Charisma certainly added to his appeal, but his looks were by far the most important thing in getting women to sleep with him.

No, women do not have game. I'm not talking about merkel and clinton. Those two are heavily masculinized women. I'm talking about young women. They have no game. They don't need it. Women are approached, and the ''sluts'' approach men all the time.

[–]MakeEmSayAyyGirlNoInventAnything8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women are such bad judges of character and when a guy's faking. If you even obnoxiously fake confidence to the point where everyone around you is onto you, girls will still think "it's the real you" a lot of times.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That biological

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism24 points25 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

People will find issues with his blog while ignoring the bigger picture.

There are other blogs, other instances of this happening. One guy once dared to express his sexual frustration online and several feminist blogs jumped him.

It's simple, men are disposable and we live in a girl power age. Accept that, move on and do what is needed to succeed, hint bitching about changing this is the wrong way.

http://www.rawstory.com/2014/12/mit-professor-explains-the-real-oppression-is-having-to-learn-to-talk-to-women/

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I like to shove the hypocrisy in their faces to expose the lie to others watching. And watching the hamster at work is always magical.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

It's simple, men are disposable and we live in a girl power age. Accept that, move on and do what is needed to succeed, hint bitching about changing this is the wrong way.

On an individual level that is true. But collectively the only way to change it is to bitch about it until society's views change. This is after all how we came to live in a girl power age, as you put it.

[–]disposable_pants5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

But collectively the only way to change it is to bitch about it until society's views change. This is after all how we came to live in a girl power age, as you put it.

Except society cares when women complain. Society tells men to "man up" when they complain, or just ignores them, because men are disposable.

The best way to change the world for men is to act, not talk. Go out and do things a better way. If someone comes to you for help, help them do things a better way, too. If enough guys do things a better way -- if women find that they can't find enough guys to do what the woman in OP is doing -- then society will change.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Except society cares when women complain. Society tells men to "man up" when they complain, or just ignores them, because men are disposable.

It does now, because there's been a solid half century of movement in that direction. Go back 100 years and it would be the exact opposite.

The best way to change the world for men is to act, not talk.

I don't disagree there.

[–]disposable_pants3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It does now, because there's been a solid half century of movement in that direction. Go back 100 years and it would be the exact opposite.

100 years ago there was a "women and children first" mentality. Society may not have listened to women as much as it listens to them now, but it certainly cared about their welfare.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

it certainly cared about their welfare.

Have you ever seen this debate featuring /u/girlwriteswhat? She makes reference at 11:30 to men being whipped for failing to take care of their wives.

The narrative that women were oppressed and men were privileged is just an outright lie.

And for anyone who is incredulous, ask yourself why you think that women were oppressed - is it not because someone showed you a list of bad things that happened to women? Do you not see that that's only half the story, and doesn't support the claim that women were oppressed? It doesn't support the claim any more than me listing whipping posts for men supports the claim that men were oppressed.

To support the claim, you have to look at both sides and at all levels of society.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Girl power came as a result of The Pill and abundance of light work that women could do. Society has nothing to do with it, because it's entirely reactionary in nature.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree with you that it's a result of industrialization and birth control, and I would add that social safety nets contributed, but as to society playing a role, consider this: what if society had rejected, right from the start, the feminist narratives of oppression?

I mean, that's really the only actual harmful component. Industrialization is good. Birth control is good. Social safety nets are good. It's only the victimhood-lie that is really bad.

There are other societies with all our modern conveniences, but without the chip that so many western women seem to have on their shoulder. South America comes to mind.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Isn't South America basically a shithole?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Posting that article kind of disproves what you originally wrote.

[–]BluePiller1776-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

still give him points for giving me one of the funniest reads in a while.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

me one of the funniest reads in a while.

You should read this. The full story is that Scott Aaronson disagreed with MIT's decision to remove another professor's course work. A random feminist appeared and suggested that Aaronson's opinion was why there are no women in tech. Aaronson made the mistake of defending himself and opening up about a painful part of his past. Somehow Amanda Marcotte twisted that into the rawstory.com abomination above.

[–][deleted] 12 points12 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There's nothing wrong with Jared. Jared wasn't making women spend money on him. He got sex, and the women got sex in return. Everyone won, and the women he rejected prior or after having sex still got something out of it regardless. The men who took Cathy out on a date(s) lost their time, money, and went home to blue balls. Why not just stay home and fap to sasha gray and save money, as if tinder is going to do squat when only the alphas of alphas get laid there. Even on the body build misc forum there was a depressing thread from a guy who went undercover on tinder as a fake alpha, and the rest of the guys who were pretty jacked and attractive confirmed they have to work hard to get some

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community23 points24 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

It reminds me of the following:

http://www.crunkfeministcollective.com/2012/07/02/asking-for-sex-what-do-you-do-when-the-guy-says-no/

The double standards are strong with this one. When a woman says no, she's empowered. When a man says no, he is an entitled asshole. Sigh. Reality sucks man! Can't we all just get along?

Even in one of the comments, the guy says that if you're going to approach be ready for rejection. Men are not allowed to write blog posts about this stuff because they aren't allowed to feel as entitled as that woman is, or the woman in OP's link. There is an inherent unfairness in a man's voice being drowned out and his business being forced to close down because people didn't like his views on dating. But what are you going to do? Be called a misogynist for daring to point out the hypocrisy? Once he got doxed, it was over.

[–]kkjdroidNo pills21 points22 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit, the lack of self-awareness in that post. Men are privileged because they want sex, until women want sex, at which point men are privileged because they don't want sex as often.

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community15 points16 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Equality and rejection sucks, doesn't it? I think some women are realising it isn't so easy being a man in a world that doesn't care about things like your sexual desires. Men have had to deal with rejection from a young age. Being a sex positive feminist doesn't entitle you to sex.

If a man wrote a blog post about how women kept saying no he'd be called a rapist or at least a sex predator waiting to happen.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

And the legions of young, privileged, white college kids on Reddit that associate red pill ideas with bitter assholes that can't get any pussy.

They'll have quite the culture shock when they finally have to live outside academia and realize that most men, regardless of sexual history, already have those opinions. I'd love for the average blue pill man or woman to hear a conversation between men at work.

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, unless it's a job mostly men do, yes. But male spaces have been taken over. You could join the Freemasons but you shouldn't have to just to talk about men stuff. Men overall don't hate women. They are frustrated that women don't care about the sacrifices they make. They are frustrated society treats them like garbage even when they are nice. But when they voice their concerns they get told to man up or that they are misogynists.

[–]disposable_pants2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, unless it's a job mostly men do, yes. But male spaces have been taken over.

I worked at a top-10 U.S. bank coming out of college -- huge corporate environment, diverse workplace. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but you do have to watch what you say at work more than at, say, my high school job of hand-pollinating corn.

And yet I found that as soon as you get a group of men from work outside of the office by themselves, they talk exactly like guys at my job in the cornfield would talk. Just because the average guy is smart enough to put up a PC face in mixed, professional company doesn't mean the average guy actually believes that stuff.

[–]KrispyMcSockingtonPillar of the community2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah it is generally frowned upon for men to be men. Saying Jane from marketing looks "toit!" like a douchebag bro should be saved for the beers after work XD

[–]lbspredh5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You know in days gone by she would say this shit out loud with normal people, be told "that's fucking stupid you muppet" and that would be the end of it

[–]deviant_the1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That disparity is crazy. There's a huge disconnect between the sexes when it comes to this sort of thing, and I can't tell what direction we're headed anymore.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hahahahahahah. Holy fucking shit dude. That may very well have been the most hypocritical thing I've ever read in my entire life.

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

She's just another toxic child on the internet, throwing a tantrum, and she should be shunned until she learns not to use the internet to coerce people into sex they don't want.

What's so hard about saying that? I'm not the first. It's much easier to get through life, if you start dealing with people as individuals, no matter what ideals they're hiding behind.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Because treating every single interaction with another human being as an individual, unprecedented experience is precisely what people with Asperger's and other disorders do. The people who flourish socially and sexually do so because they can predict how you will act, how you will think, and capitalize on it.

Telling people not to generalize, profile, and stereotype is ignorant advice given by someone who's never actually had to make an effort to be socially successful (a.k.a. a white, western woman). It is a shit test designed to weed out people with low enough self esteem not to trust their instinct and ignore it. Empty words used to signal virtue by men and women that have never taken a principled stand in their lives.

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Because treating every single interaction with another human being as an individual, unprecedented experience is precisely what people with Asperger's and other disorders do

And treating everyone's negative behavior as representative of their larger group, while ignoring any and all positive behaviors, is a habit shared by both lower animals and hate groups - but I repeat myself.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Insulting the point he made and insinuating that he's a lower animal for making it doesn't prove it's opposite. That's just ad hominem with a touch of poisoning the well. Is he correct?

[–]GridReXXit be like that0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

He insulted them first 🤔

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Because treating every single interaction with another human being as an individual, unprecedented experience is precisely what people with Asperger's and other disorders do.

Is he correct in insulting the point I made, and implying I suffer from social autism?

It's just an ad hominem with a touch of poisoning the well. Also, a strawman. You can easily observe individual personality clusters and correctly assign them to the actual larger groups they represent, such as "just another toxic child on the internet", rather than trying to score easy cheap shots against your ideological opponents.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Touche. I totally missed that one. My mind literally interpreted his simile like a funny joke, and yours like a malicious attack. Unconscious bias is unconscious.

I concede.

[–]ProbablyBelievesIt1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Kudos for recognizing a bias, instead of doubling down. There are a lot of people on my own team - or any team, really - who wouldn't.

Upvoted.

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]wynterpetalsBlue Pill XX10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it's mainly this:

“It was still really fun because we had sex in the shower. Hospital sex is weird, when she’s drugged, it’s strange, but it’s really cool.”

“Could she give consent?” Rutledge asks. “Could she give consent, Jay?”

“Uh oh,” Owens laughs. “That’s my bad. That is my bad.”

“You might’ve violated some California laws. Good thing we don’t live in California.”

that made people boycott their business.

[–]CopperFox3cAlready Red17 points18 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

The world is full of these double standards, typically in the form of Double Binds. And the reality is that Feminism is largely about replacing one set of double binds with another set ... not eliminating them.

On another note, I never buy women shit on the first few dates. The game has changed. Women have to earn that shit now, by doing things that please me. This is what the feminists have wrought ladies, enjoy ...

[–]questioningwomandetached from society1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

If someone says I have to pay for someone else's previous actions, I'll just roll my eyes at them and say nope. I'm doing whatever it takes not to be a casualty and I'm totally on to you. If you expect me to do everything you want without giving me anything and constantly testing me where you can dump me at any time, a relationship isn't worth trying for. You expect something for nothing? I don't see the point in even trying. Oh and if you're gonna act like this yet complain about assertive women or women who want to get things done I won't take you seriously. I'll get what I want however I have to. I'm not taking your gender policing while you decide to give me nothing, not even commitment. It doesn't work like that. I'll act however I want and if guys complain I'll act like that more and remind them of the mothers they hate.

[–]CopperFox3cAlready Red11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

And why should men give commitment without sex?

If you take your argument and flip the genders, then you are basically making the exact argument feminists are ... that men should give women everything in exchange for nothing. And with zero expectations for anything. That is not the basis for a healthy relationship.

Feminists fired the first shots in this gender war - men are merely adapting to the landscape. They went for the nuclear option, and this is what it created. I don't necessarily like it any more than you do, but I have to live within it.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Why should women give sex without commitment?

[–]CopperFox3cAlready Red14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There is a reasonable argument to be made that they shouldn't. Or at least not without some level of commitment. It's one of the great ironies of feminism that they argue otherwise (aka "You go girl"), in that it also makes it easier for men like me to pursue sex while giving very little in exchange. The whole marketplace is pretty distorted right now.

[–]bergkampinthesheets5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

wasn't that part of the feminist 3rd wave movement? that women can have sex with anybody they want, without commitment or relationships? a.k.a the sexual liberation of women

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So you can act in any way you want. You do not care about what you have to do and the ends justify the means: "I'll get what I want however I have to."

Yet you come in here constantly whining about TRP, terpers and male conduct. I hereby present you with an award for being the world's biggest hypocrite.

[–]lbspredh1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

If you don't want sex why even bother dating? I mean you sound like you could afford your own dinner.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]lbspredh1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh. I think I'd rather just have mutually attracted sex but you do you

[–]jackandjill22Red Pill misanthropic, contrarian0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Lol, also your writing needs work. Almost near indecipherable, there are many words that could be eliminated & replaced with more concepts to cull your verbose sentences.

[–]questioningwomandetached from society0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm pissed off. I'm not trying to win a writing contest but I SO appreciate your concern......... NOT

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nobody cares about your emotions.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun13 points14 points  (33 children) | Copy Link

My thought about Cathy's blog is that it highlights the tremendous confusion young people feel about gender. No one has any idea about what to do.

While traditional gender roles made a lot of people miserable, but I don't think what we have now is working either. The combination of online dating, feminism, and PUA/RP has created a deeply unsatisfying romantic landscape.

[–]impossibleworlds 8 points8 points [recovered] | Copy Link

I agree with your general sentiment but I'm not really sure how Cathy's blog reflects confusion. She seems to know exactly who she is and what she wants, and is successfully getting it.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun4 points5 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

From her blog:

The basis of Operation: No Pay May is a social dating experiment. Currently our society is confused on what “dating” means. Everyone seems to have their own view on when a date is a date. Girls think guys just want to “hook up” and boys think girls want relationships where couples spend every second together. After talking to many of my friends, neither of these is true. As girls, we group all men into one category, and men seem to do the same. The truth is… not all girls are the same and not all guys are the same. In order to determine what you want and who you are, you need to “date” different types of people. How are you going to do this if you don’t put yourself out there? I’ve decided to become a open minded dater in pursuit of answers.

She straight up says she's confused and looking for answers/insights into herself and the world around her. And that's not even counting the tone of her posts and the fact that she posts takeaways about what she learns.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

She's not confused at all. She is just using that statement as a cover-up excuse for why she's doing what she's doing, which is to extract resources from as many beta bux as possible, as the female imperative is ordering her to do. What is this nonsense of girls thinking men put all girls in the same category?

We aren't blind. We see how women divide men into 2 categories, the fuckers and the buckers. Buck up and pay for something you are not going to have if you aren't alpha, fuck her for free if you are alpha.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Seems like a lot of effort for a couple of free meals.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women go the extra mile to not pay their own meals even if it turns out to be more expensive for them

[–]impossibleworlds 4 points4 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Right, I can see that that's what you took from it, taking that at face value. What I'm basically saying though is that the outcome just doesn't seem to stack up. She put herself out there and was getting guys to, without fail, pick up the tab for dinners for an entire month, with some expressing intent for further interaction.

How is that representative of a confusing dating environment? In her case it sounds pretty straightforward - actions speak louder than words, and she's apparently getting exactly what she set out for with the whole No Pay May concept.

Anyway, I'm just saying that I can think of a lot more confusing scenarios and environments than her experience as an attractive blonde chick (I'm guessing) in Texas who is going on fairly traditional dates with at least some likely eligible guys and managing to not pay for any of it.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I have no problem admitting that more confusing scenarios exist, but I'm not sure how meaningful that is. There will always be a more bewildering situation to consider, but most people are likely to face confusion in a very average/typical way.

How is that representative of a confusing dating environment?

Well for one, she's clearly confused by the men she's dating. She doesn't understand their motivations. She doesn't understand why she has to take the initiative so often. She doesn't why at 24 she's getting all this attention suddenly. She doesn't understand why many of them don't want to go on 2nd dates. She doesn't understand why so many of them can't be 'real men.'

And then I think she fails to understand the foundation for these questions. What it would even mean to be a 'real man' and is she being a 'real woman'?

I don't think taking her blog at face value is a good approach. She's looking for something beyond the free food the ironic title of her project refers to.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No, she's not. She's looking for free meals, attention and validation. She's not looking for a relationship. She's not looking for casual sex, as alpha males don't really have a need to go on dates to get laid, so the men she's seeing on dates aren't super hot, or just hot.

She keeps a steady rotation of alphas to fuck when the mood hits her, by meeting alpha males within her social circles. These guys she goes on dates with are just to feed her ego and belly.

What do you mean she doesn't understand why she has to take the initiative so often? if she's getting all of this attention from men why does she have to take the initiative so often? So many can't be real man? What do you mean? What is a real man?

[–]impossibleworlds 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link

Good response, upvoted. In a rare stroke of humility, I'll admit you've outclassed me here and were more perceptive.

I do, ahem, tend to take stuff at face-value and make snap judgments too often, especially online.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's very kind of you to say, thanks.

And I tend to do the exact opposite, and overthink/read into everything way more than is needed. The curse of studying philosophy in college.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I don't think she sees any of that. That's your interpretation, though it's pretty spot on.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

This is an excerpt from one post. Bear in mind, she met the guy on a dating app. He split the bill and only payed for his food.

Here’s the MOST confusing part. Later that night, Cheap Ass sends me this text [see below]. I only split checks if a.) I initiate plans or b.) if we are just friends. Other than that, if I offer to pay, I’m being polite. I’ve never been more confused after a “date.” Let’s be real, this was not a date. I assumed Cheap Ass wasn’t into me. Why else would a man initiate plans and then not spend $8.50 ($10 with tip) on a girl he is interested in? By the time the bill came, Cheap Ass should’ve known whether or not he was into me.

The text was essentially, "Let's see each other again soon. How was your party?"

She seems pretty confused to me. She doesn't seem to get that guys have to filter out freeloaders, or that they might have a different framework for what counts as a date. I also think it's interesting that she expects someone to know whether they like her by the end of one date. He can't simply be curious - he either knows or he doesn't, based on the surface-level version of herself she presented over the course of an hour. It's bizarre.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The bit you quoted is a great example of a covert contract. She never tells the men what she expects, yet she's frustrated and confused when she doesn't get what she expects.

She could go ahead and outright state in her tinder profile that if you want to date me, you must take me to dinner, and you must pay 100%. She could write that in bold, capital letters. The dating landscape being what it is, she would still get more than enough men to fill the pages of her blog - even with her other requirements.

Nonetheless, I still like her. I forget what post it was, but she said that she wants a guy to step up to his gender role. She said it outright, and it's implied in other posts too. Some guy opened his car door for her and she wrote that nobody has ever done that for her. I happen to love that shit. It's fun.

So it's a covert contract in the sense that, like /u/hyperrreal said above, it shows the confusion that exists among young people about gender roles. She still thinks "men should be men" but a lot of men think, "men being men is offensive" and men think that because a lot of women think, "masculinity is toxic."

LOL, I guess.

She doesn't seem to get that guys have to filter out freeloaders

Solipsism. She really has no idea what dating is like for men. As a TRPer, I don't necessarily think she needs to. I just think it's interesting.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it's more down to solipsism than a covert contract. She expects other people to be able to read her mind. That isn't a function of being female, it's a function of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. The whole site screams it.

Nonetheless, I still like her.

Really? God, I think she's insufferable. I guess it's nice that she's honest about what she wants, but she sounds awful to be around.

Solipsism. She really has no idea what dating is like for men. As a TRPer, I don't necessarily think she needs to. I just think it's interesting.

Eh, she's shooting herself in the foot. She wants to trade a relationship (and, realistically, sex) for resources, right? Well, any man who is willing to invest a lot into that deal has to filter out people who aren't going to follow through on their end of the bargain. Right now, she's precluding the very thing she wants from happening.

I think she is confused because she believes men buy things for women. I don't think that's necessarily innate, she's just learned that's what men do. She's confused because that isn't how relationships work in practice and she can't reconcile reality with her expectations. I don't think she's representative of women as a whole. She's just emotionally stupid and a bit delusional.

[–]raphier1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

bullshit. She calls him cheap Ass. She knows what she does and blames him for it. If she was confused, she wouldn't blame.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

She seems confused to me. She's angry because he didn't pay, and she's also confused as to why he didn't pay.

[–]WhisperSecretly a Talking Dog4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

The combination of online dating, feminism, and PUA/RP has created a deeply unsatisfying romantic landscape.

You're confusing correlation with causality.

You don't have any clear evidence of which of these things are causes of the sexual apocalypse, and which are effects of it.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

You don't have any clear evidence of which of these things are causes of the sexual apocalypse, and which are effects of it.

This is not a sophisticated way to look at the historical moment we're in. We're very much still in what you're referring to as "the sexual apocalypse." And the manosphere/TRP fuels it.

RP is not merely correlated with "the sexual apocalypse" which is caused by feminism, etc. All of these ideas/movements feed off each other, and evolve our historical situation.

The fact that RP may be a response to other forces like urbanization, the growth of the internet, feminism, etc. does not mean it has no part in creating the unfortunate romantic/sexual environment people find themselves in.

[–]WhisperSecretly a Talking Dog2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

That's naive. Of course all significant processes contain cycles.

The importance of understanding whether something is a primary cause, or an effect (even if it also exacerbates the condition in a positive feedback loop), is understanding that effects cannot generally be removed without removing causes.

In other words, if TRP is an effect, it doesn't matter if it "makes the problem worse" or "makes things better", because you can't change it without changing whatever is causing it.

The distinction can be regarded as that between a dependent and independent variable.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Doubting a simplistic conceptual model is the opposite of naïveté.

Not only is the standard above not workable (one example of this: unless we're positing that causes have no cause of their own, applying what you wrote above will only lead us to include everything is an effect) it's not even testable. Movements like feminism, TRP, neo-liberalism can almost always be thought of as part of a broader issue or idea system depending on one's perspective.

And the "importance" of dividing things into causes and effects is something you've yet to establish. My sense is that it's important to your community, because it allows redpillers to absolve themselves of responsibility for the conditions they are helping to create.

For my purposes, the whole issue is irrelevant. It's not necessary to address the issues we face as humans.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Doubting a simplistic conceptual model is the opposite of naïveté.

"I am right because I gave more complicated answer" should be some kind of fallacy.

[–]questioningwomandetached from society0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Protecting myself from danger is more important to me than empathizing with people.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

While traditional gender roles made a lot of people miserable

Good one.

Oh wait, hyperrreal, so you're actually serious.

In that case, [citation needed]

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun-1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, it's not like there was any organized resistance to those roles. Certainly not by large groups of women who were unhappy with them. What would we even call a movement like that...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Still need that citation. Otherwise, don't even bother. The riots in New Orleans after Katrina were larger than the entirety of feminist movement, lol. So whatever you think it proves... it really doesn't

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The riots in New Orleans after Katrina were larger than the entirety of feminist movement, lol.

[citation needed]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Check the numbers. They're on Wiki page.

[–]hyperrrealLoves fun-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll wait for the citation(s) from you.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree. Many fuckups on the dating market are caused by simple confusion.

[–]funchy7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Both bloggers sound like, for lack of a better word, assholes. I can't imagine either of them being good representations of their respective genders.

Jared wasn't wrong for one night stands as long as he didn't lie to get laid. But clearly he did lie about what he was going to take from the women. It wasn't a mutually agreed on sexual act. It was him getting laid, then making fun of every woman in the most belittling and disrespectful was possible. The funny thing is he makes himself look trashy because if you believe his commentary he'll have sex with women he doesn't find attractive, doesn't like, doesn't respect. He's a failure, and I kinda feel bad for him. He can't get the women he does admire & respect, so he districts himself by banging anything and then making fun of them afterwards.

Cathy is acting equally shitty. I don't get what her social experiment is supposed to show? I've never heard of this. You say she is popular. But I checked her Facebook and found a mere 81 likes. Her bizarre rules and her attitude scream narcissism. Certainly I'm no psychiatrist and even a mental health professional needs more than a blog to know much, my gut reaction is she has a personality disorder.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree with you here. But as others have said, what's interesting here is how different the public reactions are between the two despite the fact they are indeed "equally shitty."

And yeah she probably does have a personality disorder.

[–]Ultrablue19736 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I read some of his posts and tweets. It's not the "damaged goods"; "headed towards cat lady status" that really upset me. He just said that "90% of women are only good to be fuck puppets." He generally insulted their intelligence, and basically just said horrible things about the women who were his clients.

Further, he insulted his male customers. He hit on their wives and girlfriends while they were around and said things like "she was totally into me but was being good and went home with him," and other things like that showing he was an idiot as a businessman and also delusional. (Note to males: most women will be "nice" because they don't want to cause a scene; also, hitting on your client's wife? DUMB.)

What makes me sad is although I think that the guy was way out of line, our modern social shaming doesn't have a vehicle for social rehabilitation. That's not the right word, damn it. There's no way for society to offer forgiveness. Social absolution maybe? So he and his partners' lives were ruined, and there's no way to put it back together.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (32 children) | Copy Link

No, Jared and Jacob did not run a "dating blog"

Here's their twitter

Here's their blog

At least post to the actual content that got people riled up. What they wrote was gross and cruel, and behind the backs of both their customers and their employees (and their broader community) who had supported their business. If, as a business owner, you don't respect the good will of the community that supports you and respect them in return you won't be in business very long... and writing up a thinly-veiled list of "lays" that enumerates which women you met through said business is an easy way to lose that good will. What an idiotic way to lose what you've built... They got called out on shitty behavior and people stopped buying and supporting their products, end of story. There's no Oppression Olympics here.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man13 points14 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

behind the backs of both their customers and their employees (and their broader community) who had supported their business

I'm sorry, what? Are you suggesting that a business owner no longer has the right of a personal opinion any longer?

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I am sure that the pizza place owner loves me.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Not at all! He obviously does, but his customers have the right to boycott his business if they're not down with him broadcasting his sex stories about them and their friends and family members. Asheville is a small town. As a business owner, engendering good will with the community is really important and he was pretty sloppy with his efforts to hide his identity.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Not at all! He obviously does, but his customers have the right to boycott his business if they're not down with him broadcasting his sex stories about them and their friends and family members.

No, they don't have that "right" because they don't have a "right" to the information that he's doing that in the first place. He has the right to a private life, despite your contention.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

He posted it publicly, for people to freely access, and gave enough identifying information for people to figure out not only who he was but who the women he was discussing were. He was sloppy as hell about concealing his identity.

Talk shit get hit.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

ok, so?

Talk shit get hit? Really? What are you...a low-IQ criminal?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Damn, you found me out! Now give me your wallet

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

and behind the backs of both their customers and their employees (and their broader community) who had supported their business.

TIL business owners have to broadcast their entire lives to make sure their customers approve of it.

Well Steve Jobs was an asshole so I guess no one should buy iPhones anymore eh? And put that iPad down if you are against drug use kids, because I got some news for you...

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Are you comparing taking LSD to broadcasting a podcast about your sexual conquests, including graphic and disparaging details about your employees and customers? Seems to me one of these is more damaging to the goodwill of your consumer base than the other, but I'm no business expert.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Why is the comparison so bad? I love my acid but we're talking about public perception here. Most people are extremely ill informed about psychedelics - many even still believe cannabis will make you permanently psychotic.

If anything one could argue that's even worse (again going purely by public perception) than discussing sexual conquests.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

One is injurious-- at least emotionally-- and directly insulting to your consumer base and the other is a private activity that doesn't affect anyone else. It's the act of directly disparaging, in the most private and intimate way possible, the people who keep your business afloat.

These guys gave a big fuck you to their community, and asheville is a very small town with a lot of other coffee shops.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's a lot of words to say "people got their feels hurt." But someone like that could also get angry if they think they're giving their money to someone who turns around and spends it on drugs.

What I'm saying is that going by your logic, business owners cannot do anything because someone is bound to find it objectionable for some reason.

[–]kkjdroidNo pills6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Could you point me to the "gross and cruel" content? The blog is somewhat crass, but he makes a point of saying that he's happy for the women who found other men and seem happy.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Podcasts. At one point one of the guys talks about how he technically raped an unconscious girl in the hospital... IIRC that was the initial catalyst for outrage.

[–]kkjdroidNo pills2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh. Yeah, that's pretty bad.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 7 points8 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

Just so we're clear, are you saying that Jared's descriptions of his dates, which I took from the NYMag article, are acceptable?

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

No, I'm saying that NYMag didn't duplicate the grosser shit they wrote, the quotes they reprinted were pretty tame. And since you linked to that girls entire blog to discuss the difference in public reception you should do the same for them (and I assumed you didn't have the archived link.)

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm saying that NYMag didn't duplicate the grosser shit they wrote

And in all honesty, I thank you for linking to it. Jared did two things: (a) criticize the women he dated (b) "grosser shit."

I've compared his (a) with her (a).

His (b) comes from, quite frankly, a stalker (a woman who admits that she went out with him, and was triggered to scream when she read that he described her as "not hot"). She read through who knows how many tweets and blog posts and selected out those that are offensive.

You should concede that I have no such Cathy-stalker to pour through everything she's ever written, and assemble it all into a handy collection of selection bias. I have no (b) for Cathy, so I'm comparing (a) to (a).

are you saying that Jared's descriptions of his dates, which I took from the NYMag article, are acceptable?

No

Well, if his descriptions of his dates are not acceptable, then the comparison I drew between his descriptions and her descriptions ((a) to (a)) is still valid. Maybe one day we'll get a Cathy-stalker and we can go (b) to (b).

you linked to that girls entire blog

Well, the NYMag article was adversarial, and provided me with negative quotes by Jared. I was satisfied with those. The article about Cathy was positive (this is part of my point). I had to go get negative quotes myself.

Tell me if you can honestly disagree with the following claim: a male writing a blog exactly like Cathy's (and without Jared's additional (b)) would not receive similar praise to what Cathy receives.

Maybe I should have posted just Cathy's blog, and presented this as a CMV and asked if anyone could find a male blog that criticized dates that had any positive coverage, like ever.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

His (b) comes from, quite frankly, a stalker (a woman who admits that she went out with him, and was triggered to scream when she read that he described her as "not hot"). She read through who knows how many tweets and blog posts and selected out those that are offensive.

Yes, she focused on insults to herself which is why I also posted the full archive.

Well, if his descriptions of his dates are not acceptable, then the comparison I drew between his descriptions and her descriptions ((a) to (a)) is still valid.

But you're comparing public reaction, and the public reacted negatively because of the degrading sexual details he included. Your quotes are roughly analogous, but the public had more information. Those quotes alone didn't lose him his business.

Tell me if you can honestly disagree with the following claim: a male writing a blog exactly like Cathy's (and without Jared's additional (b)) would not receive similar praise to what Cathy receives.

Well, Tucker Max got multiple book deals and a movie deal out of his blog so I'd say white guys are doing pretty well in the dating blog market. His is the only dating blog I know of, though, to be honest. It's not a genre I'm familiar with.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think a woman could easily get away with 'gross' sexual details in a blog. Hell, it's plastered on every other page in sleazy women's magazines here in the UK.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

you're comparing public reaction, and the public reacted negatively because of the degrading sexual details he included. Your quotes are roughly analogous, but the public had more information. Those quotes alone didn't lose him his business.

Fair enough. Thank you.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Why does it matter how gross it was? Why is that relevant at all, especially if there were no names attached to it and Jared was writing under a false name to begin with?

[–]planejaneThree Trench Coats in a Trench Coat.5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If the two blogs are going to be compared, what precisely is or is not relevant? Cherrypicking specific arguments can be done by both sides here.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There is no cherrypicking and it isn't relevant. Unless you believe Jared could have insulted these women's appearance, race, and called them losers without any criticism at all then your argument is completely invalid. The degree of the insults has no bearing on the actual argument when one side is receiving zero blowback and the other is being doxxed and losing business.

It's like saying that the reason a black guy gets murdered by a cop is because he was more rude than the white guy, who was also rude but didn't call the cop a pig but was let off with a smile and a "good day sir." And the when people say, "Wait, why did the black guy get shot in the face for being rude when they were both rude?" then the other side says, "Well the black guy was MORE rude, so he was shot! That makes sense! It's relevant to the argument!"

You and others on this thread are nitpicking over moronic semantics while completely looking past the main fucking issue here.

Edit: A word.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Because sexually explicit and degrading insults will elicit stronger reactions from readers than insults to a person's height or financial status, and this post directly addresses the difference in these two "dating blogs'" public reception.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

So you're saying that if Jared had only insulted the appearance of these women and their financial status he would have been applauded instead?

Come off it.

[–]planejaneThree Trench Coats in a Trench Coat.0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Shifting goalpoasts.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No it isn't. The whole point of the post is that they did something similar and the result was VASTLY different. It isn't shifting goalposts to acknowledge that even if Jared had done EXACTLY the same thing as the woman in question he clearly still would have had a dramatically different experience.

[–]autoNFAPurple Pill9 points10 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You're forgetting that she insulted being "ethnic" too.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Oh yeah she sounds like a bitch, tbh.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

she sounds like a bitch

For what it's worth, I like her. She's consistent in criticizing guys for not taking the lead, not planning the dates, not dressing appropriately, not making a move or making their intentions clear. I can work with that.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't get behind someone who leads people on and knowingly takes advantage of them like that. Nothing she wrote is particularly offensive but the concept is still gross.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

A damn solid post, well written, well researched, insightful comments. Posts do not get much better than this. Well done OP, bravo. Wish I had more upvotes.

[–]BluePiller17769 points10 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

Personally, I think both blogs are crap. I didnt get a chance to read the guys blog but it sounds like shit. I did read a couple of the articles this woman has written and it was all shit.

Both people sound shallow and boring to me.

However, to attribute the actions of these two people to their entire gender would be childish. The take away should be that some people are crazy, not "As a member of TRP, the word I use for Cathy is, "reality." This is how the world works. "

Some girls are manipulative assholes, dont date them. Some guys are manipulative assholes, dont date them. This aint some big conspiracy

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism10 points11 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

However, to attribute the actions of these two people to their entire gender would be childish.

I thought this thread was about societies reaction, two people being assholes but only the man is hated.

[–]BluePiller1776-3 points-2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure the "manosphere" would hate her. "Feminazis" hated the dude. Two sides of the same coin

[–][deleted] 5 points5 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]BluePiller1776-2 points-1 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

sooooooo?

did the government come and shut this man down?

He used a fake name and got doxed. Chances are he pulled it down himself if that happened. Which means he knew he sounded like an asshole on the internet and didnt want anyone finding out.

This girl is still being an asshole on the internet but is using her real name. This mean she cant get doxed because its already all out there. Shes being an asshole on the internet but atleast she's owning it.

[–][deleted] 8 points8 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]BluePiller17761 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

the problem was protesting and hysteria

women can afford to be assholes on the internet, men cannot

Really? So women face no harassment on the internet for voicing their opinions?

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]BluePiller17760 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Are you still not seeing the picture?

Yea but im not seeing the same picture you are.

She in fact is still being an asshole on the internet

So this women is sticking to her guns and standing up to the harassment she faces by continuing to do her work.

The guy who wrote the blog faced the same harassment and criticism and decided to cut and run?

Yet the ones actually losing their jobs and having their careers ruined are men.

again, boo fucking hoo

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

You got it wrong. Most women who are remotely attractive are like Cathy. Entitled, Arrogant, bitchy, and they demand time and money and effort without a guarantee of a return. The only women who aren't like cathy are the women who weight 300 pounds or have a face like the big London fire walked on it

[–]Chicken_Nuggers_6661 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Can I have the link to their blogs if they still exist please? I want to see all of the things they said.

[–]rulenumber3031 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure her blog has had consequences for her, the difference is she was willing to ante up and be identifiable right from the start. Thus she dealt with it all gradually, presumably also learning as she went what her friends and colleagues thought of the exercise and when and how to tone it down and be more tactful. It was all more in her control because of this. She also made it clear this was a short term thing, not how she had decided to live forevermore.

Jared on the other hand was stupid. Really no nice way to put it. He thought he wouldn't be discovered and made zero accommodations to the possibility. Dumbass. He made it clear this is who he is not just something he's trying out. Double dumbass.

[–]DietCokeImOnMyKnees80% Red / 20% Beta Bucks0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is not good evidence of a double standard in what men and women can say about dating. The guy's choice of language in describing his dates was a lot more vulgar, with quotes like:

“I hate girls ‘I do everything but fuck on the 1st date’ rules. Hard to hide my disdain. My cock was in your mouth, why not the pussy bitch.”

He also revealed intimate details about their sexual encounters, which the woman did not do, since she isn't interesting in having any actual sexual encounters. So it's not really comparing apples to apples.

[–]PoopInMyBottomNot Red0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Here’s the MOST confusing part. Later that night, Cheap Ass sends me this text [: let's see each other soon]. I only split checks if a.) I initiate plans or b.) if we are just friends. Other than that, if I offer to pay, I’m being polite. I’ve never been more confused after a “date.”

Didn't they meet on a dating app? This woman is a moron...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Click on the "loser" link if you want to read some of the most incredibly rage inducing bunch of garbage you'll ever see

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Well look at this. A woman runs game and it's too tough for RP to take.

Meanwhile, legions of RP men are out there every day and it's all good.

Do you really think you're comparing apples to oranges here? Take all the PUA sites, RP sites, MRA sites, and compare them to... Cathy.

It's not even close.

The reason there are not calls to doxx her is because she is an anomaly.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Theres been articles in My country about a woman going on dates and then sharing the intimate details about sex on the net. Without their consent.. No names tho.

[–]kkjdroidNo pills2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

OP even said that the woman shouldn't be doxxed for her blog.

[–][deleted] 5 points5 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]LordRuby0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

blue pill worldview

You realize that's not a thing right? Blue pill is just people making fun of or arguing with redpill. Calling that a worldveiw is like saying people who watch "The Room" all have some sort anti-the-room worldveiw that they apply to their daily lives.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

blue pill worldview

You realize that's not a thing right?

I use the term to refer to the default narratives about sexuality in our society. I'm referring to the worldview that TRP was created to oppose.

Blue pill is just people making fun of or arguing with redpill.

If ever I have need to refer to those people, I'll capitalize Blue Pill. See? I really do know what I'm talking about.

The TRP subreddit necessarily existed before /r/thebluepill. Here's a parallel for you: the first Vegans decide, "zomg exploiting animals is wrong!" They set up a subreddit and talk about veganism. Someone creates another subreddit and names it /r/meateaters (or whatever). A Vegan one day makes reference to, "the meat eater's diet"

Your comment is like replying, "/r/meateaters is just people making fun of Vegans"

Understand?

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Stop with the circlejerking and personal attacks. Follow the rules in the sidebar.

[–]AutoModeratorBiased against humans[M] 0 points1 point  (22 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair, just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That jared blog makes no sense at all!

Men who get laid are not misogynistic or write badly about the women online!

Source: /r/thebluepill

[–]CovenantoftheSunhealth is attractive0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The difference between his and her blog is that in the nymag he wrote a lot of sweeping generalizations about women, whereas Cathy called some individuals losers.

It is true that society has a double standard against men, but this blog comparison is a really poor example. She didn't obsess and create color coded charts and talk about how the more she dates men the more she hates them etc. etc.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

that seems like a really charitable presentation of the guy's blog, and most of TRP/manosphere in general. you've very carefully selected quotes to support your OP, choosing only the most mild comments.

her blog sounds like something i'd never read and i also think it/she is pretty lame, but i hope that you're actually comparing two things that are the same. i guess i'll find out if/when i look over her blog.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Why did you even make this comment before reading both blogs? It's like you're letting people know you have no sense of objectivity.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why did you even make this comment before reading both blogs? It's like you're letting people know you have no sense of objectivity.

because i could already tell that jared and jacob's blog had been misrepresented, which is what my comment was about. i'm sure if cathy had had worse things to say, they'd be outlined here. i've since looked at the blog, and lo and behold... i was right anyway.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male[S] 9 points10 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

you've very carefully selected quotes to support your OP

And you've insinuated something without any support at all.

I used the quotes from the NYMag article. They're quotes about specific women, which make them exactly parallel to the quotes I selected from Cathy's blog about specific men.

i hope that you're actually comparing two things that are the same

No two things are exactly the same. If that's your expectation, then you're going to have a frustrating life.

Men and women are different. The challenges they face in dating are different. And yet, I can compare the two blogs. You're free to fill in the "contrast" portion of this "compare and contrast" with as much detail as you like. But don't pretend that the goalpost is set at a line labeled, "this male's dating blog must be the same as this woman's dating blog else we're not allowed to talk about them."

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

And you've insinuated something without any support at all.

i'm not the only one who noticed.

I used the quotes from the NYMag article. They're quotes about specific women, which make them exactly parallel to the quotes I selected from Cathy's blog about specific men.

... and then you asked why one is judged differently than the other. but those quotes you picked from the NYMag article are hardly the ones that were most upsetting to people, which surely you must know, if you're writing about it.

No two things are exactly the same. If that's you're expectation, then you're going to have a frustrating life.

i expect OPs that aren't misleading. if i stumble upon ones that are, i'll point it out.

Men and women are different. The challenges they face in dating are different. And yet, I can compare the two blogs. You're free to fill in the "contrast" portion of this "compare and contrast" with as much detail as you like. But don't pretend that the goalpost is set at a line labeled, "this male's dating blog must be the same as this woman's dating blog else we're not allowed to talk about them."

you're comparing two things that are vastly different, and then asking why they aren't being treated in the same way. the answer is: because they aren't the same. do i still think what cathy is doing is gross? yeah, i sure do. but she and her blog are not the same as the other blog/people you're comparing them to.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]kick6Red Pill Man2 points3 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Some people got pissy at this one guy for doing stupid shit, then some other people didn't get pissy at this one chick for doing similarly stupid shit." It truly is a riveting and educational tale of injustice. What any of this nonsense has to do with TRP/TBP (beyond the ludicrous question you crammed in there at the end), or why you think any of this is related to whether TRP's world view is "more healthy" is a mystery.

There, I demystified it for you.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]kick6Red Pill Man2 points3 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

No, I'm pretty sure the sidebar does a thorough job of explaining how dudes being castigated for the same shit chicks get away with falls squarely within the realm of conversation topics for this sub.

[–]ianturpiesmoustache-1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

That part that says "specifically relating to /r/TheBluePill and /r/TheRedPill." is just for show?! Sweet, now I've got a place to start my own period thread each month describing the volume, viscosity and amount of clots I've been dealing with. It's a sex/gender issue, after all, so this is clearly the place for it.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

If you fail to see how this double standard doesn't apply to purple pill discussions...I think you need an entirely different subreddit than /r/periodplaybyplay

[–]ianturpiesmoustache0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

It has fuck all to do with TRP/TBP, which is what this sub is for. There are plenty of subs for discussing feminism, men's rights, and the debates between them.

/r/periodplaybyplay

"Subreddit not found"... I think I just found my new project.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

There are plenty of subs for discussing feminism, men's rights, and the debates between them.

This is one of them. It has been. For years. How long have you been around?

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter