Red Pill TheoryFight For The Cause! (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by Senior ContributorRedPope

Look at all the attention TRP is getting. More and more websites are writing about us. Soon we're even going to have our own shitty documentary. We are capturing their attention. Our little subreddit is 138,000 strong and growing. It is time to organize! It is time to unite! It is time to rally for our cause!

Rah rah... bullshit.

TRP isn't a movement. It is knowledge. Our knowledge is important. It is useful. It can change your life. But it isn't a cause. We have no consensus, no unifying platform, no defined goals.

You want the world to change for you? Sorry, isn't going to happen. The public is not going to suddenly start caring about divorce rape or male suicide. We are disposable. Physically, mentally, legally, spiritually: men are and always have been the disposable gender. Our only value is our usefulness. When our utility is gone, we are worthless.

You want to change the media-government? Good luck. They're very deeply entrenched and they make money off the controversy. But if you're willing to devote your life to it, maybe you could raise enough awareness to even the scales a little, temporarily. Maybe.

But what would you really achieve? What is actually possible? Our disposability isn't merely cultural: it is biological. You are not going to undo evolution with Twitter hashtag, mass media coverage, or a few new laws. You can't stop hypergamy. Even when adultery was punishable by death, people still cheated. Biology is undeniable.

The only thing you can change is yourself. That's been the TRP way since the beginning. You are your cause. Take what you learn here and use it to make your life better. Right now. It is your turn. Enjoy the world, stake a claim, and make it yours.

Even then, when you reach your later years, after age and infirmity have taken their toll, and your productivity and usefulness to society have reached their end, you will be discarded, same as all other men before you.

Your time on top will be all too brief. Don't waste it on frivolous and unwinnable causes. Accept the truth. You can't change it, so make peace with it. Use the knowledge of TRP to maximize the years you have. They are all you get. Make them count.

[–]Godtiermasturbator 51 points52 points  (12 children)

Read The Lucifer Principle. Once you discover how little nature thinks of you as a man you'll realize that only you care what happens to you. You'll realize it's a waste of time to worry about what others think.

This doesn't have to make you sad. It should motivate you. What else you gonna fuckin do, kill yourself? Don't be an idiot. Use your time here wisely.

[–]2rp_valiant 23 points24 points  (9 children)

it's like those people who discover nihilism and get all broody and miserable. So what if the universe doesn't have a plan for you and everything you do means nothing in the end - you can define your own purpose, and live for the sole purpose of enjoying life. Some day we're all going to die, but that doesn't invalidate the good times we can have until then, and in the same vein being disposable doesn't mean you should accept a position of low value.

[–]dragoncharity 14 points14 points [recovered]

That's called optimistic nihilism, and as an outlook it goes great with TRP. I see it as basically being another term for the acceptance stage.

[–]2rp_valiant 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It almost forms a foundation of stoicism - staring into the Nietzche's abyss and saying "I'm OK with this, I will define my own reality".

[–]2Overkillengine 4 points5 points  (3 children)

And also another bright side of an uncaring universe is that when something bad happens, it was not due to some higher being having it out for you- it was instead either random chance or a direct result of poor personal choices.

[–]2rp_valiant 7 points8 points  (0 children)

in a strange way it's very freeing.

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

it was instead either random chance or a direct result of poor personal choices.

Or by the choices and decisions of other agents.

[–]TRPhd 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Even looking for the reason is a waste of time, unless you could have prevented it and that knowledge would change your future behavior.

[–]MortalSisyphus 2 points2 points [recovered]

The problem is that the scales are fixed in life. Suffering and pain will always outweigh pleasure and joy, both in intensity and in duration. How many people would trade the flu for an orgasm, for instance? Or a broken arm for a sniff of coke? Not to mention the fact that the vast majority of life is spent sleeping and working.

People can accept that life is mostly miserable and dull if they think there is some greater purpose to it all, or that they will eventually get relief in heaven.

If you accept that both life is suffering and that life has no objective purpose it makes sense to get a bit broody. The key to happiness is to achieve denial of suffering, or denial of nihilism.

[–]2rp_valiant 4 points5 points  (0 children)

but you can "front-load" your misery to make life better. That's what working for long-term happiness/goals is - you bite the bullet and take all your pain and misery up front, leaving yourself a longer duration to enjoy the spoils. Lifting, starting a business, training to become an athlete, scrimping and saving to buy that vacation home, all of these come from having the nerve to take the pain up front.

If you're taking the pain with a vision of happiness in sight, it becomes much more bearable.

[–]kolloidal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It might be alluded to in your username, but Albert Camus wrote in the Myth of Sisyphus about acceptance that the world is absurd. Once you accept that (moving forward from nihilism), then you can begin to play with reality.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 11 points12 points  (1 child)

What else you gonna fuckin do, kill yourself?

I ponder that once in a while, but then I think about all of the people I have not pissed off yet ☺

Looks like a good book. I will go check it out. Thanks. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lucifer_Principle

[–]Godtiermasturbator 12 points13 points  (0 children)

We all have son, we all have

[–]2rp_valiant 117 points118 points  (27 children)

If you want to see the alternative, a life lived in support of a movement that can't possibly go anywhere, take a look at MRAs. Many of them typify the "fat neckbeard" stereotype because they're so busy walking in circles with placards in hand that they don't reserve time to improve themselves. It's kind of sad really, they just won't accept their own inherent disposability and thus they keep going to rallies that noone has the time nor inclination to actually pay attention to. They fall for the same stupid belief system that feminists do - that humans have "broken free" of evolutionary baggage and things like male disposability can be changed through cultural means.

[–]Zahoo 70 points71 points  (15 children)

This is what I think every time I see someone complaining about how men can't cry or show emotions.

You don't want men crying and being emotional. Society would fall apart.

[–]2rp_valiant 35 points36 points  (9 children)

Absolutely. The nature of our genitals means that many men can die without the human race being significantly affected. Evolution has taken this cue to build men into the risk takers, the ones who can be willing to die for a cause or to protect their family. Sure, that means men die more often, but men also reach loftier heights because as Milo says, men are where nature makes her experiments. Women counterbalance that by having protective and collectivist instincts, and they are allowed to cry because it triggers that protective instinct in men. It's exactly this that has led to the growth of radical feminism and white knighting - men running to the rescue of women who are just manipulating them to their own ends.

When men get in touch with their fee-fees, want to join the WI and spend their days doing crochet, and society promotes that as a good thing, that society's walls begin to crumble. Without a strong cultural pedestal for masculinity, who is going to be there to protect it when another culture with either an idealised masculinity or an element of radical violence decides to invade? We've seen masculine societies attack and cripple feminine societies all throughout history, and though they've not always won, they've done much more damage than they would have if the defender had also been a masculine culture:

  • Sparta vs Athens
  • Nazi Germany vs Europe
  • ISIS vs the West
  • Africa vs Sweden

When another country/culture makes an attack on your own, a man should step up to defend his people. A feminine policy of appeasement or doublethinking an attack into some kind of positive change just encourages the attacker to continue taking advantage. That's how we end up with Sweden pushing for more "diversity" while immigrants are running amok in their country, culturally enriching their women in alleyways and burning down synagogues.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (2 children)

That's how we end up with Sweden pushing for more "diversity" while immigrants are running amok in their country, culturally enriching their women in alleyways and burning down synagogues.

Whoa whoa whoa buddy, you can't just use undeniable facts and statistics to support that argument. Just because 25% of Sweden's population commits almost 50% of the crime doesn't mean anything*. You're just being a closet racist! I can't refute those numbers so I will just call you a racist in an effort to discredit you as a person rather than what you're saying! /s

*"25% of the almost 1,520,000 offences were found to be committed by people born abroad, while almost 20% were committed by Swedish-born people with a foreign background "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime#Sweden

[–]2rp_valiant 17 points18 points  (1 child)

and those stats are coming from a government that wants to paint immigrants in the best possible light. That means that they literally couldn't twist the stats enough to make immigrants not seem like criminals. I can imagine that with an objective review of the stats, the numbers would be much more dire.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think those numbers are generous too. Many people would probably turn a blind eye if it was just the immigrants beating on one another, but natural citizens are getting caught in the crossfire.

[–]deeman010 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Really? ISIS vs the West? How did that get on there? Western countries are bombing the shit out of them and you expect me to believe that ISIS hurt the West more?

Sure the news outlets make a bigger deal but that's because it happened on your soil. Go to those obscure news sites and you'll see the aftermath of all the bombing runs done on 'em. It's not reported on but the West is doing WAY more damage than they've sustained from ISIS.

[–]MyReddit4 6 points7 points  (2 children)

From the perspective of morale and cultural allegiance, absolutely. They've got much of the Western world in an ideological Stockholm syndrome where no matter how much harm they do, we keep making excuses and coming back for more.

Just like Rihanna to Chris Brown.

[–]2rp_valiant 2 points3 points  (0 children)

thank you for clarifying my point there, and you're exactly right. None of the examples I gave were decisive military victories for a reason - a military loss in direct warfare doesn't demonstrate a weakness of the losing nation because they may have been outnumbered or outgunned. Cultural losses, pyrrhic victories or cases where the aggressor did much more damage than they should've been able to get away with are much more telling.

[–]deeman010 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have no words. Take my upvote.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points

[permanently deleted]

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

300? Dude, you're pretty stupid if you think I'd make a claim like this off the back of a comic/film. I've read a shit ton of books and watched quite a few documentaries on the history of the early Greek states. Also, 300 was about Sparta fighting off the Persians at the battle of Thermopylae you retard.

If you re-read my point, you'll see that I was claiming not that any of these aggressors won, I chose aggressors that lost to make the point that if their aggression had been matched in return they would have likely been decimated before they did as much damage as they did. Athens left Sparta alone, when Athens had already built the Delian League and already knowing that Sparta wanted to invade. They didn't make the first strike while they knew they could defeat their enemy, and as a consequence Sparta continued acquiring allies and waited until Athens was weakened from the loss of Samos to strike. The resulting war did a lot more damage to Athens and her allies than would have occurred had Athens squashed Sparta pre-emptively.

TL;DR your snark is adorable and your point is invalid. You're even stupid enough to think that Sparta fought Athens in 300, which they didn't in either the film or the comic. Go read a book some time.

[–]tyson2444 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Had a "pro-feminist" male guest speaker in my sociology class today. Guy used to work on cars and go to a ton of lowrider shows. Started telling us about a ton of sjw bullshit. It was unbearable. Watching our Sociology professor nod in validation just solidified the "this guy is her lapdog, they went to the same school and through the same program, even grew up in the same culture, and he's a complete bitch" suspicion in the back of my head. It wasn't because I don't like the class in general (despite more than 50% of the lecture involving some sort of sjw propaganda, complete with misapplied science and/or outdated, sometimes blatantly-fabricated statistics.)

He's just that way. He has chosen to spend his time getting a degree in the field of feels, and to earn a living agreeing with whatever the female narrative says until he dies, and he didn't sell out for millions or something. This guy is likely making $60k annually or less.

Now if that were a quality example of a man: we'd be proper fucked

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

To be fair, Steve Jobs cried quite a bit.

[–]Trpidation 1 point2 points  (2 children)

What is "fair"? Jobs made a difference in the world to a degree that most people could never imagine. He also was a dick to most people and was all about his own vision. The dude was pretty alpha. But crying is a bitch move. Cry on your own time if you have to, but a man crying is frowned upon for a reason. What can you protect/defend when you have tears and snot running down your face? When your brain is so overloaded with emotions that you can't think rationally, how will you be able to successfully lead? Leaders must be fearless and levelheaded.

I don't know much about Steve but i'd be surprised if he cried in public on a regular basis. Then again, Steve did have some pretty beta tendencies as well. Reminds me of Kanye a bit.

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

It was a joke, but Steve Jobs really did cry in front his team members on several occasions. He was emotionally fucked from being adopted at a very early age. His biography is a very interesting read.
It does call into question how we define "masculinity." Is the man who changes the world but cries in front of others masculine? What about a man who leaves no significant mark, but comes across as "tough" to other people? It's open to interpretation.

[–]Paradigmond 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you can find many components to the masculinity equation and the total is the sum of the parts.

[–]1Snivellious 8 points9 points  (4 children)

And on the far side of the movement, we get the dumber parts of Neoreaction. They seemingly think that we can fix everything by going back a Dark Ages monarchy, which will develop once people write enough smarmy blog posts.

Tell me whatever you want about how hypergamy is dooming society, but don't tell me you're going to fix that by writing blog posts that are only read by other guys who agree with you.

[–]2rp_valiant 8 points9 points  (3 children)

There's a lot of people following the extreme end of politics on both spectrums. Ancaps, communists, no-state libertarians, etc. The difference between the extreme left and the extreme right is that the extreme left is currently mainstream.

The funny thing about extreme authoritarian movements like neoreaction is that the proponents always write as if they'll be the ones in power. The key failing of authoritarian movements is that eventually (or immediately) you'll get someone in power who doesn't care about the masses, or actively hates specific groups. Suddenly neo-feudalism doesn't seem so great once you're reduced to a serf toiling fields for your King, or are on the receiving end of a pogrom.

[–]1Snivellious 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Neoreaction always reminds me of an inverted French revolution.

A bunch of guys are going to storm the fortress and raise up a king for the good of the masses. That's great and well-intentioned, but it'll only take a little while for the new guys in power to start worrying about these unstable revolutionaries. After that it's all beheadings and serfdom, just like before.

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

yup. The idea of a revolution where the new leaders kill all their previous allies to secure their position is almost a cliche at this point. It even happened in The Prince.

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

This seems to have a lot in common with the usual treatment of traitors. They might have helped you out, but they've also proved that they're dangerous and willing to betray the existing order, so they have to go.

[–]MortalSisyphus 4 points4 points [recovered]

The flaw in this logic is that society can and has changed, many times over, and it always started with a small minority that people were convinced would achieve no headway.

The world hasn't always been feminist. A small, persistent minority of women have quite literally changed the dialogue of nations.

[–]J_AsapGem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it's too far gone, the only thing that would change or cause a new movement, is mass destruction cause by feminism then maybe things will change. Change won't come through speech, it will come from " i told you so action " in other words let this time take it's course, it's a fuckup just waiting to happen

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

the world isn't often changed by agitators who aren't willing to pick up arms and aren't already in power of some sorts. Feminists have the advantage that they're women, and men generally try to give women what they want. The disposability of men is instinctual, not cultural, so I don't believe it can be overcome. At any rate, I'd rather spend my life improving my life than trying to change such an entrenched belief system.

[–]MortalSisyphus 2 points2 points [recovered]

The issue isn't so much the "disposability" of men, but rather the demonization of masculinity, the myth of institutionalized patriarchy, and lie that gender differences are a social construct.

I agree you will never achieve equal empathy for men and women. But the other issues are battles that can certainly be won.

[–]2rp_valiant 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree with you on that point. Feminism will destroy itself as it descends into absurdity and we're already starting to see that. The real question is whether it'll happen in time.

[–]highman86 12 points13 points  (0 children)

“Yesterday I was clever, so I wanted to change the world. Today I am wise, so I am changing myself.”

― Rumi

[–]boomerbux 11 points12 points  (3 children)

You can dedicate your life to changing the world or you can become an independent individualist and live a great life not needing anyone to support you or to think like you do.

I speak out against PC/leftwing bullshit every chance I get, but I am not joining any political party or movement. The world is not ready for a philosophical/political change so I am not going to fight it.

I'm on strike, and have been for over 10 years. I used to pay a shitload of taxes, now I pay almost none (can't avoid some sales taxes etc.).

And I do it perfectly legally.

Just one example: If I build a house and it's my only residence, where I am from all the gains from selling it are tax free.

Since I love to build houses, that's what I do. One at a time suits me just fine. Or if I am doing two, they are in different countries.

The feminist lunatics love to say 'good riddance', thinking somehow my being on strike means I am giving up anything. Quite the opposite, I live better than I ever have and when it comes to women I no longer look for a boring, expensive LTR, I play the game, just like the women are doing.

So now I have variety, far more attractive women, and almost no financial exposure to them.

I have hundreds of married friends and relatives, and I can think of only 1 that might be happy (although I suspect even he is tiring, and he has a near unicorn for sure).

So if I ever felt I was missing out on anything, I just need to visit or talk to one of them and that thought goes away very quickly.

So stop thinking some 'movement' is going to save your ass, get off the sofa and get independent, the sooner, the better.

[–]wanderer779 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Is this the extent of your tax-avoidance strategies? If not you should do a post. We need more useful stuff on here. There's too much about what feminists said or what policy is unfair or what to text this slut to get her to sleep with me.

Congratulations on getting rich and giving the world a big fuck you.

[–]boomerbux 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I could write a book on it, and have been thinking about it, not just paying less tax but also living like a very rich person while just being moderately wealthy (those terms are relative of course, you need at least a million bucks to live well).

As an economist and financial guy, I have learned to live as efficiently as possible. Like, live in a beautiful house, but make it only as large as you need. No sense having a gift wrapping room.

In fact, living in a smaller, well built house has huge advantages over a monster house, low maintenance, fewer things to go wrong, etc., so I would argue you are happier than the guy living in a mansion. etc etc

Tax advice is extremely complex even for one country, let alone the dozens that are probably represented here. But I could give some general ideas that may or may not work depending upon where you live.

And don't mistake me for being bitter or angry at the world, I have never been either, well not for long! I get angry at the injustice I see, but that doesn't last long as I know at least I am not supporting it in any way.

As for women, they have been playing chess while we play checkers, and they have the luxury of being on the side of the intellectual (I use that word loosely) left which have taken over 99% of educational institutions, so they have won for now, until the effects of their win are felt, which seems to be happening slowly but surely. (for example, fewer men being college educated, oops! hurts the old hypergamy doesn't it? Unintended consequences are such a bitch heheheh).

So yes, I have given the 'intellectual left' a big fuck you, and it feels great, but I love the world, it's an incredible place and full of adventure.

I even love women, I just don't fall for their bullshit manipulation games any more and so we get along fine. I am going out with a slightly crazy Latina tonight (on our first date she tried to impress me by speaking Hebrew and Chinese, I just ignored her), she's 25 years younger than I am, super fit, and not too bad in the sack.

It will probably be our last date, she's too far out to take for long (she told me some whacked story about the Israelis finding a gold brick that had images on it and that lead them to invent the tablet...wtf?), but that just means tomorrow night I can look for another one. Maybe one day I'll even find a keeper!

[–]Dustin_Bromain 19 points20 points  (5 children)

Who's writing about TRP? I literally never hear about this sub; on reddit or otherwise.

[–]thefisherman1961 36 points37 points  (0 children)

good, let's keep it that way

[–]1REDPILLRECKONING 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We're all over the place, we just showed up on the Joe Rogan Podcast as an echochamber radical group.

[–]ASAP_Bickle 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I read that and googled 'the red pill news' and some bullshit article had been written about how evil we are just a week ago on some news website.

[–]10xdada 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Guys like Rogan have to distance themselves from this sub. There is no "us."

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil 15 points16 points  (2 children)

I'm just trying to piss off a bunch of mouthbreathers and sell my book. As for making "a difference" the best thing to do is to help a few individuals here and there.

[–]TRPShill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

GLO is fantastic and he has Narcissicism but he helped me be more fantastic via Skype

[–]AurelianWay 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It's not like we are going to put TRP bumper stickers on our rides or get t shirts ( although GaylubeOil's shirts aren't bad). I don't think there anything is wrong with big picture thinking. Red Pill awareness on a macro scale can "raise enough awareness to even the scales a little".

For those bold enough to get married & have kids, it will mean that RP fathers are providing a stable foundation for their offspring & in time this will diminish the blue pill delusional society we are subjected to.

I work in the trades & I have seen a lot of apprentices come & go. Some of them were lost causes as far a blue pill feminized conditioning was concerned. With a positive male influence & male workplace environment around them, most of these apprentices however seemed to break out of there feminized shell & reassert their inherent masculine traits.

What I'm getting at is that Red Pill can't change the world but it can improve it. The more red pill awareness, more quality rational men, & less blue pill social engineering. Hypergamy, AB/BB , solipsism will all exist but it will be moderate & men will have the options to truly direct their lives.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 17 points18 points  (26 children)

But what would you really achieve? What is actually possible? Our disposability isn't merely cultural: it is biological.

That is the simple fact which most members here are unwilling to accept on some level. The cause is biological, economical and technological all combined. The moment James Watt invented the steam engine, it allowed women to earn an independent income.

It makes biological sense for women to band together for their interests but it doesn't make sense for men to do the same thing. There is a simple biological reason for that.

[–]Smithcolstudentbody 20 points21 points  (10 children)

It makes biological sense for women to band together for their interests but it doesn't make sense for men to do the same thing.

Tell that to unions. Tell that to nations, to NASA, to states. There are countless examples of male cooperation and working together to further their interests.

I get where you're trying to go with this but I recommend you re-do your wording. Men can work together to achieve great things.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 5 points6 points  (7 children)

Your right, but your point actually proves my point. A union is the simplest example. A labour Union is successful when all of the workers have a similar skills, and their interests are the same. So a coal miners union for example will be successful.

MRA is a union for men, Feminism is a union for women. The union for men will inherently fail because the difference in value of men is much greater then the difference in value of women. So for the higher value men they will be losing out on this MRA union. While for a higher value female, she will benefit from helping the lower value female.

I know what you are saying, what appear to be two similar things are actually two different things.

[–]PedophilePriest 8 points9 points  (5 children)

Your point is valid, but clearly this decision has been made before, a top 20% harem society can still keep up population growth, likely with superior genetics.

Establishing lifelong monogamy with strict female controls benefits the middle 30-80th percentile. Making them productive for society and to give the bottom 30 hope.

If your 5 points away from the threshold of a woman your still going to try, If your 55 pts away you just might kill yourself.

My guess is that technologically we simply dont need anything close to full male labor at this point. Birth rates have fallen below sustainable levels, and the children that are born are raised by single mothers/divorcee's virtually eliminating them from reaching their genetic potential.

An increasing population doesn't help a country like china, the US, india, japan, brazil etc. Not even close to the benefits it had a century ago. So the incentives for growth have been removed.

If it wasn't for the great depression and WW2 coming on the heels of women's right to vote, prohibition and the flapper movement Id suspect we would be a lot further into the decline than we already are.

The feminist movement after WW1 got the prohibition of alcohol written into the constitution of the United States, 100 years ago. Let that sink in for a moment.

We got our booze back by men all over the country standing up, banding together as likeminded individuals who wouldn't shy away from violence or being labeled as criminals and outcasts.

[–]2Overkillengine 9 points10 points  (2 children)

If your 55 pts away you just might kill yourself.

And anyone else you can manage to as well.

One can denigrate Betas all they want, but the point remains that men with nothing to lose and no hope of advancement are fucking dangerous to create.

[–]PedophilePriest 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I wasn't trying to denigrate. Its a dangerous game you play when you take all hope away, a disfigured man who 60 years ago might of just been an alcoholic, petty criminal, or degenerate gambler/whorer is now just as likely to lock himself inside preparing for a murder/suicide spree.

If you have never once in your life felt powerful or acknowledged, have never felt another's desire or kindness...and then you realize their is no hope?

Sacrificing yourself isn't that big of a price to pay to have it all in an instant.

Whether its a gun toting manic shooting spree in the west, or a suicide bomber in the middle east. It all comes from the same emotionally damaged backdrop.

Incels will always be willing to become violent. Increase the incels, increase random acts of pure rage. Eliminate incels, you eliminate murders without motive.

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

I wasn't trying to denigrate.

No worries, that was actually aimed at the audience here that likes to salve their egos at the expense of Betas.

As far as the rest of your reply, that is definitely the point I was trying to make. Both the cultures you mention share a commonality- both restrict and discourage men from achieving/actualizing in order "stand out" enough to become a valid target for female attraction.

Whether it be "equality by outcome" victim politics, or apex elites hoovering up all power/resources and thus female attention; the result is the same- disenfranchised men whom have no reason left to play by the rules of society.

Simple ones that are taken for granted- like "Don't kill/rape/steal/etc".

[–]sir_wankalot_here 5 points6 points  (1 child)

You brought up many valid points.

An increasing population doesn't help a country like china, the US, india, japan, brazil etc. Not even close to the benefits it had a century ago. So the incentives for growth have been removed.

Most people are still stuck in primitive thinking where they think a nigger population is better. The benefits even 100 years ago where not as great as the benefits 500 years ago. The main reason is modern labour requires more training to be productive and mistakes made by labour are more expensive.

500 years ago, the emperor of China could order 1 out of 10 peasants to carry large blocks to where he wanted to build a great wall. The worst that could happen is the peasant dropped the block. But a peasant having an accident with a bulldozer causes a lot more damage.

China and Japan have experienced first hand the negative effects of a large population. That is why both countries are not concerned about their declining population.

Here we have it backwards, we encourage stupid people to have more kids, and discourage more intelligent people from having kids. China is doing things the other way around.

Moralists have a legit point that it is wrong to force women to have abortions. But they never explain how to feed all the unedcuated peasants that are produced.

[–]PedophilePriest 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Investment cost in the individual has become intolerably high to where the individuals family must bear the full brunt of it for him to even be considered.

There's a reason apprenticeships have disappeared almost entirely. It is no longer acceptable to recognize raw talent and assist with the time and resources to turn that person into a great asset.

In turn we lose our mentors, our next generation of leaders. Men taught by men, to be a man. This used to be normal behavior, everywhere, everyday.

Now we turn to an internet forum to catch glimpses of what we have lost so quickly.

[–]interestedplayer -4 points-3 points  (1 child)

Unions. Yeah, unions and communism, greatest thing that ever happened to humanity.

You have to accept that collectivism is fundamentally female. Women can not survive on their own, so they are hardwired to group up. Men can work in collectives, but also on their own and they are the basis of capitalist society and achievement.

[–]Smithcolstudentbody 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Hey, don't compare the two. You like having a weekend? You like a 40 hour work week? You like overtime? You like vacation days? You like benefits?


Fuck you for not appreciating what they fought their asses off and in many cases, died for. I don't get most of those, so enjoy them, you fucking ingrate.

[–]Senior ContributorRedPope[S] 8 points9 points  (14 children)


Obviously, men can and do band together, but it is never for a male cause. Anything we do -- including Watt's development of steam technology -- is for the benefit of the group as a whole. We go to war for our nation. We labor for our family. We uncover knowledge for our species. Women are always under our umbrellas. That is our nature.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 9 points10 points  (13 children)

Simple biology Two men from a genetic perspective can not share one woman, the only exception is some areas of Tibet where there where scarce resources so two brothers would marry one woman. That way each brother would know that for each child produced from the marriage 50% of the genes in the child would be his.

But two plus women can share one man and from a genetic perspective every woman is a winner since she knows for sure that the kid has 100% her genetic material in it.

Simplified explanation why women will always back other women, but it is not in the best interests for a man to always back another man.

That is why MRA has to fail.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (12 children)

Two men can't share one woman? She can't have children for each male separately?

Single moms do this all the time? WTF are you talking about?

[–]2rp_valiant 9 points10 points  (11 children)

Two men with spines won't willingly start a family with the same woman. Remember that before birth control, sex meant willingness to have children with the woman in question, hence the no-sex-before-marriage doctrine and the existence of monogamy in the first place.

If two guys are plowing the same woman and she gets pregnant, how are either of them supposed to know they aren't being cucked? The prospect of raising another man's child without knowing it is horrifying in a very deep, instinctual way.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I always found it to be repulsive and disgusting, even when I was a kid and didn't really understand these things.

[–]2rp_valiant 6 points7 points  (0 children)

instincts are built into our brains. If you watch how children react to various things, you will see how we all instinctively react because children aren't old enough to have been taught to suppress their initial reactions.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (8 children)

Its called DNA testing to determine who is the father.

You claimed two men can't "share" a woman, which is biologically false. She can have the children of both men at different times.

[–]2rp_valiant 6 points7 points  (7 children)

we're talking about mental traits that are evolutionarily selected for. Paternity tests didn't exist 100 years ago, or throughout the whole of life's evolution. These instincts against being cucked drive a lot of the feelings we have towards e.g. girls with high N-counts, or the idea of polygamy/open marriages as being something women push for rather than men. Science has counteracted these biological problems but the instincts are still there. Bear in mind I'm talking about girlfriend/wife situations, not some random fuck and chuck.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children)

I can agree with the "instincts" idea that men don't want to share women but thats about it.

Also, I see plenty of beta men who will marry a woman with children already from another man and then have another kid of their own with that woman.

[–]2rp_valiant 4 points5 points  (5 children)

yeah, being a step dad is very much a beta trait. You'll never get the respect that a father figure requires because the kids instinctively push away from you, or say shit like "you're not my dad, you can't tell me what to do". I don't get why guys do it.

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

I don't get it either.

The only explanation is that white men have become weak manginas and have let women collectively shit test them out of existence.

Men lose full respect if they let women dominate them.

Notice how feminists take the side of Islam agains the West, despite Islam being very patriarchal in outlook.

Doesn't that appear to be a contradiction? Yet women are attracted to it because ISLAM doesn't fail collective shit tests from women and that actually turns them on towards that ideology

[–]TheRedThrowAwayPill 3 points4 points  (0 children)


That documentary is about r / MensRights.

It's not about TRP.

It's just unfortunate timing & naming.

[–]pooshhMao 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Don't forget to lift weights

[–]redadactyl 3 points4 points  (0 children)

when you reach your later years, after age and infirmity have taken their toll, and your productivity and usefulness to society have reached their end, you will be discarded, same as all other men before you.

This is why since finding this sub I have taken utmost care and interest in learning from and respecting the elderly men I come across. They were us, and in 50-60 years, we will be them.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (10 children)

I have disproven this "biology" argument in another post. The concept of "disposability" where women essentially have preference in academia, business, politics, etc has NEVER been the norm throughout recorded history.

Ergo, this phase is atypical and transitory. It is a phase that is due to a decadent, dying Western world run by weak men who are controlled by their women.

[–]2rp_valiant 4 points5 points  (8 children)

I think you might be misreading the idea of disposability. Men are disposable, so men are where nature makes its experiments. This leads to much more variance in men, including geniuses and leaders. Women cluster around the mean, so women don't generally contribute much in real terms beyond having children and supporting a valuable man.

The current phase is part of a cycle where a culture with very few real problems (around the 1950s) decides to pander more and more to the whining of women. Women are designed to whine and complain, it mobilises the betas into action. Now that we've pandered and weakened our society, we're starting to see real problems again from cultural and military invasion. Judging from history, this will eventually lead to our downfall and the new culture (islam) to take over and begin the cycle anew. Either that, or the West gets its shit together and fights back.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Good points made here.

Unfortunately, I'm not convinced the others concept of "disposability" match yours.

Many of these weak manginas (strangely on TRP) think disposability consists of a society where:

1) Alphas fuck all the women 2) Betas pay all the bills willingly without resentment despite lack of mating opportunities because they are "disposable" 3) Women run shit. Dictate rules/laws to both alphas and betas.

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

Because they don't have the critical thinking skills to see the nuance and think that the blanket statements made on TRP are 100% facts.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Ok you got two out of three correct here.

1) Alphas fuck all the women 2) Betas pay all the bills willingly without resentment despite lack of mating opportunities because they are "disposable" 3) Women run shit. Dictate rules/laws to both alphas and betas.

1 and 2 describe 99% of human history. Number 3 where did you get the idea women run shit ? They never will, they have no desire to.

Several writers here have described the power structure, but using different things. One guy even had a structural layout of a real company. Simplified it was this, men run the company but then in the middle management roles they put women to act as gatekeepers.

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

1 and 2 is human history?

Which societies throughout history did the vast majority of men not mate but just paid taxes to support women's children?

Not Rome, Not Greece, Not ancient Israel, Not Islamic world, etc.

Show me these civilizations

[–]sir_wankalot_here 0 points1 point  (3 children)

You just mentioned two of the civilizations. Read your bible a little closer, but read it like you would a novel, then realize that the Bible was cut and pasted from a variety of sources.

For Greece, it depends on what era, what group of Greeks are you talking about. For Sparta, what would be classified as "male" and no just having a dick did not make you male.

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

This doesn't contradict anything I have written.

You are going off on unhelpful tangents of illogical value.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Either you are an idiot or a troll. What type of marriage did ancient Isreal have ? Islam is actually a form of Judism, Mohammad when he founded it the original intention was for people to go back to the original form of Judism.

What is the primary cause of violence in a place like Saudi ? In the case of both the Islamic empires and ancient Isreal, what would be the primary motive for military conquest ?

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

What? This doesn't even counter any of my assertions. You are too stupid to debate.

TRP is filled with morons with low IQs and poor knowledge of history who debate logical fallacies.

Like some awkward frat boy who can't get laid and has a communications degree.

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

You are not going to undo evolution with Twitter hashtag, mass media coverage, or a few new laws. You can't stop hypergamy.

No you cannot stop "hypergamy", but you are in complete control of the rules that dictate what is valuable and what is not. We are constantly evolving, we are constantly adapting to an environment that is shifting before our feet. Survival of the fittest is constantly misconstrued as literally "survival of the fit". In reality it means whomever is best mutated to survive within natures current conditions, will proliferate. Chaos is a ladder, and being ned stark will not ensure you victory. Only those willing to scrap and evolve past platitudes and simplifications of human rewards systems will grow.

The only thing you can change is yourself.

I see this post as incredibly defeatist and common amonsgt redpill mentality. This notion that we can only change the world through changing ourselves. This is a fatal flaw that many men have, because stoicism and suffering in silence is something men have been conditioned to endure from the beginning of time. Well, news flash, the kind of men that sit around and endure punishment of that sort are the ones that dwell indefinitely in mediocrity. Forget this dogshit notion that circulates on redpill that we cannot warp the world around us with our will.

Do not fall for this trap. Do not look at yourself as someone that cannot change the world around you. Do not get suckered by this "beautiful ones" allegory, because the world is not lost.

Do not believe slowly marching forward and working on your craft is the only thing that will grant you power and love, because it will not, and that is the greatest Redpill fallacy of all. And most of all, do not give into the cult of ignorance that is slowly taking root in the Redpill

[–]NeoreactionSafe 1 point2 points  (4 children)

You can't stop hypergamy. Even when adultery was punishable by death, people still cheated. Biology is undeniable.


  • Okay there's a logical error here.


No one is saying that you can prevent hypergamy 100% because it is an underlying drive for women. But with the correct laws (Marriage 1.0 style) you can drive the percentage of marriage failure way down.

Back in the 1800's the marriage success rate was 95%. (in other words marriages remained intact for the duration of those involved) Genetic evidence (which is rock solid) suggests that cuckolding never amounted to more than 2% of childbirth.

There's a saying:

Perfect is the enemy of "good enough".

It's not unreasonable to just want laws that are "good enough" to support families.


The reason why things are going in this way is this whole globalist world government power grab by the Oligarchs. They want open borders and to erase the family and to destroy all identities including the notion of gender itself.

Red Pill is supposed to expose the progressive myth as a fraud. (it's what we do)


Our main task is destroying... we destroy the myth... otherwise Red Pill is itself a myth.

We aren't in a position at this point to "create the future", so for now we "destroy the myths".

Our eyes are not on a beautiful future but on destroying the myths of the present day.


[–]MortalSisyphus 1 points1 points [recovered]

You had a half-decent post and then you edited it and ruined it. Stop watching youtube conspiracy videos about "globalist Oligarchs," they have ruined your brain. At least keep it off TRP.

[–]NeoreactionSafe 1 point2 points  (2 children)

You can't comprehend the Blue Pill and ignore the power aspect that brings it into existence.

There can be no doubt the Blue Pill emotional indoctrination is "forced" from above. (always has been)

We can ignore this or simply talk around it but it's always the base of everything.


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

You know, I want to believe this. I've read my fair share about global elite conspiracies. The problem is: no evidence.

The human brain is adept at finding patterns where there's none. Why is this any different ?

[–]NeoreactionSafe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well I'm going to hold frame on this one.

The Blue Pill is largely an operation to control the people.

You are fully capable of rejecting this knowledge.


[–]Lhtfoot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bullshit... We can petition to have laws abolished/changed. I refuse to accept this "we've already lost" attitude. For starters, we can dissolve the financial-incentives for women to get pregnant, marry and divorce.

[–]Primemale 0 points1 point  (1 child)

whilst I agree with your sentiment, particularly pertaining to TRP and mens rights movements. I sense you are implying that in general one should not waste time on things that are hard to win, sometimes fighting for what is right (or you believe to be right) perhaps stopping the (covert)genocide of your people, or the corruption of your country say, even if it seems ''unwinnable'' sometimes it is nobler to fight for what you believe in. ''Those who stand for nothing fall for anything''

And in a sense although trp is not a ''movement'' if they got enough of a following enough knowledge spread you may well be surprised how quickly it would change things, societally speaking, so indirectly it is a movement, because many individuals form a group, with the same (or similar) ideology and that forms change.

If that's not what you were implying then fuck it, I've made someone think for a second.

[–]Senior ContributorRedPope[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I sense you are implying that in general one should not waste time on things that are hard to win

I implied no such thing. I wrote quite deliberately exactly what I meant. It certainly wasn't some pussy "never fight" anything message.

A hard challenge is great, and may indeed be worthy of your effort. But an impossible challenge is foolish, a waste of your time.

Changing biology is impossible. It can't be done. No movement has that power. Hypergamy and male disposability are never going away. Find a better cause. One where you have a chance, however slim, of accomplishing something.

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

We do have common ground

Unlike most of these FemiNazis, we're not here just to get attention or maximize our own personal position. It's about a general principle, for me at least.

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

There will be a time when it makes sense to fight for men's rights and oppose the vagina-obsessed society we live in today, but it's not today. It's not in our lifetimes. It's not even close. Maybe, when we're genetically engineering our babies and can fine tune characteristics and behavior we can rally for the end of hypergamy and male/female inequality. Until then, there will be winners and losers. Be a winner.

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

I think blacknighting might work if we pretend like we're for equality, but it removes all their privileges? Isn't that why the ERA failed?

Ah fuck it, it's hopeless.

[–]MortalSisyphus 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I find it odd and a bit disturbing that we can champion masculinity and strength on the one hand and defeatism and cowardice on the other. The two seem mutually exclusive to me.

[–]boomerbux 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Going on strike or just refusing to support those you oppose is hardly defeatist or cowardly. It's a recognition of reality, and of the fact that by continuing to support things the way they are, nothing will change.

The beauty of being on the right side of things is that reality agrees with you, and reality always wins out in the end.

While waiting for the consequences of denying reality to set in (delayed by all those still supporting things as they are) it's nice to be able to enjoy life, unlike those who have to constantly worry about whether the people they are leeching off of will finally get tired of it.

[–]TonyTonyTonez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I had read this a few months back my younger self would have thrown a fit. Now? Just reaffirms what I already know and live.

[–]SuckingOffMyDad 1 points1 points [recovered]

This is a pretty bleak and depressing reality though. What's preventing TRPers from blowing their brains out? I can't see anything good in living for nothing but fleeting visceral pleasures and complete inner loneliness.

[–]boomerbux 0 points1 point  (6 children)

WTF are you talking about? Yes, if you need other people to make you happy you are doomed to depression and a sad life, but that's your choice, no reason to live like that.

You need to find out what life is all about and fast. Life is fucking fabulous, a huge adventure, a big game, and it goes by way too fast.

I've tried to talk about personal philosophy and happiness here and people say 'fuck that, this is about picking up women and improving yourself.'

Well you are a great example why none of that matters if you don't have your own philosophy figured out, and from day 1, not learning it in your 40s.

It's like building a house on sand, sooner or later the lack of a foundation cause the whole thing to come crashing down.

[–]SuckingOffMyDad 1 points1 points [recovered]

WTF are you talking about? Yes, if you need other people to make you happy you are doomed to depression and a sad life

"WTF I'm talking about" is the fact that we're social creatures with social needs, and if you're a man you're ultimately completely alone.

but that's your choice, no reason to live like that.

You can't logic emotions.

[–]boomerbux 0 points1 point  (4 children)

You might be a social creature, with social needs, whatever the fuck that means, but I must not be, because I really have no clue what you are talking about.

I have friends, I have family, I guess what I don't have is 'needs'. Sounds awful to be needy.

[–]SuckingOffMyDad 0 points0 points [recovered]

Wow you must be so cool because you can't even fathom what I'm talking about. Congrats on being so badass.

[–]boomerbux 0 points1 point  (2 children)

If it's badass to not know what a 'social need' is, then yup, I am very, very badass. Whatever it is, it sounds needy, as I said, so I think I would categorize that as umm let me see umm blue pill?

[–]SuckingOffMyDad 0 points0 points [recovered]

If it's badass to not know what a 'social need' is, then yup, I am very, very badass. Whatever it is, it sounds needy, as I said, so I think I would categorize that as umm let me see umm blue pill?

Your poor try-hard act indicates that you don't really understand what being alpha means. When you stop pretending to not understand human nature or being allergic to others talking openly about their issues because they're not uncomfortable with the process of changing into a better man I'll assume the opposite.

[–]boomerbux 0 points1 point  (0 children)

umm I read that like 3 times and once again can't make heads or tails of it. The one thing that I got was about human nature, and that I most definitely do understand. Humans are naturally self interested, as in, they like to stay alive and do things that help themselves, as opposed to sacrificing themselves for others. So if you can understand what enlightened self interest is, maybe you'll discover what life is about, and it isn't about 'social needs'.

And I sure as hell am not alpha by any stretch, but I am learning a lot. Pretty fascinating.

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

One thing I'd like to clarify:

The documentary is not actually about us. It just shares our name because when she started making the film we weren't really that popular and the term "red pill" was more commonly associated with the Men's Rights Movement. That being said, once it comes out we WILL get a ton of traffic because of the name association.