The Red Pill Movie

I thought it was great, saw it via Kodi. Well worth a watch.

Interesting the attacks on it, many people are either incredibly deluded or just flat out lying.

The man who created the red pill Reddit thing, the man who then had to resign from his job, is the perfect of example of everything wrong with this red pill "movement".

"“Feminists are obsessed with rape because we live in a rape fantasy culture, where feminists wish they were hot enough to be rape-able,” he wrote in one post from April 2014."

"In hundreds of online remarks made under usernames Pk_atheist and redpillschool, Fisher espoused a belief that women had inferior intellects and were useful only for sex. "

This is exactly why so many people are repulsed by red pill and MGTOW. It is a great reason to disconnect from it entirely,

PucaMama wrote: »

The man who created the red pill Reddit thing, the man who then had to resign from his job, is the perfect of example of everything wrong with this red pill "movement".

"“Feminists are obsessed with rape because we live in a rape fantasy culture, where feminists wish they were hot enough to be rape-able,” he wrote in one post from April 2014."

"In hundreds of online remarks made under usernames Pk_atheist and redpillschool, Fisher espoused a belief that women had inferior intellects and were useful only for sex. "

This is exactly why so many people are repulsed by red pill and MGTOW. It is a great reason to disconnect from it entirely,

Have you seen the documentary?

I think the mistake you are making here is assuming that everyone has the same view as that guy.

In the Red Pill movement, you have a good few whackjobs and extremists who get most of the publicity, because they are whackjobs and extremists.

The people making reasoned arguments don't get any publicity because reasoned arguments don't cause public outcry.

Indeed even in the documentary there are guys on there that are vilified because fo the extreme comments they have made online. But from what I have read, which isn't much, they made these crazy arguments in order to get noticed. If they kept making well reasoned,c lam points no one would notice them.

But int he documentary these guys are all making very logical, well-reasoned points.

It's the same with anything.

All the decent people, doing good work get ignored as it doesn't whip up outrage and get people talking. and then it is the usual extremists and whackjobs that get all the publicity which then, in turn, ends up tarring everyone with the same brush.

Are all feminists like the stereotypical "Big Red" from the Red Pill documentary? I.e. extremely rude, loud, obnoxious, seemingly unreasonable? No, but the people who don't agree with feminism or who have a problem with feminism have people like her as the poster child of feminism. She is the representation of feminism. The reasonable, calm, feminist making reasonable arguments doesn't get the airtime.

It's the way the world is nowadays.

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Not a convincing argument.

You may have a point about the Red Pill movement/philosophy but this is not an effective way to make that point. To attack the person who holds the view is not to attack the point itself. It's an ad hominem argument; a logical fallacy.

It's fact, not argument. It's a fact this man is literally the perfect example of what turns people off the red pill movement. The language he uses. Everything.

tinpib wrote: »

Have you seen the documentary?

I think the mistake you are making here is assuming that everyone has the same view as that guy.

In the Red Pill movement, you have a good few whackjobs and extremists who get most of the publicity, because they are whackjobs and extremists.

The people making reasoned arguments don't get any publicity because reasoned arguments don't cause public outcry.

Indeed even in the documentary there are guys on there that are vilified because fo the extreme comments they have made online. But from what I have read, which isn't much, they made these crazy arguments in order to get noticed. If they kept making well reasoned,c lam points no one would notice them.

But int he documentary these guys are all making very logical, well-reasoned points.

It's the same with anything.

All the decent people, doing good work get ignored as it doesn't whip up outrage and get people talking. and then it is the usual extremists and whackjobs that get all the publicity which then, in turn, ends up tarring everyone with the same brush.

Are all feminists like the stereotypical "Big Red" from the Red Pill documentary? I.e. extremely rude, loud, obnoxious, seemingly unreasonable? No, but the people who don't agree with feminism or who have a problem with feminism have people like her as the poster child of feminism. She is the representation of feminism. The reasonable, calm, feminist making reasonable arguments doesn't get the airtime.

It's the way the world is nowadays.

Have a look around boards. They have already decided all feminists are the same and are only a few steps away from agreeing with the man I mentioned. I seem to remember a thread before supporting mandatory paternity tests on babies at birth? Imagine demanding all men have give a DNA sample to be sure they haven't committed a crime. Doesn't sound right does it?? Yet loads of posters were all for assuming every woman needs to be checked up on to make sure she wasn't cheating. So boards thinks all feminists are bad and have men oppressed, but they can't have any disagreement with MRAs. No we can't have that now.

PucaMama wrote: »

Have a look around boards. They have already decided all feminists are the same and are only a few steps away from agreeing with the man I mentioned.

I wouldn't say 'they', that implies 'all'. It would be more accurate to say 'some of them'. Which is my point.

It's a vocal minority, often extremists, that leads people to think it is 'them' or 'all'.

Murrisk wrote: »

I reckon a new movement separate of the red pill is the way to go.

That's rather vague.

I think the problem is while most problems men face were there before feminism started a lot of problems men face are also new. And we live in a society where when some clearly is preferential to women over men feminism will state that it is equality. So MRAs feed off of this type of thing.

The best way for MRAs to operate is to raise awareness of the problems that men face and work with politicians and educators to get funding and awareness. However there is always the problem that many forms of feminism gets in men's way such as domestic violence theories (designed by feminists) and how outdated, doctrinal or prejudiced they can be so this will also require MRAs to call feminism out on this which can be a minefield. The next problem is supports that exist for many gender related issues are actually run by feminists so getting men to be supported by those services like women already are is a problem because it will be a member of the privileged/oppressor group demanding help which many feminists won't want to be involved in. So then you may say well why don't MRAs set up a male equivalent service? Well they often do try to but setting up an equivalent service for men will be a direct threat to feminism's funding and resource monopoly which feminism will often try to block (which is what we see in domestic violence shelters etc...)

what do they say politics is downstream of culture, chin wagging on the internet is as good as anything. I remember last year there was an article on the Journal after the LC results came out and the headline was "girls leave boys in hapenny place" luckily in the comments they got hell for it, remember looking back recently and they had changed the headline.