Thursday, January 16, 2014

Red pill women

It wasn't that long ago that critics of feminism were few and far between. Then the men's rights movement sprang up and suddenly even lefty men were complaining about men being treated as oppressors. Now there is a movement of anti-feminist women calling themselves red pill women. These women want to make relationships with men work and so they reject the feminism they were brought up with. They reject the idea that masculinity and femininity are oppressive social constructs; they also reject the "men as enemy" idea.

It makes for a refreshing change. At the red pill women sites there are articles with titles like "10 ways to respect your husband" and "What nice thing did you do for your partner today?"

Now, it's true that feminists still dominate in the media and schools. Society is still being driven in a feminist direction. However, the rise of alternative movements provides an important political lesson for us. Right now, liberalism remains a dominant orthodoxy. It is possible, though, for the political landscape to change, just as it has done in respect to feminism. It is important, therefore, not to withdraw or become disheartened, but to work seriously to build up an alternative. We too can be part of a change in the political landscape in respect to liberalism.

While on the topic of feminism, I'd like to link to a few interesting posts I've read recently. Dalrock has one called "Feminists are ugly". He argues that the ugliness is not so much physical, but in feminists being miserly with love. Mark Moncrieff has written a useful post on "Why we are not feminists".

Finally, I thought it interesting to highlight a comment I read in a discussion thread from a Native American Indian. He was trying to explain why he found it difficult to date women from his own ethnic group:
In my experience as a Native American is that Native American girls are very independent. I'm Navajo and the culture even a few generations back was matriarchal. I think that's where a lot of it comes from.
The girl I dated for two years was also Navajo. The problems I had in the relationship were that she was always competing against me to prove something. She was really impatient and domineering. I felt like she expected much more than she was willing to give in the relationship. If I suggested that I wanted her to wear a dress once in awhile or asked if she'd wear heels if I bought them for her, I'd be met with anger and fighting and okay, maybe that's not fair, but if it's someone with love, you could at least consider it and explain why you don't want to instead of getting mad.
Another Native American girl I dated was a mix with a white father and Navajo mother. She was pretty hot but she wore basketball shorts and a hoodie every single day. Yeah, there's more to a relationship than clothing but it bothered me that I would wear something nice, invite her out to dinner, and she'd still be wearing basketball shorts, hair unkempt, no makeup, and be so boring. To me, it spoke to her interest in me, like I wasn't important enough to wear something decent out for.
I know I'm attractive to other Native American girls because they pursue me. Unfortunately, many are boring, overweight, and are really domineering, which does not fit with my personality. I know I'm not the perfect catch. I've got my problems. However, dating native girls has always left a bad taste in my mouth. I want my girl to be excited to see me, to dress up nicely, to be kind to me and I have yet to experience the same results that I get with a white or latina girl with a native girl.

I find the quote interesting, in part, because it shows a similarity in male preferences across ethnic groups. The behaviour of the Navaho women is also a bit similar to some of the arts faculty Anglo women I mixed with at the height of third-wave feminism in the early 1990s (I don't think things are quite as bad now).



    This is all based on the Internet. What a marvelous technology it is. Bruce Charlton says it's nothing but a part of the mass media complex he identifies with the Devil. He's totally wrong.

    From the rise of radio (and fascist demagogues) to ubiquitous television and cultural Marxist programming, the culture of the West was dominated by technologies that were all selling and no talking back. By monopolizing these technologies, people who hate white, Western people and culture were able to demoralize us and destroy us, slamming their evil massages into the minds of people staring at the boob tube in a hypnotized, uncritical and passive state. There was no effective way to get a dissenting message out.

    Now, because of the Internet, it's a different game. Of course the forces of evil still have all the money and the mass media, and that gives them a big advantage with everything that feeds off the mass media, which is a lot of the Internet. But the forces of good, like Femen, or just sanity, like the red pill women, have a way to talk back. People can share information on what they tried and what works, and encourage people to keep going with what works.

    After a long, dark night of corruption, the sun is glimmering at the horizon again. And guess what: as the darkness begins to retreat, we can see that the truth is still what it always was. Men and women are different and complementary, not enemies. Kids need both their parents. When different gene pools are in competition, giving away your territory is a fatal idea, but taking care of your own race and nation (without prejudice to other races and nations) is a great idea. And so on.

    All we needed was an effective way for people to contact each other and start saying things like: "My life doesn't match what they're showing on television. Does what they recommend on TV not work for you either, or is it just me?"

    1. Titus, a very good comment, thank you. It's interesting to observe the way that the new movements burst onto the scene. The red pill women seem to have grown out of the discussion threads of websites that rose to prominence about five years ago. It takes a little time for ideas to catch and take hold. (BTW, did you mean to list the Antigones as a force for good rather than Femen?)

  2. (laughing, a lot) Yes of course I meant to list the Antigones as a force for good; Femen are as bad as possible.

    Sorry, That was a really silly mistake.

  3. This is a good comment, but I would add that the internet works both for and against traditionalists. TDT describes the way in which one-way mass media isolated individuals who had opinions contrary to the one-way mass media, and when a dissident is isolated like that, he either becomes an irritable crank or a broken conformist. If the mass media persuades you that you are the only person on earth who thinks as you do, you will either grow very angry or very sad. No matter what, you will see yourself, and others will see you, as a social pariah. With the advent of the internet, in contrast, it was rather as if we finally received radio signals from intelligent life on another planet. Hallelujah! I'm not alone! Traditionalists were one of the groups to shout this, because there were actually a large number of us, but we had been slighted by the big publishers and broadcasters. But radical deviants of every stripe were shouting it at the same time. The internet has emboldened the friends of traditional normality, but it has also emboldened its enemies.

    1. I think there is much truth to your observation that isolation causes dissidents to become either "an irritable crank or a broken conformist". And, you're right of course that the internet also gives a platform to a variety of non-traditionalist political movements. Trads do have an advantage though that life keeps pushing back toward at least some of our principles (do heterosexuals really want to embrace androgyny?) So the more that discussion opens up, I do think the more opportunity there is for us.

  4. Regarding people being independent, while there is nothing wrong having an independent personality, it can become bossiness and domineering behaviour if the needs of others are not taken into account for. I would be careful with anyone who is extremely independent to the extent that they do not appreciate your help. This is because they expect you to help yourself, by their terms, which may or may not be good.

  5. In 1980, what could the Antigones have done? They could have put out a pamphlet which would have meant nothing and not really expressed what they stand for they way their live presentation does, and the media would have ignored it.

    I'm sure they couldn't have hired a film crew, and anyway no cinema would have dared show it.

    Every channel was big media and big money, and big money people have so much to lose.

    I don't like movies, but I make exceptions, and Batman Begins was basically right: the force that lies behind the massive corruption of our society is fear. And the solution is braver people, often anonymous, to show that society doesn't belong to criminals and the corrupt. Usually that will mean people with few resources and not much to lose, and often it will mean brave women, who aren't afraid to show their faces the way men are.

    But there has to be a way for people with few resources and not much to lose to get a message out. Without that, you can have all the courage in the world, but tough luck, you're just shouting back at a television screen, and nobody else is ever going to know.

  6. *Since* the internet we have (in the UK) compulsory sexual revolution with dissent punished by public vilification, ruinous fines and jail time; mass immigration and positive discrimination for recent immigrants; diversity training and publicly funded celebration; open, explicit, strategic mandatory discrimination in favour of women, some ethnic groups, certain postcode districts... Well done internet - great job at rolling-back Leftism!

    The good things about the internet are minuscule micro-eddies against a flood tide of Leftism; a tiny proportion of what goes on - a small fraction of a percent - and the evidence suggests that they have zero impact on the overall direction.

    Obviously I think it is worth continuing the battle, else I would not blog every day and write a book a year. But the positive impact is on a few individual souls - not at a societal level.

    1. It's certainly true that the liberal political class is still firmly ensconced and that policy settings are still driving society toward ever more radical liberal ends.

      But there have been changes. It was once the case, in Australia anyway, that feminism simply went unchallenged. Now, at least, there is an opposition in the field, even if it hasn't reached the point yet of influencing public policy. Even in the comments to posts in the more left-leaning websites you'll now find a preponderance of (mostly) intelligent criticisms of feminism.

      The question is, at what point does this change in opinion amongst thinking types, translate into changes in policy or direction? Usually, a system has to hollow out for quite some time before the cracks really begin to show. So I don't think we'll necessarily see changes in the next few years. But beyond that?

    2. Micro-eddies can be dismissed because every drop of water is the same as all the others and none have volition.

      What is happening on the internet is the creation of new types of people (especially white people) who accept new challenges.

      The goal is to stop white genocide. Lesser goals than survival are worthless.

      Bill Slim couldn't just show up in Burma and kick the Japanese out. The Japanese were in charge and inevitably kept winning for a long time. Nevertheless, once someone with the right attitude arrived, an eventual turn-around was possible.

      According to old-fashioned standards the new people are nothing - but previous generations that never tried to secure our existence don't know whether it's possible to succeed or what it might take.

  7. I suppose I am what you would call a red pill woman (and I've been frequenting that reddit site recently). I grew up in a very feminist environment, and it has been difficult to change the way I think. The internet was the main way that I came to this alternative worldview. Without it, I doubt that I would have been able to determine exactly what was wrong in my life or it would have taken me a lot longer. How does one have a healthy family while both parents are focused on their careers? Is there a difference between men and women? Should there be? I was utterly confused by it all a few years ago, but the confusion has lessened with the help of "red pill" blogs mostly.

    I'm also thankful for the anonymity that the internet provides. Antifeminism is often harshly criticized by liberals. To express my views with family or coworkers would be to open myself up to shaming and abuse. It can be lonely in the real world, but the internet allows like-minded people to communicate.

    1. Same here. A male friend of mine asked me why I disliked feminism so much. It is because it is basically female chauvanism and excluded cultural, ethnic and religious minorities despite claiming that it helped minorities. Read my article at