Red Pill Thread 2.0: Neckbeard Revenge

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
Arbitrary_sl said:
No, it's not. You do not get to sit here and claim that the social movement of feminism is actually a component of sociology and thus give it some sort of automatic scientific credibility. There is certainly feminist theory that enters those waters but it is not the same thing as the big blanket term "feminism."
Click to expand...
You can't lump random tumblr accounts into feminism either to prove your strawman.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,959
138,459
Mist_sl said:
You can't lump random tumblr accounts into feminism either to prove your strawman.
Click to expand...
yeah it's so much better with academics

Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont, in their book critiquing postmodern thought (Fashionable Nonsense, 1997), criticize Luce Irigaray on several grounds. In their view, she wrongly regards E=mc2 as a "sexed equation" because she argues that "it privileges the speed of light over other speeds that are vitally necessary to us". They also take issue with the assertion that fluid mechanics is unfairly neglected because it deals with "feminine" fluids in contrast to "masculine" rigid mechanics.
Click to expand...
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
I also just love it when people 'discover' the social sciences via random google searches. That would be like someone googling random physics words, finding articles about absurd-seeming thought-experiments like Schrodinger's cat or quantum immortality and deciding that because those sound silly that all of physics must be a crock of shit.

Newton? That guy just had an apple fetish.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,959
138,459
it's more like postmodernism was "made up" by butthurt marxists after the gulags became widespread knowledge and being a marxist was hard to do as an academic. you were kinda right about marxists being the spawn of this.
 
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,036
Mist_sl said:
"Women have very little idea how much men hate them." -Absolutely true, and has nothing to do with misandry. Most women don't have any idea how much men hate women. After reading redpill nonsense, I'm starting to get a pretty good idea.
.
Click to expand...
"Men have no idea how much women hate them"--Absolutely true. Most men have no idea how much women hate them, but after reading a bunch of rad fem sites advocating the gender genocide of men, I'm starting to get a pretty good idea!

I'm not even sure if you're trying to be satirical here; I hope so.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
I'm just saying it's not an example of misandry to say that women don't know how much men hate them.

Your inversion isn't an example of misogyny.
 
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,036
Mist_sl said:
I'm just saying it's not an example of misandry to say that women don't know how much men hate them.

Your inversion isn't an example of misogyny.
Click to expand...
I know, I'm the one who illustrated it's sexism earlier. I was talking about using the evidence of a radical community to justify a statement. (Also, kind of proves the MRA's should be fed up with being called misogynistic, no? When it's obvious that even their more outlandish rhetoric is just sexist. Rarely do they display open hatred of women, but rather just attribute negative social effects on them.)

Anyway, I put Red Pill right in there with Rad or Nu-wave feminism. Radical takes on weak correlations and anecdotal experiences.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
I'm pretty sure most MRA rhetoric paints women as nothing more than objects/children to be manipulated, which is pretty damn misogynistic.
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
Because womenwantto be objects/manipulated. You don't blame men because it's something women want and something that works, and trust me, it works a bazillion times better empirically than any rational gender equalism attitude towards dating (unfortunately - we don't want it to be this way).

There's a famous axiom that if you can keep a 2nd grader entertained, you'll do well with women. That's not a coincidence.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
Dumar_sl said:
Because womenwantto be objects/manipulated. You don't blame men because it's something women want and something that works, and trust me, that works a bazillion times better empirically than any rational gender equalism attitude (unfortunately - we don't want to be this way).

There's a famous axiom that if you can keep a 2nd grader entertained, you'll do well with women. That's not a coincidence.
Click to expand...
Yeah because your average man is so fucking complicated. How about a new axiom: if you can sip a coke with a straw you can do well with men.
 
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,036
Mist_sl said:
I'm pretty sure most MRA rhetoric paints women as nothing more than objects/children to be manipulated, which is pretty damn misogynistic.
Click to expand...

"So now that women don't need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, 'You know we need you in the way we need ice cream - you'll be more ornamental.'--Dowd.

So, feminism IS misandric overall? But just not those quotes. Okay, I get it now. Glad we cleared that up.
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
Do you not think many men would be ecstatic to approach relationships with a higher-order rationality to them, one with the equalism feminism advocates? Absolutely, we'd jump at the chance. The problem is, it never works because it's not what women find attractive as evidenced in behavior. They want the alpha jerkboy, so RP/MRA designs its ideology to make men aware of that fact. First part of that is discarding of society's narratives regarding relationships.

If women actually behaved as they speak, then gender equalism might work for society. Until women grow up or nature selects for different genes rather than jerkboy attractors, we'll constantly be dancing this dance of manipulative bullshit.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
Lithose_sl said:

"So now that women don't need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, 'You know we need you in the way we need ice cream - you'll be more ornamental.'--Dowd.

So, feminism IS misandric overall? But just not those quotes. Okay, I get it now. Glad we cleared that up.
Click to expand...
You clearly misunderstand the amount of reverence women have for ice cream, especially early/mid menopausal women.

That's a compliment goddamnit.
 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,371
23,792
Dumar_sl said:
Do you not think many men would be ecstatic to approach relationships with a higher-order rationality to them, one with the equalism feminism advocates? Absolutely, we'd jump at the chance. The problem is, it never works because it's not what women find attractive as evidenced in behavior. They want the alpha jerkboy, so RP/MRA designs its ideology to make men aware of that fact. First part of that is discarding of society's narratives regarding relationships.

If women actually behaved as they speak, then gender equalism might work for society. Until women grow up or nature selects for different genes rather than jerkboy attractors, we'll constantly be dancing this dance of manipulative bullshit.
Click to expand...
Men would be ecstatic if all relationships were completely transactional in nature, so long as they always felt they were coming out on the winning side of the transaction.

The problem is that transactional relationships are demonstrably horrible environments for both the mental health of the participants and for any unfortunate children that might accidentally spawn from them.
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
Mist_sl said:
Men would be ecstatic if all relationships were completely transactional in nature, so long as they always felt they were coming out on the winning side of the transaction.

The problem is that transactional relationships are demonstrably horrible environments for both the mental health of the participants and for any unfortunate children that might accidentally spawn from them.
Click to expand...
The True Romantics

Watch the food court proposal for full effect.

Tomassi_sl said:
It is men who are the real romantics. It's men who are the imaginative ones when it comes to romance, and all in an effort to provide a woman with the romantic experiences she says she wants. Romance is what men perceive it to be for women.
Click to expand...
Think about it: when is a woman ever romantic? It's always men facilitating romance in an effort for women to experience it, never the other way around. Flowers, proposals, candlelight dinners, picnics, a walk on the beach, all men. Women are the transactional ones, not men. Ever see those articles about how sexy it is for guy to 'help out around the house' (so to give him sex in exchange for doing laundry)? Even Sandberg's quote says it. That's transactional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.