You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
2

[–] AustNerevar 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The two concepts were inseparable

Are you kidding? Have you read The Red Pill handbook? It's completely antithetical to men's rights. It promotes backwards gender roles and is filled with blatant misandry and misogyny. I mean, I'm not making this up.

Women rely on men to be emotionally stoic, we often call this "holding frame" you have to be mentally strong so she can lean on you, she finds that attractive. You cannot lean on her, there is a double standard, if you lean on her the relationship will fall apart, she will not be able to handle your problems and she will no longer find you attractive. You are a man. You have to be better than her, which means to be stronger than she is. This is why women get to be emotional and we have to be non-reactive, we are strong and ignore our emotions so they can indulge in their emotions and enjoy the ride.

Seriously, anyone who knows even the slightest bit about the MRM will recognize that TRP ideals are in complete opposition to men's rights. TRP takes everything that mens rights has done to make society accepting of men's vulnerabilities and shit on it. It's rooted in a Victorian view on male and female gender roles and has not even the slightest resemblance to what the MRM's ideals are.

[–] [deleted] 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] AustNerevar ago 

I wasn't trying to highlight that as misogyny. However, implying that a woman cannot support you through your problems through some sort of inherent failing because of her sex certainly is sexist. If you'll even just browse through TRP handbook, you'll find tons of examples of sexism toward men and women. One thing I've noticed is that they constantly conflate women with feminism. I'm sure many of the women in the MRM would take issue with that.

Facts can neither be misogynistic nor misandric

I'm sorry, but I must have missed whatever study that presented that as fact. I can testify from personal experience that a relationship does not fall apart when the man leans on the woman for support. My girlfriend has been one of the most supportive and caring people I've ever known and seeing TRP blanketly claim that all relationships function a specific way because of backwards male and female gender roles is pretty irritating.

1
0

[–] LordStriker 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

I think you have a misunderstanding of how Red Pill philosophy is connected to the MRA. One thing to note is the word, "philosophy". i.e. the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. The Red Pill philosophy is a way of seeing how the world works. How you act on this understanding is another story.

Now let's look at the MRA, or Men's Rights Activism. Note the word, "activism", i.e. the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change. So if the MRA use the Red Pill philosophy as their way of understanding the world, and they are setting out to change the world through political or social change, how does that in any way make "TRP ideals...in complete opposition to men's rights"? If anything, the Red Pill philosophy is a way of identifying problems with society, and denying said problems is, therefore, counter-intuitive to Men's Rights Activism. Consider it the MRA version of the feminist "patriarchal theory" or "social power dynamics", if you will.

Just some food for thought.

0
0

[–] AustNerevar ago 

They don't though. The MRM is in no way affiliated with TRP nor do they operate off of TRP philosophies. There may be RedPillers who say they are MRAs, but they're woefully unaware of whatever cognitive dissonance they've had to to undergo to hold both TRP and MRM beliefs.