Is Stage Green Currently Losing Influence?

[Leo Gura]

23 minutes ago, Emerald said:

But are men who subscribe to these things (excluding pickup artists who are specifically focused on approaching women) actually having more sex than men who don't subscribe to these things?

1) Doesn't really matter since what matters is their own perception. Similar to how Trumpists vote against their own economic interests but tell themselves that Trump is good for the economy.

2) Overall I would bet the misogyny does lead to more sex because it allows men to dominate and exploit women. That is its survival function. Its easier to get sex when women are treated purely as sexual objects and not at equal human beings. The lack of empathy is functional. It enables cheating, lying, manipulation, abuse, rape, exploitation, prositution, corruption, etc.

Say what you will about Tate, I'm pretty sure lack of sex is not one of his problems. The function of his toxic philosophy is to get more sex.

Quote

To me, it seems like most of these guys are making themselves more socially stunted and nerdy through subscribing to these ideologies, and are thus much less attractive to women as a whole than if they'd never gotten into those ideologies.

Incels yes. But the other mens groups are taking action and getting some results.

Women don't really see the ideology. Women sleep with men based on how actively social men are. So even a horrible ideology will work as long as it gets men out of the house and talking to women.

Nazism will get you laid as long as it gets you out of the house. Literally Nazis start having sex with each other just because they meet at a Nazi rally. In a sense Nazism is just an excuse to get out of the house.

Ideology tends to get people mobilized. That is its function. Incel and Blackpill ideology is an exception.

Edited November 24 by Leo Gura

[Emerald]

29 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

1) Doesn't really matter since what matters is their own perception. Similar to how Trumpists vote against their own economic interests but tell themselves that Trump is good for the economy.

2) Overall I would bet the misogyny does lead to more sex because it allows men to dominate and exploit women. That is its survival function. Its easier to get sex when women are treated purely as sexual objects and not at equal human beings. The lack of empathy is functional. It enables cheating, lying, manipulation, abuse, rape, exploitation, prositution, corruption, etc.

Say what you will about Tate, I'm pretty sure lack of sex is not one of his problems.

Incels yes. But the other mens groups are taking action and getting some results.

Women don't really see the ideology. Women sleep with men based on how actively social men are. So even a horrible ideology will work as long as it gets men out of the house and talking to women.

1) That's true. It's more about their perception.

2) I somewhat doubt that misogynistic guys (on the whole) get more sex than guys who aren't. My observation has been that guys who are more misogynistic than average tend to be obsessed with women and put women up on a pedestal, which is why they put so much energy into hating women and trying to tear us down from that pedestal.

And my guess from what I've observed about misogynists and been on the receiving end of is that 90% of the time, that leads to lots of insecurity and difficulty approaching and communicating with women. The more hatred, the more obsession. The more obsession, the more desperation. The more desperation the more social avoidance and awkwardness.

The more misogynistic a guy gets, the more he loses the ability to have a normal human interaction with women.

It's only like 10% of misogynistic guys who go out and do pick up and can pull off the misogynistic macho man vibe that might get him laid here and there. And this is only possible if a guy is able to gain the respect of other men for his machoness. The rest just seethe in their room about alpha males fucking all the women and write manifestos.

Like, look around on this forum (or other places on the internet where men tend to congregate) and you'll find plenty examples of your truly average middle-of-the-road misogynist. And these guys usually give me inexperienced awkward nerdy vibes.

But I'm sure Andrew Tate himself is getting a lot of sex. But he's got a lot of aggression and the ability to block out all of his insecurities through emotional disconnection. So, even if it's clear to the trained eye that he's got tons of vulnerabilities, I can see a woman who hasn't developed that radar to fall for his macho man act.

But that's why he's famous. He's an exceptional misogynist... an aspirational misogynist.

Most misogynists are usually just guys with no social skills who believe like women hold the power to validate or invalidate the value of their existence. And they get resentful and catty about that.

Edited November 24 by Emerald

[Leo Gura]

Look at it this way: if Tate went Green he would get laid less. Which is exactly why he doesn't like Green. And Tate is far from exceptional in this regard.

[Hardkill]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Look at it this way: if Tate went Green he would get laid less. Which is exactly why he doesn't like Green. And Tate is far from exceptional in this regard.

What happens when these followers eventually realize that people like Tate betrayed them and let them down?

Edited November 24 by Hardkill

[The Renaissance Man]

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

And my guess from what I've observed about misogynists and been on the receiving end of is that 90% of the time, that leads to lots of insecurity and difficulty approaching and communicating with women. The more hatred, the more obsession. The more obsession, the more desperation. The more desperation the more social avoidance and awkwardness.

The more misogynistic a guy gets, the more he loses the ability to have a normal human interaction with women.

It's only like 10% of misogynistic guys who go out and do pick up and can pull off the misogynistic macho man vibe that might get him laid here and there. And this is only possible if a guy is able to gain the respect of other men for his machoness. The rest just seethe in their room about alpha males fucking all the women and write manifestos.

I agree with you on this one, the first sentence captures the mechanism quite well

[LSD-Rumi]

This has been eye opening to me. People often present themselves as more developed than they truly are.

Words are wind indeed.

[LSD-Rumi]

 

11 hours ago, Lyubov said:

You want pure green living, go live on a commune or in a hippy village and grow wheat grass and raise chickens

This is a primal form of Green, like a DOS operating system. 

10 hours ago, Scholar said:

Yes, it's how people get annoyed at vegans if they talk about the ethics of meat-eating. And if the vegans get frustrated, they will pretend that they would have been far more likely to be convinced if only the vegan wasn't so annoying. The reality is, they just don't want their value system to be challenged because they feel comfortable, and they want the vegan to behave in line with social norms because then they don't annoy them as much with their pesky morality.

well said

[Davino]

Quote

What happens when these followers eventually realize that people like Tate betrayed them and let them down?

Hopefully you realize how you betrayed yourself and how Tate exploited that in you.

You cannot outsource responsibility for your own self-deception; all these bloodsuckers just take advantage of it: of your needs, of your insecurities, of your fears, of your ignorance, of your immaturity...

Egocentrist don't sacrifice lions, they eat lambs. Don't be a sheep!

[Stovo]

Green isn't dead. It's very much alive in northern Europe and the west and east coasts of the US. 

The challenge for the US is half the country is at northern Europe levels of social development and the other half is at Russian levels of social development. 

[Basman]

1 hour ago, Stovo said:

Green isn't dead. It's very much alive in northern Europe and the west and east coasts of the US. 

The challenge for the US is half the country is at northern Europe levels of social development and the other half is at Russian levels of social development. 

The right is on the rise in general in Europe as well with an exception of a couple of countries like Denmark, which incidentally has a much stricter immigration control than many other European countries (much of these is about immigration) and is far away from Northern-Africa.

I see this recent push-back against Stage Green values as an inevitable outcome due to nature of Stage Green. Its too unholistic and impractical to function, which inevitably leads to backlashes from the lower stages which are the majority. Political failure is what will eventually lead to Stage Green to turn into Yellow as they learn that they have to play ball with how the world actually is as opposed to their idealized vision.

Democratically, this right-wing shift is the majority rule. I would rather have a majority rule that burns itself on bad policy and learns the hard way than a minority rule of Stage Green elites that are too out of touch with the day to day issues of normal people, like identity politics and such garbage.

[Emerald]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Look at it this way: if Tate went Green he would get laid less. Which is exactly why he doesn't like Green. And Tate is far from exceptional in this regard.

Perhaps that's true for Andrew Tate in particular because he's a famous fighter and he can put on an aggressive show that some women would find interesting.

And there are quite a few guys like him that exist. I've encountered quite a few.

In the little redneck town I grew up in, there would be these emotionally blunted mildly attractive trashy guys with macho vibes. Maybe 1 or 2 out of every 20 guys were like that.

And they'd usually have a few average to slightly above average looking trashy women getting into cat fights (and sometimes fist fights) over them because these types of guys are always cheating.

Andrew Tate kind of reminds of the Platonic Ideal of that type of local yokel. He's what that type of person thinks they are and are trying very hard to be.

And certainly these guys are misogynistic. And they get laid pretty often because their social circle is still partially in Stage Red and values what they are. And many trashy women are looking for a Stage Red petty warlord to turn into a Stage Blue trad hubby with the power of her love and body... which of course is a fool's errand.

But these guys only account for a fraction of misogynists that are out there. And they only get saved from the awkwardness around women because small redneck towns are very social. And working class people are more communal in their ways of operating. And because they are somewhat proximal to the Masculine beauty standard, especially compared to others in the same environment, they can garner some popularity in that environment.

So, he gets saved from the awkward social isolation and manifesto writing because he's a Stage Red/Blue guy in a Stage Blue communal setting where there are other Red/Blue men and women who see him like the villagers in Beauty and the Beast see Gaston.

But I understand that, even men who are becoming emotionally stunted and unable to interact normally with women because of watching people like Andrew Tate, believe they're benefiting. And they believe he's helping them and that the misogynistic view of women will eventually pay off and they'll be getting tons of sex once they pull it off.

It's what happens when people believe that the poison is the cure and that the cure is the poison.

Here's an example of a (really accurate) parody of the type of guy that I'm talking about who does get laid more because he's misogynistic...

 

[Emerald]

7 hours ago, The Renaissance Man said:

I agree with you on this one, the first sentence captures the mechanism quite well

Yes, they repress and push their Feminine side away from themselves as much as possible because they hate and are ashamed of their Feminine side.

And then, they feel this lack and this craving for wholeness and integration with the Feminine.

And they put the blame and responsibility onto women to operate as their own Feminine side to fix their own lack of integration and wholeness. And they feel powerless to women because they feel that only women can validate them and save their from their own shame.

And when women can't/won't fill that role of making up for their own repressed Feminine, they feel resentful towards women.

They feel like women have all this power to fill this void for them and validate their existence to reprieve them of shame, but that women just refuse to because they're being evil man-haters and/or have been brainwashed by Feminists.

So, every encounter with an attractive woman becomes this intense projection of a mythos of Shadow boxing with their own repressed Feminine side that they want desperately to integrate with to feel whole... but also hate and feel ashamed of and try to marginalize within their own being. But they do not realize the call is coming from inside of the house.

And then, all these feelings are there that most men are totally overwhelmed by. But some men who are very disconnected from their emotions may lose the awareness of these vulnerabilities from their conscious mind despite still operating off of them unconsciously.

[whh2222]

14 hours ago, Emerald said:

1) That's true. It's more about their perception.

2) I somewhat doubt that misogynistic guys (on the whole) get more sex than guys who aren't. My observation has been that guys who are more misogynistic than average tend to be obsessed with women and put women up on a pedestal, which is why they put so much energy into hating women and trying to tear us down from that pedestal.

And my guess from what I've observed about misogynists and been on the receiving end of is that 90% of the time, that leads to lots of insecurity and difficulty approaching and communicating with women. The more hatred, the more obsession. The more obsession, the more desperation. The more desperation the more social avoidance and awkwardness.

The more misogynistic a guy gets, the more he loses the ability to have a normal human interaction with women.

It's only like 10% of misogynistic guys who go out and do pick up and can pull off the misogynistic macho man vibe that might get him laid here and there. And this is only possible if a guy is able to gain the respect of other men for his machoness. The rest just seethe in their room about alpha males fucking all the women and write manifestos.

Like, look around on this forum (or other places on the internet where men tend to congregate) and you'll find plenty examples of your truly average middle-of-the-road misogynist. And these guys usually give me inexperienced awkward nerdy vibes.

But I'm sure Andrew Tate himself is getting a lot of sex. But he's got a lot of aggression and the ability to block out all of his insecurities through emotional disconnection. So, even if it's clear to the trained eye that he's got tons of vulnerabilities, I can see a woman who hasn't developed that radar to fall for his macho man act.

But that's why he's famous. He's an exceptional misogynist... an aspirational misogynist.

Most misogynists are usually just guys with no social skills who believe like women hold the power to validate or invalidate the value of their existence. And they get resentful and catty about that.

you underestimate how much you don't truly see. I think you're partially right in a sense that a lot of men who actually hate women hate them because they don't feel validated/good enough for them, but most men who are 'good' with women don't truly value them. 

A childhood friend of mine doesn't hate women. He gets a lot of women. Pussy is his drug. But I've never really heard him say he loves a woman, or has ever talked about any particular woman being amazing or someone he values. He has like 2 or 3 baby mommas now and eventually they realize that he only cares for them as much as it serves him then the relationship fades out. He's not doing this because he wants to ruin their lives or maliciously treat them badly, but the fact that he doesn't truly value them is attractive to them, because it comes off as confident. 

Edited Sunday at 09:37 PM by whh2222

[Joshe]

15 hours ago, Emerald said:

Most misogynists are usually just guys with no social skills who believe like women hold the power to validate or invalidate the value of their existence. And they get resentful and catty about that.

I know a guy with exceptional social skills but is still misogynistic. He has a repressed inferiority complex because he’s short and was always picked on for it, but he’s a popular social butterfly. I think you’re spot on about the root cause though. They need women to validate their worth and when they don’t, they hate them for it. 

[Raze]

16 hours ago, Emerald said:

Most misogynists are usually just guys with no social skills who believe like women hold the power to validate or invalidate the value of their existence. And they get resentful and catty about that.

Not necessarily, see this scientific study

https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wsvq8

Quote

The core of incels’ own narratives and of the emerging research on the incel movement is a mismatch between sexual desires and actual sexual behavior (more precisely the lack of sexual activity). In this study, we put this idea to the test. In a pre-registered survey of 748 young American males with validated measures of sociosexuality and a novel composite measure of extreme misogyny, we investigate whether a mismatch between sexual intentions (i.e., how many sexual partners a person would like to have) and actual sexual practice (i.e., how many sexual partners a person has had) predicts extreme misogynist views. Contrary to the incel narrative, we do not find support for this overall claim. Rather, the findings show that extreme misogynistic views are driven by a psychology of status-seeking and dominance-orientation, which correlates with having many, not few, sexual partners. This suggests that a perceived mismatch between one’s sexual intentions and sexual experiences is not related to extreme misogyny.

 

Edited Sunday at 11:32 PM by Raze

[Emerald]

52 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I know a guy with exceptional social skills but is still misogynistic. He has a repressed inferiority complex because he’s short and was always picked on for it, but he’s a popular social butterfly. I think you’re spot on about the root cause though. They need women to validate their worth and when they don’t, they hate them for it. 

This can also happen when a person is able to cope well with their shame by polarizing into superiority to avoid falling into feelings of inferiority.

And many can be fooled that this person comes across as a confident person.

But more often than not, misogynistic guys aren't as good at coping and hiding their insecurities.

It's just like if someone feels shame, and polarizes into achievement to temporarily bolster their sense of self-efficacy to feel superior instead of inferior. Some people can keep that up and keep running on the floating log of achievement. 

But far more often than not, people fail to stay afloat on the floating log and end up in the waters of shame and inferiority.... and they can't motivate themselves at all.

[Scholar]

22 hours ago, What Am I said:

This is kind of off topic, but what are your thoughts on whether there are compromises to human health when adopting a long-term vegan diet? I was previously a vegetarian for over 10 years, and even though I included dairy, I still felt like something vital was lacking. I'm asking from a place of curiosity rather than a gotcha.

It's possible that for some individuals that are some compromises. In general I think it is hard to justify what we do to animals, even in that context.

 

17 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Look at it this way: if Tate went Green he would get laid less. Which is exactly why he doesn't like Green. And Tate is far from exceptional in this regard.

Not only will he get less laid, he would also not be famous, he wouldn't be rich and he would basically have no status.

[Emerald]

32 minutes ago, Raze said:

Not necessarily, see this scientific study

https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wsvq8

 

To be clear, my claim is not that having fewer sexual partners is the driving force behind misogyny.

Repression of Feminine aspects of the personality, shame, resentment, and scapegoating are the driving forces behind misogyny. And the "women won't have sex with me" is just an Incel's means of feeling like their resentment and scapegoating is justified and to wallow in self-pity, anger, and shame.

And when misogynists start getting sex with many women through learning pick up, their hatred tends to intensify rather than getting better. 

But it is hard for me to imagine that the majority of misogynists are getting more sex than the average non-misogynistic guy. 

Yet again, perhaps they do seek it more often with pick up and things like that. So, maybe that's the case that they're getting it more because they're seeking it out more.

I'm still not sure about that though because the average misogynist seems to be a lot less social than other guys.

They come across online as victimy and isolated. I think of the keyboard warrior type of guy who does nothing but play video games all day and complain about women. That's my impression of what the average run-of-the-mill misogynist is like.

I rarely think of the hyper-aggressive macho misogynists because that seems to be the exception and not the rule. Perhaps that machismo doesn't translate online, because misogynists all feel pretty catty and bitter. So, what might translate as machismo in person, exudes emotional vulnerability online.

Yet again, my impression is still that most misogynistic guys I've encountered in real life and online are fairly vulnerable guys who don't possess a lot of machismo. 

Maybe the study selected for guys that fit the "misogynistic macho guy" mold and that less masculine misogynists weren't included in the study. I'll have to see how the sampling was done in the study.

 

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, whh2222 said:

you underestimate how much you don't truly see. I think you're partially right in a sense that a lot of men who actually hate women hate them because they don't feel validated/good enough for them, but most men who are 'good' with women don't truly value them. 

A childhood friend of mine doesn't hate women. He gets a lot of women. Pussy is his drug. But I've never really heard him say he loves a woman, or has ever talked about any particular woman being amazing or someone he values. He has like 2 or 3 baby mommas now and eventually they realize that he only cares for them as much as it serves him then the relationship fades out. He's not doing this because he wants to ruin their lives or maliciously treat them badly, but the fact that he doesn't truly value them is attractive to them, because it comes off as confident. 

I know that's true that most men who are "good" with women (in the way pick up artists define it) don't care about women... and many hate them. And having sex with lots of women can tend to exacerbate negative feelings about women in general because it reinforces objectification and disconnection.

There's no doubt in my mind that a great many pick up artists are misogynists and/or they have major issues with connecting with women and use sex like a drug, like your friend. And certainly pick up artists are having quite a bit of sex and multiple female partners.

And certainly, in the place I grew up in there were tons of emotionally detached men who would use women for sex. And they were misogynistic. 

None of that is new information to me. I've seen it before, as these are also relatively common phenomena.

My claim was more that the average misogynist that I come across seems to be incredibly socially awkward and even afraid of women. Maybe that's a misperception on my part and that that's not as big of a percentage of misogynists as I think. My perception is that that describes 80% of misogynists the I've encountered in my life that they're pretty social awkward.

I don't tend to get an image in my mind of an emotionally detached guy when I think about misogynists. I get an image of a fairly desperate and bitter guy.

So the types of guys I'm thinking about when I think about the concept of a misogynist is that they are probably having much less success with women than the average guy.

I'm sure that's true. But maybe these types of guys account for a lower fraction of misogynists than I had assumed.

But I also see that men who are truly detached from women's humanity could potentially see women as mere objects to manipulate. In which case, the social awkwardness may not even be a factor. And that could lead a guy to getting a lot of sex because he could just treat pick up like going to the grocery store.

I'm just not sure that that describes the majority of misogynistic guys who seem pretty upset and pressed about women all the time.

Now I'm curious what the mean, median, and mode are regarding types of misogynists.  

[What Am I]

19 minutes ago, Scholar said:

It's possible that for some individuals that are some compromises. In general I think it is hard to justify what we do to animals, even in that context.

But what if the greater nutrition from non-vegan-specific foods would help fuel our brains to eventually invent synthetic foods that are superior to animals? In an unintuitive way, wouldn't that actually end up being the more moral option? If heightened human development is to the benefit of all, wouldn't it make sense not to hobble ourselves?

I'm just playing around with ideas. Since I was a vegetarian for so long, you can probably guess that I respect animals and their suffering as well.