The fundamental problem with redpill

[mr_engineer]

It sees dating as a 'marketplace'. Which is fundamentally wrong. Because it commodifies people. 

This makes people disposable. And just one more option on a dating-app. And it feeds into people's egocentric view of 'other people being there to satisfy our needs'. 

This is a problem for making relationships work. Cuz to truly have a loving relationship, you can't be in your ego. Both sides have to be willing to set aside their own ego and focus on making the relationship itself work. 

[NoSelfSelf]

Thats not the problem and being in the ego helps alot here ,not being in ego is what srews you over so you become red pilled because you make it all about the woman....

Market is bs because thats the thing that will determen how good you are for something and now they use that to put their ideology of hypergamy etc. 

Edited November 1, 2022 by NoSelfSelf

[mr_engineer]

26 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

Thats not the problem and being in the ego helps alot here ,not being in ego is what srews you over so you become red pilled because you make it all about the woman....

If you're making it all about the woman, you're enabling her being in her ego. That's not what I'm talking about. 

I said that both sides must set their egos aside. And you make it about the relationship, or the collective of the two of you, which is a third entity. 

[NoSelfSelf]

@mr_engineer and how would that look like?

[mr_engineer]

6 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

@mr_engineer and how would that look like?

Highly specific to the individuals. But, I can give you an example. 

The first thing to understand, is that a 'relationship', is a system. And, a system must have a purpose! So, the goal of the relationship must be defined. By the person in charge of the relationship, by the masculine figure. (I don't believe in the equality-stuff, I believe that a hierarchy results in better teamwork to get shit done) And agreed upon by both sides. 

Then, the roles must be defined. Clearly. For that, there must be a compatibility in values and priorities. The roles must be authentic to the individuals, the individuals must have the prep to take the roles on, and the roles must work well together in relation to one another. 

For example, if the 'goal' is a certain sexual experience, then the 'roles' will be the specific roles of the roleplay that you want to go for. That's how they work well together in relation to one another, because that masculine/feminine dynamic will work that way. 

Your egos will have needs. That you will want the relationship to meet. But, in the process of committing to and following through with your commitments to the relationship, you will want your relationship to take a shape and design such that it meets the ego-needs for all parties involved. And, ironically, in order to actually have that work, you will have to set your ego aside when it's time to do your due diligence in your roles, when it's time to do the duties your role asks for! 

[NoSelfSelf]

@mr_engineer To clarify it all whos making the purpose and goals of the relationship?

[thepixelmonk]

1 minute ago, NoSelfSelf said:

@mr_engineer To clarify it all whos making the purpose and goals of the relationship?

Apparently the "masculine figure in charge of the relationship". Ironically this is starting to smell of redpill itself LOL

[mr_engineer]

Just now, NoSelfSelf said:

@mr_engineer To clarify it all whos making the purpose and goals of the relationship?

Both sides are doing it together. Both sides are independent agents with equal rights before the relationship is defined. In the big-picture, both sides must agree. 

However, when you get into the relationship and shit goes wrong, then the masculine side must take over and improvise on this stuff. The masculine side reserves the right to do that when push comes to shove. 

[mr_engineer]

3 minutes ago, thepixelmonk said:

Apparently the "masculine figure in charge of the relationship". Ironically this is starting to smell of redpill itself LOL

You were warned that it is a biased example. 

[Consept]

9 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

Highly specific to the individuals. But, I can give you an example. 

The first thing to understand, is that a 'relationship', is a system. And, a system must have a purpose! So, the goal of the relationship must be defined. By the person in charge of the relationship, by the masculine figure. (I don't believe in the equality-stuff, I believe that a hierarchy results in better teamwork to get shit done) And agreed upon by both sides. 

Then, the roles must be defined. Clearly. For that, there must be a compatibility in values and priorities. The roles must be authentic to the individuals, the individuals must have the prep to take the roles on, and the roles must work well together in relation to one another. 

For example, if the 'goal' is a certain sexual experience, then the 'roles' will be the specific roles of the roleplay that you want to go for. That's how they work well together in relation to one another, because that masculine/feminine dynamic will work that way. 

Your egos will have needs. That you will want the relationship to meet. But, in the process of committing to and following through with your commitments to the relationship, you will want your relationship to take a shape and design such that it meets the ego-needs for all parties involved. And, ironically, in order to actually have that work, you will have to set your ego aside when it's time to do your due diligence in your roles, when it's time to do the duties your role asks for! 

This is fine for when you actually get into a relationship but the selection stage is completely different and is more like a marketplace. For a women to want to take you seriously enough to work out a system with you she has to choose you, shes not going to choose you just because you drop your ego aside, shes going to pick the best person she thinks is suitable and usually women will want the same 'suitable' man that other women want, in which case that man is now going to choose out of the women that hes managed to get interested in him. It works similar in the animal kingdom as well, its very difficult to get around. 

[Yarco]

What's the alternative to creating a marketplace and commodifying people?

Even if you've got a jewelry shop selling diamonds... every diamond is special, unique, and 1-of-a-kind. No two diamonds are identical. They each have their own origin stories and history, their own flaws and inclusions. 

But at the end of the day, they're still commodities. Everything has a generally agreed-upon worth to it, even people.

There are millions of other fish in the sea. It's not practical for everyone to get a 1-hour interview before they get swiped left on. Going on first impressions is a necessity, unless you want to make finding a partner your full-time job.

Dating is different from being in a relationship. Once you're a few dates in, then you can start to set your ego aside.

[mr_engineer]

My entire point here is that commodification is reductionistic. From a systemic perspective, it doesn't hold up. And this is the problem with redpill. 

[mr_engineer]

People are not just commodities. They are creators. Of the very relationship/system they inhabit. 

[something_else]

Quote

My entire point here is that commodification is reductionistic. From a systemic perspective, it doesn't hold up. And this is the problem with redpill. 

What does this even mean? This is literally, completely, meaningless.

Even your main point is not even really that clear. Dating shouldn't be a marketplace, is that what you are suggesting?

[mr_engineer]

@something_else I'm talking about redpill as a philosophy and the problems with it. I'm not telling anyone what they should/shouldn't do. That's your call. 

[something_else]

I don't think it's redpill that commodifies people. People commodify each other regardless of whether redpill exists or not.

It is very difficult to pick out exactly what your point/criticism is here, I'm sorry.

[Consept]

18 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

People are not just commodities. They are creators. Of the very relationship/system they inhabit. 

This is not me taking the piss here but try and make your argument in regard to Lions. Male Lions have to become strong and dominant so they can be protectors, female Lions pick the most dominant males so they can pass down these genes, the males will then mate with the most fertile Lionesses. This is basically a market in the same way we have a market, we select for different things but the idea is the same and its all about reproduction. So what it seems youre arguing for is a man made system over nature. The market place we experience is our reaction to our nature, its nothing to do with redpill, at its core.

You can make the argument that redpill tries to manipulate this nature for the benefit of men, which is true but all that is is just a mating strategy geared toward men, the criticism could be that it hurts women in the process but some female mating strategies hurt men in the process, its just one of those things. Your mating strategy might be to convince women of dropping their ego and work on the relationship and thats fine, its not even a bad strategy. If you want to talk about higher level love then that would exist with or without a relationship. 

[mr_engineer]

@Consept You're right about lions. 

The problem is that a lot of human bullshit comes with having a well-developed human brain. Living a harmonious existence with nature isn't an automatic for us, we have to work towards it. Now, we rely on systems to have a relatively stable, orderly existence. And my suggestion is that we would need to set aside our biases to truly prioritize and take care of and troubleshoot our systems. The family-system being a huge candidate for this process. 

[Consept]

27 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

@Consept You're right about lions. 

The problem is that a lot of human bullshit comes with having a well-developed human brain. Living a harmonious existence with nature isn't an automatic for us, we have to work towards it. Now, we rely on systems to have a relatively stable, orderly existence. And my suggestion is that we would need to set aside our biases to truly prioritize and take care of and troubleshoot our systems. The family-system being a huge candidate for this process. 

You can call it more bullshit, which it kind of is, but you can also see it as just a more complexed strategy as we have more developed brains as you say. There are chimps now that adapt different mating strategies such as isolating females when they can, theres a fish that pretends to be a female to bypass the alpha male and fertilise the eggs of the haram. Point being that what youre seeing as a bullshit marketplace is just a natural development of human mating strategies. I think a good argument is that its kind of on steroids because of social media and capitalism in general but even so, it is what it is and the 'successful' humans will reproduce. Once you get into a relationship then of course set your system and find a mate who will partner with you, but in terms of changing mating strategies as a whole which i might be wrong but its what you seem to be suggesting, thats not going to happen 

[mr_engineer]

3 minutes ago, Consept said:

in terms of changing mating strategies as a whole which i might be wrong but its what you seem to be suggesting, thats not going to happen 

I'm not suggesting that we 'change mating-strategies'. I'm suggesting that we're fundamentally wrong about how it actually works. Because of the reductionism of redpill. 

How many women agree with redpill as a philosophy? Probably very few. This should give you a clue that something is wrong with it. And that what we think is 'natural' for humans specifically, isn't actually natural. Especially human females. 

For example, in a lot of species, the males will be stronger than the females. So, the males will fight over the females. But, humanity has managed to civilize ourselves and construct a system in which women are even getting a certain degree of equality! This would never be possible without a superior human brain. 

As women get more and more of a say in how they mate, the validity of patriarchal hierarchies to determine who's 'high-value' vs 'low-value' starts breaking down. Women will probably agree with me on this. And this is where redpill breaks down. 

It's not just that redpill benefits men and hurts women as a mating-strategy. It's that it's so wrong that it hurts men much moreso, actually!