Tag Archives: red-pill

Not a “50s Housewife”

Can I just say one thing? Ok, I hate the 1950s. seriously. I hate it that when I say that I believe in stuff like traditional gender roles and that I’ve always stayed home and stuff like that that people immediately start thinking “1950s.” Ugh. I hate that era. Personally, I see the 1950s as a time of female superiority if you want to know the truth about it. I actually think the era was quite feminist. It’s always been clear to me that both of my grandmothers were always “in charge” in their marriages. The 1950s weren’t traditional from my point of view. I mean, women were already voting and a lot of wives were already starting to join the workforce and stuff like that.

I don’t act like a 1950s housewife nor do I dress like one. Ok, well, I do kind of like stuff like vintage dresses and bikinis, but because I think they’re cute, not because I’ve got a thing for the 50s or anything like that. I used to have some vintage dresses but they fall off of me these days so I haven’t worn them in years. But, anyway, back to the subject. We’re not rich. My husband doesn’t “have money.” We’re just simple people, and I’m just a simple girl.

I know I’ve said it before, but when I say “housewife” I think a bit farther back to the times when husbands were actually in charge. I don’t think of high heels and perfectly permed hair so much as I think of bare feet, waist length hair (for a woman) and simplicity.

I also don’t like people that think housewives are somehow “lazy” or anything of the sort. I don’t sit around eating bon-bons all day, watching soap-operas, and writing “honey-do” lists while having an affair with the pool boy. I would also hate to think that a man only wanted to provide for me just because of the way I look. That’s why I would never want to be with a rich man, unless I knew in my heart that that man truly loved and cherished me for the long-term and would always do so.

My husband provides for me 100% financially speaking, as I believe it is his responsibility to do so, but he’s also in charge of everything too. For instance, he gave me a credit card on his account I could use for a while but then he took it away from me last year after I came back home. (He said it was because he got a new card, but I suspect the real reason was to take independence from me so I wouldn’t leave again. In either case, he never gave me another one.)

He gives me things I want and need, but he also has the power to say no to me or take them away from me too. And yes, I accept this even though I’ve suffered pain and frustration and I still accept it no matter what others might think about it, because it confers security on me and protects me. I’d rather accept this life than the life of the modern woman with all her unhappiness, unstable relationships and lack of ability to raise and care for her own children every day.

You want to talk about lazy and entitled? It’s the men these days that are lazy and entitled, just as much or not more so than the women are. Men who talk about how their wives need to “get a job” or go around bragging about how they’ve got their wives in the workforce full-time and stuff like that or how that they’d never support no woman. It’s these same men that also complain about women being spoiled and entitled “not wanting responsibility”, when in reality men are just as bad and lazy as modern women.

In his latest article, Jesse Powell talks about red-pill men moving on to a higher-functioning stage in the wider culture. Undoubtedly I think a movement like this will grow, and that it needs to, but what they advocate for is unsustainable and unworkable when it denies male responsibility for women, so in the end it will result in men having obligations imposed upon them instead of it being all about exploiting everything to their advantage and screwing everybody else and the damage left in their wake.

From the Daily Beast article he quoted:

On The Red Pill, Fisher commonly expressed disappointment that the institutions of marriage and religion were destroyed by women’s equality. He maintained that as a result of financial independence, women were no longer compelled to remain faithful and as a result, men needed to protectively adapt their sexual strategy.

Ok, so how are women going to be financially dependent if men don’t fully financially support their wives? Only for a mere six weeks did I hold paid employment out of nearly a decade of marriage, and it was only to separate from him. I never worked for money, neither inside nor out of the home, and my husband never had to play a bunch of head games just to keep me sexually attracted to him or invested in the marriage.

By “protectively adapting their sexual strategy” what do they mean? Screwing as many sl*ts as possible? (Because that it sustainable for society when you leave illegitimate children all over the place, and that’s sure to help them with all those “pregnancy scares!”) Or perhaps he means playing a bunch of stupid head games that will result, at best, in keeping a woman’s interest for a whole six months- if that? (Because that will obviously lead to a high-functioning committed relationship when one person is a narcissistic abuser.)

“To give women autonomy is to take away the very thing that made marriage a realistic institution… what I dislike is the general attitude that somehow we owe [women] something for sex… Women enjoy the autonomy that feminism has afforded them… But don’t expect the relics from back in the day to continue to benefit you without the sacrifices you were making,”

Well, don’t expect the relics YOU enjoyed back in the day to continue to benefit YOU without the sacrifices you made as well. And I’m unaware completely of any traditional relics from back in the day that women are still enjoying out in the real world. To deny the breadwinner role (for men) is also to take away the very glue that once held marriage together. Men enjoy the easy ride and easy sex feminism has afforded THEM. And women sacrifice more in sex and bring something to the table men don’t, every society in the history of the world has recognized and given credit to this undeniable fact. Get over it.

“Marriage, and yes, female oppression, slut shaming, religion, these were all a means to control hypergamy [infidelity]. Marriages might be considered loveless, and women might have been unhappy, but for men it meant marriages that lasted, commitments that continued, and protection against the fickle whims of females,” Fisher wrote on The Red Pill in November 2012.

Yes, never mind when men chase after “bad girls” that will only screw them over or when husbands disappear or  cheat on their breadwinner wives with a poor woman that makes him feel more like a man. Not to mention that you run a simultaneous marriage strike and spend all your time chasing after the very sl*ts you claim to hate. A traditional woman deserves a traditional man.

But, in conclusion, stop it with the 1950s stereotypes. The 1950s were a whole world better in many ways than today, but the era still wasn’t traditional by my point of view. But if I would ask anything of men today, it would be to please stop this. Please do something about the state of affairs today. It isn’t a woman’s job to fix it. It’s a woman’s job to be “good” and to accept a man’s authority (when and where it’s legitimate). These are your daughters, your sisters, your mothers, your wives/future wives and mothers of your children and all of the women you know and love. They aren’t some outside enemy or foreign invader to get rid of and punish at all costs. They’re your own people, of the same blood and heritage as you. Girls and women today grew up/ are growing up never knowing the stable relationships, protections and security that were afforded to our ancestors- just the same as men. Stop acting like you’re some kind of special oppressed snowflakes. Your grievances have merit, but I think they’re exaggerated beyond belief and only tell one side of the story.

I know from experience there are just as many traditional men as there are women, it just seems like there aren’t because most of the time men just remain silent. They watch and listen, but they don’t comment, they don’t form opinions or organize and protest. For decades they’ve left all of that up to women. But if there’s anything good happening now, it would be that it seems men are finally taking some kind of action, even if they are, as of now, in a rage and sorely misguided. But if men take action, women will follow, and men that accept responsibility (such as a husband keeping his wife out of the workforce and providing for her) can still impose the rules on women even when they are unwilling. YOU don’t expect that “privilege” otherwise. The man that loves a woman provides for her and he protects her- even from herself. I’ll only know the red-pill is “highly-functioning” when their men strive to do just that.

Red-Pill Delusions 

Warning: CONTENT

 

“The Red Pill is, for all intents and purposes, what happens when the pick-up community decides that it hates women…” (1)

 

For anyone that doesn’t read the “manosphere” or associated Red-Pill blogs let me save you some trouble. The basic motto is this: Women are shit. Women should be treated like shit. It’s all about different ways to use and play women and implementing any form of psychological mind-f*ckery to get the upper hand in relationships and in the so-called “sexual marketplace.” They actually have various acronyms used to describe exactly how women are shit, how women have only a short-lived value in society that dries up at a very young age, how all women (especially American women) are all natural born sl*ts who only f*ck so-called “alpha” men and use the so-called “beta” men for resources and any sexually frustrated man with a victim mentality is welcome to leave all kind of vile comments about women. There’s nothing about being a better man or bettering society nor any talk about how men might actually be falling short of what they should be at all. It’s all about poking fun at women and advocating their worthlessness as anything other than a warm, wet hole.

I’ve read a lot of the crap over the years and a lot of what I have read is so ridiculous I can’t even take half of it seriously and actually wonder if a lot of the articles aren’t actually written just for comedic effect (For instance, Roosh V, notorious pick-up artist, has actually previously claimed at least one of his articles to be a joke after it caused public outrage before). The manosphere puts way more antagonism between the sexes than the most militant feminist advocates looking to hold their own in the corporate world with men ever could.

Don’t forget as well that everybody is rated on a certain scale and that determines how valuable they actually are to society and to the opposite sex (a total guy thing to be sure). So let’s say we have guy A and guy B. Guy A scores a bit higher on so-called “alpha” traits (according to their point system, and they’re all such geniuses). Obviously women will ALWAYS choose guy A over guy B because of his so-called “alpha traits.” Guy A is more “alpha” because he makes more money, has more “swag” and wears a better “poker face” so obviously he will get all the girls and have all the sex. His “sexual market value” is higher according to their little point system. And, of course, women divide men into two categories: the alpha f*cks and the beta bucks because we women always separate out between the men we wish to have sex with and the men we wish to be in a relationship with … [pause for dramatic effect]Say whaaaat? That’s the kind of crap men do, not women. It seems as though they actually project their own desires and traits onto the opposite sex. Furthermore, what are we cavemen living in prehistoric times?

Of course a consistent theme among traditionalists and on this site is that men should provide for and protect their women (their wives, daughters, sisters and mothers) and this still stands. But it is something that a man does out of a sense of duty, honor, and, above all, love. It’s not something that’s done because his latest “thing” is so hot and he wants to splurge on her and show her off until he tires or her and wants to replace her.

Sure, no woman wants to be with some loser or bum any more than a man wants to be with or would be attracted to a slovenly masculinized woman that’s 50+ pounds overweight. Obviously if a guy has billions or millions in the bank then any number of 25 year-old bimbos (without values or morals) will come throwing themselves at him for the resources he has or to advance their position in society. He might be so old he’s about to croak over dead anytime but they probably don’t care about him any more than he does about them (and never mind that young men go after older women in the same way sometimes). As well, a 22 year-old woman might sleep with her 45 year-old married boss to promote herself. But would that not then mean that these so-called “alpha” men are the actual ones being used for what they can PROVIDE to these women (status validation, perks, promotions, money, fame/popularity) and perhaps the women who get with these so-called “beta” men (who probably in reality aren’t even “beta” at all) actually do so because they love them and are genuinely attracted to them? Maybe they should start using the term “alpha bucks, beta luv.”

Of course, the Red Pill position is that women f*ck all the “alpha” men in their youth and then get with the “beta” men once they hit “THE WALL” and have no other options left because no man but the most “beta” wants their dried-up, floppy, smelly v*ginas. Because obviously older women never attract men or remarry, have more kids or are genuinely happy in life or in relationships with men that love them. And they are never attractive to men. Never. Sexual market place; Remember the point system!

Are any of their views actually rooted in reality or is it just their own delusions and fantasies of grandeur that fuels their vitriol? They can’t seem to differentiate between fantasy and reality very well. Their views might go over well on an online forum, but in the end they are very far removed from reality. Do older women ever attract men? Yes. Does a man’s high status always win over the girl? No. We are not soulless creatures. We are human, with human conscience, human feelings, unique differences and circumstances. But they don’t take this into account.

For a woman sex and love generally go hand in hand together. Initially the man’s dominant traits might attract and get a woman’s attention just the same way as a woman’s beauty might initially catch a man’s eye. The asshole might have success in the short-term just the same way as the perfect “10” might have all the men surrounding her and drooling over her, but in the long-term there is so much more that comes into play. A woman might become interested or even fascinated by a man by his status and achievements, sure, but a woman generally always mixes fantasies of love and romance with sexual desire. That’s something these guys miss entirely. For them everything exists on a point scale and relationships are always a fight for dominance and control. There is no love. There is no humanity. There is no higher purpose in their eyes. Women are only objects to them and by treating women in such a way and viewing women in such a way they also render themselves irrelevant, because by treating women as nothing but disposable sex objects they imply that men have no value or worth to either society or women beyond their ability to impregnate females and fight with each other over territorial quests for dominance. They make themselves expendable.

I know personally I have never been attracted to men who had a lot of fame, power or money. This is probably because instinctively I knew that the long-term potential of such men was highly questionable and I was never willing to cheapen myself or sell my soul for 15 minutes of fame or a few dollars. When it comes down to it I have always had much more love for myself than to throw myself at some “high-status” man with so-called “options.” Only a woman with no self-love or a woman who was out for personal gain would allow herself to be used like that. Yes, I’ve had the option of doing such things in my life- of becoming involved sexually with men who could, however temporarily, bump up my status and provide me resources- but I never did. The reason is because my sexuality was worth more- I was worth more- and I have never been willing to be used or abused by some man as some kind of disposable sex object- the very thing the “manosphere” seeks to degrade women down to.

I do always find it interesting whenever their Red Pill teachings don’t pan out in reality. Older women are dried up old hags to you? Oh, so why are so few of you with someone significantly younger than you then..?(2) We don’t always get what we want, do we? (Perhaps they just over-estimate their value a wee bit then?) Plenty of men have tried out Red Pill techniques on their wives, girlfriends and women that they hoped to get with/sleep with only to have it backfire and ruin the relationship entirely. My favorite was this one incidence I read on a forum somewhere (I’ll probably never find it again and don’t remember where I was when I read it) where the guy tried the “advice” to pull out of his girlfriend in the middle of sex and pretend like he just lost interest all of a sudden. The idea is that it was, supposedly, supposed to tilt things in his favor and make her desire him 10x more and then they would have crazy, wild sex 5x more often. To his surprise (yes he was actually surprised it didn’t work, poor guy) it backfired on him, and, instead of her desiring him more, the girlfriend instead refused to even speak to him for something like two weeks. Similar stories abound all over the “manosphere.” Furthermore, much of the “manosphere” teachings seem to be nothing more than child’s play. Most of the teachings are about getting the upper hand and turning the “sexual marketplace” back in their favor so they can use women as they please without any kind of commitment or responsibility on their part.

It’s abusive, irresponsible and doesn’t always work, but hey, why not take the Red Pill anyways despite the side-effects?

 

**Screenshots captured from this ROK article.