This community was created as a harbor for RP minded women whose goal is to build a lasting and happy relationship with a great man.
- Main Forums
- What's Hot
- TRP.RED
- Tribe Forums
- TheRedPill
- Tribe Management
- Create New Tribe
- Manage My Tribes
- Find New Tribes
- Recent News
-
-
Whisper 10y ago
Tradcon ideologies may be more closely aligned to the conclusions most "red pill" takers form, but Tradcon != Red Pill.
My problem with conservative traditionalism is that, while it acknowledges sexual dimorphism in humans, it divides sex roles and motivations in an unconscious way, which stems from "what used to work (when we didn't have contraceptives)" , rather than from awareness of the sexual marketplace.
This gave rise to such perversions as male disposibility, chivalry, the compassion gap, and other things that I have no interest in preserving.
Feminism and conservative traditionalism share a common goal... to serve and protect the interests of women. They are merely having a disagreement as to how best to accomplish this.
The Red Pill, on the other hand, advocates nothing in particular. It simply makes people aware of sexual realpolitik, and thus allows them to serve their own (chosen or instinctive) ends more effectively.
[deleted] 10y ago
I think you don't really understand tradcon... care to give specific examples? I know that you probably mean the Birkenhead drill but this is nothing but a basic reproductive instinct.
Whisper 10y ago
The Birkenhead drill is part of it, but just the beginning. And it's certainly not hardwired in. If it were hardwired in, in would be universal or nearly so, like male-led societies. Most cultures throughout history, including some highly successful ones, have had absolutely no "save the women first" tradition at all.
I think Birkenhead is an artifact of strict monogamy.
The tradcon way means following the Judeo-christian social rules. Chastity until marriage, strict monogamy afterwards. Male disposibility (men do all the hard, dirty, and dangerous jobs), the compassion gap (habit of caring more about women's problems than men's), chivalry ('nuff said), demonization of male sexuality, etc.
I have no interest in restricting myself to one sexual partner. I have no interest in putting women's welfare before my own. I have no interest in sets of elabourate social rules about what special courtesies I must show to women. I have no interest in "manning up" when that means marrying some self-involved twit and paying for her entire life.
Feminism may want to make men into dogs, obeying the rules of their female owners, and doing tricks in the hope of the occasional treat, but tradconism wants to make men into horses, hitched for life to the cart of someone else's ambitions and dreams.
So no.
No to feminism. No to cultural Marxism. No to liberalism. No to conservativism. No to Jesus. No to marriage. No to anything that tells me that I do not belong to myself, that my talents are for anything other than me, that I must do this, or I must do that, or I should do the other.
[deleted] 10y ago
I appreciate your honesty. One question: do you intend to reproduce?
When not, feel free to do whatever you want to. And, sorry if it is a bit offensive, but you just lost the whole evolutionary game by refusing to play at all. But I can respect that choice. On the social level I dislike it because if many intelligent people opt out we end up with Idiocracy, but I can't force others to reproduce, I have to accept that.
When yes, things a bit different. Point one, free choice ends when there are kids: we owe responsibility to them. Making them is like signing a contract for caring for them as best we can. Point two: tradcon is essentially nothing but the ideal childrearing environment.
Whisper 10y ago
You don't understand the game.
Read your Dawkins. Get through "The Blind Watchmaker", and "The Selfish Gene", and you'll understand that you and I are not players in the evolution game. We are strategies. The evolution game is played between genes, not people.
The game is about genes trying to make copies of themselves. That's all it is.
You don't have children because you want to win the game. You have children because some mindless combinations of nucleic acids won in the past by instilling people like you with the urge to create a shrieking, jam-covered goblin, then give it resources.
We're all puppets of our genes. But I'm not attached to that particular string. I'm an r-selecting male, a natural alpha. We're not interested in settling down with one woman, and raising a couple of kids. We're naturally promiscuous, and genetically inclined to sire bastards and leave. In the age of birth control, this makes us childless. Maybe in half a million years, we'll be edited out of the gene pool, and males will all be broody, child-loving, faithful, cooperative, and obedient.
I'm not particularly disappointed not to be the most useful puppet for a bunch of proteins.
[deleted] 10y ago
You are like the Shakers who practiced celibacy; your values are self-negating and doomed. The world is inevitably going to be inherited by people with values other than your own. Fine, I guess, but I don't find it very interesting. I'm interested in the values that will survive.
Whisper 10y ago
You just made the same argument twice.
First you told me that I wasn't a good tool for genes to propagate themselves. Now you're telling me that I'm not a good tool for memes to propagate themselves.
I have no interest in being a tool.
cron_nin 10y ago
And here's the question that I want to ask: why do we have to bring politics into this? Is it not possible to be liberal or moderate and be redpill as well?
[deleted] 10y ago
Liberalism, although the word progressivism is better, is all about denying reality.
zionController 10y ago
Hear, hear
SoftHarem 10y ago
Atheist Independent/Libertarian checking in and I'd like to think I'm fairly RP. Sexual strategy is at the heart of any political movement, whether they admit it or not. You can absolutely be liberal or conservative and be RP, but the further towards the edges you go of either extreme the harder it will be to accept reality without any preconceived notions. There's a reason feminists are almost all on the left, and there's a reason traditionalists are almost all on the right. RP, as you know, is about exposing the truth and playing to our biological strengths, which both parties fail at.
TempestTcup 10y ago
A large number of the red pill sites I frequent advocate ditching politics altogether. No voting. Don't feed the system.
I haven't quite gotten to that point, but I do realize that no matter who you vote for, a politician is always elected.
The_Ringmistress 10y ago
Anarcho-monarchist Catholic here. Pretty much what SoftHarem said. It's harder to be RP and liberal if being liberal means trying to create equality where there is essential difference. But that doesn't mean you can't be.
I think the important thing to keep in mind is that it's about accepting reality for what it is. I may come from a standpoint that says Grace can perfect Nature, but acknowledge that Nature for what it is. We can have different ideas on what may be the political consequences of that Nature.
[deleted] 10y ago
The best position to have would be the one with the least preconceived notions by this logic. That is difficult to quantify. Probably a waste of time as well.