The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.
European88
Posted 9y ago in Men's Rights - Permalink - Locked - 1K Views
TheRedPill Sidebar
Welcome to The Red Pill
The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.
Original Reddit Red Pill sub (quarantine bypass) that contains the full original sidebar
The Rules & Glossary
You are REQUIRED to read these before posting. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse.
Endorsed Contributors: Respect The Tag
Glossary of Terms and Acronyms (2015)
Here to troll? Here's a Glossary of Shaming Tactics, try to be creative and avoid these. We know you won't, that's why you're easy to spot.
The Red Pill Network
Official Fail Safe Forums (Currently Locked)
New Here?
New here? Read the following threads and the Theory Reading below. Read before participating:
Confessions of a Reformed Incel
Theory Reading
Relationships, the Red Pill, and you
Women, the most responsible teenager in the house
On Value and the Value of Women
Powertalk and other Language Categories
References
Everything you need to know about Shit Tests
Comprehensive Guide to Shit Tests
Goals - A beginners guide on how to attain them
One Key Step to Not Giving a Fuck
Links to the Manosphere
Subreddit By Flair
Red Pill Subreddits
/r/TheRedPill
/r/RedPillWomen
/r/askTRP
/r/RedPillParenting
/r/thankTRP
/r/becomeaman
/r/altTRP
/r/GEOTRP
/r/TRPOffTopic
The Archives
Special Thanks
/u/CrazyHorseInvincible
/u/bsutansalt
/u/EpicLevelCheater
/u/Halitenina
/u/SlyGradient
/u/TheRedPike
/u/RedForEducation
/u/RedShifter99
/u/LegendOfTheFrontier
/u/MachiavellianRed
/u/RedSovereign
/u/OldMuckyTerrahawk
/u/Aerobus
/u/RedAsteroid
/u/CrimsonPerspective
/u/RedGoldSaint
/u/GaiusScaevolus
/u/SoftHarem
/u/-Anteros-
LeeryLucifer 9y ago
Well, to be frank; I've had enough.
I'm sick and tired of being treated like shit by cunts, so this just adds to it.
No more dates. If I want sex, I'll purchase it from some nice honest whore. Much cheaper and far less risky (rape-charge wise). And of course: No god damned drama.
Never going to apply to work for a female dominated workplace again. Not worth it.
Max2000Warlord 9y ago
What a moron. The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 makes what he's trying to do expressly illegal. You'd think the Premier of a fucking state (even if it is only South Australia) would know that.
WillClickOnAnything 9y ago
Heh, I want to start a petition to ban women from STEM careers. Who's with me?
zendeavor 9y ago
okay. do it. put your money where your mouth is and make a statement
[deleted]
Ossuari 9y ago
The crimes of one to prevent a whole gender from working in child care. That sounds so right to me.
It might even go through parliament considering if they vote on party lines. I really hope he does not make the wrong decision
veggie_girl 9y ago
There are plenty of women who are pedophiles as well. We should in addition disallow women from working in child care.
Just leave the children to fend for themselves, it's for their own protection.
JP_Whoregan 9y ago
Funny South Park episode is completely relevant.
chakravanti93 9y ago
One bad apple spoils half the batch?
Clauderoughly 9y ago
only if that apple has a penis..
awwwwyehmutherfurk 9y ago
This was also posten on mens rights, so I'll leave you guys with the response I left over there, as i feel it has some better information:
So in Summary, the Premier, the Minister of Child Development and the Union of Childcare workers all thing this is fucking stupid and a terrible idea. I doubt it would get to the point where this idea is actually voted on. The SA opposition also seem to be working positively with the current government.
Meglomaniac 9y ago
Sounds like a stupid idea got some press and never ever ever would have made it anywhere close to being law.
Would get slapped down by the court system so fucking fast.
awwwwyehmutherfurk 9y ago
It barely got press though. I didn't find much online and the NZ article is the only one that seems to put more focus on the "ban men" part.
AnArcher 9y ago
What the hell is going on over in Australia, man. Every bit of news from there seems completely insane these days.
[deleted] 9y ago
This is just something that the media has drummed up, I live in SA, some idiot suggested it and everyone the media asked about it including the premier and I'm pretty sure Minister for families all said no straight away to this.
Really this is just a shitty link from from a different countries news paper about a non issue.
mordanus 9y ago
What I get out of this is that when a man is accused of doing something then all men are guilty of the exact same thing but if you say something bad about a woman then your immediate reply is NOT ALL WOMEN ARE LIKE THAT. Women are fucking hilarious.
Night--Writer 9y ago
Women do this just as much as men, yet when men do it it's weighed much more heavily. I use to work with kids and one time someone said 'you better watch him' just because I was a man. Talked to some buddies I met through the program and they've received some of the same gestures. The majority of the time parents are awesome, but there's that needle in the haystack that doesn't know wtf they're talking about. So this law seems absurd to me, especially since I was a much better protector and care giver than the majority of older women who would yell at them every chance they got because they don't have patience or they have personal problems that they take out on the kids.
In fact, the reason why I stayed so long at that job was simply to know that there's one spot an asshole won't have to treat the kids like shit.
[deleted] 9y ago
When I see posts like these, my first reaction is usually "who gives a fuck, doesn't affect my sexual strategy so fuck it."
Then I think about the issue a little more, and its scary. Once they stop men from doing one thing, why not continue preventing men from doing other shit? It just seems like a slippery slope is all.
Man I just try not to think about this stuff these days. The "progress train" is moving full speed ahead, I'm just gonna enjoy the view for as long as I can.
Squeezymypenisy 9y ago
Is this a state government? Last I checked the national Toby Abbott-led government is pretty conservative. I mean most of reddit hates him so I doubt he is very "progressive."
Kayden01 9y ago
Honestly, by international standards, he's probably moderately conservative. His charity work and so on would make him an absolute hero if he was on the other side of politics, however I won't deny that he has some kind of special fucking superpower that just makes him unlike-able. It's really damn strange.
awwwwyehmutherfurk 9y ago
That "super power" is his attempts to dismantle Australia's very good and successful welfare and social policies. That "super power" is his attempts to change the medical and education systems closer to those of America, something that the overwhelming majority of Australians don't want. There are other smaller things, like using the anniversary of D-Day as an opportunity to announce how he's going to be talking to foreign leaders to inform them that "Australia is open for business".
It doesn't help that he has the charisma of a gnat. Abbots a weird guy, he doesn't display any leadership qualities but managed to become leader of a major political party.
Kayden01 9y ago
Dismantle? He could work at the pace he has been for the next 2 decades and not touch more than 20% of our welfare policies. In all seriousness, Rudd/Gillard went insane on spending. Not just on useful social policies, just in general. We had 4 different government 'climate' departments. A federal minister for women. They deferred planned military spending, specifically to use the budgeted money on pet projects.
Our medical and education systems are so far from Americas that he could proceed like this for decades without making much of a dent. Spending the way labour had set it up was unsustainable. It couldn't be kept up with our current population demographics, and their solution of just putting the payments off indefinately and going perpetually further into debt were insane.
Abbott is absolutely a weird guy. He seems to be generally disliked - by everyone that hasn't directly worked with him. To most of 'his' people, he seems to be their version of a frikkin messiah, which just increases the weirdness.
otiswild 9y ago
Yeah, but he gives the pinkos conniptions so he wins my vote purely on the lulz.
MachiavellianRed 9y ago
I wish I knew what this means.
vzhu 9y ago
He drives the progressives up the wall.
tsudonimh 9y ago
You need to go look up the definition of the word 'dismantle'. Scaling back the fucking obscene spending habits of the previous government is not dismantling.
And the policies were only 'good and successful' if you think 'unsustainable' is a good thing.
8n0n 9y ago
Is the Australian Government running out of money? Is the RBA (Reserve Bank of Australia) putting an end to printing of the AUD?
Nope to the latter means a hard no to the former, we could end up in worse straits than the US, or even Japan if you want to go deeper in the economic black hole, and they are ticking along fine in comparison. Unsustainable? I think that's akin to a drunk stumbling home finding the ground beneath their feet 'unstable' and shouting about an earthquake.
A government is supposed to be in debt to govern, to provide the services we as individuals and corporations can not, or will not, provide on their own. Massive scale projects, like the NBN, were scrapped by a government abandoning its core roles on a country in the name of a 'budget crisis' that has never existed (if not in the financial interests of a minority being places above those of said country).
Real estate could tank tomorrow but the government (be it local, state or federal) would continue to govern; of course that does not guarantee the safety of the individuals chairing seats within the government being the same after such a rough economic transition (suppose that's the only real crisis I see here).
Finally before you sling any attacks on me about real estate (ie someone waiting for some 'market crash'); I don't own any property whatsoever nor have any interests in playing a zero sum game (even when you 'own' it your still paying for the privilege), at any opening price.
tsudonimh 9y ago
Wow, ok, I'm going to work on the assumption you're not a troll, though only due solely to the lack of spelling and grammatical errors.
I'm not sure what in that sentence was the most profoundly stupid - that by scaling back spending we could somehow end up in a worse position than the US or Japan (who through deficit spending are running at 100% debt-to-GDP and over double that respectively), or that you think those economies are "ticking along fine in comparison".
In comparison to what? The labor participation rate in the US is at catastrophic lows, regulations and red-tape are at historic highs and the government is spending two dollars for every one they take in. The only thing in the US that's 'ticking along fine' is the stock market, due solely to the fed and the 80-odd billion injection of monthly printed currency. Why don't you guess how many stocks on there that aren't running a P/E ratio way higher than the historical average.
Yes it's unsustainable.
This is an example of someone being told something, then nodding along and accepting it without question.
Under certain circumstances, running a relatively (and temporary) small deficit can be beneficial to a population's standard of living. By relatively small I mean 'less than the inflation rate'. That way the borrowing of tax receipts from the future is paid back more easily by the reduction in value of the currency.
Anyone not financially illiterate understands that, over time, budgets are supposed to be balanced for a government to be stable and sustainable.
Wow. Just fucking wow. Do you accept everything you read on ihateabbott.com without checking? I just had a look at the NBN webpage, and funnily enough, there isn't a single mention of being scrapped. You'd think that would be pretty prominent, wouldn't you? You know, if it was true.
Or are you perhaps referring to the NBN being told that they need to justify why they haven't met a single target goal despite the billions of dollars thrown at them?
On a completely unrelated note, I find the similarities between the rhetoric used by 'budget-crisis' deniers and the 'climate-change' deniers fucking amusing.
It's like they take the arguments of each other, then just use find/replace to change budget to climate and vice versa.
iseeyou1312 9y ago
Of course not, a government that prints its own fiat currency can never run out of money, they can however make that money worthless and unable to pay for anything if their printing is not offset with increasing economic growth. So although they can never fail to pay off their current debts, the consequence of economic mismanagement is to impose instantaneous austerity upon themselves and cause a huge depression with misallocated resources.
If fine is totally stagnant economies laden with perpetual debt they will never be able to pay off, what does an unhealthy economy look like?
According to whom - you?
Who determines what a good or bad project is? You? The government? Oh wait, the government doesn't actually care about the price mechanism, just the arbitrary demands of lobbyists.
The only reason the real estate bubble exists is from cheap credit creation that drives speculative inflationary bubbles and negative gearing, which was introduced to increase investment property development, but in fact did the exact opposite (drove the rates down from 60% to less than 7%).
And yet it still exists. Whoever would have thought that using violence and coercion to solve complex social issues would ultimately fail in the long run?
[deleted] 9y ago
All he did with the welfare system was suggest that people should work for it. You obviously have no idea how easy it is to wrought the system. At the moment they're just throwing money at unmotivated houso's who spend it all on smokes and beer? Tell me more about how it's a successful system?
awwwwyehmutherfurk 9y ago
Wow son. You literally have no idea. I'm going to assume you've never needed the system based on your ignorance, but correct me of you have. So here is how the new budget wants to set it - you loose your job. You don't get "the dole". At all. No help. For six months. Nothing. After six months, then you are allowed to get support. Pretty fucked if you live in an area with high unemployment.
Now, the dole is below the poverty line, when I was on it, I was given $420 a fortnight. I was lucky I had low expenses and was able to pay rent and still have enough for food. If I had lost my job with the Liberal budget in control I would new to make sure I have atleast $5000 saved PURELY for security. If it had happened to me I would have had no choice but to ask my family for money, purchase a plane ticket and move from the city to the country to live with them, where job prospects are even worse and there is no hope for tertiary education.
Let's move on to "Woking for the dole", it wot help people get a job, and it's highly unethical. It's illegal for private businesses to pay their workers under legal wages, so why should it be legal for the government to do so? At what point is someone supposed to apply for the hundreds of jobs they need to apply for to be successful?
Then you have interest on university loans. Great! Now if you take any time off work for any reason, the cos of your degree just got larger! Sorry, you got pregnant and couldn't work? Tough titties, your debt will just grow? Going to be a doctor? I hope you like debt large enough to have been used to buy a house in the outer suburbs. That comes with another issue. Say you an your mate just graduate uni and are now dentist. He works in the city because it has a larger client base and means more money, and you decide to work in Rural Australia because they don't have much access to dental care. Naturally you are going to be making less money then him. Yet, despite providing what is arguably a more useful service his degree will overall cost him less money. Thanks interest.
Now you have them charging you for hospital use AND cutting funding to that sector. This is great for all the pensioners out there, and the poor. Oh well.
Fuck everyone not on six figures right? Only suggesting people work for the dole my ass.
[deleted] 9y ago
The system as it was was full of flaws, there is innumerable proven cases of people faking injuries for the dole. Why would they do it? Because it was so easy to claim you hurt yourself and then sit on your ass getting free money. Yeah you guessed it I don't get any government support, not a cent. But everyone in my family pays more tax because we are "high income earners" just because we our aggregate income is higher means we pay more money to give to others and we are barred from getting anything. Screw equality right?
This six month waiting period is a blanket security measure to stop people getting a job at Maccas, throwing in the towel after a month and then getting the dole the next day. I'm not saying that is an effective measure but I know teens who dropped out of school in year 10 and went straight on to the dole which they used to buy drugs and pay for their iPhones. Don't tell me it does't happen because I've seen it with my own two eyes. That's not even going into all the government housing that was trashed by people on the dole and then payed for by us "high income earners" or the rich immigrants who move here and lie about how much they have so they get support too.
For every person who genuinely needs support there is just as many scumbags taking advantage of it and until there is an effective, fair and lenient system I refuse to believe that the "old" system worked.
There needs to a case by case system without loopholes like the one we have.
Saying that working for the dole is unethical is like saying it's unethical not to pay volunteers for volunteer work, where does ethics come into putting in a bit of effort into getting your free money? Councils giving people a job would get people jobs believe it or not, crazy how that works right? Where are you getting your information to ay that dole workers would get less then minimum wage?
There's interest on every goddamn loan ever. You only start paying off your HECS loan when you are making over $53,000, taking time off work isn't going to make you bankrupt is it?
And usefulness doesn't dictate your wage, that's just doesn't happen in any job market and it would be uneducated to suggest that it should be like that. That implies that a city dentist should get less money or a rural dentist should have their clients pay more because they're useful.
You don't even know what you want. Don't fuck everyone on six figures, fuck the people that make the welfare system shit. Why don't you point the finger at them?
awwwwyehmutherfurk 9y ago
What do you think is going to happen to people in those six months? "A blanket security measure"? Are you absolutely fucking insane? You want to put people in the streets because they can't get a job? Do you have any idea how bad that is? Do you have any idea how much of a scumbag you are?
Some people are bad so everyone else must suffer? Some people game the system so those who don't get fucked in the arse because you're upset that you make too much money to ever be impacted by the system?
You know what that's tantamount to? Assuming a man is guilty of rape simply because more rapists are men then women. Is this TheRedPill or r/Feminism? But we don't do that, because punishing people for the crimes of others is barbarism. But that is what you're proposing. Its not a solution to people gaming the system, but its not better than what we had. With what we had, people who needed the help got it - this "security measure" fucks people and only saves money. I guarantee that it will see a rise in crime and homelessness.
The dole is below the poverty line and below basic wages. Thats why "work for the dole" is unethical. If the work you'e doing for the dole actually IS inline with wage laws - then why not just GIVE people those jobs permanently? If its an actual, base paying job just give it to the people who need the work. Its not "working for the dole" if you're being paid more than the dole, its a job.
Usefulness dictating your wage wasn't the point I was making. People make choices that affect their income for better or worse and need to live with the fact that they aren't going to make as much money. I'm going to be a teacher. I'm full aware that I'm never going to be fairly rich, I'm fine with that(But I also know I can make decent money by taking those skills to countries like China and teaching english their). What I'm not fine with is people being actively punished and profited off for that decision. Thats what interest on university loans will do - the dentist making less money in the country will spend more time paying off his loan, this makes sense, except for the fact that that now means he will pay MORE for his loan. His degree was more expensive, because people who got their degree for free decided it should be. Knowing this, why would anyone work somewhere like that?
Free Healthcare is also a form of welfare, but we're also losing that.
You're worried about your tax dollars? How about get angry at the F-35 procurement? Did you know that even in the military, a huge amout of people think that is fucking retarded? We virtually never use the fast-jets we DO have, why do we need a shit ton more (which will also mean higher upkeep and more tax dollars)? For that matter, the countries that have been testing them seem to find that its a piece of shit.
I do agree with you on one thing though, it is bullshit that people are refused support because of the incomes of their parents. I think it was on r/Australia just the other day that some kid couldn't get ausstudy when now that he is about to attend Uni, because his parents income combined is too much - despite that they're divorced and both up to their eyeballs in house and car repayments leaving them with only a few hundred at the end of the fortnight. Not enough for them to support their son to live close to the UNiversity. He's stuffed, because living with them means he's too far from University, and he is unable to find employment closer. That IS bullshit. I can't get ausstudy either - because centrlink requires I give them the details of everyone I live with - despite that I live with 5 other students which change quite regularly. I find it an invasion of privacy to give out their details without permission. I'm ethically bound. Centrelink says it needs it because it determines how much I'll get paid. Does that make sense to you? They have no affect on my income or expenses. I rent directly from my landlord, my rent doesn't change. So I also agree with you on another thing, the system is kind of spastic.
But you are inarguably wrong one one point. I do KNOW what I want. What I want is for the system to not punish people for the indiscretion of others, what I want is for Australia to not follow in the footsteps of the United States. We have one of strongest, low debt economies in the world. Fucking the poor isn't going to stop that from being true.
To answer your question though, "Why don't you point your finger at them?" Simple, really. Because the people making the system shit, all they're doing is making me look bad, but the people like you? The people on their six figures? There the ones advocating that I should suffer. That if I can't find work then I don't deserve the fundamental human rights of food, shelter and health.
When men get falsely accused of rape on campuses and get expelled, when their names get dragged through the mud and have their lives negatively impacted for the rest of their lives, I don't blame the real rapists for making men look bad, I blame the groups enacting laws and making these decisions that actively harm the innocent. I don't blame male abusers for the creation of the Duluth model, which is designed to be biased specifically against men, I blame the people who brought the model into use.
Ultimately, neither of us will get anywhere in this argument, as it is an argument that has lasted since Roman times.
Squeezymypenisy 9y ago
Lol its probably because of his association with the wealthy mining families. It seems they are despised. At least by reddit.
Kayden01 9y ago
Half of the Australian redditors seem to be far, far left uni student types. The kind that join the Socialist Alliance while in uni, then slowly figure out that that level of insanity just isn't taken seriously, so they move a little more towards the centre and fall solidly into the left side of the labour party.
Hell, the Libs would fit comfortably into the Democrats in the US. And the left wing of the Dems at that.
Squeezymypenisy 9y ago
Its kind of sad. We use to have a number of blue dog democrats. And then many were forced out due to their party's platforms going to far left. It's funny, Frank Underwood is a blue dog democrat and reddit is obsessed with him.
Kayden01 9y ago
Yep. I think it's interesting that a lot of Reddit doesn't seem to realize just how far left Aus is politically. Then when you get people complaining about our 'right wing politicians' they picture someone like Santorum/Gingrich etc, rather than someone that's probably about as far right as Clinton.
Squeezymypenisy 9y ago
True, I find it funny that while the population is leftist, Australian intelligence works very closely with US intelligence.
Kayden01 9y ago
We've got the oddest setup. Politically, we're pretty close to hard left, but with threads of conservatism running almost at random through society.
Squeezymypenisy 9y ago
That's interesting, do you know what many of their backgrounds are? Like middle class, upper class? Somewhere in between?
Kayden01 9y ago
Generally middle, though you'll have a range from low middle to upper. Also, the government will pay most uni costs, as well as partial living allowance etc. In my experience, almost none of them are working as well as studying, which leaves time for 'activism' alongside study.
With this in mind, of course anything at all that threatens either low cost uni or the partially taxpayer funded life they have is attacked with extreme fervour.
Squeezymypenisy 9y ago
See I hate that right there. It can create to much entitlement. Does the rest of the population support the almost all expenses paid uni?
Kayden01 9y ago
Pretty much. It's always played as 'Our kids deserve a decent education!' which seems totally reasonable. Everyone then throws an absolute fit when our 'conservative' party stops automatically increasing spending every year.
rpkarma 9y ago
Well, a lot of the population had uni entirely paid for them. No loans, no nothing, including the politicians who are now saying that uni students are whinging because they have to pay more now. That makes me laugh.
MachiavellianRed 9y ago
I hear it's like that in the UK too.
Screenp2 9y ago
how cute of them..
my question.. what do they plan to do with the catholic ministers, I mean they've been messing with kids for a couple thousand years now and last time I checked.. they still allow the kids to attend sunday school.
chakravanti93 9y ago
That depends how profitable the catholic church remains in the area.
[deleted]
TheRealMewt 9y ago
So one person does a crime and now an entire gender is walled off from that area of work? Ausfailia getting all logical on us now...
NormanoSilurian 9y ago
I've believed this for years.
Lots of PC comments here, didn't expect that from this subreddit. So, I take it that TRP is also MRA/egalitarian?
pupplenupple 9y ago
They are thinking of banning men from being full-time residential care workers (i.e., live-in roles) for kids in state care. They don't get to live in and run group homes, in other words. Most of these group homes house at-risk teenagers of both genders who in many cases will have already shown signs of risk-taking and sexually problematic behavior.
I have zero problems with this. Women in general are just better suited to this role, that requires them to very much put their own sexuality and seeking of mates on hold 24 hours a day until they get a whole weekend off. Not every woman is suited to this work, but almost no man is. Even though very few men will react to this employment situation by becoming abusers that doesn't alter the fact the entire job goes against the grain.
Of course the ideal employees for this role would be stable and functional married couples in the 45 to 65 years range, but there are so few of those nowadays that it would not be worth bothering attempting to recruit along those lines.