Do most Men's Rights activists support The Red Pill? (self.MensRights)

89 ups - 38 downs = 51 votes

I ask this because as someone that believes men should have the right to not have to pay child support, and we really need to take a look at why male suicide rates are so much higher than female suicide rates. I feel a connection to Men's Rights, even though I personally consider myself a humanist, and agree with feminism on some points as well.

However, I was browsing The Red Pill and I was highly disturbed at the outlook of the users there. Suggesting that women have the brains of children, and that there is no such thing as marital rape, and that cheating is OK if a man does it, and the homophobia was shocking. I also feel that the whole Alpha and Beta thing that they portray men as is exactly why the Male Suicide rate is so high. We are expected to be rocks. We are expected to be soulless. We are expected to have no emotions. As someone that suffered bullying growing up, and suffered a lack of confidence and even attempted suicide at the age of 15 because of it, I feel it was mainly because of the horrible gender roles that say that men have to be "Alpha". We don't encourages boys-(or girls) to be themselves. We tell them what they HAVE to be or should be. We don't let our children be their own person.

I ask this question because I feel that The Red Pill actually directly goes against EVERYTHING that Men's Rights stands for, and is an extremely damaging platform that if in a Twilight Zone-esque world where we all started following Red Pill principles, it would not only raise the female suicide rate, but also raise the male suicide rate.

Just curious to see what MRA's here have to say on TRP.

112 comments submitted at 07:39:09 on Nov 21, 2013 by Horrorbuff2

  • [-]
  • theonlyguyonreddit
  • 68 Points
  • 07:54:06, 21 November

I suppose I can only speak for myself, but it's my opinion when I say absolutely not

Once again in my opinion the red pill is some sort of meta feminism mirror where the shoe is on the other foot so to speak

I personally find it occasionally humorous to browse. But I absolutely don't agree with their statements

  • [-]
  • Bartab
  • 153 Points
  • 08:02:35, 21 November

No

  • [-]
  • A_User
  • 33 Points
  • 11:48:04, 21 November

I'm glad this is top comment.

While MRA's are likely to agree with many points of the redpill analysis of todays dating game for any young man who isn't an alphabro douchenozzle, it's something that treats all women as if they think and act alike, and encourages traditional gender roles.

You will find the real misogynists of the world in the Redpill movement, and to that end Redpills are what feminists think we are (or paint us as for propaganda purposes - one or the other), and as long as feminists have all the media in their pockets, it is up to us to prove to the world, again and again and again, that we are not like the redpills.

  • [-]
  • kernafigjam
  • 17 Points
  • 14:20:44, 21 November

This subreddit has its facepalm moments, I'll admit it, but if you can't tell the difference between it and the red pill you're just not paying attention, or you don't want to pay attention.

  • [-]
  • Hormander
  • 2 Points
  • 17:26:43, 21 November

> traditional gender roles

You mean biological gender roles.

  • [-]
  • PIBagent
  • 1 Points
  • 16:03:16, 21 November

>and encourages traditional gender roles.

Could you elaborate on that. From what I've seen the vast majority of the sub is anti-marriage and in some instances anti-dating.

  • [-]
  • Kineticillation
  • 2 Points
  • 16:41:49, 21 November

The man is born as a rational creature and is a natural-born leader. It is in a woman's best interest to find a man to follow, and to get him to provide for her. (See /r/redpillwomen.) A man on the other hand, should never trust a woman as they are irrational and manipulative creatures. However, if given the right instruction, they too can learn to manipulate and bag as many women as possible.

Basically men lead the family and provide the bread, women take care of the man and household, even if there isn't really a "household" to speak of. It generally just means to be down to fuck whenever the man wishes it and to keep the apartment clean. Or to be gone, except when the man wants sex. All of this is quintessential Red Pill.

  • [-]
  • PIBagent
  • 1 Points
  • 16:59:14, 21 November

Interesting.

Tell me, what is your perspective on the MGTOW movement?

  • [-]
  • Kineticillation
  • 1 Points
  • 17:04:38, 21 November

Me? Well it makes me a little sad, but that's from my knee-jerk "No one should die alone" opinion. But if it makes these men happier, that works. In action, it seems to be a huge self-esteem boost and these people lead productive, self-motivated lives. But then they realize the real truth--that that's what makes a person attractive to the right people, and then they're not alone.

But I really, really don't like the Red Pill. I find it insanely unhealthy, but I try to approach it neutrally when I'm explaining it to others. I can see the appeal under certain circumstances, but I don't like how it manifests into essentially hating women.

  • [-]
  • TPtherapist
  • 22 Points
  • 10:00:11, 21 November

Not exactly a MRA (Don't like labels), but I don't support what you see in that sub, but I really understand it and I also know that for most of them, it's just a phase. Their content is still quite toxic and naive though. I do, however, support the concept of swallowing the red pill, as in, wake up and realize that men and women are both capable of being equally nasty and terrible. No point idealizing either.

Being angry at women is a phase that most men go through. The early dating life has more losers than winners (on both sides) and this leaves a man with a bitter feeling, that eventually disappears as the man matures and engages with more mature women.

However, education (at home, school and indirectly media) has become more women-oriented and this has had effects on how men perceive relationships. If you read any of those articles that shame male sexuality ("Don't do X, Y and Z with women, it's sexist, do instead A, B and C"), you'll get an interesting notion of how attraction works. If you consider your own sexuality to be wrong, to be something to be ashamed of, you'll have to learn different strategies. Some of them include being very nice, bowing to the girl you like, stick around as friends so she can get to know you better, keep her happy, don't argue with her, let her have her way, etc. That's how dating for a man looks from a feminist point of view. It's artificial, dishonest, highly manipulative. When young men with poor self-confidence and self-esteem (most young people have issues with that) use these tactics, they tend to backfire quite badly. These things, by themselves, are not attractive.

Is the paragraph above familiar? It's the entire friend zone thing. Who could have guessed that learning how to fish from a fish would end badly. The problem is that men who engage in this behaviour usually have a very low success rate, so the bitterness increase. They are told that girls are made of all what is good, that they are so angelical, that if they want to seduce them, they need to do this and that, but it never works, it ends so badly for them...and then they discover the entire PUA/Red Pill thing. Suddenly, the pendulum swings in the total opposite, they have the power, they can actually win. Isn't it a very attractive prospect?

So that's how I feel that it happens, you've been told how to date, it never worked, you are bitter, but someone offers you a magical pill that will make things better. I said I believe it's temporary because at some point, the pendulum goes back to a neutral position as the man matures and improves himself in many aspects.

When a man engages a girl with the intention of starting a relationship with her or just have sex, he's considered to have "hidden intentions", an "ulterior motive", he's "not up to anything good". What is a good way to get what you want in the future, but not come across as a pervert? By hiding those intentions, by being there for her, a good friend. Good intentions, but very manipulative procedures. But who's exactly to blame? I get annoyed when I see feminists hating on red pillers considering that the view of many of them actually are the main cause of the red pillers existence (this needs to be expanded though, but some other time).

So, in short, red pillers feel cheated by their education on dating, swing in the total opposite direction, but hopefully with age they move to a more neutral stance.

  • [-]
  • typhonblue
  • 0 Points
  • 16:38:13, 21 November

>If you consider your own sexuality to be wrong, to be something to be ashamed of, you'll have to learn different strategies.

Essentially the strategies boil down to bribing women to process your toxic sexuality; like you might pay someone to process garbage.

Interestingly Feminists hate the idea that sex is transactional and blame men for "bribing women"--even call it a form of rape--yet still promote the idea that male sexuality is disgusting, filthy and degrading to women.

After all they invest a lot of energy in "proving" objectification exists, it's harmful to women and that men engage in it.

  • [-]
  • CosmicKeys
  • 23 Points
  • 09:00:06, 21 November

I absolutely sympathize with socially awkward young men and the problems they face, although I'm not interested in discussing it much (certainly not here) men have many issues surrounding vunerability in relationships that are worth discussing. But I am not interested in supporting PUA or RedPillers in any form. That are going in an opposite direction to MRAs.

I feel that PUAs have a naive, but frail high horse they try to climb on when trying to justify what is essentially gender nihilism. PUA is Machiavellian and amoral, and about reducing people to stereotypes based on armchair evo psych in order to justify their behaviour.

All the cult like "game" phrases are attempts to meld what they believe with what normal people call life. They want to the TheRedPill as a valid holistic philosophy, because they recognize and want to hide the inherent shallow and abusive nature of it's basic roots. And like feminism (who's tagline is "It's just equality"), I don't deal with smokescreens. The majority of popular PUAs are dehumanizing misogynists. RooshV basically admitted to being a rapist, RedPillers seem to have no problem with the idea.

There is of course no equivalent female pick up artistry/agency for them because it relies on the idea that women are nothing more than numbers on an scale of physical attractiveness, as that RedPill endorsed contributor said - their only value as a human being is pussy, just sexual children to make decisions for. You can throw all the Tony Robbins motivational magic on it you like but that's what the churning engine of it is.

Disgusting ideas. MRAs to me are about recognizing women as equals, equals in ability to choose and equal in the negative aspects that feminists won't discuss. TRP is almost an anti-religion, it is destroying the idiosyncracies and beauty of life and love by turning them into traditionalist formulas for "success". As I watched in a youtube video recently, some doubt women even have the ability to love. Women are just pathetic solipsistic insects begging to reproduce, what a lovely outlook on life to give young men about life and love.

The majority of PUA relies on pretending to be something they feel they are not, and hoping this act can mimic someone who is the "alpha" until they transform that shell into something they can wear all the time. The caring fathers? The intrinsic bodily beauty of men? Effeminiate men? Fags and betas. All this "meta-game" malarky does is try and widen the scope so PUAs can't be criticized for their obession with shallow sex, turn it into philosophical mush and meld it with a framework beyond criticism (again a similarity with feminism). It doesn't matter, the alpha/beta definitions will always be a constriction, an emasculation, the things that separate someone who is free from those who are chained to someone elses concept of a real man.

And as a last point, PUAs are intensely Americanized. They internalize their own dating culture and justify it with their own half cocked evo psych. I think if you visit a place like New Zealand or Norway or Africa you'll see it's not all the same. Here is a group of young guys who exemplify pick up artistry and selecting and manipulating young vunerable women for their own benefit. They are currently the most hated people in New Zealand, and there's a reason for that.

They are the traditionalists, and every time MRAs get mistaken for TRP it tarnishes what MRAs are saying about men being victimized.

tl;dr, No.

  • [-]
  • caimis
  • 9 Points
  • 09:30:29, 21 November

> They are the traditionalists

Honestly this and that the MRM is as much anti-traditionalist as we are anti-feminist is all anyone needs to know.


One thing I would like to note about PUA stupidity is they invariably end up justifying it because "it works" which is likely true but on the other hand drugging someone works as well I'm not sure how "it works" is an argument for something being morally or ethically right.

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 4 Points
  • 14:28:03, 21 November

I don't necessarily see it this way at all. I'm not a traditionalist, and I have never bothered with the PUA ideas - but if they work, and your only goal is getting laid, then why not I guess. But there's a germ of truth to the idea that there are certain things that are gender-defined. Biologists define male and female behaviors in every species. Why would we be so arrogant to believe that humans are different?

  • [-]
  • Neurotikitty
  • 3 Points
  • 15:56:31, 21 November

>Biologists define male and female behaviors in every species. Why would we be so arrogant to believe that humans are different?

Biologists are descriptivist, not prescriptivist. It's one thing to observe the way males and females interact - it's another thing entirely to try and enforce a particular set of behaviors on unwilling (or unaware) participants.

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 2 Points
  • 16:11:38, 21 November

I don't think TRP is prescriptive at all. It's a descriptive theory. What you do with it is your own choice. Like I've said elsewhere in this thread, PUA is not for me, but they're putting a prescriptive solution out there for people who just want to get laid.

  • [-]
  • Neurotikitty
  • 3 Points
  • 16:13:31, 21 November

Perhaps. The problem I have with their descriptive theory is that it only seems accurate in a narrow range of situations. If you're dealing with shallow relationships with certain types of people in the club scene... then yeah, they are kind of spot on. If you're talking about long term relationships with other mature adults, I find their ideas simplistic and insulting.

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 2 Points
  • 16:16:29, 21 November

Whereas I've found TRP to be insanely helpful. It helped me understand why my previous LTRs had gone south eventually, and helped me change my own behaviors to better make my partners happy while not subjugating my own needs. One of thing things about finding things insulting is that it's often a sign that it hits close to home.

  • [-]
  • Neurotikitty
  • 3 Points
  • 16:18:55, 21 November

It's not that there's nothing of value in that sub at all. Helping a man learn to be confident in himself and his decisions regarding relationships is fine by me. The insulting bits are the PUA related shit - "Start drama with women to get them addicted to you" stuff. I've seen a video that was literally all about that posted and upvoted in that sub. I have no patience for that kind of manipulative behavior.

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 4 Points
  • 16:27:48, 21 November

As opposed to the manipulative behavior of women? The sexual marketplace is vicious, and populated by sharks of either gender. I can't simply kick all of the bad people out of the gene pool. For one, no one appointed me lifeguard. The reason why you see things like that upvoted on TRP is because they do work, and the fact that they work is utterly stupefying to men. We were pretty much all programmed to look for a man with a vagina to fall in love with, and when we found out that the woman we fell in love with was a woman, and not a man, we ran into problems. "Swallowing TRP" is that moment when men come to grips with the idea that they can't treat women as men, but instead have to treat them as women. Now, a lot of TRP people can go overboard, as I've mentioned before, but that idea that men and women are not identical is not groundbreaking. It's just that it isn't what men are taught, and then when the way we were taught leads to failure, and then typical "being an asshole" leads to success, it leads us into a very dark place, questioning everything we though we knew. Some people stay in that dark place, but I think the majority come out of it with a respect for women. In fact, you could say with more respect for women, as these people are no longer attempting to force women to live according to a male system of priorities.

  • [-]
  • Neurotikitty
  • 1 Points
  • 16:35:07, 21 November

>We were pretty much all programmed to look for a man with a vagina to fall in love with, and when we found out that the woman we fell in love with was a woman, and not a man, we ran into problems.

That's an interesting concept. I thought the problem was supposedly that "blue pill" men put women on a pedestal and acted like they were princesses and not real human beings with occasionally terrible motivations?

That said, I don't look at the dating pool as a trading floor - I've never personally had to. Maybe it works for a lot of people, but the relationship dynamics in my life only vaguely resemble anything I've seen at TRP, and that's why it all sounds ridiculous and extreme to me.

  • [-]
  • cashmunnymillionaire
  • 1 Points
  • 18:03:16, 21 November

I'd add the MGTOW crowd to that bunch.

  • [-]
  • Revoran
  • 7 Points
  • 12:58:07, 21 November

I support the concept of realizing that hey, it's not only men that are assholes but women too.

But...

A large amount of the content I've seen coming out of /r/theredpill is just blatantly misogynistic, hateful garbage and I do not support it. Also a minority of the content here on /r/mensrights is hateful stuff. I don't support that.

I'm not in this to hate on females for the sake of hating on females and I hope others would call me out if I ever let bitterness get in the way of reason, also.

  • [-]
  • Proud_Male
  • 23 Points
  • 08:05:06, 21 November

I'm against those sorts of attitudes strongly, I don't even bother going to places like that so I have no idea what they talk about. Really if that's what they advocate i'd rather they not associate themselves with MRAs, because that's not helping men at all.

  • [-]
  • antithing
  • -4 Points
  • 08:22:53, 21 November

Whom they are helping ? Feminists ?

  • [-]
  • Exactly_what_I_think
  • 16 Points
  • 08:49:26, 21 November

In a seance yes. If the /r/MensRights is associated with /r/TheRedPill /r/MensRights could get the accosted bad press.

IMO the /r/MensRights mods should publicly denounce /r/TheRedPill because the 2 subs are regularly listed in tandem.

  • [-]
  • JakeDDrake
  • 7 Points
  • 09:54:29, 21 November

Well, not publicly denounce, so much as to publicly and very firmly state our status of non-affiliation in a polite manner.

Not that we should worry about drama from TheRedPill if we denounce them, so much as it's the more politically astute thing to do.

Why burn that bridge down, if TheRedPill may one day purge that sort of bigotry and PR-hurting rhetoric from their group? That may never happen, of course, but we should at least remain on good enough terms with them, should they clean up their act. They have quite a few active members, and it would serve to accumulate as many allies as we can, provided they don't misrepresent us with actions that are incongruent with our message and our beliefs.

  • [-]
  • Exactly_what_I_think
  • 8 Points
  • 10:35:36, 21 November

TheRedPill are not going to change but it will be banned by reddit.

TheRedPill users may not post or look at MensRights but they will vote with MensRights.

Denouncing them would be a political move and you wont loose any one.

How do I know? Look at my post history.

  • [-]
  • TRPACC
  • 4 Points
  • 11:49:08, 21 November

If we were to denounce people based on feminist sensibilities CAFE and Warren Farrell would have to go too.

  • [-]
  • CosmicKeys
  • 4 Points
  • 12:41:06, 21 November

Huh? I think they're saying you denounce those who are more extreme versions of yourself, not less extreme.

Although, I do not consider TRP to be a version of MRA. I consider them to be going in different directions, but others perceive TRP to be the same as MR.

  • [-]
  • TRPACC
  • 2 Points
  • 13:28:54, 21 November

If the more extreme were to be denounced that would be the end of any social movement, /r/mr would have to denounce AVfM for example. They way social movements work is that the more extreme widen the window for the more moderate to climb through.

  • [-]
  • mraproto
  • 1 Points
  • 13:57:57, 21 November

>/r/mr would have to denounce AVfM for example.

It'd be a good start

  • [-]
  • TRPACC
  • 2 Points
  • 14:56:45, 21 November

Yeah, this is where its dumb. Where is the profit in the part of the movement that does nothing and is being carried along by AVfM and similar, denouncing groups like AVfM that are leading the way for everyone else?

  • [-]
  • Exactly_what_I_think
  • 5 Points
  • 12:13:36, 21 November

My suggestion has noting to do with feminist sensibilities.

TheRedPill is based on ideals in direct opposition of MensRights. If feminism rejected outliers it would have stayed a healthy movement rather than the cancer it is now.

  • [-]
  • TRPACC
  • 5 Points
  • 12:18:05, 21 November

The majority of the mrm rejects pua/game/traditionalism anyway.

  • [-]
  • NiceIce
  • 1 Points
  • 16:31:47, 21 November

>In a seance yes.

I'm not sure that's the word you were looking for.

  • [-]
  • drrrrrr
  • 19 Points
  • 11:44:53, 21 November

As someone who believes in both groups, I'll try to offer an unbiased opinion as to why both can help men. I'm aware I'm in the minority here, but allow me to at least represent both sides.

  1. Both groups agree that men are force-fed a shitty narrative about how masculinity is toxic, about how women come first, about how marriage is the ultimate goal that a man must do for women, that women's healthcare is more important than men's, etc. Men grow up with bad ideas about what they should be, guilt, and how they should exist for the benefit of others, namely women.

  2. TRP says the solution is individualistic. You alone are responsible for breaking out of societal programming and "proofing" your life against people who want to take advantage of you or generally just ensure that you don't acheive what you want out of life. The consensus is basically that there are two types of people - those who rationalize away their lives (most men and women) and those who consciously choose to act on reality. Therefore to help men, TRP tries to say "here is the reality of the situation, and here is a blueprint for how to maximize your own happiness within the confines of that reality."

Meanwhile, MR says the issue is predominantly societal. Guys are unhappy because society treats them badly. Men and women alike suffer in modern society due to institutional problems, like the erosion of fatherhood, the shittyness of divorce and family court, the public education sucking. Therefore to help men, we must change society.

It's essentially individualistic versus societal. TRP would tend to be more libertarian if you will, saying that society / government is broken to favor women, who then wind up unhappy as a result of living in a country of weakened males. Therefore, the optimal course is to disengage with societal institutions / narratives that "tax" you. Abstain from marriage, hold off on giving commitment away freely, and focus on maximizing what you want out of life (sex, power, relationships, friends, status, etc). You owe nobody anything, and no one owes you anything.

MR would be a more liberal point of view. We have to rebalance society - campaign to drive more resources towards men. Raise awareness, change attitudes, etc. Getting laid, earning more money, getting in shape, becoming dominant, and reading intellectual books is all well and good, but men's problems are societally constructed, so doing all of those individual endeavors will not help. It's essentially the "are poor people kept poverty because of societal forces keeping them down, or do they lack the character traits necessary to pull themselves up by their bootstraps" argument.

I think that they are both right, TBH, and both groups go to extremes. At the end of the day, so many men do need to accept their own complicity in their own unhappiness. When you grow up, you have to cast off the ideals of your parents and society, and formulate your own beliefs. Many male problems do stem from being in imbalanced relationships or having a scarcity of romantic / sexual partners, and TRP can help with this.

But you still have to recognize that society must improve. Men can't be indoctrinated with "blue pill" ideology and then expected to either have a revelation or suffer. We have to change the ideologies being constructed. MR does a good job with that. TRP has the attitude that men who suffer are simply men who lacked the mental fortitude to see the truth in front of them and make the correct choices. This is false - plenty of men do everything right, and still get fucked over by getting falsely accused, tricked into fatherhood, divorce-raped, DV'd, etc.

Yes, TRP has its crazies, but go check out RPW (Red Pill Women) subreddit and you will see how female subscribers use TRP ideology. Women are not brainless - women are equally smart, but modern society has popped out MOST men as beta and most women as the female equivalent of beta. The bluntness comes from a theory that men have an undervalued sense of self-worth and women have an overvalued sense of self-worth - a sentiment I see here on MR alllll the time. A high-value man and a high-value women will essentially be equals, although different in nearly every aspect due to their biological differences.

  • [-]
  • danpilon
  • 1 Points
  • 18:04:31, 21 November

This is a really well thought out comment. While I am not a red piller, I am always hesitant to completely dismiss them due to "misogyny". That is precisely what many people do to dismiss the MRM. I seems to me that there are some valid concerns that some people take to ridiculous extremes, and that puts off a lot of people. That does not mean the valid concerns are not valid.

  • [-]
  • Sharpedgs
  • 6 Points
  • 12:24:33, 21 November

Hahahaha, no. They have some solid points, but they pour the crazy all over it. They're the tumblr TERF equivalent of MRAs.

  • [-]
  • onetenth
  • 33 Points
  • 08:07:59, 21 November

I personally think they are basically an antithesis to the goals of the MRM. They openly advocate for traditionalism, they want to stuff men (and women) into narrow gender roles, and that's not even mentioning the blatant misogyny.

  • [-]
  • JakeDDrake
  • 25 Points
  • 09:55:34, 21 November

So they're basically what Feminists accuse us of being.

  • [-]
  • thebrazenleaf
  • 12 Points
  • 11:39:27, 21 November

Exactly, which is why we need to distance ourselves from them.

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 3 Points
  • 14:33:17, 21 November

I think that some of them are. There are definitely people within TRP, even some of the major internet voices, who are like that. Return of Kings comes to mind. But I don't think the core idea of TRP - that men and women are not identical - is anti-feminist.

  • [-]
  • scarecrow569_
  • -1 Points
  • 13:17:57, 21 November

Exactly. The frustrating part is that they call themselves MRAs.

  • [-]
  • I_DOXX_CATS
  • 4 Points
  • 13:29:21, 21 November

It seems like the problem feminism has with the radfem movement.

  • [-]
  • scarecrow569_
  • 4 Points
  • 13:35:03, 21 November

Definitely. I feel like most people that call themselves feminists are humanists and I beat that RadFems make them skrew up their face.

  • [-]
  • chocoboat
  • 9 Points
  • 12:09:54, 21 November

Completely agree with you OP. I think Red Pill is made up of people who have had their compassion and sympathy for humanity beaten out of them, so now they're just out for themselves.

"You need to stand up for yourself and put your own needs first sometimes" is good advice for people who are pushovers, but putting yourself first at all times is no way to live your life. Most Redpillers are deeply sexist and think nearly all women act a certain way, and execute gameplans based on women being inferiors who you can manipulate - they are not pro equality at all, which to me is what MRAs are all about.

  • [-]
  • dejour
  • 4 Points
  • 07:57:05, 21 November

If you use Henry Laasanen's description of the manosphere, Men's rights is more about equalism and the red pill is more about individualism.

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/06/19/main-ideologies-in-the-manosphere/

Personally I'm much more interested in the MRM.

  • [-]
  • YetAnotherCommenter
  • 3 Points
  • 17:08:15, 21 November

> If you use Henry Laasanen's description of the manosphere, Men's rights is more about equalism and the red pill is more about individualism.

Which is ridiculous, since Red Pill is methodologically collectivist and biologically essentialist, therefore radically anti-individualist.

Not only that, but the idea of equality of the sexes and the virtue of equal treatment came from classical liberal individualism. Equality and individualism only conflict when you accept the basic premises of the collectivist left.

  • [-]
  • lordslag
  • 4 Points
  • 08:52:26, 21 November

Relevant

  • [-]
  • Captaincastle
  • 5 Points
  • 10:05:32, 21 November

I must hear more from this man

  • [-]
  • lordslag
  • 3 Points
  • 10:13:14, 21 November

I wish I had more to give you...but all I have is this upvote...you can have it.

Edit-You know what? (goes to your page and upvotes the shit out of you) Here's a bunch....

  • [-]
  • Captaincastle
  • 3 Points
  • 10:15:29, 21 November

Hey go team

  • [-]
  • Jkb77
  • 4 Points
  • 14:42:18, 21 November

No, I see them as the male equivalent of SRS.

  • [-]
  • jeanralph
  • 9 Points
  • 08:33:23, 21 November

We probably share some objective characteristics with redpillers as far as demographics go. I understand what led them where they are and I too would rather try and become Chad Thundercock than a man who is disrespected in his own house if I had to choose between the two.

But within the world of men who grew disillusioned with the male role models they grew up with (the proverbial "pussy-whipped" husbands who work themselves to death, won't garner any respect doing so and will get thrown out of the house when wifey sees it fit), a redpiller and I are polar opposites.

I derive my sense of worth from trying to treat others with fairness and advocating for equality before the law and fair treatment in mainstream culture, they derive theirs from scoring one night stands with drunk girls they don't respect.

Edit: added a few things.

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 2 Points
  • 14:31:08, 21 November

I think you're confusing PUA and red pill. I think the core idea of TRP is that there are certain inherent differences between men and women, and that is it. For me, TRP is the idea that you can't try to force people into a mold that they aren't happy in.

  • [-]
  • Neurotikitty
  • 2 Points
  • 16:00:48, 21 November

>For me, TRP is the idea that you can't try to force people into a mold that they aren't happy in.

What about the people that don't seem to fit in that "inherent" behavior scheme you described? What about effeminate men and masculine women?

  • [-]
  • Terry_Bruce_Dick
  • 3 Points
  • 16:10:08, 21 November

What about basketball players and short people? There are always outliers.

  • [-]
  • hankeofthehill
  • 9 Points
  • 12:30:00, 21 November

>Suggesting that women have the brains of children, and that there is no such thing as marital rape, and that cheating is OK if a man does it, and the homophobia was shocking.

Phrasing the question like that isn't very fair, but yes I do consider myself a member of the community. I've found that these opinions are in the minority (I'm surprised you didn't mention a few member's belief that women's suffrage was a mistake), and in the case of cheating and homophobia, nonexistent in the sub.

I've found TRP to be mostly about personal improvement, working out, striving for success, and becoming more confident. They also preach taking women off the pedestal, a common "nice guy" mistake and valuing yourself in relationships.

But yes, TRP believes in traditional roles (that gender is not a social construct) which can often conflict with MensRights and Feminism. I still think they share a lot in common with the MensRights, in the sense of being very pro-man.

That's just my opinion though.

  • [-]
  • flad
  • 3 Points
  • 08:34:59, 21 November

I know most of you will understand the "red pill" thing...I have no freaking idea, I have never seen that movie.

  • [-]
  • Incense_Archer
  • 1 Points
  • 16:01:32, 21 November

Is google too hard for you to figure out ?

  • [-]
  • flad
  • 0 Points
  • 16:39:10, 21 November

No one asked anyone anything! So why would I need google? I don't give fuck what the red pill is! OP is slinging the red pill around like it's real or something...it's not and not everyone knows what it even means...I thought I might try to point that out.

  • [-]
  • Incense_Archer
  • 1 Points
  • 16:49:44, 21 November

Too stupid to even so much as educate yourself. Ah it's really quite sad how hard you defend it too.

Tsk Tsk Tsk no wonder this world is going to shit. You have the greatest tool of self-teaching right in front of you, and your reaction to me asking why you can't figure out what a word means is such anger, and defensivness instead of trying to better yourself

It's sad really. Very very sad.

  • [-]
  • coherentsheaf
  • 2 Points
  • 10:43:06, 21 November

I disagree with many notions formulated there.

  • [-]
  • typhonblue
  • 2 Points
  • 16:33:19, 21 November

Men tend to be susceptible to power fantasies. It's one of the reasons why they're so easily controlled.

It sounds like the Red Pill is a power fantasy. Although I don't know for sure because I don't go there so I'm basing it on what you've said.

  • [-]
  • theozoph
  • 9 Points
  • 10:38:21, 21 November

First off, /r/TheRedPill is a subreddit which has almost nothing to do with the Red Pill meme that started in the Manosphere a few years ago, and which was a codeword for the realization that our culture is sick, and lives on lies and propaganda. /r/TheRedPill subscribers have highjacked the term to describe themselves as Neo-like rebel fighters for "truth", but like a lot of their methods, it is little more than bombastic posturing.

Apart from a common belief in the misandrist nature of feminist ideology, MRA's (well, the antifeminist ones) and "redpillers" hold little in common.

The rest of their "ideology", as far as I can tell, is a mix of traditionalist beliefs, PUA "advice" about being "dark triad" (a sociopath), and a lot of alpha posturing. They take their inspiration from other websites/blog like The Return of Kings or Heartiste. The former "5 reasons to date a girl with eating disorders" article is their greatest success at trolling the SJW crowd so far, and boy did it work! The ensuing drama has kept me entertained and popcorn-fed for days, now. Even if you don't agree with their ideology and methods, you have to admit they're entertaining.

I see them as an offshoot of the "fratire" and PUA movements, and I wish they found another name for themselves. I like the "red pill" original meaning, and now they're associating it with juvenile shock humor designed to piss off lefties. Oh, well.

Now, the question a lot of us wonder about is : are they serious? SJW's enthousiastically say yes, but since they are the ones being trolled, I'm even less inclined to believe them than usual. Like fratire, their method is a mix of bombastic over-the-top statements and behavior while slipping in a few serious comments and social critiques, so it's hard to decide whether any one statement is truly a reflection of their worldview, or if they were just trying to raise a few hairs. Another complication is that, as the quote goes :

> "Any community that gets its laughs by pretending to be idiots will eventually be flooded by actual idiots who mistakenly believe that they're in good company"

So there's probably a few morons taking this very seriously and wallowing in misogynistic rage, along the jokesters in it for the lulz.

In any case, whether any MRA appreciates their humor, agrees with them on a few points, or sees them as a bunch of misogynistic PUA wanabees (all valid points of view), I don't think we should worry overmuch about them. The MRM is centered on men's social, judicial and political issues, which transcend political divides, and it certainly doesn't kowtow to a bunch of juvenile pranksters.

What we should worry about, is that the leftist MRA's will try to use them as scarecrows to take over the movement, by exaggerating the menace they pose, as is their standard procedure, and then try to expell their political enemies by accusing them of being "fascist redpillers" or some such. It's bullshit now, and it will be bullshit then.

Peace.

  • [-]
  • chocoboat
  • 6 Points
  • 12:13:25, 21 November

Leftist here, I don't see this happening. Equal rights isn't about politics, and arguments over political topics like economic policy or foreign relations don't really come up often.

  • [-]
  • theozoph
  • -2 Points
  • 12:35:26, 21 November

> Leftist here, I don't see this happening.

Depends what you mean by that. Just as there is a legitimate Right looking out for personal, entreprenarial and economical freedoms, there's a legitimate Left looking out for worker's rights. Unfortunately, they are both an endangered breed of politics.

Most leftists nowadays are of the SJW (Social Justice Warrior) type mockingly displayed by /r/TumblrInAction, or the social Marxist type infiltrating movements to better control their narrative. I've been arguing with them for the better part of two years, now. It's not like they're absent from the MRM.

> Equal rights isn't about politics

I'd agree, but ever since feminism the personal has become the political. Feminism has been the trojan horse to governmental control over our personal lives for the benefit of the elite. There's nothing out of politics' grasp, nowadays. You can thank your feminist cohorts for that.

So, I'll keep reminding people of being very careful about what, exactly, they're being asked to take sides for and against. Most often, it's just foreplay for a sucker punch.

Peace.

  • [-]
  • Captaincastle
  • 6 Points
  • 08:30:41, 21 November

Never been there

  • [-]
  • RaxL
  • 4 Points
  • 14:04:23, 21 November

The Red Pill is just the seduction community + conservative religious philosophy.

The crazy stuff is just the conservative religious stuff they try to meld with seduction community theory.

  • [-]
  • nihilist_nancy
  • 2 Points
  • 13:08:47, 21 November

I don't care about TRP. The only people linking us are the usual suspects who more than hypocritically don't call out radfems (but why would they - they either are or secretly love radfems) who are very much a part of their movement.

And for all their "concern" for transfolks you can look to what leading lights of their movement like Steinem have to say.

TRPers aren't even MGTOWs.

  • [-]
  • scarecrow569_
  • 2 Points
  • 13:15:26, 21 November

My ideology if far closer to feminism than to the red pill. In my opinion the MRA and the red pill have the opposite core belief.

  • [-]
  • sillymod
  • 2 Points
  • 13:31:05, 21 November

People aren't uniform. Some will, some won't. I think the majority here are saying that they don't.

  • [-]
  • YetAnotherCommenter
  • 2 Points
  • 16:41:44, 21 November

>I ask this question because I feel that The Red Pill actually directly goes against EVERYTHING that Men's Rights stands for, and is an extremely damaging platform..

Your feelings are correct. Most MRA's and Men's Rights supporters reject the "Red Pill" stuff.

That whole "Red Pill" alpha/beta PUA crap is a load of lies. I mean... its like the hetero version of whatever homoerotic-skinhead-Fight-Club-where-manly-neo-nazis-wrestle-for-top goes on in Jack Donovan's mind.

  • [-]
  • yeomoany
  • 3 Points
  • 08:31:28, 21 November

Its a splinter group, but does not represent the majority.They represent some of the more radical ideas that strive for action from passive disobedience

  • [-]
  • warspite88
  • 3 Points
  • 09:36:45, 21 November

I'm still confused by this blue pill red pill thing...can we come up with a different term that is more straight forward and understandable? then we can continue the discussion.

  • [-]
  • theozoph
  • 1 Points
  • 09:45:17, 21 November

blue pill = propaganda

red pill = truth

No need to thank me, I do it for the children.

  • [-]
  • Sharpedgs
  • 3 Points
  • 12:28:37, 21 November

^ These positions are technical explanations of the concepts, and have no relation to the subreddits named after them.

Which can both be characterized as "Fuck that, I've got better things to do with my time".

  • [-]
  • theozoph
  • -1 Points
  • 12:38:27, 21 November

I'm theozoph, and I agree with this message.

  • [-]
  • bigmanbeats
  • 3 Points
  • 11:29:00, 21 November

My best understanding is there is some philosophical overlap, with some significant derivations. The largest overlap that I notice is both believe that the end effect of feminism and promotion of feminist ideology has negatively affected the male experience. MRM differs from TRP I think in that the MRM doesn't seek to re-establish some sort of idealized 1950's version of masculinity, but rather seeks to promote a broader range of male experience into our culture, rejecting notions of needing to be tough, unemotional, the breadwinner, unable to raise children, etc.

TRP uses a lot of pseudoscientific words to try and legitimize their point of view (alpha/beta, hypergamy, 'hamstering') but has very little truth rooted in actual science or fact. It's mostly just pop psychology with anecdotal evidence to try and increase the amount of sex they have.

Also, all that talk about swallowing each other's pills is kind of gay.

  • [-]
  • CertusAT
  • 3 Points
  • 10:57:29, 21 November

No. Women are humans like us. We have some different parts and our brains work slightly different but they are not "inherently" anything, just like us.

I love my gf very much and my mother is an incredible woman.

I'm an MRA because I want to work against the unfairness and imbalance in the law, not to put woman down.

TL;DR: The Red Pillers can fuck right off.

  • [-]
  • Tastysalad101
  • 3 Points
  • 11:18:57, 21 November

theredpill isn't to do with mensrights it's do with getting women and stuff.

  • [-]
  • WilliamShatnersEgo
  • 0 Points
  • 15:52:24, 21 November

> getting women and stuff.

And stuff. That's a highly detailed and insightful analysis!

  • [-]
  • IMULTRAHARDCORE
  • 2 Points
  • 11:02:13, 21 November

I tend to think of them as the angry and misguided cousins. They see the truth of the world same as us but instead of just trying to make the world a better place they are vulgar and angry and advocate mistreating others. We do not support them.

  • [-]
  • antithing
  • 1 Points
  • 08:14:39, 21 November

> I personally consider myself a humanist, and agree with feminism on some points as well.

It is interesting to see that many who are posting here agree with feminism's points and feels they should be here too. Yet, they can't have open discussions in feminist forums without getting banned.

What you have to think, is the aspects which nurtured the growth of TRP. For me it is just a realization or introspection of male psyche. Do not subscribe to their views entirely, but they gives some good hints to misandrist environment we live in and some possible ways how to tackle it.

Men, though not all, compete /adjust themselves by not budging when they are faced with competition or an adverse environment. It is in their basic nature. No one can deny alpha beta behavior of animals including humans.

So, when feminism and redfems are going against male's very own identity, they are naturally expected to fight back. If they do not, that means men are not evolving.

Neither support TRP not support chronic feminists, just prefers to view them as complex manifestations of human behavior being taken advantage of by politicians. I support human values of life and understanding. Don't want to fit in the fence and ascribe with 'ism' or 'ist' movements.

  • [-]
  • xantris
  • 2 Points
  • 11:02:24, 21 November

That particular subreddit... No.

The hypothesis though, I think that has a lot of truth in it.

  • [-]
  • HalfwySandwch
  • 2 Points
  • 13:36:21, 21 November

I don't think you are understanding what red pill is. If you look at what they mean by alpha and what they mean by beta, then decide which of those positions you prefer, the title shouldn't matter. If you are offended by being called beta in the context they use it, you may need to look at yourself to find out why you care at all what these people refer to you as.

The point of the red pill isn't to be mean, and is not homophobic, gay dude posted just yesterday about how the information in the red pill opened his eyes to how he experienced women in college. If the world is a certain way, and if you have certain goals, then you have options on how to pursue those goals. You can try to change the world to fit the ideal you strive for, while in the mean time not getting what you originally wanted, or you can try to change to fit the world and the way it is work for you. One of those options is all about your personal behavior, the other about the behavior of others. I say that both ways are legitimate, but one is more successful for the average guy.

Being emotionally vulnerable isn't necessarily bad in red pill, it is only bad if doing so creates a road block in you succeeding in your goals, and if those goals are getting laid - it does.

I look at RedPill as more of a social theory to make men successful no matter what the circumstance, while I look at MensRights as a social movement to change hearts and minds. Maybe if the MensRights movement becomes in ingrained in culture and our collective conscious I won't need to be a dick to pick up women, but until then - I'll do what works.

  • [-]
  • rightsbot
  • 1 Points
  • 07:40:16, 21 November

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

  • [-]
  • Draziil
  • 1 Points
  • 13:24:21, 21 November

No. But it doesn't even seem to matter. Because as long as TRP guys are around, that's all the feminists will ever use to attack the MRA as a whole.

  • [-]
  • Cyrakrum
  • 1 Points
  • 13:26:27, 21 November

While I could go look up what this red pill is... I'd rather have a biased opinion with some sort of clever phrasing, so could someone please explain?

  • [-]
  • josephisepic
  • 1 Points
  • 15:07:29, 21 November

there is a crossover and there are some aspects I agree with but not all of them

  • [-]
  • herewegoaga1n
  • 1 Points
  • 16:26:52, 21 November

Quite frankly, I don't care about TRP. My girlfriend showed it to me and we had a good chuckle. The point we reached was: biologically speaking, it doesn't matter how you get from point A to point B so whatever floats your boat. If you can get by on charm, wit, and good looks that's great; but I'm not going to fault others for seeking/using alternative methods.

  • [-]
  • True_Murican
  • 1 Points
  • 16:45:50, 21 November

Nope it's the schrodinger's rapist of the male sided gender discussion

  • [-]
  • sketchfest
  • 1 Points
  • 17:15:50, 21 November

fuck no

  • [-]
  • Andrew9623
  • 1 Points
  • 17:18:40, 21 November

hmm... I always found the red pill a little hard line for me. If gender issues were a scale with feminism on the left and men's rights on the right I'd be about centre-right, TheRedPill would be far right and SRS would be far left. So, I'd say that I agree with them on a few points but for the most part I steer clear of them.

TL,DR: I agree with a few points, but disagree with most

  • [-]
  • JimmyTheIntern
  • 0 Points
  • 17:32:44, 21 November

I used to consider myself an MRA but there was a sticking point that I could never quite come to terms with: Men and women are not equal, and there is no use wishing they were . The MRA community seems to clings firmly to the notion that gender equality is possible through social change. Claiming that men's rights issues will be solved just as soon as everyone treats men and women equally is the same as saying men's rights issues will never be solved.

That is where /r/TheRedPill diverges from MR. Where the common narrative here is "Men and women should be equal", TRP looks at what is rather than what "should" be: Men and women are different. Unequivocally. No amount of begging and pleading and legislative action is ever going to change that. Accepting this basic premise means accepting that society isn't going to help men and often seeks to destroy men who refuse to follow orders. As a man, you are solely responsible for your own protection from those forces that would harm you.

Those who have had their lives shattered, or have seen it happen to their friends and brothers, are often vitriolic practically to the point of rage. Thus you see a lot of callous disregard for women on TRP, but do not mistake any of it for an ideology or even well reasoned thoughts. These are feelings being expressed by hurt men in one of the only forums where such expression does not have to be defended and justified to the easily offended. Yet even on TRP, those angry few are the minority. Most men are there to learn about and discuss the differences between men and women for the purpose of having more successful relationships with women, however they define that success. The reason TRP advocates cultivating alpha traits is because women find those traits attractive. Don't want to attract women? Don't worry about it! Again, there is no ideology here, simply men discussing how to maximize their sexual/romantic efficacy.

MRA vs TRP: Politically correct idealist collectivism vs politically incorrect realist individualism. I choose TRP because improving my life is more important to me than persuading feminists to take men's rights seriously.

  • [-]
  • wrez
  • 1 Points
  • 17:45:33, 21 November

I view there being many responses to misandry in our world.

  • Men's Rights
  • PUA
  • MGTOW
  • among others

I find much to appreciate in all of above ideas and I would prefer not to be prescriptive about forcing someone to agree with me about a specific reaction. If someone wants to be a PUA, or a MGTOW, that is up to them. While I can identify with many elements of above ideas, I consider myself different from them. However, I learn from them.

MGTOWs best examine the risk that women represent to men when the women are empowered with the force of the state to compel us.

PUAs show how to apply strategy to dating and in many ways challenge us to be better men by examining ourselves critically.

MRAs are more about egalitarianism and applying that in a "just world" manner.

However, I appreciate all of our approaches.

I will not condemn men for doing that which every copy of Cosmopolitan advises women to do ~ basically manipulating men.

If a woman can do it and gain approval for it, so also should a man be able

  • [-]
  • Higev
  • 1 Points
  • 17:49:31, 21 November

MRAs really need to work more on distancing themselves from TRP or there will be the exact same problem as feminism is having where the crazies become the only ones heard and take over the movement.

  • [-]
  • humanityisavirus
  • 0 Points
  • 08:09:43, 21 November

>Suggesting that women have the brains of children

TRP is a thing of the western world.

As such their views are skewed by interaction with western women, who more or less are children.

That is to say they act and are treated like children.

The "red/blue pill" bit is a fine analogy for the transition of perception in how sexist much of society is, but these people have abused that analogy for their own agendas.

The TRP crowd however is mostly the brain dead lemmings who inhabit /r9k/ and /fit/ who blather about being "alpha".

Throw in a bit of political and social conservatism for good measure.

They're all fucking morons really.

What really blew my mind was /r/redpillwomen.

Some damaged women up in there, that or a whole lot of baby crazy, shoe phobic, shut in type women.

Edit: apparently the femicunt loving doormats of /r/mr disagree, but again lack the balls to specify what.

  • [-]
  • Pecanpig
  • 0 Points
  • 13:07:23, 21 November

I think child support is a tricky one and a lot of the time it is called for, but is abused to often for it's own good.

Meh, I find TRP to be fairly centered in reality, just kinda douchy.

  • [-]
  • WilliamShatnersEgo
  • 1 Points
  • 16:06:33, 21 November

I'm seeing a lot of misinformation and it's enlightening to see the vehemence against the red pill movement...McCarthyism at it's finest.

My take on red pill? Making men better.

  1. Stand up for yourself.

  2. Position yourself so you have the ability to make decisions regarding your own destiny, never allow yourself to be in the position where you must capitulate to another's will or agenda.

  3. Take care of your health, be fit.

  4. Expand your intellect, education and paradigms.

  5. Make sound financial decisions.

  6. Understand what motivates men and women so you can maximize your social yield and opportunities.

Doing this makes you more attractive and will being opportunities for higher quality women. Don't confuse red pill with seduction. Yes, there is a flood of seddit dipshits in red pill to justify their PUA parlor tricks. Do you judge the whole feminist movement on a few militant bull dykes? Of course not!

As for men's rights....I haven't seen any sort of sophistication regarding the end goal of the movement. MR is completely in line with traditional feminism, not this 3rd wave militant garbage. The mission statement should be "one standard for all...legally, socially, professionally." Hold everyone accountable for themselves, their actions, and decisions. Parsing it any smaller than that is useless until a standard has been implemented.

  • [-]
  • ShawnGH
  • -4 Points
  • 08:34:36, 21 November

The red pill is coming same as it is already in japan. Support is irrelevant. The cause is socioeconomic.

  • [-]
  • oneiorosgrip
  • -4 Points
  • 11:21:34, 21 November

Asking that question automatically identifies you as a troll.

  • [-]
  • PresidentBarackOsama
  • -5 Points
  • 10:21:24, 21 November

Only if it will get rid of the feminist problem.

  • [-]
  • Scar7
  • -5 Points
  • 15:25:59, 21 November

What's with all these shitty dads not wanting to pay child support? If it's your child, take responsibility and support them. Do you really not care about your children that much that you won't even pay a dime to help them grow up?

  • [-]
  • Incense_Archer
  • 1 Points
  • 16:16:57, 21 November

What's with all these shitty women wanting to have an abortion ? It's your child, take responsibility and support them. Do you really not care about your children that much that you'd just kill them instead of helping them grow up ?

  • [-]
  • Scar7
  • 2 Points
  • 16:19:05, 21 November

There's a difference between a fetus and a child growing up. Once the child is born, it's your responsibility to take care of them. Be a father and at least pay child support instead of bailing on your children

  • [-]
  • Incense_Archer
  • 2 Points
  • 16:27:54, 21 November

> There's a difference between a fetus and a child growing up

Only in the blinded eyes of the law. There is no magical change that happens between womb, and birth that somehow changes the fact that it's a growing, defenseless human being.

> Once the child is born, it's your responsibility to take care of them.

As long as abortion is legal you have not a fucking right to tell me that my gender has a god damn place to take care of a kid when a woman has full societal support to literally kill it off if it inconveniences them.

Now go, and open your god damn eyes. Look at the blood covering your hands, and the genocide happening in front of you that you're supporting. Take off the veil.

  • [-]
  • Scar7
  • 0 Points
  • 16:33:54, 21 November

edit: mixed up two different topics. my bad

  • [-]
  • Incense_Archer
  • 1 Points
  • 16:38:05, 21 November

Ahahahah look at the pathetic little fool, and his pathetic little strawmans. I've broken you so hard that you've been reduced to this haven't you ?

I will say it only once more since you're too much of a fool to be able to comprehend what I'm saying.

If you want to come to me, and tell me I should support a child then first you remove a womans ability to legally murder hers. To call it a double standard is to call the atomic bombings a slight altercation.

No random scenarios of evil "dude bros", or random exclamation makes (these show you fear me) will change any of the presented facts. You're supporting a genocide, and until you realize that I'm not wasting any more time on someone as pathetic, and foolish as you.

  • [-]
  • Scar7
  • 0 Points
  • 16:47:11, 21 November

If you're going to make the absurd claim that I "support genocide", then you support children growing up in broken homes and having a miserable life.

Oh, and screw you for spouting your delusional "YOU SUPPORT GENOCIDE" bullshit. Get your head out of your ass. Apparently your ego is so large you have to repeatedly call me a "fool" and "pathetic" to make yourself superior. Alright Mr. Righteous. You win. But wait, you're "not going to respond" to this so I'm just wasting my time. Im especially wasting my time because you're an obvious troll. Shame on me

  • [-]
  • Incense_Archer
  • 1 Points
  • 17:36:21, 21 November

> If you're going to make the absurd claim that I "support genocide",

Are you not an abortion supporter ? We can determine in one sentence whether what I say is true, or not