The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.) Thanks!
After a day spent going through hundreds of pages of violent misogyny posted in that notorious 4channer IRC chat log, I thought I’d cleanse my palate by taking another peek into Reddit’s favorite gathering hole for Red Pill Redditors. The Red Pill subreddit, after all, is all about self-improvement, and helping men navigate the sexual marketplace in “a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.”
So let’s see what sort of self-improvement tips I can find there today! Here’s one!
![sumdumguy-throwaway 6 points 17 hours ago If women didn't have vaginas, they would be hunted for sport. permalink save report give gold [–]2vengefully_yours 11 points 14 hours ago Not much of a challenge really, they are slow, relatively incompetent, weak as shit, and have nearly zero spatial ability. It would be like hunting a video game journalist.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/vaginas.png?ssl=1)
Oh, dear. We’re off to a really bad start here. I mean, some people might consider these comments to be just an eensy-weensy bit, you know, sexist.
But these are just a couple of comments. Let’s back up a moment to look at the post these comments were responding to. Here it is, a (presumably) very thoughtful treatise on the expectations men and women have going into relationships, by a fellow with the unusual name Gay Lube-Oil. (Presumably his parents, Mr. and Mrs. Lube-Oil, named him after “new journalism” legend Gay Talese.) It’s got literally hundreds of upvotes, so it must be pretty good.
So let’s take a look at the younger Mr. Lube-Oil’s thoughts on this fascinating topic.
What you’re going to find is that western and western influenced women expect a lot more from men than they’re willing to give in return. Women shouldn’t be judged for their bodies but that fat dude is a creep. I needed time to find myself but men without a good income are losers. My husband needs to be there for me, but if I sense any emotional weakness ill be gone faster than Jose Canseco during a piss test.
Huh. I see no citations for any of this, but I guess I’ll take his word for it.
Why are all women like this?
Ah, a variation on Freud’s famous question: “women — what’s their fucking problem?”
Because all her life, the only thing that was expected of her was for her to bring her vagina. It got her into parties and clubs. It got her drugs. It might have even helped her get a job that she was less qualified for. The corporate media taught her that as a vagina operator, men owed her tons of free shit. The movies and shows that she defines herself by depict women as passive objects to be showered in male affection. Diamonds are a girls best friend (because women are incapable of real friendship).
Huh. I thought maybe I’d ask my best friend about this, but as it turns out she’s a woman, and therefore not my best friend at all.
Its foolish to expect any equality in a relationship because society conditions women to be selfish assholes. When a women says that she will be there for her boyfriend. She means in the literal physical sense. Depressed men are unattractive and women have no interest being anywhere near them. Ultimately, most women only bring to relationships what they bring to the club: vagina.
This is kind of a double whammy because, as we’ve been told again and again from the fellows I write about on this blog, vaginas are dirty and slimy and smell very, very bad.
There are two ways to respond to this Red Pill truth. You can use women for their vaginas and nothing else. Or you can teach her to cook, workout and whatever else you expect out of a LTR. In the end all you get by default is vagina, unless she stops being attracted to you. If that’s the case she has a headache.
It’s like that old joke: “Boy, the vaginas at this place are really stinky. And such small portions!”
(Thanks, Blue Pill Subreddit, for pointing me to these wondrous bits of Red Pill Wisdom.)
@Flying Mouse – leaning more to diabolical than ingenious…
Definitely true on one level, though; i would argue that all that sugar and chemical stew junk isn’t real food, and since there was no way I was going to buy it, well, it might as well have been just for display. At least, that’s what I tell myself…
I hated the gullible stage, when I was in it. I was convinced for the longest time that if you unscrewed my belly-button, my butt would fall off.
Finding out that was nothing but a dirty lie was terrible.
Then again, I got a penny out of it!
(Dad’s deal: if we caught him lying, he owed us a penny. It sounded like a great deal when you were a little tyke, but seemed progressively less worth it as you got old enough to realize not all coins were created equal,)
My mom used to sneak handfuls of M&Ms and when I asked what she was eating, she would tell me it was broccoli because I hate broccoli. I could smell the chocolate so I knew she was lying but it was a good try.
I can’t see any practical purpose to telling a child that their belly button could unscrew their butt. At least I was lying to my children to protect them from the pain of being denied junk food that is bad for them and makes them act like supersonic little jerks. See? I only use my powers for good!
A penny for every paternal lie actually sounds kind of sweet, though. Do you get to collect interest?
@WWTH – wouldn’t work for me, alas. The little grumps like broccoli, and then I’d have to wash them some broccoli and get them some ranch dip to go with the M&M’s.
Does being delivered via c-section absolve us of some of our mothers’ Original Stink?
seraph4377
“@fruitloopsie – ah, but men rise above their humble origin by virtue of being men. Not only do men do things while women get everything handed to them because vagina, all men today are owed all the credit for every good thing any man did ever (thus “we hunted the mammoth to feed you”) – though of course, any blame or even discussion of bad things those past men did is misandry.”
http://youtu.be/X8u7px_GzWQ
@ej
It’s pretty clear that they think that women only refuse sex to be mean and that they care nothing for how their partner feels. That’s why the idea of enthusiastic consent upsets them so much. It means that they have to care about that.
Wait wait wait hold on a minute.
If women are incapable of friendship, then that means… oh my God!
THE FRIENDZONE IS FAKE!
@ Cavoyo women can do friendship just fine, mostly. It’s guys with these fucked up concepts that can’t. Women are objects, men are competition to one-up, but not to get close to as friends. If you get too close to guys like this, you hear the sucking sound of the vacuum where their soul is supposed to be.
GrumpyOldNurse, did you have an answer on hand if the smalls saw any other kids getting sweets at the checkout?
I’m just thinking of saying something like “Every one of those you eat means you’re closer to another visit to the dentist. With fillings.” Never had kids but it probably would have worked on me if I’d been a checkout whiner (actually I’m not sure lollies at the checkout were a thing when I was that young).
D’you think, if you made them stand on their heads with their mouths open, they’d make halfway decent vacuum cleaners?
Nah, they’d figure out a way to turn it off just to spite you.
Ah, but if that meant they’d shut up, it’d still be a win.
@Alais
I think you hit the nail on the head with that one. These guys don’t care about their partner’s feelings so they assume that their partner doesn’t care about them either. It’s a way of comforting themselves when they don’t get what they want, when they want it.
Empathy…These guys no haz it.
http://memegenerator.net/instance/33001608
Sorry. The link there is Grumpy Cat with a statement about empathy.
The other day my littles wanted ice cream sandwiches before dinner. I got the box out of the freezer, then assumed a woeful expression and told them the batteries had run out.
Amazingly, they bought it.
I wish kitties could be fooled that easily. But they’re such fibbers they’re always ahead in that game.
If people didn’t have vaginas, no one would manage to be born.
I hit the parental jackpot with my daughter: she’s naturally neat and doesn’t care much for sweets. She’ll tear up a vanilla ice cream cone and would eat whipped cream by the gallon, but that’s about it.
My son, OTOH, loooooves anything with sugar in it, be that sugar natural or refined. He and I spend a fair amount of time discussing the candy at the grocery store. My line is that it’s not good for us, and should be for really special occasions: holidays, birthdays, vacations. His assertion is that it’s blue and he wants it.
Having been a kid once myself, I see the logic in his argument. But I’m still not buying him a bright yellow syringe of Technicolor corn syrup goo (I grudgingly salute the evil geniuses in the market research and the innovation departments of these candy companies; who would come up with that, and who would also know that it speaks to something deep and elemental in the soul of an almost-four-year-old?).
They forget that not all parents give in to the kid.
I had to take all my wee ones to the dentist with me last week. They were angelic. They drew or read or played with the little toys they brought while we waited and my littlest quietly watched me get my check up. The dental tech stepped just outside of the room at one point and my baby girl asked sweetly, “Since we’ve been so good, do we get something special when we leave?” I told her that she had my respect and affection and those are pretty special. From outside the door, I heard the tech bust out laughing. I guess it’s funny, but I meant it. Paying kids not to terrorize you is like paying the mafia “protection” money.
Oops, forgot to blockquote.
I’m seeing your little girl dressed like a movie Mafia don while she asks that, Lea. 😀
I kind of think a lot of them say stuff like that in hopes of moving the overton window. If you can get enough people to read your obviously-horrible ideas, then slightly-less-horrible ideas start to look better, or at least more reasonable, by comparison. Shrug.
I’ve seen red-pillers and other reactionaries say this explicitly on some of their more backwater blogs. Some of these guys are probably sincere but others say ridiculous things in an a naked effort to manipulate/influence other people.
Personally, I don’t think it will ever work outside the echo chamber that is internet reactionary circles (it’s so weird how they all link together, despite their ostensibly separate interests: what do “orthodox” Catholics have to do with Steve Sailer’s brand of racial politics? Why would Sunshine Mary, who is Protestant, link to people who think Protestantism is heresy? Racists, on the other hand, seem less likely to link back to either the various stripes of fundies or to the red-pillers. I really think it’s racial anxiety, explicit or otherwise, that drives the train on a lot of this. I was reading one of the more reasonable voices that hangs around there and she was talking about how it’s better in terms of long-term population growth for there to be a cultural norm of families having 3-5 kids, since couples having 10-12 kids can really just lead a lot of their kids to decide they’ve no interest in family life, so the whole “reproduce like rabbits and take over the world” thing is not a very realistic strategy for achieving long-term population growth in a world where some degree of fertility control is a real thing.
OK, I can see that… BUT WHY EXACTLY DO “WE” NEED LONG TERM POPULATION GROWTH?! aaaahhhhhh