bad science hetsplaining homophobia lesbians don't real red pill

Reddit Red Pillers ask the important question: Are lesbians real?

Red Pillers see themselves as serious, scientific students of the human condition, helping one another make sense of the sometimes hard truths of human nature. In the Ask The Red Pill subreddit, they deal forthrightly with important questions about life and how to live it. Like: What do I do if my girlfriend insists on walking in front of me? Is playing piano a beta cuck activity? And perhaps the most perplexing question of all: Are lesbians real?

I am happy to announce that Red Pill scientists have reached a consensus on this critical issue: No, lesbians do not exist, outside of a tiny handful of really screwed-up ladies. And also, they’re ugly.

Let’s look at the scientific evidence. According to one Red Pill commenter called Joey_Lopez,

Most of the lesbians I’ve known are not really lesbians. They play lesbian because they think it’ll make them hotter. Without that gimmick more of them would just be below average.

The real lesbians are a product of toxic feminism. They been trained to see men with such disdain that to them the only logical thing to do is get with a female.

Zxcvb7809 is equally blunt:

Every woman I know who claims she is a lesbian sleeps with or has slept with men. They are closer to the socially inept side of the scale I will add which might explain why they would just go for women as opposed to men. I kind of see it as a cop out.

-saltymangos- offers this explanation: 

They aren’t real.

In their minds, unattainable/taken men are more attractive. They want what they can’t have. So, they apply this to their own lives and try to become “unattainable” in hopes of being more attractive in the man’s eye. This is only true for women, not men. Men don’t see you as more attractive if you’re taken, but some women cannot think/see past that and get with another woman in hopes of becoming “unattainable” and therefore more attractive.

Very wise, Mr. Mangos, very wise.

TheTrenTr*nnyTrain has a simpler explanation:

There are no lesbians, only ugly women who can’t attract men.

Now, there are a few dissenters. According to BoundaryChimps,

Homosexual behavior can be seen sometimes in non-human animals, so it can’t possibly be only an artifact of girls trying to play games or even of general human psychology.

The only thing left is that it’s real, and that it exists at a level below whatever makes us humans special. Maybe it’s wires accidentally getting crossed before birth or whatever (I mean, it’s not like they contribute to the gene pool), but whatever the cause it is most definitely a thing.

There’s even one dissenter who claims that there are not only lesbians but that some of them are actually pretty.

“It’s not just ugly chicks.,”_Anarchon_ claims,

There are some good looking chicks with deep-seated issues that causes it…typically borderline personality disorder type stuff (abandonment, early abuse, etc). It’s basically incels and femcels that go gay.

I’m not sure I can accept that. The contributions of -saltymangos- and his esteemed colleagues are quite compelling.

And now onto other important questions: Are women mammals? Can they stand upright on their hind legs? Are they capable of tool use?

Follow me on Twitter.

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

117 replies on “Reddit Red Pillers ask the important question: Are lesbians real?”

@ Hysterectomy conversation

In my personal opinion, anyone who is considering getting a hysterectomy is welcome to it. I know I would not be able to get one and would face the old “You might want children!” even though I thoroughly do not.

However! You should be aware that there is more than one kind of hysterectomy, one that takes the whole stem of the cervix and one that doesn’t. Unless you need it for medial reasons, you should not get the one that takes the cervix, it impedes sexual pleasure afterwards. Find out from your surgeon which one you are going to get and why, and if it isn’t “because you have cervical cancer” or “your endometrium totally took it over” or something similar, run away and find a different one. It is my personal conspiracy theory, with no proof but entirely plausible to me, that the cervix-removal procedure is used with unnecessary frequency to punish those women who have the temerity to remove their baby-making bits.

@Big Titty Demon
Is it possible that the idea of punishment is also the reason for so many older women being subjected to medically unnecessary hysterectomies? It appears that a lot of women over 50 are being given hysterectomies when it would not be necessary or could be treated through less invasive methods. Is it that society is trying to sexually punish older women that are no longer seen as useful because their childbearing years are over?

For example, my grandmother was given a full hysterectomy in the 1990s when she was in her 50s because of fibroids that most likely could have been treated without removing the uterus. She now has osteoporosis that is possibly linked to it.

@big titty demon,

To find out, you could try asking a variety of people who’ve had one. My hysterectomy took my entire cervix. My orgasms became DIFFERENT after the surgery, but I wouldn’t say they were any less pleasurable for it and definitely couldn’t ascribe any differences to the lack of a cervix (in some ways orgasms became better. The endometriosis actually gave me abdominal pain, sometimes, after an orgasm), and it didn’t change my level of desire at all. Orgasms did change again when I started HRT, but again they’re just different, and not actually worse or better.

Admittedly, my one case is only my one case, not the whole, but I think great deal can vary based on who your doctor was, what method they used to remove everything, where they made those cuts and what else they did in there, etc.


Would not be surprised at all of that figures in! But again I have zero proof and freely admit it is my own personal hypothesis.

@Seth S.

My opinion is based on a number of women who have had hysterectomies, that’s the only reason I know about the difference in the first place. I don’t specifically ask about people’s orgasms generally but have had the information volunteered to me, whence the formation of my opinion. It’s the procedure used that seems to matter, not the cause behind (endometriosis, cancer, and voluntary removal being the most common causes). In all cases of cervix-removal it ranged from “meh-ok” to “actively painful”. (Only one person, fortunately, is in the “actively painful” category).

I am happy that your experience was different from the data I have, though.

It’s a separate issue, but I’ve often thought that forced sterilization of trans* people could be important to some people as a sort of “punishment” or something you just have to go through if you really want to prove your gender identity (à la “what do you *want* a uterus for if you’re a man?”). Because getting to define your own identity and retaining your bodily autonomy is apparently having your cake and eating it too.

It’s sad that sterilization is such an important and horribly irreversible procedure that an adult can’t decide to get one, but when you’re trans* it’s suddenly no big deal and you shouldn’t complain.

It’s sad that sterilization is such an important and horribly irreversible procedure that an adult can’t decide to get one, but when you’re trans* it’s suddenly no big deal and you shouldn’t complain.

There’s plenty of research into reversible but otherwise permanent sterility procedures for men, but sadly no funding to actually produce it.

… sterilization is such an important and horribly irreversible procedure …

For women, yes, but for men’s sterilisation our kids number 4 and 6 would disagree, seeing as they were conceived after I’d had a vasectomy. Those things are hardly irreversible.

(Yes, the obvious answer had occurred to me – they’re definitely mine. Missus insisted on a paternity check for 4 so I’d not be going around thinking that, then 6 came along before I’d got around to arranging a new snip. Just one of those things as happens.

Number 5 is adopted, so the presence or absence of my vasectomy wouldn’t have much of an effect on her. 😛 )

Holy shit, Timothy McVeigh was an incel!

McVeigh’s unhappy or distorted relations with women helped fuel his rage. His mother took the active role in breaking up his parents’ marriage and left her son behind with her husband. McVeigh apparently developed a wider resentment. According to Michel and Herbeck, in interviews McVeigh “would also lash out—repeatedly and emotionally—at the concept of working mothers and two-income families, which he considered a major cause of problems in American society. ‘In the past thirty years, because of the women’s movement, they’ve taken an influence out of the household,’” he told the reporters.

Or at least some sort of a proto-MGTOW-incel-MRA, before those crystallized into quasi-distinct movements.

This alone probably doubles the incel body count in terrorist acts. And still the threat isn’t taken especially seriously by the wider society …

Something’s gone wrong. I’m not seeing any new comments or anything for well over 12 hours now. I suspect I’m getting stale cached copies of, at the very least, this page and the following article’s.

Of course, if this is affecting everybody, no-one will see this, so it is my hope that not everyone is affected and someone can either fix this or suggest a workaround.

@Surplus: At least in this thread there were no new comments since your comment about Timothy McVeigh, as far as I can tell.

The site seems to be working fine and I can see your more recent comments, I think there just isn’t anyone commenting because David is on hiatus for the time being since his mother died.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.