Christ-Pill adherents cannot imagine an analysis that does not occur for the purposes of judgment, much less one that doesn’t include any idea about what people “should” do. This is also why the Red Pill insists that moralists are willfully ignorant. Because to them, anyone who doesn’t acknowledge factual truth must be unable or unwilling to perceive it. They cannot imagine anyone not caring what the truth is.
The Christ-Pill think that Red Pill empiricists are trying to restore the Dark Ages. Any argument excluding a moral imperative seems like an endorsement of returning to a state of barbarism. This is why many Red Pill theories are dismissed as biological determinism by believers, even though Red Pill theory almost always accounts for the human element of free will. They cannot imagine any group with shared views not having one moral agenda they wish everyone to abide by.
This also grates on the ideological principle of personal responsibility, which requires free will to be set above biological determinism. To the moral absolutist, the sheer objectivity of the Red Pill implies that biology and evolution remove humans’ capacity for choice and, by extension, a soul. We become automatons, but instead of the devil making me do it, it’s my selfish genes that made me do it
Because, like all women, you don’t understand that happiness is a proximate outcome, not an ultimate outcome. You’ve been sold the lie that contentment should be a maintainable goal-state. It’s why women gulp down SSRIs like M&Ms.
The human condition is defined by discontent. This is a feature, not a bug. Women are easily sold on the fantasy of happiness and contentment as a state of being. They believe they’re entitled to “having theirs needs met” and deserve to “be” happy.
But happiness is in the doing. You cannot ‘be’ happy.
Evolutionarily, women are the vulnerable sex. As such, the fantasy of a sustainable, long-term security, contentment and happiness is so believable it becomes something ALL women should be entitled to.
A lot of ignorant critics think my infamous SMV graph has no basis in “science.” Of course, none of them have the intellectual capacity to actually read the essay this graph came from. So, well start here:
I published this in 2012. Most of the current critics were busy watching Jimmy Neutron and Fairly Odd Parents when I wrote this so I can forgive their ignorance to a point.
As you might expect, I’ve dealt with virtually every lazy point of contention over my graph for 12 years.
"It’s my opinion that red pill awareness needs to remain fundamentally apolitical, non-racial, and non-religious. The moment the Red Pill is associated with any social or religious movement, you co-brand it with an ideology, and the validity of it will be written off along with any preconceptions related to that specific ideology."
– The Rational Male, The Political is Personal, 2015
"Furthermore, any co-branding will be violently disowned by whatever ideology it’s paired with. Gynocentrism has co-opted and trumps the fundamentals of that ideology. The truth is the manosphere, pro-masculine thought, Red Pill awareness, are an entity of its own."
"This is what scares the shit out of critics attempting to define, contain and compartmentalize the Red Pill – conceptually, it’s bigger than social, racial, political, and religious strictures can contain. It crosses all of those constructs just as Gynocentrism has co-opted all of those cultural constructs. The feminized infrastructure of the mainstream is just beginning to take the manosphere seriously enough to be critical of it. It's discovering the scope of it and trying to put the genie back into a bottle defined by Gynocentrism."