The “Red Pill” movement is a loosely organised online community that emerged primarily on internet forums and social media platforms. It originated from the concept depicted in the 1999 movie “The Matrix,” where taking the red pill symbolises waking up to the truth, even if it is uncomfortable or unpleasant.
Comparatively the blue pill denotes a state of wilful ignorance forsake of comfort. It is critical we start off with a reminder of the inception of the red pill because I think the general consensus around this idea is a good one. Red pill = harsh truths. Blue pill = comforting lies. That is a sentiment any conscientious man and women can get behind. However in more recent times the definition has become muddied and diluted.
In the context of the movement, taking the red pill signifies rejecting mainstream narratives, especially those related to gender dynamics, feminism, political correctness, and social justice issues.
Disciples of the Red Pill movement often advocate for traditional systems and challenge what they perceive as feminist and politically correct ideologies. Again, there exists value behind these perspectives such as the natural or biological proclivities between sexes. However, when it becomes a religion to follow, is the moment we regress as men.
One of my personal gripes with the modern red pill is it’s over-zealous perspectives on the modern dating market and relationships.
The red pill would have you believe that the only relationship dynamic to pursue that is commensurate with success is to revert back to traditional gender roles.
Now let me share that this is not without sound reasoning. This plays into the scientific truth that there are fundamental differences between the sexes. This you know. Therefore if there are fundamental differences in the sexes, this means that there are fundamentally different roles within the relationship.
This plays into an idea that sexes have different strengths and weakness. For example. Men typically have more testosterone than women. Testosterone makes you more assertive and temperamentally makes you pursue challenge. You can make a very compelling argument that higher rates of testosterones equals more occupational success and higher salary.
There are also compelling scientific literature to denote this:
1. Mazur, A., & Booth, A. (1998). Testosterone and dominance in men.
2. Apicella, C. L., Carré, J. M., Dreber, A., & Campbell, B. (2015).
Testosterone and economic risk taking: A review. Based on the above you can make the argument that a man should always be the financial provider, and therefore a woman should take a more domestic role.
Now, here’s where the problems happen. Whilst the above is true. It is not always true.
Yes, men by in large have higher testosterone than women. But not all men, and not all men earn more than women. It seems to me in this present time that neither a traditional or egalitarian relationship are correct.
The answer is: it’s a choice. One that a man and woman should be clear on before pursing a relationship.
Do you want to pursue a relationship predicated on traditional values?
Or a relationship predicated on egalitarian principles?
Failure to acknowledge these two very different relationship dynamics is a failure to understand the very rules you both agree upon in your relationship.
Additionally, failure to understand the validity of the other relationship dynamic is naive and reminiscent of the blue pill.
For example. You can pursue an egalitarian relationship and live happily. However, if you don’t believe that masculine and feminine energies influence your day-to-day, you might as well go and bury your head in the sand.
One disturbing aspect of the red pill ideology revolves around male and female sexual behaviour.
According to this narrative, women with a low number of sexual partners are highly desired because it supposedly indicates future success in relationships and monogamy. There are studies suggesting a correlation between increased sexual partners and higher divorce rates, supporting this idea.
Interestingly, there’s a corresponding narrative regarding men: the number of sexual partners they’ve had doesn’t matter at all. This belief is propagated by so called “self-improvement” YouTubers like Fresh and Fit, who argue that men who have multiple sexual partners are seen as competent, and women are inherently attracted to men with such experience.
However, the hypocrisy lies in the fact that men subscribing to this ideology often engage in casual relationships, hurting women emotionally and creating the very type of women they despise.
They preach about the importance of having as many sexual partners as possible but also insist on marrying a virgin, a completely contradictory stance.
My argument against this is that sexual competence isn’t determined by the number of partners one has had. One can be sexually competent by having a fulfilling monogamous relationship with just one person.
Sexual competency is not exclusive to individuals with a high number of partners. In a monogamous relationship, the frequency of sexual activity can be tailored to the desires and needs of both partners, significantly enhancing one’s sexual competency.
It is poisonous rhetoric like this that creates entitled, delusional and the emotionally broken women skew the dating market.
The modern red pill would have you believe that you should be disciplined with your money, fitness, time, energy but not women.
The real uncomfortable truth is the most powerful men are disciplined in all areas of lives especially sexually.