Does the red pill guy get the girl? Feminist Advice Friday
A male reader wonders about the ultimate payoff of red pill ideology
This question came in on a recent AMA, from a new male reader. Based upon his follow-up comments, I believe that he is sincere and interested in learning, if horribly naive and partially swept up in misogynist ideology.
A reader asks…
I have just a sincere question. Despite the dialect (if i speak far right wing you would hate me too), what you say makes lots of sense to me. So I have a question please. Does the red pill guy end up getting the girl? Does self delusional confidence and the torturous experience of approaching like 1000 women beat self improvement work on everything else?
My answer
I want to begin by rephrasing your question, so that you understand why you might get a negative reaction from other readers.
Essentially, what you’re asking is this:
I know misogyny is wrong and violent. But does behaving in a violent and abusive manner toward women actually work? Will it get me sex?
To even consider whether red pill ideology is “worth it” in this regard, you have to be willing to dehumanize women. What you’re proposing is to damage the very women you want to sleep with. That choice always has consequences, even if they’re not immediately apparent.
But I want to address your question as asked, because I understand that being lonely sucks, and that many men turn to red pill ideology as an act of desperation (this, incidentally, is why feminism needs to offer something more appealing). Rejection sucks, and most men do not want to be alone.
You might get the girl if you do what red pillers tell you to do. But whether the girl you get is a good match for you, whether you keep her, and whether you’ll be happy with her or yourself…these are entirely different matters.
The women who are drawn in by misogynist techniques are the women least likely to remain happy with these techniques. A woman with low self-esteem, who is content with a misogynist man who doesn’t care about her sexual pleasure, will quickly lose interest over time.
She will be extremely unhappy with you if you stay together. Even if you don’t care about her unhappiness, that unhappiness will spill out onto you. No one can spend their entire life serving a man and expecting only moderate financial support in return. She will resent you. She will lose sexual interest. Eventually, she’ll hate you. She’ll leave you if she can, and if she can’t, she’ll withdraw as much as possible. You will both be profoundly lonely.
I’ve talked a lot about the benefits of a feminist marriage for women—and how anything less than a fully liberatory feminist marriage just isn’t worth it at all.
Feminist marriages are better for men, too. I often look at the life my husband has compared to men in less equitable marriages, and I can see how on every measure of well-being, his life is better.
For one thing, I don’t hate or resent him, which means I’m nicer to him. There’s no nagging or complaining, no chronic low-level unhappiness. There’s more, and better, sex. I want him to like me and stay attracted to me, so I am constantly trying, and experimenting with ways to make his life better. Our family time is peaceful and fun, and each of us has a clear understanding of our roles and duties. We both get plenty of alone time and hobby time, but we mostly want to spend as much time together as possible.
One recent study found that feminist men have more sex. My own research confirms this.
These things are all great, but here’s the thing that I think matters most: My husband is leading a life of purpose and dignity. On his death bed, he will not have regrets. When he’s dead and gone, we will mourn rather than rejoice. He has not destroyed the psyches of his children or wife. His legacy will be a lasting one of building purpose and meaning—not a fleeting, meaningless legacy of destruction and hatred.
He has—we have—a better life than just about anyone else we know, and it’s a direct result of building real and lasting partnership. A feminist marriage built on mutual respect is the only way to build lasting partnership.
So does the red pill guy get the girl? He can get some girls, but only temporarily. Self-improvement is hard, but it’s also the only way to attain a life of real meaning.
I appreciate the reframing so it is clear that the question presupposes that it would be ok to treat women like garbage if it mean the man got sex. We need to be calling out the hidden presuppositions everywhere.
Here are some I've started to do:
"You have to accept the help your husband is willing to give."
-->"What you're saying is that I'm the responsible one and he is an optional helper, and I should be grateful for anything he decides to contribute. What I'm saying is that we are both equally responsible and I reject the idea of holding all the responsibility while he gets far more freedom at my expense AND gets praised for any contributions at all. My time is just as valuable as his and he is just as capable of doing chores adequately and unprompted as I am."
"Men just don't care about that stuff."
--> "What you're saying is that men not wanting to bother with essential chores and caregiving tasks means that they should not have to do them. Given that they are essential, meaning they have to get done, you must be pretty confident that someone else will do them, and we both know that's a woman. You're also suggesting women make up silly fussy ways of doing things for funsies. What does that suggest about women, if they're just inventing work for themselves and then complaining? Isn't it more likely their spouse is lazy?"
"Women have gotten so demanding."
-->"You're suggesting that men were doing enough at some point and women are now escalating their demands arbitrarily. Given the domestic inequity that is uncovered every time the topic is studied, isn't it more likely that men are making too many demands of their overworked partners?"
Zawn, I love your deconstruction of this question. One line that did stick out to me was "I understand that being lonely sucks, and that many men turn to red pill ideology as an act of desperation (this, incidentally, is why feminism needs to offer something more appealing)." Can you say more? I'm so curious what you mean by "why feminism needs to offer something more appealing." I can't recall seeing a column on that topic, but perhaps you are planning to address it in the future. Thank you!