Thread: MGTOW v Red Pill

Looking into the red pill sphere recently, I have the feeling that MGTOW and Red Pill should make a point to distinguish themselves from each other.

Both ideas are different in their essential exercises, for one thing. The Red Pill feels like a marketing gimmick, promising to teach 'game' and the tips and tricks for playing the dating market in a manner that is predatory on Men. MGTOW is a free gift of the knowledge that Men don't have to play the game to be happy.

Besides, Red Pill hates MGTOW. If no one wants to play the game, Red Pillers can't make money. Now, while no Man should take the bread off another Man's table, no Man should make their bread at the expense of another, so I don't feel any guilt for Red Pill influencers losing another soul to feed their machine.

Perhaps, in the year 2023, MGTOW should demarcate the lines and warn each other to steer clear of Red Pill.

Depends on your definition of Red Pill. I looked in the dictionary on this site and didn't find it.

I did find this:

red pill Meaning & Origin | Slang by Dictionary.com

IMO, Red Pill = knowledge of human nature or female nature. The study of Human Behavioral Biology.

The way I see it, first identify and learn about human nature (become Red Pill aware) then decide to go MGTOW or walk away from relationships.

Can a man be BP'ed and be MGTOW? I think not, RP knowledge is part of MGTOW.

The group you call Red Pill (PUA) also uses the same knowledge about female nature but for different means.

The hate from the PUA crowd is minor to the hate that we will see from the feminists.... They don't like to see an empty plantation. "Where did all the good men go?"....

Red pill is about money.

MGTOW is about you keeping your money.

RP will always hate MGTOW just like Andrew Taint, because you can't easily monetize MGTOW.

Unless you're a manipulatable trad cuck and you're only MGTOW to push politics, which a great many are. Then you're monetized.

Go back to the origin.

The red pill, stemming from the movie The Matrix, is about seeing the world for what it is and brushing aside the cobwebs of lies and deceit that are cast over us.

Many in the so-called red pill communities see this as a means to further manipulate others because that is their goal in life. Even with their extended knowledge they are still blue pill at heart, playing the blue piller’s game whilst claiming that they are somehow something else. They are the equivilent of agents - better, stronger blue pillers.

Just because they are claiming a false mantle does not in any way diminish the truth, that the blue pill world is one of lies designed to manipulate us into being willing slaves.

Any attempt to use red pill knowledge to play a better game is still playing the game, the blue pill game, a game that is rigged so that no-one wins.

The only way to win is not to play their game.

Enter MGTOW.

Blue pill is about women validation. Red pill is about status or society's validation. MGTOW is when you don't need validation.

Red pillers are slaves to what is cool or gets the most attention. They like attention, whether from men or women it doesn't matter. Red pillers are slaves to the current most popular trends (getting rich, fast cars, big muscles, tattoos, expensive clothes, luxury life, etc). All they want is to be important, hence the term "high value man" being thrown so often in their conversations. It is hedonism marketed as self improvement.

The reason they hate us is either they are jellaous that we have the peace of mind they couldn't achieve even with all the validation they have gotten or they think we are a threat to their lifestyle.
Maybe they just act like they hate us in hopes of selling something.

Originally Posted by chbedok

Looking into the red pill sphere recently, I have the feeling that MGTOW and Red Pill should make a point to distinguish themselves from each other.

Both ideas are different in their essential exercises, for one thing. The Red Pill feels like a marketing gimmick, promising to teach 'game' and the tips and tricks for playing the dating market in a manner that is predatory on Men. MGTOW is a free gift of the knowledge that Men don't have to play the game to be happy.

Besides, Red Pill hates MGTOW. If no one wants to play the game, Red Pillers can't make money. Now, while no Man should take the bread off another Man's table, no Man should make their bread at the expense of another, so I don't feel any guilt for Red Pill influencers losing another soul to feed their machine.

Perhaps, in the year 2023, MGTOW should demarcate the lines and warn each other to steer clear of Red Pill.

This is why I always laugh when people say "Oh MGTOW(Or red pill, mansphere, whatever) will be a strong political platform!!!". How can that be when there is so much fighting amongst men? It's an internet ideology for the most part kinda like No Nut November. Let's face it. In the real world another man will kill you for a stale whiff if you even disagree with a woman. I keep my beliefs to myself in real life but will speak up if I see injustice.

F*ck all these categories. Live your life how you want and see fit. Don't listen to others views cause when shit goes down then they will leave you holding the bag and you will only have yourself to rely on.

Originally Posted by MGTOWFOREVER

F*ck all these categories.

Yeah....they're all just made up Internet terms.

So the two have big intersections in the venn diagram.
The Red Pill equivalent to MGOW are the 'bachelor' category. People that are trying to decipher the truth and approach women from the most cautious perspective, and are still optimistic about finding some type of peace.

Originally Posted by MGTOWFOREVER

In the real world another man will kill you for a stale whiff if you even disagree with a woman. I keep my beliefs to myself in real life but will speak up if I see injustice.

There is a level when Pathetic simping reaches the point of diminishing returns. You dont 'defend' women from other men when there is absolutely nothing to be gained whatsoever.
Also men wont bother defending ugly femminists because they arent even considered woman.

Originally Posted by FrozenBlade

So the two have big intersections in the venn diagram.
The Red Pill equivalent to MGOW are the 'bachelor' category. People that are trying to decipher the truth and approach women from the most cautious perspective, and are still optimistic about finding some type of peace.


There is a level when Pathetic simping reaches the point of diminishing returns. You dont 'defend' women from other men when there is absolutely nothing to be gained whatsoever.
Also men wont bother defending ugly femminists because they arent even considered woman.

So the two have big intersections in the venn diagram.
The Red Pill equivalent to MGOW are the 'bachelor' category. People that are trying to decipher the truth and approach women from the most cautious perspective, and are still optimistic about finding some type of peace.

This is where I get confused. I thought you are MGTOW once you take "the red pill" cause you see "the blue pill" is nothing but a reality of lies and bullshit.

I always say on here to live your life as you see fit.

There is a level when Pathetic simping reaches the point of diminishing returns. You dont 'defend' women from other men when there is absolutely nothing to be gained whatsoever.
Also men wont bother defending ugly femminists because they arent even considered woman.

You are wrong on so many levels. Most men will simp for ANY women. They always think they are going to play white knight for the supposed "damsel in distress" and she will give up her swamp. It never works but simps don't care. They will continue to do it even if it means murder. I was stunned and appalled by the song "wait in the truck" that was posted in the song thread. A guy murders his girlfriend's ex in cold blood all because of bullshit she claimed happened and simp wasn't even around at the time. He ends up in prison but thinks he did the right thing. Yeah. Okay. You killed another man based just on her word, she is out free to ride the cock carousel, and you are in prison getting ass pumped in the showers. Happy ending, huh? That song happens more often than you think!

Originally Posted by Witch Doctor

Blue pill is about women validation. Red pill is about status or society's validation. MGTOW is when you don't need validation.

Yes and no.

The red pill needs no validation from anyone. There are those however that claim to be red pill that do, as you say, seek validation from others.

They are pretenders that claim the mantle but are really blue pillers in disguise.

Originally Posted by FrozenBlade

So the two have big intersections in the venn diagram.

Here's my Venn diagram showing the minimal intersections:

Originally Posted by Jackoff

Yes and no.

The red pill needs no validation from anyone. There are those however that claim to be red pill that do, as you say, seek validation from others.

They are pretenders that claim the mantle but are really blue pillers in disguise.

If you look at each of the subgroups that preach red pill knowledge you will find it to be true.

Classic red pillers want the validation of other men to see them as alpha. This is why everyone fallowing these people wanted to be like Andrew Tate, the perfect showcase of what high social status.

MRA want to change the laws and fight for mens rights. They want society to validate mens strougles and unfairness.

PUAs want to become good with women. Red pilled PUAs don't do it to find "the one" because they know that she doesn't exist. Rather they want to be seen as a high status man by other guys attending their seminars.

Only MGTOW doesn't seek for validation from anyone.

I don't think they are pretenders, but they switched from seeking womans validation to seeking status/societal validation and in the process got red pilled. I have yet to see a red piller who doesn't fit this description.

Originally Posted by Witch Doctor

If you look at each of the subgroups that preach red pill knowledge you will find it to be true.

Classic red pillers want the validation of other men to see them as alpha. This is why everyone fallowing these people wanted to be like Andrew Tate, the perfect showcase of what high social status.

MRA want to change the laws and fight for mens rights. They want society to validate mens strougles and unfairness.

PUAs want to become good with women. Red pilled PUAs don't do it to find "the one" because they know that she doesn't exist. Rather they want to be seen as a high status man by other guys attending their seminars.

Only MGTOW doesn't seek for validation from anyone.

I don't think they are pretenders, but they switched from seeking womans validation to seeking status/societal validation and in the process got red pilled. I have yet to see a red piller who doesn't fit this description.

“I have yet to see a red piller who doesn't fit this description.”

Very nice to meet you, too!

Originally Posted by Witch Doctor

If you look at each of the subgroups that preach red pill knowledge you will find it to be true.

Classic red pillers want the validation of other men to see them as alpha. This is why everyone fallowing these people wanted to be like Andrew Tate, the perfect showcase of what high social status.

MRA want to change the laws and fight for mens rights. They want society to validate mens strougles and unfairness.

PUAs want to become good with women. Red pilled PUAs don't do it to find "the one" because they know that she doesn't exist. Rather they want to be seen as a high status man by other guys attending their seminars.

Only MGTOW doesn't seek for validation from anyone.

I don't think they are pretenders, but they switched from seeking womans validation to seeking status/societal validation and in the process got red pilled. I have yet to see a red piller who doesn't fit this description.

You are of course welcome to your opinion but I respectfully disagree.

PUAs do indeed seek validation from other guys, but they do what they do in order to improve their ability to get laid therefore their main goal is validation from women.

Whilst I have no evidence that they are looking for a unicorn it seems reasonable to me that this is their hidden objective. They’re obviously enamoured with women to the point of obsession and IMO shag so many in a forlorn search for something special.

MRAs do indeed seek validation from society, but with the exception of the MGTOW MRA they do so to make relationships more equitable. The only reason I can see for this is the relationship is usually their ultimate goal, therefore even though they have and preach red pill knowledge they are blue pill at heart with everything that that entails.

I guess that in my eyes they (PUAs and MRAs) are purple pilled.

As for all red pillers fitting your description, MGTOW are red pillers and IMO the only true red-pillers.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

You are of course welcome to your opinion but I respectfully disagree.

PUAs do indeed seek validation from other guys, but they do what they do in order to improve their ability to get laid therefore their main goal is validation from women.

Whilst I have no evidence that they are looking for a unicorn it seems reasonable to me that this is their hidden objective. They’re obviously enamoured with women to the point of obsession and IMO shag so many in a forlorn search something special.

MRAs do indeed seek validation from society, but with the exception of the MGTOW MRA they do so to make relationships more equitable. The only reason I can see for this is the relationship is usually their ultimate goal, therefore even though they have and preach red pill knowledge they are blue pill at heart with everything that that entails.

I guess that in my eyes they (PUAs and MRAs) are purple pilled.

As for all red pillers fitting your description, MGTOW are red pillers and IMO the only true red-pillers.

Yes, I agree. PUAs consider themselves to be red-pill, but they're all about chasing tail and simping for pussy (in the sense of playing up to women's expectations and seeking female approval), so I see them as pretty much blue-pill. And MRAs start from a red-pill understanding of the sexes, but they are about repairing relations between the sexes, which still sounds pretty blue-pill in the end (and pretty unrealistic to boot).

I tend to see MGTOW as the most red-pill of all, in that out of the manosphere they're the group least concerned with simping for women's approval. Just my own opinion, of course.

Red pill is pua just marketed differently.

Pua started to die down around 2010. It got a bad rap and then remarketed itself as "red pill".

It's more refined to call yourself as a red pill man instead of a pua. This whole transition is fascinating because it was an organic and natural process, but the ridicule of pua online really spurred this on. But red pill at its basic core is pua.

People will ridicule pua but praise red pill. It's so funny. There were some reallly bad examples of pua, but the good pua had red pill concepts at its core.

Originally Posted by opensource

Red pill is pua just marketed differently.

Pua started to die down around 2010. It got a bad rap and then remarketed itself as "red pill".

It's more refined to call yourself as a red pill man instead of a pua. This whole transition is fascinating because it was an organic and natural process, but the ridicule of pua online really spurred this on. But red pill at its basic core is pua.

People will ridicule pua but praise red pill. It's so funny. There were some reallly bad examples of pua, but the good pua had red pill concepts at its core.

I agree that the new so-called "red pill" stuff is just updated PUA. But I don't consider any of it to be true red-pill. I think PUA uses some red-pill tactics, but the ultimate aim is blue-pill to the core. PUAs are pussy-beggars just as much as incels or tradcons. Just because they want to pump and dump, it doesn't change anything. They're still slaves to pussy. Same with the newer so-called "red pill"/PUA peddlers like Tate or Fresh and Fit or whoever, as far as I can tell.

And "game" is basically just pussy-begging technique that has been borrowed from blue-pill tradcons and honed for pump-and-dump purposes.

Psychology considers PUA to be something called "Don Juanism" or "Don Juan syndrome" (a type of satyriasis). And the central feature is that they're seeking out Mommy figures. In other words, slaves to pussy. From Wikipedia: "Psychiatrist Carl Jung believed that Don Juanism was an unconscious desire of a man to seek his mother in every woman he encountered." And so on. In other words, it's just a fancy way of saying pussy-beggar.

Wikipedia link for "Don Juanism": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Juanism

I realize that this is just a terminology dispute. But as you pointed out, PUA has adopted the "red pill" label only lately as a way to duck the bad image of the PUA label. Meantime, true "red pill awareness" goes back to Esther Vilar's book "The Manipulated Man" in the 1970s, and the message of "The Manipulated Man" was that men were selling themselves into slavery by chasing pussy. Esther Vilar's message was MGTOW, not PUA.

QED: Pussy beggars (PUAs, incels, and tradcons) aren't true red pill.

To sum up: This is all just my opinion. I don't think there's a central authority on who is red-pill and who isn't. But it sounds ridiculous to my ear to call PUAs red-pill just because they've taken tradcon pussy-begging technique and perfected it for pump-and-dump goals.

(By the way, I've been married twice and done some PUA myself, back in my tradcon days. I've also read Strauss's "The Game" and "Rules of the Game" and Mystery's "Mystery Method," and Tomasi's "Rational Male." Guess what: PUA is pussy-begging.)

Following up on my last post (just above this one), the following is a bit of history on the PUA community, just as a tangent on the subject of this thread.

Before 2004, the world hadn't heard of PUA. But Neil Strauss, a writer for Rolling Stone and The New York Times, spent a year in the PUA community meeting the top PUA gurus, learning their tricks, and even teaching some PUA seminars to new students himself. The mainstream world was then introduced to the subject when The New York Times published a short article by Neil Strauss about the PUA community in January 2004 entitled "He aims! He shoots! Yes!" The article gives an insider's view of the community, and it mentions briefly some of the controversial aspects of the community like negging and objectification.

Here is a link to Strauss's original 2004 PUA article: HE AIMS! HE SHOOTS! YES!! - The New York Times

The New York Times article is behind a paywall after viewing a certain number of articles. If you can't see it at the New York Times site, you'll find it on PUA sites. For example: https://dallaspua.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1291

Anyway, after another year in the PUA community, Neil Strauss went on to publish a full book on the subject, an autobiography on his experiences, entitled The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists. That book was on The New York Times Bestseller List for two months after its release in September 2005, and to this day it's still pretty much considered the Bible of the PUA community. I've read it. I no longer have any particular need for the knowledge contained in it; but it's a piece of history, a cultural artifact from a couple decades ago.

Anyway, if anyone is interested in additional reading on the subject, see the Wikipedia articles under "Pickup artist" and "Seduction community."

Also, here is Neil Strauss's appearance on The View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0omMTu9Ax8

PUA is using Female Nature (RP knowledge) for "Game", to date women. Women consider "Game" as abuse or the use of it for picking up women as abuse. Why? Because the PUA is not naturally that way, it was a learned craft, she is being fooled into believing he is a natural. She thinks, after finding out he is a PUA, she has been had or conned. In reality, the "Game" that PUA play belongs to women. The woman's female nature sets the rules on what works and what doesn't. So women get pissed off at men when they figure out the rules to her "Game"...

I'll just take my toys over here and not play her silly "Game".... Fuck sharing with her when she wants to keep her rules to herself.... I know what happens when I loose... GYOW.

Originally Posted by RustyNuts

[...] In reality, the "Game" that PUA play belongs to women. The woman's female nature sets the rules on what works and what doesn't. So women get pissed off at men when they figure out the rules to her "Game"... [...]

Actually, that's truer than you know.

PUA became a big deal starting in 2005, after Neil Strauss publicized it.

But ten years before, in 1995, two women came out with a female version of PUA. It was called "The Rules," by Ellen Fein & Sherrie Schneider, and it was a step-by-step guide for women on how to act like a high-value woman and snag a high-value man: Play hard-to-get, practice lots of shit-tests on men to test their loyalty, run hot-and-cold to tantalize them, train them to give you expensive gifts, etc.

Here is a quote from the Wikipedia article on "The Rules": The book generated much discussion upon its release. Some audiences considered it useful and motivational, while others felt that it was outdated, anti-men and antifeminist, or a how-to guide that teaches women to play games that toy with men.

There was also criticism to the effect that when women play hard-to-get, men find it difficult to know if they are supposed to give up or try harder; it can become encouragement for a general attitude that men should act like stalkers in relationships.

Another quote from the Wikipedia article on "The Rules": Psychology lecturer and therapist Dr Meg-John Barker claims that the emergence of seduction communities happened "almost as a direct response to this hard-to-get femininity."

In other words, Wikipedia suggests that the success of "The Rules" in 1995 basically caused men to follow suit and develop the PUA community over the following 10 years. Basically, Wikipedia is suggesting that women invented PUA. Or at least women were the first to publicize it and turn it into big business and big money.

Link to the article on "The Rules" in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rules

Incidentally, "The Rules" kind of died off ten years ago and has been replaced by FDS: Female Dating Strategy. Basically FDS is the same thing as "The Rules," but it's even more toxic and misandrist; FDS is pretty much about how to be an outright gold-digger.