Login or Register
TRP.RED: Home | Blogs - Forums.RED: ALL | TheRedPill | RedPillWomen | AskTRP | thankTRP | OffTopic
The Parables of The Sower
The Why of Feminism
Published 05/18/19 by Whisper [1 Comments]

People like to ask “why”. Specifically they like to ask “why”, and “why that”, and “why that” again, up until they reach the villain they wish to blame. Then that suddenly becomes an entirely causeless, spontaneous eruption of pure evil that we all need to be very concerned about.


Skipping over a lot of really of really boring philosophy, here, let’s just agree that no one will ever prove or disprove the existence of free will. But we all know that people do shit for reasons.

Stop looking for the reasons, and you’ve decided to stop understanding shit. In which case what are you doing here, anyway?

So we’ve certainly heard a whole lot about what feminism causes, and fuck-all about what causes feminism, which leads some dudes to get from dirt-obvious shit like this:

>> One thing that has always baffled me is how Muslim nations have practiced female subordination for centuries... and yet feminists never go after them for their, "misogynistic" practices. In fact they defend them.

To dirt-stupid shit like this:

>> I have a theory that women secretly crave that type of man guiding their lives.

… in one giant leap.

Yeah, women crave subordination… to powerful, confident men that they look up to and trust.

I guarantee you that random third world peasants do not qualify. You think women are just submissive to randos, go up to one, start groping her, get slapped, and reassess your worldview.

You wanna understand, you need better ideas. So why does feminism do dirt stupid shit like this? Where did it come from? And what the hell is it? All three questions are related.

Feminism isn’t a movement, and it isn’t a philosophy. It’s a tactic.

A tactic doesn’t have a fixed overarching goal. It’s simply a means of getting whatever the individual user of that tactic happens to want. That’s why feminists keep telling you that feminism came in different “waves”. It’s simple. Different generations of women wanted different shit. They just used the same method to get it.

What, then, is the method?

Feminism is the act of using shame and guilt to evoke the male protective instinct.

That’s it. That’s all. Think about how it works:

1. Find something you think is a problem, that affects you (a woman), regardless of whether or not it affects mostly women, or affects you because you’re a woman, or has anything to do with being a woman at all.

2. Construct a narrative that frames this problem as unfairness to women.

3. Relate this narrative to any man who will listen, and tell them that they personally are oppressing women unless they change their behaviour to fix this problem for you.

4. Repeat until men give you whatever it is you wanted.

So now can we ask why feminism exists? How about why it is so prevalent? Sure. It’s easy to explain now.

Feminism is prevalent in the modern world because the most powerful demographic of men in history became especially vulnerable to appeals to guilt and shame.

So why isn’t feminism being used against the muslim world? Easy to see that now.

Feminists don’t go after muslims because the feminist tactic doesn’t work on them.

So why do feminists come to the (verbal) defense of third world peasants who treat women as cattle? Simple to understand now. Muslims aren’t a target for the feminist tactic, they are a weapon. The concept of them as poor oppressed brown people who are victims of the evil white man (instead of the armed rabble gathered at the gates of civilization)… this can be used to make first world men feel more guilt and shame, and to get those men in the habit of feeling guilt and shame.

So what can we do with this knowledge?

Well, we now know how to protect ourselves from feminism. Become immune to guilt and shame. You’ll still be vulnerable to attack by herds of manipulated men, but you won’t be one of them.

We also know to stop blaming feminism for our problems, whatever they might be. Feminism is a thing precisely because it works… and who has allowed it to work? Modern first world men. Too domesticated. Too ashamed. Too unselfish. Too weak.

Of course it was inevitable that women should discover that femininity (which offers submission in exchange for protectiveness) was more effort than applying shame and guilt (which requires women to give nothing). Women did it because men incentivized it.

Feminism is not new. It is not a game-changer. It is not an alteration in the terrain. The Great Game has always existed and always will. Everything is a move.

Learn to counter.

How Do I Use This Thing?
Published 04/23/19 by Whisper [0 Comments]

One of the most confusing, controversial, and hotly debated topics for the red-pilled woman is when and how to engage in sex.

At puberty, every girl suddenly finds herself in possession of a very powerful and dangerous vagina; it is powerful because every post-puberty male wants in, and it is dangerous because it is powerful and doesn’t come with an instruction manual.

Not really surprising, then, that a lot of girls manage to blow themselves up with it. And equally unsurprising that the debate rages hot and vociferous over just how to handle this thing.

So, while tradcons browbeat women over availing themselves of its power at all, and feminists fuss at men over any negative consequences at all that attach to indiscriminate use of that power, the red pill has always started from the intent to devise a set of guidelines based on what works and doesn’t.

So why can’t girls just leave the volatile object alone?

  • Because, like it or not, you’re in an arms race. Women who men are willing to have sex with outnumber men whose commitment is desirable. (Remember that 87%/34% statistic?) That means someone is going to win, and someone else is going to lose… and if you withhold too much, the loser is going to be you.
  • Because you have needs and desires, too. The tradcon way of life was and is being destroyed by feminism and modernity for a reason. If it had really been the wonderful idealized version of the 1950s that its few remaining advocates pretend, women would not have been unhappy enough to kick over the traces and abandon it for feminism… nor would men have allowed them do so.

So why can’t girls just use this thing indiscriminately?

  • Because women’s long term happiness requires something more than sexual pleasure… it requires men’s continued presence and emotional investment. If orgasms were all you needed, middle aged feminist spinsters with six vibrators and twelve cats would be happy instead of angry at the world.
  • And men simply will not tolerate it. Men hate the idea of commitment to a promiscuous woman so much that they make up ridiculous myths about vaginal stretching in an effect to explain or understand their own instinctive distaste.

Just close your legs” and “just open your legs” are both terrible strategies that lead to long term unhappiness.

So, if you can’t do whatever, and you can’t just do nothing, then you have to do some things, but not others. But what?

What the heck do men want, anyway? They seem to want sex as quick and easy as possible, but resent the hell out of any other man getting sex from you quick, easy, or indeed at all. What gives? It’s like they want you to be a slut, but only for them.

That’s almost right.

We don’t need to make a long list of sexual acts and circumstances that are abhorrent to men. We don’t need to construct a giant flowchart. We don’t need a long lecture.

Because there is only one sexual act you can perform that men object to. Everything else, absent that one act, is okay, and often more than okay. Which means you get to have your fun, indulge your kinks, do whatever, so long as you stay away from one thing…

Don’t switch partners.

That’s it. Everything else you thought men hated, they hated because you switched partners afterwards. Anything you did, however freaky, with a dude you stayed with, is just being a good and adventurous sexual partner. Doesn’t even matter if you did it a scandalously short time after meeting him, so long as you didn’t switch partners afterwards.

This is the big difference between the tradcon rules and values and the red pill.

Under various interpretations of the tradcon rules, if you have sex with a man before you have married him, had him declare to the world that you’re a couple, dated him for X amount of time, whatever… then you have failed, and you are a bad girl, and the only advice this system has for you is you shouldn’t have done that, hung your head in shame. Which obviously isn’t very useful.

The red pill, obviously, also advises sexual continence, but this is where the similarity ends. In its tactical doctrine, having sex with a man is not making a mistake, it is choosing a mate. Once you have gotten naked with someone, you have effectively thrown your hat in the ring, and are banking on your ability to keep him. (And we have a whole bunch of tactical advice about how to do that.)

This is very important because the men you most want, the men who are most desirable to you, are going to be the ones you have the least self-control in the presence of. You are not a logic robot, men are trying to get to sex as quick and easy as possible (even with girls they eventually decide to keep around), and the sexiest ones are by definition the ones who are best at doing that. So instead of having “beat an expert in his area of greatest strength” as your plan A, with no plan B, you have something to do next if you find yourself in a risky situation.

The girls with low N counts are not the ones who delay sex the most, but those who, first, know their interests lie in seeking to stay with a partner, and, second, know how to inspire partners to stay.

Tactically, what this means is that you operate with "Hell yes or hell no" mindset. That you are either all in or all out. That you never get naked with a man you not passionate about and wanting to keep, and that you give free rein to your drives when you find that "Hell, yes"... because then your task is getting him to "Hell, yes" as well. Whatever delay you impose is for you to be sure, not for him to be invested, because men don't work like that.

Keeping a partner is, of course, never completely under your control. This is simply the risk that goes with being the gatekeeper of sex, rather than relationships. But the first step to not switching partners is to know that it's not a good idea to do so, that you only want to do it for overriding, serious reasons, and that no other form of sexual continence matters all that much.

This in itself places you light years ahead of women who do not even know what they ought to be trying to do.

Amy Schumer, a fat and repugnant female alleged comedian, once remarked, in a manner intended to be funny, that her weight didn't matter because she can "still catch a dick".

But the truth is that any woman can "catch a dick". The trick is to get to the end zone without fumbling it.

Next Page

About The Parables of The Sower
We will be bringing you all updates here on this blog!

Latest Posts