The theme of our upcoming conference ICMI15 (International Conference on Men’s Issues 2015) relates to building bridges between men and women in a feminist-dominated world. In this article I’d like to explore the idea of building bridges in a different way – between the disparate elements of the red pill community of MGTOW, MRAs/MHRAs, and PUAs.
I’ve been watching with interest and dismay the ebb and flow of the discord between those of us in the red pill world. I identify as both MGTOW and MRA/MHRA, and I often use PUA conversation techniques when I engage feminist women in real life. I do that to charm them into dropping their emotional revulsion to men like me, not to sleep with them (yuck).
I find harmony in these red pill perspectives because we all work from a common data set (our understanding of what women respond to and why) and our common enemy is feminism. I detest the open lies, rape hoaxes, man-hate, and misogyny of feminism on a level so fundamental that even if the entire red pill community vanished tomorrow, I would still seek allies to demolish feminism with every waking thought, even if those allies were somewhat hostile to me and each other.
The Freud of the Red Pill
Because I both empathize and sympathize with all three red pill perspectives, I find it fun and easy to apply them using a simple Freudian personality model. Yes, Freud is passé and discredited in modern feminist-dominated psychology but what better endorsement could one have?
I view PUAs as the Id: a primal sexual energy unconcerned with everything except its own sexual needs, satisfaction, and perfecting the behaviors necessary to achieve those goals. The Id/PUA wants sex and judges everything by its utility in getting sex. The only worthy men are the ones whose penises smell of pussy, according to Id/PUA.
We can discount and even criminalize the Id/PUA, but the fact remains that human civilization was built to satisfy the Id/PUA, and every happy baby owes its life to the sexual machinations of the Id/PUA. Every bedroom was built by a man’s Id-driven hand and hammer to placate the privacy and safety needs of a woman’s sexual requirements.
The Id/PUA is unable to grasp the importance of the more cautious thinking of MGTOW and MRA; It dismisses them as lower status (beta/omega to their alpha) when it even thinks about them at all.
I view MGTOW as the Ego. The Ego/MGTOW is a realistic response to the harsh realities of the world. The Ego/MGTOW fights the impractical, dangerous desires of the Id/PUA and turns away from the societal dangers imposed on those with an unbridled Id/PUA: forced fatherhood, marriage, divorce, child support, alimony, false rape allegations, suicide, emotional/physical trauma, and slavery to obligations born of normal human sexuality corrupted by government/feminist meddling.
The higher stages of Ego/MGTOW (and I identify strongly with this) turn away from both women and society as the folly of Id/PUA plays itself out. MGTOW believe that the only effective way to reform or even to deal with society is to check out of it. Paradoxically, Ego/MGTOW view their self-interest in undermining society is the only cure or hope for society.
I view MRA/MHRA as the Superego. The Superego/MRA tries to interface with both society (in order to reform it) and with the self (in order to inculcate worthy societal values – morality – into the self). Whereas Ego/MGTOW is at most passive-aggressive in trying to reform society, Superego/MRA aggressively engages both society and the self in the struggle to improve both.
Superego/MRA seeks ways to address the sexual power of the Id/PUA without falling into the feminist traps and hatred of male sexuality. Unlike Ego/MGTOW, Superego/MRA seeks a positive engagement with society and male sexuality but recognizes that this may, in the end, be as impossible as Ego/MGTOW purport.
Conflict, competition and coöperation.
Feminism is the uncontrolled, “liberated” female Id. It wants what it wants, and it wants it NOW. It is no small irony that the largest feminist organization in the world is named “NOW” (the National Organization Women) and that this group reflexively fights men and men’s issues with bleached tooth and manicured nail.
Feminists want perfect safety for women AND perfect freedom to do as they please, even though these desires are mutually contradicting: a safe world has no full freedom, and a free world has no full safety. The feminist id reacts with the rage of a frustrated, hungry baby when this is explained to them.
Conflict between feminists is their major failure – even as they fight to become a unified Id their individual, angry brains turn on each other whenever any one of them meets with a modicum of success. Attempts to form an internal feminist ego or superego can never succeed because they have never had to face a world that doesn’t jump to feed, pleasure and otherwise placate their raging desires. Feminists with glimmerings of ego-awareness like Christina Hoff-Sommers are routinely savaged by the feminist id collective.
Likewise, Anita Sarkeesian recently came out against what she called “choice” feminism (the idea that feminism is women doing whatever they want – the id). Sarkeesian is also attempting to gain ego-awareness and quell the feminist id but she will come under increasing fire from feminist id-monsters once they become aware that Sarkeesian is advocating restricting their choices, not expanding them.
The unfortunate truth is that blue-pill men serve as the proxy egos of feminist women: they are the white knights, the practical interface with the world that feminists can view directly with only such interest as the next shoe sale or alpha penis. This is why feminists detest their blue-pill sycophants: their ids are frustrated by the practical limitations blue pill servants / boyfriends / husbands / Sarkeesians must explain and modulate to them.
Feminists cannot handle criticism or restriction – it is all “abuse” to them. You cannot reason an infant into learning to tie her shoes until the infant grows up a bit. Men handle criticism and competition in ways feminists find perplexing and frustrating – men in the crucible can grow stronger. Feminists can only abide at best.
Although feminism cannot grow much from conflict, red pill men can as long as we maintain a certain decorum – a sportsmanship – that is impossible for feminists.
Red pill men can fight each other, and harshly so. This is both our strength and the source of our growth.
But can we tone it down a bit, guys? There is a real enemy out there, and we need to remember who it is. When we are not fighting each other we can do serious damage to feminism.
PUAs fight feminism exploitively: women are wary of uncontrolled male sexuality but since feminism strips women of their protective instincts (“don’t protect yourself – teach men not to rape”) the PUA can undermine feminism in the female psyche by entangling women with meaningless sexual hook-ups that leave those women feeling confused and angry in the aftermath.
MGTOW fight feminism passive-aggressively by refusing to kowtow to feminist demands for more pampering and protection from men. Choking off the excess of work and resources generated by men undermines the prosperity that is essential to feminism.
MHRAs fight feminism aggressively by engaging them directly with reason and evidence-based counter-arguments that expose the rotten core of feminism to neutral observers. We can’t change the minds of feminists – the feminist id has no capacity to reason – but we can convince those under the yoke of feminism to cast it off.
No one will ever win the PUA Superbang, or the MGTOW World Un-Series, or the MRA Venal Jeopardy.
But we can be respectful rivals as we thrash those feminists back into their well-deserved hell.
The mutual coöperation of PUA. MGTOW and MRA – a Zeta masculinity – is the worst nightmare for feminism ever.
McLeod, S. A. (2008). Id, Ego and Superego. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/psyche.html