Misunderstood Models

Without relevant context, the Red Pill appears as toxic filth.

Readership: All
Theme: Problems with The Red Pill
Length: 1,500 words
Reading Time: 8 minutes

⁵ If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him.  ⁶ But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind.

James 1:5-6 (NKJV)

Overview

In the Exposition of this month’s theme, A Failure of Knowledge Transference was identified as one type of problem with The Red Pill.

There are six main areas of knowledge transference that have been ineffective.

1. Models are misappropriated.
2. Models are misinterpreted.
3. Models are misunderstood.
4. Models are misapplied.
5. The Practical Application is Difficult, Elusive, Insurmountable, or Unacceptable
6. The Absence of Actionable Knowledge

This essay will cover the third.

Foundational reading includes the basics of modeling and 9 Types of Red Pill Models.

Intro

In this post, I’ll point out what I believe are the three most egregious forms of misunderstanding Red Pill lore in general: (1) Oversimplification, (2) Saturation, and (3) Inappropriate Mischaracterizations, the latter of which there are three areas that will be discussed: (A) The Christian Manosphere, (B) the Secular Manosphere, and (C) the personal application.

Concerning misunderstandings specific to models, the confusion is unique to each model and dependent on context.  Individual bias may also play a hand.  In future posts, I’ll cover a few specific models and how they are misunderstood.

1. Oversimplification

As mentioned before, models are a simplified representation of reality.  However, there is a strong tendency for people to oversimplify, usually for the sake of saving words, where the oversimplified version not only loses some of the important fundamental concepts but it also takes on a peculiar biased viewpoint unique to the individual.

For example, Bardelys the Magnificent wrote,

“The Manosphere began with two questions: how do I get her into bed, or how do I get / keep her married? Both problems have been solved for quite some time now. There is no new ground to discover. […]”

BtM’s assessment is a very concise materialist reduction of TRP. But if packing P00n was all there was to TRP, then it would have died out with the PUAs 6 years ago. A broader view of TRP recognizes that the sex drive (a proxy incentive for reproduction) is a strong carnal motivator — and the relative lack of access thereof for a growing number of men provided the incentive that drove men to do some hard digging, to face themselves, and to change their deeply embedded Blue Pill mental constructs of men, women, and the SMP.

However, it didn’t stop there.  The ideas that were uncovered led to a rediscovery of a larger paradigm of truth that no one expected, especially coming from this source (the PUA scene). It became a metaphysical awakening on par with that depicted in The Matrix. It fractured the old construct of masculinity and even transformed the framework of what it means to be a man. It led many men to God, and/or to make drastically different choices in life. This fundamental element of truth is also what contributed to the increasing acceptance of TRP, eventually leading to its mainstream popularity.

The Christian Manosphere has recognized that this reawakening is not a coincidence nor even an act of God per se. Sex is intrinsically tied to Sanctification. (See 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8.)  When you start messing around with sex, then you’ll eventually bump into issues related to Sanctification. When that happens, then you’re forced to make some difficult life decisions.  This is what has happened on a cultural level in the West.

Anyway, once we begin simplifying models, we must necessarily omit certain details in the process. But which details are essential and which are peripheral? The details that are omitted and the details that are retained and emphasized as central truths are what constitutes a biased viewpoint peculiar to each individual. According to BtM’s view, getting laid / married / etc. is the central truth. According to Jack, a realignment of conscious awareness is the central truth. According to Rollo Tomassi, men learning to navigate the Feminine Imperative is the central truth. According to … well, you get the idea.

Moreover, if we simplify a model too much, then we lose some of the basic concepts. We are also prone to misunderstand the value of the application as well as specific details. More broadly, if we fail to recognize all the ways the Red Pill has impacted human life, including philosophical, social, sexual, metaphysical, and spiritual — then we will have made an incomplete assessment.

2. Saturation

The feminist culture and the MGM have hoped that the Manosphere was a fad that would eventually die out.  No.  It went mainstream.  And as long as there are men searching for purpose and truth and asking difficult questions and thinking critically for themselves, there will be a Manosphere in some form.

However, although this saturation brought widespread RP knowledge to many people, it also reduced the quality thereof. Now TRP 2.0 faces a new set of challenges as a result of saturation. (Some of these have been mentioned before, but here I want to point out that it is a direct consequence of saturation.)

• It is regressing to a materialist reduction of intersexual dynamics, similar to BtM’s comment above.
• It is debased and sensationalized.
• It has become more of a sacrilegious entertainment and less of a sanctifying self-assessment.
• It has lost the power to generate epiphanies that inspire men to introspect and reassess their lives.
• Overfamiliarity — clichés without depth nor personal meaning.

Concerning the last, there is irony in the way a person, a tradition, or a philosophy becomes common and less appreciated after it is well known and revered as classical.  To draw a comparison, the Swing Era of the 1930s and 40s swept the world with its resonating big band sounds.  But the same music was considered mundane and outdated by the following generation.  Likewise, when fusion jazz was introduced in the late 1960s, it blew up the music scene.  But 20 years later, when Herbie Hancock’s muffled tunes could be heard on every downtown elevator, it became annoying and boorish to younger generations.

I believe The Red Pill is now undergoing a similar metamorphosis in how it is regarded by younger generations.  This is why there has been a recent call to produce fictional narratives that convey comprehensive Red Pill mythos. I plan to examine the transgenerational views in more detail in an upcoming po$t.

3. Inappropriate Mischaracterizations

The Manosphere and Red Pill lore are constantly smacked with mischaracterizations, sometimes taking the form of an obvious Straw Man.  One of the most annoying blunders is how Manospherians and sometimes men in general are broadly pigeonholed into one of two dialogisms: (1) hypermasculine — abusive, immoral, ‘toxic’ players (e.g. Andr@w T@te, Bad@ss Ch@d, Roosh pre-conversion, et al.), or (2) effeminate — basement troglodytes, mouth breathers, wimpy !ncels, et al. Another example is the recent trend of culture shapers and religious figureheads badmouthing the Manosphere and men in general.  The same thing happens between various Manosphere subgroups, such as the Civilizationists and MGTOW.  Even Feminism is sometimes mischaracterized by Red Pill voices.

Overall, there are as many mischaracterizations as there are personal opinions.  It would be impossible for me to cover them all, but reminding ourselves to be aware of this and look out for it may be enough.

Here, I’ll focus on three conceptual mischaracterizations that happen regularly among readers: (A.) The Christian Manosphere, (B.) the Secular Manosphere, and (C.) the personal application. 

A. The Christian Manosphere

One of the purposes of the Christian Manosphere is to help men who have been emasculated by the Beta Factory get a foothold in the SMP/MMP so that he can make further or better progress down the road of life.  Another purpose is to help married men navigate the messiness of Marriage 2.0.

The Christian Manosphere is NOT for natural Alpha Ch@ds or men looking to score.  If a man finds it easy to pick up chicks, get laid, etc., then he doesn’t need any advice, and our experience here shows that such men are not very good at giving out advice to men who are NOT naturals.  Also, happily married men are not very good at giving out advice to men struggling with contentious wives / unions.  Yet, many men will readily assume that Manosphere authors are setting themselves up as experts or naturals who are expecting the same from other men.

Just to be clear, among all the authors that have written posts for Σ Frame, only one is a ‘natural’.  Most of us are sharing the difficult lessons we have learned as a consequence of NOT being a natural.

B. The Secular Manosphere

The content of the Secular Manosphere is intended for secular men in the secular SMP.  Celibacy and marriage are entirely different contexts that the secular Manosphere rarely goes into, except in theory and invariably as a warning against it. Rollo goes heavy on the Tingly Respect type of Headship as an ideal structure, but he totally ignores other variations of Headship which are more relevant to men who are not naturals.

OTOH, just because a model is NOT explicitly Christian does NOT mean it is entirely invalid.  For Christian men, anything coming from the secular Manosphere has to be translated into Christianese, and then you have to pick out the meat and throw away the bones. Having a mystical approach helps.

C. The Personal Application

Adopting any models, or anything given out as pat advice should be taken with a grain of salt, and a good deal of introspection and a prayer, as every person’s situation is different.  It also depends on the situation and the woman in question, especially her level of agency and maturity. Moreover, men should be asking themselves, “What do I, in my particular situation (my own age, marital / relationship status, looks, personality, goals, etc.), do with this information?”

In posts, I’ll shuffle through ideas and hash things out, but it is mostly left up to readers to decide for themselves what the best personal application would be. In fact, we’ve seen that different men can read the exact same post and come to wildly different conclusions as to the application. So don’t be surprised if you find some posts and comments with alternative conclusions. The bottom line is, consider the information for what it’s worth and think for yourself.

Related

• Σ Frame: The Dispensation of the Red Pill (2018/4/7)
• Σ Frame: Avoiding the Broken Window Effect (2021/7/21)
• Σ Frame: The Cold Christian Shoulder (2023/12/7)
• Σ Frame: Invisible Magic Authority (2023/12/13)
• Rollo Tomassi: Teaching Slaves to Read (2024/2/26)