“I am a writer with an M.A degree in philosophy. My mission is to inspire you to become the best version of yourself through my contents.
The red pill and feminist culture are two opposing movements seeking gender equality and rights in relevant aspect of society and its social structure.
This post hopes to shed light on two important things:
- A general background of the red pill and feminist movements.
- The implications of these movements on the idea of masculinity and femininity.
i) A General Background of the Red Pill & Feminist movement.
The red pill movement is a postmodern opposition against feminism, which aims at restoring control and ‘masculinity’ among men in line with a conservative understanding of female nature.
The concept of the ‘red pill’ was popularized by the 1999 sci-fi movie The Matrix, where Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) offered a red pill and a blue pill to the lead character Neo (played by Keanu Reeves).
The blue pill exemplified a choice to remain in ignorance, while the red pill served as a self-awakening decision to understand the underlying realities behind an illusive world.
Since its adoption, men have transformed this concept into a movement and a mindset shift to ridicule the ‘self-expression’ practices of modern feminism and to criticize the overall dating game.
On the other side of the gender rights tussle is the -feminist movement which saw its first wave in 1848 in the Seneca Falls Convention, U.S, where women propagated their right to vote, and engage in other political and social activities.
In 1893, New Zealand also gave widespread knowledge to women around the world that their right to vote can be achieved through advocacy.
This dragged on to the 20th century, where women finally got their right to vote in the U.S around the 1920s, and Europe also marked its first international women’s day in major countries like; Germany, Denmark, Austria, and Switzerland in 1911.
The second wave started along with a sexual revolution in the 60s, were women demanded more legal rights over their sexualities by pushing such agenda like the approval of birth control by the FDA, abortion rights, and within the mix, the formation of notable women’s convention like-the First World Conference on Women in 1975, the United Nations Decade for Women (1975-1985), CEDAW: the“International women’s bill of rights” 1979, and much more.
The third wave of feminism took a different route in the early 2000s which became less of a legal stride.
Its tenets focused more on kicking against misogyny and other conservative views about female roles in marriages and relationships, including the girl-child agenda (which remains a global feminist campaign, especially in Africa).
Modern feminism ushered the fourth wave of the movement, and was purported by the trends of social media and pop culture to engage women to become more: self-aware, self-dependent, and self-expressive of their sexuality and abilities.
Thereby, selling the ideology that “what a man can do, a woman can do better”, or to rephrase in the words of Margaret Thatcher:
“If you want something said, ask a man; if you want something done, ask a woman”.
ii) The Implications of these movements on the idea of masculinity & femininity
Understanding the brief background of these two gender-oriented cultures (for the lack of a better word) can enable us to derive some narcissistic implications and effects of their respective principles on -what it means to be masculine and what it means to be feminine.
Let’s start by examining the narcissistic implications it has had on the meaning of femininity.
a) Vulnerable narcissism in Feminism
Whether we believe it or not, for the major part of the feminist movement, activists have always played the victim role not mainly for the sake of being abused or securing human rights, but as an agenda to possess control and become less vulnerable, thus displaying traits of vulnerable narcissism.
The infographic above explicates the traits of vulnerable narcissism, and with proper analysis, one can comprehend how it reduces ‘femininity’ to mean an “entitlement to empowerment to stay relevant” in the society, instead of men always getting such privileges.
The rave for women's empowerment has some rationale and importance, but it has symbolized femininity as a vulnerable and entitled state of existence, which has done more harm than good by developing such narcissistic behavior in women.
For instance, modern feminism has subtly given women a perception that marriage and relationships are opportunities for men to play on their vulnerability or to make them -submit, or give away control.
Therefore making women shy away from the concept of having a family, getting married, or having monogamous relationships. This has also given them some form of leverage to use their sexuality as a manipulative force against men.
In an interview, Mona Charen, author of Sex Matters: How Modern Feminism Lost Touch With Science, Love and Common Sense, opined that:
“Obviously, the gains of feminism are obvious, and all reasonable people agree women should be full legal, moral, ethical and every other way equals of men, and women should earn the same and so on and so forth. But where I believe feminism took a couple of very disastrous wrong turns was in rejecting the family as antithetical to women's interests and in endorsing the sexual revolution, which turned out to be less than satisfactory for women, and actually, we're now seeing has very, very baleful consequences for men as well.”
Charen’s criticism in this statement was to simply expose where modern feminism is headed while surfing its waves and also the narcissistic mindset females have developed towards family, marriage and relationships.
Some may argue that this implication may arise as a misconception or misinterpretation of what feminism stands for.
But such misconception ought to be expected! Because terms such as; gender-equality, women empowerment, self-expression, self-dependency, etc, connotes some level of vulnerability that may not be obvious at first, but keeps unveiling as civilization evolves.
b) Grandiose Narcissism of the Red Pill Mindset.
Without a flush of historical and legal stride, the red pill movement has resulted in a mindset (the red pill mindset) that ranks masculinity in a different hierarchy that befits a social status and an attitude towards women.
However, this movement has oftentimes shifted its focus from the dating game, and have resulted in men having extreme political views on race, gender rights, etc...and a rigid classification of masculine personalities according to individual traits,e.g, alpha male, beta male, sigma male, so on and so forth.
In a CNN documentary titled -Red Pill: A Search for Dating Advice Turns into Radicalization, hosted by Laurie Segall, she interviewed an ex-red pill member who remained anonymous during the interview session and was given the pseudonym “Josh”.
During the interview session, Laurie asked; “At what point did this turn political for you?”
“I just really felt powerless, because I felt that my opinions, my feelings, especially as a man, did not matter, especially when there are people getting more money than me, getting more girls than me. I’m just like, what can I do to catch up? And I was, to my eternal embarrassment, radicalized by the right-wing politically.”
Like Josh’s story, most men influenced with the red pill mindset have been convinced to view masculinity as a grand sense of self (Alpha male mentality), and anything less is considered as a sign of weakness (Beta male mentality).
The pressure associated with what is perceived to be masculine by the red pill community has led most men to adopt a grandiose narcissistic behavior towards women and even towards society.
Here is why, true masculinity is defined by the basic red pill principles, which are:
- Being unemotionally attached with women by not getting married or not being in a relationship.
- Making women chase validation and attention.
- Using women's hypergamous and manipulative nature against them.
- Cutting down on socializing and networking.
- Being confident, and arrogant when necessary.
- Self-importance and self-admiration,
- The penchant to always stay in control.
In conclusion, the red pill and feminist culture are not so distinct, and the power tussle behind what it means to be masculine and feminine is not to establish mutual values but to massage the ego and relevance of both respective genders in the society.
This content is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and is not meant to substitute for formal and individualized advice from a qualified professional.
© 2021 Preye Raymond