The Red Pill documentary

openload.co/f/kQJvBrqsQRQ/The.Red.Pill.(2016).mp4

Can any members who have a significant audience or good video making/ writing techniques please create the perfect counterpoint to this retarded IDPOL nonsense?

In this documentary there are two sides, the bourgeois feminists and the MRAs. The MRAs want to return to previous gender roles, and the feminists want more women in the productive sphere.

Using what we as communists know about The origins of the family, state and private property and the base/superstructure dichotomy can we show how both sides are misinformed and do not understand what patriarchy is and where it came from.

Other urls found in this thread:

soundcloud.com/boontavista/episode-6-the-brown-pill-featuring-therockrit
reddit.com/r/MensLib/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

not gonna waste my time on watching this, but here's an idea

ask an organisation to do the job for you while offering to finance the production by promoting it here with a patreon or just bank info

Why even bother? These retards are are dogmatic as the SJW camp. They won't listen to reason, only facts that conform to their preconceived notions. You said the best response already, imo. Point out that this is retarded id pol nonsense.

But if you really want to critique the film, I went to a public screening and I had some thoughts. Identity politics is charaterised by its particularism, as opposed to universalism (i.e. everyone, not just specific identities). This film just mirrors the particularism of male identity, in addition to inverting muh privilege theory and presenting it from a particularistic perspective.

tl;dr: remove id pol

Bourgeois feminists will say that the patriarchy emanates solely from the male gender, wherever men are, the patriarchy is also present. Its not that simple though, patriarchy does not exist because we think it into existence. They see the effect and assume it to be the cause.

The origins of patriarchy or patriarchal societies is tied to the organisation of society. But what decides how society is organised? People don't just think oh lets live in the middle of the ocean, and then suddenly plop live in the middle of the ocean. They use what they can and the world around them to create the conditions of their existence. So it is the material conditions of our society that determine the organisational structure of our society.

You already discussed the private property thing and family structure before so ill skip that. So from this we can conclude, bourgeois feminists view patriarchy as its own cause when really its an effect.

On the MRA side they keep talking about men being expendable and men's work being worth more and their worth in society being dependent on how successful (rich) they are, and then they talk about how women's lives are worth more and they are grouped with the children. This is standard gender roles, and these idiots want to return to them but do they ever considered where these gender roles came from and what their basis is?

The material basis of society determines the superstructure? Well when you see the facets of the superstructure like gender roles/ gender's meaning itself/ family structure/ changes in education etc. It reflects that there has been a fundamental change in the base.

So the patriarchy exist because men have historically the closest relation to production

The dumbest shit is that the guys in the redpill documentary never considered what the solution to their (and feminists) problems were. The solution is not to return to previous gender roles, and neither is it to give a better control of the productive sphere to women (more female CEOS). The solution is communism, the abolition of class society and the conditions which allow a small elite (be they male or femlae) to control the material factors of our lives.

Fuck that, I'm working on pretentious faggotry and don't have time to do a counter documentary to this bullshit.

Marxist anthropology and historiography is demonstrably false.

So demonstrate it then

soundcloud.com/boontavista/episode-6-the-brown-pill-featuring-therockrit

Boonta Vista Socialist Club already reviewed the film.

I could go point through point why the film is stupid (along with basically everything MRAs say) but I've done it so many times and nobody on the MRA side ever gives a shit because "DUUUR MUH GAMER RIGHTS"

You mean, like about every other human, outside of the ones that are still searching for their beloved ideology? Truly, surged my synapses.

But that's not true, have you even watched the movie? They only try to address certain gender injustices towards men in society. Whether you agree with those points or not they do NOT advocate for what you said. at least in the movie

Not him, but I've dealt with MRAs a long time and worked for a mental health org.

Basically he's right, MRA's do only want a return to like the 1950s. Literally the only reason they bring up suicide rates or whatever, is to shut down feminist discussion. They don't actually give a single shit about about mens health issues. You can also tell this from their ideology as well, they're neo-masculinists, they believe men have been emasculated by women which has led to men losing their place in society. It's why they spout all the alpha and beta and numale bullshit.

I watched the movie as well and the message is pretty much just that "Mens issues are a bigger problem, feminists are crazy and hate men". You can not convince me in a million years, Paul Elam gives a single fuck about mens issues in any serious regard. The dude is toxic as fuck. It also doesn't help MRAs are transphobic, homophobic and racist as fuck, basically throwing, the most oppressed groups of men under the bus.

Back to my time in mental health, basically our major focus was on rural male mental health and guess who our biggest allies were, the MRAs? Nope, those damn feminist academics and gender studies SJWs.

MRAs are just a right wing supremacy movement hiding behind actual serious issues as a shield.

Also Cassie Jaye came off as actually retarded in the film. No wonder she got "red pilled" so easily.

Oh and one of the most hilarious things about MRAs, the thing they always cry about with feminists is "Toxic masculinity", but heres the thing, toxic masculinity theory, wasn't even originally feminist, it came out of the fathers rights movement in the 1990s.

if you care about Male issues, MensLib is actually the real movement that addresses actual real gender issues and has mental health organisations and campaigns and such MRAs are just shitheads.

reddit.com/r/MensLib/

There's a lot of non-conservative MRA's tbh

the non-conservatives are irrelevant when almost every big name MRA is willing to ally with reactionaries because muh feminism.

MRAs like the HoneyBadgers seem to be legit anti-gender. The difference between them and radical feminists is that they say women are the ones in charge and feminism is about getting them even more rights at the expense of men.
MRAs like this would be cool if they dropped the whole conspiracy of women actually being the ones in charge and focussed on the anti-gender thing. (and also became anti-capitalists)

Did you actually watch the film or are you constructing a straw man? Be honest.

The patriarchy doesn't exist.

It works both ways.

I'm certain you're right about their motivation but it doesn't make the argument any less salient.

For me and no doubt many other men the fact that feminists are so loath to recognize serious issues that afflict men that merely bring up facts can "can shut down feminist discussion" show how much of a crypto female landed white supremacist movement feminism has become.


I call shenanigans on this. You going to have to post some convincing proofs and now a handful of cherry picked incidents either. The reputation of feminist acedemics being anti male is well earned. The inequalities like child custody that men face that the movie brings up are rooted in the work of those same feminist academics


That's true, but men's issues are in such a state of deep neglect that merely drawing attention to it will make you seem like a hero. Feminists just seem mad at MRAs because feminists are so deeply entrenched that there's not much more they can do for landed white women that doesn't make it super obvious that they are seeking competitive advantages for landed white women and not equality for all women.

I wasn't trying to imply otherwise

tbh if the mens rights movement was a predominantly anti capitalist movement, or even if there was a Marxist/Anarcho strain of it I would be in full agreement.

checks out

Take your shit meme back to 4chan.

hello where are the proofs

And then what? What genuine meaning does this hold, in a modern industrial nation with universal suffrage, a law since the '70s outlawing discriminatory wage practices, etc.

Patriarchy is not a public institution or a group of individuals. It describes a social system in which power is held mostly by men. That's all.

You know, you can be critical of liberal feminism without being dismissive of any concept ever so slightly associated with them.

...

Tell us what you would have done please.

Once rightists realized jumping onto Mens rights would be a good way to have pissing matches with feminists online 24/7 the men's rights movements was dead. Mainly because feminists can't not describe any group that bickers with them as evil mizooguny nazis.

Well done

> reddit.com/r/MensLib/

jesus, never thought I'd see you bootlickers reduced to coming to fucking Holla Forums to try selling your shit. I mean, I'm frustrated that examining gender from a male perspective is so entangled with right wing politics right now as well and have plenty of criticisms of the current men's rights movement (and of mainstream feminist currents), but MensLibbers are the worst possible alternative. They take the shittiest, most pathetic, self-loathing parts of the gentleman's auxilliary of liberal feminism and combine them with the most pitiful, whinging, do-nothing layers of the men's movement.

Whatever terrible things can be said about MRAs or political feminists, and there are many, MensLib is worse. And literally everybody hates them. Radfems hate them because a) they're male and b) you can't examine social gender without occasionally criticising normative female behaviour and c) muh trannies. Libfems hate them because they're not traditionalist enough and libfems generally are terrified of the prospect of men also abandoning their traditional roles. Lefty gender abolitionist MRAs hate them because they're too traditionalist, too willing to fall back into old patterns of typical masculine behaviour of sacrificing whatever they're doing to thirstily accomodate women. Righty tradcon and lolbert MRAs hate them because they see them all as cucks and manginas.

you shill this shit a lot.
fuck off Holla Forums.

Unverifiable dick measuring e-cred cliams in the first para. Does Reddit/Tumblr do something to peoples' brains?

The movement that almost uniformly wants to weaken or abolish marriage, and gave birth to MGTOWs, who abandon their societal obligations as perpetuators of humanity, let alone breadwinning patriarchs?

I remember the first time I ever came across the terms "feminist literature", and more laughably, "feminist theory". "Self", thought I, "How could someone write even one book, not to mention an entire genre of formal literature, enumerating the absence of sexual unfairness? No other abolition movement has something like that." Of course, I would later discover that it consisted of pretentious lezbo trannies trying to one-up eachother at constructing elaborate fantasies about how men and maleness are the cthonic root of all evil and suffering, reaching from the dawn of sexually dimorphic life, through all of human history, into an all-consuming conspiracy, whose phallocratic tentacles sprout from every man's every action and thought beginning In the (violate) womb, unless (perhaps) repressed by continuous engram clearanceprivilege checking and mortification of the fleshexploration of his feminine side.

>I watched the movie as well and the message is pretty much just that "Mens issues are a bigger problem, 'feminists' are crazy and hate men".
FTFY. These sorts of strawmen, like the "my revolution, your revolution"-one, seem endemic to feminazis.

If anything, one of the most similar foibles MRAs & feminists share, is a predilection for ultra-supremacist/isolationist/exterminationist ideological homosexuality.

The ones who, after the feminist founder of such services noticed that such problems afflicted men too, responded to her attempts at expanding shelters to handle abused husbands by burying her in slander and bomb threats until she obligingly committed suicide? Yes feminazis just love "helping" in cases of abused men.

[citation ne…


I personally think it's somewhat encouraging that we seem to have made enough of a splash to draw shills from both sides of such idpol grievance lobbies. Maybe the ideas of leftism are starting to bubble through their layers of indoctrination, and cause some persistent strife in their echo chambers.