PUA relies on Red Pill knowledge - one might say that PUA *exploits* Red Pill knowledge - but it is distinct. Trigonometry relies on Algebra, but they encompass different sets of material.
Now that you put it that way way. The PUA breaks down Red-Pill knowledge in such a way that on the surface it sounds gimmicky but it provides a structural framework on how you can express confidence. Allot of people do things that are scripted. Apart from Actors/Actresses, even Real-Estate coaches or someone making a presentation could be memorizing good scripts and delivering them in such a way it sounds like its coming from themselves. After all, its mainly the tone and body-language that people listen, and what you say is a smaller percentage. I would guess PUA frames and creates the right script and delivery if its done correctly.
It also had something called "Inner Game", which I guess sounds like the inherent value you are talking about, since it's often the missing ingredient to make everything work. If you do not believe that you have inherent attractiveness then you don't have "inner game" in order to make all of those routines work.
Is that how you would say PUA exploits Red Pill knowledge?
MatureDJ said:
The allegory from "The Matrix" is the basis - the Blue Pill believes the canonical methods of getting into a woman's pants are most effective, while the Red Pill knows the Truth that this is no longer the case in our sick contemporary society.
Most people seem to think that society has changed drastically since the 00 decade. The Matrix movie and those analogies were born on that decade. When you say contemporary society, do you mean post sexual revolution (i.e. late-sixties), or do you mean the 00 decade, or the late 10s decade to now?
MatureDJ said:
The holistic self-improvement is just building up one's core attractiveness. A man in good shape, well-read, and that has his sh!t together has a higher core value that is inherently more attractive - and this is common to both Pills, but the Blue Pill posits that a man can develop attractiveness by exherent attributes like spending money or otherwise supplicating behavior. Red Pill says that these exherent attributes are only "attractive" in that women will take advantage of such a man while keeping her true sexual interest in the inherently attractive man.
When you apply Christian principles, then everything sounds Blue-pill times 10. In a Christian marriage, the man is supposed to provide for the woman. In fact, the Bible says that if a man does not provide for his wife then he is worst than an infidel, and this is one of the only passages I've seen that word in the text. (1 Tim 5:8). A husband is to love their wife like Christ loved the church. (Eph 5:25). So it seems to me that the Bible supports a Blue-pill mindset towards providing for your wife. Do you think the Bible or Christianity is the main driving force of blue-pill thought or is the blue-pill something else entirely?
MatureDJ said:
Blue Pill will get a woman that looks at her Beta man as a wallet to be exhausted and back to be broken in toil, while her real sexual desire lies with the Alpha man with inherent attractiveness. Sure, the woman might be able to put up with sexually servicing her Beta man, but since she doesn't have an inherent desire for him, it will be easy for her to stop her servicing, hence "dead bedrooms".
This is why the disciples of Jesus said that it is good if nobody marries. Matt 19:10. So maybe Jesus' disciples started with MGTOW, or at least the genesis of this idea, when they saw marriage was a bad deal since divorce is not really possible. The cost is too high for it to be worth it according to them.
MatureDJ said:
Incel TV is very Red Pill in that it shows how women act just as Red Pill dictates, but also that there is a certain standard of inherent attractiveness that a man needs to be successful - and that most men don't meet this standard, which is different than the Blue Pill canonics, which states that men & women pair off at the same level of the sexual attractiveness totem pole, and thus there is a woman for every man. Incel TV basically explains why it is "so OVER" for such men.
Incel TV describes itself as Blackpill rather than Redpill.
MatureDJ said:
There isn't really a difference - although the MGTOW John would say that he could achieve non-professional sex if he really, really put in the effort (including all the BS), but that that effort (i.e., the squeeze") is not worth it. The escortcel accepts the fact that even if he put in the effort, he would not get sex (i.e., sex with a woman of a certain level of attractiveness, since even most normies could probably get fat chicks). Perhaps another difference is that the MGTOW doesn't feel the need to have sex as much, and thus could "take it or leave it" whereas the escortcel feels the need.
It sounds like you feel that most escortcels are really normies who don't like fat woman and want a hot 7+ woman but they are out of their league and there is simply nothing they can do about it, while MGTOWS are able to get a hot enough woman but simply don't want to.
So, someone who settles with someone they are not attracted to but is unpaid vs someone paying for someone they are satisfied with, which arrangement of the two is worst off in your opinion?
