As I was interviewing Alexander Cortes for my Planet Hawkins podcast (that one is not out yet), we were discussing criticism of the Red Pill. While both of us think learning about the Red Pill is useful, there was a dark side of it that I think is too often shrugged off or downplayed.
While the Red Pill is an extremely useful way of looking at why both sexes do what they do, it doesn’t necessarily work so well if you try to change it from an academic way of looking at sexual dynamics to hard and fast rules for guys to follow. Not only is the world too complicated to be broken down that way, a lot of other things that aren’t necessarily “Red pill” get lumped in with it.
As Rollo Tomassi, the “Godfather of the Red Pill” and someone whose work I respect said when I interviewed him,
People who were negative before they came to the red pill are still going to probably hang onto that negativity or if they’re are coming into the red pill with a preconception. Now when I talk about the red pill, I’m talking about intersexual dynamics. Okay? I’m not talking about politics. I’m not talking about, you know, alt-right stuff. I’m not talking about ethnonationalism or anything else. I stick strictly to intersectional dynamics. So I feel like I got to define that here before we move on because the red pill has become so bastardized lately that it’s this sort of pet brand for various ideologies. And it’s gotten to the point right now where everybody’s saying, well, the red pill is an ideology. I do not approach it that way. The red pill is a praxeology or it is a loose science.