Elliot Rodger, Ugly Girls, & Sex

By Chris Delamo of Red Pill Philosophy


Somewhere, right now, there is an angry, sexually frustrated woman.

She’s always liked men, but men…never liked her.

She’s not “ugly”, per se, but she IS about 60 pounds overweight.

Every time she walks into public places—a Starbucks, or at school, or the mall—she darts her eyes to the left, to the right, inconspicuously using her peripheral vision to see if any guys are “checking her out”.

But even when she thinks they’re looking, unsure if her peripheral vision was deceiving her, she would turn to see that the guy she thought was interested in HER, was actually looking just behind her at the slimmer women in tight jeans, strutting confidently forward with long, flowing blonde hair.


Disappointed, she grits her teeth, and continues her day, feeling just a bit more depressed than she had the previous day, or the day before, or the day before that…

It’s not long before this overweight woman starts to RESENT men.

At night, lonely and lying in bed, she thinks to herself, “These superficial men, with their superficial standards, only interested in these slutty women.  Why don’t they like ME?”

She soon falls asleep, and dreams of a world where all the men she’s ever wanted, FINALLY learn to appreciate HER, instead of all those “slutty, stuck-up girls”.

But these dreams, these hopes, these ambitions quickly fester into a nightmare, one where she is trapped in a cycle of self-hatred, which breeds more loneliness, which breeds more self-hatred, and then more loneliness as she becomes a more wretched and unlikeable person over time—not because SHE is fundamentally unlikeable, but because she has chosen NOT to like herself…

But this nightmare is not just in her head: this is the REAL LIFE she lives everyday.


Men still ignore her, yet DROOL at the sight of the “pretty girls”.

One afternoon, she is leaving a book store, when a handsome guy holds the door open for her.

She smiles, surprised and hopeful, viewing his kindness as a gesture of interest in her.

She says, “Thank you.” In her desperate nervousness, afraid of letting this opportunity go to waste, she blurts out, “Hi, I’m Karen, what’s your name?”

Awkwardly, the guy responds, but immediately after looks past Karen at the “hot chick” behind her, who was trying to exit the book store, too.

As if she no longer existed, the guy ignores Karen and introduces himself to the blonde girl, holding the door open and then trying to chat with her as they walked away, leaving Karen alone.

Karen can hear the cracking sound of her teeth grinding in anger.

This was the last straw.


That night, lying alone in bed, she formulates a plot to murder all those men who ignored her, who never knew how to appreciate HER beauty, who always fell for those slutty, stuck-up women, who always had superficial standards and didn’t know what TRUE beauty was.

She would have…her day of Redemption.

If this sounds familiar to you, then you’ve probably heard about Elliot Rodger.

His sexually-frustrated mass-shooting was sparked by a life of loneliness and self-hatred, where women never seemed to like him, though they didn’t hesitate to throw themselves at the “brutish, obnoxious men” that he despised so much.

What does Elliot Rodger have in common with Karen the overweight girl?

They both are bitter at the world for having superficial dating standards, all while they themselves have superficial dating standards, too.

For Karen, she hated men for only liking the “hot girls”, even though she only wanted to date the “hot guys”.

For Elliot Rodger, he hated women for only liking the “hot guys”, even though he only wanted to date the “hot girls”.

Quite a contradiction, is it not?


You could just imagine if Elliot and Karen had ever crossed paths, that Karen would have HATED Elliot for not “checking her out”, because Elliot was too busy checking out the “hot blonde girls” he desired so much.

If anything, Elliot and Karen would have probably been a perfect match: two self-hating individuals, angry at the world for having superficial standards, all while they themselves had the SAME SUPERFICIAL STANDARDS!

Why would Karen hate men for only liking “the hot girls”, when Karen herself ONLY wanted to date “the hot guys”?

Why would Elliot hate women for only liking “the hot guys”, when Elliot himself ONLY wanted to date “the hot girls?”

This kind of neurotic contradiction, which Elliot seemed entirely unaware of, is at the core of what PROVES the TRUTH about people like Elliot and Karen.

They use the victim mentality of “boo-hoo, why don’t people like me” to justify their laziness in not putting in the work necessary to IMPROVE themselves in order to get laid.

How is it women’s responsibility to lower their standards so that they like Elliot, while Elliot himself wouldn’t lower his standards to date “less attractive girls” – hell, to date a girl just like Karen?


This contradiction is painfully obvious, yet due to the neurotic egotistical web of self-lies that Elliot spun, it was blurred out and hidden behind layers of entitlement and victimhood.

If “the hot girls” Elliot wanted to date were “evil and merciless”, then was Elliot “evil and merciless” because he wasn’t interested in the 60-pound overweight girl in the back of his psychology class?

What about poor Karen?

At the end of the day, people like Elliot Rodger suffer from a condition called “spoiled”: like a 5 year-old who throws a temper-tantrum because mommy didn’t buy him a toy, Elliot Rodger was angry because he didn’t want to put in the effort to do the TRULY hard work of improving his character in order to attract women.

Instead, he wanted the easy way out by “buying sunglasses, dress shirts, and a nice car”, hoping that those INANIMATE OBJECTS would do the attracting FOR him.


But that’s the easy way out: if attracting women was that easy, then no one would have trouble getting laid.

“Hey, all I gotta do is stand around with my sunglasses and shiny car, and women will FUCK ME!!!  YEAH!!!!”

Not really buddy, not really…

So, Elliot, and even a fictitious girl named Karen, are nothing more than spoiled and bitter, and instead of accepting that they can’t (or don’t want to) properly play the competitive game of dating, they create a victim-complex in their minds, where it’s not THEM that have to lose weight, or improve their character to attract others, it’s OTHERS who are evil, and merciless, and stuck up, and obnoxious, and brutish.

I have no pity for Elliot Rodger.

At best, he’s a victim of his own arrogance and ego.


CONNECT with Red Pill Philosophy:

- Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/RedPillPhilosophy

- Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/RedPillTweets

- YouTube:  http://www.youtube.com/LifeLibertyNow


Liked the Article? Donate to Support More:

1) Pay Pal:

2) Bitcoin: My Address:  1NtSZ7SrVRm9z6KWURNiNPpNbgmoo774sK

Russia Today News Anchor Quits on Air: Is This Manufactured Dissent by Russia?

Liz Wahl, a news anchor for Russia Today–a Russian-funded news organization that now has many outlets within the United States and has become quite popular in recent years–supposedly quit her job on Wednesday because she could no longer be “part of a network that whitewashes the actions of Putin.”

Is this true?

Can this be trusted?

What if this news anchor’s “quitting” was just a ploy to re-instill in the minds of the world that Russia Today, although funded by the same Russian government that this anchor claims would commit such an evil act of invasion, is a legitimate news organization run by people like Liz who oppose Russia’s militaristic spread, and thus is trustworthy?


I’ve always had questions about Russia Today.

I remember the first time I heard of it, I was scratching my head, puzzled: what the hell is a Russian news organization doing operating WITHIN the U.S., and worse: what is it doing CONSTANTLY criticizing the U.S.?

Now, I’m the FIRST person criticizing the U.S., because quite simply, the U.S. is worthy of criticism: unceasing imperialist wars, banker bailouts against the will of the citizens who paid for  it, and never-ending abuses of Americans’ (humans’) civil liberties here within the country.

So when I saw RT, years ago, not only criticizing the U.S. (and even giving a voice to 9/11 conspiracy theories), but also giving a platform for anti-U.S. voices WITHIN the U.S., like American citizens Adam Kokesh, Luke Rudkowski, Stefan Molyneux, Alex Jones, and basically ANY of the hardcore, libertarian, ANTI-American-Imperialism voices–I couldn’t help but feel like, if ANYTHING, RT was doing some good for the world: they were letting peaceful libertarians trash-talk the U.S. and all of its imperialistic, anti-liberty, anti-peace actions in the past century.

Swell, right?

Certainly, as a libertarian myself, and someone opposed to the unfettered war-mongering of the United States, I enjoyed what RT was reporting on, but I always wondered about ONE, IMPORTANT, QUESTION:

“Do you think Russia Today blasts American imperialism because they’re opposed to imperialism, or because they’re geopolitically opposed to the U.S.?” Continue reading

“Skeptics” Aren’t Really “Skeptics”

By Chris Delamo of Red Pill Philosophy


You know, I’m a big supporter of science.

Although my criticisms of the shortcomings modern mainstream science (specifically the doctrine of materialism) might lead you to believe otherwise, the fact is that I want science to be as SCIENTIFIC as possible, by removing as much dogma, belief, faith, and hearsay from it as I can.

I recently got into a short Twitter debate with Cara Santa Maria, a dedicated advocate of “science” who’s worked with The Young Turks and came to my attention through her two appearances on the Joe Rogan Experience Podcast.

In her Twitter description, she includes the hashtag “#ScienceFTW!”:


Wonderful: I like science, too.

But I don’t like hearsay, dogma, and faith DISGUISED as science.

I tweeted out to Cara the following: @CaraSantaMaria claims to be an empiricist, yet relies on hearsay from studies she didn’t conduct as foundation of her knowledge.”

The rationale behind the tweet was to show that, although Cara claims to be an advocate of science and empiricism, she is willing to BYPASS scientific empiricism by believing in the results of studies she did not personally conduct, on the basis of faith and hearsay alone.

Now, although this might sound like a harsh criticism, I agree that it is: it’s technically impossible for each person to personally carry out and perform EVERY study every done so they can PERSONALLY experience the evidence firsthand, instead of relying on faith and trust that those who actually DID conduct the experiments, are valid. Continue reading