OK, you know the drill,..stop, wait, don’t hit play just yet.
Before you think I’m being unusually cruel by posting this, try to pause a moment and observe the particulars of how Chelsea’s process works. Don’t assume I’m poking fun at all women; I’m using this as an illustration of process. She’s obviously not the sharpest tool in the drawer, and I can already hear the NAWALT echoes from the Matrix, but try to tune out the hilarity of this and understand how she constructs her reasoning here. It’s a fascinating insight into the approach average women use when calculating rational matters. I have no doubt that offended women will seek to dissociate themselves from this sort of ignorance, but I’m not focusing on ridicule here, I’m interested in the process.
From the beginning Chelsea can’t appear to have not given the topic its logical due diligence. So she’s has to prove an effort has been made on her part by offering a lengthy breakdown of how she figured it out. Watch any Sarah Palin interview and you’ll get the idea; it’s similar to having to show your work when doing a mathematical computation in school. After a lengthy analysis, “yeah, I dunno how you’d work that out.”
Next we move into the solipsistic logic that is women’s default when required to formulate a logical-sounding theory. Chelsea is kind enough to verbalize this for us; “if I run a mile in like,..9 minutes,..but when I’m really in shape, it’s like,..7 minutes,..when I’m really in shape, and that like takes me a mile. An I’m running at like 10 miles per hour, and that’s pretty fast for a human being,..”, however this is often an unspoken, subconscious process for women. As I’ve describe in past post, women’s solipsism and emotional wiring is generally the primary conduit through which problem solving and opinion formulation occurs. That’s not to say that women lack the capacity to be just as rational as men, but it is to say that this solipsistic logic is the innate filter that must be cognitively repressed when arriving at a rational solution to a problem.
To see this in action all a guy needs to do is read any manosphere comment thread to see the frequency with which women will apply their personal, anecdotal experiences to a situation and presume her experience is the global, universally applicable, reality.
Continuing,..once Chel realizes that her personal experience isn’t sufficient to adequately solve the problem she then resorts back to over-explanation of her process, only this time, with more variables added to hedge her bets for when she inevitably is proven uneducated in her assessments. This is called preemptive ego preservation. You see, at a certain point, once personalization and wordy analyzation proves fruitless in solving or misdirecting a solution, there needs to be footnotes and caveats pre-established and readily available when the actual solution is provided. In fact a NAWALT (“not all women are like that”) retort is a prepackaged form of exactly this preemptive ego preservation.
And as you can see, when the actual verifiable solution is presented, she falls back on all of her previous methodologies at once, and includes her previous caveats in her defense in spite of the empirical evidence that disproves her “logic”.
Finally comes the accusations of error on the premises of the poser of the question,..
“you are not making sense, I make sense, you do not make sense…you don’t know the answer, you guestimate like I guestimate…”
She’s dumb as fuck, but I recognize that process. She’s not listening to the question, she only hears half of it and it’s interrumpted by some internal reference. When she finds an internal reference for part of the question, she thinks she’s got it, and she takes it from there, of course arriving at whatever irrelevant “conclusion”. So the question has to be asked once and again, and she does the same process again and again. Basically she exhausts her internal references repertoire then gets frustrated because that’s not “enough”, and since you’re putting her in that position, you must… Read more »
She sounds like a typical California liberal, actually. Facts, logic and reason have no place in that tiny brain. She’s all emotions.
Thanks for the laugh. Good post.
I appreciate stupid broads; they’re entertaining.
we’ll she’s hot
so she could always strip as a back up plan if she ever gets short on cash 🙂
She’s going to need a pimp to handle her money though. How many blowjobs is ten blowjobs per hour?
“Hmmm when Im really fit… I slash that in half?”
wait….is that 1 dance for $50
or 50 dances for $1
That’s a lot of dances for a human being.
Hilarious part is that the guy who asked her the question said she was his wife. Scary.
I realize we all have different tastes but that chick is no where near being “hot” !
You Men are sooo meeaaannnn!!!! I’m mean, come on she’s just . . . .
No, I got nothin’. She’s just dumb . 😉
Almost as funny as the original video is this “response to MPH” video that popped up in Youtube after the original was over. Check out how the herd protects itself and continues to reframe the question as “Not Chelsea’s fault”
Not sure if that was a goof or not, but again follow the solipsistic stream of logic in this as I outlined in the post. Ramble off irrelevant facts, personalization as prof of evidence, preemptive ego preservations, and ended with ‘your just wrong’ and shame.
Dunno if it is or not, but going through the response videos are hilarious. Seen two other women that can’t get around the whole thing and get caught up in the same process you’re describing.
Then I see a seven year old that not only can do it, but was able to tell you that if you’re going 80 MPH it will only take you 30 minutes to go 40 miles.
Damnit, linked the wrong video. Go delete that if you want Rollo.
This follow up had me LOL “There are so many factors we didn’t take into account here” Lauren, is so right. We forgot to take into account that the answer was embedded in the question. She didn’t think to mention that one. I’m surprised she didn’t use the trick question excuse. Also highly amusing was how she defended Chelsea’s slow running by calling attention to herself. “So what if she’s a slow runner. Not everyone can hit the gym everyday like I do” So now that this guy has humiliated his wife in front of the whole world, do you… Read more »
He’s probably getting more than he was before – either grateful “you made me famous” sex (goes along with her stupidity) or she divorced him and he’s getting some good single action.
If you look at the other videos and info for the woman who made the reply, it becomes pretty obvious that it’s a parody.
As has been pointed out by many others in many other instances, notice how often she uses the word “I” to communicate.
On the surface it appears as if she’s merely poking fun at and disapproving of Chel’s (original MPH girl) stupidity. But because of the education I’m receiving from this site, I’m starting to “hear past the words”, so to speak, and instead I’m “hearing” the processes and medium *behind* them. She’s every bit as solipsistic as the female she’s ostensibly put herself above by way of ridicule.
I think I’m really starting to unplug…
Yep, try to figure out what’s the point of the video?
“I just thought I should share my frustration”
Check her other videos too. Actually find any female video pointing at the obvious…
“Before you think I’m being unusually cruel by posting this…”
No, of course not. No one thought that of the other 1000 sites who posted that before… wait, what 🙂
Good analysis as usual.
Those are the women who does not need men? Those who needs to be encouraged to enter in STEM?
Solipistic doesn’t mean what you think it does.
Unstructured……….the rathional male’s writing and thinking syle.
Come back once you’re educated and you have something to contribute.
it’s not spelled “solipistic”
nice trying to shit all over the concept behind the post and you can’t even get your own post right
The truly scary thing is — 51% of the electorate in this country use this same “thought process” to choose who (and/or what) they *vote* for !
Western civilization made a huge mistake in elevating women to equal status as men under the law.
this video is proof of that
I can’t say as I agree with that. I know enough women who do have the capacity to rationalize things; my critique is that there is an innate mental process which is an obstacle to a rational process that most feel no necessity to cognitively address, and furthermore feel offended that anyone should expect them to, much less point it out to them and think them stupid. It’s like men struggling to get past our testosterone and look beyond big tits, a flat stomach and a nice ass before making a rational decision about something. Far too many guys get… Read more »
the difference is that society has its guns pointed at men forcing us to ‘get past our testosterone’ as you nicely put it. news, movies, music…all attack men wantonly where is the parallel hysteria for women to get over their cognitive issues? there is none. So men become defacto slaves to women’s ridicule. The wise are always slaves to the ignorant especially when the weight of the state is placed behind the ignorant. tangentially..it is men who do hard science (99% percent of the time). Women scorn and vilify logic (the girl in the response video ‘is that the type… Read more »
Your suggestion to observe the video as a legitimate example of default feminine processes, rather than simply another example of comical female stupidity, was well taken by this reader. Sure, it’s funny to watch–especially when her husband pans the camera back to himself to record his reactions of gleeful disbelief. But it all becomes less and less funny as I realize that what I’m witnessing is actually (and chillingly) a splintered piece of the larger dysfunctional cultural/societal imperative. In other words, what I saw in the video was this: the very reason incarnate why females in general do not pursue… Read more »
As a red pill man in the arts – I can attest to this as being true. I know that I plan on doing all I can to fight against it though. I’m a set designer for theatre. I plan on starting my own company with some friends, putting out messages and plays on this and other subjects I care about, and possibly going into academic life as a professor later in life. There I can directly educate men and women on arts and find ways to not give in to the feminine imperative – to find ways to bring… Read more »
If you happen to be starting your new company in the Chicagoland area, I’m going to ask you to take a look at my portfolio and resume.
I am in the Chicagoland area actually. The company thing is probably a year or two away – its with some people I met in undergrad. We all just moved to Chicago in the last year and are getting our feet under us in the theatre scene here and seeing what we need to do to in order to get a company off the ground.
Feel free to shoot me an email though – email@example.com.
See this, girls? The underground is real.
Yes exactly….history will show the mistake of equality. Women (99% of the time) have neither the capacity nor the will to achieve ‘greatness’ in the sense as it is defined…. the realm of women is the social. the realm of men is the world. we have given women the world and its rules of science and mathematics are (generally) too complex for them, so they endeavor to bend science to the social…a fool’s errand if ever there was one. men have built the world and now women are destroying it…with the precise sort of ‘logic’ shown in the video…and no… Read more »
Also, here’s a play by a red pill man (or atleast, he writes like one). Its freaking amazing – I’m pushing a company I work with to produce it here in Chicago. If any readers are in Iowa City, it’s being produced there as well. This is the kind of great art I want to be involved in – a ton of great views on the social ideas of today presented by both men and women. I’d hate to see this in the hands of a feminist director (she’d probably portray the men as weak idiots), but in a red… Read more »
Sure, some might find her attractive, but the ‘nice-but-dumb-fake- California blonde-types’ are never truly attractive, are they? The more she opened her mouth the more cringeworthy she became. But hey, she’s a n-i-c-e girl!!! Lucky guy, eh? She should count her lucky stars she’s married. Let’s hope husband doesn’t get bored. “once Chel[sea] (God, I hate that name, it’s just reeks of preciousness and pretense) realizes that her personal experience isn’t sufficient to adequately solve the problem she then resorts back to over-explanation of her process, only this time, with more variables added to hedge her bets for when she… Read more »
OT: hilarity continues on HUS:
“This is not pie in the sky stuff. There has been a great deal of study and research on this. Devlin doesn’t count. You and I don’t get to make shit up.”
“Honestly, I feel like the Game bloggers and their readers are getting more and more strident, more and more negative about women. The animus has skyrocketed in the last year or so. I am not sure why. Roissy used to be the most cynical, and he’s a pussycat compared to Rollo or Dalrock.”
This woman is just nasty.
Wait, it gets better:
” If you want to opine on female sexuality, back up your claims with credible sources. I can cite a source for every claim I make. You should do the same. And as Escoffier can tell you, by credible I don’t mean misogynist sociopath.”
Escoffier is a credibility seal now? that’s an even better joke.
The real joke is that she barks out ‘misogynist sociopath’ as if it was some sort of scientific definition. (I posted two further quotes in a comment that’s stuck in moderation btw, hence the words ‘it gets better’.) She’s so full of shit.
It’s a form of fallacy called “poisoning the waters”. I can do it too:
“OK Hollen… tell me something that is not completely and pathologically stupid.”
See? I can do it! It doesnt come as first nature though. Im slow. That’s a lot of fallacies for a human being ya know.
Also, had a good laugh at the second to last paragraph of her newest post. Without irony, SW discussing kicking bad habits-
“There is another type of habitual behavior that involves more cognitive activity, namely people’s interpretation of a situation according to what it means for them and how it fits into the narratives they tell themselves. These behaviors are habitual in the sense that people have chronic ways of interpreting the world.”
Ha, that’s funny, coming from Miss “I have my own truth and you have no right to judge it as a lie because you don’t know what it is” .
Here’s the link to the comment just in case anyone thinks I’m making it up.
Exhibit A: how this woman “analysed” Roissy’s Dread:
“It doesn’t work on me!” *points finger at self proudly*
maybe brunettes are better
Maybe the reason these girls are having such a difficult time is because MPH is a patriarchical, heteronormative, cisgendered construct meant to oppress women.
Haha, yeah Yohami, that was one of the other women I saw getting tripped up by the same things. It’s too fucking funny. And scary. Definitely makes you understand why there’s so many more men in STEM areas.
Ha!!! Good stuff. I used to think that Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehorse were merely comedians from the UK who made satirical comedic skits of 1940’s education films and modern life in London;
Women: Know Your Limits!
Women: Don’t Drive!
Women: Keep Your Virtue!
Blonds of a Certain Age
Now, I’m suspect they might be more subversive than I ever thought possible.
Christ almighty. I enjoy your blog BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD please learn proper English grammar. Of note, learn the difference between “it’s” and “its.” Every one of your posts is riddled with errors. Funny how you ridicule this female but don’t have a third-grade level grasp of basic grammatical concepts.
Hey, RT I’m fairly new to your site and the manosphere in general. I started with solvemygirlproblems.com, then read all of Roissy and then your articles (now checking out Dalrock). I really like your writing style and analytical approach to things. I’m seeing things from a very different perspective. I have a question for you… I’m aware of Roissy’s 12 commandments of poon and that often a woman complaining about not getting enough attention or feeling loved is really suffering a lack of attraction rather than rapport. However, basic instincts often tell me that rather than “weather her storm” when… Read more »
Well, why do you feel you have to argue with her at all? If you’re arguing with her you’re already having a problem – it will get emotional and that’s her arena where she will excel. If she’s not at that point, have a discussion, take in her opinion first, and then make your decision and stick to it with authority. Depending on the individual, maybe express your desire first, take hers, and then make a decision – she may need to see that you do consider her point of view rather than just going with what you want at… Read more »
I appreciate the reply. I completely understand the game POV you gave me and there MUST be times when it’s necessary, but I invite you to check out the link I posted. When you’re girl is arguing w/ u doean’t it ever seem like it is a sign that SHE GIVES A SHIT? You’re renogotiating the terms of the relationship and if you want to take he thing to the next level you had better show you’re invested enough to get pissed?
“When you’re girl is arguing w/ u doean’t it ever seem like it is a sign that SHE GIVES A SHIT?”
Well, she maybe gives a shit about getting you to do what SHE wants rather than what YOU want. But in a good relationship, the girl will try to find out what YOU BOTH want.
Otherwise, she’s just a bully, and you’re an insecure, dependent fool for tolerating her bullying when all you have to do is physically leave (including cutting off all communication) and GFTOW.
Don’t mind me, just a therapist with ten years experience.
She tries to answer the question by stringing words together into arrangements that sound like they might make sense. To her, it’s a purely verbal puzzle. At no stage does she grapple with the underlying concepts of time, speed, and distance.
I’m pretty sure she’s Mormon.
The masses have commented. Apparently HE’S the one being ridiculed more for posting this video…how he’s in the “doghouse” Apparently he was just teasing and he made a very public apology to her.
I would very much like to get input.
Also, she goes to Utah State University. She….is in college.
Too funny and true. I couldn’t answer the question either!
Congrats, Rollo. I’m pretty sure you “made it” in the blogoshere when the grammar
nazisnerds think you are worthy of correcting.
if a possessive/plural apostrophe is my worst sin, send me to hell.
Not as bad as those other people who are REALLY dumb and can’t explain MPH, right.
Well, maybe it won’t send you to hell, but it does make you look like an idiot. And it’s pretty amusing when someone who’s deriding other people for stupidity can’t spell simple English correctly.
It’s really not that hard to tell the difference between, say, “it’s” and “its” or “who’s” and “whose”. Figure it out before you make fun of other people.
So I actually tried this on a plate last night. I consider her to be fairly intelligent. I was somewhat surprised when I saw the hamster wheel start spinning immediately…”welllll if you travel a mile in a minute then you add twenty minutes so an hour and twenty minutes maybe? I’m not so good at math” and so on from there with about 5 minutes of more inexplicable algorithms. Her math made more sense then this sorry broad in the video but the point is women’s brains for the most part don’t seem to be hardwired for logic and deductive… Read more »
Try reframing the question:
If you get 80 bucks for a blowjob and want to buy an accessory that costs $80, how many blowjobs do you have to give?
Sure brings back memories of this girl. Lets face it pretty women aren’t usually smart because they never had to strive to be in order to get ahead in life.
What The Fuck.
No brains = no headaches. Saves you from spending money on aspirin.
Some dude’ll marry and take care of her.
This is interesting, but I think you’re only partially right. Your wife (is that you who wrote this? Sorry, first time here…) obviously likes the attention your giving her. Once or twice in there (I didn’t finish the entire video — stopped when you started explaining the methodology…) you could almost see her just beginning to smile…I think they call those micro-expressions. And yes, I’m proud of that word, it’s the first time I’ve used it in written dialogue. My point is that, I think you’re right that your wife (?) is using solipsistic reasoning, but I also think that… Read more »
“To see this in action all a guy needs to do is read any manosphere comment thread to see the frequency with which women will apply their personal, anecdotal experiences to a situation and presume her experience is the global, universally applicable, reality.”
Did it not occur to you that you are commiting this error as well by using an anectoadal story about your wife? You asked a woman a math question, she gave a confused response, and you apply this as universal to all “average” women.
Must I acknowledge this as a usual case of solipsism? Is there any hope that this may be an extreme, “industrial strength” case?
Women are too funny. Her best answer (to the MPH question) would have been “I don’t know” versus letting the hamster spin. Two video examples by two different women with the same result (fail).
And yes, all women do this…there are no exceptions.
[…] on more occasions than I can account on this blog, and with regard to how women defer to their solipsistic nature there is no better way to identify it than in the priorities they give to communicating with men […]
Sounds like Common Core math, eh?
Women should not vote. Or be president or a judge
[…] Solipsistic Logic […]
Rollo, looks like one of the bots is back.