We aim for equality every day: equal time working, equal time parenting. Time together. Time apart.
But today it felt like I was holding the world together by myself.
I'm trying to tell him how hard it was, looking for appreciation, looking for a promise that he'll help me get more me time tomorrow.
He's not hearing me: He's defending. He's explaining. He's excusing. He's rationalizing.
I take a deep breath, measure my words, make sure this comes out as an "I statement":
"I feel unappreciated and alone.""Well, you're choosing to feel those things."
Clearly, we need some help communicating.
I came across some relationship advice claiming to fix everything.
A whole new frame for seeing the world:
Here was advice, aimed at men, to stop doing exactly what he was doing: DEERing — Defending, Explaining, Excusing, Rationalizing.
The only problem was, the advice came at the expense of my status as an equal member of my marriage.
Enough mystery: I'm talking about The Red Pill. And specifically, I'm talking about Married Red Pill.
From the FAQ of the Married Red Pill (MRP) subreddit, which has over 24,000 subscribers (and I've got to assume thousands more lurkers who don't want their wives to know):
"We are men that (sic) subscribe to The Red Pill (TRP) philosophy of sexual strategy, and are dedicated to applying it in marriage or in Long Term Relationships."Wait, what's The Red Pill?
"This is the Red Pill on hard mode."
The term Red Pill comes from the beginning of The Matrix, where Morpheus offers Neo a choice between two pills: a blue pill to wake back up in his bed and carry on as he was, or a red pill to learn the truth.
The "truth," as Red Pillers see it, is that men are a certain way and women are a certain way, and men should work on themselves in order to be/appear more alpha (like a wolf pack leader. Sigh.) They believe men are naturally dominant over women, and more rational, and should "game" women in order to get what they want (to have sex and be served by women).MRP is "Red Pill on hard mode," because these men are trying to game the same woman every day, rather than just trying to get strangers to have sex with them. Trying out false confidence on lots of ladies until you manage a one-night stand does sound much easier than getting a woman to stay with you long-term once you've swallowed the Red Pill.
What would a Red Piller have done, in the conversation my husband and I had?
This thread on MRP is about when your wife is trying to vent, or connect, and you're trying to mansplain. (Of course, it doesn't use the word mansplain.)
The man in this post fails when he tries to, in his words, "give a great logical solution to a woman," and she replies, I just want you to listen, not to fix everything.
Okay, most of us have been there.
“She wants the feeling she gets that she’s worth listening to.”
STFU. At first I thought it meant to tell the woman to STFU, but the advice is actually for the man to be quiet. Yes, that could help.
Hug. Yes, if she's open to a hug right now, that could be awesome.
Sass. Depending on what's said, a little humor could help.
Dancing. Sure, getting moving could be helpful. Dancing with her could feel like connecting.
"She wants the feeling she gets that she's worth listening too (sic)." Yes, exactly, it feels good to be listened to!
But then comes this bit of mental gymnastics:
"This is why the ass-hole got the girl. While you were determined to care about and fix her negative feelings... he was busy not giving a shit..."Somehow the Married Red Pill takeaway was that caring is the problem, while listening — okay, not listening, but giving the appearance of listening — works because it's an asshole move, and women really just want assholes.
Nope. Woman here. Can confirm that we just want our partners to treat us with basic respect and care.
Other problematic things in that Reddit post:
Where do I even begin?
- "As an MRP dude you are inherently logical." Read The Magical Thinking of Guys Who Love Logic by Aisling McCrea to understand how ridiculous these repeated assertions of logic and rationality are.
- Women "don't have the greater sense of righteousness for acknowledging her flaws and improving them." Lol.
- "Ever notice that most women are bad at telling stories."
- "Respond by controlling her feelings to what you want!!"
Hey, we've got something tried and true; let's remove the heart!
In the case of Red Pill, the missing piece is the "giving a shit" part, the caring, the love, the respect — the partnership. And Married Red Pill men are proudly trying to game their wives. It's all tactics.
TRP is a "philosophy of sexual strategy."
Married Red Pillers, though already in serious relationships, are studying pickup artist tactics designed to trick women into having sex with men. MRP followers discuss tactics to get their wives to quit asking them to do stuff (what they call "nagging" and "shit tests") and to have more sex with them.
And they call it Fight Club. Married men are out there, swallowing the Red Pill, and discussing tactics with each other. They're not respecting their wives, but they are respecting the first — and second — rules of Fight Club:
You do not talk about Fight Club.How do You Even Know if Your Husband Swallowed The Pill?
'Alpha Pills'
My husband is a visual artist, and he listens to a lot of podcasts while he works. He told me last week that he listened to a relationship podcast, that it was great, even though it was really, "Men are like this and women are like this." Immediately, I felt panicked.
I'd just read Hussein Kesvani's When YouTube Red-Pills the Love of Your Life in MEL Magazine. A friend of mine lived a similar story. Before divorcing him, she watched her open-minded, loving partner devolve into a racist anti-feminist, all because of the Red Pill. They have two young daughters.
My husband is a leftist anarchist, identifies as a feminist. I have zero reason to think he'd swallow the Red Pill (or any Pill), and yet I got so scared, afraid a podcast could brainwash him and ruin everything.
He told me the podcast was hosted by two ladies. I felt my entire body relax.
How Men Get Sucked In
Here's a couple snippets from a post about "reasonable requests," on the MRP subreddit, written by a newbie:
"I've found that a few times I've been failing in a different way when my wife makes reasonable requests."This newbie recently discovered TRP philosophy, but he's still in touch with reality, still understands his wife can be reasonable too, that men do not have dominion over reason.
and
"I was being a sarcastic prick. My wife pointed it out, and she was right."
He realizes his old communication patterns weren't working, so he's trying something new, communicating differently. And it seems to be working. So he's thinking, "Wow, TRP is really onto something!"
Similar to how Eastern religions got repackaged into productivity bestsellers, the timeless virtues of patience and listening are co-opted into strategy to get men laid.Every time someone posts that the techniques are working, because they feel closer to their wife, someone else tells them they don't sound like an alpha, that it's not about getting closer, that they "have a lot to learn."
MRP Newb: "She's told me she appreciates that I'm not just reacting, and she's been sweeter and more affectionate toward me. We're making progress because I'm making progress."What I'm thinking: Don't listen to their feedback! You and your marriage still have a chance! Toss all the metaphorical pills in the metaphorical trash, and just treat your wife as an equal! Because she is!
MRP Commenter: "Did you tell her about fight club? Also, what the fuck is up with this "we're making progress" BS? Yep... you're balls deep in her frame."
MRP Newb: "Feedback well taken. I was trying to say that I'm setting an example for what a better marriage looks like."
The hierarchy is clear. And of course it is: their whole deal is hierarchy:
Alpha men on top, then beta men, then "all my kids, (wife included)."
Men go online looking for answers, because no one ever taught them how to talk about feelings. The Red Pill promises a solution, then gives them textbook toxic masculinity.
In case it's not clear, Red Pillers despise feminism.
The Red Pill's glossary — found in MRP's pinned post — calls feminism "a doctrine of class hatred, and violence."
Here's a quote from a popular TRP post about what to do instead of DEER (Defend, Explain, Excuse, Rationalize).
Married Red Pillers called this post "INVALUABLE," "fucking gold," and "Probably the most valuable information on this subreddit":
"In a healthy sexual relationship, the submissive feminine women (sic) is subordinate to a competent, masculine male.Married Red Pillers call themselves "captains" of their marriage, and refer to their wives as "children."
You, as the man, are the captain of the ship, and she is your trustworthy first-mate.
You were given the responsibility of being the ever knowing, omnipresent manifestation of masculinity, and she is the flowery child, impulsive, curious, emotional, and silly, but most of all, eager for definitive direction from a strong authority figure.
If at any point these roles switch, there will be hell to pay."
Their entire philosophy rests on gender inequality. What clearer evidence do we have for the validity of and need for feminism?Here's one of countless "captain" posts. Notice the frequent use of the word "henpecking" and the insistence that wives want their husbands to be leaders — not partners, but leaders.
It's terrifying — it's Handmaidesque — but it's also kind of sad.
These men want answers. They want to feel self-worth, appreciation. They want to feel competent, strong. They want respect, connection. They want what we all want: to feel like they have a clue what they're doing, like life makes sense.
Life doesn't make sense. We can't find answers through a pill, certainly not through The Red Pill. But we can find connection, when we truly see each other as equals.
Reader Comments
there is no give and TAKE, but there is give and receive.
However, this online group ("Married Red Pill") teaches men to manipulate in order to get what they want.
That can only go one way (badly) when relationships are about respecting and celebrating differences between people as well as actively treating a partner as an equal. No need to 'game' them (i.e.manipulate). That just destroys any cohesiveness. Or, it will eventually. Nobody likes being used, it doesn't matter what sex they are.
Or at least, it is where I come from.
If you think that men have the same needs as women, you're in for a lifetime of disappointment, Ruth.
If you think that men should think like women, you're in for a lifetime of disappointment, Ruth.
If you think that men should have the same needs as women, you're in for a lifetime of disappointment, Ruth.
Scrolling down I think it was written for the sort of people who indulge in that ghastly unattractive fashion of purposely torn jeans.
Women: Stop spending every waking moment trying to second guess men.
Men: Stop spending every waking moment trying to second guess women.
Just kidding folks. I have a fantastic marriage and we love each other very much.
"Well, you're choosing to feel those things."
She is clearly choosing to feel unappreciated and alone. This couldn't be more obvious than the fact that her husband is lying right next to her as she says this, that is not the definition of alone and her feelings do not reflect reality. If he needs to console her every time these feelings arise she will become a child. When does it end? He will continue to reinforce that those feelings are normal by addressing them and she will think it's okay to let these feelings dictate her perception of reality. What she is really saying when she says that to him is "This is your fault, now grovel and apologize for making me feel this way." Adults should have the maturity to understand that life is not about you, it's about learning and surviving. If you can have a partner in that struggle than you are all that much more blessed, plenty of people have to make this journey truly alone (as in without a husband or wife). She's also allowing the world to dictate to her that she ought to feel that way through whatever feminist programming she has consumed. Instead she should appreciate that he is there and together they are working toward a common goal, no matter how much either is contributing.
It also sounds like she has a very high opinion of herself and what she is contributing to her relationship. I would like to ask her if she sees her marriage as a competition, because it seems to me she wants it to be a race to who can complete the most tasks and the winner gets to hold this over the others head and make them grovel. This is a mistake. Everyone will have days they contribute more and days they will contribute less, focusing on that will only embolden these feelings to arise more often. If the dishes need to be done, just do them, not because you will then have something to laud over your husband, but because it's the right thing to do. Marriages that turn into these games of who does more will never last because both subjects are not actually committed to one another or the common goal. People change by seeing the good in each other shine through and telling themselves that's who they want to be too. If you try to force that they will look for reasons not to believe and resist changing. All you can strive for is to do what's right and then you can have perfect peace knowing you did all that you could. If the other half doesn't contribute more maybe you should accept that you made a poor choice in a mate and deal with the consequences of such until they are ready to change. Marriage is about knowing who you are and who they are before making such a commitment.
Finally, let's not beat around the bush, feminism is about female supremacy . It's right in the name! If it was about equality then they would call it egalitarianism. Women do not deserve special treatment anymore than men do under the law, that means women should get the same sentencing for the same crime as men and there should be equal treatment of men's reproductive and child custody rights. Conversely, we should treat men and women differently in culture because they are different and should be treated as thus, refer to trans people competing in sports to see what I mean. If her husband is a feminist then this marriage is doomed to failure. One day he will wake up, see that he is not less than her, she is not more than him, that she manipulated him into believe in her supremacy and rebel.
" When a man marries, his wife starts right in to make him into the bloke she wanted to marry. If he lets her do it, she'll despise him. If he resists, she'll nag him 'till the end of his days."
She doesn't want her husband to be a man. She wants equality in the marriage when it suits her, and feminine superiority when it doesn't ie. he should shut the fuck up and remain silent when she wants to vent her frustrations without him offering his own opinion. But, what about if he wants to vent? Can he tell her to shut the fuck up and just listen? Wouldn't that be true equality? A problem that some women have when it comes to their "men" is that they feel the great need to mold that man into something useful, something that they envision he should be regardless of what he already is. I didn't see any mention of drug addiction, alcoholism, or adultery, so I think that her molding of her husband is disrespectful to him. And, as is typical feminist control fashion, she appears to be one that likes to withhold sexual connection from her husband, using her vagina as a tool to get what she wants, but would despise and ridicule her husband were he to attempt to withhold penis from her as a...hehe...tool of his own.
As a man, I'm sure my "mansplaining" would be called out because I prefer to get to the point. I find unnecessary details unnecessary and useless. To me, in a conversation, there is a point A to point B. A happened, and B was the result. Now, my wife can tell a story, and her story also has a point A and a point B. I love my wife, she is the world to me. However, the story she has to tell, while proceeding from A to B contains an uncertain amount of appendices. Details during the story about what someone might have been wearing, or what the weather was like during the events of this story, or what customers she may have had or what they were doing. "Femsplaining" I like to call it. Thankfully, she's not a feminist, and despises feminist ideology. I am a man, and she a woman. We are the way that we are individually, but we merge together as a team. I am dominant, she submissive. We both believe in egalitarianism, we are both great at things the other is not, and we both fill our roles the way we were meant to. When it comes to the children, she nurtures, and I discipline. She bandages their wounds, and I tell them that it's going to be a beautiful scar.
We have a great marriage. I wouldn't trade her for anything in the world. We have a marriage of mutual respect, trust, and honor. That isn't to say we don't get under one another's skin. But, when we do, we don't hold a superiority or elitest complex over each other's heads. We provide one another with what we need when we need it. Feminists and SJW's, both "male" and female, have everything all wrong in terms of world view. Feminism isn't about equality. You can't be equal while you're tearing the other down and forcing your opinion and world view onto them. One and one will always be two, but regardless of the differences one may have over or under the other, they both equal an even number.
And, she loves my misogyny.
The question is; over the long run, who's really the dominant one?
A battle for power of one over another, neither one has any idea what a real loving cooperative, collaborative relationship really looks.... like in a caring bonded relationship.
A relationship that sees each other as equals, willing to support one another in their goals toward a fulling productive life, for both partners.
This diatribe gives nothing more than insight into the relationship of SJW bonding, full of conflict, selfishness, and lack of any form of understanding of what one anthers needs are to make this a loving and caring bond, that will last.
A capsule the how they see intimate relationships......Just my thought.
Her profile reads: Veganism and Parenting too! "Yeah empathy for the win"...
"Sex is non-verbal".
I tend to think....
"Empathy is non-verbal".
I kind of wonder how a person can be accused of being the very thing they is trying to point out. Doesn't anyone have the patience to read the full article?
Reading articles about relationships is what women in trouble do.
* See my first comment.
If you've got a problem with that, you're the one left with the problem.
Of that I'm doubtful, unless perhaps you were just content to stick with...
"Shrug. I guess it means that they don't matter then."
If so, once again, you're the one left with the problem.
The Game by Neil Strauss is worth a read. While 95% of it is actually a primer on how to get laid, the other 5% explains that whatever your game, it won't work on The One. Using the Game on a woman you respect enough to want to be with everyday will fail. It's actually the moral of the author's tale. I guarantee each one of these men who are trying to game their wives are actually doing it [marriage] the hard way, and they will have unfulfilling marriages that are likely to end in divorce.
I'm lucky enough to be married to my best friend. Neither of us took the other's last name. It would change the dynamic. We are a unit, but we are still individuals. And mutual respect and effort are the foundation of our relationship. It's been hard work, but it would be harder if I lived with the illusion that the point of marriage is to get what you want all the time.
I've been reading your stuff for more years than I care to mention, and I don't recall you ever referencing any of your personal experiences with boys, men, women, whomever, whatever.
Maybe you just like to read about that kind of thing.
But.... if it's important to you to keep whether or not you've actually had any sexual relationships with men at all a Deep Dark Secret, I shall respect that.
Equally so, as to whether you just speak with the accumulated gravitas from forty years of reading Marie-Claire magazine or whatever.
So there's this crap that's been shoveled out about being a Alpha male, which was evidently formulated by a psychopath (criminal) because no right minded person enters a relationship with ideas about that relationship being a profit loss trade system, or themselves as a kind of divine supreme ruler. Lol~ talk about F--ing wacked. Good luck in love with that BS.
Honestly you say something like "You're choosing to see it that way, and you're inviting a frying pan across the head." Christ Sakes can you get any dumber? Fuck I wouldn't have someone like that around me either, whoever they were, male or female. Like what am I living with: A person or a Cat? We love critters like cats because they assume everthing is all about them, but it's not an attractive feature in real relationships or people generally speaking.
This Alpha crap is about becoming a monster, not about becoming a human being. I don't want other humans around me that excised their emotions, and this bullshit about an alpha male is about excising emotions, it isn't about being a fully realized human being. I wouldn't give a dime to the man or woman that doesn't have enough emotion left in them to value life for what it is; to love an animal, to appreciate a flower, to ponder the written word, to cry, or to show joy, or to dive in to the thick of it because another person needs help.
it has no functional purpose beyond it's original intent.
I've always been chased by girls since I was a little boy. Dunno what that's supposed to make me.
First: What is the purpose of emotions? I would like to know your opinion, not necessarily a perfect answer.
Second: Do you believe that love is an emotional thing?
Thanks!
1. I think the more important question is "How important is it to react to emotions?" I have always been a very emotionally driven person regardless of whether I admitted such. For the last 3 years or so I've worked hard to stop reacting to them or acting upon them and I've never felt psychologically healthier. Now, I have emotions, reflect a moment, let the emotion go, act upon other factors including logic, reason, practicality, and intended outcome.
2. Love is an often defined as an emotion, but it is a way of being and looking at the world. Being in love, feeling loved, and living with love are all different things. And often, I believe people mistake infatuation for love. Frankly, I don't think there's a good way to describe it in English. Maybe there's no good word for it at all! But I had one psychedelic experience that reminded me what being loved is. I can't really describe it beyond "knowing that no matter what, you're accepted for who/what you are without conditions, and knowing that all you are is all you can be."
I feel similar to how you feel about emotions. I have tried and tried but I have a hard time seeing a purpose (or rather a good purpose) for them. In my experience they seem to act as a cloud that inhibits my ability to discern the truth and do what's right. With an objective eye they seem to be a tool of evil to plant seeds of manipulation. Emotions, I believe, are there to be overcome.
I have searched for a real answer to what love is and I do not think it is an emotion, that seems more like infatuation, as you said. You do not "fall in love." When I have "loved" with emotional love it has left me open to manipulation similar to all the other emotions, perhaps even more powerful manipulation. What I have found rings true as love, is that love is not hating. Simple as that. When I interact with people without hate, resentment, or anger I can give them the best advice and treat them fairly without prejudice. I believe that true love is treating people with pure honesty. It may be painful to hear the truth in the short term, but the potential long term consequences of not being honest can be much greater to them and those around them. This may hurt their emotions, but that suffering that they allow themselves to experience by not overcoming emotion is a learning experience for them as well.
I appreciate your answer.
So yes, of course this idea of becoming and idealized male by psychological means is complete quackery, probably invented by the psyop dept of military intelligence, and it is hardy the idealized male in the female mind.
The idealized male in the female mind is not something I can know. I'm a man and as a man I can know only what I idealize in men, and it does not include this alpha male.
My response is love is an unconditional condition which brings joy to the heart and pain in separation. If you've ever lost an animal and cry or become emotional just recalling the memory then that is love. The pain of separation is symptomatic of love. This is extremely rare in human to human form in my experience. Rarely do humans bond as closely as they do with animals. Animals don't care who you are or how crazy, stupid, smart, rich, poor, or anything else. Animals as a general rule are never intentionally trying to bring pain to anything, which is not typically associated with being a human, many of whom make that a life long objective. I see the Alpha male as a pain giver and not as a love maker.
Preconceived notions, like how to become an alpha male are programs, and not a good one either. Not in my opinion anyways.
I would consider Jesus a good role model of what an alpha male truly is, but it seems like most these days just consider Christianity to be propaganda. Whether that's true or not the example that was set by Jesus seems to be a good one.
But then again, what do I know?
The concept of alpha male is a problem because the source of the idea, the alpha wolf , doesn't exist in nature. [Link]
The real problem is that there is no "coming of age" for teens anymore. Traditions (for better or worse) are lost. Without the symbology and a compass to point a young person in the right direction, you end up with confused young adults. I was one of them. Very lost in my career and unable to figure out what the hell I was supposed to do with myself (despite having a partner and otherwise being happy).
Also, one who is an alpha in physical situations won't be an alpha in intellectual situations. Who is best at what and who will feel most comfortable in a leadership role is very much situational. Also, those who subscribe to the alpha male theories need to put down the keyboard and just go for a walk.
Emotions are programs brought about through experience. Their purpose are at base to create triggers which primarily are associated with safety, after which comes deeper value in devolpment or fulfillment of the meaning of life experiences. We are, after all, here for a reason and our lives are not accidents of nature. Life is a conscious decision undertaken as part of a self help development system.
Nevertheless, our bodies are somewhat like bio-bots, but consciousness in the mind is the result of unknown receptions, and not specifically then a physical system as we understand. The mind is evidently a fractal receiver and that understanding is of supreme importantance to the rulers whom would like nothing better than find the key to how this reception works so that they can interdict it. Thus creating bio-bots which could be completely controlled. Now of course the official statement is this is all nonsense but their studies and where they are right now pouring all available research in to is specifically directed at what they think holds the best clues to how this all works.
Specifically this has to do with notions about worm holes, which in the body are called soltron's, and this pdf will give you some concept of how they think thought is transmitted along with basically life itself. [Link]
"The problem is not the term "love," the problem is the interpretation of the term. Those on third density have a tendency to confuse the issue horribly. After all, they confuse many things as love. […] It is not necessarily a feeling that one has that can also be interpreted as an emotion, but rather,[…] the essence of light which is knowledge is love, and this has been corrupted when it is said that love leads to illumination. Love is Light is Knowledge. Love makes no sense when common definitions are used as they are in your environment. To love you must know. And to know is to have light. And to have light is to love. And to have knowledge is to love."
I want to take a quick moment to reiterate that I do not agree with anything the fools on the reddit forum describe as an alpha or the methods with which they describe using manipulation on women. There is no need to manipulate women if you do the right thing and control yourself, emotions and all, leading by example. Definitely those that subscribe to the incorrect idea in the reddit forum! I would like to add taking a look in the proverbial mirror as well to that statement.
Well these ideas are born out of Einsteinan Physic's. There is some value in having a generalized understanding of vortex's as transport tubes, however...however....Einsteinian physics is corrupt and has held humanity back for about a century now. Thankfully this physics is about to undergo a serious re-evalution.
Space is not what Einstein thought, space is a posterior attribute of inertial deceleartion, and what that means is that energies exist all around us that create the illusion of space, as in distance, by virtue of creating mass through magnetic and electric fields inducted in to matter, and this induction is the result of an energy field which passes through all matter, and as it pass it is perturbed by matter and sprials inwards to a centeral point. This interaction produces a deceleration of the energetic field which is all around us.
This field of energy, a field being an all encompassing thing, is more modernly known as the ZPE or Zero Point Energy Field. Tesla called it Radiant Energy, but the real genius was Charles Proteus Steinmetz who called it counter-space. He called it that because it is invisible and undetectable by conventional means except for one method, which was the magnetic field at the time.
Now let me clarify a couple things. A posterior attribute is something which is an artifact. A shadow is a posterior attribute. Space is the posterior attribute of inertia. A little obtuse I realize but if you find this interesting and want to understand you can do so by reading Ken Wheeler's book "Uncovering the missing secrets of magnetism." it can be downloaded for free, or you can buy the latest version for a few pennies. I think he's up to the 5th edition now. Free versions all over the web now days but here's a couple links, all to the same book.
Search youtube under the title name of the book for Video's by Ken.
[Link]
[Link]
The reason you would want to do those things is so that you will be able to understand things like anti-gravity. This has been solved now and I think before long we will be seeing real live applications, possibly I hope hover boards to be the first. Anyways, Einstein was an idiot, Tesla said he was an idiot, and others of significance also said he was an idiot. I'm not sure if he was an idiot but he certainly worked out nicely as a tool for the deep state, which is in truth billionaires and their plans to milk all of us by keeping us stupid an trapped under their information and energy supply system, but that's another topic.
So the magnetic field is actually counter-spatial energies organized by the crystalline feaures of a magnet to produce an organized structure, and it's this organization which creates magnetism. Wheeler will explain how this works and this is why it's important to understand, because the energy is, in fact, a 2D energy as most energies are, and this energetic field is moving at billions of times the speed of light by all estimations. What this means then is that if you connect yourself to that field you can be instantly transported across the galaxy. Refer to George Lucy Legs Lucas and the tetrahedronal warships of fame lost in space a long time ago on a planet far, far, away...hint...hint...
Now there is absolute proof that the real world knowledge of how space works, that most if not all UFO's are man made is found in a variety of sources, but the triangular form, specifically tetrahedronal, is of the most importance that I am myself aware of, because this form is what the idiot savants of mathematics now think is the shape of the Planck constant reduced to a pixel of quantum energy. Quantum energy being a theft of Aether Theory mind you, so don't get lost in the quantum BS field because those people are stil lost and screwed up with Einstein. We know this is all correct because unlke the physics of idiots we can empirically prove the theory and have already done so, even if some refuse to accept what they are seeing.
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
one for the ladies..
Dwhite Yoakam. fast as you..
[Link]