I like the article. Just a simple observation: It is easy to spot differences but much more difficult to find similarities. So many movements hinge on groups of people based on glaring differences. There is a lack of empathy and real concern. This might just be an echo of "Humanism", but grouping in general is a kind of a power play. We all try to fit people, things, and places into groups and categories in hopes we can predict events and protect ourselves. We stereotype and categorize to gain power over "otherness".
In terms of, "The Red Pill," I think it points to very real gender dynamics that are a result of biology and nature. This programming has built our desires and is indifferent to our understanding of it. For example, women generally want assertive men, and men typically want women who are good caregivers. All the theories and ideologies in the world won't change that, because we will all die, but our species will carry on using these tools to survive.
We can group all we want, and we will, but why are we seeking this power? To what end? You could be the most powerful person in the world and still be unhappy, because a meaningful life isn't about power. What I think this article really points to is a disconnected sense of community. With the internet and modern media, we are in a hyper sense of finding differences. Differences become more readily accessible and dominate our minds. We move faster to categorize and group to compensate for a lack of power and comfort. What unifies us is simply overwhelmed. I think if you really ask, "Why do I want more power?" or "money," or "fame," or "better health," or whatever, the answer is always "to be happy." Check out this ted talk about people who live a really long time. It is startling how much a long, happy life has to do with a good culture. Sorry for the rant, thanks for the article.
https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_buettner_how_to_live_to_be_100
RE: Challenging Feminism. What's your opinion?