I'm not arguing your argument because your argument is absurd. Seriously, sit down and think about this, you are treating women and feminists(not the same thing) as having ulterior motives to put all men down. Like it or not, that's Red Pill, that's what Red Pill advocates.

::eyeroll:: You are the one being absurd. I will explain this very slowly so you can keep up:

Some people hold beliefs because those beliefs are emotionally satisfying. People who believe things because it is emotionally satisfying often are not capable of rationally defending those beliefs. We place a strong emphasis in our culture on being able to rationally defend one's beliefs. Because of this, those people who believe in things because they are emotionally satisfying often cannot admit to themselves and others that they believe things because they are emotionally satisfying, because that is embarrassing. It is akin to admitting that one is irrational.

When a person believes something for emotional reasons, and their sense of self, ego and identity is wrapped up in those ideas, they become exceptionally defensive of those ideas being challenged. When the ideas they believe are hostile to the mainstream of belief, they are challenged often enough that they develop defense mechanisms to prevent criticism of their beliefs. This is the stage at which ideas begin to become ideologies. Most of these defenses take the form of thought terminating cliches.

Feminism is an ideology. While there are some feminist ideas worth considering, for most adherents feminism is emotionally gratifying. It provides an all-powerful, omnipresent but invisible enemy ("Patriarchy") for which all of one's personal failings can be blamed, it provides its adherents with a sense of righteousness, it provides a sense of belonging, etc. Thus one encounters many poorly educated feminists who are incapable of effectively arguing their positions, which are mostly held as a result of the feelings of righteousness and moral superiority that such positions provide, and the justification they give to act in a lazy, self-indulgent and self-righteous manner.

Feminists routinely make statements that are offensive to men, generally statements that proscribe irrational and manifestly malign motivations to men's actions and habits. Men often attempt to argue with feminists from their own experience of being male. Because many of these feminists cannot effectively refute these counter-arguments, they have a pressing need to shut down dialog and end the argument -- particularly arguments from men.

An accusation of "creepiness" is one of many ways a feminist can shut down such an argument. Because there is no real definition of creepy, and it only refers to an emotion felt by the person making the accusation, it is impossible to defend oneself against the charge except to say "I'm not creepy!" -- at which point the feminist has successfully derailed the conversation.

There is nothing "Red Pill" about this observation. Similar patterns can be seen in other ideological groups. For example, Red Pillers use the word "Beta" in the same manner. If one contradicts the observations of a Red Piller, one is accused of being "beta." Since only a beta would argue that he's not beta, there is no effective way to defend oneself against the charge -- if one has to prove one is alpha, one is not alpha. By labeling the person making the criticism a beta, the Red Piller changes the topic from what is being criticized to who is criticizing.