TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

AcatalepticPolemic Archive

View 0 posts and 34 comments by AcatalepticPolemic on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Are you getting laid by every woman? Out of every woman you've ever met, how many would you say you've boned?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/13 11:16 PM
0

There's a difference between "believing you're wrong" and "understanding you're fallible". People are wrong far more often than they're right; the wisest people often doubt themselves because they're aware how limited the knowledge of an individual really is. Red pillers and SJW's believe the only valid perspectives are theirs and everyone who agrees with them. They have no interest in broadening their view, only impressing theirs upon others. This is textbook narcissism.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/13 07:10 PM
18

That link is ridiculous. Of the four negative consequences they listed for premarital sex, here's the first three: An increase in the number of non-marital sex partners greatly increases the probability that one will become infected by sexu ally transmitted diseases. Women who have more non-marital sex partners are more likely to be single mothers. Women who have had five non-marital sex partners during their lives are seven times more likely to become single mothers than are women who have enga…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/13 12:30 AM
7

A lot of stuff this guy talks about seems to be at odds with a lot of the stuff I've read on TRP, particularly the section about responding to shit tests. It seems like we're seeing two different subreddits. Speaking of which... Selection bias people Aren't you, in turn, promoting selection bias by embracing all the quality content from TRP without addressing the equivalent amount of bad content?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/13 05:02 PM
10

I will add one counter-point. A central dialogue in this piece seems to be that everyone, not just women, shit-test, manipulate, are sometimes irrational, etc… I've made this exact argument here before; that everyone, not just women exhibit these perceived negative traits, it's just that TRP doesn't usually highlight the fact that men take part as well, as the sub is for men in regards to attracting women. This is the key right here. Red pillers think this isn't relevant because they're not tryi…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/13 04:53 PM
16

Actually, the first paragraph that OP quoted from your post is textbook hate speech: Hate speech is, outside the law, communication that vilifies a person or a group based on discrimination against that person or group. Your entitled to your own opinion, but your opinion can also be hate speech. The two are not mutually exclusive. Whether or not your okay with that entirely up to you. I find it interesting that you quote popular media as an accurate portrayal of how female relationships actually…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/13 11:38 PM
11

The solution are offered, "red pillers" just don't want to see them, or think it's the same tired advice they've gotten over and over again. Sometimes it is, but the sad truth of the matter is, there's no real "key" to attracting "women" (as in, every woman ever). Red pillers don't like to hear that though, they like to believe there is some secret short cut that no one told them about, like people who discover some crazy new crash diet and think they discovered the key to weight loss. I've seen…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 09:42 PM
9

TBP is not a belief system. It's not a group. It's a name designated by TRP to define everyone who doesn't agree with them. The only thing TBP has in common is that we disagree with TRP. The BP states that all a man needs to do is to be himself and be honest in his intentions. This seems logical because it would work with him. Furthermore he has a great innate need to show his softer side to women, kindness, romance and so on. Why should this be so if women are repelled by these things? These tw…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 09:35 PM
7

I have no doubt that there are good people there with good intentions, such as yourself. The first sentence, however, in the side bar of TRP is: The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men. It's main aim is to be a sexual strategy through discussions of shared experience. This strategy relies on beliefs and individual experiences. There are certain opinions that will get you upvoted in that sub, and some that will get you banned; ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 02:13 PM
7

TRP isn't an ideology TRP absolutely is an ideology. From dictionary.com: the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group. (emphasis mine) They have values and beliefs which are generally shared by members of the subreddit, which its constituents believe guides them towards a shared goal (sexual strategy). I mean, they have a required reading list. TRP is undoubtedly an ideology.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 01:40 PM
16

It does not exist to make the world better in any way. It exists to stigmatise men who cannot get laid and so make Blue Pill people (many of which claim to be in relationships) feel superior. I'm not really red pill or blue pill, but aren't the red pillers the ones who do this? Red pillers talk about the importance of what they perceive as "traditional masculine values", and the importance of being "alphas" so they can bed many women. All while making fun of what they call "blue pillers" with "b…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 01:27 PM
0

Do you believe that the actions and beliefs of a few feminists speak for the entire group? Why or why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/13 01:51 AM
3

Blue pillers scream, "no! stop saying that!! not all women are shorter than all men!! he might meet a woman who is taller than him! you're giving him bad advice!!" That's just useless information. It's a waste of everyone's time. This is not useless information, nor a waste of everyone's time. It's only poor advice in the paradigm created by TRP, or more appropriately, the paradigm TRP has adopted from the same society they claim lied to them about relationships in the first place; the idea that…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/13 04:28 AM
7

From your first link: Fertile women chose the masculine version of each image 15 percent more often, on average, than women who were not fertile Is 15 percent really that big of a difference? Enough to draw the "alpha fucks/beta bucks" conclusion, even as a broad generalization? Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but 15% sounds like the exception rather than the rule...
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/13 11:21 PM
4

You're partially right, and it's a very curious and complex issue. There are a few proposed explanations from the field, none of which I can give an opinion on because I wouldn't consider myself an "expert", but from what I understand, most experts attribute this to cultural influence; women were socially (and up until recent times, politically) discouraged from engaging in academic pursuits, and were culturally conditioned to instead focus on exemplifying more feminine traits. The brain is pret…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/13 04:39 PM
11

Many others have shown you proof suggesting otherwise (which you've ardently ignored), but all it requires a is a cursory glance at the wikipedia page: Popular IQ batteries such as the WAIS and the WISC-R are also constructed in order to eliminate sex differences Intelligence increases every year, yet the average IQ remains 100. This is because the IQ test is relative rather than objective. IQ tests are still controversial; I can get better at IQ tests by taking IQ tests, so their inconsistency …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/13 12:17 PM
19

Your source is outdated, and not consistent with many other studies indicating otherwise. IQ doesn't differ between the sexes, because it CAN'T differ between the sexes; it's measured on averages from all groups (sex, race, etc.) to create a balanced approach, and is specifically designed to average out amongst all people. There is no contemporary evidence suggesting either sex is superior to the other in regards to IQ. The weight placed on IQ in determining intelligence is dwindling over the ye…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/13 02:30 AM
24

You don't hear about many female innovators nowadays for the same reason you don't hear about many male innovators nowadays; every field is accelerating with such great intensity and requires so many different facets of specialization that any earth shattering innovation is either the product of teams or only understood by their peers. Anything put out by female Newtons or Da Vincis nowadays wouldn't be heard of in the media or pop-science fads because understanding the ingenuity of their ideas …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/13 05:05 PM
6

So what? Even if men and women's intelligence distributions were identical, intelligence isn't the end all be all. And it is more than mere under-representation of women in STEM, I am saying they wouldn't be anything if not for men setting it up. The strong and independent women would be at 0% if not for men teaching them how to. The source is human history and not the herstory that feminism has succeeded in replacing it with where the dehumanized terms like education, technology, science remove…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/13 04:50 PM
8

Tell you what, I'm going to try something a little different. First, I'm going to give you three different arguments, all of which have a glaring flaw. The same glaring flaw, in fact. See if you can spot it: Theists are obviously smarter than non-theists. Many of the greatest minds ever live believed in God, and the ones who didn't just don't matter for whatever reason. If non-theists were capable of being as rational as theists, they would have wasted enormous time and resources starting their …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/13 04:30 PM
7

It's not. It demonstrably is. Herstorically and a rather convenient excuse. “Lock up your libraries if you like, but there is no gate, no lock, no bolt that you can set upon the freedom of my mind.” Also, historically a fact. To deny that women were historically prevented from entering academia is simply laughable; it's comparable to denying the Holocaust happened. No 'just as' and had to be taught by men. Men also had to be taught by men. Einstein, Newton, and every other human being to ever di…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/13 01:11 AM
8

Human history tells us that men came up with academia and women were let in after an orgy of thousands of tears. This is just silly. Women were historically confined to imposed gender roles, and were let in after it was realized that they are just as capable of contributing to academia as men are. The tears haven't stopped since then because women are still not equal(mentally) in test scores(maths), Source? (Preferably an actual scientific source, not a blog post about feminist conspiracies). fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/13 12:02 AM
6

Ah. Thanks for letting me know.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 09:02 PM
10

Obviously. No need to repeat yourself. In response, I explained to you how this fact can't support the notion that women are intellectually inferior considering contemporary evidence indicating otherwise, and that there are much more plausible explanations that explain this phenomenon, such as the fact that women were socially and politically blocked from entering academia up until recently. Everyone on your list is from a time when women were considered property; intellectual women wouldn't hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 05:25 PM
14

That blog is ridiculous. Do you have any sources that are actually accurate?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 05:04 PM
16

Human history tells us that women were politically and socially prevented from entering academia up until very recently. Modern test scores, on the other hand, indicate no difference between male and female intelligence. Given this fact, the "women are historically under-represented in STEM because they are genetically inferior" model is untenable.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 04:32 PM
8

Yes. Feminism is a result of insecure women raging against this fact. Source?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 04:11 PM
10

where are the innovative, visionary female architects? where are all the great female polymaths who have always existed but were just kept down by men? This question answers itself. Red pillers argue that women are historically under-represented in STEM fields because of inherent inferiority, feminists claim it's because of systematic oppression by patriarchal societies. They would both be equally plausible explanations, until you realize that: Women were historically prevented from entering STE…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 04:07 PM
4

Wrong. When women have only a highly restricted amount of eggs in her lifetime, as well as the biological inclinations to seek out high value males and filter out lower value males, we can see how society considers women's genitals to be a lot more valuable than men's. This is silly; like most animals, human beings are (at a base level) naturally inclined to satisfy immediate pleasure rather than invest in long term goals. Women and men alike are plagued by the need to fuck, even when it's not p…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 12:32 PM
7

I wasn't trying to. I was showing you how your question is irrelevant; how you didn't really answer OP's question, in other words. I'm not sure how this went over your head, the intent is fairly explicit. My apologies, I'll try to use simpler phrasing next time. But given your change of definition to "unable to consent", now ALL of your questions are silly: Yes, she stole the pizza. Stealing is defined as "to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right." Sober or drunk, …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 01:52 AM
10

Your comparison is fallacious. Many people would agree that she be over the legal driving limit and still able to consent. The question is at what point is she unable to consent? To frame your situations in a more relevant way, if the women walked into the pizza place and drunkenly passed out, then the pizza guy made a pizza, put it next to her, and took money out of her wallet, would you say she was asking for that pizza? If the cab man then came in, dragged her out of the pizza place (still un…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 01:10 AM
6

TRP has a reading list, blogs, and glossary of terms; posts following specific, reoccurring themes are often upvoted to their front page; there are viewpoints, opinions, and legitimate questions which are swiftly deleted and the users banned from the sub. There is undoubtedly some semblance of unified theory among the majority of TRP's constituents, but many of the red pillers on this sub seem reserved in giving any sort of straightforward answer concerning this. When only left with vague descri…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 01:01 AM
9

It's very typical for bluepillers to despise the Red Pill ideology so much that they'd disagree on even the most obvious things and banalities. This isn't "obvious" in to the extent that TRP describes it; sexual dynamics vary wildly between cultures. The "women = gatekeepers, men = initiators" model is predominantly the by-product of a Protestant construct, and isn't even comparable to the vast majority of sexual dynamics historically. If you have something and you're guarding it, then it means …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/13 12:39 AM
8

Most of the time the things I see label as woman hating is usually something about a specific woman or type of woman. Some people interpret anything bad said about a woman to mean all women. This is a perfectly valid assumption, given that TRP insists that they're talking about all women, or at the very least most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/13 05:21 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter