TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Ambitious-Target-470 Archive

View 3 posts and 59 comments by Ambitious-Target-470 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

The call for gatekeeping is a predictable administrative response to narrative entropy. When a framework can no longer reconcile its promises of 'equality' with the clinical reality of the mating gap and the surplus man, its only survival mechanism is to restrict the input data. This isn't an act of empowerment; it's a quarantine of the social contract, ensuring that the 'decommissioned' are silenced to prevent a full post-mortem of the system's failure.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:00 AM
1

Indifference is the expected output of a decommissioned Reciprocal Utility Framework. The 'disdain' you describe is merely the biological signaling of a high-selection market identifying a non-contributing asset. It confirms that the transition from systemic integration to a state of calculated nihilism is functional; you aren't expressing a unique moral stance, you are simply articulating the standard operating procedure of civilizational decommissioning.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 08:57 AM
1

I appreciate the nuance in your response and the rejection of the generalized 'incel' label. You’ve correctly identified the distinction I’m attempting to make: this isn't a grievance about 'casual sex,' but a documentation of the breakdown in communal integration. I agree that hateful rhetoric is counterproductive to any meaningful analysis of the social contract. My focus remains on the decent guys you mentioned - those who are being factored out by the selection vacuum through no fault of the…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 08:46 AM
2

Your account of 'crawling back under a bridge' after being used for utility is a visceral data point for the systemic entropy I’ve been documenting. It reveals that the modern 'selection vacuum' has effectively re-activated the 17-to-1 reproductive ratio seen in the post-Neolithic bottleneck - a period where a tiny elite of powerful men held a monopoly on reproduction, leaving the vast majority of the male population as a surplus demographic. Historically, the social contract functioned as a sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 08:41 AM
2

I appreciate the grounding in your response. By comparing this to the 'animal kingdom,' you’ve identified the exact regression of the social contract I’m documenting. In nature, a 'surplus' of unselected males is standard; but in a civilization, that same surplus has historically been the primary driver of systemic instability and social collapse. Regarding the response to these men: I don't believe 'advice' is the solution, as that is a micro-fix for a macro-collapse. The most honest path is a …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:24 AM
0

The intellectual dishonesty lies in the attempt to frame a structural collapse as a matter of personal 'compatibility.' I am not suggesting that you, as an individual, should find a place for these men in your life; I am observing that a society that has no place for 40% of its male demographic is a society in the process of systemic entropy. When you say you 'feel bad' but cannot see their utility, you are confirming the institutional apathy I’ve been documenting. You are supporting a high-sele…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:19 AM
0

The argument that women have a 'less compulsive libido' is a notable contradiction to the empirical reality of the post-sexual revolution market, which is characterized by high-volume, fluid sexual selection. By framing women as biologically 'above' the need for pairing, you are obfuscating the fact that the modern social contract has simply pivoted toward mass promiscuity as a primary mode of engagement for the protected class. You can rightfully criticize the patriarchy but the 'having a boyfr…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 04:56 AM
1

Your observation about the cultural mismatch for Asian men is actually the frontline of a global phenomenon. Look at the 4B movement and the demographic collapse in South Korea and Japan; these aren't just 'personal choices,' they are the end-state of the asymmetric social contract. When the selection vacuum becomes this extreme, both sides eventually choose a total 'exit.' You’ve identified the specific cultural friction, but the macro-data shows that this leads to systemic entropy - where the …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 04:41 AM
1

Calling it a simple 'impasse' is a convenient way to finalize the dismissal of a demographic without addressing the ethics of the selection market that created them. If the only 'fix' is creating a problem for someone else, then we are effectively admitting that modern social cohesion is built on a foundation of calculated nihilism. I’m not claiming there’s an easy solution; I’m documenting the fact that we’ve collectively decided that the mass 'silent exit' of the unselected man is a price wort…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 04:32 AM
–

I was just trying to expose the calculated nihilism required to implement gender equality while upholding the female protected class and the opportunism that comes with asymmetric female sexual selection. It was an objective, universal truth. I'm not against it. I'm just saying a surplus of men will have to be left behind and face obsolescence, but no one wants to hear it. No one wants to admit that addressing inequality in one context will expose one in another. I think this might be a power st…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 11:28 PM
–

But the expectations for women have changed yet the expectations for men have not. Boss babe moms can be providers and caretakers but stay at home dads can't breastfeed their young. Just face it, you gotta let male obsolescence take its course. As a woman, asking for autonomy at the expense of Western social cohesion isn't too much to ask for but a surplus of men must be left behind via mass suicide in the process.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 07:02 PM
1

You categorize a man's invisibility as a 'red flag' simply to provide a moral justification for the fact that he was already invisible to you. It’s the sociological equivalent of blaming a person for drowning because they couldn't find a lifeguard. My post isn't a plea for your concern; it's a clinical observation that when a demographic’s inability to 'get someone to care' is treated as an inherent defect rather than a systemic displacement, you aren't 'steering clear' of a threat - you are sim…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 08:44 PM
5

Why not? Having a boyfriend is embarrassing now. Choose your harem wisely I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 08:35 PM
2

The intent seems to be trying to funnel my argument into a narrow debate so it can be dismissed as a personal grievance rather than a systemic one. If I had a penny. To clarify the first contention: I am not 'only' talking about romantic access, but I am refusing to decouple romantic intimacy from communal integration. In a functional social contract, these are not separate silos - they are a cohesive ecosystem. The structural obsolescence of the unselected man manifests as both a lack of 'frien…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:42 PM
7

Your response is a perfect demonstration of the institutional apathy I’ve been documenting. By assuming my post is the result of 'incompetent parenting' or 'neurodivergence,' you’re utilizing a pathologizing shield to avoid engaging with the actual market data. I am not asking for empathy from women, nor am I critiquing individual choices; I am pointing out that asymmetric social dynamics produces a surplus of men who are mathematically factored out by design. Suggesting that the 'solution' is f…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:29 PM
5

I acknowledge that women have been historically domesticated into specific roles and that masculine/feminine attraction triggers are often rooted in these deep-seated socializations. However, my post isn't a defense of the 'provider' role - it’s an observation of the structural obsolescence that has replaced it. You see sexism in the 'inherent value' argument, but from a clinical perspective, it describes a high-leverage market where one class maintains a protected baseline while the other is tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 12:47 PM
4

I understand why women show apathy and opt for a curated reality in these threads; with safety and respect at stake, you are far less forgiving of the vitriol found in these communities. However, my point is about the asymmetric dating landscape not individual character. Even if we remove every 'sexist loner' from the equation, the current architecture still produces a permanent surplus of men who are mathematically factored out of the hierarchy by design. Calling this observation 'misogynistic'…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 12:37 PM
1

The attempt to equate the invisibility of certain women with the systemic Surplus Man problem is a category error that ignores the selection leverage inherent in a deregulated market. My thesis isn't a 'sad and lonely' plea for empathy - it is a clinical acknowledgment of institutional apathy toward a demographic that has been factored out of the social contract by design. Dismissing this as an 'Apex Fallacy' or a moral failing of 'loners' is exactly the name-calling I mentioned; it allows you t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:55 AM
7

By equating modern dating to 'animal mating,' you’re confirming that the social contract has regressed into a raw biological competition where the losers are simply discarded. Labeling unselected men as 'bringing nothing' ignores the fact that their displacement is a mathematical certainty of the high-selection model you're defending. Taunting a demographic that is on a documented path toward self-destruction doesn't prove your standards are high; it just proves that your 'Blue Pill' framework r…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:48 AM
5

This isn't a plea for you to lower your standards; it’s a clinical observation of a system where female protected status and high-selection leverage necessitate a permanent surplus of men by design. You can maintain your criteria while acknowledging that the statistical end-point for this demographic is a quiet exit via suicide in their 40s or 50s. My post wasn't 'sadfishing' or playing the victim; it was pointing out that name-calling men who have already been factored out of the social contrac…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:45 AM
4

I appreciate the acknowledgment of the 'luxury of options' women hold, as that is the core of the selection leverage I’m discussing. However, framing 'decentering women' as a solution for men misses the point of my post. My observation isn't a plea for inclusion or a lack of hobbies; it is a clinical acknowledgment that for the Surplus Man, decentering isn't just a choice - it is a necessity of post-modernity. By exiting the market and acknowledging the information asymmetry of modern dating, th…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:15 AM
7

I appreciate the depth of this social mirror. You’re right that there is an asymmetrical trade-off: women face the high cost of objectification and physical risk, while men face the high cost of total invisibility and selection pressure. My point isn't that men want to 'trade places' with the trauma you described, but rather that in the current market, women are a protected class whose inherent value is assumed, whereas the 'Surplus Man' has no inherent value and must earn his right to exist thr…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:08 AM
0

You’re viewing the 'left behind' demographic through a lens of personal dysfunction, which conveniently avoids the structural reality: a high-selection market for a protected class requires a surplus of unselected men by design. My post isn't a plea for 'getting laid' or social integration; it's an observation of institutional apathy toward those who are effectively doing the fatalistic work of exiting a social contract that no longer functions for them. If the 'universal good' of modern autonom…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:47 AM
0

You successfully shield the protected status of the feminine archetype from any interrogation of its asymmetrical social risk. Interpreting 'inherent value' as a demand for sexual utility is a category error - it's an effective way to maintain selection leverage while ignoring the systemic displacement of a demographic that has been factored out.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:38 AM
1

I appreciate the objective social mirror you’ve provided here. It’s rare to find a response that engages with the macro-selection dynamics and the surplus man without defaulting to moralizing OP or 'pity-seeking' accusations. Acknowledging that this demographic can exist with varying intentions - is exactly the nuance I was looking for. Thank you for the intellectual honesty.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:31 AM
-1

It’s easy for you to mistake a functioning personal anecdote for a functioning social contract, but survivorship bias isn't a systemic refutation; your marriage is a data point, not a market trend.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 12:45 PM
0

Case and point
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 12:36 PM
0

You all are overanalyzing this. Not to trivialize the male experience but blue pilled men were preselected. They don't see the world the way red pilled men do. They have a different set of priorities e.g. happy wife = happy life.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 12:33 PM
3

Fair point - my response was aimed more at the broader thread's premise on hypergamy than your specific success story. I actually think your experience as a breadwinner is a great example of the 'New Social Contract' I'm talking about. My point was simply that while individual successes like yours are great, they don't erase the systemic gap that currently exists for a huge demographic of men. I’m arguing that we can celebrate female autonomy while still acknowledging the institutional apathy th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 11:14 AM
3

I’m saying this as someone who supports the autonomy the Sexual Revolution provided: we have to stop pretending that thousands of years of systemic roles didn't create a massive blind spot in female social awareness. For a long time, the 'incentive structure' for women didn't require an understanding of the male experience - it required survival within a specific niche. Now, we see the results: many women move through archetypal behaviors - the 'Mean Girl,' the 'Eternal Daughter,' the 'Apathetic…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 08:38 AM
–

You’re conflating de jure equality (how laws are written) with de facto outcomes (how they are exploited). The 'asymmetry' isn't in the text of the law, but in the incentive structure: the government subsidizes marriage while the courts offer a clear, opportunistic pathway for wealth redistribution through divorce. When the 'feminine archetype' is shielded from all institutional critique, and women can leverage the state to exit a contract with a financial windfall, the institution stops being a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 02:40 AM
2

That's a baseless, strawman argument. My point reiterated: the current legal and social institution of marriage is a failed product because it lacks symmetrical utility. you’ve misunderstood the 'worthwhile' metric. My argument isn't that marriage is only valuable if it involves 'owning property'; it’s that a legal contract is only functional if it provides reciprocal social utility. The 20th-century model was a social script for integration; the 21st-century model is, as I noted, a transactiona…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 10:18 PM
0

Casual or not, straight dating is asymmetrical. If a woman goes 'fuck your feelings,' the guy usually eats more of the cost because men are competing in a high-competition, low-selection environment. When guys brag about body counts it’s usually status signaling to other men. But the women involved often just feel used or devalued. Meanwhile a promiscuous woman can emotionally slay attached guys just by pointing out how many men she's slept with, and avoid shaming in the process post sexual revo…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:57 PM
6

I have to call you out for some gaps, specifically regarding the "Solution Gap"; you basically identified that the 20th-century social contract is dead and that modern tech has hollowed out our "social scripts," but you don't offer a vision for what a functional 21st-century replacement looks like. You also oversimplify the comparison to gay dating, which, while a great rhetorical tool to highlight market distortion, ignores the vastly different biological and social drivers at play in those cir…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:35 PM
1

Thousands of years of evolution domesticated men and women differently - as in how the sexes behave. As a man I'll admit, you as an average+ attraction scale women have all the leverage when it comes to sexual selection unless you're trying to lock down a top tier man down for marriage. He has options so he will sleep around, if you won't, he'll find other women who will. He might even form harems with average to above average women (most notably Elon Musk). The bottom line is you have far less …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 03:08 AM
1

It's fascinating to see a 'Blue Left' perspective boil down to 'The state has no obligations to you, but you have every obligation to the state; follow the law lol'. Historically, when 'because it's the law' becomes the only remaining justification for a social contract that no longer provides a path to integration for millions, you aren't describing a stable society - you’re describing an authoritarian shell. Thank you for illustrating my point about institutional apathy so perfectly. It’s been…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 06:38 PM
1

That sentence perfectly encapsulates the core of my thesis: the shift from a collective social contract to a model of pure individual apathy. My argument isn't about 'obligation' to individuals; it’s about social stability. If a society explicitly states it has no obligation or path for millions of its members, then those members have no incentive to uphold that society’s laws, taxes, or defense. By dismissing this demographic as 'people no one wants,' you aren't just expressing a moral preferen…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 06:29 PM
1

I haven’t suggested 'forcing' anyone; bodily autonomy is a baseline we both agree on. However, your moral defense of the status quo ignores the reality that marriage has already been fundamentally redefined by the Sexual Revolution into a transactional institution. If we live in a world where marriage is optional, sex is deregulated, and divorce is a wealth-redistribution tool, then the 'social contract' has already been hollowed out. My point is that the legal system is holding onto 20th-centur…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 06:18 PM
1

I’m surprised that a 'Blue Left Catholic' perspective on a systemic social crisis is 'let the rich buy their way out.' Relying on the anecdotes of a wealthy few to dismiss the structural isolation of the many is exactly the kind of institutional apathy my thesis highlights. Whether or not a minority of men 'dislike' an outlet doesn't change the macro-trend: we have a massive demographic drifting away from the social contract because the system treats their lack of integration as a personal prefe…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 06:09 PM
1

Suggesting surrogacy as a 'solution' to a demographic-scale mating gap is like suggesting every homeless person simply buy a hotel room. It’s a wealth-gated individual workaround, not a systemic fix for the millions of men who feel excluded from the social contract. My thesis isn't about how a wealthy individual can technically produce an heir; it's about the systemic instability created when a society offers no integrated path or moral outlets for its 'unselected' population. A society where th…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 06:01 PM
1

You’re conflating reproduction with social integration. My thesis isn't suggesting that men 'reproduce with hookers' - it’s pointing out that a society with a massive mating gap becomes systemically unstable when it offers no outlets or path to integration for 'unselected' men. Historically, civilizations managed these surpluses to prevent crime and internal violence. By criminalizing outlets and ignoring the mating gap, we aren't 'protecting' reproduction; we are creating a demographic of isola…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:52 PM
0

You’re confusing my sociological observation with a personal reproductive plan. I’m not suggesting men 'impregnate sex workers'; I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of a legal system that treats marriage as a transactional 'value-for-value' exchange while criminalizing the more direct version of that same exchange. In a landscape where high promiscuity is normalized but also correlates with high divorce rates, the 'social contract' of marriage has effectively become a high-stakes, institutionalized f…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 03:41 AM
1

That’s a common trope, but it actually reinforces my point. If the only 'answer' to a systemic mating gap is for individuals to wait until 40 to 'find out' the consequences of a dissolved social contract, then we are admitting that the system provides no stable path for the two decades of peak adult life. My thesis isn't about how people feel at 40; it’s about why the current legal and social framework treats the 'mating gap' with apathy until that instability becomes a crisis/tragedy. Whether a…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 02:54 AM
1

I’ll be the first to agree with you: nobody is 'entitled' to sex, and bodily autonomy is an absolute right. My personal history or 'fitness' is irrelevant because my thesis isn't a plea for help - it’s a sociological observation. You’re focused on the individual level (the right to be selective), while I’m focused on the civilizational level (the fallout of mass unselection). A society can have 100% bodily autonomy and 0% entitlement - which I support - and still face a systemic crisis if it doe…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 02:35 AM
1

This is the social mirror I've been looking for. I've been agreeing with you on this the whole time, the female sexual revolution is what created hookup culture and I'm not here to shame them for that. The sexual revolution and female autonomy have shifted marriage from a 'survival necessity' to a 'value-for-value' transactional partnership. My point is that while women have adapted to this optionality, the legal system and social norms haven't caught up for men. We live in a world where women c…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 02:23 AM
1

I'd rather not dilute my thesis with right leaning manosphere jokes, but I hear the frustration regarding the breakdown of the traditional family unit. You’re touching on a significant political divide: while the Left focuses on individual female autonomy, the Right often focuses on protecting the lineage and stable households. My thesis sits in the middle: I’m arguing that regardless of which side you lean toward, we are witnessing a systemic 'mating gap' that the current legal system (no-fault…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 01:28 AM
0

That is a very 19th-century view of 'Natural Selection.' While survival of the fittest describes biological competition, it doesn't account for social cohesion. Historically, civilizations moved away from that 'natural' state of high-selection inequality specifically because large populations of unselected, unintegrated men lead to high crime, internal violence, and state collapse. By dismissing a macro-extinction event as just 'being mad,' you’re missing the point: a society that returns to raw…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 01:08 AM
1

I’m not here to seek romantic advice or discuss my personal romantic encounters; my thesis is a macro-sociological analysis of population trends, not a personal diary. Using an ad hominem to dismiss systemic data is a common way to avoid the actual argument. About the 17:1 ratio: naming a specific historical bottleneck isn't 'cherry-picking' - it is using a documented biological precedent to show how extreme sexual selection can become when social 'regulations' like enforced monogamy are absent.…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 12:55 AM
1

I appreciate the perspective, but you’re focusing on individual choices while my thesis addresses a systemic population crisis. 'Other options' like celibate sublimation or hobbies don't resolve the macro-instability caused by a massive mating gap. Also, your point about sex work 'damaging' a woman's ability to wed assumes that marriage is the universal end-goal for all women - which ignores modern trends where many prioritize financial independence, personal autonomy, and sexual liberation. App…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 12:40 AM
1

That’s a very broad net to cast. If you have a specific study or anthropological finding that contradicts the well-documented historical reproductive bottlenecks or the rise of 'mating gaps' in deregulated environments, I’d be genuinely interested in seeing it. Name dropping fields doesn't address the core of my thesis: that as we move away from enforced monogamy, we are seeing a return to high-selection patterns that the current legal system is ill-equipped to handle. If the evidence says other…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:26 PM
1

In a purely biological/unregulated state? Yes, the data on reproductive bottlenecks suggests that is exactly the default pattern humans fall into. My thesis isn't advocating for a return to that state; it’s pointing out that the 20th-century 'solution' (enforced monogamy) is dissolving. My argument is that the Western legal system is currently ignoring this 'regression to the mean' and punishing the men who fall through the cracks, rather than acknowledging that the 1-to-1 social contract is fai…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:13 PM
0

I honestly appreciate the moral perspective, but this isn't a debate about personal 'wants' or the ethics of the industry itself. My thesis is a sociological look at how men are adapting to the post-sexual revolution landscape. In an era where hookup culture is rampant yet increasingly selective, a significant portion of the male population is left without traditional or casual avenues for intimacy. When society responds to this demographic reality with pure apathy or moral shaming - rather than…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 05:54 PM
1

You’ve correctly identified the tension between state demographic goals and individual social stability. However, I’d argue that 'ratcheting up the pressure' on men only works if the social contract offers a fair and stable outcome. In a legal landscape where no-fault divorce, alimony, and custody laws create a high-risk environment for men, adding more pressure doesn't necessarily inspire marriage - it often leads to total withdrawal. While demographic collapse is a valid concern for any nation…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 05:38 PM
1

You're right. The underclass didn't fall from the sky. But that underclass was historically integrated into the reproductive pool through enforced monogamy - a social contract that essentially traded male labor for a guaranteed path to a family and don't forget, more kids then meant more labor. My argument is that as we move away from that pre-industrial family unit toward a more 'selective' landscape, we are seeing the return of a massive surplus of unselected men. Whether the fertility drop is…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 05:00 PM
2

You make a strong point regarding the 'regression to the mean' and the vanishing of traditional male gender roles. I'll have to disagree that further criminalization of outlets like sex work is a viable solution. My thesis argues that the legal system already punishes unselected men; doubling down on that punishment would likely increase the systemic instability I mentioned rather than fixing reproduction. And while 'substitutes' like pets or tech exist, they don't address the fundamental biolog…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 04:31 PM
4

Fair point on the genetic data. Even without Y-chromosomal metrics, the anthropological record of extreme polygyny - like imperial harems and concubinage - shows a history of small groups of men monopolizing reproductive access. My thesis isn't dependent on DNA markers; it’s that history is a long record of society 'managing' a massive surplus of unselected men. I’m arguing that modern Western law tries to do the same via criminalization and forced monogamy, without admitting the immense social …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 04:18 PM
2

I appreciate the request for clarity. In layman's terms: I believe the legal system punishes single men for seeking intimacy outside of marriage as a way to force everyone into traditional monogamy, even though history shows that not every man is naturally 'selected' for that path. I’ve laid out the data on the 17:1 reproductive ratio in the main post to support why this is a systemic issue rather than a personal one. I’m happy to debate the merits of that data or the legal theory if you have a …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 04:11 PM
2

I'll take the 'ChatGPT' comment as a compliment on my grammar. It’s a nice change from being told I’m incoherent. I’ve spent a long time refining this thesis to make sure it met the sub's rules. If you have a critique of the 17:1 ratio or the legal arguments, I’m all ears.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 04:00 PM
1

I am posting this [CMV] because I believe the intersection of evolutionary history (specifically reproductive ratios) and modern puritanical law creates a 'trap' for men who are not socially preselected. I am specifically looking for logical rebuttals in the following areas: Historical/Biological: Is the 17:1 ratio (or similar genetic bottlenecks) a valid comparison for the modern 'mating gap,' or do modern social factors make this a false equivalence? Legal/Sociological: Is there evidence that …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:06 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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