TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Cavali19 Archive

View 3 posts and 137 comments by Cavali19 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)
8

Cavali19/r/MGTOW26/06/19 01:58 PM
3

Cavali19/r/MGTOW01/07/19 05:13 PM
1

Cavali19/r/MGTOW07/11/19 04:42 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
7

As long as it takes to reason women out of what they weren't reasoned into.
/r/MGTOW30/07/19 06:39 PM
2

It is male resources-- men pay more in taxes.
/r/MGTOW30/07/19 06:38 PM
1

Both are still worth less as time goes on.
/r/MGTOW27/07/19 05:09 AM
1

Still feel this way
/r/MGTOW24/07/19 04:23 AM
1

D. Awareness of no consequences for behavior change
/r/MGTOW24/07/19 04:17 AM
1

Bunnies are dumb and easy prey..
/r/MGTOW21/07/19 04:51 AM
5

Yes. This is becaused of the goal of population control thru the manipulation of women. Happening across developed world since pregnancy risk\ consequences were removed from sex.
/r/MGTOW18/07/19 02:29 AM
9

Justification Hamster on display.
/r/TheRedPill16/07/19 05:29 PM
3

Political fashion < merits of pay.
/r/MGTOW15/07/19 07:24 PM
15

My wife has done this before to me. My theory is that it is a combination of the knowledge that there is no consequences for the provocation and instigation and a desire to take advantage of the free victim card. Nothing spells unearned attention and resources more than consequence free instigation paired with social favorability.
/r/MGTOW15/07/19 01:58 AM
4

Leveraging social favorability
/r/MGTOW13/07/19 01:22 PM
3

Only unclever people believe they are clever. Only unintelligent people believe they cannot have something because they are too clever.
/r/MGTOW10/07/19 02:42 PM
1

That isn't true. The individual interpreting a word decides how strong it is. The dictionary is an authority that represents objective definition. However, words in and of themselves are neutral-- they are given meaning/meaning is ascribed to them. It is like a computer. A computer works because the parts are in order and a user initiates it. Without the user, the pile of junk/electronics mashed together has no meaning. Therefore the computer has neutral value in and of itself. This is a questio…
/r/MGTOW10/07/19 02:06 PM
4

its related to population
/r/MGTOW10/07/19 01:35 AM
1

Pernicious whoremones
/r/MGTOW10/07/19 01:33 AM
2

I hate when people say hate is a strong word. Words are words. Strong is an attribute that cannot apply to a word. People ascribe meaning. Meaning is not inherent in words, therefore words cannot be strong or weak.
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 09:52 PM
2

My hatred does not control me.
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 07:03 PM
6

It isn't logic because it's not a system of reasoning. It is a reaction. Reasoning is the conscious process of making sense of things. This is unconscious emotionalistic, self serving reactionism.
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 05:50 PM
1

Necessity to negotiate if you want to reproduce. Unfortunately.
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 04:51 PM
1

That doesn't follow because women can potentially be rapists. I'd argue that it's easier for women to 'get away with' rape because of the sociocultural & legal punishments/guilt associated with male on female rape. Therefore invalid and irrational.
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 04:35 PM
6

I do.
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 02:11 PM
7

I don't get the her logic. lol
/r/MGTOW09/07/19 01:05 PM
4

I don't understand why one just wouldn't swipe left in the first place? xD #swipelefttobumble
/r/MGTOW08/07/19 08:24 PM
1

Because less ad revenue. If i do better in little league and i'm complaining about being paid less than big league, i'm confessing i don't understand economics and are stupid.
/r/MGTOW08/07/19 03:07 PM
2

It isn't women these days. It is biologically. Being able to demand "more" without cost because you happen to be born with eggs is the source of the immorality/evil. However, one cannot reason with people who can't be reasoned with.
/r/MGTOW05/07/19 05:52 PM
0

But gender isn't the same as sex according to the left.. this means no one can mistreat anyone lol. How does one prove the intent behind discrimination though? If i walk to work my intent isn't to discriminate against my car, bike or motorcycle.. or the bus drive of the public transit who happens to be black..
/r/MGTOW05/07/19 05:33 PM
1

no. That is an illogical inference. If you'd like to elaborate we can discuss-- I think that emotion is a poor basis of negotiation/decision making in general because emotions are claims of certainty in and of themselves. If all react with certainty then all are determined based upon what will increase their perception of pleasure and minimize their perception of pain. This means animal = people. Emotion on emotion does not necessarily work. The underlying reality is more interesting, however, a…
/r/MGTOW05/07/19 05:12 PM
12

Because the VDON [vulgar displays of narcissism] have no cost, are validated by the people to that do it & ppl that pay, and those who disagree are shamed as being against the choice of women. Welcome to hell gents.
/r/MGTOW05/07/19 02:14 PM
14

Emotional thinking is not thinking. You cannot reason ppl out of what they weren't reasoned into.
/r/MGTOW05/07/19 12:56 PM
0

Female empowerment is nothing more than a victimhood peddling shakedown, enforced by them at ovarian-gunpoint.
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 08:58 PM
4

The argument of ideological blindness occurs when someone confuses what SHOULD HAPPEN with what is LIKELY TO HAPPEN and uses it as justification to force others to change at their expense.
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 06:18 PM
17

The only play for an immoral person is to justify their immorality--- usually this means accuses the other person of deserving it or, if you are a dem, accusing the other person of what you are guilty of.
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:58 PM
3

Honest thought: Negative pressure creates strength. Less negative pressure can cause weakness. ​ Men struggle with self doubt and doubt motivates one to pursue the truth. Women struggle with self certainty and self certainty does not motivate one to pursue truth but to believe they already know/have it.
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:17 PM
2

lol confirmation bias
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 02:40 PM
31

Women are the aggressors in more than 70% of Domestic Violence cases.. muh unreported cases
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 02:21 PM
2

I appreciate the effort here! Because having kids is an option, it can and does have moral content, therefore your response is invalid. We agree on 2. Freedom competence and justice aren't mutually exclusive to the idea presented. Because they are not mentioned does not me they are excluded and thus exclusive. [expresio unius est exclusio alterio] Appeal to nihilism = to make a case for the validity of/to. Resource helplessness is relevent. I would say the opposite it true because the conversati…
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 12:54 PM
1

That is only based upon feelings of worth at the time of the decision. Example: Woman age 25 marries man age 30. Man age 30 SMV from earnings and looks = 7.5, female = 7 (assumption of hypergamy.). The woman will always claim that her SMV AT THE TIME OF THE DECISION could have (IMPORTANT phrase) landed a better guy, therefore a sacrifice was made. The feelings are used. In reality the mans SMV will continue to rise as he ages while hers declines. The claim men and women do not sacrifice to the s…
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:59 AM
5

Pilot
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:55 AM
0

no risk or no dice = female logic = you are no diff than what you claim to be against or avoiding
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:15 AM
1

exactly so if you value yourself then you want more of you equally to the player of a baseball team valuing more homeruns.
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:15 AM
2

haha really
/r/MGTOW03/07/19 03:13 AM
7

The need/choice to publicly announce this suggests you believe that the perspective is valid.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 05:26 PM
21

Flip the sexes
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 05:19 PM
24

How did she earn that money?
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 05:13 PM
-2

Responsibility requires sacrifice. A focus solely on benefits suggests a lack of willingness to truly investigate the value or properly value the costs or other benefits of another decision. It only sounds nice out of spite of what you could have and likely aren't willing to properly value--- i see no difference from this reasoning and the feminist.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 05:02 PM
1

Such a lame way of dismissal. Okay if that's the standard then I arbitrarily assign you the label of asshole. You're an asshole and if people agree with me or not I need not respond because you're an asshole.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 04:42 PM
2

Circular logic based in feelings of preference that comes out of spite of a non-universal definition.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 03:50 PM
-3

A life unexamined is not worth living.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 03:35 PM
24

VASDON [vulgar and shameless display of narcissism]
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 03:17 PM
3

[Expectation of reasonableness] I am married I believe that semi-intelligent people have a duty to reproduce given the disgenic-incentives and populations reproducing at higher rates. [Obviously my view of a duty isn't enforceable and I wouldn't want it to be.] Life without risk is not life but death [and female]. Life without children is to live temporarily and have all that you worked for poured into others' children. Not to appeal to nihilism, but your resources will and are redistributed via…
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 03:14 PM
1

Brilliant. I've found a simple series of rule helps to expose and thus allow one to easily sift through bad apples: 1) what you PAY for, SPEND TIME on and FUCK are votes for the approval of behaviors and/or existence of a good/service. [spend frugally and if you do invest use 2 and 3) 2) Honesty in the active voice, never hide a thought you have. 3) Ask simple, logical questions. Leave if emotional-reasoning/circular self-validation is used.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 02:55 PM
5

I wonder how much of BPD is genetic vs conditioned from the lack of action done or behavioral responses from others.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 02:40 PM
5

I get the feeling. Me too. What happened with yours? I believe mine has faked mental illness for the past 15 years in order to avoid responsibility for her actions. Hence the inconsistent diagnosis and constant cognitive dissonance that reminds me of vaguely of AOC
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 02:33 PM
1

Proof men are better than women: men don't need an entire culture and legal system catering to them in order to survive.
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 01:58 PM
3

This is equal to feminism's claim of the parasitic offspring.. This only adds to the population control beast & disgenic incentives that currently exist. MGTOW you have an obligation to reproduce if you value your values & genetics in the long run... Children = responsibility and humility. ​ ​ [perasrt]
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 01:19 PM
0

Totally a straw-man, but funny!
/r/MGTOW02/07/19 12:59 PM
6

Not hung well = my husband. "my husband is my husband" xD
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 07:37 PM
1

Yeah buddy.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 07:25 PM
3

Yes. Ironically, however, hypergamy can be argued to serve in the best interests of the species-- hence the collective justification and dissatifaction default.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 07:04 PM
7

I'd argue fatherhood is more important than motherhood. motherhood is good until age 2 max.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 05:44 PM
1

It means: I have the eggs (key to reproduction) therefore do i what i want or else. That creates weakness because of the sense of biological superiority (value of eggs > sperm). If i live my life believing i am superior then i may not work as hard to improve therefore I have a flaw in that a gift i was given prevents me from developing my faculties.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 05:01 PM
1

The woman is weaker because body-strength and egg-strength. Weaker in character and physical strength.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 04:35 PM
1

I understand your perspective. You believe that reasonability = truth and if something is reasonable then it must be true. It is reasonable that i won't win the lottery, therefore i won't win the lottery. This logic is reasonable. However, reasonable doesn't mean true or determined. That is the flaw in your logic as you don't seem to understand. You can repeat and reassert, however you are by definition a charlatan.. You cannot have true-certainty of future events based upon reasonableness alone…
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 04:02 PM
1

I don't see the proof of the woman being weaker because of the possible choices and behaviors that are found immoral in both men and women. I agree that hypergamy + social enforcement at the point of an ovarian gun = entitlement/monopoly = less likely to be virtuous. I disagree that a higher probability is sufficient to prove 100% however.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 03:58 PM
3

Isn't it interesting that the claim of superiority has its roots in what is completely unearned? (reproductive monopoly) I think the difference between earning and not earning reproduction at a high level shows the actual truth.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 03:56 PM
1

You make my point. I apologize if you cannot see it.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 03:54 PM
10

Could be. I never understood what fairer meant. Fair is a vague word. I think the female halo-effect is caused by vulgar displays of narcissism/self-obsession that comes along with the knowledge that you have a biological monopoly (eggs). This display signals to the feminine hierarchy (determined by alpha-male selection) a position/value to assist in keeping them in their place as well as one to the alpha-males in gene-fitness (as men look for indicators of fertility found in physical attributes…
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 03:24 PM
36

I've found that women are essentially utilitarian-- they chose solely based upon costs/benefits which is their ethical system. The narcissism comes into play when it comes to enforcement: the shameless use of this philosophy while decrying others' use of it.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 02:57 PM
1

I don't have the burden of proving a claim. It is a matter of language. Will refers to future intentions/events. If i say x will occur then I am stating, with certainty, that x will occur. If x has 1/10<sup>100000</sup> % of a chance of occuring, then logically your statement is fallacious.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 02:46 PM
1

Yes. 'You will not win the lottery' is a logical fallacy, however. The error is in the claim of future knowledge without the future occurring. Reasonability relates to confidence indexes within a framework of presumed or defined knowledge does it not? It is unreasonable, however, to assume with certainty knowledge that we cannot currently validate. In terms of making life decisions with the female, it is not unreasonable to say that MWALT. AWALT = fallacious.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 02:39 PM
2

Strategy of a shameless narcissist: Accuse x party of being y negative trait x party doesn't fold accuse x party of its inaction or defensive actions causing y; if positive for you, then accuse x party of it not being enough. hope no one buys the endless circular logic based in garbage & use all means necessary to enforce social conformity.
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 01:13 PM
1

So based upon the data that you've showed me, you've established a general trend-- you haven't established sufficient evidence as to the knowledge that AWALT. You have established, as we both agree, a general expectation or default. We never disagreed ;)
/r/MGTOW01/07/19 01:10 PM
0

Can you provide them. Not providing but stating you have them = feelings logic. AWALT isn't a generalization based upon the language used. Therefore burden of proof = 3.3 billion rows.
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 02:13 PM
0

AWALT generality = agreed. Faulty analogy. It isn't the nature of a grenade to explode without outside initiation. The purpose of a grenade is to explode, however. Conflation of nature with purpose. Needing a benefit or else one cannot believe something = faulty logic for the basis of a belief. Needing benefit or else NOT CHOOSING AN OPTION = valid.
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 12:26 PM
1

Not a tradcon.
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 12:24 PM
-2

AWALT based upon what, your feelings?
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 12:24 PM
-7

In principle, yes you are a hypocrite. Being a hypocrite doesn't mean you are wrong generally. Example- parent that smokes telling children smoking is bad. In this case however you are hypocritical. The urge to slander and downvote suggests an expectation of ideological conformity. If this said all men are like that would it be the same..? All women's nature is like that. (AWNILT). Because one has a nature doesn't mean they must be dominated by it. Similarly to MGTOW resisting the biological mas…
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 02:26 AM
-16

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. ​ Also, false. Just applying the Kantian imperative.
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 01:47 AM
-22

NAWALT. However you are doing what you are complaining about.
/r/MGTOW29/06/19 01:40 AM
3

Isn't wanting more a simple nature tho?
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 09:45 PM
2

Do not pay her back. How do your friends agree with her if you're telling the truth which clearly shows that she changed her mind afterwards and blames you for her choice?
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 09:42 PM
2

If the truth bothers you, perhaps you confirm its truth.
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 09:00 PM
13

Censorship is bad. Just ignore them.
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 03:12 PM
1

Whether or not they are wanted is irrelevant-- they can use that same logic against you. The only useful response to those who use horrible logic, irrespective of their genitalia, is to ignore. Do not reward what you dislike with attention.
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 03:11 PM
2

Sounds like a confession of female nature: "more, and I justify all the means to get to the ends that i will never get to".
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 03:09 PM
3

It is the justification hamster.
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 03:08 PM
30

My buddy told me a great quote that i think applies here: "Men love women, women love themselves"
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 03:07 PM
1

Do Something for me but hide the expectation Suggestion Self-justified vitriol.
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 02:38 PM
3

Well no shit because a female believes she can't be hit, therefore she hits and mocks and complains if it's given back deservedly.. cry bullying 101
/r/MGTOW28/06/19 02:31 PM
2

Woah potential reciprocation of moral duties? nah
/r/MGTOW27/06/19 07:12 PM
1

Because it's a way to score cheap points by assigning bad intents/negative attributes to a group based upon their feelings & opportunism.
/r/MGTOW27/06/19 02:12 PM
1

False bifurcation.
/r/MGTOW27/06/19 02:11 PM
4

Consent, like the marxist view on power, is an illusion between those with (sexual) power (the female) and those without (the male). It can be changed dependent on the benefit to the individual.
/r/MGTOW27/06/19 02:09 PM
2

Yeah. It seems like a strawman meant to appeal to the sense of victimhood of a group to create a basis of its indignant-unity? Only those blinded by self interest and unable to use logic would buy the argument on its face and propagate it without due process.
/r/MGTOW27/06/19 01:47 PM
1

I understand. So you believe the nature of choice is not a cause from biological wiring but separate from it? I don't see how an entity that is biological can be separate from its biology at any level. Much like a computer's software is separate from it's operating system or hardware. We can agree if we can prove based upon a value what moral is better. Consensus validation requirements don't disprove the claim of truth by necessity. If i agree you and me are having a discussion and a group of p…
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 06:11 PM
1

I do not have the burden of proof. One can postulate that all claims of language within language are constructed and thus subjective, not objective. The definition of objective requires agreement of criteria and object.
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 05:31 PM
1

Do you have any evidence for that? The question first is determine whether or not they have choice and whether nor not choice has a biological influence. If so, than morality is influenced by biology and the immorality is influenced by biology claim is true--- which a reasonable person would agree. Appeal to OP intent of criticism? I am unsure how this relates or is relevant. The answer is no. if you reject that i must assert that Facts > feelings and criticism is allowable as you agree with thi…
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 04:52 PM
5

If that was true then why isn't the workforce entirely female to save money?
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 04:45 PM
1

Can you prove the first claim? I don't see any evidence for that. Humans are biological beings, if a biological being creates something, it is biologically influenced. Neurotransmitter responses are conditioned but that system existing is biological? Judgment system = enforced standards = community = tribe = exists in great/lesser apes = arguably biological influence/cause? Could you use an objective moral opinion? I believe objective morality exists.
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 04:16 PM
16

Scary. I find it interesting that HR's formula is the following: 1) If it can be interpreted in a negative way it must be meant in that way. 2) Guilty until proven innocent. 3) Fem > Mal
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 04:08 PM
0

I was hoping to have a more specific discussion than logical fallacies & non related topics. Do you have specifics?
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 03:53 PM
0

Correct and spacing is an aesthetic. If i attack an aesthetic I am signaling that it isn't within my preference. If i am signaling that then my preference is claimed to be superior to the other person's argument. Thus it is an ad-hominem. Could be considered a genetic fallacy to because it invalidates based upon source attributes. 'So poorly explained' is another signal /ad hom without showing how or where or why. It signals to the potential perception of superiority on the basis of an interpret…
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 03:40 PM
1

Biology is hardware that serves as an underlying influence for behavior that manifests itself at the cultural level. Do you agree? If so, immorality relates to biology as it helps to explain it.
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 03:17 PM
0

Seems like a potential ad-hom, Can you share how you think? The purpose of this was to engage in discussion.
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 03:14 PM
0

Ad Hominem.
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 03:13 PM
16

Be careful here.. Men don't value victimhood as a form of merit in general, yes?
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 02:01 PM
2

I find the incentive structures men and women face to be interestingly opposed: 1) female sexual market value is mainly based upon looks which for the most part are genetic/not controlled. 2) male sexual market value is mainly based upon achievement/utility which for the most part is earned/controlled. A definition of immorality is gaining that which one did not earn at another's expense. I wonder which biological sex's sexual market incentives are closer to this definition.
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 01:57 PM
28

Leftist logic: Those with power are generally at fault Leftist axiom: Women have sexual selection power/their consent > male consent Also leftist logic: Women shouldn't be presented as the problem for opening their legs and bad things happening. Hamster!
/r/MGTOW26/06/19 01:30 PM
1

But the second part never happened lol
/r/MGTOW25/06/19 02:41 PM
2

have*
/r/MGTOW25/06/19 02:39 PM
4

Narcissism 101
/r/MGTOW25/06/19 02:37 PM
3

They can never be wrong because they have no null hypothesis.
/r/MGTOW25/06/19 02:33 PM
49

Knowing that either society or the future ex hubby will foot the bill
/r/MGTOW25/06/19 02:31 PM
1

and over 2/3rds of the STEM degrees are held by men. What's the point?
/r/MGTOW25/06/19 02:31 PM
1

I think that a woman would blame the man and say it wasn't meant to be and he's a weak man etc. Anything that removes agency.
/r/MGTOW21/06/19 05:22 PM
1

You think too much-- this seems to suggest knowledge of the wrongness of the behavior you engaged in. Requesting validation from third parties that have no stake in the outcome is not an ideal path to solve the issue you struggle with: Hypergamy + knowledge of corruptibility. My suggestion would be: accept yourself as a fallen individual that had a slip up and drifted towards something, intentionally or not. I recommend taking full responsibility for this and communicating it to your husband imm…
/r/RedPillWomen21/06/19 02:44 PM
7

The context of the entire verse, not just these two lines, make it even more legit: "one man among a thousand.. truly wise and gracious.. but not one woman among them all: that is, among all the harlots and adulterous women I ever knew or heard of, I never knew nor heard of one that was ever reclaimed from her evil ways, and reformed or became a chaste and virtuous woman: he may have respect to the thousand women that were either his wives and concubines, and, among all these, he found not one t…
/r/MGTOW21/06/19 02:39 PM
3

It's interesting how nature's representative would choose to fail to maintain the nature order to benefit itself. Perhaps social engineering is the culprit. I don't believe that agency cannot be ascribed however
/r/MGTOW20/06/19 05:54 PM
5

Perhaps we both actually need each other. It is in male nature (like the republicans lol) to give good-faith concessions and it is in female nature to believe that the good-faith concessions because of biology are a justified, entitled offering that requires no shame. Maybe reality is that both need to be tempered--the male tendency towards hierarchy and meritocracy and who that affects negatively and the female tendency towards endless victimhood, no agency & rewards based upon what one doesn't…
/r/MGTOW20/06/19 02:39 PM
2

To be honest I believe that the first two are correct. Self-actualization however, comes from having the eggs and having value from men. The motivation is external but internalized because realization of monopoly/selection power. I think men require motivation from the outside. I wish I was wrong but I think the motivation men get from the desire for women (reproduction, will to survival) is what influences the great extremes of male achievement.
/r/MGTOW20/06/19 02:21 PM
16

Yes. It may be because no feminine-hierarchy (or a hierarchy predicated on female values) can survive without peddling victim-hood-- that is the currency.
/r/MGTOW20/06/19 02:16 PM
2

Relatively accurate. A little extreme on the job loss but humorous and true to many points.. especially the endless social leveraging against the male for the female. To be frank ya'll, if men had social leveraging like women had, we probably wouldn't be as productive and better in general. It's not a strength as much as a confession of weakness.
/r/MGTOW20/06/19 02:06 PM
2

Yeah. I think it has to do with the feelings associated with maternity and the positive intentions associated with helping third parties at another's expense. It bypasses logic and reason/review because sophistry.
/r/MGTOW18/06/19 07:23 PM
1

Theory: Biological imperatives mean men prefer freedom and women prefer security. Data: Pew research Apr 11, 2019 says 58% of women would rather have bigger gov't, more services while 59% of men prefer smaller gov't, fewer services. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/11/gender-gap-widens-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/
/r/MGTOW18/06/19 01:55 PM
1

One can be a hypocrite and correct. example: I smoke and I tell my mother not to smoke. This still renders points valid and not dismissible from both perspectives.
/r/MGTOW17/06/19 06:35 PM
0

This is insufficient evidence logically but humorous to consider as representative.
/r/MGTOW17/06/19 05:57 PM
1

I am attempting to outline your hypocrisy. Thus your appeal to hypocrisy is useless. I don't care about the appearance of hypocrisy btw. I find it ironic, not wrong. Female reasoning is me identifying, correctly, the need for security.
/r/MGTOW06/06/19 06:40 PM
1

I love the part when she equates herself to a good thing. Jk that was the entire time.
/r/MGTOW05/06/19 04:29 PM
2

Yeah. It does stink that the monopoly of the service (children) lies within a human and thus corruptible entity. Pairing corruptibility with the state, which by definition is force, means that the sentiment of fear/resentment against women in this day and age is justified. Justified however, doesn't mean always right/correct or stupid to decide.
/r/MGTOW05/06/19 04:26 PM
1

I understand the feeling. It is ironic to me that you demand security in a decision or else you don't do it/shame those who do. Isn't that a form of female reasoning?
/r/MGTOW05/06/19 04:24 PM
1

You're assuming that a slave that hates his job but can do more is better than a slave who thinks he's free that can't do more, correct?
/r/MGTOW05/06/19 04:23 PM
-1

Yet more = appearance of contradiction. Yet more of what you state has no relevance to my general statement of fact.
/r/MGTOW31/05/19 06:49 PM
7

Marriage offers men a chance their kids will have a higher probability of success.
/r/MGTOW31/05/19 01:26 PM
4

Why would one expect the causes of death to be very similar to news reporting? That's like expecting a factory worker in Ohio to be similar to the CEO of the PR firm representing the factory's company.
/r/MGTOW31/05/19 01:25 PM
3

It seems almost as if the pursuit of self interest and power based upon an overvaluing of self is what the driver is. All who disagree are against the pursuit and thus the individual. It is like leftism took a page outta female logic
/r/MGTOW10/04/19 02:58 AM
1

That is a logical fallacy as it values what we don't choose over what we should choose. If we only do what we are programmed to then rape, theft assault and murder would not have punishment. Appeal to nature.
/r/TheRedPill12/03/19 05:01 PM
1

Rather than bore you with a backstory, I will give you my version of the risk+/- benefit calculation. I recommend saving at least 60,000 in cash before having your first child. This is Dave Ramsey's method (6 months of earnings) + the padding for children (60,000-6 months of earning = child padding). I choose 60,000 because this number of savings gives you sufficient lee-way in case of an unexpected or prolonged issue. I don't know how you define today's culture. If it's defined as leading to pa…
/r/TheRedPill12/03/19 04:48 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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