TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

CokeBooty Archive

View 2 posts and 47 comments by CokeBooty 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)
1

I'm saying if you make the claim that the majority of men were beating and abusing their wives, then show the evidence for that claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 11:39 PM
1

The majority? Because thats the claim being made
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 11:19 PM
1

You think the majority of men, would just continually rape their wives despite them constantly resisting and being averse to them?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 11:18 PM
0

You really believe wives back then were just constantly raped by their husbands?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 10:17 PM
2

People can rate pretty high on narcissism and Machiavellianism, but rating high on psychopathy is whats pretty uncommon, the idea that you disregard others well being, are you willing to screw someone else over to get what you want, to screw over your loved ones? Most people aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 09:02 PM
2

and mens suicide went up
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 08:56 PM
1

Ellen Burnstyn, a goddamned movie star, was beaten by her husband and the police wouldn’t intervene. This is talking about the 50s/60s/70s, modern dating was already widespread in those days, I'm talking about way before that. And you reference someone that was in the entertainment industry, an industry thats known to be corrupt.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 08:48 PM
0

because in a proper system like the days before dating, when families arranged marriages, unattractive people had a chance to get married. Its the new system our societies have adopted that eliminates chances for unattractive people unless they makeup for it in other ways, forget unattractive people, average men don't have a chance either.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 08:41 PM
-2

Whats your evidence that most women back then in those marriages were "resigned". This is a common feminist rhetoric, that women back then were only tolerating their marriages because they had no choice, yet theres no evidence of this. If thats the case then why did they have so many kids, a lot more kids than people have today, why would they continue having kids and care for the family if they weren't satisfied? Also why were the majority of women against suffragettes and feminism in the early…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 11:01 AM
-2

Theres already lots of different financial assistance and welfare programs for single parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 10:50 AM
-6

And if she is unable to manage financially, the kids shall be given back to the abusive father. The father doesn't want custody (since he wanted to get rid of them) so the kids would be taken by child protective services and put in a new temporary home, until the mother has the ability to do so. And its not like single moms have no help, they already have lots of financial assistance and welfare programs to get help from. What then is your alternative to the divorce laws that we have now, becaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 10:49 AM
1

thats assuming you have full custody
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 10:11 AM
2

I don't understand your point, why would you be in poverty? Maybe give a scenario as an example.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 10:01 AM
-7

No, I'm not saying they should get paid by the government from taxes (which they already do btw), I'm saying the parent should be responsible for providing for their child when they have custody, and if they can't then child protective services may get involved (which they already do btw), and some of your custody may be given to the other parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 10:00 AM
-7

dv victims should only be able to leave and a domestic abuser should subsequently not even be financially responsible for their kids If they can't prove abuse, how can they pursue it in court? Abuse is not exclusive to divorce, if they have proof then they can pursue it. Child support is not responsibility for the child, its often leveraged by the mother to get more payments from the father after divorce. For example in many countries if the mother has more custody she will get more child suppor…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 09:48 AM
1

Its complicated the way women look at men for relationships, they look at men on two axis, one for attractiveness and another for security (money/resources), the goal is to find a man that hits the top on both axis, but often thats rare, often she'll just find the bad boy who's just for fun but she'll never settle down with, and then she'll find the good boy who will provide for her and be a good father. She doesn't see the good boy as someone she can have fun with, but she sees him as someone t…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 09:38 AM
4

I agree with you OP but you misunderstand what the game system is, the system which is unfair is NOT life, its not unfair that some were born unattractive. What is unfair is the dating system that our society has adopted, which rewards the cheaters, the liars, the manipulators. Many people don't realize this but dating is a modern phenomenon, humans have been doing it for less than a century and its already been a big failure, marriage rates falling, birth rates are declining, as a result societ…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 09:26 AM
-13

Maybe the solution isn't to get rid of no fault divorce, but to get rid of things which incentivize women to get divorces like equalization of assets, alimony, child support, etc. which are barbaric and outdated laws themselves. Victims of abuse care about leaving, not getting something out of it, and the other women that divorce based on whim will think twice if they get nothing. Taking someone elses wealth and assets to give to another person is theft, its immoral. I know the common argument i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 09:07 AM
1

(And as women proved first during WW2, women can also replace men). go back and read the thread, the point flew over your head (Teachers are essential. Think the pandemic might have taught you that. The pandemic showed us why teachers are NOT essential, and actually how corrupted the education system is. Lots of parents actually got to see what their kids were doing in class, and they weren't happy. So are doctors, which is now 60/40 men women. This is one of issues I was talking about where the…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 05:10 AM
2

Relationships are not a measurement for a mans options. I didn't say a 5'8" man will not get women, I said they will have significantly less options that a guy who's 6'1". And height is just one factor of attractiveness, albeit one of the most significant factors. On top of that, its men who dictate the relationship, its women who dictate access to sex, which is why its a bad measure.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 01:33 AM
9

100%, its not called goldigging if the man knows she's just with him for his money, then its a sugar baby/daddy relationship. Men generally understand that their wealth and status is a factor for attraction, even the men who are being gold dug understand this, but theres a difference between being attracted to a man because of his wealth and status, and being attracted to a mans wealth and status, golddiggers are the later while the men they date believe its the former.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 12:28 AM
18

Golddiggers make it easier to believe that they actually want you for you and not your money. With prostitutes you know going into it that its a transaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 11:36 PM
10

Its not just good girls that are attracted to the bad boy archetype, its most women. The bad boy archetype is whats been labelled as the 'dark triad' : narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Studies have shown that people who are perceived to have dark triad personality are rated higher in attractiveness by women: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886913012245 Its true that a lot of criminals and bad guys exhibit the dark triad, but so do people in high level pos…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 11:33 PM
–

No, humans are social creatures. The issue isn't they can't be alone but rather that they are serial daters or promiscuous. Instead, being alone and this individualistic mentality is whats abnormal and destroying communities.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 11:17 PM
3

You didn't get the point. The shorter a man is, the less options he has, the average 5'8" guy will struggle to get matches on dating apps, let alone 5'5".
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 11:11 PM
3

The exceptions prove the rule. You all are bringing up exceptional women, if you do that you can't compare the same way. What you have to do is compare Sofia Vergara at 51 to Sofia Vergara at 25, which one gets more options for dating. Also note Sofia at 51 has clearly had a lot of work done on her face.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 08:36 PM
5

but she has made it clear that she’s happy with her 5’8” boyfriend No one said someone whos 5'8" can't get a GF, the point is that shorter men have less options, its significantly harder for a 5'8" man to get a woman who will sleep with them compared to a 6'1" man. This is a fact. Go on any dating app, make a male profile and put the height as 5'8", you'll barely get matches compared to when you change it to 6'1".
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 08:32 PM
2

Many essential fields employ women, does not mean they require women, they can be easily replaced by men. Ironically majority of teachers used to be men not too long ago. The majority of women are not in essential fields, they're whats called BS jobs, like administration, managerial positions, receptionists, etc. It is true that there needs to be an overhaul of the system, because the system has changed throughout the years to accommodate societies new ideals. Like the scope of responsibilities …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 02:05 AM
4

if that was a safe option, then women would already being doing it you don't have to convince people to take the best available option for them If that were true, fat people wouldn't exist. why is men providing so rare? Men are still majority sole or primary breadwinners why do they want to be 50/50? Because feminism has told them thats good why do they hate golddiggers? providing is not the same as being swindled by golddigging whores why do women tip more? has nothing at all to do with the top…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 11:23 PM
2

They can try but you can't defeat biology, no matter how many incentives you provide you can't make a population artificially reproduce. There may be a few that go along with it, but the rapid decline in birth rates will continue until society collapses. Creating a life with someone you love is appealing, creating life in a lab isn't. Most of the women that will go for it will be middle aged and older women who feel time is running out, and for many of them it has. Its a very costly process that…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 10:50 PM
1

This assumes that a significant portion of men who pursue marriage are abusive, which is an unfounded claim. Even if thats the case, the solution is not for women to dedicate a decade of their life to pursue a career, this doesn't promote marriage, it discourages it, this is taken straight from classical feminist literature like simone de beauvoirs the second sex, where she says that women have to pursue careers so they don't have to depend on men, and can do their own thing, her goal was NOT to…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 10:38 PM
1

You can't chronically import immigrants to slap a band aid on the rapidly declining birth rates. There isn't an infinite supply of immigrants, and it has many other issues on its own. This is how feminism ruined society.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 10:10 PM
–

A study estimates by 2030 45% of working age women (25-44) are going to be single and childless, this study was done by Stanley Morgan, an investment bank. So we clearly see that big financial institutions, businesses, investors are trying to study and pivot for this demographic since these are the target consumers, these are who make the most money for big businesses. Materialistic consumerist single childless women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 10:03 PM
7

Women should get married and depend on a man to provide for them, most men would love to provide for a woman who's dedicated to them and the family. Women don't want to provide for men, they're not biologically wired that way, like men are to provide for women and the family. Thats why even when women start earning six figures, they don't take the responsibility of providing for a man and her family, she looks for a man who is equal or greater in wealth, so that they can still be provided for by…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 09:54 PM
3

Theres a difference between women working odd jobs for pocket money vs pursuing degrees and careers. Theres always been women working some jobs, like on farms, mid wives, sewing, cleaning, etc., but not all women worked, and women weren't going out to earn a living, they weren't pursuing careers. The priority was always the family, priority was to get married and start a family first and take care of them. it’s not this dichotomy between high flying girl boss and trad wife. It really is and we c…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 09:45 PM
-1

I never gave an outline of how a leader should lead, nor did I say all women seek a leader. I simply explained the relationship between a leader and its followers, a leader leads their followers, and the followers submit to the leader, that is a fact, by definition. Whatever else caveat they want to add on is up to them, whether the follower is free to leave or not, or has no input, etc., I never denied these things.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 08:28 PM
7

A lot of people are crypto feminists, they have feminist ideals, though they may outwardly be against feminism and be opposed to labelling themselves as one. Its because feminism has sunk its claws so deep into our societies that its embedded in to the culture. So a really good example of this is pushing women to pursue degrees and careers. I know many of you now are scoffing at the idea of this being feminism, and thats the point I'm making, its so deeply ingrained in our culture that we now th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 09:45 AM
-1

If submitting to their man is not their preference, then they should not look for men with leadership traits, that was my premise. I mean its simple, if it isn't their preference then it doesn't concern them, why are they arguing?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:09 AM
-4

I don't disagree with that, but I don't think anything I said implied one way or another either
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:00 AM
-2

So a boss can order their followers. A leader: inspires, fosters teamwork, doesn't seek obedience, seeks trust and respect. Ok cool, but is there no leading aspect to a leader? What does it mean to lead when it comes to leaders?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:58 AM
-4

We were talking about leadership in general, not romantic relationships specifically. You are not an authority figure. You are her partner. Women who want a relationship to be like a equal partnership can pursue that, but its hypocritical if at the same time they look for the man to have leadership qualities.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:54 AM
-3

Thats basically my point, just look at this thread, many women who are opposed to the simple idea of submitting to their man. No amount of competency is going to change that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:51 AM
1

OP asked women, regarding what men can do to go above and beyond, so thats what everyone is going to assume unless you state otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 12:36 AM
0

Lol, you guys always complain women are passive in the dating/mating game What do you mean by this?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 12:17 AM
-9

I agree that leaders need to be competent, but similarly there are some people who will not follow leaders at all and are by nature rebellious, no matter how competent a leader is they cannot make them submit and follow orders. This is why even the most successful and competent CEOs, bosses, senior management, etc. will avoid recruiting people on their team who they know are going to be trouble. If you go into it with the mentality of "I can save them", you're more than likely going to get burne…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 12:16 AM
-23

Edit: Its pretty clear that people are reading their own interpretations into what I said. No where did I mention forcing someone, bossing them around, non consent, being a dictator, king, etc. Nowhere did I say the woman should be just a slave and not have any free will, or that her input doesn't matter. Captains take advice from their crew, but the point is that ultimately its their decision and their responsibility, if something goes wrong then they are to blame. Then could you please define …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 12:09 AM
1

If women were put in charge of everything today, all our infrastructure would collapse, and we'd be plunged into nuclear war. I remember reading that historically, female leaders were more likely to wage war. And then its established that kids that grow up in single mom households end up being less successful in life, more likely to go to jail, commit crime, abuse drugs, be promiscious, fail in school, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/24 10:43 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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