TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Due-Kale-6397 Archive

View 0 posts and 93 comments by Due-Kale-6397 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)
1

You’re forgiven
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:22 PM
1

Then you should’ve stated that
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:17 PM
1

Then you should’ve stated that in full. The fact you didn’t tells me you dont even know what your argument truly is
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:16 PM
1

So your argument was all bs then ? If you don’t believe in it there was no reason to relay that to anyone. How is it valid when you don’t even agree? 😂😂😂🤭
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:13 PM
1

And that proportion was in relation to how much it actually happens and if it’s an established phenomenon. That was the whole point. If it wasn’t. Then my point stays that it internalised misogyny is a thing. I’m glad you can now allow me to say that without arguing semantics!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:11 PM
1

Correlation to their argument doesn’t mean neglecting your overall stance. Nor does it mean changing the whole premise of your argument ? So explain the logic ever so reputable one
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:08 PM
1

That doesn’t really explain anything. How does who you’re replying to change the way you articulate your opinions ? If you believe something exists. It exists. If you don’t believe it exists it doesn’t. So. Pls. Explain
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:07 PM
1

And why wasn’t that made clear ? Why use it to fuel your argument if it’s not what you believe to be true at all ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:05 PM
1

And I’m asking why wasn’t ur argument adjacent to your true opinions on the matter. The fact you were arguing with feminists doesn’t change or dismiss that question. If you are arguing with child abusers your opinion doesn’t change whether their child abusers or not. So pls. Explain that logic
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:04 PM
1

No one is arguing about reality. I’m talking about conceptually. Which was always my stance. If you cared about real life- you would’ve mentioned it in your argument. But you didn’t. Because it didn’t fit your narrative
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:02 PM
1

No im not. Im going off what your study said. It used words like aggressive, hate speech and criticism in which you admitted was from bias. Your whole stance was women are more misogynistic and bias to other women. Especially online. Soooo
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 05:01 PM
1

There was no answer. And that proved my point. No one put words in your mouth. You can’t even back up the ones that acc came out of it so don’t be mad at me
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:59 PM
1

Then why didn’t u make that clear. Why are u arguing about a concept you don’t even believe to be true ? If that was not how you think why didn’t you state that ? Instead you made it your own argument? Why ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:59 PM
1

I don’t consider everything bigotry. Pls where did I say that ? You mentioned online aggressive hate speech ? I’m just going off the argument you made?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:58 PM
1

So no answer as to why you used a study you don’t even agree in ? Thanks for proving my point…again 🤭🤭😭
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:57 PM
1

Then why mention a type of bigotry in your argument? If you don’t define bigotry the same way others do ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:56 PM
1

Let’s not do that. Anyways. Disrespect is a component of bigotry so thank you for proving my point yet again 😂😂
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:56 PM
1

But that was never the point was it. And if that was- you wouldn’t have argued about online hate speech in your previous argument. You would’ve argued it doesn’t exist nor is it relevant. So why did you ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:51 PM
1

Which are components of bigotry. You got there in the end !
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:48 PM
1

Because if that was the argument with your logic it would be no one spreads it. You argument both men and women do not have internalised hate towards women. But now your saying it’s criticism, offensiveness and other synonymous words to back pedal
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:46 PM
1

Then why are u brining real life examples as if it’s the end conclusion needed to determine if internalised misogyny is real ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:44 PM
1

Noones saying that. I said you don’t have to marry women to be a misogynist. And that was never the argument to be honest. The argument wasn’t about who spreads it. It was about women having internalised misogyny and whether or not that true or not
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:43 PM
1

And why is this a factor now when it wasn’t a factor before ? If real life examples matter sm to you- wouldn’t that be your premise ? Or was the whole argument to push how women are bad to each other V
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:42 PM
1

Spreading of a mindset…okay this doesn’t specify if it has to be understood in real life either. It is still purely the existence of it and whether it’s a perpetuated phenomenon. There’s no specificity of real life or online attitudes
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:41 PM
1

Because you don’t have to be attracted to women to have them. And because “feminists” do doesn’t mean anything really. Some feminists believe all men are bad- I’m sure youll defo disagree and argue against that as to why that isn’t even a thing. So what is your excuse for mentioning misogyny now
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:39 PM
1

If you’re replying to feminist who think that wouldn’t you denounce the whole concept of misogyny since you don’t agree ? You wouldn’t use it as a driving force of your argument. So why use it if you don’t agree it exists at all ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:37 PM
1

If you didn’t agree why did you use it as the main focus of your argument ?? And I know you hate women. You don’t have to be attracted to one to hate them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:36 PM
1

Then why didn’t you make your stance clear ? Why use misogyny and gendered bias to fuel your argument if you disagree with it now ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:34 PM
1

So the latter
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:33 PM
1

If you used the words you thought to be right why are you now rejecting the misogyny part of your argument ? Even though you used it ? And ur not egalitarian. You argue against women every chance you get 😭
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:33 PM
1

And I doubt that. Or maybe you are but using your intelligence to soothe your victimisation of yourself
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:31 PM
1

No one said they are. But you chose to use them. So I’m asking why would you use them in the same context but now you’re rejecting one ? If you don’t believe in the study why did you use it ??
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:30 PM
1

That was your own hypothesis. This was before you mentioned the study. You claimed that not the study. And why are you picking and choosing what the study said and what you said ? I’m thoroughly confused. Explain !
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:29 PM
1

I feel sorry for your wife. Or maybe she’s part of the women who are misogynistic oh sorry “rude” to other women 😂😂😂😂 and you didn’t say critical. The study you cited did. In which is also said misogynistic. Which you claimed isn’t true. So how does that work ? You pick and choose what words work for you in a study you cite ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:28 PM
1

And if you wanna cite the study about criticism and use that- you’ll have to use the one you ALSO cited that included misogyny. If you don’t. That just lets me know you’re not a reputable academic at all 😂😂😂
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:26 PM
1

No you didn’t. You acc said this “I don’t understand why men get all the hate for online misogyny when studies done over the years have consistently shown that women are atleast responsible for half, if not most online misogyny”. Which was your own stance. This was before you cited any studies. The study said they’re more likely to be critical. Not you. You said critical, the study said misogyny, I didn’t say misogyny, the study didn’t mention bigotry, rudeness is not hatred. Semantics semantics…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:25 PM
1

Yet you still included it to prove your claim that women are more horrible to other women. And like I’ve mentioned before. When did this become an argument of real life examples. It was always conceptual in nature. Youre so misogynistic you stumble on your arguments 😂that is hilarious
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:23 PM
1

Oh so it wasn’t relevant to your narrative that women are terrible ! Got it !
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:21 PM
1

It did. It stated misogyny. Which is a bigoted viewpoint. Why are u picking and choosing what the study said or did not say and what words you do believe and not believe in ??
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:20 PM
1

If that was your conclusion why wasn’t it added to your hypothesis? Your whole stance was women are more horrible to other women ? So why the change of heart ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:19 PM
1

That’s good for you. But that’s not how studies work. Especially if you cite them. If you don’t agree with some definitions- why did you use it to further your point ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:17 PM
1

How can it be benevolent if it has bias ? In what way is unfair bias a good thing ? And how is t benevolent criticism now if your argument stemmed from women are aggressive to other women ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:17 PM
1

And bias is another component of bigotry. So what now ? And the study used highlighted the negatives there was no talk on “optimism”. So what’s the point in adding that to your argument now ?? If it’s negative- keep that going. Don’t change your tune now to seem impartial
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:14 PM
1

Repeating yourself doesn’t answer anything. Criticism is a component of bigotry. No one is saying they are equal. So what more is there to say ??
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:13 PM
1

And criticism is a heavy component in bigotry. So what is ur argument now ? No one is saying they are equal.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:12 PM
1

And higher expectations is found in bigotry a lot. Excusing behaviour from one yet being critical of another. So more semantics I see.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:11 PM
1

You brought up work place examples tho… in which you haven’t even explained or in your case tried to argue against. And regardless. When did this argument become about real life behaviours ? This was always a conceptual issue. How does that dismiss the fact that internalised hatred, internalised misogyny and internalised animosity between women is a thing ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:10 PM
1

Pls explain the work place examples you used and the conclusion that you made. And explain why you’re defending some terminology yet dismissing others? Because it’s terms from the study ? How does that work ? Is that the more accurate academic way you interpret studies ? Pls ! Educate me !!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:08 PM
1

Is being overly critical of a demographic not grounds of bigotry ? Especially if it’s gendered. I’m confused. Is that what ur saying ? Or is this more semantic foreplay ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:06 PM
1

Great ! Next time if you wanna pull the 150th study to disprove women out ur an again- use terminology that you acc agree with !!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:05 PM
1

Yet you also talked about work real life explains. In which the overall conclusion was “Across the three studies, we found consistent evidence that women reported higher levels of incivility from other women than their male counterparts. There is enormous amount of evidence to suggest that women are as likely as men to perpetrate online misogyny if not more likely”. And this was never an argument of real life or online. It was an argument of existence. Which you denied. So pls. Explain.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:04 PM
1

It’s a synonymous word. And the study you cited said misogyny. Which is a type of prejudice. So are u arguing what it says in the study or what it says that you don’t acc believe in ? Because if the words of the study doesn’t resonate with you- why are you questioning me with the conclusion I got ? You apparently concluded misogyny isn’t real in this case even though they mentioned it. So why are you on me and my interpretation?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 04:02 PM
1

Then why use that in your argument ? Why use a word you don’t believe in to further your argument ? It’s like me not believing animal abuse exists- yet using the fact animal abuse exists to further my argument ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:59 PM
1

Semantics. That means you agree that internalised contempt for others is real. Finally !!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:58 PM
1

Which are all components of bigotry. Being disrespectful towards a demographic due to them existing…is bigoted mindsets. Bit weird an academic like you is arguing words and meanings. Where’s all the big shot studies now ??
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:57 PM
1

“Women are as almost as likely as men to use the terms ‘slut’ and ‘whore’ on Twitter. Not only are women using these words, they are directing them at each other, both casually and offensively; women are increasingly more inclined to engage in discourses using the same language that has been, and continues to be, used as derogatory against them.” “Slut and whore” to most are intrinsically misogynistic. In which you stated multiple times in that argument that they are. But if that’s ur warped opi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:55 PM
1

Yet you stated that was your stance in a previous statement. Not very reputable of you to suggest a point in which you don’t even agree with to push your narrative is it
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:54 PM
1

Even though you were the one to state women are more critical, misogynistic and hateful towards other women. Glad you could admit where you’re wrong ! Byee
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:52 PM
1

Or more like you’ve been outed as hypocritical now you wanna run. Internalised disrespect of women is a thing. Imma play your argument and finger the semantic argument as much as you’d like
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:52 PM
1

But they all relate. Meaning internalised bigotry. Internalised hate. Internalised nastiness. Internalised offensiveness. Internalised disrespect. Still stands. No matter what semantic argument you wanna spin with this. Glad u can agree 👍🏽
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:50 PM
1

I never said they are equal tho. I said they all stem from the same feeling of being offensive.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:49 PM
1

That’s not the definition of rudeness. It means to be offensive or ill mannered. The definition doesn’t mention competition once. Synonyms including harsh, nasty and ill mannered. Which are all component of bigotry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:48 PM
1

Okay. Overly Critical. And aggressive. Which are both words you also used. And rudeness can stem from bigotry. So theyre not far of at all.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:46 PM
1

You didn’t just mention online. You mentioned in work aswell. “Male coworkers gave a 52% response rate, followed by female coworkers, with a 71% response rate. These results suggest that females experienced more critical feedback from superiors than coworkers, and experienced less critical feedback from male coworkers.” So that’s a real life example. So what now ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:45 PM
1

Then why use that to justify your argument. And why not state online attitudes don’t reflect real life attitudes?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:44 PM
1

Nah. Let’s not end it. You’ve made a claim. Now you’re back pedalling because it doesn’t fit your narrative that women are the evil ones. So pls. Let’s keep going. Why would you state in your argument “I don’t understand why men get all the hate for online misogyny when studies done over the years have consistently shown that women are atleast responsible for half, if not most online misogyny.” If you don’t believe misogyny is real ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:43 PM
1

Okay. Bigotry. I use the word bigotry. And internalised prejudice. Anything more you wanna rebuttal ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:42 PM
1

Explain the difference. Explain how rudeness is not hate speech. Even though you used those words in your argument ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:41 PM
1

So you therefore agree. Internalised bigotry to your own gender is a real concept. Finally !
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:40 PM
1

Okay. You wanna play semantics. Even though you said the word misogyny and hate speech countless of times ? 😂😂😂. Being “rude” to your gender to me is internalised bigotry. The same way a black person being “rude” to someone of their own colour is internalised bigotry. Glad you could agree !
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:39 PM
1

Why use terms in a study that don’t reflect what you actually think? What use that to support your argument if…it’s not really your argument? 😂😂😂
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:38 PM
1

There’s always a rebuttal for everything 😂😂 it’s biological to perpetuate hate speech online to other women ? Lol okay. Anyways. With ur logic, even though you said misogyny and hate speech is not the same as competitiveness- others would disagree. There’s no study to support this. You claimed it was hate speech. Now your tone has changed. I’ve claimed internalised misogyny is prevalent. Since you don’t think competitiveness is a worthy factor- I will also believe in what I believe
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:37 PM
1

“Misogynist tweets were the second most common form of hate speech with 3m of analysed tweets featuring misogynistic comments. 52% of these were sent by women. Tweets about what it means to be a man, homophobia and transphobia also featured largely.“. If that was true why would you call it hate speech ? It’s only hate speech if women look bad right ? Got it 😂😂🤭
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:34 PM
1

Ur argument is inconsistent. “Misogynist tweets were the second most common form of hate speech with 3m of analysed tweets featuring misogynistic comments. 52% of these were sent by women. Tweets about what it means to be a man, homophobia and transphobia also featured largely.”. Pls explain
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:33 PM
1

You didn’t say competitiveness. You said online misogyny. So which one is it ? And jealously and negative comments can come from feeling you are in competition with someone else. What what now ? Is it misogyny? Or the need to be in competition with other women ? Which is also a result of misogyny ? 🤭
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:32 PM
1

Misogyny is hatred of women. And you said women perpetuate the same amount of “misogyny” if not more. Is ur argument semantics. Or just wanting to be right ? What is the definition of misogyny to you ? Being competitive of women ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:31 PM
1

So you have no argument. Glad you can realise internalised misogyny exists. Stop arguing about semantics. It’s corny
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:30 PM
1

“I don’t understand why men get all the hate for online misogyny when studies done over the years have consistently shown that women are atleast responsible for half, if not most online misogyny. “In other words, women are ruder to each other than they are to men, or than men are to women. There is enormous amount of evidence to suggest that women are as likely as men to perpetrate online misogyny if not more likely.” Youre words. So pls explain this
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:29 PM
1

And that’s the whole premise of the argument. That internalised misogyny happens and women are held responsible. So what is ur argument
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:29 PM
1

That’s the whole point of the argument. That internalised misogyny is a thing. So what is your point ??? 😭😭😭
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:28 PM
1

“I don’t understand why men get all the hate for online misogyny when studies done over the years have consistently shown that women are atleast responsible for half, if not most online misogyny. “In other words, women are ruder to each other than they are to men, or than men are to women. There is enormous amount of evidence to suggest that women are as likely as men to perpetrate online misogyny if not more likely.” Youre words. So pls explain this
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:27 PM
1

I don’t care what can be proven as a whole to your standards. I’ve witnessed that type of bigotry all the time. Your opinions don’t change that. Plus- answer the question. If you don’t believe in women hating on other women- why did you say women hate on other women online more ?? Bit confused.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:25 PM
1

If this was the case why in your comments you claimed “why do are men blamed when most of the online hate of women comes from other women”. Pls. Explain that. If you believe women aren’t hating on other women why would you claimed online hate stems from most women ?? Because all this science jargon is corny
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:23 PM
1

A summary of a concept doesn’t disprove the existence of another. No one said that the majority trend. We just said it exists. In which I’ve borne witness to it. Are you saying my experience are incorrect then ? I’m still confused what ur point is but to argue and trying to be right
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:20 PM
1

You yourself should know even if a “study” shows a bias there is still some outliers. You argued about outliers all the time
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:18 PM
1

Even if this is true. It doesn’t disprove the fact internalised hate is a real concept. So what exactly is ur point ? Other than to argue and be disagreeable ?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:17 PM
1

Pls stop bothering women. Internalised bigotry is a thing. Stop telling ppl how to feel because you can’t accept the role your gender plays in everything
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:16 PM
1

I do not know why group bias is. You’re pathetic. And arguing women women online all day won’t make u happy
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:15 PM
1

I really don’t care what studies you have scoured the internet to try and argue with women about. Internalised bigotry is a thing. Internalised racism, internalised sexism and internalised homophobia. If you don’t agree that’s ur own. But others understand this therefore they believe in that. Stop telling others how to feel about society and the people around them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:15 PM
1

So why are u brining it up ? I didn’t talk about the different “abilities” of men and women. I talked about internalised self hate. So what’s w the essays ? Stop trying to prove you’re right all the time it’s so embarrassing and distasteful. Internalised misogyny is a thing. And if u don’t agree. You have no right to tell others they’re wrong
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:13 PM
1

If you care about men- focus on men. You just seem like an angry male trying to prove men are not the problem. That does nothing but create arguments. Arguing that testosterone is the reason for male shitty behaviour does nothing but reaffirm that everyone’s “risk seeking” behaviour is okay. It’s pathetic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:11 PM
1

Can you relax w the copy and paste. I told you what internalised bigotry is. It has less to do with programming of each gender and more to do with self hatred and the programming that goes into being something and hating yourself. All your comments is about women. You ask other ppl what they’re doing for the oppression of women. But here you are. Arguing about everything that comes with the oppression of women. Pathetic really
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:08 PM
1

Because internalised stems from self hate. Same way gay men and women can have internalised homophobia. Maybe google it instead of crying
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/07/24 03:04 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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