TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

EvanHarper Archive

View 0 posts and 91 comments by EvanHarper 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)
3

...how is this in any way related to the ostensible purpose of the subreddit? ...also how were her comments in any way "bigoted and racist?"
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/17 03:19 PM
1

i didn't zoom in ffs
/r/PussyPass27/04/17 03:23 AM
0

I didn't zoom it in. Marisa Mayer is still not Jewish though.
/r/PussyPass22/04/17 03:41 PM
0

Trying to claim that literally no-one at the top level of any major media corporation is a heterosexual white gentile is kind of a bridge too far. E.g., Marisa Mayer is not Jewish.
/r/PussyPass22/04/17 01:36 AM
1

This whole conversation has been about whether we should worry. This whole time I have been offering reasons why I think it's worrysome. Jesus Christ, you're just dumb.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/03/17 02:23 AM
1

Women dominate almost all health care professions and will soon be the majority of internist MDs. Not just vet science. People concerned about the wage gap argue that women are pushed into lower-paying career paths with less possibility for advancement Yea, that's a poor argument. Women do what they want to do You're saying it's impossible that women might be pushed into less ambitious paths? That it's possible but it's inherently not something to worry about because it involves an element of ch…
/r/PussyPassDenied15/03/17 01:49 AM
1

My point is that you are coming out with this blizzard of poorly thought out and even contradictory claims, from one moment to the next, with the only constant among them being they all lead one to think "let's not worry about male dominance in STEM." Why else would you say something like misogyny in STEM couldn't be a problem even if it did exist, since women would just work harder to fulfill their dreams? That's obviously stupid if you stop to think about it even a little bit.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/03/17 01:41 AM
1

You're saying that if an 11-year old girl were subtly discouraged from trying her hardest in math class because her teacher took a "don't be sad, math is hard" approach that they wouldn't have taken with an equivalent boy, there would be discrimination lawsuits and national media coverage about it? This is why I'm saying that you're not fucking listening. You refuse to answer the actual arguments of people who are concerned about this issue. You pretend to acknowledge the arguments, but then in …
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 11:58 PM
3

I don't see women digging ditches, building that apt. complex next to me, working in coal mines... do you? But you've very obviously cherry-picked your "stamina and work ethic" examples here. You could just as easily have picked health-care professions, which are female-dominated (even MDs are likely to be majority female before too long) and extremely demanding. Obama DIDN'T get the crappy 70% out of a dollar quote for his fake wage gap argument. The amount of hours worked, the type of job, the…
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 11:51 PM
1

Look I'm trying to engage with you here but it's increasingly obvious that you aren't listening or aren't capable of understanding my specific points, and just want to give little canned homilies about equality of opportunity or whatever. Like, your newest argument here seems to be that there realistically can't be social and environmental factors pushing women away from STEM, because there are laws against discrimination in labor and education. This is self-refuting and I don't see a need to dw…
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 11:37 PM
2

1) Just to note up front that you're not seriously defending the idea that "if women choose not to go into STEM, it must be the case that STEM isn't discriminating against women." Can I get you to either acknowledge that what you said before was obviously not a serious argument, or try explicitly to defend it. Because that's why I originally commented – I couldn't let slide such an arrogant air of certainty on a comment with hundreds of upvotes that is blatantly false and frankly idiotic. 2) we …
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 10:28 PM
1

The reason why there aren't more females in STEM is because more females don't want to be in STEM Even if this is 100% true and the only explanation for low female representation in STEM it wouldn't be remotely good evidence that sexism isn't keeping women out of STEM. Seriously, it's almost as if you guys have never read anything serious about these issues or discussed them with anyone who doesn't already agree with you. Because the argument you're making here is obviously wrong to anyone with …
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 07:45 PM
3

No-one's "logic" failed here though. There was never any logical argument going on. You can't just use words like "logic" as generic positive terms for things you agree with, guys.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 07:41 PM
0

cool story
/r/MensRights18/01/17 11:55 PM
1

Yeah. Or to put it another way, we should overprotect and deny the agency of male children just like we do with female children.
/r/MensRights18/01/17 09:48 PM
8

Maybe we could acknowledge that there's a deep sexism in the way we treat "statutory rape" cases without taking the most punitive, moral-panicky, think-of-the-children position on the question.
/r/MensRights18/01/17 07:22 PM
1

im "feminists" #brosinthemist #killallmen ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
/r/MensRights15/11/16 05:19 PM
1

what's sad is that reddit is full of people who consider it fairly normal to consider that this is considered fairly normal
/r/MensRights13/10/16 10:23 PM
1

what the fuck are you even talking about you mong
/r/PussyPassDenied09/09/16 11:11 PM
1

And now her campaign is saying if you don't vote for her because of her sex you're not a feminist. This is definitely true and all, but just in case I run into some SJW who would doubt it, can you show me where the Hillary Clinton campaign has said "If you don't vote for Hillary because she's a woman you're not a feminist?" Since this absolutely 100% happened and is not in any way some completely insane shit that you just made up and ran with, I'd like that proof pls
/r/MensRights09/09/16 09:21 PM
2

it's obvious trolling if you're not completely retarded
/r/PussyPassDenied09/09/16 09:18 PM
0

i never saw it before yet it was still 100% obvious
/r/PussyPassDenied09/09/16 09:18 PM
0

Are you people fucking retarded? Here George Lopez got owned by zero effort trolling and you're actually convinced you saw him shut down le SJWs. My God you people are stupid.
/r/PussyPassDenied09/09/16 09:17 PM
2

Oh, wow. So the original court judgment was reduced substantially, and then in negotiations with the company they dropped all claims for money in exchange for Pao dropping any further possibility of appeal. "Officially Found Liable," lol
/r/PussyPassDenied08/09/16 07:47 PM
4

A hate-figure for awful Redditors
/r/PussyPassDenied08/09/16 12:21 PM
53

There's... not even a pretense that this fits the ostensible purpose of the sub. There was no "pussy pass" and she was not "denied" but actually won a substantial reduction in the fees claimed.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/09/16 11:44 AM
1

It seems like it would be pretty easy to demagogue comparisons between arbitrarily selected prisoners' prison conditions, especially if the source you're starting with is the Daily Mail.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 01:14 AM
1

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrible
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 05:22 PM
1

┌┬┐┌─┐┬─┐┬─┐┬┌┐ ┬ ┌─┐ │ ├┤ ├┬┘├┬┘│├┴┐│ ├┤ ┴ └─┘┴└─┴└─┴└─┘┴─┘└─┘
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 05:11 PM
-5

this is literally a shit-tier comedian being trolled on Twitter, biting it hard and losing his shit, and merely by forcing it into a "yeah! fuck women! they get all the breaks!" frame it's a front-page post on Reddit with 93% upvotes terrible
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 05:00 PM
-5

terrible
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 04:50 PM
-17

George Lopez is terrible and this post is terrible and this subreddit is terrible and you are terrible and Reddit is terrible.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 04:37 PM
0

The NISVS has a co-operation rate of over 80% and very similar numbers. Aside from that, you're correct, the questions were not as biased as I thought, but as I made clear I needed to look into it, and in doing found many other flaws. I'll take motivated reasoning for 1,000, Alex. I live on a campus. I know dozens of women. None, in my admittedly limited knowledge of their personal lives, have been raped or even assaulted for that matter. You go from response rates and survey methodology to this…
/r/MensRights22/07/15 05:27 AM
0

I've heard the study asked questions like "have you ever had sex under the influence of a drug?" This is a lie that is commonly repeated. The question that's asked is if anyone ever had sex with you while you were sufficiently drugged that you could not provide consent or stop what was happening. The language is extremely clear: NISVS (CDC study) CSA (Campus study) Sometimes sex happens when a person is unable to consent to it or stop it from happening because they were drunk, high, drugged, or …
/r/MensRights21/07/15 08:58 PM
-1

Don't you think it's more likely that mods simply didn't like the narrative of the story and especially the comments No, I don't, and your comment has given me no reason to think so.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 01:50 PM
-1

I mean if you've been on Reddit for any length of time you'll have noticed that mods are pretty arbitrary about giving reasons for removing things, and will tend to look for more "neutral" reasons to delete shitstorm-inciting posts, rather than just saying we nuked it because it's a shitstorm.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 01:12 PM
0

Does free speech imply that discussion groups have to host whoever walks through the door?
/r/MensRights12/06/15 05:21 AM
-1

"You're an idiot" isn't an argument, which you would understand if you weren't an idiot. The point is I'm trying to establish proper definitions of concepts like free speech so we can have an actual conversation about free speech. You would, again, know this, if you were not an idiot. Does free speech imply that discussion groups have to host whoever walks through the door?
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:52 AM
-6

No, I'm not interested in the part about feminazis, that's clearly your idée fixe. My point is that you have no evidence that "hardcore users" of Reddit share your beliefs. You think of yourself as a hardcore user and you hang with other hardcore users and they all hate feminism and the SJW menace. But that has nothing to do with actual evidence that Reddit's most committed users are consistently or even disproportionately "anti-SJW." Thus, you have no basis for asserting that kicking out the wo…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:49 AM
-2

It's not so much thanks to the hashtag as to the ingrained, second-nature dishonesty of "anti-SJW" types.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:44 AM
-1

Okay lets cut the ad homonym shit and be respectful. Insulting you isn't an ad hominem argument, which you would know if you weren't an idiot. And it's "hominem." Anyway, about your reply: The fuck is all this? I asked you about the definition of free speech and you made up your own issue instead and gave me a bunch of baffling analogies. It seems that because, to repeat, you are an idiot, you don't understand that I'm asking you about a purely hypothetical scenario meant to demonstrate the idio…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:40 AM
-8

Hey look, it's any idiot!
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:19 AM
-13

I mean, you clearly have no basis for this other than your personal self-image and that of the folks you run with.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:19 AM
-2

Well, now it's just obvious that you're saying whatever dumb shit will exempt you from having to address my argument. Actually, to be honest, I think you might just be really stupid, and this is sincerely the best you can do. So I'll try again: Are MRA discussion groups obligated, on free speech grounds, to allow anyone who shows up to speak? Even if they're feminist activists? I'm not asking you whether it might be a good idea to hear from feminists occasionally, I'm asking whether free speech …
/r/MensRights12/06/15 03:30 AM
-2

So e.g. Mens' Rights discussion circles should not have the right to prevent groups of feminist activists from showing up and literally talking over everyone? It would be a violation of their free speech rights to show them the door? This is so basic and obvious.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 03:09 AM
-5

Yeah, one of the strangest things about the little GamerGate/anti-"SJW"/MRA/etc thing you have going is the prevalence of these ridiculous 3edgy ultra-leftist types who somehow still insist they're not part of a conservative movement. And it never seems to be moderate leftists, either – as far as I can tell it's teenagers and university-aged guys who are deeply anxious about being able to make it in the world, and think the solution is some kind of socialist revolution, which of course will make…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 03:01 AM
-25

Not in a million years. It's not implausible enough, doesn't fit their politics, and couldn't sustain an article's worth of jokes.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:37 AM
4

The two parties are sharply divided by ideology and the Democrats are vastly more favorable to feminist causes.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:20 AM
-60

This has nothing to do with Ellen Pao. And the concept of "completely free speech" you're implicitly advocating here is completely incoherent and self-negating. Free speech implies the ability to form speech communities with their own norms and procedures, without them being constantly overrun by whatever person comes along and wants to shout them down.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:19 AM
-18

This has nothing to do with Ellen Pao.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:18 AM
-4

You will, at best, pull a GamerGate trying this. You'll get some advertisers pulled in the initial stages when it's not obvious to the world that your campaign is dishonest and motivated by political extremism; it will have no lasting effect and you'll get no further because the backlash to the advertiser pullouts will make the nature of your campaign better understood.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:18 AM
43

Yes, this entire thing is an incredibly obvious non-story, and it's just gullibility and fixed beliefs about "SJW" "censorship" that's leading people not to see that. It might have been because the comments were a shitstorm, or it might have been because the headline in no way fit the theme of the sub. No-one familiar with The Onion could possibly imagine that as an Onion headline, it makes no sense. This has been happening more and more since /r/NotTheOnion was defaulted, and it's basically rui…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:15 AM
16

Please, please, please do.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:14 AM
-2

We should be so lucky, but, no.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:14 AM
-28

This has nothing to do with Ellen Pao, and you guys are gullible, hair-trigger wackaloons.
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:13 AM
41

Reddit didn't take it down, /r/NotTheOnion moderators took it down. Their reason for the takedown was content-neutral and fully in line with the way they run their sub. (Yes, any idiot can find examples of the loosely co-ordinated volunteer mod team making seemingly contradictory decisions, it proves nothing.) That sub has been struggling mightily, since it became a default, with people ignoring the actual point of "Onionyness" and just posting weird events, "shock" headlines, and so on. It's ne…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 02:12 AM
-19

why are we celebrating some douchebag being a douchebag to a douchebag oh because it's /r/pussypassdenied that made it to /r/all because reddit is a terrible place for terrible people
/r/PussyPassDenied23/05/15 06:22 PM
0

The american military will continue to be attacked for it's sexism and such until they give in Where are the attacks? Cite them. You're claiming that military recruitment policy is being rewritten under pressure from activists taking part in public discourse. So document the attacks, document the pressure, prove that it exists. If this was really happening you'd be able to cite the attacks, you'd be able to quote feminist leaders and spokespeople making them, and news articles describing how the…
/r/MensRights19/05/15 12:11 AM
1

I wouldn't say that feminists are overriding the military officers. Just that they've swallowed the kool aid, and are either feminists themselves, or scared of feminist lynch mobs, or just going with the majority, or [...] So, you have no idea how feminists have enforced their will on the military brass – who were able to hold out on official homophobia and no-women-in-combat until only a few years ago, mind you – but you know it's happened, and if there's no evidence that doesn't bother you bec…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 11:47 PM
1

How is this not just an ad hoc rationalization you've made up on the spot? What evidence do you have that a "gynocentric culture" has enforced its "temper tantrums" on the senior officer corps of the U.S. military? How plausible is it that feminists are overriding the wishes of career military officers to determine U.S. military recruitment policy – and yet this astonishing, unprecedented takeover has attracted no notice?
/r/MensRights18/05/15 11:24 PM
-3

That is literally what they're preaching in schools, groups, what ever. Name "them." Name the "schools" and "groups" and "what ever." Document that you are not just talking out of your ass and/or seizing on some ambiguous or foolish statement made by some rando. Sexual assault prevention and education is a huge field. There are literally thousands of books, pamphlets, posters, web pages etc. you should be able to cite to document this "feminists say a drop of alcohol negates consent" fact that i…
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 03:31 PM
-5

Do you honestly think if a woman is drunk, she can't give consent, but if a man is drunk, he can? I don't think that and no-one thinks that because it's literally just a calumny made up by people who don't like feminists. It makes no sense and has no basis. I don't know how much clearer I can make this. No-one claims that alcohol consumption in itself (as opposed to severe intoxication) negates consent and no-one claims that this principle applies especially to women but not men. This is a made-…
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 02:03 PM
-10

Jesus Christ, this is just incoherent. You're a very foolish man.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 03:53 AM
-15

If feminists were capable of reasoning they wouldn't have become feminists. But even if you accept the proposition that being a feminist was as crazy as being, say, a Nazi; still clearly most Nazis aren't even diagnosably mentally ill, let alone "incapable of reasoning." How could it be that all of the adherents of an entire political standpoint are not only wrong but fundamentally lacking a basic human characteristic, that of reasoning ability? Seriously, will you just admit that this is just y…
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 02:37 AM
-13

I suppose I'm meant to take statements like these more as pronouncements of faith – "Jesus Died For Our Sins" – because as factual assertions they're too ridiculous to even discuss. Feminists aren't capable of rational thought? Not "feminism is wrong" or "feminists are irrational about feminism," no, feminists are literally not capable of reasoning. At this point what are you even left with? You might as well just say feminists worship Satan. There's no daylight anymore between yours and that ki…
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 02:06 AM
-15

Oh well, if you say it's nearly universal, and add that you really don't like feminists, clearly that satisfies my objection.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 01:55 AM
-31

the decades that each of them would have done if they had been found guilty How are you not just making up stupid bullshit in your head? It's unlikely they would have served decades if they'd murdered her. It's completely ridiculous to suggest they'd get decades for rape. Jesus, the maximum sentence is a decade. Christ, you're a lazy, dumb hack.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 01:12 AM
-52

Like most "feminist ideologies" it's literally something just made up by assholes on the Internet who habitually lie about what feminists actually believe
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 01:09 AM
-44

It's an overwhelmingly obvious lie.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 01:08 AM
-9

Citing that statistic makes no sense whatsoever. DNA evidence is only relevant when the suspect denies that he had sex with the complainant at all, and yet someone did have sex with the complainant, making DNA evidence available. You have to come up with some kind of convoluted Special Victims Unit scenario to explain how that relates to false rape allegations. It can't apply to calling it rape afterwards, or to making up an allegation out of whole cloth. But it wouldn't make any sense to try an…
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 01:05 AM
-28

Holy shit. What is it the feminists are fond of saying? If you've had so much as a sip of beer you're too drunk to give consent, and it's rape? Definitely a real thing that feminists are fond of saying and in no way an absurdly obvious legend that makes no sense.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/05/15 01:02 AM
1

Advocates had called for more, however, noting that the leave isn’t available to fathers or adoptive parents. They noted that the Family and Medical Leave Act, which guarantees 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave, applies to mothers and fathers alike as well as parents who adopt. So the "feminists" here are... who? The Navy brass? Because it seems like you guys are calling out a genuinely inequitable policy and then blaming it on feminism with no justification.
/r/MensRights17/05/15 10:18 PM
1

gets herself drunk, does something she regrets and then claims to have no memory Absolutely none of this follows from the fact (if it is a fact) that she was incapacitated by alcohol and not GHB.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 07:25 PM
0

So your definition of "he said, she said" is literally just "whenever the defendant pleads not guilty in a rape trial." If words just mean whatever you want them to at the time, I really don't see the point in continuing.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 06:59 PM
2

Mistrial if ever there was one. /r/badlegaladvice
/r/MensRights04/01/15 06:17 PM
0

I like they way they were convicted of speculatively drugging her with GHB...but if not she must have been drunk anyways. Just make stuff up and hope it sticks. Um, GHB and alcohol have very similar effects, so it's not clear why you think this is damning. Couldn't they have been honestly mistaken about the exact drugs involved?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 06:17 PM
0

Even if this were true, it already means that your "He-said/She-said case" is a total lie; it's actually a "he said; she said; some of what he said was apparent perjury; neighbour said; cops said; but I found reasons to dismiss all of that." But here's the thing: all of this stuff about the testimony being all wrong and the evidence not matching is just what you said, and I've already said I think you're lying. So give me something more than your word or I'm not interested. (By the way, what's y…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 06:14 PM
0

Sorry, was the Jezebel article written by either of the Twitter users mentioned here? Because otherwise I'm struggling to see the relevance. Edit: Oooh, I found the article. And it says that the women featured in the article are not real feminists because they explicitly justified their choices by invoking gender stereotypes: Kelly Makino, a 33-year-old former social worker who ultimately became a stay at home mom because she "believes that every household needs one primary caretaker, that women…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 06:06 PM
-1

That wasn't really the point of the comparison, which was a riff on your analogy, and an aside to the argument anyway. Would you care to respond to anything else I said?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 05:33 PM
0

She ... even refers to it as "serving her husband" (which, frankly, is the real reason the feminists are angry). How do you know this? If that comment was a reasonable thing to say, then it is reasonable to call you a racist because you aren't a member of the NAACP. That comment did not call KC-S a bigot; it said that feminism is not a dirty word. The actual analogy would be if someone distanced themself from the NAACP and was told in response, "The NAACP is not a bad organization." (And then /r…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 04:38 PM
0

KC-S said she was reluctant to identify as a feminist. "Feminism is not a dirty word" is not even an unreasonable response to that; it's certainly not a "blatant lie" and an "attack."
/r/MensRights04/01/15 03:53 PM
0

Can you explain how you know that this "was essentially a He-said/She-said case of Date Rape?" Because that's not actually supported by the article at all. Another article quotes the prosecutor praising a large number of witnesses for showing up for the re-trial, which is a little odd for a "he-said/she-said case." Oh... wait a second. Here we go. So, according to the testimony of a witness, the two accused invited him over to have sex with the victim, whom he saw lying passed out in a chair and…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 02:21 PM
-2

Which part of that tweet lies about what Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting said? Which part is the attack? It's literally only nine words, it shouldn't be hard to find it in there...
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:59 PM
-5

The actual text of the tweet is: This is disappointing. #Feminism is not a dirty word. ~ [link to original article.] "Blatant lies," eh?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:58 PM
-3

You're the only person in this thread who appears to have actually read the article.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:41 PM
-9

That's not supported in the least by the article, which quotes mild, polite criticism (and one "Libertarian Weeaboo" screaming insults against the critics.)
/r/MensRights04/01/15 12:40 PM
-5

This is a pretty weak attempt at a "gotcha."
/r/TheRedPill24/09/14 11:59 AM
-2

I want the last fifteen seconds of my life back
/r/MensRights08/09/14 09:06 PM
9

What is the point of coming to a debate subreddit and just repeatedly asserting premises that you know aren't generally accepted as if they're not up for debate?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 10:39 AM
25

He's blatantly cherry-picking a worthless study that's been ripped apart repeatedly over decades on many occasions. Even if it wasn't an N=18 study with blatant methodological flaws up to and including categorizing a rape report as false solely because the author believed that the victim was too fat to have been practicably raped, it's an outlier among outliers.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 11:24 PM
10

[this comment made only to legitimate downvote]
/r/MensRights29/03/14 11:18 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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