TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

EvilTomte Archive

View 0 posts and 50 comments by EvilTomte 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)
2

Indeed. It's not feminism. Plus, I think it's just a joke, don't know why people are taking it so seriously.
/r/PussyPassDenied22/08/20 01:59 AM
1

This isn't the feminist movement. Feminism started way earlier, unless that's what you meant with your ' '.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/08/20 02:58 PM
1

Untrue. As a person from a nation comprised of mostly feminists, most of us think "man-spreading" is bullshit.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/08/20 02:56 PM
1

It's a pretty funny joke, though.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/08/20 02:54 PM
1

Since you're unlikely to ever eliminate all negatives.. I don't even know what positives you're talking about still. Affirmative action is one thing I also think is wrong, it's better to target economically weak people in general rather than particular ethnicities. But 'chivalry'? That's just a social construct.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 10:46 AM
1

I mean... It's fine to talk about principles such as true equality, but until you have an actual solution there's not much point in wanting to eliminate a certain persecuted group's positives. First you target their negatives indiscriminately (meaning you target sexual crimes no matter who's the victim or perpetrator), then you can talk about eliminating 'positives'.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 10:39 AM
1

How will you achieve that?
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 10:19 AM
1

All negatives won't go away any time soon, though. It's a fact that men are responsible for way more violent crime, sexual crimes of different severity, etc. 'Chivalry' is just one equalizer for the weaker sex.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 10:05 AM
1

Why would that be wrong. That's like saying eliminating slavery was dumb because..? Or allowing women to vote. I don't see your point, at all. It's a fact that some groups of people experience racism and thus require protection, and intervention to reduce said racism through education, law enforcement, and so on. Affirmative action may not be the perfect solution, but at least targeting poor neighbourhoods with social solutions and education and similar should be the norm. No matter a person's r…
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 09:37 AM
0

What perks do black people have, specifically? I'm not sure why you're saying 'race', they're the same race we are, homo sapiens. Just a different skin pigmentation and some attributes that may or may not exist depending on heritage and environment. And obviously you don't want to give up positives, does that really negate talking about downsides or problems that some groups have? I don't really get what you mean. As far as I understand you, you seem to be saying that it's hypocritical to mainta…
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 04:41 AM
3

What relevance do those positives have to her situation, though? Single mothers aren't really sought after as much, and depending on her appearance that factor may be very small or nonexistant. Those singular characteristics may exist on a macro scale but may not on a micro scale. Your looking at to wide of a picture Well you brought up equality, though? That's why I wanted to find out what you mean from such a wide perspective.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 04:02 AM
-1

But we can probably say that some people are disadvantaged, no? Being an unmarried woman was a large disadvantage back in the day, for example. Or nowadays, being from 'the hood', or from a poor family, etc. What are the positives of coming from that background or becoming a widow or being left by a deadbeat husband?
/r/PussyPassDenied31/07/20 02:35 AM
0

The implication is that gaining equality would mean retaining positives inherent of inequality while removing negatives. I'm just curious about what those positives of inequality was? Getting handouts for being a single mom? Disclaimer: I'm not trying to be daft or annoying, I genuinely find the subject interesting. The mom in OP's post is definitely a choosing beggar.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/07/20 11:49 PM
-13

Did single moms historically have that many positives, though?
/r/PussyPassDenied30/07/20 11:35 PM
-1

That's simplifying it a bit, in my opinion. Feminism took hold fairly recently if we look at it historically. As it evolved, it sought out legitimate arguments for its cause. One of them is the wage gap. The problem was that the first conclusion one jumps to is that it was due to the same oppression that kept them from voting back in the day. And there might be something there - we still see informal oppression towards different social groups a long time after concepts such as slavery was abolis…
/r/PussyPassDenied26/05/20 01:55 AM
1

When you're in a fight, you hit them until they cannot get up again. That is when the fight is ended. Or... until you can make a clean exit. There are plenty of ways to end a fight without ending their consciousness completely. It's all context-based, though. Sometimes a good shove is all it takes.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/04/20 02:31 AM
-1

This is such a stupid word.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/04/20 02:29 AM
2

Like she can't even think of how men feel Can you explain this? I'm a guy and I don't mind the question. I feel like if that's her physical preference, she's allowed to have it. (Yes, you can argue that asking the weight question in return is OK as well)
/r/MGTOW01/02/18 05:17 PM
1

Looks is not important? you only have to be tall?? Why? Obviously not, height is another factor besides looks. It's a concept here in Sweden too, maybe not quite as much emphasis though. Most girls I've talked to about it think height is somewhat important, and some of them are extremely attracted to height to the point of ignoring 'bad looks' if he's tall as 'compensation' for it.
/r/MGTOW01/02/18 05:15 PM
1

The thing is that it's fairly easy to see the way fascism intended to dominate. They had clear values of race: which were superior/inferior. They had clear intentions to create "living room" for Germans, they clearly treated one people/race as better than another, etc. I don't see this tendency in true feminism. That there are feminists who believe in radical measures or even female supremacy doesn't mean that the rest also believe in that. If you truly believe this, then the same is true for an…
/r/MensRights10/08/17 12:07 PM
1

Sure, I may do that when I have time. I was hoping for some succinct answers to my questions first, though. Merely linking correlation of suffrage to a larger government size isn't really enough for me. Thanks for the suggestions.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 08:56 AM
1

Interesting, I haven't heard of or thought of this correlation before. But is it really causation, or just correlation? Many other things have happened to society in the past 100 years, including a large increase in economy for all of the countries mentioned. And comparing a very low level of government with the current "large" one (the US level is still small compared to other countries such as in Scandinavia). Can you isolate those factors in order to attribute all of the change to suffrage? W…
/r/MensRights10/08/17 08:39 AM
1

I'm here from /r/all and interested in the opinions of this board. I am enjoying the debate here as I'm unfamiliar with some of your arguments, but I don't believe (thus far) that feminism is about supremacy.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 08:18 AM
-3

What do you mean women are voting for increasingly larger government? I'm assuming you're American, only you guys are this afraid of 'large government'. Your suggestion of womb conscription is incredibly stupid for many reasons, I'm sorry to say.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:10 PM
1

Ok, but I was hoping for some current issues. That just seems like growing pains to me? (I hope I'm translating this expression well)
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:05 PM
0

Anyway... You're basically arguing that they have ulterior, hidden motives behind their quest for equality. Like the nazis they strive to gain power and kill all Jews... I mean men. I don't think they do. And I am referring to the actual feminists, not the female supremacists. They actually believe in the wage gap myth, that women are discriminated against, forced into gender roles, etc. Whether it's true or not is another thing entirely - since it's their motive that counts when determining whe…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:02 PM
1

I'm unsure. I'd say they too should be conscripted where they can be used in war. They won't make as good soldiers though.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:48 PM
-2

Terrorists, how so? Why do you say that their goal must be beyond equality?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:43 PM
-12

Yeah I guess so. Isn't it mostly because men are much more suited for war, though? Due to physical differences. But other than that, are there more?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:42 PM
-6

Women weren't allowed to work outside the house, like these privileged gents Img That's not really an argument. They wanted the right to work anywhere, including that place. Women weren't allowed to vote, but they weren't required to die for their country either. True but that's not really a valid comparison is it? It's not an issue of who has it best/worst but about justice. Women on the losing side of war definitely suffered tremendously, for one. Men are still required to be willing to die fo…
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:40 PM
1

I don't think they see it that way is what I'm saying. And I think we're all flawed in that we can't see the exact middle ground where the optimal justice exists.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:30 PM
1

First wave feminism obtained men's rights but rejected men's responsibilities. Can you explain this further? Which of men's responsibilities did they reject?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:23 PM
1

Sure, but isn't that reasonable? I operate the same way, personally. It's in a way how we are supposed to behave in a democracy. Say I am a middle-class citizen, I will vote for whomever promises tax breaks and benefits for the middle-class. I won't unnecessarily complain about benefits I have from being X thing, unless I am driven by altruism or some form of ideological basis.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:21 PM
0

You know what they say about someone who refers to nazis/Hitler? They instantly lose the argument. You could say the same about anyone who has ever run for social change or justice. Trump is running on the same principle, "MAGA", is he literally Hitler too?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:17 PM
-1

Yeah but the thing is that it's the vocal minority we see and hear about the most. Generally because what they do and say is so crazy that it gains traction and interest in media as well as opposing groups since they want to delegitimise the 'normal' feminists by drawing attention to the crazy ones. Lots of things factor into it.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:14 PM
1

Feminism was a female supremacist movement since it's inception. He said this is their actual goal, and this is what I disagree with.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:11 PM
197

Nah. They actually had/have a point, they really were marginalised and discriminated against, and it still happens sometimes. That's what feminism is about. The 'supremacy' part is something that happens as a byproduct when some try to take it too far.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 05:15 PM
2

It's not irrelevant or inconsequential. 12 is significantly less than 30.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/06/17 11:29 AM
1

Meh. Everything can be boiled down to "society" with that logic.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 08:44 AM
8

for asking support from the same organization that you don't think should exist. AFAIK, some of them want other, similar alternatives to exist. For example, anarcho-capitalists want police and similar to be privatized instead. Meaning they would want them to exist, just not in their current form. Either way, I don't think it's wrong for them to use current structures in existence if it serves them in getting their objective, which may or may not be the dissolution of that structure. The end just…
/r/PussyPassDenied21/01/17 01:48 PM
1

I'm not sure it's that simple... but I'll agree with your premise.
/r/MensRights10/01/17 12:10 PM
3

These are two entirely unrelated things. Women are made to make children. They can definitely take a lot of pain, probably similar to men (maybe more, I don't know). But the problem isn't taking it, it's enduring it and function in a hostile environment. Most of all, physically functioning in it over large periods of time. This means that you need to be able to march long distances, lift/climb/run efficiently. You need to be able to carry heavy equipment/weapons etc. for long stretches of distan…
/r/MensRights09/01/17 06:19 PM
29

(Edit: IMO) the main reason men go to war over women is that men are overwhelmingly stronger and more capable of enduring physical stress. Add social structures and expectations, that depend in part on this difference in physical capability, and you get men going to war instead of women. Men also do not have a ~week per month of pain, stress and changed hormonal levels (yes, I realize not all women are affected as much by this). I believe men are also more capable of outright aggression. No one …
/r/MensRights09/01/17 05:02 PM
1

Um but you did say Which involve giving women smaller raises until it was equal. But if it's a joke then it makes more sense.
/r/MensRights28/09/16 09:11 PM
1

Which involve giving women smaller raises until it was equal. That seems silly.. seems like an excuse to turn down their wages instead of having anything to do with equality. Not interfering with wages or measuring it will likely result in wages based on a person's worth to the company rather than on any ideology of equal wages.
/r/MensRights28/09/16 04:33 PM
3

Definitely. And a child hasn't got a fully developed brain and can't be blamed like an adult can for their actions... there's a lot of things that are wrong with his comparison.
/r/MensRights24/09/16 09:23 PM
13

No, it would be like if you got headbutted on your nose* by a 10 year old who is nearly as big as you, who while obviously weaker than you is still advancing towards you aggressively despite you backing away defensively. And since the 10 year old in question has already demonstrated aggressive intent is definitely fully deserving of being hit, and hard. You would not be saying this if it was a guy who looked weaker than the other guy. You'd be like, "oh... well he definitely deserved that. What …
/r/MensRights24/09/16 03:08 PM
5

Doesn't matter. The gist of it remains: she would try dating him despite his height, which is a terribly rude statement no matter the context. What context are you saying could redeem her?
/r/PussyPassDenied10/09/16 08:49 PM
4

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ucf-smashed-window-victoria-king-20140919-story.html The justice system disagrees with your opinion on what is illegal.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 06:03 PM
1

She was trying to assault as well as steal his stuff, continually. He told her to stop many times. He was in his full right to defend himself. IMO he could've done much worse and it would still be warranted. She's silly for thinking she can take him on who's at least twice her size as well as much stronger.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/08/15 05:27 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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