TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Gazareth Archive

View 0 posts and 40 comments by Gazareth 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

Well human nature can be overcome, that has been proven time and time again. Problem really is there's too much hatred in this so called tolerant movement. It's been said before that a lot of socialism is driven more by hatred of the rich than compassion for the poor. And now you could say it's hatred for the white man rather than compassion for minorities.
/r/PussyPassDenied09/05/19 08:35 PM
2

Antifa people are so violent... i really don't know why the world sees them as saviour. People who share the ideology and think it's all for "the greater good", or want to ignore it, that's the best I can come up with.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/05/19 09:53 PM
1

You say it would cause weird things to happen, but we live in a country where weird things already are happening because uneducated people are told that capitalism is the big evil giant government hovering over their heads and that by voting for big government: more control, more regulations, they'll bring it down. Yes and people are being taught this in universities, by qualified professors. The kind of professors who would be writing the tests. Don't you see? Anyone anywhere can be fucked up, …
/r/MensRights13/04/19 08:31 AM
1

In that kind of system, I think most of the benefit would come from being able to vote separately on specific policies rather than today's style of voting where you go for a specific candidate. But there's a cost and alienating factor to making the voting process more complicated. There is another caveat, that "tests" aren't perfect either (What are you testing for? You could easily phrase an economics test to favour capitalists and catch out socialists, which isn't fair). You have to appreciate…
/r/MensRights13/04/19 08:03 AM
1

It doesn't really matter how many people conform to the trend, as soon as you place restrictions upon it, you are excluding everyone, categorically. Meaning the Bill Gates' and the Steve Jobs' of the world are also excluded. Think about the implications of not being able to vote. These people will be considered lesser citizens, shunned and told they don't know things, when actually they are perfectly capable of contributing more than your average 9-5 braindead worker. So do you think women in th…
/r/MensRights12/04/19 05:52 PM
1

motivation to finish basic schooling to suddenly decide to spend money on harder schooling What are you on about? Why is schooling so important to you? People can get out and learn things in the real world just as well, perhaps better in some cases. Also, just because most high school dropouts don't become millionaires or billionaires, doesn't mean they won't contribute just as much as your average, 'schooled' citizen. Schooling is not a prerequisite for living a full, decent, wholesome, product…
/r/MensRights11/04/19 09:04 PM
1

I've tried twice! You stuck with the exact same interpretation even after I elaborated! if a middle school dropout votes on economic policy How can you know the middle schooler didn't spend the next three or four years studying economics? Just like that other guy I was talking to before you, you seem to revere the education system as this infallible, perfect thing. There's no reason why a school dropout cannot contribute plenty to society. Didn't Bill Gates drop out of school? Steve Jobs? And pr…
/r/MensRights11/04/19 08:25 PM
1

That's twice now you've completely misconstrued the way I was using the word "contribute". Yeah I don't agree with that particular idea, but for fucks sake we need a minimum competency test for voting. Competency in what? And who gets to decide this? People who've voted? Cause that doesn't sound exploitable... Perhaps women should be on the mandatory draft, after all, that would be equality, right? Personally I'm partial to taking into account the physical differences between men and women befor…
/r/MensRights10/04/19 09:08 PM
1

Yes, everyone contributes. Society is what the people in it behave like. Good or bad. The guy I was speaking to started the thread with the comment: Take away womens right to vote? Which I think is more of a statement on what "should be".
/r/MensRights10/04/19 08:29 PM
1

Firstly, men shouldn't have had their rights stripped for not drafting. That is unjust. That said, if people weren't forced into war, we might not have the civilisation we have today. Good things sometimes have to be fought for, and not everyone realises that reality. Secondly, there's two positions you can take here, either bring everyone up or bring everyone down. You seem to be opting for the 'bring everyone down' option. Your argument seems to be that since x group of people have had a bad t…
/r/MensRights10/04/19 08:17 PM
1

Well the simple answer is that it should be. We all make up society, we all participate and contribute to what it is and will be, so we should all have an explicit say in the direction it's headed. Seems pretty straight-forward to me.
/r/MensRights10/04/19 05:42 PM
1

I think the philosophy still stands. Your reason for not granting the right to vote has nothing to do with whether or not it would actually help society as a whole. Like, what's your angle here? Are you going to hold the right to vote hostage until all women say all men are good? That's just a power play. This isn't a transaction, it's societal progress. Condemning all men as being bad is still a terrible thing to do whether you've been granted the right to vote or not.
/r/MensRights10/04/19 05:40 PM
1

Rights are not earned or granted. They are upheld by all of us. If they were earned or granted, they would be privileges. Just because women don't want to fight in wars, doesn't mean they should be denied the right to vote. There's no reason why men should be forced into wars, either. And from the perspective of maximising societal progress & improvement, willingness to fight in wars says nothing about a person's ability to make political judgements for the nation.
/r/MensRights09/04/19 05:53 PM
2

I don't think the people who are willing to sign their lives away for the privilege to vote are necessarily the best candidates for choosing the political future of the nation. The same way people who pursue power are not always the best candidates to lead. Just because men have traditionally been allowed to vote, and traditionally been forced into war, doesn't mean those two things are related, or that they should be. I think everyone should have the right to vote, because good ideas can come f…
/r/MensRights09/04/19 05:49 PM
2

If debating tactics include: bringing up how many girls you've slept with in the last week, accusing your opponent of being in high school, and not being able to give any solid reasoning behind your views when pushed, I hope to never have had the kind of "experience" you've had. Nonetheless, thanks for the (mostly) civilised discussion, was enlightening. Likewise.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 11:14 PM
1

A shit uni that, for example, accepts donations for admissions? https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/b0b6b1/college_admissions_scandal_actresses_business/
/r/MensRights08/04/19 11:09 PM
2

Sorry, I'm not that interested in your love life. I'm more interested in understanding rights & roles of men & women in society. I was only asking if she votes to try and make a point about how women like and want the ability to vote. You've still not given any real reason why they shouldn't be allowed that right.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 11:06 PM
1

Yes, most grades in school these days are still acquired by committing as much information as possible to memory for the duration of the exam in question. Obviously this is a gross simplification, but the point still stands: the academic system is not a good enough process for identifying whether or not someone would be competent at leading society politically. And that's besides the fact that it would obviously be exploited to get someone of interest into the political class illegitimately. Tha…
/r/MensRights08/04/19 11:02 PM
1

You think people who can pass memory tests in school would be better at running the country? There's no way everyone's views will be represented if you reduce the political class to such a small and specific subset of society. And there's no way of telling what views qualify as 'better'. 'fairer' does not necessarily mean more average, either. It means everyone has more opportunity to succeed, live a good life and improve the world.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:54 PM
2

While you ponder about reducing her rights? Does she vote? I'm single, so I don't have anyone making anything for me at the moment. But thanks for asking.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:51 PM
1

Given that everyone probably has at least a slightly different idea of what 'better' is, I think the best way to proceed is to aim for something that is 'fairer'. That way we maximise net gain everyone gets from progress.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:46 PM
2

I don't really want this to get personal, but I'm assuming we are pretty similar- sitting on some obscure reddit thread, 10 or so messages deep, arguing about rights & values.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:42 PM
1

High-value males are males with good genes. Intelligence, for instance, as opposed to retarded barbarians. Men who can outsmart 'retarded barbarians' and win in a fight/war? Is that what you mean? Women political views don't matter. That isn't their strength or role. What are you basing this assertion on?
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:39 PM
2

You can't argue evolution and then against the system that it created What do you mean? What system did evolution create, that I am arguing against? They are the oldest teenagers in the house and are in charge of it and raising children. Having all the responsibility in one area is not something that leads to ideal outcomes, in my eyes. Having a good father figure is important to a child's development, too.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:36 PM
1

Governance based on Reason and Logic. You're going to have to be more specific than that. I don't understand what you mean by this in the context of voting. Wealth, education, etc. Enough roads to gain voting rights that productive members of society can gain voting rights. People who are well educated or wealthy do not necessarily have political ideas that will lead towards a fairer society for everyone.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:33 PM
1

If you are worthy of mating women will try to mate with you. Well yes, but it's not a 1 or 0, some males will be 'more worthy' than others, then the female has to pick. And what if none of the males on offer align with her politically? They can have the privilege of bringing the bastards of high value males into the world.. High value males who abandon their offspring? What do you consider characteristic of high-value? You're contradicting yourself now, before you implied women need to make bett…
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:32 PM
2

Just because some women choose poor mates does not mean all women are incapable of making good decisions. Also, what might be a poor mate financially, may well be a decent mate biologically, for the strength & survivability of the child. Are single mothers even the majority of women? It seems far more likely to me that a woman will make good decisions when picking mates. That will have come about due to thousands of years of evolution, as well. And just because men have had all the responsibilit…
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:26 PM
1

Good mates aren't always easy to find. Sometimes you have to settle. There's no reason why political progress of the nation should be hindered by this unfortunate reality. What does this family-based voting system actually give us in return for its restrictions? Cost-saving?
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:17 PM
4

Why should she trust his good judgement? What if his judgement is not so good? I think having a say in the political future of the nation is a 'burden' many women are happy to take on. Many women aspire to living a life that follows a more difficult path.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:11 PM
3

What if the woman disagrees politically with her husband? ​ What if a woman doesn't have a husband to "speak for her", what about single people?
/r/MensRights08/04/19 10:01 PM
4

How would one-family-one-vote fix anything? What if I disagreed politically with my parents or children? The real views of all the people are not being represented.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 09:55 PM
4

How would that solve anything?
/r/MensRights08/04/19 09:49 PM
1

I think it's "Patriarchal", by the way, but yes, indeed.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/10/18 02:44 PM
1

Actually, I have an argument against it... the state facilitated the earning of said wealth.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/11/16 05:10 PM
21

It is different because the state is not funding their wealth.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/11/16 02:35 PM
1

No, you hold them up to their own standards to point out their hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 11:16 AM
41

Revenge is justice for these people.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 05:54 PM
1

Right, but look at the comment I responded to. It's implying that 15 is not far away enough from 16 to warrant a sentence. That's obviously not how things should be done. A clear line has been crossed. There can still be explicit and precise rules addressing what you brought up. Complicated and nuanced =/= ambiguous and imprecise.
/r/MensRights03/03/15 04:34 PM
3

Is this article an example of that in effect?
/r/MensRights02/03/15 09:51 PM
4

The law needs to be explicit and precise so that everyone obeys exactly the same rules. There is no "meh, near enough".
/r/MensRights02/03/15 08:05 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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