TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Gold_Equipment5916 Archive

View 0 posts and 50 comments by Gold_Equipment5916 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)
7

Do you seriously believe there's a 5% probability you will get raped by each encounter with a man? That's an absolutely insane misuse of probability.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/24 07:09 PM
6

It's 2024, and people are still citing Paul Dolan's claim about single women being happier, a claim that was debunked half a decade ago. You need to make a sticky about this so you don't see the same misinformation posted every couple of weeks.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/24 08:08 PM
8

Research has consistently shown that political leaning has a large genetic component, and as such it has significantly heritability. Your example is faulty because you're comparing a specific policy in a particular time and place. There's obviously not going to be something as specific as "pro-contraception" gene, but there's a large genetic element to the psychological traits that lean someone to one side of the political spectrum or the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/24 12:49 PM

What's concerning is that your absolutely absurd views are gaining ground in American discourse surrounding age. Your assertion that 22-year-old women are children is not only factually incorrect but also undermines the very principles of adult agency that underpin modern society. Firstly, legally and biologically, a 22-year-old is an adult, not a child. There's no debate, no ambiguity here. The distinction is crucial and not just a matter of semantics. By international standards, including the …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/23 07:29 PM

22 year old girls ARE kids Absolute insanity that anyone could actually believe this. Is this what the, already worrying, infantilization of young adults in America is degenerating into? Women of that age are adults by every existing definition, in every field of study, in every inch of the planet. Get real.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/23 06:25 PM

You should just not lie about it. It's not part of your marital vows to disclose you have paid for genetic tests. Sure, you may choose to disclose it, but that's ultimately your prerogative. As for the statistic: Bellis MA, Hughes K, Hughes S, Ashton JR. Measuring paternal discrepancy and its public health consequences. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005 Sep;59(9):749-54. doi: 10.1136/jech.2005.036517. PMID: 16100312; PMCID: PMC1733152.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 07:58 PM

Studies show a rate of misattributed paternity of around 4%. Grasp the enormity of this statistic. This means you likely know someone who is unaware that the man they call 'father' is not their biological parent. Millions globally are unknowingly nurturing a child born of infidelity. Most of these individuals probably never doubted their partner's fidelity. Do you grasp the implication? Trust, when fueled by romantic feelings, is frighteningly prone to failure. This justifies a healthy skepticis…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 07:45 PM

How would that kid not be yours, if not through infidelity? You can trust someone, but believing the chances of them cheating are absolute zero is not trust, but irrationality.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 07:28 PM

The decision to seek paternity testing is a prudent application of expected value reasoning. Like fastening a seatbelt in a car, which isn’t about mistrusting the driver but guarding against the rare yet severe possibility of an accident, paternity testing is a precaution against the low-probability, high-impact risk of paternal discrepancy. Some women demonize such testing as a trust issue, equating paternity testing with an accusation of infidelity. However, this overlooks the basic principle …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 07:20 PM
1

Sex at Dawn has been widely criticized by researchers and is considered pseudoscience by mainstream scholarship.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/23 04:39 PM
1

But women aren’t rotten food. The example went completely over your head.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 10:56 PM
1

Or is it evolutionary instinct? If it’s evolutionary instinct than infidelity wouldn’t matter because you wouldn’t be thinking of it. That doesn't follow. Consider the example of our disgust towards rotten food: this aversion is not just a random preference but an evolved instinct deeply embedded in our survival mechanisms. Rotten food is often teeming with pathogens that are detrimental to human health. Our understanding of germ theory and the discovery of microbes have further validated this i…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 10:28 PM
1

I find promiscuity undesirable. Why do I find it undesirable? Evolution. Hope this clears things up.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 10:05 PM
1

My position is the same as Dr Buss. It’s the CHEATING you’re worried about? This discussion isn't centered on specific individuals, but rather on general trends in mate selection. It's important to recognize that mate preferences can stem from evolutionary factors that aren't always consciously recognized by individuals. Men don't consciously think, "Wow, that woman has a 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio, indicating optimal health, fertility, and lower disease risk, traits beneficial for successful reprod…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 09:51 PM
11

The argument that religion is the sole reason for women to avoid promiscuity is profoundly mistaken and ignorant of scholarly views regarding sociosexual orientation, evolutionary pressures, and cultural influences. Humans, including women, vary in their sociosexual orientation. This spectrum ranges from those who are comfortable with casual sex to those who find it unacceptable. This orientation is significantly influenced by genetics and remains stable throughout life. For women with a more re…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 09:43 PM

Scholarly research is quite straightforward about why men have such preferences. David Buss, one of the world's leading psychologists and an eminence on mate selection, pulls no punches: Men apparently assess and evaluate levels of sexual activity by a woman prior to long-term commitment—behavior that would have been observable or known through social reputation in the small-group lifestyles of our ancestors. Past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior, and having a large number of sex …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:58 PM
1

IOW, a study with only the most tangential relevance to the conversation at hand. Only tangential relevance? Your dismissal of the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample's relevance disregards its comprehensive analysis of human societies, which include both modern and pre-industrial examples, specifically chosen to minimize cultural overlap. This methodical selection provides insights applicable to the broader discussion of human mating systems across history. May I remind you of the statements that st…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/23 10:44 PM
1

The quote is explicitly talking about contemporaneous societies. The quote is based on the seminal work "Standard Cross-Cultural Sample" by George P. Murdock and Douglas R. White, in which they analyzed 186 (mostly pre-industrial) societies meticulously chosen to minimize cultural relatedness, with only one society selected from a given cultural area. The sample spans a broad range of human history and geography, from contemporary hunter-gatherer societies like the Kung, ancient cities such as B…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/23 11:25 AM
1

I knew it. You're one of those people who preach the pseudoscientific ideas of unscrupulous figures like Christopher Ryan. I hope you're aware Sex at Dawn has been utterly trashed by scholars in the relevant fields, and that not only the views espoused on that book are well outside scientific orthodoxy, but they also present a heavily distorted, inaccurate interpretation of our ancestral past. Unfortunately, we can't study how humans lived 20,000 years ago, nor can we make inferences from pre-in…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 11:57 AM
1

The views you've presented on sperm competition and paternity are not aligned with the scholarly consensus. Human genital size relative to body mass and the lack of an estrus period are not universally attributed to sperm competition. In fact, the majority of research in evolutionary biology and anthropology suggests that while sperm competition exists, it plays a minor role in human evolution compared to other factors. The notion of paternity as you've described it does not reflect a widely rec…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/23 08:05 PM

While the original poster didn't cite their sources, their claim aligns with various research findings. Studies show that conservative individuals, both politically and sexually, generally report higher levels of sexual satisfaction and marital happiness. Further, unrestricted sociosexuality — which often correlates with a higher number of sexual partners — is linked to less sexual satisfaction within relationships. It's unclear whether people who have more sexual partners are inherently less sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/23 03:19 PM
1

Your point is well-taken, but it seems to oversimplify the complexity of the issue. While it's certainly possible that men could be overlooking potential partners who are indeed happy, confident, and competent, the flip side of that coin is that they could also be avoiding potential partners who carry higher risks of infidelity, divorce, or transmitting an STD, all of which have been empirically linked to a higher number of sexual partners. Preferences and selection criteria in mate choice aren'…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/23 07:42 PM
2

Interesting perspective. It seems you've fallen into the rather common fallacy that sexual proficiency and comfort with one's body are intrinsically linked to a high number of sexual partners. I would be fascinated to see the empirical data that supports such a claim. Moreover, your sarcasm appears to inadvertently stigmatize women who choose to approach their sexuality in a more traditional or conservative manner. It might come as a surprise to you, but research and surveys consistently find th…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/23 09:22 AM
-1

You just know
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/23 07:26 PM
1

Highest divorce rate of any type of pairing
/r/ExRedPill31/05/23 02:08 AM
2

Men with higher body count should be avoided as well, then. Yes, of course. Did I say otherwise?
/r/ExRedPill30/05/23 07:52 PM
-7

The first one IS peer-reviewed, do your homework. So are all the other papers cited, with the exception of one. And trying to poison the well by finding it cites a concept that isn't to your liking is just desperate.
/r/ExRedPill30/05/23 04:44 PM
-9

Factors found to facilitate infidelity Number of sex partners: Greater number of sex partners before marriage predicts infidelity As might be expected, attitudes toward infidelity specifically, permissive attitudes toward sex more generally and a greater willingness to have casual sex and to engage in sex without closeness, commitment or love (i.e., a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation) are also reliably related to infidelity (pg.71) Fincham, F. D., & May, R. W. (2017). Infidelity in roma…
/r/ExRedPill30/05/23 03:42 PM
3

Non-monogamy is not a more egalitarian social custom, quite the opposite according to research.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/23 03:21 PM
1

The studies are all poorly done and biased. Says who? On what grounds? Violence Against Women is one of the most reputable journals on the subject. I reckon you must have a solid argument if you're so skeptical of their peer-review process.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 05:15 PM
1

Sorry, but I prefer replicable studies published in academic peer-reviewed journals over Facebook gossip. But, hey, I don't judge.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 04:47 PM
2

Your perception of religious marriages and domestic violence seems to be rooted more in prejudice than evidence. In the U.S., religious involvement is correlated with reduced levels of domestic violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 11:43 PM
3

If that were the case, we would observe liberal women being more satisfied in their relationships and sexual lives, yet research shows the exact opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 11:34 PM
1

Funny that you contrast women 'who enjoy sex' with supposedly 'inhibited' conservative women, when in reality conservative people report higher satisfaction with their sexual lives than liberals. It seems uncommitted promiscuity isn't the way to sexual satisfaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/22 03:30 PM
2

and also largely polygamous. That's pure pseudoanthropology. Even among societies that allowed polygyny, monogamy was the most common type of pairing, and in most most of these societies, only a small fraction (less than 20%) of men were polygynous. Despite the considerable cross-cultural variation in our mating system, marriage is a human universal. Across societies, polyandry is rare (1%), polygyny is common (82%), but the majority of marriages (even in polygynous societies) are monogamous (Mu…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/22 03:12 AM
3

The Madonna-whore complex is Freudian psychoanalysis from over a century ago. It has as much scientific validity as the idea that men want to fuck their mothers. Only reason such pseudoscientific concept is still heard about nowadays, instead of being left in the ash heap of failed sciences where it belongs, is because it is ideologically convenient for some people, but its empirical support is nil.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/22 02:40 AM
1

Incredibly dumb take. Even though the usual redditors love to abuse this strawman, "entitled to sex" rarely explains anything and has nothing to do with why men care about this situation. ​ As it has been established before, sociosexuality is hugely important at determining how willing and capable people are at having stable, satisfying long-term relationships. ​ What happens here is that a woman who had casual sex with random men in the past and, when looking for a serious relationship, makes h…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/22 06:29 PM
1

Actual research shows that married individuals, of both genders, are happier when married. Here’s a great article about it, citing many studies about marriage and happiness. On the other hand, there are no studies showing single women being happier. Historically, large studies show that, on average, married people report greater happiness later in life than unmarried people. Separated and divorced people tend to fall into a less-happy bucket, while the never-married and widowed fall someplace in…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/22 03:08 PM
4

That’s not what my experience on social media has been. I have seen plenty of bi women, like Anna Akana, say that dating men is significantly easier, and that their dating experiences with women have made them sympathize with the dating woes of men more. Not to mention lesbian couples have the highest rates of intimate partner violence of any type of pairing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/21 02:00 AM
2

I'll recommend you read the book "women after all" by medical doctor and anthropologist Melvin Konner That book does not represent the mainstream view among anthropologists, at all. And given that Melvin Konner is one of the main thinkers behind the Paleolithic diet, a pseudoscientific fad diet whose theoretical foundations have been largely shown to be wrong by evolutionary biologists, I’m willing to bet Konner is more interested in pushing agendas than doing proper science.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/21 06:11 PM
5

That’s not what the article says. Did you even read it?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 05:47 PM
1

What do you define as ‘the present’ when looking at someone’s behavior? The last week? Month? Year? It seems completely irrational to ignore a person’s behavior just because it occurred before an arbitrary, poorly defined moment in time. Someone’s past was once their present. There’s a reason why the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, the past provides a large amount of evidence of a person’s underlying personality traits (which are relatively stable through life), behaviors, va…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/21 10:31 PM
1

Uhh, your link compares childless, married people against married people with children. Even if you think the marginal differences in self-reported happiness are worth not having children, everything points to married people being happier than never-married people.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 05:03 AM
2

So, you went from "never-married women are happier" to "well, married people are only slightly happier, you can still be happy while single"? Even the best endorsement you can give for it says slight (likely statistically insignificant) boost. The "slight" boost is after the "honeymoon phase" completely fades. So, married people get years of a strong increase in happiness and a lifelong boost to their happiness after that period. Sounds like a good deal to me, if happiness is the sole metric fro…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 04:51 AM
1

You're omitting the fact that even after the "honeymoon effect" goes away, married people are still happier than single people, as explained in the link I gave: According to science, no. Historically, large studies show that, on average, married people report greater happiness later in life than unmarried people. Separated and divorced people tend to fall into a less-happy bucket, while the never-married and widowed fall someplace in between. Studies also report upticks in happiness in the lead-…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 04:37 AM
1

Absolutely nothing in your quote says unmarried people are happier than married people. Did you misquote?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 04:25 AM
1

How is this not evidence that unmarried women are better off? At worst, their life expectancy is no worse than if they don't bother getting married. Seriously? A single study that reports a slight difference in health outcomes and another reporting no difference in life expectancy means marriage is bad now? What about the multiple studies showing married women are happier? Finally, if marriage is so beneficial to women, why is that women in India have the highest rate of suicide in the world? Ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 04:04 AM
1

The first and third link cite Dolan's research. None of the other links says anything about never-married women being better off
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 03:08 AM
1

The only ones claiming that 'never-married women with no children' have better outcomes are based on debunked research.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 02:38 AM
1

multiple studies find that never-married women with no children have outcomes that are better than average, Which studies? Cite them
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/21 01:32 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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