TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

IUsePayPhones Archive

View 1 posts and 40 comments by IUsePayPhones 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)
10

DiscussionIUsePayPhones/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 02:42 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Why the fuck do people keep doing this? It’s like arguing China is more historically important and successful than Mongolia and then someone swings in on a chandelier yelling GENGHIS KHAN, ASSHOLLLLLLLLLLLE, trying to slit my throat. So what about Catherine? So what about Genghis? Those powers exist because all humans prefer to be comfortable due to survival instincts and those things allow for civilizational comforts. I am a man. I compete at work. I compete at poker. I don’t care to gain femal…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 02:27 PM
1

Held back from political power, economic power, physical power, social status outside of sexual relationships, and much more. I agree, presuming guilt is ridiculous. I’m talking about feminism in the sense that women should be given greater access to the powers listed above that they’ve clearly been held back from.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 01:50 PM
1

I think you can continue on like that while not falling for the naturalistic fallacy of “oh if it’s natural, it’a preferable/morally right/good/etc.” that I often see reds falling for. For example, I believe nature largely rules those interactions. But I also support feminism because women have clearly been unjustly held back throughout history. Many reds seem to be against such social policies because they distort the nature that they find automatically morally correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 11:13 AM
1

I don’t think everyone is wrong. I think I am wrong in many ways. The interplay bt nature and nurture is very complex. I would say most sociologists are quite biased on this topic like anyone else. I just have an obsession with faulty logic which often leads me to these sorts of conclusions in debates where both sides sometimes use motivated, biased reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 10:41 PM
1

Lol I think I’m solidly purpled!
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 10:34 PM
1

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Tenuously linked to how we act on the margins, which is what everyone pays attention to. But it is solidly linked to baseline behavioral tendencies in the human population, such as men tending to dislike very overweight women or women tending to dislike short men or preference for facial symmetry or the circadian rhythm’s impact on mood, etc, etc. Sure. Chimps and baboons are very alike too, that doesn’t mean there aren’t significant, interesting differences. Com…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 10:29 PM
1

I more or less agree with this. I’m encouraging blues to overcome the idea that nature has next to no role to play in social outcomes. Maybe my post didn’t mention blue being mainstream but I didn’t find that relevant although it is likely true apart from cable news and talk radio
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 09:19 PM
1

I’m confused why you’re mocking when I’m just answering their simple question
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 06:49 AM
1

I’m confused as to why I would want to alienate trans or fat girls at all even in the scenario where I find them less desirable due to natural factors. That seems cold hearted. With regards to corporate America it’s actually much simpler than that, when it comes to being social liberal, which I am myself. Yes, it’s good for business, but the fact is that just reflects the personal politics of the people working in corporate America.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 03:38 AM
1

This one confuses me. I agree corporate America is largely blue but I don’t get the connection to money making.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 02:49 AM
2

I get your point but I am coming at this from a compassionate viewpoint and am largely supportive of these social interventions as I’ve said. But other people like that seem to shy away from natural causes for social phenomenon because it makes them uncomfortable and/or is associated with right wing politics. That is clearly biased thinking imo and I really dislike its existence at even the highest rungs of scholarship.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 02:45 AM
1

Then we can make paradigm shifting breakthroughs in social science, better understanding reality, and potentially leading to better social policy. For example, in education, most parents operate under the largely false assumption that schools and educators drive educational outcomes. But the evidence suggests outcomes are mostly driven by the child’s natural ability, drive, etc. If this notion became mainstream, policy makers may do less throwing money at “bad” schools and more throwing money at…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 02:38 AM
–

I actually am on the exact other side of the fence in that I believe a lot of mainstream evopsych and sociology but I appreciate your consistency and honest attempt at understanding.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 12:35 AM
1

Understanding tendencies and preferences often have biological/neurological causes. Don’t blame every last thing on socialization and culture. Understand that genetics have a massive influence on intelligence, athleticism, personality, etc. and not just gender and sexual orientation. That’s a good overview to start
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 12:34 AM
–

This comment is ass backwards with regards to modern times. Parents are creating beneficial externalities to society, birthing children that will almost certainly contribute more in taxes than they’ll receive in services, all to provide the labor/social security that allows the childless elderly to live their lives 50 years from now. I say this from the liberal perspective of “let’s help parents” not the perspective of “good for nothing blood sucking govt taking my kids money.” Creating more peo…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 12:22 AM
–

I agree they often commit the is/ought fallacy. However, your (and everyone else’s) critiques of evopsych always fail to mention that sociology ALSO is not falsifiable, rendering conclusions about the social construction of various social phenomenon also invalid if you agree with that line of reasoning. Very tired of the motivated reasoning from both sides in place of a balanced, dispassionate review of the evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/23 12:16 AM
1

Yes, just that I get the sense each side prefers one side of the equation to the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 11:48 PM
4

Yes something I am learning today. Interesting stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 11:46 PM
2

I don’t listen to San but unsurprised to here my views overlap with his
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 09:11 PM
2

I don’t believe they’re unified or that it’s more than a tendency but you’re right that I’m painting with too broad of a brush here.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 07:56 PM
1

Yes the rules themselves are based off of morals, rationality, etc. You’re right. But social norms are based off of a complex interplay between nature and environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 07:17 PM
0

Ok perhaps that is fair and I’m getting caught up in all the ancillary communities that glom on without being really red pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 07:13 PM
3

One has choices but within substantial constraints. If I’m born with the most psychotic brain ever in existence, can I choose to act in a normal, well adjusted way? No. I will always behave somewhat psychotically. Just like if I’m born with a male brain, I’ll always act somewhat male-y, even though many people consider that a “choice” or “culture”. Perhaps I could “choose” to act more feminine in various ways but it’d feel so odd that it’s come off forced and weird I’d imagine.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 06:22 PM
1

A very complex interplay between natural and environmental causes.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 06:18 PM
1

Or you could develop a civilization, creating a radically different environment, and begin economically exploiting snakes for meat, circuses, pets, etc. Not that I have an issue with that. Just pointing out how two different environments create two wildly different optimal outcomes. Moreover, there is zero way to know what would’ve occurred given the absence of matriarchal societies.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 06:17 PM
2

This is not an example of a matriarchal society. It is an instance where a woman was queen. I’ve read for several minutes now about the Imerina people and they don’t seem to be especially matriarchal at all. If Kamala became president tomorrow we wouldn’t switch from patriarchal or egalitarian to matriarchal.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 06:15 PM
0

It’s extreme in red pill communities to argue men are natural leaders? I don’t get that sense but am open to changing my mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 06:03 PM
1

This makes little sense to me. There are entire offshoot communities like RedPillWomen that espouse a lifestyle, ethos, and common norms that go far beyond that simple tenet. Just like a Muslim can argue “No, only THIS particular thing matters and only THIS philosophy is true”, it doesn’t mean there isn’t a wide swath of Islam that goes beyond that. And it doesn’t mean those people aren’t part of Islam. Moreover, ISIS and the like are clear minority extremists. I’m describing mainstream views.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 05:57 PM
1

A. I would love to see references to the females led societies. The anthropological consensus is that there have been no truly matriarchal societies but I am open minded. B. Today’s environment is wildly different from history’s. Physical prowess used to matter far more. Aggression and spatial knowledge are not as useful. Just because men led in THAT environment, even if for optimal reasons, would not necessarily mean they are optimal leaders in the current environment. I also don’t see how it’s…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:32 PM
1

You said some biological realities are impossible to change as if that’s why men have and will continue to lead. Correct me if I misunderstood your point. I am saying the biological reality of men being overpowering lacks importance in modern society when it comes to attaining leadership roles.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:23 PM
-1

It may be that simple to you, but it’s clearly become much more than that, hasn’t it? And when it comes to dating, yes of course physical attraction comes first and I am extremely critical of blues who don’t acknowledge that, as I more or less alluded to.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:16 PM
1

I mean violence is illegal unless you’re military or law enforcement.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:12 PM
1

I think he/she meant in a general sense. Patriarchy, SMITH CO. AND “SONS”, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:11 PM
0

So wait red pillers never established how men came to lead in the first place? Isn’t that kind of important? You can’t say “no not biology, history” without examining HOW that history BEGAN.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:08 PM
2

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. A. Yes. Under the current paradigm, controversial hypotheses such as the Male Variability Hypothesis, are so toxic that Larry Summers got ran out of Harvard for suggesting it may have a hand in gender disparities in certain positions at Harvard. I don’t care whether it’s true or not. I am happy about efforts to make women more comfortable in STEM fields. I only care that one is allowed to argue that in good faith, while still having love for every human. I don’t …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:04 PM
1

Waging war when you don’t have to fight isn’t the same as reacting aggressively in a tense moment in an alley or whatever. Not that it doesn’t display a certain type of aggression.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 03:57 PM
2

Yes. But now we’ve reached the point in humanity where only institutions have a legitimate claim on violence. Hence, women can lead more often than they have historically and that notion shouldn’t be a sticking point with reds. That’s the point being made.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 03:56 PM
1

Oh ok. I guess I don’t see how that’s incompatible with my point which is they are still blues that underestimate the role of nature, especially when it comes to divergent gendered behaviors.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 03:53 PM
0

Their morals almost certainly come from a biblically inspired worldview where men are venerated over women as a matter of course. I’m confused by the sex at dawn reference. Can you elaborate?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 03:45 PM
1

History shows that “works” because men have historically used their physical prowess to dominate and stake out roles and norms.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 03:36 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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