TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

JLTeabag Archive

View 0 posts and 49 comments by JLTeabag 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

I don't really know how chess rating works, but according to some other comments on this thread that is definitely an issue with this study.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 04:38 PM
2

If weaker strategies are more prevalent among girls, it should be accounted for in their rating, so it shouldn't actually affect this study.
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:23 AM
1

Not really. Girls are doing worse than expected (based on their rating) when they play against boys. The suggestion that it's because boys are better at chess doesn't really make sense because then their ratings should account for that. The fact that young girls are more susceptible and that girls are more susceptible when playing older boys definitely suggests that there's some kind of intimidation going on. Maybe girls would be intimidated by boys regardless of stereotypes, but it certainly is…
/r/MensRights29/01/14 05:20 AM
11

Nowhere in this article are men blamed. It just suggests that stereotypes about the sexes impact the outcome of children's chess matches.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:32 PM
4

It seems likely that seeing your opponent has some effect, because playing economic games on a computer has been shown to affect decision making. Also, if the girls play poorly when told they're playing against boys, it's still not necessarily because of stereotype threat. A group of girls not aware of the stereotype should be studied, but the stereotype is well known enough that such a group might not exist.
/r/MensRights28/01/14 09:29 PM
10

I think this shows that the people who use the word "misandry" are also likely to equate feminism and the hatred of men more than it shows a change in public opinion.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 09:36 AM
1

How so?
/r/MensRights13/08/13 03:47 PM
1

Okay. At this point, I don't think either of us, is going to change our minds, and I understand your point much better than when this started. I think we can agree to disagree?
/r/MensRights13/08/13 03:41 PM
1

Regardless, it seems to me that if people want to go by the first definition, and label themselves accordingly, it isn't worth taking issue with.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 08:42 AM
1

If someone wants my support, he should explain his actual position. If it is egalitarianism, he should then renounce the name of feminism when I point this out. The first definition of feminism in the Merriam Webster dictionary is egalitarianism. Plenty of self-declared feminists don't fit this definition, but I have met some who do, and I would not insist that they change their titles before I support their ideas.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 08:32 AM
1

Hmm... I think I misinterpreted what you meant by proposal, and what you said makes more sense now, but yours is still a stronger stance than I would take here.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:55 AM
0

Yes! People have this victim mentality where we have a tendency to interpret things that aren't attacks as attacks and blaming, and then we return with an attack and things just escalate. The tendency to try to win, as you mentioned really pisses me off. I think that if MRAs and feminists were to actually have a discussion, they would realize that not all their goals are mutually exclusive, and probably people on both sides would change their minds on some issues.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:32 AM
0

I will never support any aim, goal, or proposal put forward by a self-declaired feminist. Period. Really? Plenty of self declared feminists probably just have different definitions of feminism than you do. Also, just because an idea comes from someone whose opinions you generally disagree with doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea. I probably agree with many Neo-Nazis on many issues that aren't related to the fact that they're Nazis. Like I bet there are plenty of neo-Nazis who like National …
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:20 AM
1

What is it that you think gives a human life value?
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:05 PM
1

More human cells die when you pull out a hair than with early abortion.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:21 AM
1

I am trying to explain the thought process here, not my own views. I love sex. Sex is on my top 5 list of things probably, along with bicycles, trees, mountains, and mathematics. Sometimes sex is distracting though, and I wish I could turn it off for a few hours. I think it is totally possible to think about sex and value people for things people should be valued for, but some people fail to do this, and that makes others (feminists) think that it is impossible. I think the thing with the findin…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 01:19 AM
1

Because you should be respecting people for their ideas and personality traits, rather than their fuckability. I don't really agree with this idea. I was just saying that the ideas aren't cognitively dissonant. I mean, there are a lot of times when I would like for sex to not come into play, like in hiring for...bartenders, or whatever, but I don't think it's possible to stop people from thinking about sex so...
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:52 PM
1

The assumption is that people of all groups are equally capable. So the lack of diversity is due to unfair bias of employers/school admissions/socioeconomic status toward certain groups of people. The diversity is supposed to make it more fair because in theory capable people are getting left out for reasons that have nothing to do with their abilities to do the job, ie being a woman. There might be some reasons to want diversity even if the people in power actually just are the most capable: If…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:47 PM
1

Partially because it would cost twice as much money, and the death penalty is already really expensive.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:57 PM
2

I have an objection to life sentences for personal moral reasons. It seems like laws should be corrective instead of punitive. I am not always against life sentences, but generally I am. edit: typo
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:43 PM
1

Sadism was turned down when it was proposed a sexual disorder, and one of the big arguments against it was that primarily men are sadists, and therefore regarding sadism as a disorder could perpetuate rape culture. It's interesting that when it's mothers killing babies people are willing to blame illness.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:42 PM
1

In case you want actual statistics instead of unsubstantiated claims: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/women-and-death-penalty#facts http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:38 PM
1

Feminists are like the Nazis. They pick and choose what they believe based on what promotes their ideas. If something doesn’t promote their ideas, they suppress it. That’s why the term feminazi is not only fair, it’s accurate! Most people pick and choose evidence to support their beliefs. It's called Confirmation bias, or Affirmation bias, and it's something that people have to be taught not to do. Yes, many feminists and many Nazis, have fallen victim to this fallacy, but so have the majority o…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:50 PM
2

finding a woman attractive is bad and finding a woman unattractive is bad While I can find problems with these beliefs, I do not think they are contradictory. The point is that you aren't supposed to be thinking about sex in not sexual contexts. When you're at work, you should be thinking about whether each person is a good employee, not about how attractive or unattractive the person is. Think about it with men (assuming you're a heterosexual male here). You probably don't look at men (most of …
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:33 PM
2

I find the best way to get people to listen is to change it from an argument to a discussion. Listen to their views. Ask them for evidence. Ask them for SPECIFIC evidence. Give your own specific evidence. Yield sometimes, because probably they're sometimes right. It doesn't always work, but it works better. When you argue, it's a contest about who is the smartest. When you discuss, it's about finding out what the truth is.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:24 PM
3

I think you're missing their point: They're making the assumption that race, gender, orientation, or whatever has no effect on likelihood to be a good candidate for high level positions, and therefore there must be something in society that is making a certain group of people (white, straight, cisgender men) more likely to be really successful. I'm not saying they're right, and I'm also not saying they're wrong. It's such a politically charged issue that they're aren't really any reliable studie…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:14 PM
5

The problem with this infographic is that it highlights the issues that negatively affect men. It would probably be better received by /r/feminism if it also showed some issues that negatively affect women.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 12:20 AM
-29

I think you're wrong about what feminists think.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 05:47 PM
2

I hadn't noticed. No. Now I have. I see your point.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 10:27 AM
5

It's still a valid question when you switch the genders in the story. What's your point?
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:40 AM
2

Go fall in a well you fucking subhuman piece of garbage. I understand why you're upset, but ad hominem attacks only serve to alienate the people who disagree with you. It might make you feel better about yourself, but the best way to get people to listen to you is to be more respectful of their ideas. Then you can get a dialog started, and they'll actually listen, instead of arguing without ever actually questioning their own beliefs.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:36 AM
13

And none of these sources are reliable. Also, this story is strangely similar to the following from 15 years ago. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-12-22/features/9612220045_1_pay-child-support-child-support-behalf I'm calling bullshit.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 12:23 AM
2

I think that it is usually different women who are feeling entitled to money, and who are complaining about entitlement.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 04:56 PM
1

Money is appealing, but passion about what you do is really sexy. Do what you love.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 04:47 PM
1

The blog this came from said that the trend was the same, except a little weaker.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 04:39 PM
1

I'm actually not sure which one is which in your argument here. I can see it both ways.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 04:24 PM
1

The feminists that you talk to seem a lot less reasonable than the ones that I talk to.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 12:30 AM
1

Messages on OkCupid.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 11:41 PM
1

My completely unsubstantiated theory for this is that as you go up in the business world, the densities of sociopathy, and workaholism (both very undesirable traits for long term relationships) increase.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 10:47 PM
1

I thought that as well, but I did a Google search, and found that it was from OKcupid (a dating website), so it's probably a majority attracted women, a large minority of attracted men, and then a tiny group of people not interested in dating.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 10:41 PM
1

Stereotypes almost always reflect real trends. That's where stereotypes come from.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 10:36 PM
4

I agree. As a woman I don't want to see men's incomes when deciding whether to date them. I am aware that my thoughts about someone's attractiveness can be influenced by money, but I don't want my attraction to be based on that, and if I don't know, then I don't feel shallow about it.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 10:31 PM
1

if your main concern is getting the absolutely best partner... I don't think that is anyone's main concern. There are 7 billion people on the planet, and it's not possible to sift through all of them in order to find the best possible mate. There are lots of people with whom I'd be happy, and my goal is to find one of them. There are some places where they are more likely to be found than others.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 10:12 PM
1

I use education to judge intelligence more than to judge income. I generally find people who I can't have an intellectual debate with boring, and people who don't seem to think things through frustratingly set in opinions that don't make sense. I wouldn't want to date somebody who seems like an idiot, and education and intelligence have a pretty strong positive correlation.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:38 PM
5

Yeah! Just like men who pursue good looking women don't really like them, they just want to have sex, and know they need to buy her things to get it.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:26 PM
1

This chart is really ambiguous. We don't know what the distribution of messages is like. It could be that the bottom ten percentile only receive 20% fewer messages than average. It could also be that the bottom ten percentile receive literally zero messages. We also don't know the relative sizes of these income groups, or how the percentile for each income range is determined. Is it the mean of the percentiles of people in that income group? Is it the percentile of the mean person in that income…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:15 PM
17

I mean, objects don't have to be appealing for them to be objects. If your entire opinion about a person is "I don't like her because she's ugly," or "I don't like him because he's poor," then you're basically seeing these people as sex objects or money bags.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:48 PM
-3

I agree that this is awful, but I don't agree with your commentary on feminism. All the feminists I know personally are aware of and disgusted by the family court bias.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 06:15 AM
0

The problem is not images of nudity, it's images that are supposed to be sexual. I don't have a problem with either, but they are different things.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 05:58 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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