TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

JustDIMS Archive

View 0 posts and 44 comments by JustDIMS 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

priests Certainly works out well for choir boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/16 01:29 PM
1

Plastic surgery and hair transplants can fix most of the physical stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/16 01:20 PM
1

I didn't. Google Socratic reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/16 01:17 PM
1

I do. If you're worried about your income relative to a woman's, it's obvious which side of the fence you fall on.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/16 07:21 AM
3

There are plenty of coding jobs that are nothing more than punching cards that someone else has already game planned. And this is beside the point: tech is a sausage fest because of the expectations that society has and the way that such things flow on, not because of any inherent difference between the sexes.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/16 07:45 AM
-1

Think what you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 10:18 PM
1

Were they creating the actual programs though? They were programmers. Take that as you will.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 10:18 PM
3

The reason that rock stars get laid isn't that they're rich, and it isn't that they're famous. It's that they're desired by women, and that desire feeds in on itself. Women want what other women want. Pre-selection. There are plenty of famous people who aren't sex magnets, and there are plenty of rich people who couldn't pull to save their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 09:00 PM
-1

I can explain where you've misunderstood, I just don't care to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 08:55 PM
-1

Yeah, I'm out, this conversation is fruitless.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 08:47 PM
0

Who said that? The... OP? Not that it's the only discrimination that exists, but that it's the only discrimination worthy of the name? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 08:42 PM
1

If you believe this to be true, I have no interest in trying to change your mind, but that's not what I'm talking about. Looks aren't everything. Prince was 5'2 and a living sex god.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 08:18 PM
1

What part is bad faith? The whole thing that we've been hashing out about how legal discrimination is the only discrimination. And I didn't claim it did. "Explicitly apply to women" =/= "explicitly apply only to women." It explicitly applies to women in the same way that laws against rape apply to women; it applies to everyone. Title IX prevents federal funding from being given to programs which discriminate on the basis of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 08:13 PM
1

TRP teaches that all that women care about is looks. No it doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 07:38 PM
5

No, because that makes some degree of sense. If manual labor back in the day only ever involved carrying objects which were less than a pound in weight and manual labor now only involves carrying objects which weigh more than 100 pounds at a time, there would be a biological difference between the sexes which is relevant to why there's a segregation in labor. There is no difference between punch card programming and scripting which has any relevance to any given difference between men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 07:35 PM
2

Punch card programming is like working in assembly, but sure, whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 07:32 PM
3

Ah, so now that programming is primarily high-level scripting instead of punch cards, now there's a biological barrier preventing women from being as suited towards it as men are? Are you fucking high?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 07:01 PM
3

If you want me to take your example seriously you would link to the text itself rather than you talking about the text, because I have no reason to believe that you're not willfully misinterpreting the text. Further, even if we assume that you're 100% correct in what you're saying, this is roughly like arguing that because Darwin said X, this is what evolution is thought to be. No. The field has evolved.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 06:55 PM
2

So is the draft something that you need emotional relief from, or is it something that you don't think about at all? I'm getting mixed messages.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 06:38 PM
4

http://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/csep590/06au/readings/p175-gurer.pdf See the second page. Much like how women took over a lot of the industrial work during WW2, women did most of the programming because men were needed elsewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 06:37 PM
3

Fine, nobody with credibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 06:33 PM
1

The US military has more volunteers than it wants. During the surge it had more volunteers than it wanted. We don't need a draft now, and in the event that we had an invasion of the continental USA on our hands, we wouldn't need one because volunteers would outstrip all possible ability to train them. You don't spend this much time being worried about being killed crossing the road, but the latter is vastly more likely.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 06:28 PM
2

Feminists don't tend to use "legal" as a disqualifier because they can't point to many examples of legal discrimination against women, explicit or otherwise. Which is why the OP is arguing in bad faith IMO. And their opponents can point to examples of legal protections that do explicitly apply to women (again, see Title IX). Title IX doesn't explicitly apply only to women. It mostly benefits women, but this isn't the same thing; you may as well argue that a law which punishes someone who with ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 06:21 PM
3

Is the disparity between sentencing on crack and cocaine legal institutionalised racism against blacks, or are the racist effects a byproduct? Systemic racism/sexism don't need to be explicitly legislated to exist, which is why feminists don't tend to use "legal" as a qualifier, which is what the thread is ostensibly about. If we were talking about what government policy to combat such biases should be, then I would be all for discussing only what is legislated, but that's another discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 05:35 PM
-1

Yes, and? The draft is never happening again, and feminists have campaigned for women to be a) signed up for the draft and b) allowed into combat roles. This is a non-issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 05:20 PM
1

Only men get signed up for the draft because women are considered worthless in combat. All the ways that you consider men to be shafted by the system come about from how we collectively consider women as a class. And on the draft: who do you think is campaigning for women in combat roles? It sure as shit ain't grunts. E: I question the inclusion of "legal" as a qualifier, because I've never seen anyone restrict misogyny to only things that are explicitly legislated. I'm not calling strawman, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 04:42 PM
1

Look at Drake and say this shit again.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 04:39 PM
1

Alright, let me rephrase. Men who are genuinely nice, romantic, and caring are usually in the kind of relationship that they want to be in. They aren't dominating the ONS scene, but that kind of guy usually doesn't want ONS's. I'm not forever-alone (or even alone), and I recognize that being a doormat is not the only way to be nice. Being a doormat isn't being nice. It's treating the woman in question like she'll break if you display any traits that aren't total subservience. It's forcing her to…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 03:20 PM
0

Men who are genuinely nice, caring, and romantic do dominate the marketplace. The problem is that there's a disconnect between what forever alone types think of as being nice and what being nice actually means. It's not being a doormat.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 02:40 PM
2

As in I tend to treat attractive women differently than men or unattractive women (I treat them like they want to fuck me until otherwise indicated). If I were to follow your advice, I would not get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 09:31 AM
2

When I no longer want to have sex, I will apply this wholeheartedly.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 09:15 AM
5

No, they're women. The current crop of female graduates are happy to marry people earning less than them. I happily admit that gen xers and up aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 07:24 AM
6

The majority of programmers were women back when it was seen as glorified secretary work.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 07:15 AM
1

I am asking the OP to explain what a case based approach looks like and you're catching the brunt of it I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 01:16 AM
9

Your argument is incomplete. You've stated that motivations change through changes in hormones, not behaviour. That said, nobody argues that all human behaviour is derived from nurture: what's argued is that what is seen as acceptable behaviour is derived from society, and this affects the behaviour of everyone. People in Dallas don't shit in the streets, whereas people in India do. Why? Not because of differences in hormone levels, I'll tell you h'wut.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 01:15 AM
3

Explain those prison guards who were so attracted to a prisoner that they got tattoos of his name and became his harem.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 01:05 AM
1

Okay. This is not helpful information to think about when communicating with people in real life. Thanks though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 01:03 AM
2

I could fill fifty posts to the character limit with assumptions that you're making about every single one of the people you speak to. You wouldn't be able to say that they're not assumptions you're making; you'd just say that they're justified, or avoid the question, like you have here. You simply disagree about which assumptions are okay to have.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 12:50 AM
3

Assuming nothing is honest to god how I approach people I guarantee you that it's not. This is impossible. You're assuming that they won't be offended if you don't call them a cunt. You're assuming that they won't try to stab you if you talk to them. There are myriad assumptions that you have about literally everyone that you meet. And before you say "You're just being pedantic", I am asking you, in case it's not obvious, for a step by step guide to approaching people with the individual in mind…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 12:34 AM
2

It's why they demand you buy into their alpha fux/beta bux binary TRP demands nothing. You're free to believe whatever you want. However, if you're just being disruptive, you'll get banned.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 12:04 AM
3

Okay, but so? Should I assume literally nothing about them before I've spoken to them? It's a meaningless platitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/16 12:01 AM
1

Essentially, look at a prospective partner with the individual in mind. This, specifically, is what I'm asking about. What does it mean to keep the individual in mind, rather than (presumably) an idealised generalisation of whatever gender your partner is?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/16 08:39 PM
2

Do what your partner likes, not what the general consensus seems to be for your partner's group of people (So an approach like: If your gf cries in sad movies, so what? That's a your gf thing, not a girl thing). What does this mean in practice?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/16 08:21 PM
1

Then it is still in a way "doing it for you" because it will help you get what you want (sex with women). When I was a weak chubby fuck, I had no problem attaining sex because I had a modicum of game. I don't work out in order to obtain sex, I work out in order to have good sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/16 06:26 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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