~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?Correct, rights don't exist in nature, they're a social construct. People with the most power (via violence or help from others) decided what is right and imposed that decision on others. It wasn't nature that decided that women shouldn't have the right to vote; men did. You’ve just contradicted yourself… Nature decided no one gets rights as a baseline. Some men then granted themselves the right to vote. Later most men were granted themselves right. Later still women were granted the right to vo… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 10:25 PM |
| 3 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?I think that’s descriptively true. Even if illegal, women do have the power to prevent someone being born… So descriptively, by not terminating early, they do let them be born, even if passively. | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 09:33 PM |
| 2 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?I can't count how often I've read "women didn’t fight for their rights, they were handed to them by men" as if women had to be grateful for that act of mercy, negating that the same rights were first taken away from them by men. I think that’s the first area of disagreement. Rights don’t exist in nature. So they had to be granted before they could be taken away, so how were they originally granted? In the 2000s, in some Western nations, children "gained" the right to an education without corpora… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 09:31 PM |
| 0 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?I agree completely. What I’m saying is that I think Rollo’s position is In a scenario whereby only powerful men who could galvanise armies voted, no one would dispute election results. Because that would be to call for war, and that would obviously fail because they can raise armies, by definition of being able to vote. Whereas now, you have extremes on both sides questioning whether they could just take power… because we all know it’s one thing to vote for a party… another to say you’re willing… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 04:14 PM |
| -1 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?Yeah so I think to steel man the argument you’d point out the following: 1) yes women can use guns, however the biggest guns, and artillery, tanks etc do all require some degree of physical strength So in a pure men vs women war, even if both had equal guns, men could probably carry the guns up hill better than women an receive less stress fractures etc- which is something that does show up in military injury statistics, albeit at an unfair sample size. And I think they’d also argue that men are… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 04:01 PM |
| 1 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?I think he’s trying to make a justification distinction, and argue men deserve rights because they earned them through violence Women don’t because they didn’t. But, that’s just my assumption, I’ve never heard him say that. And I doubt he’s actually so stupid as to say it either | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 03:56 PM |
| 4 | Rollo Tomassi says women shouldn't have been allowed to vote because voting is proxy for war and women would have lost in the case of war, what do you think about this?He’s trying to historically tie it back to the mechanic of early democracy in the English common law tradition. If you go back all the way to the Anglo-Saxons, say in places like Wessex. You don’t have automatic hereditary kings or queens. For example, Alfred the Great was made king of Wessex when his brother (the king died) even though his brother had an heir. The incumbent dies, then the Witan selects the next monarch. This was in essence what Rollo is referencing, because if there were two co… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/03/26 09:44 AM |
| 1 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?In what universe is that the takeaway to what I said? I said in a specific context, debates, you’ll see him use it as an internal critique argument against feminists But in long form, when not debating, he does lay out the logic as a descriptive claim exactly as I did above. How does that remotely mean he doesn’t believe it or is bad faith? I’m highlighting how you won’t find him lay out each step of the claim in a debate, because it’s not necessary in that context to do so… You asked where to f… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 18/02/26 11:19 PM |
| 0 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?Listen to literally anytime he’s explained it long form and that’s how he lays it out. I don’t mean when debating, because then there are interruptions etc and he tends to use it as internal critiques of other’s views, not a foundational claim of his own, but find him actually just laying out his world view and he lays out that logically descriptively all the time. With examples- usually citing Afghanistan, how the taliban showed up and send no more education for women, and women couldn’t do any… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 18/02/26 10:33 PM |
| 0 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?That’s because you’re inverting the claim It’s not that men team up to take away women’s rights It’s that if you start at the natural baseline- then no one has any rights at all. No law, no legal protections etc, it’s just pure animal kingdom. From that baseline, all rights are granted via force. Eg, I have the right to property, because you know I’m willing to fight to defend my property… And that later evolves into I have the right to property because the police and state are willing to fight … | /r/PurplePillDebate | 18/02/26 05:48 PM |
| 0 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?Because the demarcation is made by feminists, and women’s rights etc… they introduce gender as the metric. Yes there are weak men. They were usually called peasants and losers, and ruled over by stronger men. That was the society worked. Things only changed when enough weak men, and middle-weak men bound together that they had cumulatively more power than the strong men and such could say give us what we want or we riot. Hence the French Revolution for example. The same analysis doesn’t work usi… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 18/02/26 07:22 AM |
| – | Male sexuality just seems borderline antisocial to meI think you’re describing trade offs essentially The type of person who has the character traits that tend to correlate (historically) which financial success and ability to provide, tend to be attractive to a greater number of women, and so it was seen as a tradeoff they may occasionally sleep around, provided the provisioning etc was focussed in the wife’s direction an not also shared out with the mistresses etc. Now the debate is in part how much that circumstance holds true, and whether that… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 07/02/26 04:19 PM |
| – | Male sexuality just seems borderline antisocial to meIt’s because you’re looking at it from your own paradigm and axioms, not from there’s in the first instance, and conflating claims in the second So I’ll lay out arguments, I’m not saying I agree with them or disagree with them etc, just being descriptive 1) the novelty aspect: Let’s say I do get happily married and have a family with one woman. And then without anyone knowing also occasionally sleep with other women. Just sex, no romantic attachment. The argument is that it doesn’t affect the fi… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 07/02/26 01:37 PM |
| 1 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'When we examine the facts here, when two people decide to have a child the women will spend more time, on average raising that child, than the male. She will also spent more time doing household chores than the male. Agreed When two people are of child bearing age, the women in the workforce will take more of a hit than then women regardless of her intent to have children. Agreed. Men are much more likely to abandon heir children than women are. And the largest threat to pregnant women is their … | /r/PurplePillDebate | 06/01/26 07:19 AM |
| 6 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'I think it would be more akin to, “the more beautiful the woman, the easier the mode she can opt to be in, generally speaking” However, it doesn’t take much time online to find a “content creator” who we would probably agree is below average in terms of looks but still makes a living doing this, partly because male desperation doesn’t have a lower limit as far as I can tell, preference varies from person to person, and if you’re willing to do novel/ weird/ wild/ kinky enough acts, you’ll find yo… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 05/01/26 07:26 PM |
| 1 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'I’m not dismissing the effect. I’m saying that saying the chilling effect exists can be granted by feminists, but they can simply say the onus is on you to prove the size of the effect, which cannot be done. So they can agree the chilling effect exists, and say “but it’s not enough to close the gap” I’m talking purely in terms of how one frames an argument, not whether it’s true in reality. Saying there’s an effect, but I don’t know how much, and no one could ever prove how much verifiably, allo… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 05/01/26 10:30 AM |
| 0 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'There you go. This is a much better argument^ Use this instead of simply saying “men don’t report it” | /r/PurplePillDebate | 05/01/26 12:46 AM |
| 3 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'It may be a bad deal, but the question is if its choice or not. People are allowed to say that being a parent is more important than income. And if they make that choice, good for them. Now there’s questions to be asked about why men don’t have the same option (I think the physical toll of childbirth warrants more time off personally, but maybe I’m just sexist) and whether men would on average make the same choice at the same rate women do. And there’s a conversation to be had regarding whether … | /r/PurplePillDebate | 05/01/26 12:44 AM |
| 9 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'So to focus just on the pay gap, simply because it’s the only one of the three I’ve ever looked into with any detail, there are some sources available off the top of my head. https://iea.org.uk/media/gender-pay-gap-briefing/ https://iea.org.uk/media/equal-pay-day-calculation-is-fundamentally-misleading/ https://www.adamsmith.org/press-releases/press-release-the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-myth The main analysis tends to be a critique of methodology used in creating it. Doing a mean or median average of … | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/01/26 11:38 PM |
| 2 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'Those are displays of emotion, not felt emotion… You’re conflating issues. The fact I was raised never to try or show weakness etc, which is true, doesn’t mean I don’t feel them. That said, I can compare how often I feel them, to how often my foster sister displayed them, and she displayed it more than I ever felt it. And that would make sense given the world is literally more potentially dangerous to her than to me. For example, of just the two of us, only one had the ability to physically over… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/01/26 10:40 PM |
| 2 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'Of course. But we aren’t taking about monoliths, we said gender norms… eg what’s likely to be true at the average, granting exceptions apply. Most of the most aggressive people are men, most of the people with the highest anxiety levels are women. And on average men are more aggressive than women, and on average women are more anxious than men. It’s not a monolith, it’s a norm. Same as women can be taller than men, but men on average are taller than women and the tallest people are almost all me… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/01/26 10:30 PM |
| 2 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'I’m talking broadly about any of the gender roles that exist, do any of them have a root in evolution in your opinion? I agree that many of them are social constructs, and many of the specific traditions and ways we manifest them are social constructs, but that doesn’t mean the root couldn’t be evolutionary. Take anxiety and aggression. Both obviously are coded by gender in terms of frequency of display etc But can also both be explained by testosterone and relative combat analysis and threat de… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/01/26 10:24 PM |
| 2 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'And yet feminists/radical feminists say that they are oppressed by using fake lies like the wage gap or the domestic violence gap (there is no wage gap and male victims of domestic violence aren't taken seriously and they are way less likely to report it) Just to be clear for future reference, saying men aren’t taken seriously and less likely to report it doesn’t do anything to refute the argument men abuse more. If the claimed rates are 5:1 male perpetrator to female perpetrator, and men under-… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/01/26 10:15 PM |
| 105 | What do some men mean when they say 'woman have life on easy mode?'It’s a reference to the idea that there are tactics and exploits available to women at large that do not exist for men at large. And that the comparable advantages men are deemed to have, exist only for a minority of men, not men at large, thus meaning that if you look at broad domains, not specifics, women have more options available to them to achieve a given goal than men do. For example, in dating. The biggest thing holding a woman back from getting laid is her own standards. (Not a criticis… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/01/26 09:39 PM |
| 2 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?And how fast the person can draw, aim and shoot. 21 feet is the distance trained professionals are told not to bother, against an assailant moving at average speed for an adult human… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 05/12/25 07:30 AM |
| 2 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?Even more true if you zoom out of America and look at say… all of Europe…. | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/12/25 09:33 PM |
| 13 | Why do red pillers try to use the "force doctrine"?So, ignoring the fact that not all firearms are equal, and bigger, more powerful firearms require increased strength to operate You also have to answer the question of every scenario that occurs at close quarters whereby a firearm is actually rendered useless. (Look up the 21 feet rule of firearms for example) | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/12/25 05:31 PM |
| – | There is very little reason to believe unattractive guys will be good partnersThere’s no overall data about anyone being a good partner Attractiveness doesn’t correlate with traits that make you a good partner Because the traits that make you a good partner are conditional on what the other person deems them to be. Sure there’s broad agreement on a small number of traits, but they don’t correlate with attractiveness. There is some logic to the idea that anyone could cheat given enough incentive and opportunity to do so, and therefore a more attractive person is likely goi… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 04/12/25 01:28 PM |
| – | Help me understand the "not girlfriend material" phenomenonIt’s a massive sweeping statement and it’s not accurate But it’s basing itself on the premise that most women could get to a body count of 100 by walking outside each day and declaring they’re up for it, and assuming they then sleep with the first man who says yes each day, and one per day, that would take 100 days. Whereas almost no man on planet earth has a comparable ability to sleep with 100 women in 100 days having met them all for the first time on the day they sleep together. So people th… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 16/11/25 05:07 PM |
| -1 | What do men mean when they say women's standards are too highI mean there are several aspects to address here 1) your standards, if we assume they are reasonable, doesn’t say anything about the trend or the average, which could be unreasonable hence the claim that generally they’re too high would remain true. 2) it’s a comparative statement often, talking about the standards of people 20 or 50 years ago vs standards now 3) let’s address your specific standards. Have you ever tried to work out the data on your standard? As in, what is the percentage of men… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 08/11/25 11:18 AM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menBut describing a system as patriarchal requires it to be a majority or overwhelming majority No one criticises a single family for having a patriarchal leaning assuming no other aspect exists that warrants criticism The criticism is the fact it’s seen as the social default If every relationship defaulted to female leadership except for one no one would reference it as patriarchal in the same we do not point to dominatrix or femdom relationships as proof against patriarchy | /r/PurplePillDebate | 13/09/25 07:30 PM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menHang on, doesn’t everyone believe in patriarchy? Like who denies the fact men held more social power than women historically? | /r/PurplePillDebate | 13/09/25 04:13 AM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menWhy would I ever say that? It’s a lie… and I as a man know that’s a lie… as a father to sons I know it’s a lie. As a human in society I know it’s a lie… I tend to avoid lying to me kids. | /r/PurplePillDebate | 12/09/25 07:07 AM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menI think we’re disagreeing based on context This is not advice I shout from the rooftop, it’s advice I give to my daughter, who has a decade and a half of experience with me, in all kinds of contexts, and knows my colloquialisms and world view, so the degree of misinterpretation is significantly lower than it would be with someone without the context. Like this isn’t a conversation in a vacuum like you and I are having, my daughter knows my moral world view and sees the dynamic I have with my wif… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 11/09/25 07:49 PM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menYou’re drawing a false equivalence between capability and likelihood. Yes, every man could commit assault in the same way that every person could commit theft. But we don’t tell our children to treat every person as a potential thief by default. We teach them to recognize red flags, safeguard valuables, and respond to suspicious behavior. Capability alone isn’t enough to justify blanket suspicion. I’m ignoring likelihood and only discussing capability. Because likelihood is what you use your dis… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 11/09/25 06:51 PM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menYour analogy still misses the mark, because unlike guns or wild animals, men are not inherently dangerous objects or species. A gun is always capable of firing if loaded, and a wild predator is biologically wired for survival behaviors that can include attacking. Men, on the other hand, are not defined by predatory instincts, and most live their entire lives without harming anyone. You switched halfway here from capability to manifestation A gun is always capable of potentially killing someone i… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 11/09/25 06:26 PM |
| 1 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menYour analogy falls apart because not all men are predators. Warning your daughter about serial killers, racists, or bad drivers works because those categories are actually defined by harmful behavior. But “men” is not a category of predator. it’s half the human race, the overwhelming majority of whom will never commit those acts. Lumping all men together under suspicion isn’t the same thing as warning about objectively dangerous groups. So that’s true, but you don’t know who the serial killer is… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 11/09/25 05:39 PM |
| 7 | Women are instructed to believed "all men bad" by other menSo if I tell my daughter to avoid dating serial killers then that means I must be a serial killer? Or if I tell her not to date Tom Cruise I get a part in the next mission impossible movie? That’s obviously wrong. I am aware racists exist, therefore warn against them. I’m aware bad drivers exist, so warn against them. I’m aware wolves and venomous snakes exist so I warn against them I’m aware predatory men exist, so I warn against them. There’s no logic in your argument whatsoever | /r/PurplePillDebate | 11/09/25 04:01 PM |
| 3 | “Men are expected to be attractive and/or funny, fun, charismatic, etc - women just have to exist”So you’re taking the term “just exist” way too literal. Almost every guy has some kind of standard- even if it’s as low as “don’t have HIV” The statement is designed as a reflection of base level requirements, not preferences, and it’s designed to highlight that most women fit the average man’s stated requirements, or at least could do so with realistically achievable results. For example, don’t be obese, or don’t have slept with 100 people are probably relatively common requirements for most me… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/09/25 06:13 PM |
| 2 | “Men are expected to be attractive and/or funny, fun, charismatic, etc - women just have to exist”“Here is a crazy thing…. Maybe dudes should hold women to a higher standard? Like “just existing” should be enough and tbh someone wanting their partner to be some combination of attractive, funny, fun, interesting, cool, charismatic, and whatever is entirely reasonable. You should want a partner who actually has some kind of substance - whether it be as simple as ‘they know how to have fun’ or something more than that.” When you said this… You’re literally saying that if a man has a preference … | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/09/25 06:03 PM |
| 1 | “Men are expected to be attractive and/or funny, fun, charismatic, etc - women just have to exist”I mean let’s grant all the premise etc just to tackle your prescription which is men should hold women to a higher standard So if I’m madly in love with a woman, she fits all my preferences, I need to artificially make up a new preference to reject her? Like what is wrong with me not caring about if my wife is funny or not for example? | /r/PurplePillDebate | 01/09/25 05:44 PM |
| 1 | What defines the bad boy/asshole?I mean that’s exactly the explanation psychologists have. These traits are fantastic in the correct levels It takes age and experience to discern what the correct level is, rationally. So broadly speaking, the explanation is Women start by looking for just the biggest manifestation of these traits- because bigger is better. Then as they become more aware of the downside of the traits, they become more moderate in their preferences. That explains the current phenomenon of why the stereotype exist… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 29/08/25 04:12 PM |
| – | Men arent rewarding bad men, women areYou're using a very proprietary definition of reward if simply not being punished counts as a reward... By that standard the legal system rewards every behaviour it doesn't make illegal... Usually a reward is defined as a positive consequence. The absence of negative is neutral, not positive. | /r/PurplePillDebate | 25/08/25 05:19 PM |
| – | If women "hit a wall" then why should we bother with marriage?Preference and outcome aren’t the same thing though because you aren’t accounting for availability. Eg if my absolute preference is Russian ballerinas or whatever, the odds of me ever meeting one, let alone one who ticks all the other boxes necessary for a relationship to form etc, and who is also interested in me etc, such that I then marry one is so low that it wouldn’t be surprising to discover im not married to one. That doesn’t discount the fact it’s my preference, it just highlights availa… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 20/08/25 05:19 PM |
| 19 | I want to be a fuckboy and a gentleman at the same time, how do I do that?Define your terms Usually a fuckboy is someone who lies and cheats in order to sleep around But if you just mean can you be promiscuous and sleep around whilst acting like a gentleman, then of course you can. You hold yourself to your standards, you’re upfront and honest, and don’t kiss and tell, and make it clear you’re not looking for commitment | /r/seduction | 22/06/25 03:05 PM |
| 1 | Advice for success in daygame/nightgame in Miami?You moved here 3 weeks ago. That’s a good opener- you probably don’t know the area perfectly yet, so that opens the door for plenty of genuine questions you can ask, like recommendations. That’s for locals though, If you are focussing on tourists, then literally google it as if you’re a tourist- where does Google recommend visiting, chances are tourists are doing the same thing. If it’s day game, your the local, you can be the person with the inside information on the best spots, places you reco… | /r/seduction | 30/01/24 06:21 AM |
| 3 | Dinner is a TERRIBLE first date idea! Why you should always avoid itSo I completely understand this argument, but each problem can be addressed quite comfortable 1) just have good table manners. And don’t go for specifically messy foods- no ribs etc 2) find a restaurant with booths so you can sit side by side 3) don’t go to a proper restaurant with 3 courses etc, instead have a plan to get food, then go do activity x, then get desert at a third place. 4) I refer you back to points 2 and 3 5) I refer back to points 2 and 3. This also gives you plenty of natural b… | /r/seduction | 30/01/24 06:15 AM |
| 5 | This is what I don't get about the "wait to text" line of thinkingIt’s not about actually waiting 3 days or whatever because as a rule, playing games to artificially create attraction is not a good way to go. It’s about actually being busy. You’re right, almost everyone has their phone on them. But if you’re at work, in meetings, then on calls, then doing a report etc, that could equate to hours of your time that you’re aren’t free to text. The same goes for if you’re a student in the library and leave your phone in your bag to focus. Or a guy who leaves his p… | /r/seduction | 30/01/24 06:06 AM |
| 3 | When should I approach?This. Outside of being actually idiotic or trying to be a moron like approaching a girl in a dark alleyway with your hood up hiding your face, there aren’t many bad places to approach It’s almost exclusively about how you approach, and making it clear you don’t mean to be creepy, pushy or mean her any harm | /r/seduction | 30/01/24 05:48 AM |
| 1 | What I noticed about men that have a hot girlfriend.I can't be sure based on your post But are you conflating being sixially intelligent with not being socially anxious or introverted? | /r/seduction | 06/09/23 03:35 AM |
| 1 | if you're slightly autistic than its oversOk, so a few quick comments 1) don’t go to the gym for girls. Go for yourself, go to be healthy, strong and to prolong your life. You never know what’s going to happen in life, so extra cardio and strength is always useful 2) if you don’t like bars and clubs, don’t go to them. There’s 10000000000 other places to meet people, from dungeons and dragons meet ups, to hiking groups and everything in between 3) you called yourself autistic, so I’m assuming that means you’re logical. So level up your s… | /r/seduction | 24/10/22 06:56 AM |
| 6 | if you're slightly autistic than its oversOk, so first of all. It’s very possible that the women you’re with the “shitty dates” with “overweight unattractive feminists” can sense your resentment or lack of attraction to them and that’s a part of what’s fucking up your results. In terms of the rest, yes being in good shape helps, yes being attractive helps, yes having money helps, and yes social skills of game helps But all of those can be worked on, so either focus on levelling up, or just completely give up. Because you’re right. Women… | /r/seduction | 24/10/22 04:56 AM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter