TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

LastOfSane Archive

View 7 posts and 166 comments by LastOfSane on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

Okay, just recognize that you're no longer taking part of this debate topic of conversation. You've chosen to talk about something else entirely.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 02:53 AM
–

Firstly, for your first 2 stories, you never mentioned that either man was hitting on you. One screamed at you and called you a liar, the other suddenly got in your face, talking fast and tweaking out. Should we classify those interactions in the same category as 'man walks up to woman in bar and asks to buy her a drink?' I don't believe we should. They harassed you no doubt, but your "rejection" of them is similar to how I would "reject" a pushy homeless guy begging me for change. I still belie…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 02:17 AM
–

Check it out.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 12:40 AM
–

First of all, I want to thank you for sharing so honestly and in such detail. I agree that all of those experiences you mentioned would make anyone feel uncomfortable and upset. I'm going to reply now in the context of the debate topic, not from any sort of position regarding whether what happened in your experiences were terrifying or not for you. That is already something we agree about (They clearly were) In your first 2 stories, I wouldn't even classify those as 'romantic approach / rejectio…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 12:29 AM
2

Wow, I nearly choked on all those words you put in my mouth. I disagree with almost everything you presume to know about me and my opinions, but I think you've already made up your mind about what you think I believe. It makes me sad for you, but I don't feel like arguing with someone who has no willingness to listen.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 09:07 AM
2

What are you talking about? Of course I believe in those stories. I said that the % of instances where they occur is miniscule when you consider how many men get rejected. We're talking about odds of occurrence, not about doubting fringe cases. It's like having a fear of flying because you read stories about horrific plane crashes. In actuality, the % of planes that crash is so low that you're not being rational with your fear. I believe some planes crash, but I don't boycott or campaign to ruin…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 08:56 AM
0

I'd have to know more about the context about what happened. For example, it can be the case that women are afraid, but they are not in any real danger. Not saying that's what happened to you, but I can't rule it out either. Not to mention, I'll only ever get one side of the story. Giving women total control of the narrative without any evidence to refute what they say or testimony from the other person leaves me in a eternal state of skepticism. An old joke, but still relevant
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 08:37 AM
-1

My point was that it's meaningless to point at a handful of the worst / most extreme stories and act like that's evidence to dismiss OPs claim. They are such a microscopic % that it just feeds the false narrative about how men react to rejection. Personally, I don't necessarily agree with OP either. I think women may handle rejection differently than men, but not better or worse. That's a different conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 08:33 AM
2

When you have literally hundreds of millions (globally since that's what you're referencing with stories like the acid throwing in places like Afghanistan or w/e) of one sided interactions (men asking women out each year) the handful of reprehensible violent reactions of a fraction of a fraction of less than .00001% (basically same or lower odds as being struck by lightning) isn't statistically significant to call it a pattern of behavior no matter how horrible the crime was. Awful? Yes. Move th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 06:42 AM
4

OP already said that if you look at all men who get rejected and all women who get rejected, the % of men who react negatively is miniscule. Meanwhile the % of women who react negatively is much higher. They react differently to rejection (men with physical violence - nearly zero chance) (women with shaming, reputation destruction, and false accusations - low chance)
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 06:37 AM
1

There is a sort of 3D mental game of chess going on when the prenup conversation takes place. The man is saying things to sound reasonable, but it's quite possible that his train on thought also includes "I'm not going to let this woman take advantage of me in the future if she decides to leave me" Meanwhile the woman is saying "why don't you trust me?" and "it's like you're planning for us to get divorced" etc etc. Then it's quite possible that her train of thought also includes "I have to make…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 07:34 AM
1

You're conflating two seperate issues. The same organization (pew) concluded that TOTAL paid/unpaid hours of labor between American husbands and wives of working age is nearly the same. That was part of my whole point to debunk this false narrative that women put in more hours of labor than men. It may feel like it's true and it does happen, but the studies (yours included) prove that it's not the norm. This seperate issue you cited discussing leisure time is not in question here. However, there…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:51 AM
1

According to the stats, studies, and data, it is not the case that the majority of women work more total hours of paid/unpaid labor than men. It may feel like that and the the very loud anecdotal narrative may promote the idea, but it doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny. When it is the case that a woman does significantly more TOTAL paid/unpaid hours than her husband (like in your example), then she has every right to be upset with the arrangement. However, it is not the norm and this false nar…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 12:29 AM
1

If it is the case that the wife does significantly more total hours of paid/unpaid labor than her husband then I agree with you. She has a right to be upset with that arrangement. However, the studies show that the total hours of labor for working age American huabands/wives are nearly equal. It is a false narrative that situations like you described are the majority. My post is challenging this kind of cherry picking, feeling over fact, misrepresentation of the issue. https://www.pewresearch.or…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 12:23 AM
1

Incorrect! Men tend to gravitate towards "unpaid domestic labor" That can be MULTITASKED with leisure. Men are self reporting doing leisure at the same time as some chore/task! There are only so many hours in a day. Men just typically use theirs to do two things at the same time. I will admit that the chores and domestic duties that women usually do can't be multitasked with leisure. THAT is one of the biggest reasons for the leisure gap. But my original arguments remain factual and correct (bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 04:13 PM
1

You are falling for the same false narrative. The total labor hours ARE roughly the same which proves one of my key arguments. The distribution of paid/unpaid labor hours between men and women is different, but the TOTAL is nearly the same. You said so yourself! I never said that leisure time between married men/women was similar. It seems like the reason for this leisure gap is quite complicated, but it doesn't matter in the context of my post and the topics of the debate on the narrative of "u…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 12:52 PM
1

I can agree with a lot of what you said. I am pretty much exclusively talking about the context of married couples only. There is something to say about one spouse gaining marketable skills/reputation while the other does not and the issue of post-divorce/death/job loss etc. That's a different and valuable conversation, but I stand by my claims in the context I've chosen to discuss. Moral of the story: Everyone choose your spouses wisely
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:48 AM
1

Others have pointed out that even a 30 minute difference per day really adds up over time. I'm against the inequality where it exists, although having the numbers be perfectly equal is unrealistic. I think my third point covers that "feeling" many women have that they contribute more when it's mostly psychological.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:35 AM
1

Agreed, although here we're mainly talking about common law marriage and heterosexual marriage. How the couples' earnings are distributed is another discussion. If you showed me a study that proved a significant % of men deliberately/maliciously withhold money from their wives, I would eagerly condemn those men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:22 AM
-4

Yes, I meant shopping for herself with the implication that she was also shopping for the family as well. Obviously it's an important task along with saving as much money as possible. However, sometimes it's not worth the time/effort to over think small choices. That's why I said "agonizing over brands and reviews" to emphasize that it's not always necessary and men tend to put less thought into things they deem as unimportant whereas women tend to put a lot of thought into pretty much everythin…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:53 AM
0

Thanks ChatGPT... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11761833/ Finding: women do more cognitive labor. Relevance to debate: none. Total hours for paid/unpaid labor between men and women still nearly the same https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/social-fabric/202501/gender-inequality-in-the-division-of-housework-persists Finding: wives are contributing more financially while still spending more hours on household labor than men Relevance to debate: none. The claim was never that the dist…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:26 AM
-2

On the contrary, women frequently use examples like buying clothes/school supplies for kids when giving lists of all the various one sided "unpaid domestic labor" It happens all the time. It's on the same lists as: making dentist appointments, remembering birthdays/buying gifts, and all the other cooking/cleaning as well. If my example is irrelevant to the topic, why do women keep using it in their own arguments?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:53 AM
0

I'll take your word for it about your partner since he's not here to defend himself. He sounds like a bum. You said you would leave him if he stopped pulling his weight, but you already admitted he doesn't! I don't accept that situations like yours are normal. Here's a study to prove it. My reading comprehension is fine. Feel free to link you "studies" No more anecdotes. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structur…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:44 AM
1

I agree with your assessment for the most part. Although, I think it's certain groups are promoting a narrative that isn't accurate. They frame the discussion from the premise that women are doing more work than men in total when that's arguably not the case (not in a very significant way anyway) They fail to account for paid AND unpaid hours of labor done by both people in a marriage/relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:36 AM
1

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ "Taking paid and unpaid work time together, working-age American men and women differ very little in their total work time."
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:29 AM
0

I'll say it again, the distribution of hours spent by men and women on paid and unpaid work is different, but the total hours worked is nearly the same. Your statistics are irrelevant because the issue isn't about who usually does different types of tasks. It's about who does more work IN TOTAL. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ Literally the first sentence of the study: Taking paid and unpaid work tim…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:28 AM
0

It's not nonsense. A married couple are functioning like one unit. Legally, she is entitled to half of everything he earns and vice versa. It's all shared right down the middle. If he earns a dollar, 50 cents automatically belongs to her. Think about it this way, let's pretend there is a floating counter above everyone's heads that shows how much money they are earning at any given time. When the husband is at work and the wife is at home washing dishes, her counter is ticking up the same as her…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:23 AM
-1

In my last paragraph,, I did cover legitimate cases where inequality does exist and should be attacked. What I'm saying is that cases like yours are not the norm. You should really have a serious talk with your partner about it. Although, without hearing his(?) side of things, I have my doubts about your accounting. Be honest, if he read your comment, would he agree with your breakdown of the hours?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:18 AM
1

I linked this study in a few replies and other users did also. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/ First sentence of the study findings: "Taking paid and unpaid work time together, working-age American men and women differ very little in their total work time." Satisfied?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:13 AM
-1

Ridiculous. Husbands almost always give their wives either direct/formal access to shared finances/accounts. it's not only a social convention, but also best practice and common sense to not be a financial tyrant in a relationship. It may be the case that a small % of husbands (,in Western/modern countries) try to dominate/withhold finances from their wives, but those are exceptions. The wife has legal rights to all assets/money obtained by both people throughout the course of the marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:07 PM
-3

Some would argue that certain parts of the domestic labor that women choose to do is mostly unnecessary and that the difference of leisure time is partially self inflicted. For example, a woman spending an hour each day shopping and comparing prices for gym shorts may not qualify as "labor" to many people. Most men would probably check her options and pick in under a minute. Her choice to agonize over reviews and brands reduces her free time voluntarily (for example)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 06:59 PM
-11

His money is her money. It just gets to her indirectly
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:45 PM
-7

I didn't claim that a wife is entitled to the same kind of benefits that are offered by a full time job. What you described are formal benefits like a pension, maternity leave, etc. In a (good) marriage, these benefits are informal. The man's labor provides all of those in an unwritten/socially enforced way. Could it be the case that a male breadwinner withholds funds/,informal benefits from his wife? Yes, it can happen. Does this happen enough to merit a generalization that "unpaid domestic lab…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:39 PM
-5

The takeaway from this article is that the difference between men and women's working hours+domesric hours is quite small. The disparity is about men taking more leisure time. Even then, it's about 5 hours more per week. Yes, it's a difference, but there is no evidence of men neglecting any duties.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:32 PM
-1

The scope of the discussion is not about who built society or some macro assessment of who deserves credit for anything. It's about a trend across marriages and relationships with a division of opinions about fairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:27 PM
-2

Married couples may maintain the appearance of seperate finances, but when push comes to shove, everything earned/acquired during the marriage belongs to both. Glad to provide an example of a study from pew https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:21 PM
-5

I meant that a married man/woman become a single unit in a legal sense for tax purposes and such. Not that they stop being individuals in a philosophical sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:16 PM
1

I'm not trying to disprove or counter your studies. The best idiom would be "Take it with a grain of salt" This isn't an outright rejection of the stat, but instead an introduction of nuance, skepticism and variables that were not considered when the studies' parameters were implemented. My whole point is that this kind of topic is essentially impossible to be studied empirically. So asking me to offer alternative studies or sources is meaningless. These participants may not be lying, but it's s…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 05:11 PM
4

I'm not saying the participants from the survey/study were all lying. However, I think it's fair to point out reasons to be skeptical using these numbers as if they tell the whole story. What I'm saying is that there is more nuance to this topic (which I outlined earlier) that skews the numbers in such a way that makes any stats about this topic at least somewhat unreliable.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 12:14 PM
12

I'm skeptical about this kind of self reported data. Many women are notorious for virtue signalling when making public statements while their true feelings/beliefs/actions may not be socially acceptable to admit (shared body count is lower than true number, spoken height/income preferences don't reflect dating history, claiming to seek a good man while only dating players, etc) Then there's the plausible deniability issue. A woman might subconsciously feel a negative way about a man who doesn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 11:49 AM
0

Agreed, however there has also been a semantic watering down of the descriptive way people use the word "abuse" The categories of physical/emotional/financial abuse are each on a different spectrum with a high amount of ambiguity and variable tolerance from person to person. Then, there are people (men and women) who have isolated incidents of partner abuse. Should you be labeled a thief for the rest of your life because you got caught stealing an umbrella from Walmart 6 yeara ago? I think most …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:29 AM
1

Forget lust. That is not particularly relevant for long term and long lasting relationships/marriages. Physical attraction and personality are components of a person's overall attractiveness, but they aren't the only pieces of the puzzle. Charisma, competence, WEALTH, social status, and so many more traits that have NOTHING to do with physical /personality play a role. Saying those aren't relevant to attraction is ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 01:04 AM
3

0.000001% of men had any real power throughout all of civilization (kings and castles , etc). Men and women struggled basically the same for all intents and purposes. Different struggles, but same horrible, desperate, starving, disease, rat infested, plague exposure, toil, slavery, surfdom, ZERO bodily autonomy, drought, floods, raids, war, economic instability. THE FUCKING LIST GOES ON. Don't pretend men had ANYTHING better
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 05:14 PM
0

Money doesn't make women attracted to a guy. It makes gold diggers fake-attracted to a guy. I don't accept the above as a premise You are talking about exceptions to the rule. In general, women ARE more attracted to men who either currently have money or have "ambition" or some other code word that equates to 'will have money later' Literally every 20 something year old has experienced knowing a girl who grew up and had a glow up. That's "effort." She was ugly in high school, nobody liked her, b…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 05:04 PM
0

Idgaf about Andrew Tate. I don't watch his content or subscribe to his affiliated channels, but I can answer your question. Men are sick of the gross generalizations that paint us as oppressors and villains. Men are tired of false historical narratives that use modern morality to judge the actions of people from the past. Men have had enough of being blamed for all the inequality and injustice of our imperfect world. This world was inflicted upon all of humanity. A world of scarcity, danger, env…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 04:19 PM
0

Respectfully, I disagree with your point about men's attractiveness being a skill issue (at least in a majority of cases). Let's start by addressing your clear attempt to shame men by implying every guy could be attractive but isn't putting in the work to become attractive (their "skill issue"). A core manosphere axiom is that women are born with their value (youth beauty, etc) while men have to earn their value (money, status, etc). With this axiom in mind, the "skill issue" is not the same for…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 03:55 PM
–

Bare minimum
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 11:16 AM
1

Let's be honest. The women asking these men "Are you gay?" aren't trying to find any sort of truth. They are trying to shame men by playing on their insecurities. They are trying to humiliate heterosexual men because they dislike their behaviour. That want these men to FEEL BAD about what they have said/done. It is the dictionary definition of shame. Don't defend these awful women.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 07:33 AM
7

The intention of the 'Are you gay?" type of comment from women is CLEARLY a shaming tactic in response to criticism of women and/or support for men. There's no ambiguity.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:49 AM
2

That's really nice to hear. I suppose the contributing factors for relationships like yours (from a RP perspective) would involve the concept of SMV. According to their beliefs, a person's age, attractiveness, money, number of previous relationships, children from previous relationships, etc all give people a "score" that's usually 1 - 10. When people of similar SMV get together, that is seen as normal and good from the RP perspective. 5s getting with 5s , etc is how things should be. However, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 04:25 AM
-1

Either engage or don't. Your shaming language is not contributing to the discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 04:07 AM
2

I think the RP response to your self ID as a woman who doesn't date men with those qualities would be 2 options: 1: you're lying and you know it. Or 2: you're lying, but you don't know it.. yet. For number 2, this is a common pattern that women seem to exhibit when they make tiktok videos, YouTube videos, interview responses, and comments on dating podcasts. Ex. "I don't care about if he's rich or not. I just want a man who's motivated, passionate, and has a plan for his career" This kind of sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 03:59 AM
1

According to what I've read, an Indigenous man, a man with a physical disability, or a man who is a member of a visible minority is a direct beneficiary of employment equity initiatives designed to achieve substantive equality in the workplaces all across Canada.
/r/MensRights18/03/26 02:36 AM
1

According to feminism, any gendered double standard is sexist. You expecting a man to pay for dates is a gendered double standard. Your offering to pay is meaningless or just a test. You said if he takes you up on your offer then the relationship is over. It's fine for you to prefer a certain type of behavior, but you might have to admit that it's a sexist preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 11:38 AM
2

Isn't that a tad sexist?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 08:13 AM
1

Canadian legislation has never pushed for gender equality. The concept championed by legislators is 'substantive equality ' which is essentially a fancy way of saying 'special privileges for any group that isn't white men'
/r/MensRights13/03/26 03:50 PM
2

It would be more of an accurate analogy if you absolutely hated your parents-in-law but LIED to your partner and said that you adored them. That lie certainly would also cause relationship problems beyond withholding info or keeping a secret. Same logic applies to to people lying about their past.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:08 AM
2

Men lying in this way is equally bad. However, men aren't publicly advocating and supportive of lying as a justifiable dating strategy for long term relationships. Many women are.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 02:38 AM
1

I don't think lying about body count and lying about paternity are equally bad, but they are in the same ballpark. I'm certainly NOT trying to paint all women a certain way. I'm only talking about the ones who choose to lie about these things when asked by their SO. And for the record, as I've said multiple times in the thread, men are ABSOLUTELY guilty of lies and bad behavior in relationships that are comparable OR WORSE. I agree with all the examples you stated (hiding baby mommas, hiding fin…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 02:28 AM
1

Who is more willing to lie in order to secure a long term committed relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:07 PM
1

It's not my personal position, but here's the counter argument: There is some compelling science to support that the higher a woman's 'body count' is, the higher chance her marriage will end in divorce (Google it). It is statistically significant. Faithfulness is only part of the equation. Pair bonding and the ability to stay in a relationship are also important factors that men consider when choosing a partner for obvious reasons. Withholding or straight up lying about information that impact t…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 06:41 PM
2

Lots of reasons. Past sexual behavior could be connected to other bad habits and red flags. Relationships should be based on trust and honesty, not lies. His past matters too. If he was a drug addict, gambler in debt, or violent person/criminal many years ago, wouldn't you be upset if he LIED and said he wasn't? Lies of omission are bad enough, but straight up verbal lies are worse. This. Shit. Matters!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 06:14 PM
-1

The concept is called 'monkey branching' and it is almost exclusively a dating strategy available to women. Men typically don't think about their relationships this way so it's unsurprising that you don't think this way as a man. That doesn't mean it isn't common.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 06:03 PM
3

I agree (with the female logic) until your last paragraph. The 'good person' question from the post was about how someone who LIED to their significant other and continues that lie as the basis and foundation for their long term relationship or marriage. How can THEY not feel any guilt? It's not about her past. IT'S ABOUT THE LIES
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:42 PM
-2

The fact that you're already planning your hypothetical future casual sex is kind of telling.. it sounds like you aren't really serious about committing to a lifelong relationship such as a traditional marriage. No hate, but this is a sentiment shared by women who are willing to lie about their pasts. They are concealing that they will find it more difficult to pair bond for life with one person and will always be thinking about 'what's next?' while their naive husband thinks he's 'the one' It's…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:23 PM
1

There's no 'one size fits all' way to ask. I suppose the formula looks something like this: Acknowledge: We've been dating for a while. I really like you and I want to be sure that we're right for each other before we take the next step in our relationship. Preface: That is why it's so important that I make sure we align on the kind of values that I hold so dear to my heart like trust and honesty. No joking around + respect: I know it's a sensitive topic and I'll totally understand if you hate m…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:13 PM
-1

Pretty much. Reform =/= absolution
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:59 PM
1

It's funny, I read your message and literally the next message I got was about "why should a man wait for the right timing/context when the relationship is getting serious to ask? Shouldn't he ask on a first date ASAP if it matters so much to him?" (My opinion from a previous reply) There really is no winning. As for the 'body count' terminology. I agree it's cringe and I wouldn't use it in real life. It's internet vernacular. A shorthand term that we all know the meaning of. If I may ask, what …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:57 PM
3

Putting aside the insults and disrespectful language, I'm willing to engage with your arguments. The example you gave of a woman who lied about being a virgin but actually had slept with one person is kind of the least possible egregious example I can possibly think of. In reality, the lies about past sexual partners are far more likely to be much more significant. You are trying to pick the weakest argument of mine and act like it's my primary position. I find it convenient that you skipped ove…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:42 PM
3

I think it's an unfair generalization to say that "the women on those podcasts are OF models". For example, Whatever released a statistic that only 10% of all of their guests in TOTAL were Onlyfans content creators. According to another statistic, 10-14% of American women aged 18-24 create content on Onlyfans (according to Google) So it seems like a fair representation on paper. I'm not saying these stats are completely accurate, but it could be that the viral clips from those kinds podcasts mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:21 PM
3

That sounds like a game and a bit manipulative. Can't say I approve.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 03:49 PM
-1

Those kinds of accusations and judgments are also problematic. However, I think the only time a man should ask a woman " How many men have you slept with?" or similar variations, is when the relationship has developed to the point when things are getting serious. The man may have a a non-negotionable preference and it's in both of their interests to sort those out ASAP. Hers are just as important. It's like asking whether or not someone wants to have children/how many. Yes, it's a personal quest…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 03:45 PM
3

No
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 02:00 PM
5

Fair enough. However, your reply reminds me of a similar question about what if a man asks to split the bill on a first date. The woman says "Of course I'd be happy to split the bill and have a pleasant evening with him. Then afterwards, I would never speak to him again because of it" Like... Okay. That's your decision. It just seems like the pot calling the kettle black in regards to immaturity in both situations. You're assuming his reasons for asking and thinking of the worst case scenario. T…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 01:46 PM
4

1: Generally speaking, women tend to care about a man's future earning potential and current/upcoming status (ambition, passion, and motivation are all synonymous for earning potential when girls talk about what they want from a man). On the flip side, men typically don't care much about a woman's future ability to make money. 2: Generally speaking, women aren't as hung up on men's body count unless it's REALLY high. Up to a certain point, a man's ability to be attractive to many women means tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 11:25 AM
4

I would argue that your freedom to ask about if a dating partner has any past criminal history is valid and he should be honest. Assuming he would lie is projection from the female perspective (i.e. I would lie if I were him so he will lie if I ask)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:16 AM
5

From the male dating perspective, this mindset is very problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:14 AM
3

Is it equally sexist for a woman to prefer a man who's tall and makes a lot of money? By your logic, she's valuing him for his ability to protect her and provide resources asymmetrically. Yet, this double standard isn't vilified by men. Should men be fighting for female partners to contribute more monetarily and physically to a relationship? I don't think you would find many women, feminist or otherwise, who would be supportive of that position.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 08:59 AM
1

Okay, I can agree with some of that. But what about the idea that past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior? It's not JUST the "ick" Of a high body count or JUST anxiety about paternity issues. It's about pattern recognition. The promiscuity is a piece of the puzzle. There could be a lot of red flags associated with a person who engaged in thay kind of behavior. Are there some assumptions being made? Yes, but risk mitigation often involves biased assumptions (i.e. treating strange m…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 08:35 AM
2

Not true at all. In fact, I think a man should be sympathetic to a woman who admits that she was lied to and slept with a man under false pretences. That kind of transparency and honesty speaks FAR more about her character than the mistake she made. I would respect it. Some men would use the knowledge to filter her out. If that's the case, then those men weren't right for her and lying about the past would only cause problems later in the relationship if the truth came out.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 08:11 AM
2

I don't need to have first hand experience or a personal issue to be concerned about the topic and it's related issues. The issue interests me and I want to discuss it. That is enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 08:05 AM
1

Believe what you want to believe. I'm only interested in the conversation about the topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 08:00 AM
-1

Great observations. As I mentioned to someone else here, some men will have a preference for a certain pattern of past behavior, such as low number of past sexual partners or not ever being a cheater/abuser, etc. An expression that gets used that I happen to agree with is: the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. This accounts for all kinds of red flags that could exist in a relationship. So the more honest and transparent a person is about their past, the better a potential datin…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:55 AM
8

You and me both brother
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:39 AM
3

Equally reprehensible
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:38 AM
4

Everyone lies, yes. But we are talking about building the foundation of a relationship on lies. That is a bit different.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:34 AM
2

Can you explain what is sexist about having a preference for someone with few sexual partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:32 AM
6

Happily married with children. Let's stay on topic shall we?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:26 AM
-2

How about I just reply to you instead of putting words in my mouth. Obviously I thin k all lying, especially in this context of relationships, is wrong. I'm more than willing to shame and vilify men who lie to sleep with women. With that said, it's apples and oranges when you try to compare the two types of lies. If a man lies to sleep with a woman, the damage is immediate and the relationship won't last long. It won't take a girl long to find out the man isn't a millionaire like he claimed (for…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:25 AM
-1

You raise a lot of good points, although those aren't the only podcasts/street interview cities I'm referring to. Also, a good portion of the women I've seen with the attitude I've described could be considered 'typical' not party girls or sex workers. It could be that those more 'normal' girls are speaking FOR other women who are the way you described (i.e. "He'll never know because THEY will just lie about it")
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:04 AM
4

Both men and women have preferences when choosing someone to date. Some things can be filtered visually and some can't. It could be a man's preference that his future spouse has not have more than X number of sexual partners. There are some pretty reasonable reasons why men might have this preference. Also, women vet men's behavior and filter them out for all kinds of reasons too, which is also fair and valid in my opinion. No double standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 06:54 AM
-1

I agree with both of your points on their own, but those don't really address what we're talking about here. The question isn't "What is your body count?" The question is "Would you tell your significant other the truth if he asked?" (with an implication that the timing/context/tone are appropriate) In this context, I believe the man DOES have the right to know the truth. As I said, this is information to build the foundation of a potentially long term relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 06:38 AM
2

Learning these things "naturally" (what you heard in your online echo chamber) is what has led to the tens of millions of young people, especially women, being brainwashed into believing false narratives. Education leads to more accurate knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 03:32 PM
2

It's an analogy.. not a 1-to-1 identical comparison. Read the whole conversation. I said as much already. Same with other reply chains about how a boss doesn't automatically hate his staff just because he has authority over them. Once again, it's just an analogy. No claims were made to deserve such a half cocked reaction..
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 02:45 PM
2

Totally agree. Those controversial passages about men and women's role/place/purpose in society were interpreted and used to justify a lot of really harmful laws/practices throughout history that probably went against the intended spirit of the Bible.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 08:31 AM
2

These assumptions you're making about Christianity's views of women still sound like your own interpretation of certain passages. I'm no theologian, but I'm pretty sure that kind of explicit statement of inferiority isn't used in The Bible for example. You don't think something like Eve being made from one of Adam's ribs because he was lonely isn't subtle? There's nothing in that that explicitly states women's inferiority to men. I'm pretty aure there are more passages along the lines of both me…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 05:09 AM
2

I hear you 100%. Many of the issues you described are very recent within the past few years. That's a part of the puzzle, but not all that is being discussed here. You said that men refuse to acknowledge the system they take part in, but I disagree. I believe men aren't ignorant or oblivious. They just have a different perspective/narrative. The feminist narrative is one of male oppression of women throughout history. It is shallow and ignores a lot of the brutal harsh realities that plagued men…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 05:19 PM
2

They post videos on hundreds of different YouTube channels with tens of thousands of followers each. The majority of which advocate positive messages about the lifestyle with a fraction being focused on dating (in a positive way that follows terms of service) What % of those posts/comments/contributors on the subreddit are engaging in the behavior you described? My assumption is that the % is actually much lower than you believe, but I may be wrong. It's hard to believe though since Reddit is VE…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:44 PM
3

I didn't gloss over anything. If you read my reply, I went into detail about one of the main historical reasons why men, the obvious/shallow answer in and of itself, is the answer. Raiders, bandits, vikings, tribes, etc, they were primarily made up of men with the purpose of taking resources from other groups to bring back to their own groups (their women/children/families) because of scarcity and survival. My point was about nuance, history, and complexity being ignored by many feminist narrati…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:28 PM
0

When I said I'm not familiar with their community, I meant on Reddit. I'm very familiar with their goals/objectives and motivations described elsewhere. So while I'm not necessarily a member of their community, I'm still fully aware of what they represent in principle. As for the "commonalities" of the kinds of comments you described on Reddit posts in that community, I will need to do further research. It still sounds like it could be exceptions/anecdotal, but I'm willing to have my mind change…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:09 PM
-3

To be honest, I'm not familiar with the passport bro community. It wouldn't surprise me that some of them are the way you described. All communities have bad actors. I've mostly seen videos of them describing the benefits of living/dating in places like SEA from men who are currently there. Nothing in those videos appears hateful, sexist, or misogynistic. I would argue that many people who comment on posts in their community are not actively involved in their lifestyle. Some may be trolls and so…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:36 PM
2

I like to look at world history and evolutionary psychology to explain ancient reasons for things and YouTube, TikTok, and other social media platforms to explain modern reasons for things. None of these have any connections to the 1990s, lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 01:59 PM
1

Never seen it. Ive heard of the "nice guy" trope, and I think there are a lot of valid female criticisms. Not sure if the sub is connected in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 01:17 PM
1

I disagree with your conclusion. By your logic all people in positions of authority view those below them with hatred and contempt which is obviously not true. You're assigning views to men that they have clearly expressed they do not hold. The vast vast VAST majority of men love and appreciate women (sisters, mothers, friends, romantic partners, neighbors, female countrymen etc) I believe you have formed your opinions from unreliable sources or exceptions/anecdotes. Men. Don't. Hate. Women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 01:13 PM
1

Hardly.. I said in several replies that misogyny is real and bad. But the false feminist narrative that misogyny is at the core of nearly all problems between men and women is incorrect. If I go about defending men's perspectives and historical complexity/nuance to debunk this false narrative, that seems perfectly rational. The way you take offense, make assumptions, and generalize me as a misogynist is pretty much the point of the post. This kind of broad generalization about men/male perspecti…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 01:00 PM
1

Pretty much. An analogy would be having a boss who values your input, appreciates/recognizes your contributions, treats you with respect, and financially compensates you fairly. Can some bosses be shitty human beings who abuse their position and treat their subordinates badly? Of course. But that's not the way the system was designed to be like.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 12:39 PM
2

Married women of the time had unrestricted and unlimited access to what was essentially a join account in her husband's name. The economy of the late 1800s and early 1900s was VERY different. Much more local and personal. People basically knew everyone in their neighborhood/town. A woman didn't even need to use cash. She could just buy whatever she wanted on credit. So yes, she could take on debt, just none that she would be personally responsible for.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 12:36 PM
1

None of the examples I gave are sexist in any way. No idea how you came to that conclusion except perhaps Tiktok propaganda full of false or misleading info. You asked for more examples so I gave you one additional resources full of examples. That's not the only one. There are hundreds of female content creators, influencers, SJWs, talk show panelists, etc etc who parrot the same BS. Too many to count. Last time I checked, MRAs, manosphere content creators, and male social media influencers are …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 12:33 PM
2

Interesting points. And I'm also happy to discuss these ideas with you. I'm just not oblivious to phrasing that heavily implies your disdain for my opinions from earlier. To my knowledge, the term "female nature" does not have any significant negative connotation. It's a kind of short hand generalization term to quickly describe common female behaviors. Liking taller men, desiring a man who can financially provide, wanting a partner who is physically fit/strong enough to protect her using force …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:56 AM
3

About voting: as I mentioned, women were protected from forced military service (they still are but there were worries from women in the 1920s that voting would open this door) and political manipulation. They had moral superiority to men and occupied a recognized/respected place as the voice of virtue for many important issues. Women's opinions on political matters were taken VERY seriously despite not being able to vote. About bank accounts: historically, when a woman got married, she was inex…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:27 AM
2

I totally agree with you. We are not discussing academic textbook feminist philosophy. Those ideas are striving for a kind of utopia that may or may not be possible, but seems worth fighting for. I have a certain respect for the genuine feminist goals, although I personally believe they are rather unrealistic or the attempt to realize them may cause more harm than good in the short term (kind of like attempts to reverse climate change or something, lol) The kind of feminist I'm describing is mor…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:13 AM
3

Again, your phrasing makes it sound like my arguments are like poison or some other kind of disgusting reprehensible ooze that flows like venom. Not the case. I'm making valid insights based on patterns and observations. I guess the best expression to answer your question would be "the truth hurts". Actually, me and my female friends, family, and wife enjoy lively debate about gender differences in the living room after dinner or at a hangout setting. Nothing said is a personal attack. No one is…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:55 AM
1

I think it would be more accurate to say that many men are critical of what appears to be female nature in dating/selecting a mate. They see female hypocrisy, double standards, saying one thing and doing another, lacking accountability for bad decisions, hypergamy (denied by women despite obvious widespread occurrence), misandry, etc and respond negatively. In context, is that reaction not reasonable?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:41 AM
2

Physically for the purposes of personal safety/security, women are less capable than men. That much is indisputable in 99% of cases. Otherwise, women are perfectly as able as men. My comparison of women and children was not meant to be a perfect analogy across all metrics. Just an example.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:35 AM
5

It sounds like you've already made up your mind about these topics based on limited info/feminist propaganda, but I have a basic understanding of the real answers and I'm happy to share my incomplete but more accurate knowledge. Women not having the right to vote: direct democracy was not common in history. America was no exception. Universal male suffrage was only about 50 years old by 1920. The idea was that women would influence politics through lobbying for change from a morally elevated pos…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:10 AM
0

Who is irrelevant. What mattered historically speaking was and is scarcity, hostile environments, hunger, poverty, disease, war, and danger of uncountable kinds. Obviously you want me to say that men are the primary source of danger to women. Once again, this is narrow minded, non contextual, and lacks nuance. For example, if a group of ancient men attacked your tribe, they were doing it to secure resources for their own tribe (their women/family) BECAUSE of all those terrible realities I listed…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:27 AM
4

Despite being irrelevant, I will answer. Yes, I have many female friends and family members of similar and different ages. I find it offensive that you suggest that I EVER treat women as sex objects or whatever other insulting implications you are trying to attribute to me. Regardless, I don't use your/other women's assumptions about me or other men as justification to hold misoginistic views about women in general. However I will observe this illogical tactic and call it out as a deflection and…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:20 AM
3

A) You didn't give a definition of misogyny B) I didn't ask for one C) You didn't address any of my positions. You just attacked men. THAT way of commenting is precisely the problematic feminist rhetoric I'm describing.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:35 AM
0

More generalization, assumptions, and lack of nuance. You define the problem I described...
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:27 AM
2

Where you see control, we see respect and appreciation. Keep your projections to yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:21 AM
2

"Who set the system up?" seems to be a nearly identical topic as "What is the foundation of society?" Does it not?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:17 AM
-1

It was the historical reality that women were more vulnerable and needed additional safeguards in society. Substantive equality in modern societies continues to recognize this reality. You are assuming that religious ethics are based in beliefs that women are less capable (physically true, but let's set that aside and focus on things line decision making/intelligence). It seems like you are interpreting some religious passages to IMPLY what you think they meant which is not the same thing. Put i…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:13 AM
2

You missed my point entirely. And no, just because you live in a democracy, that doesn't mean you can choose whether or not the state will protect you. That goes for men, women, and children. My point stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:01 AM
6

I never talked about video games, streaming or whatever... I'm not saying misogyny doesn't exist. I'm saying it's not some 'get out of jail free' card for women to ignore history, censor differing opinions, or avoid accountability. You're just using some random anecdotes to try to justify this horrendous rhetorical tactic that feminists use far too often.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:58 AM
–

I expect a reasonable answer. There is no hatred or unfairness to treating a group in a way that seems to give them advantages. From your point of view, substantive equality is also misogyny. Equally ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:54 AM
2

Are systems that were designed to give women special protections and privileges also misogyny?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:50 AM
1

Anecdotes, exceptions, and assumptions like you described are exactly the problem. The worst stories get the most attention, but they are outliers. I'm not basing my claim exclusively on personal feelings, although I will admit they partially influence my reaction. I'm doing my best to approach this topic from multiple historical perspectives. An analogy of the problem would be someone asking "What started WW2?" The first person (feminist rational) says one word like 'racism' or 'fascism'. The s…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:45 AM
2

I live in a country that has laws that supposedly exist for my protection. There are institutions in place (law enforcement, armies etc) to enfore those laws for my protection whether I want them or not. It has been decided by governing bodies that I don't get to opt out of this protection. It's not much different than ways women were protected in pre-industrialized societies. It was essentially for the greater good.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:26 AM
-3

If the roles were reversed somehow and women were the stronger sex and men carried and nurtured children, no I wouldn't feel differently. I would see the practical survival purposes that led to a female led society. Would I also believe that as technology improves and resources become more abundant that the system could become more equalized? Probably. However, I would NOT cry misandry and oppression.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:19 AM
2

I suppose my point is that, in the pre-industrialized world, women needed to be protected in much the same way that children also needed to be protected. It's not some kind of oppression narrative, it was about survival in a harsh world full of scarcity, uncertainty, disease, poverty, and danger. This is where the 'everything is misogyny' argument fails. No nuance, no perspective, no complexity.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:15 AM
-1

The "real answers" are that context, culture, history, and reasons for why things are the way they are is more complicated and nuanced than they are willing to accept. When feminists see a bad outcome for women, they never ask "what is our share of the blame for this?" I'm not talking about rape or crime stats. This is mostly about social norms, romantic relationships, historical narratives, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:10 AM
0

If you have authority over your children, do you hate your children? Obviously not. You're entrusted with their protection.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:00 AM
6

Yup, it isn't. I wrote another post in the past about the 'but who set the system up?' argument from women which relates to the same issues. I've thought about it a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 06:57 AM
-3

How so? Passport bros love and cherish women, just a particular kind of woman based on preferences. Men in age gap relationships love and cherish women as well. Same for the rest of my summary. If you only see misogyny, then you are part of the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 06:49 AM
5

I gave a lot of examples at the end of my post. But if you like, go to r/AskFeminists and see the top comments of a dozen random posts. The majority of the top answers are "because misogyny" with little to no critical analysis of women's contribution to the problem in question.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 06:47 AM
-5

I disagree. Religions are not hating women just because they typically have a hierarchy that gives men authority over women. I'm not saying I subscribe to their beliefs, just stating that there is no inherent hatred of women in those religious beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 06:44 AM
-5

It's more of a deflection or change of subject in that way. They know the real answer would make women look bad so it's easier to blame their bad behavior on unprovable, generic, systemic male oppression narratives i.e. "but who set the system up?"
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:30 AM
1

Interesting points. I do agree entirely with your last observation about how Red Pill is almost entirely for men but ABOUT women. However, the topics from Red Pill creators on YouTube are mostly about criticism of female dating styles and pointing out hypocrisy and double/unrealistic standards of women, NOT how to get/use women. That's more of a 'pick up artist' idea, which is much different. I believe the dating problems expressed by RP/manosphere thinkers can't really be "reversed" because the…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 02:48 AM
3

When women ask "How can we help men?" The framing is perceived as "How can we help men so they can better meet women's unrealistic standards?" which is not really a question seeking to help men. Ultimately, it's just another way to USE men for the benefit of women. This ignores men's real problems discussed here and elsewhere in manosphere communities (for example Rollo Tomassi's YouTube channel). This framing of "let's help men for the benefit of women" from people like Scott Galloway fuels Red…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 10:52 AM
0

Mostly sound reasoning, but the 'womens bodily autonomy' as the foundation is not the primary issue related to OP's topic. The primary issue, as far as the law and society is concerned is: What is in the best interest of the child? Unfortunately for men, this boils down to breadwinners (typically men) being forced to give their resources away regardless of relationship status to the mother or personal reluctance. This unbreakable legal mandate has led to a variety of unfair outcomes for men. Let…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 08:32 AM
1

I know what you mean with your question. I'm just a few steps ahead. There are essentially 2 answers to your question. The short answer is that men played a larger part in making decisions that were necessary for the survival of our species (what feminists call "setting up the system"). The long answer is that men throughout history were basically stuck between a rock and a hard place. No matter what men did or didn't do, people starved, froze, got sick, and fought wars. Men didn't choose the co…
/r/MensRights12/08/25 07:56 PM
1

Fair point. However, we seem to have a very big issue that is preventing any kind of meaningful discussion on this topic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the foundational premise for your argument is that men DID "set the system up" that is the source of so many of society's woes and a major source of gender inequality. Meanwhile my foundational premise is that men DIDN'T "set the system up" etc etc... We would just be talking past each other if we can't agree on this core premise. I've done my bes…
/r/MensRights12/08/25 05:20 PM
0

whoosh
/r/MensRights12/08/25 06:12 AM
1

The point is that physics, nature, and a hostile world is the real "system" that all humanity is forced to adapt to and deal with. Avoiding death, starvation, and freezing is what shaped society. Not patriarchal domination directed at women. For 99.9% of human history, it has been about survival and sacrifice. Has that changed in the very recent past? Yes, somewhat. Should we assign blame to either gender for the way things are. NO. THAT is what feminists should refer to when they ask this ignor…
/r/MensRights12/08/25 12:35 AM
5

A) no one is blaming women. We are talking about women blaming men. B) If you get to the heart of the matter, my logic still holds up. For example, the selective service system is a RESPONSE to the conditions that we have ALL had to deal with and suffer from since the beginning of humanity. Scarcity, hunger, cold, disease, and all manner of dangers INCLUDING from other humans. You may say "Well it's men and male soldiers that attack and hurt other people" and that's true, but I would bet that th…
/r/MensRights11/08/25 08:04 PM
8

Unfortunately, you missed my point. My point was that men DIDN'T set the system up. At least not intentionally. The system was set up by the realities of the laws of the universe that existed long before human beings evolved on this planet and will continue to exist long after we're gone. We didn't decide that food, shelter and other resources were essential for staying alive. The unequal distribution of those resources and the violent competition for them wasn't our idea either. Dinosaurs had t…
/r/MensRights11/08/25 03:31 AM
10

I think that modern women belittle male insecurities, in part, because they base their feelings about men on their core ideology/worldview. The foundation of feminist theory is that all men oppressed all women for all of human history in the most humiliating, savage, and reprehensible ways imaginable. From that premise, it is illogical to have sympathy or compassion for any type of male suffering. After all, men deserve their troubles as punishment for all their historical crimes against womanki…
/r/MensRights24/01/25 06:32 PM
14

The core premises of feminist ideology are that patriarchy is the cause of most problems in society, that this system exists solely to oppress women for the benefit of men, and that men as a collective actively support this system as they perceive it. By extension, the next premise is that patriarchy doesn't allow women to participate in society equally with men. Therefore, their poor outcomes can never be blamed on their poor choices since, according to feminist theory, they lack the power to m…
/r/MensRights07/01/25 12:10 PM
7

I liked that first article. Very cheeky. It didn't talk much about the perceived female 'right' to deception (reproductive privacy) though. But it's true! It's baffling that the wording of Roe vs Wade has been stretched and contorted as a defense against mandatory paternity testing. Outrageous. You would think that when you create another human life, your individual right to reproductive privacy ends.
/r/MensRights31/12/24 11:10 AM
44

Read and judge for yourself, but here are some particularly despicable quotes to look out for: 1: ... "although mandatory paternity testing may not aim to coerce mothers, the practice is situated in “oppressive social situations and institutional structures [that] can effectively coerce agents, detracting from their ability to exercise autonomy in choice and action" In other words, the possibility for negative consequences for women if they lie and cheat men may influence how they make decisions…
/r/MensRights31/12/24 07:44 AM
10

Good luck. You have a lot of careful work to do. It's no easy thing to moderate such a controversial sub and actually see it grow/define itself. Is wish you all the best.
/r/MensRights02/08/21 02:53 PM
15

Don't lower yourself to her level.
/r/MensRights06/06/20 07:42 AM
1

Have you ever been to r/trollxchromosomes They're waaaay worse about generalizing for men. It's gotten to the point where everyone is super defensive because both sides make sweeping generalizations about gender
/r/MensRights26/05/20 04:46 AM
4

This is probably /s but it's not well done /s either...
/r/MensRights03/05/20 12:37 AM
5

What the fuck are you talking about?
/r/MensRights03/05/20 12:32 AM
13

Twitter is a dumpster fire anyway. Just walk away and let the babies cry to each other.
/r/MensRights02/04/20 05:04 PM
2

I think their complaint primarily refers to the comments on pictures of random girls/Instagram models rather than any kind of relationship. For example, a comment like "This girl looks so much better without make-up." triggers the angry responses I mentioned because the model in the picture is usually wearing make-up. Part of the problem is that girls feel damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they wear make-up and it's noticeable then people tell them they like no make-up better. If th…
/r/MensRights16/03/20 08:40 PM
7

Just a heads up, this is a REALLY unpopular thing to say to girls on Reddit. A lot of girls wholeheartedly believe that men have no idea if women are wearing a lot of make-up or not much at all and that we're wrong about our observations 99% of the time. Maybe they're right or maybe they aren't. I just see so many irritated posts and comments about it so I wanted to let you know.
/r/MensRights16/03/20 09:28 AM
2

It's usually called toxic masculinity when men act inappropriately/sexist and internalized misogyny when women do the same kind of stuff. It's got a nicer ring to it, right? It sounds more victimizing and less responsible. Personally, I just call it a double standard.
/r/MensRights16/03/20 09:07 AM
2

I don't know about the articles, but I have seen plenty of examples on Reddit where people (mostly women I presume) use a phrase similar to "unpaid emotional labor" more broadly. I think the way you define it is accurate, but the day to day use seems to have boiled down to apply whenever a woman is asked/expected to listen to other peoples' problems and offer sympathy when she would rather not be involved. Don't get me wrong, it's definitely a lot of work either way and no one should be forced t…
/r/MensRights22/10/19 08:13 AM
7

Interesting read. I think you make some valid observations about the double standards for how our society handles infidelity. I'm not sure why you focus so much on the 1990s. You started out talking about history and then glossed over some of the most important events that created modern gender tensions like the industrial revolution and the invention of birth control (both of which happened yesterday in the context of the history of humankind). I think a lot of fence sitters and skeptics of men…
/r/MensRights04/09/19 06:06 AM
1

Eh, there's time for facts, statistics, and peer reviewed articles. There's also a time to oversimplify, meme, and have a sarcastic chuckle. This is not some legitimate graph. It's just an image to represent a feeling/general attitude. Lighten up.
/r/MensRights30/08/19 02:10 AM
11

Tough request. I could agrue that ultra rich people have the resources to keep their private lives and finances as secret as possible compared to the average person. The owners/CEOs of BMW, Mars, H&M all came from inherired wealth (just to name a few)
/r/MensRights30/08/19 01:23 AM
2

It's thought provoking and interesting. That being said, it's not useful for finding a good job after graduating.
/r/MensRights13/07/19 05:38 AM
10

I feel like the problem resides in both parties consenting to have unsafe sex. In which case, accidental pregnancy should be handled with extreme care and consideration. But instead, the pregnant girl has 100% of the power and deciding vote on any issue related to her body (which is fair). At the same time, the man deserves an opinion/vote about the situation. Let's not put all unplanned pregnancies in the same pile. Women can be careless about sex too.
/r/MensRights24/03/19 03:43 PM
5

👏👏👏
/r/MensRights24/03/19 03:32 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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