TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MrPoochPants Archive

View 1 post and 125 comments by MrPoochPants 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)
2

No, wife material is used to describe a woman who has traits or behaviors that men find attractive, or otherwise 'cool'. If you're into cars, which is a predominately male hobby, and then meet a woman who has that same hobby, then she would be 'wife material'. It's about women who are desirable for their traits, particularly traits not directly related to their physical appearance.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 06:43 PM
4

Gotta be honest, this all sounds immature and insanely insecure. But, hey, if you're in your early 20's, that's definitional, so have at. Maybe it's an age thing, but the idea of having a partner around who you can enjoy your life with, be emotionally AND physically intimate with, who genuinely cares about you, does things to make your life better and not because they have to or because its expected but because they want to, sounds vastly better than what amounts to a living fleshlight.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 06:40 PM
1

Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe everyone else is missing something, but aren't these generalizations about those people who can't find partners? All the cases of "Well there's plenty of women who are successful and found someone" are missing that those women aren't who OP's really talking about. Successful women with partners aren't saying that men are intimidated by them, with respect to dating. Tall women dating shorter men aren't complaining about not finding a partner because they can'…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 12:55 AM
1

Also, stop fuckin' stalking me. You're very clearly going through my comment history, first to reply to something I said 8 years ago and don't even entirely agree with anymore, and now in a completely different subreddit. If you continue, I'm just going to end up blocking you.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 01:41 AM
1

Yes, because men complimenting me is, by and large, rather meaningless. I don't care that a man thinks my muscles look good, or that I've lost weight. I didn't do any of that for him. It's appreciated, but it's overall value to my self esteem and validation isn't very high. I go through my entire life discarding the opinions of others, because I don't define myself by their valuation of me - certainly no where near to the level in which women define themselves by the opinions of others. But, aga…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 01:38 AM
1

"I find it sad that no one gives me compliments." Yes, but consider: Who's compliments do you care more about? A. Those that you're trying to attract, and who directly validate not only your desirability, but accordingly also your perceived value? B. Compliments from those you generally aren't trying to attract and who's validation you generally don't desire? A grandparent, or even a parent, could give you a compliment, but it doesn't really mean as much as a really gorgeous model, with an A+ pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 01:23 AM
2

Because the men are complaining about not receiving that type of affection back. ...because not all men engage in affection in exactly the same manner. You basically ignored my entire point and anecdotal examples to repeat your thesis. Neither of my fathers were particularly physically affectionate with me. That didn't mean they didn't love me, or that they didn't show it in other ways. Your argument basically boils down to "Men, as a group, don't engage in affection in exactly the same way that…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/23 09:28 AM
4

For example the parent who’s always present and showing affection will be the one the child is likely endeared to and show that same affection back toward. Part of the issue, though, is you're basing this standard of "Who cares more" near-exclusively on how women show affection. I know my step-father cares about me. I knew my father cared about me. But the way my fathers showed it was very different to how my mother did. My step-father is the sort of guy that will go last on basically everything…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/23 03:43 AM
6

No, equality is. Equality is concerned with equal opportunities. Equality would give everyone 100 dollars so they could all have an equal opportunity to invest. Everyone ends up being treated the same, but obviously each person's individual circumstances are different, and so for some investing 100 dollars is everything and for others it is nothing. Equity is concerned with equal outcomes, and so to achieve equal outcomes with unequal circumstances, values, inputs/outputs, and so on, you need to…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/03/21 04:08 AM
1

Porn is the reason men are pressuring women into anal sex. Is it? Can you provide any evidence to support this claim? Most women don't like anal sex, yet a man will ask her for it anyway. Do most women not like anal sex? Again, can you provide some corroborating evidence of this? Also, keep in mind that I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that you're making claims without supporting information/evidence. Also what woman likes a man to cum on her face? Some women absolutely …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/18 10:29 PM
2

Half of that video the dude was making him look like a fucking idiot, who the fuck would script that? Because it's funny and entertaining. Because it allows the guy to crack jokes the whole time. Fuck sake, if the other guy is going to run, why does he keep stopping and hanging around the 'bounty hunter' and not ditching him altogether, to only then drop to the floor afterwards and turn himself in? The whole thing is obviously staged... It's funny as hell, but it's staged. Here's another...
/r/PussyPass24/10/18 03:40 AM
7

Because, none of it happened. It's all staged. Seriously, think about how that all goes down. Why would the guy run like that? What would he run like a cartoon character from the guy? Why's he such a damned good comedian while running? Why is he not actually running, but instead just giving up? But here's a wiki about him... which isn't amazingly compelling, but... here's another video calling him out. Seriously... just look at the videos. Ask yourself, is this how a real bounty hunter would ope…
/r/PussyPass24/10/18 03:20 AM
16

All of this guy's show is fake... It's entertaining, but it's fake as fuck.
/r/PussyPass23/10/18 10:29 PM
2

If it's any consolation, as I've gotten older, I find comparatively older women more attractive, and the younger 18 to 20-something women to be... a comparative headache. In your case, you're 22, so most of the women around your age are trying to party, have fun, go to bars, drink, etc. Well, think about the conversations you have with those sort of women. Now let's hypothetically say that you're able to date someone that's 16 (without it being weird). What sort of conversations do you think you…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/18 06:39 PM
1

I don’t respect lacking awareness nor stupidity 😈 Too many ppl fall in that Venn. Agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/18 08:49 PM
1

Eh. I don’t respect conservatives who abide by bootstrap mentality. “I’ve gotten here on my own through working hard and goal setting!” - a person luckily born into high socioeconomic status and network That's the point, though. Some of that thought process is 100% right. Someone at the bottom that does nothing to help themselves isn't succeeding because of their own lack of effort, not because society put them down, or whatever. On the flip side, yea, some of it is 100% wrong, too. Some rich ki…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/18 08:44 PM
2

From what I've seen, at least, the biggest difference between conservatives and liberals is how they view the influences of personal responsibility vs. societal. Liberals generally view the problem and the solution to be one of the societal sphere. Conservatives, however, view it as more of the personal responsibility sphere. If we look at someone who's poor, conservatives will view it as 'They clearly aren't doing enough to be successful' ignoring all the other societal factors that are at play…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/18 08:36 AM
1

It's because the subtext is that she's already being pursued by a series of otherwise attractive men. What she's saying is she wants one of those guys to also have a sense of humor and make her laugh. It's like having people come in all the time offering you donuts Cake, and she says "I like sprinkles". She means, she wants some of the primo cake... but with sprinkles.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/18 12:07 AM
1

Also do you like cake or pie more? I prefer cake. Hey... I've got eggs.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/18 12:03 AM
1

Probably point of view. I see the sub as already having few female-supporting voices on a sub that should likely have more to produce quality debate. That said, from what I've seen of tiered comments, they've usually been fair and relatively consistent. I don't expect 100% consistency, and so the few inconsistencies I've seen I've made an attempt to point out. I just don't see the massive disparity that's often presented regarding the moderation.
/r/MensRights04/06/18 10:46 PM
1

The problem is that the moderation is used as a tool to silence non-feminist. Unfortunately, we're likely just going to disagree on this point, but I understand where you're coming from.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 08:56 AM
2

Do you agree that some moderation is needed? Would you agree that warning/banning people for insults and insulting generalizations is good for a sub intended for debate? I'm guessing that we actually don't agree all that much that moderation should be present, just the extent to which it should be involved and doing its job.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 11:01 PM
2

Well, I can be tiered down, if I wasn't lazy... and a few times at that... but I havn't HAD any mistakes for ~2 years now... so... -shrug- You can always ask for a lowering of tier every ~6 months, if memory serves. Permanent ban isn't necessarily permanent.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 05:57 PM
2

I have being tierd for saying "some feminist", but other user was not tierd for saying "all Jordan followers are fanatics". Without any more information on the specifics, I can say that you probably shouldn't have been... but, mistakes are made, and there's been a changing of the majority of the mod team every couple of years or so as people drop off their activity. It's also generally where we use the Meta sub to debate those sorts of calls. I've seen at least one tier get moved back to a sandb…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 03:56 PM
2

Too much can be a problem, I do agree, however, I do also think that the rules that are on the sub are very useful for keeping things relatively civil. The two major rules are no name calling and the other is regarding generalizations to give space for those that don't much up with one's generalization. For example, I can look to a lot of feminist groups and call them out as the trash that they are. However, there's a ton of people who identify as feminist who aren't like those trash feminists t…
/r/MensRights31/05/18 11:07 PM
2

All my comments were deleted because I was not "approved" to comment on the subreddit. That annoyed me, firstly because having to ask permission to participate on a forum specifically designated for debate is stupid, IMO, and secondly because you'd think the mods would have seen my user name and made an exception since the entire post was specifically about me. Hi Karen! Its really cool having a chance to speak to you, particularly since you're one of the individuals who started my interest in d…
/r/MensRights31/05/18 12:18 AM
2

As a pretty long-time poster and participant on the sub... no... no its not. Some calls are a bit bias, and we generally call them out and discuss them where appropriate. Perfect moderation is nearly impossible, and on the whole, our mods do a pretty good job - mind you I don't speak for the whole sub, but it's a far, far way from being /r/menslib. I'd have jumped ship a while ago if that were the case.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 12:08 AM
6

So why do they only pay the top women? Easily they could pay $20 to some Russian lady and she will do anything they want but instead they pay $20 to the top woman who just says thank you and ignores them. Because you're missing a lot of what makes the successful models so successful. Some if it definitely looks... but a large, large part of it is personality and connection. Back in the day, I use to frequent MFC, specifically. There were a few girls, in particular, who I'd visit every time they …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/18 04:29 AM
0

In fact, last time I checked, there were more women working on minimum wage than men. And the majority of homeless people are men, so... This idea that all women get money from having a vagina is dumb. I, generally speaking, agree with you on this, however.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/18 08:52 AM
1

Well, it does start to get better at about the 20-30 minute mark. Still not great, and still frustrating, but there's at least some progress with the conversation going on and the men on the right side of the panel are representing their position(s), again, better.
/r/MensRights09/05/18 10:06 PM
4

I've turned surfing through profiles on dating apps almost into a game. If I see an attractive woman, who's on the dating app, I guess if she has kids. Seemingly around 90% of them do. Granted, it makes a ton of sense, because you're talking about a woman in her ~30s, who's single.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/18 07:24 PM
0

No. A full-blown autist probably doesn't care what others think, still not very masculine. Neither does a coma patient. Does that make them alpha? Of course not, because your statement is dumb and removes the relevant context of what OP is referring to. You're creating exceptions to what OP is saying, not addressing what they're saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 10:06 PM
2

I don't think that someone who's genuinely nice reacts the way they do to unreciprocated feelings. Why not? They're having to deal with the reality of rejection, investing time and affection into an individual and not having that being reciprocated, and that the reality they've been told is all a lie. Just because they're nice doesn't mean that they're not hurt and lashing out. Just because they're nice doesn't mean that they can't also be angry and lash out. Just because they're nice doesn't me…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/18 06:21 PM
8

That explanation is too simple because it disregards the fact that someone who's actually nice, instead of merely pretending to be nice I don't think 'nice guys' are pretending to be nice, though. They're being nice because they want to be, but also because they want it to show that they're a good and valuable person. They're upset because they're told that women want good men, and as men have attempted to project that they are also a good man, but are instead rejected. The reality is that attra…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/18 05:17 PM
12

What may work in the future is to remain excessively calm. In comparison, they'll look even MORE nutty, and they're less likely to be believed. If you're not worked up, its because you know that you've done nothing wrong. I mean, think of that situation from if you were the cop and the you in that situation had been completely and totally calm while she was off shouting her nutty head off. You'd explain the situation calmly and politely and every time she shouts, stop talking and start over. Not…
/r/PussyPass11/09/17 09:22 AM
1

You never have to prove innocence, the state has to make it's case. Sure, but with affirmative consent, there's now added facets to the interaction that they can use against you. Rather than 'did you have consent', they can use 'did you have affirmative consent?'. At the end of the day, affirmative consent is meant to increase the number of cases where someone does not have consent compared to a situation that is not prescribing to affirmative consent. We end up in more complicated situations, w…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 03:41 PM
1

How? Affirmative consent just means that both of you actively want to have sex. Consent doesn't have to be verbal. How would one go about proving that they had consent when that consent was non-verbal? What if the consent given was more subtle, or what if the given consent under any normal circumstance would be considered in the affirmative, but the other party gave a plausible explanation as to why such a cue was given, and claims that it wasn't actually intended as such? Oh, and since rape is …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 05:50 AM
4

Why do these threads always devolve into being about extorted sex when that isn't the topic at all. Probably because talking about the nuances of something like 'freezing up' during sex is complicated and isn't as cut and dry. Do we blame the guy because he doesn't recognize the signs and is otherwise under the impression that everything is on the up-and-up? Do we blame the girl (of course not) for freezing up and not expressing that she wasn't consenting? I mean, its a genuinely difficult probl…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 05:44 AM
5

Somehow because I was born with a vagina, it means I should never be alone in public. That's not what anyone is proposing. People are suggesting doing activities that increase your risk. Your gender, in this situation, is not a hugely relevant factor. The issue is risk and risky behavior. Consider, for example, that men are the predominate victims of violence - particularly by other men. So when we consider men getting drunk and having a 'night out on the town', they're doing the exact same thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 05:40 AM
24

There's a distinct difference between blame and responsibility. I'm responsible for my own well being, but that doesn't mean I'm to blame is someone manages to attack me. I'm responsible for reducing my risk factors, or not, but that doesn't mean I'm to blame if someone takes advantage of me while my risk factors are increased. There's a subtle distinction between responsibility and blame, and the two terms are often used interchangeably. Someone shouldn't abuse me, but shitty people exist in th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 05:35 AM
2

Kobe's ex got a divorce settlement in the hundreds of millions and probably never hit a layup in her life. I, too, love Bill Burr.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/17 08:37 PM
1

I have a very light preference for women that are shorter than me, but I certainly wouldn't turn down a woman who was taller - although I'm at ~5'11", and I do think that the taller she gets, the weirder it starts to get. So, if she's 5'11" too? no biggie. 6'3"? that's a little off, but alright. 6'6"? Ok, this is getting awkward.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 06:36 PM
1

but most (white) men are able to walk around cops without being afraid Well, what about the fact that, in terms of raw numbers, its actually white men that get killed more often by the police? Now in terms of percentage-of-population, black men lead, but again, in terms of raw numbers, white men die to police at a rate of 2 to 1.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 09:21 PM
1

A man who goes on a date with me does have to pay, but that is mainly to weed out the women are entitled cunts who expect free stuff embittered types, who are the ones who don't like to pay. Wait, wait wait, so you 'weed out' a set of men by doing the very action that said group of men are complaining about? Wouldn't it be easier to just pay for the dinner yourself, rather than expect the guy to do so, and then see how the guy reacts, or if the guy is legitimately impressed and more attracted to…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 06:34 PM
7

PS being against the insane idea of "financial abortion" doesn't make one against "men having reproductive rights." nobody outside of MRA groups actually wants that shit I don't think the idea is so much insane as it is not great for the greater society. If its a woman's right to choose to carry the child to term, how can you call it equality to then force the man to pay for that child if he never had a choice in the first place - particularly if we're going with the argument that sex isn't cons…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/17 07:51 PM
3

but there is, imo, more rape-apologism in the deeper reaches of the manosphere I think a lot of this is also affected by the way we look at and treat male and female sexuality. I mean, we high five boys that have sex with their teachers, yet lend emotional support to girls who have sex with theirs - we basically assume that the girl didn't want it, and the boy did. In many cases, when alcohol is involved, we've seen courts and prosecutors basically assert that only the guy could have raped anyon…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 05:03 PM
1

women are raised knowing that their body is desirable and valuable to men and that rape, therefor, is a tangible threat Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the majority of rapes are not necessarily based around an idea of physical desire or lust, which is a large part of why 'what was she wearing?' is so egregiously unhelpful. Men rarely if ever fear that they may be raped outside of prison. What they fear and what actually happens doesn't always line up with reality, though. Far more women are af…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/16 06:57 PM
1

The problem is that most women who wouldn't do that are the silent majority, keyword being 'silent'. You let the crazy radicals steer the ship, controlling the political actions that push for misandrist new laws that harm men, while you passively remain in the background. This is a problem in literally every single movement currently in existence. It takes a lot of work, mentally, to remember to constantly separate the majority from the loud minority. Its a huge reason why you just shouldn't tal…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/16 07:12 AM
2

So they are just intrinsically toxic? The sort of person that doesn't care for others is toxic. The sort of individual who's a complete narcissist and who's only goal is to get off, the other person is on their own, is toxic. If both people are just interested in 'getting theirs' then fine, but what RP theory is promoting is the one-sided case, not the mutual one. It says that you should assume women are all shit and then act accordingly. Its caustic to the view of women, and caustic to men in c…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/16 03:32 PM
1

Jesus Christ are there pieces of shit people in ALL walks of life. I can agree. Corporate executives? Please.. they're the worst (like the attorney I met who cheated on her hubby, jumps from man to man and has a dungeon of sex toys hidden in her house). I'm not disagreeing that there are shitty people, however, and ideology that starts from the assumption, not that people are shitty, but that you should treat people shitty to get what YOU want is what I find shitty. Sure, some people are going t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/16 03:18 PM
1

So toxic to women, but not to men? No, its toxic to men, who are then toxic TO women. Its really not good for either - well, those guys that don't give a fuck and just want to get laid, but whatever, THEY are toxic in that case. This seems to rely on the patriarchal idea that it is the man's role to protect the woman. I... don't see where you're connecting those dots. For example, is it not toxic to men that women never initiate? No, it totally is. I'm pretty sure that was what I was saying in m…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/16 01:50 AM
3

I know guys like that and I can always just wonder why they don't realize why it is like that. They aren't successful with women, they are successful with a certain type of women, because they rely on the same strategy over and over again. Its selection bias. They pass or move on from the women that it doesn't work on, likely making a short mental rationalization of why their strategy didn't work (so, 'psh, dumb bitch'). They aren't remembering the exception to their 'rule' (the women it doesn't…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/16 12:17 AM
1

Yet you call it toxic (to men?) No, I'm saying that aspects of RP theory suggest that women are fuckin' idiots and that the best way to get sex, not a relationship but sex, is to treat them as such. I'm saying that the end-goal of RP theory, in many cases, is to pump-and-dump. That the few situations where relationships are maintained, RP theory's approach to relationships is to be an abusive partner. RP theory has a few good points, at best, and among those are that self-improvement is key and …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/16 10:10 PM
1

I think you're kind of reinforcing my point here...
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 04:47 PM
1

To clarify here... most men would actually be thrilled to have a woman initiate and have a woman give them attention for once. and there's a clear difference in my statement about initiating, and attention, compared to the exceptional cases of what amounts to literal sexual harassment. Those things aren't creepy, those things are things you report to the authorities. Again, I'm talking about men being approached by women - asked, out of the blue, what they're listening to, or that they think he …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 04:13 PM
1

So, we'll assume that red pill is right and no man has ever been creepy. No, some men are absolutely creepy. Some men actively TRY to be creepy, a bit like trolls offend people for fun. Other men are creepy because they actively don't care - these guys probably fall under the same category as cat-callers. Then the problem is that they're ugly and hitting on girls who are attractive. Not always. Besides, attractive is somewhat subjective. Don't they want to know this? Actually, it would probably …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 04:03 PM
1

If a man wouldn't like it, why would a woman?? I'm pretty sure that, given the dynamic of who does the majority of the initiating, and who gets the majority of the attention, most men would actually be thrilled to have a woman initiate and have a woman give them attention for once. Again, a really big problem with ALL of this is the imbalance inherent in the societal expectation of who is doing the majority of the initiation.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 03:38 PM
1

Please give those men a detailed description of how to do this, because last I checked, men don't exactly have a manual on how to be bold, confident, and forward while also not being creepy. We don't have a 'here's how to approach women' class in school - and that class would be a failure simply due to how absolutely impossible it would be to account for all possibilities. It doesn't help, at all, that many of our romance movies show legitimately creepy behavior as romantic gestures, of which th…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 03:36 PM
1

God, the way you describe it, it's a wonder that the human species has managed to continue on for so long! Billions of men have figured out how to talk to a woman, I don't know how to help you if you can't. And many of them have been labeled creepy for it. Before I go further, let me also clarify here there are creepy men, and that the existence of legitimately creepy men (women too), is why its so easy to label men as creepy - its easy to throw someone into a pile that already exists. The issue…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 03:33 PM
2

Dude, men who are creepy are creep shamed. What's creepy? What defines creepy? This has nothing to do at all with how often women approach men. If men never had to approach, and women did, don't we expect men being creepy would drop rather dramatically? Don't do mental gymnastics to somehow blame women not hitting on you more often to defend your creepiness. Yes, because we're talking about me here, not you know, being compassionate for the fact that men are expected to all the work, and get all…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 06:14 AM
1

You seem to have something against men to just assume that they all just want to fuck you and throw you away. Some guys do actually want a relationship, marriage, whatever... that doesn't mean they can't also want sex inside of that relationship, that its not the first, second, or even third thing they value most. Not all guys are dumb-ass, horn-dogs that just want to fuck and run.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 02:53 AM
1

Women approach exactly as often as they need and want to. Exactly, and my point here is that men end up unduly blamed for being creepy, etc, more often because of how the system works. Men end up demonized because women don't have to approach in the same way or at the same rate - as a group, mind you.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 12:28 AM
1

I mean genuine, non sexual interest. I think at least a part of this problem is that there's a lot of assumptions made of men, and their sexuality, such that all they're supposedly interested in is sex. Its really easy to assume that a guy's interest in someone is sex, and only sex, but just because someone has a sexual interest in someone else doesn't mean that they only have a sexual interest in that person. Some people lack character, some people end up thinking a bit too much with their horm…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 12:20 AM
1

An ugly girl stops you on the street and compliments your shirt. Whatever, right? Whatever. Exactly. 'Thank you.' and move on. I don't think she's creepy for giving me a compliment - but here's the deal, I'll totally give woman some pass on that, because I understand that with the current dynamic, with men being expected to do the lion's share of initiating, that any randomly selected guy is going to be thrilled to get basically any attention whereas a woman might otherwise be inundated with so …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 12:11 AM
2

When I don't have my headphones in, and I'm not on the way somewhere urgent. Ok, so what if Channing Tatum, or someone gorgeous and perfect, comes up to you with your headphones in? Same treatment? and I'm not on the way somewhere urgent How would one know this without asking?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 11:58 PM
1

If a man is showing genuine interest in me, ain't nothing creepy about that. So, is a 'creepy' guy not showing genuine interest? A lot of guys who get clowned for approaching have 'off', unnatural mannerisms that unnerve women. So... its ok to bully or shit on people for being different and 'off'? Awkward guy comes up to a woman and asks for her number. Does he deserve to get put on blast for daring to ask?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 11:56 PM
1

Sure. But on the whole, they're not, right? So it seems to me that at least half of the problem is that women do all the non-approaching, leaving the men to do it all and, in some cases, fuck it all up.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 11:54 PM
2

There are better times to approach than when someone is trying to get in their zone and escape people's bullshit. Ok, so hypothetically, lets say I'm trying to approach you and just so happen to run into you a lot (so, I'm not following you or anything, but I have a limitless number of possible approach opportunities for the sake of the question). When would be a 'good' time to approach you?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 11:52 PM
4

Or... women could approach too and it not be an issue that only men face, and where only men end up with creepy as a label?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 11:50 PM
4

What about those guys that just show a genuine interest in you, but otherwise approach at a time when you'd rather they not? I mean, there's plenty of cases where guys simply approached and got put on blast for it. Wasn't there a guy that asked a woman out on an elevator, so she put him on blast on social media? (I'm fuzzy on the details now)
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 11:49 PM
2

I know others are asking the question about if X person felt raped, etc. but lets run through a few scenarios, if you'd be willing to humor me. Now, in the context of the following, who was and was not raped is completely unknown. Lets say that person A comes out and says they feel raped. Person B also comes out and says they feel raped. Who goes to jail? Who raped who? Could they both rape each other? Lets say that person A was raped, but person B comes out and says they were raped before perso…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/16 07:49 AM
1

Without her going through childbirth, HE would have no child. He could adopt. He doesn't need her to give birth. Again. You're gonna have the woman give birth, & then make her go to war after? And you're going to only select men to go off to get shot, regardless of if they have a partner who has born them a child? You're going to only select men to get shot, period?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/16 08:52 AM
1

Only if they both wish to do so. Why? Men don't get the choice in going to war, right? Why should women get the choice in staying home or not? Then he doesn't have to provide if he didn't want the child. I think MRAs are fighting for some sort of "paternal surrender" thing. Whatever, he can do that. As much as I think men are in a bad spot for children they don't want, LPS is, unfortunately, far too complicated of a problem to simply allow men to not have to pay for the child. I mean, the child …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/16 08:36 AM
1

Another thought since I was thinking of Theodore Roosevelt. The context in which he said "birth pangs make all men the debtors of all women" was in a speech where he said that women's civic duty was to give birth, and men's was to go to war, and that men and women who shirk those duties should be equally shamed and despised. And this was said in 1908 - over 100 years ago. Again, its regressive. Further, this concept of inherent duties... I mean, its like with the pay gap, 'women have the duty to…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/16 08:27 AM
1

Well helping provide for, and protect, women (and children) is the least men could do in compensation for all that women go through in order to bring men's children into the world & continue the human race. Again, regressive. If that's our goal, then women should be at home, tending to the children, while the man provides. What incentive does he have to burden any of that responsibility, especially if its all for a child he didn't want in the first place? What does he get out of the exchange? Al…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/16 07:55 AM
1

But if there is a draft, it would be unfair to draft women too because it presents women with a double burden men don't have to deal with. See, the way I see it, women have the burden of child birth, and in many cases, the burden of raising the child. Men, on the other hand, have the burden of their value as a person is almost exclusively tied to their utility and their ability to produce resources. They don't have an inherent worth, which is why its far easier to justify sending them off to die…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/16 07:23 AM
1

Well I don't think we should make women die sooner but men live longer. Well sure, and I think we should have fewer women die every year from child birth, but that's not how biology works - unfortunately. I mean, it seems like it comes down to 'because she might die in child birth, we're sending you off to war to maybe die, too.' Like, doesn't that, at the very least, seem completely unrelated? And doesn't sending only men off to war perpetuate some really negative views about men and whether we…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/16 06:40 AM
1

then IF we draft women I'm more inclined towards not having the draft, or selective service presently, but lets explore this a bit, because you bring up an interesting point. If I'm interpreting what you're saying correctly, you're suggesting that women are inherently in an unfair position because of their biology, and thus, being drafted is a sort of balancing effect for the burden that women endure due to childbirth, correct? However, my counter-argument is that the draft, as well as the compl…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/16 06:12 AM
2

I once lost a girl being a nice guy by asking her permission to kiss her, she told me its a total turn off to ask. I than gave her a speech about Informed consent and how she wasn't a sex object. Its the double-bind. Do you put extra emphasis on consent, especially since many feminists are supporting this idea, or perhaps because you're afraid of potentially getting accused of some malfeasance, OR, do you just go for it and hope you don't end up jail over it all? Tack on something like 'revoking…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 10:21 PM
5

I actually think /u/pcofo's answer, here, is probably one of the best you're going to get that's reasonable. A comment down they claim its the 'swiss cheese' of RP, which technically it is, but actually its more akin to RP if it were a piece of candy that you dropped and then washed off. What's the core thing that really make RP work, and that isn't inherently rooted in thinking of people negatively? Self-improvement. Be kind to people. ALL people, whether it's the person who makes your coffee o…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 05:46 PM
2

reverse racism Isn't a thing. Its still just racism. What is the spirit, the general meaning, the purpose behind the term 'racism'? Its the hatred of a person, or a group of people, based upon their race. Reverse racism is a reaction to people using the phrase 'black people can't be racist to white people', wherein they're using the justification that black people lack institutional power. This is exactly the point I was making, though, with my post. Because the terms being used aren't clear, yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 05:25 AM
2

You can do a sexist thing, but not be a misogynist. Further, you can disagree with someone about a point, usually that has an impact on women, and not be a sexist, and by extension, also not a misogynist.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 04:28 AM
3

I would argue, instead, that the whole point of a dictionary definition, to cite a dictionary definition, is to be clear in what someone is talking about. As an example, someone would say that black people can't be racist. Now, what they fail to do in this situation is to be more clear with their terms. What they actually MEAN to say is that black people can't be institutionally racist, because black people do not have institutional power, or at least this is the general consensus. Black people …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 04:26 AM
3

But I think it's usage remains under the same definition. So, are you suggesting that, if things continue like they are, the word misogynist, for example, will be roughly equivalent to "well, he wasn't nice to that one woman once. What a misogynist."? Because, as I see it, a lot more people are using the word to basically attack someone, to basically call them the rough equivalent for a racist or homophobic, to basically label them in a way that they back away from their position, not because th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 04:10 AM
1

I'm not interested in more people being in jail. Mandatory minimums are a problem. Recidivism is a huge problem. The private prisons are a problem. All conspire to make people quick to just toss someone into the system, not caring that there is a good chance we lose them forever to being conditioned to no longer function well in normal society. On this we agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/16 05:17 PM
1

And there are more innocents than the people who are falsely accused. We really don't know the rate of false accusations for many crimes, especially rape (for example). Those who are victimized and find not justice in the system are just as much victimized and not balancing their needs with the rest is, in my opinion, missing the point of the justice system. But now you're suggesting that the victimized should be better served by our justice system, and the means of doing so is by making it easi…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/16 04:32 PM
1

That's why we have to keep tweaking until we find that sweet spot that does well to protect the innocent and progresses further towards dealing with the guilty. See, I'm not so sure that 'tweaking' is the right answer. The #1 priority, at all times, should be protecting the innocent. That means that some people WILL go free. Tweaking implies that we're willing to make some acceptable loses. Acknowledging our lack of perfection is not granting acceptable losses, however, its acknowledging that wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/16 11:53 PM
1

No matter the determination to prevent the innocent from being judged guilty, it will happen. Certainly, but the response to 'we're also bad at keeping innocent people out of jail' isn't to then just scrap the whole thing. We recognize that we're not perfect and that's exactly WHY we go with innocent until proven guilty. We HAVE to go with innocent until proven guilty, especially because of the very real implications if we didn't. I mean, honestly, if we made something like rape easier to convic…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/16 11:17 PM
6

Conscription has never been tied to voting in the US. What I'm talking about is that all men did not have the right to vote, and it was because of conscription, and the fact that said men weren't able to vote for what wars they were and were not going into, essentially, that they were given the right to vote. To put it another way, its a bit like how at 18 you can join the military in the US where you can get shot, but you can't have a shot, due to the drinking age being 21. Well, you had to hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/16 07:50 AM
3

The draft ain't never gonna happen again. So certain? So why not have everyone being included on the books, just in case? Warfare is so far removed from the old "boots on the ground" strategy of decades past. Its working its way there, but how do we know that we won't end up with an enemy where we have to have boots on the ground? But I do think everyone, male and female, should serve a year for their country, similar to what Israel does. The US is about freedom, which includes the freedom to ch…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/16 06:58 AM
4

Little wonder that coupled with PTSD, war veterans who get divorced upon coming back to the country are at the highest risk of anyone for suicide. Oh, hey, don't forget homelessness too!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/16 06:56 AM
8

I think she's confused as to what feminism is. To be fair, this largely depends upon how you define feminism. If you define feminism as 'equality for everyone', then sure. If you define feminism as 'equality for women', then you could exclude men from that equality, and basically just take the good shit. Now, I'd ideologically agree with you on the first interpretation, although I see far too much of the second to really think of feminism as 'equality for everyone'.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/16 06:55 AM
1

Feminism is 'better equipped', in the sense that if feminism were to make men's issues a priority, that men's rights would get a huge boost. I'm not sure that feminism is ideologically capable of doing that though.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/16 02:14 PM
4

I have literally never heard of them. Perhaps we need to promote them more? Still, are they publicly advocating to change the system, or are they just working within it?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/16 02:12 PM
1

I agree with you, it isn't quite the same but then neither is the environment with which one would work within. I even still, maybe AVFM'S is that threatened group, and maybe they are the way forward. Or, maybe, they're the bad option that will end up getting moved forward because we don't nuture and foster a better option. Besides, with all the talk about equality, shouldn't everyone else, feminists included, be looking to assist a better option than AVFM? Isn't that actually in their best inte…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/16 02:11 PM
10

There has never been any significant effort, if any effort at all, to help men in need. Yet MRA can line Paul Elam's pockets like no tomorrow. Elam, the founder of the Men's Rights website A Voice for Men, was able to raise something like $50K in just a few days for the "security" for his little get together in Detroit a couple years ago, which he admittedly spent about $7K on security, and pocketed the rest (which received no criticism from MRA). That money could have gone to help homeless men,…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/16 03:08 AM
3

To be fair, this is due to Title XI, mostly, and that's nation wide. Furthermore, the issue that's probably most alarming is not that its happening at universities, but the prestigious universities its happening at. We're talking about universities that are legitimately looking at adopting tumblrina ideology as policy. Trigger warnings in a college class? The fuck? Its college, where you're supposed to be a god damned adult, and be exposed to shit that's meant to shake you up, to make you questi…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:45 AM
6

Men are the ones concerned with how it looks, not women. I've actually been a part of another sub on this particular topic. The consensus is that a man's value, to women, is largely related to their masculinity. Men are less judgmental of other men, generally speak, whereas women are looking for 'manly men' because its also a reflection on themselves, of who they're able to attract, and due to social pressures of their own. Consider than a truly 'manly man', an alpha male if you will, doesn't ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 04:59 PM
5

The dating world is all about what you can bring to the table. Any attractive and (arguably depending on what show you analyse) intelligent person being with someone who doesn't bring either looks or brains or even thoughtfulness to the table is nobody's dream partner. How do you feel that the dynamics of this have changed with the shift from male-provider, more traditional roles to the much more varied, woman-empowered society we see today? I think dating still follows a lot more traditional ro…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 03:56 PM
9

Am I the only one around here that thinks two consenting individuals exploring their sexuality, during puberty, is not really wrong? I mean, we've got issues of age here and that's really it. I mean, who the hell cares if a boy sends his girlfriend a video of his dick, especially if she's reciprocating, or if the video was the reciprocation. I think Dave Chappelle did a bit on this, How old is 15 really?
/r/MensRights11/07/14 08:20 AM
1

So, again, i will ask for a definition of patriarchy, so that i might better understand . If i am using the term incorrectly, i would like to correct that so i might come to a more correct opinion or stance on the issue. If you do not have a definition, where might i find one, a link with a decent definition is preferred, so i might better understand. Educate me on what patriarchy is, otherwise, i have to come to the conclusion that it does not exist, at least not as it is often referred. I have…
/r/MensRights25/06/14 05:15 AM
1

I tell you what, can you define Patriarchy to me? Perhaps I am failing to understand the definition or meaning. Could I use 'culture' in its place? The issue if child support being enforced is an interesting issue. Again, the point isn't to have fathers leaving their partner and child with nothing. On the whole I am in support of child support. The problem comes into those situations where the father had no real choice in becoming a father. If I have a partner, and we are in agreement that we do…
/r/MensRights25/06/14 12:56 AM
1

Yea, but I'd rather pick a better term, like egalitarian, as stated as an answer to my question of this topic. It fits much better. I'm for gender equality, period, and I'm against those that prescribe to the idea that one gender is inherently more oppressed than the other. This term lets me distance myself from them while also supporting the positive ideals. I avoid the backlash of being "pro-man" and still get to be "pro-woman". I honestly just don't get why the other sides even matter. Like p…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 09:55 AM
2

I may have to then, yea. I still have a sort of inherent qualm about using the term feminist, though. It comes with a lot of baggage, even if i do find the "right" feminism, but i still feel like other terms would better suit the goal.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 08:57 AM
2

Anything not having to do with equality under the law is feelings/emotions. Or, it could from a desire for actual equality? I mean, i get that it is largely emotionally charged, a good portion of it, sure, but to say that one's interest in not getting screwed over is purely emotion is just nonsense. Name one right that men have that women do not have. So, being a man, and being unable to name one, i should just assume and act in such a way as though they do not exist? I mean, lets grant that the…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 08:03 AM
2

Then you should reject the criticism of Second Wave Feminism that CHS has done because she's a Feminist and Farrell was a former Feminst. The point is you don't have someone from an alternative view making a critique. If I am trying to get at the truth of a matter, i don't ask someone who already believes that thing to be true. How am i ever going to discuss the merits of, say, patriarchy, if those that academically discuss is are all feminists that believe in patriarchy? They'd have to be schol…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 04:31 AM
0

And more ad hominem. thanks.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 03:49 AM
1

Yes, and that's exactly why i was asking for a group, such as Egalitarian. If we can get a group together, that agrees that both genders, and everything in between, has problems, and that we need to address those problems, we can actually get some work done. Instead we have bickering. We have those that do not understand the MRAs, and we have those that are a part of Feminism but do not understand all the baggage that comes with. Even still, i imagine that BOTH come with baggage and that being a…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 03:03 AM
2

Ok, agreement overall... And, as I said, there are lots of groups and movements that deal with the rights of all humans already. Yes, but having a singular title someone could identify with, a set of ideals, that is equality for all people across the board, allows for discussion amongst others. If someone were to tell me they were feminist, i'd say why? why are you not an Egalitarian instead? If you're for gender equality, you'd be better served as an Egalitarian. Instead we have people that ide…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:59 AM
2

Please clarify by what you mean by "rights" I don't think i've ever used the term rights, at least not in any sense outside of what someone should be entitled to in a given situation. In something like custody law, it should be the right of both parents to have custody of the child, from the word go. So rights, in my particular set of arguments, is not really very useful of a term. I'm usually talking in more of a broad term with 'issues', and not really rights. They are related, sure, and right…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:51 AM
2

I believe what he is trying to say, essentially, is that feminist theory is something heavily ingrained in academia and that trying to come up with legitimate arguments grants no merit. Basically, in academia, the idea that feminism ISN'T in the right is held with contempt. It is asserted that feminist theory is the case, and arguments made to oppose that idea are met with derision. If i were to walk into a scientific platform, my argument would stand and fall on its merits. Instead, with femini…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:31 AM
2

OK, I can follow that. My main contention, then, is that there are those that identify with feminism that are very much willing, or even looking for, something that addresses both issues without being an ideology. People need to fit into a box, and if we have a box label, for example, Egalitarian, then they have an arena with which to debate those issues. As it stands now, I think the majority of it comes down to poo-flings and shouting matches. I would very much like to see something like, the …
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:16 AM
1

I'm sorry, were you making an argument or simply resorting to ad hominem attacks, because it looks like you're resorting to ad hominem attacks. You're one of those people that likes to shoot their mouth off on topics they don't know anything about aren't you? You should know it makes you look like a fool and it's annoying You need to quit yapping with your empty head and start listening to people who actually know some stuff. Yep, ad hominem attacks. I win by default, thanks. Still, i'll address…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:12 AM
2

I don't care about feelings. Where did i address feelings? Men do not have all the rights women do. But do they? I'd almost completely agree with you but you also ignore, by omission, the idea that women have areas where their rights are insufficient when compared to their male counterparts. "Men do not have all the rights women do" completely omits the idea that women MAY have the same issue on the other side. That's the EXACT same problem that feminism has when it comes to men's issues. Medica…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 02:05 AM
1

Except that they inherently focus on women's right, at the exclusion of mens right. And i dont mean complete exclusion, but i've yet to hear a feminist of any kind state that men have problems too and address those problems specifically and not throw it under some nonsense blanket term like patriarchy. I don't recognize patriarchy in the first place, define it and support its existence, but instead it is used as the scapegoat for men's problems when, ironically, a handful of men's problems are a…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 01:50 AM
2

While the method is effective, and while that is what I'm also thinking we should aim as well, it does not give us a means of identification nor a means of agreement amongst, say feminism or the MRM, by comparison.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 01:44 AM
1

The assumption that women are completely ahead of men is the very same reason why you hate feminism, it inherently excludes the idea that the other side might have problems too. Your bias is very clear, here, and the fact that you are not at the very least recognizing that, while you may not know what they are, that women have issues that need addressed as well, is very telling. If women are "ahead of men everywhere", support that. Give me a good reason to follow that. I think you'd be hard pres…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 12:49 AM
2

Yea, i am using 'ideology' as a means of describing a method of approaching the problem. So i do not mean to say that we should have a doctrine, at least in the same sense as feminism, but we should be attempting to make a better method. I think we're ultimately talking about the same things, i am probably just using the word ideology incorrectly as a means of trying to convey that method.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 12:47 AM
2

What makes you think feminist would listen to reason after intentionally ignoring male victims of sexual and domestic violence for decades to protect their power? You need to understand what kind of fight those who focus on men's issues are in. Because i recognize that there are those within both movements that would much rather focus on both sides rather than one at the exclusion of the other. I am and example: i would be feminist, as they generally support equality, but i feel they focus so he…
/r/MensRights24/06/14 12:45 AM
0

Could we not, instead, have an ideology who's objective is to address both sides equally? Feminism focuses on women, while simultaneously claiming to address men's issues. I question a lot of their asserted states of the status quo, why men or women have problems, but they do at least pretend to address both sides. MRA actively does not really address both sides. They have elements that they ultimately agree upon between the two, but they are not really concerned with addressing women's issues. …
/r/MensRights23/06/14 11:45 PM
1

See, i would agree with you, except i recognize that there were men's issues that never occured to me, that was never mentioned. It would be arrogant, or perhaps ignorant, of me to not acknowledge that there are probably some issues that women face of which i am not aware. Inherently focusing on one side makes us blind to the plight of the other.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 11:42 PM
2

but with a male focus on issue advocacy And this is, essentially, the same thing that feminism does, which is why i can't in good conscience identify with MRA. There's an inherent bias towards one side at the exclusion of the other. Even if i agreed that men are underrepresented or are now in the deficit of concern, or whatever, it still does not justify the ignoring of women's issues. Basically, if i wanted to address men's and women's issues, i should become a feminist, but then I basically ig…
/r/MensRights23/06/14 11:40 PM
3

I think there's a lot of women, and men, that recognize the flaws inherent in feminism, particularly the sort of ignoring of male issues and the distorting of fact to support feminist agenda. I would be hesitant to not also suggest that this probably also happens in the MRA. That said, i think the Egalitarian movement, shall we say, or EM, could actually find a place rather easily. I guarantee there are feminist men who are feminist only because they do not feel that the MRA supports women's iss…
/r/MensRights23/06/14 11:43 AM
2

Egalitarian. Perfect. Totally what i was looking for. To address your points, though, i agree that problems would abound, and in great number. I question, however, that an adversarial approach really solves anything. I mean, we have issues that are pretty cut and dry when the evidence is provided and some thought given to the issue. For example, we could address one of the MRA's issues, child custody, by forcing joint custody as default. We could fight injustices on a case-by-case basis. I suppo…
/r/MensRights23/06/14 10:38 AM
2

Perhaps ideology is the wrong word then? I mean, Humanism, to me, was the closest thing i could think of to identifying with that avoids the pitfalls of both side's approach to addressing men's and women's issues. What would one identify with that supports equality for both genders, and not at the exclusion of one or the other? Would it be pertinent to attempt to start an entirely new movement that treats the problem as one rather than as two edges of the same sword?
/r/MensRights23/06/14 09:43 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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