TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Queasy-Cherry-11 Archive

View 1 posts and 74 comments by Queasy-Cherry-11 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)
1

My sister and sister in law remodelled their house. Both are short, not especially strong women with no prior experience. The only tradesperson they hired was to blow in the insulation, because buying such equipment themselves didn't make sense. I, a woman, change my own oil. It's a simple task that any able bodied woman on this earth could handle after watching a single YouTube video. I've also fixed problems with my boiler and sink with similar ease. My now 60 year old mother taught me to chan…
/r/Divorce_Men26/04/25 05:23 AM
0

How often are you doing those "man tasks"? The only semi frequent one is mowing the lawn, and that's at most a weekly task. Dishes are done every day, several times a day. Likewise with laundry and cleaning when you have a small child. Stop pretending that's at all an equal contribution.
/r/Divorce_Men26/04/25 12:49 AM
–

Humans with the exact same biology as us have existed for 190,000 years. The oldest known civilisations are around 10,000 years old, and we don't have a clue what neolithic tribes thought about purity. Your understanding of 'all human history' is severely limited.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/23 11:09 AM
–

You are free to have whatever standards you want for a partner, but it's not biological. Purity is a very recent concept in human history. It only became a thing once private property and lineage did, aka when we stopped being nomadic. For 99% of our existence it mattered no more than it does to other apes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/23 09:45 AM
1

In what world are they not talked about enough? Women hear about how having sex lowers their value from long before they even know what sex is. It's not a slippery slope and it's not a 'standard' of men, it's simply incompatible men. That's not a bad thing, there are 8 billion people on this planet and we aren't supposed to all be compatible with each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/23 10:03 PM
1

I hate to burst your redpill bubble but women with a promiscuous past are not doomed to die alone. It may mean they are no longer viable options to a select group of men, but they were never going to be interested in those kinds of men anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/23 04:59 PM
1

This is such a non existent problem lol, how many women do you seriously think have body counts in the triple digits? Caring about 'the chase' is weird, why do you find it hotter when you have to convince a woman to be interested in you?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 03:56 PM
1

Consequences in this case being not getting to be some hypocrites bang maid, however will women survive?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 12:00 PM
2

No, it's like saying "getting eaten causes you to be fucking around in a lion cage". Causal direction is important.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 08:35 AM
1

Several studies have shown a correlation between cheating and having a higher body count, 0 have established causality. A causes B (people who cheat have higher body counts, because obviously) does not automatically mean B causes A. Fallacies are not factual. Security is absolutely a feeling lmao, just because feelings can be influenced by our environment doesn't mean they aren't feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 12:21 AM
2

That's not how oxytocin works, the number of sexual partners does not impact neurotransmitter capabilities. If you are going to use science words maybe have a basic understanding of that science.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 11:57 PM
1

I have enough savings to last me a year, and am in one of the most demand fields everywhere. I can find a new job in that time. I am monogamous so thus don't want a partner who's sleeping with other people, yes. Other people are polygamous and don't care. We aren't wired that way at all, evidence suggests we are wired the opposite and only conditioned for monogamy. It's not shaming tactics, that's what you said you wanted. If you find that shameful, well, maybe ask yourself why.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 11:53 PM
1

"Women thrive in abuse" is a new one.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 10:19 PM
1

There isn't a biological imperative to be with someone with a low body count lmao, humans were non-monogamous for 99% of our history until we stopped being nomadic and started caring about property and linage. Just like every other ape. Virginity is an entirely social and fairly young concept in terms of humanities existence. For example would you marry a rich man that paid all your bills treated you well but slept with other woman probably not. logically there's no reason not to. Being with him…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 09:09 PM
1

You understand this is a contradiction right? Women are not worth more than sex implies what you would want from women ideally is something other than sex. But you assert that women aren't worth that because they offered sex to too many men - sex that, as we've established, isn't the thing you really want from them. ​ This of course disproves the myth that men feel "insecure" or "emasculated" by promiscuous women. There's another guy in this very thread claiming it is in fact about ego and makin…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 06:10 PM
2

But if want you want is companionship etc, then surely what matters is that you are the one she is giving companionship to, not who she's given sex to. Just as the women you find special should feel special aren't special because you give them sex after giving sex to however many other women, they should feel special because of what you offer outside of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 06:01 PM
1

You understand this doesn't make sense right? Treating her special means treating her as if she is worth more than just sex. That means there must be something more than sex you want from her. Ergo it doesn't matter who else she 'gave' sex to, because sex isn't the thing you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:55 PM
5

I shared some links in another comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:43 PM
2

Doesn't that just mean he was wasting his life whilst he was PUA and advising his followers to do to the same? Or does it mean people can change their minds about what they want at different stages in their life, or want different things from different people (which you'd think could also apply to women)?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:42 PM
1

But we do know those reasons. We know how high our partners sex drives are, we know if they are religious, and we know generally whether they have a lot of other options or not. The rest are where relationship failure lead to a higher body count rather than the other way around, or false positives where a failing relationship is continued when it shouldn't be (which I imagine is not what anyone wants). Knowing the reasons mean you can avoid those reasons if you so choose and have a better overal…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:37 PM
2

It's also what a lot of RP dudes say. Though usually phrased as 'all women are good for is sex' as I had in the description.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:18 PM
3

Does fucking her not mean you also lose value though? If the value assessment is 'sex with this person is special because not many other people have had it', or 'high body count people are more likely to be unfaithful or dissatisfied in a relationship' as some others here have said, does that not equally apply to the man who is losing his value by wasting a number on a woman they find disgusting?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:15 PM
2

Thank you for your answer. So if I am following correctly, now you only want sex from women, their body count ceases to matter? Or you still seek out women with low body counts, telling yourself all they are good for is sex but secretly hoping they prove your assessment wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:10 PM
1

Appreciate the well thought out comment. It does seem I may have misunderstood how widespread those who think point 1 is, though I'm still curious to hear from those who do think that. I'm not really a fan of overarching statements of what 'men' or 'women' want or think when it tends to be used in place of 'this is what 'I' want/think'. I do accept that statistical correlation does exist, though I feel it can be explained by more than 'high body count men/women have trouble committing'. For exam…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 05:00 PM
3

So you don't only value women for sex, you also value them for their willpower - an aspect of their personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 03:57 PM
2

The fresh and fit guys have stated outright several times, including in the title of that video, that sex is all women matter for. As have several others who's names I cannot be bothered remembering. It's disingenuous to pretend this is not something red pillers (at least the ones who aren't just trad guys jumping on the bandwagon) say regularly.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 03:40 PM
2

Most men (at least in my parts of the world) don't care in general, but that's besides the point. I'm asking about men who just want sex (or claim to) but also care about body count. Not qualities one prefers in a wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 03:33 PM
1

I agree that men in reality want those things, I'm speaking to a specific group who claim otherwise. Because yeah, the fact they aren't just paying for prostitutes (or hiding it when they do) suggests that, counter to their claims, that's not all men want. I'm not bothered about men who care about body count, that's their prerogative and I'm happy sticking with the ones who don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 03:31 PM
2

The title of the first video is literally "men only want one thing"
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 02:57 PM
-1

I'm talking about the men who do believe both those things, not men in general, who may believe one or neither.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 02:44 PM
3

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oQGQ7TNnh2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqGsOVDj2K0 I don't want to further encourage my algorithm by searching for too long but here's a couple, I'm sure you can find more very easily. There's even one in this thread. Hell, Roosh himself said that was what he was convincing himself and his followers of before he found Jesus https://www.rooshv.com/men-treat-women-as-gods
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 02:14 PM
7

Why does it matter which women want to be in a relationship if being in a relationship is off the table for you anyway?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:54 PM
3

What is TRP if you still value a relationship? Isn't that just being a regular trad man?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:52 PM
2

That's what half TRP talking heads say every podcast, verbatim. Many of whom do hire prostitutes, but that's not what their advice is geared towards and thus is something they try to keep secret, least they lose their following.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:51 PM
10

Why does it matter if all you want is sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:47 PM
1

But that's not what TRP claims. They claim that all men want is sex, marriage is a scam/self cucking, and promiscuous women should be avoided at all costs. That's what separates TRP from the regular age old traditional man looking for their virgin wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:46 PM
0

I think there's definitely ones like the latter category, but most of the former seem to still criticize women with high body counts. Otherwise their advice would just be to use sex workers, as making enough to afford that seems like a lot less effort than doing all the other things they claim are needed to attract women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:36 PM
7

So then, men do not only want sex, and personality matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:29 PM
8

I acknowledge that is what TRP believes, I just don't understand it. Why does it matter who else she's fucked if all men want is sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/23 01:22 PM
1

'Treat her like a human being' essentially means 2 things. portray active listening skills. Demonstrate you are paying attention with you body language, ask follow up questions, and bring up things they've told you previously later in conversation. Seems basic but honestly something a lot of dates I've been on have been lacking in this regard. don't put her on a pedestal. Its uncomfy, can easily lead to unintentional love bombing (which will be taken as a red flag), and makes women feel less lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/22 12:32 PM
1

Then maybe be more upfront about not wanting a relationship? Idk what to tell you dude, don't coast along in the grey zone and then bitch when people feel lead on after a few months of you still not giving them a clear answer. Not that this is a real problem you are actually experiencing outside of the women in your head.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/22 02:37 PM
1

'Hope' or 'expect'? Cause those are two different things, and only one is entitled.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/22 02:27 PM
1

Who does? Theres women who only want to have sex with people they are in a relationship, and they will be pissed off if a guy implies he wants a relationship to get into her pants, sure. But they aren't pissed off because they are entitled, they are pissed off because they were deceived. Completely unnecessarily too, considering theres plenty of women who just want the sex without the relationship that didn't require deceiving. There aren't large swathes of women out here thinking having casual …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/22 12:01 PM
2

I think the ideal dynamic is where it doesn't matter at all, and each person plays to their strengths, whether those strengths do or don't align with tradition. Being overly concerned on things being 50/50 seems like a bad idea for a LTR, as sometimes one partner might have more energy available to give, and later that might reverse. It's also just not as nice - I'd rather buy you something, and later you buy me something, than for us to split every expense down the middle to make sure everythin…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 02:36 PM
2

It shows you are shallow in what you consider 'better'. That you consider looks more valuable than someone who knows you inside and out, and has supported and loved you through the hard times. I don't think it should be normalized or frowned upon, its just sad, and those people are going to live pretty empty lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 02:28 PM
1

Men you are attracted to are more likely to be forgiven for creepy behavior then men you aren't. It doesn't mean the behavior isn't creepy, just that other factors mean it may be overlooked. I don't think it's really a double standard, just the way things work - likewise, you might ignore a woman you are attracted to being a bitch, but not put up with it from a woman you aren't attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 02:22 PM
1

Legally I don't think there should be a limit. Morally is another matter, but I don't think it's the role of the government to make black and white rules on situations that are never black and white.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 02:19 PM
1

Vast majority of sex workers do not date clients as a hard rule. Because of the dynamics that have been set, it's a recipe for a bad time, and SWers are aware of this. Your chance of success here is about the same as your chance of dating a super model.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 02:00 PM
0

The top 1% of men aren't the hottest men though. They are the ones who are best able to meet all of our needs, including a sense of comfort, support, and security in a relationship. So hot fuckboys are not included in that. You are operating under the false assumption that men we most want to fuck and men we most want to date are the same. They aren't, just as the women you want to fuck and the women you want to date are not the same. They are different categories, and thus have different 'top 1…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 01:57 PM
1

This only makes sense if you believe the only value a woman has is sex, and that women don't also enjoy sex. I'd say its ultimately beneficial to everyone. Women who just want to get laid can do that without being judged as negatively by society. Women who are looking for a relationship are more easily able to find guys who also want that, because guys just looking to get laid don't have to pretend they want a relationship, they can find the women who also just want sex. I don't want to marry a …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 01:51 PM
1

This advice is geared towards men who do not know how to talk with women. So the suggestion is to make friends with women so they learn that, and are then better able to talk to women they are pursuing without coming across as a creep. It doesn't mean try to befriend the women you are interested in and hope that it'll naturally progress to more - most of us hate that. It means expand your social circle to include women, and you'll have an easier time with women in general, because a) you won't b…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 01:38 PM
4

'Talk to women you are interested in like they are people and get to know them' doesn't mean 'make friends with her before showing any interest'. It means showing her you are interested in her as an individual, rather than as a random attractive woman. You can and should still show your attraction, it's just showing your attraction to her personality and interests, rather than solely an attraction to her body. Which will be more effective as it sets you apart - knowing you think shes hot means n…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 01:23 PM
1

This ones more for established relationships than dating, but seems to crop up among a lot of my friends. Guys who complain you don't want to have sex enough but do 0 to try and make sex enjoyable for you. Like they'll just start humping her in bed and then get mad when she isn't immediately in the mood. Their idea of foreplay is to rub the clit for 30 seconds before sticking it in, but they don't understand why she is always too tired to have sex that she knows is going to leave her more unsati…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/21 12:03 AM
0

Being pedastalled. I don't mean viewing you highly. I mean projecting on to you their view of the perfect woman and dismissing who you actually are. This results in a number of annoying traits, including but not limited to: Talking over you, and not listening when you talk (because why would they need to learn about you when they've already decided who you are?) Assuming you do not exist as a person outside of them, and have no skills or interests that do not pertain to them Not hearing you the …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/21 11:38 PM
4

I wouldn't say its lesser known as such, but it's not uncommon for men to immediately want to use you as their sole means of emotional support. I get it. Men seem to be often told they aren't really allowed to talk about their feelings with anyone other than a woman they are dating. So they go on a first date and immediately unleash all of the emotions they've been keeping buried for who knows how long. It's understandable, but it's also overwhelming, and puts a lot of pressure on you to continu…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/21 11:22 PM
2

I don't think not taking sex seriously requires viewing it as sport. For me it was just the natural progression after spending time with someone who's company I enjoyed. I didn't take sex 'seriously' in that I didn't view it as an indication of commitment, anymore than I viewed spending a nice evening talking with someone a commitment. It just if we were both horny at the end of that evening, why not finish it by getting each other off? Theres plenty of room in between 'has sex with anyone to ge…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/21 11:10 PM
1

During my promiscuous phase yeah, this was pretty much it for me. Was either existing friends, or first made friends with majority of the people I had sex with. I needed a connection in order for sex to be enjoyable, but I had some unhealthy traits I wanted to sort out before getting in a relationship again and risking someone else having to deal with those traits. But as connection + sex comes with a fair risk of someone developing feelings and getting hurt, it was best to keep those connection…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/21 11:00 PM
1

I don't mind a high body count. If it was someone who's body count was high because they intentionally tried to boost it, it would depend on whether that was a recent mentality or something he did when he was younger that he now recognises was stupid and immature. People can learn and change, so 'former fuckboi' wouldn't be an automatic deal breaker.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/21 10:45 PM
1

Depends on the woman. Personally the mysterious thing was hot when I was <23, but bores the hell out of me now. The older she is the more likely she'll be more interested in vulnerability than games, which are pretty easy to see through once you have a little experience. Every woman is different, but I usually find Mark Manson to be pretty spot on.
/r/seduction04/08/20 04:34 AM
2

As a woman I've found you can just be straight up with reasonable success. I'm terrible at flirting too so usually I'll just hang out and chat with the guy like I would anyone else, then end it with either "You're cute, we should hang out" (also works well as a first fb message) or, if you want to get straight down to it, inviting them to bed/asking where they are going after this. One time I even just jerked my head in the direction of the bedroom I was taking for the night and he was very quic…
/r/seduction04/08/20 04:26 AM
4

"Hey, how's it going? I've seen you around a lot, thought it about time I say hi." Then later in the conversation make a joke about how you've caught her looking at you and move things into a more flirty zone.
/r/seduction04/08/20 04:12 AM
1

I would avoid. Usually if I see a guy doing this my thoughts are less that he's a player, more than he's pathetically trying to get any pussy he can, and any potential attraction I might have had to him is lost. There's not really a way around this. All I can think of is if you approach a group like you are simply looking to make friends, then get flirty with the first one who gives you the eye. No one is going to think you are creepy for simply being social and chatting with multiple people in …
/r/seduction04/08/20 04:06 AM
1

If your goal is quantity rather than quality of sex then yeah I guess you could come back to the club. Weird you wouldn't just want to fuck the same girl multiple times for extended periods but sure, I guess if your aim is just to nut in as many people as possible than it's not wrong. Careful with the number of shots though. Getting her drunk first is kinda rapey.
/r/seduction20/07/20 06:55 AM
1

Invite her to hang out with you at night time at her place or your place. She'll know why you are asking. Then once you are there, go for a kiss after getting physical or verbal consent (so either it's really obvious she wants you to kiss her, or if you can't tell, just ask. If you ask confidently it will never come across as cringe, and can actually be extremely sexy ('oooh he cares about my desires and pleasure, dayum'). I would avoid outright asking for sex in those terms. "Do you want to com…
/r/seduction20/07/20 06:48 AM
1

" after taking a couple shots that you would come back to the party" False premises are not how you have sex. This would definitely hinder my chances of having sex with you because I'll think either 1) you are lying about wanting to come back and can't just be straightforward about you want, which is at best unattractive, at worse (particularly if we've just met) would make me concerned about getting into a situation with you where consent is important. Or 2) I'll think you don't want to have se…
/r/seduction20/07/20 06:10 AM
1

No line as in no pick up line. The point in your comment I'm responding to. Of course theres a line of physical attraction that must be present for you to be considered. But that line can be very, very low, at least in terms of generic attractiveness identifiers, and is different for every one. Theres plenty of men who can't get laid, sure, but their problems stem deeper than just looks. "I wasn't into him at first but then we started talking and..." is a conversation point I hear all the time. …
/r/seduction14/07/20 03:25 AM
1

No. The simple fact is that for more people, being 'good' or 'nice' doesn't impact where you finish whatsoever. It's everything you do and are outside of that that matters. Anyone can be nice. Especially when they want something from you. Be more than nice. Be interesting.
/r/seduction12/07/20 06:01 AM
1

Where did I say looks don't matter? Of course they matter. They just aren't the only thing that matters, and pretending that they are is just an excuse dudes like you use to convince yourself you are doomed sexually because of how you look, and not because your personality doesn't near make up for your poor genes. Because again, plenty of shreks getting laid constantly. Your parents had sex, you can too. You just have to ditch the bitterness.
/r/seduction12/07/20 05:49 AM
5

It's usually really obvious who's at these events chatting up everyone they see and there is nothing less attractive. Keep doing what you are doing, enjoy the event and talk to people around you. Because people tend to be in groups at these event, make friends with people of both genders and then you might find they introduce you to someone else in the group and you just hang out and vibe and then might end up getting some at the end of the night. Anyone I've slept with or given my number to at …
/r/seduction12/07/20 05:39 AM
1

It gets a lot less important as you get older. In high school I wouldn't have dreamed of dating a shorter guy because I was insecure about my own slightly above average height, and felt a shorter guy would draw attention to that. Now I'm more secure in myself, I don't really care. Sure I'm more likely to be immediately attracted to a guy who's taller, but it's not a deal breaker by any means, and some of the most physically attractive guys I know are shorter than me. So yeah, it's a factor, but …
/r/seduction12/07/20 05:24 AM
1

I'm sorry but you are just incorrect. Asking for a number before we've had a good conversation makes you seem presumptuous, or at best, utterly forgettable. I know a guy wants my number. The point of the conversation is for me to know why I should bother responding to you instead of some other dude trying to virtually chat me up. It's about her getting to know you, not you getting to know her. Theres enough average looking cocky guys in bars that confidence alone is rarely enough. Be interesting…
/r/seduction08/07/20 02:15 PM
1

Nearly every woman I know agrees that they have to have a conversation with a guy before knowing if they find them attractive or not. Unless you are a male model, if you don't form a connection before getting her number you are not getting a text back. “you know, at first i didn’t find this dude attractive, but now that he said that I like him now.” is something that happens ALL the time. Do you know any women? That's the basis for like 50% of our sexual/romantic relationships. Because frankly, …
/r/seduction08/07/20 03:25 AM
1

I don't care how butt ugly you are, you can still get a woman. You just have to be attractive in other ways. That's why the phenomenon of extremely with men who look like toes exists. You can still be attractive with a fucked up face, they aren't mutually exclusive.
/r/seduction08/07/20 01:28 AM
1

Most of these are fairly spot on, but a couple of them miss the mark. Number 2 would be better as don't buy a drink IMMEDIATELY. Chat to us first, but as someone who will always buy the next round if we stay chatting for long enough, if a guy doesn't offer me a drink when he goes up to get his next one I'm going to think hes either stingy, not interested, or doing it as some kind of power play. All things that are not attractive and significantly lessen the chance I'm going to hang around. Numbe…
/r/seduction08/07/20 01:14 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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