TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

RedRiotGirl Archive

View 10 posts and 102 comments by RedRiotGirl 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

The book is not even sympathetic to socialism, so I don't know what you're talking about. It just states historical facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/18 11:18 AM
1

Proof?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/18 07:50 AM
1

Globalism is not free trade. I didn't say that, I'm just explaining the reasons behind the creation of the EU. It was definitely connected to free trade.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/18 08:31 PM
1

Europe is doing well right now (I live in Europe). It has been through way worse crises in the previous century. Now it's actually a good time compared to the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/18 09:15 AM
1

Europe declined because the old colonies fell and this book explains how it happened. It also explains how globalist organizations that the RPillers don't like came into existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/18 07:55 AM
1

I'm just repeating TRP narrative. They are the ones who don't like globalism but support the free market.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/18 07:53 AM
6

That is not true. There were quite a lot of working class women working even in factories.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 09:13 PM
1

Maybe you are just stupid? Everyone else understands what I'm saying pretty clearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 09:11 PM
6

If it looks like a fascist, acts like a fascist and speaks like a fascist then it has to be a fascist.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 09:10 PM
4

Very well, I apologize for my tone.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 07:17 PM
1

Neoliberalism is not the only kind of right-wing there is. However it is true that leftists opposed globalization. It's interesting because Red Pillers blame leftists for "globalism" when the EU for example is actually a neoliberal organization that was meant to promote free trade.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 07:13 PM
9

I don't want to break it to you but a lot of women were working in the old days too. It's not like all had easy lives without "hard labor".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 07:07 PM
1

You know, people aren't really worried being called fascists anymore. Maybe stop living inside the Internet? That doesn't reflect real life at all. Most people hate fascism. Also, if I see actual fascist propaganda, I'm going to call it what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 07:04 PM
2

You're not actually providing any evidence for your claims. "Someone further right" like who? Any sources? Around 40% of men still voted for Hillary and that's not even counting all those who didn't vote at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:50 PM
2

it's global governments. ...Like the EU, which is what I'm talking about in the OP. However, it's also more difficult for leaders like Stalin or Hitler to come to total power Do you know anything about how exactly these leaders came to power? I doubt it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:43 PM
1

As far as I know around 60% of men voted for Trump and you said Trump would be considered "left-wing".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:42 PM
1

Protectionism is not considered left-wing. The fascist states were protectionist and they were considered right-wing in Europe.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:40 PM
4

Posts like this show us how many Red Pillers are fascists. There are upvoted posts that are unironically anti-semitic and promoting Nazi propaganda from the 30s.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:29 PM
1

Proof?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:26 PM
4

I just thought I should provide an actual source for what I'm saying, unlike TRPillers. Not that I expected anyone to actually read it. "Globalism" is not the same as the welfare state, but a lot of Red Pillers are crypto-nationalists and view globalism negatively and blame women for it, that's why I mentioned it. This book actually explains how globalist institutions were created (institutions that affect the US too)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 05:47 PM
2

I bet TRPillers will eventually say that the wars were women's fault too.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 05:24 PM
12

While I'm not so familiar of the history of the US, I'm pretty sure women are not the reason for the decline of laissez-faire there. In fact, why don't you read the book. It briefly mentions the role of the US too. If you have a serious source that shows that women are to blame for the decline of laissez-faire, I'm willing to study it. Also, it's not true that TRPillers are only concerned with the US. For example, they blame women for the EU and for the refugee crisis in Europe. "Women ruined Eu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 04:46 PM
1

Yes, I know very well, that there is a connection between TRP and the alt-right but my point was that this sub is aimed at the more "libertarian" types.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 04:20 PM
0

The alt-righters are fascists and monarchists so I doubt they mind the governmental intervention to the economy. I am talking about the "libertarian" Red Pillers.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 04:04 PM
-1

I live in a European country and you have a false view of what is going on. The immigrants are a minority. Many of them will only stay in Europe temporarily and many others will just assimilate.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/17 02:01 PM
-1

They haven't "collapsed" lol. You're talking out of your ass. Birth rates need to plummet worldwide. Nationalism in the 21st century is ridiculous and useless.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/17 01:57 PM
1

Gender roles existed but they were still equal, the men didn't have authority over women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/17 07:54 AM
1

Ok, which feminist societies have collapsed? Can you name them?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/17 07:53 AM
1

gender roles don't mean they were unequal. Men didn't have authority over women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 11:11 PM
1

It has nothing to do with "human nature". It makes sense for women to do what they had to in order to survive. Prove your point. I am the only one bothering to post any evidence here.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:50 PM
1

Also, again - were there no ways to show wealth and status before agriculture? No, because in hunters-gatherers societies the resources were shared. Hunters-gatherers had to cooperate in order to survive that's why they didn't hoard resources. Certain males accumulated resources after agriculture which led to women choosing them for survival and this eventually led to the patriarchy. That's all.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:47 PM
1

The males were stronger and more able to pull it off.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:38 PM
2

It takes no genius to understand this. Agriculture led to certain males hoarding all of the resources.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:35 PM
1

Agriculture.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:33 PM
1

Better than anything TRPillers have to offer, considering TRPillers don't even care about science.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 07:24 PM
1

It's suggested by evidence that the patriarchy became a thing only after agriculture was invented.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 03:42 PM
2

The men didn't have authority over the women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 03:40 PM
2

Yes so.... Equality is not something "unnatural" after all?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 03:40 PM
4

We're talking about how the patriarchy originally became a thing, not now. Also, notice how more feminist societies are more likely to have strong social security programs? I wonder if there is a correlation.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 03:27 PM
3

Care to enlighten us?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 03:14 PM
4

What does this have to do with hunters-gatherers?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 02:54 PM
3

Did you even read the article? Agriculture created accumulation of wealth which led to the patriarchy. This is the most likely scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 02:43 PM
2

They paint a picture that men basically owned the women and that hunters-gatherers societies were patriarchal. That's very debatable. Most data suggests that the patriarchy only became a thing after agriculture.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 02:40 PM
5

Because you are lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 02:38 PM
3

This wasn't about gender roles. Gender roles did exist, nobody says otherwise. The men were the hunters and the women were the gatherers. The point is that there was overall egalitarianism. The picture that RPillers paint that women basically did nothing, is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 02:36 PM
3

Where is the data?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 02:26 PM
4

Yes, that's my point. The patriarchy was caused by wealth inequality.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 01:08 PM
3

It was not executed by a single person, he just led the study. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6236/796 Look at the names.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 12:29 PM
2

TRPillers often claim to care about truth, even though they base their sources on random Internet theories. They are however skeptical of actual scientists. That says a lot. (I'm sure you will backpedal now and say TRPillers don't claim to know the ultimate truth, even though that's what the term "Red Pill" itself implies)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 12:17 PM
1

Way better source than something a bunch of internet Red Pillers say.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 12:11 PM
3

I can't find the source but DNA evidence proves that about 100k years ago 1 male was reproducing for every 17 females. Yes, but it was caused by wealth inequality. https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success Another member of the research team, a biological anthropologist, hypothesizes that somehow, only a few men accumulated lots of wealth and power, leaving nothing for others. These men could then pass their wealth on to their sons, perpetuating this pattern of elitist reproduct…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 12:10 PM
4

Well, they say that gender equality goes against human nature and they paint a specific picture about early humans. If there are examples of gender egalitarian societies, it clearly goes against the narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 12:09 PM
3

May I ask what this has to do with our discussion?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 12:08 PM
6

Its not rays of sunshine and unicorn farts working in harmony to create free love all across the land. Except that nobody says so. What a strawman. And prove his study wrong? No, no, that's not how it works. His works have to be PEER REVIEWED. His work has to stand up to scrutiny. Uh, so when an expert says something, we doubt it, but when some random Red Piller says something, it's ultimate truth ?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:57 AM
4

So do you have proof that his study is wrong, or nah?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 09:42 AM
1

Yeah, and men too. A person's a person. No, they don't. It's not that simple. We think that women are different. That's where our agreement ends. Only those of us who think different is bad/incorrect/lesser would view women as inferior, and there's plenty of those types in any given camp. That doesn't make TRP hateful, it makes hateful people hateful. Do you disagree that they view women as mentally inferior? It's in the sidebar. They also say that women lack honor and loyalty because those are …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/17 06:55 PM
1

Because we criticize some of them some of them? They literally claim that all women are like that. (AWALT) They think women are mentally inferior, it's in the sidebar (most responsible teenager in the house). They also think that all women lack honor and loyalty. My girl's self esteem is fine. Are you sure I'm the one here with a low opinion of women? Does she know that you view women as inferior?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/17 06:39 PM
5

They don't date RPM as in men who browse TRP sub. I remember seeing posts about that. Nobody wants to date a man that has these views on women that's why RPM wouldn't express these opinions irl.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/17 12:10 AM
7

I mean TRPillers obviously tend to have a very low opinion of women, so women who actively seek these types (if they exist) would probably have a low opinion of themselves. Not even RPW date RPM as far as I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/17 10:30 PM
1

It wasn't about you. It was about the OP. He seems to have a postmodern-like belief of what truth is.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/17 09:30 PM
1

That was because they wanted to make some money, not because there is some secret anti-male plot. I'm saying this because some Red Pillers act like there is a secret plot to keep them down.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/17 10:14 AM
2

No, I'm just not into relationships. I prefer to keep it casual
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/17 10:11 AM
1

The "wage gap" has been debunked multiple times. And "sexual harassment" is only a problem if it comes from unattractive men, and it's not even a serious problem. I was talking about the past, hence the past tense.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 11:34 PM
2

If women really wanted to join the shithole that corporations are, then they could, And they were getting paid less than men while there was 0 protection for sexual harassment in the workplace. Also, they were generally looked down on and they were not trusted in positions of power.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 11:06 PM
4

Why is it that people like you only criticize capitalism when it comes to women working? I have noticed that capitalism is the best thing ever, but when talking about women working then suddenly the bosses are tyrannical and the corporations are evil. Feminism is generally a good thing because it allows people to be themselves. Does it have its flaws? Absolutely. However, making it so that women aren't basically second class citizens it not a bad thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 09:35 PM
1

I'm mostly chill, just not with strangers.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 09:32 PM
2

I didn't say they are a political threat. But it's a common view on TRP. We're discussing TRP here, so it's irrelevant whether they're a political threat or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 06:02 PM
3

I am against the US and NATO playing world police and destroying weaker nations. They have caused so much misery around the world. Just look at Libya, they completely destabilized it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 05:05 PM
5

I know that feel. I'm super introverted but I can communicate just fine with everyone, except when it comes to flirting, it just doesn't come naturally. Even when I was in relationships, I barely flirted at all. To be fair, most guys don't interest me in the slightest anyway, so when I can't respond to flirting by some random guy in a bar, it's not a huge loss.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 04:39 PM
0

I don't flirt with random men. The only occasion I have flirted in the past was when I was already in a relationship, but even then it was rare. I am disgustingly introverted so it doesn't come very naturally to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 04:17 PM
2

I never flirt , because I'm never interested enough to flirt.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 04:04 PM
3

Ironically it seems like some weird postmodern view and this type of people usually say they hate postmodernism.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 04:03 PM
2

Strawman. The cherrypicked facebook posts of men shared on the internet don't represent the majority of socially affable but unsuccessful men irl (i.e actual nice guys). It was written in jest. We all know some genuinely nice unsuccessful men exist. I was just mocking the stereotype.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 04:02 PM
2

Nah, if the Incredibles was a Red Pill family then Helen Parr would have probably allowed herself to become a cuckqueen while her husband slept with that blond villain chick.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 04:01 PM
10

The Red Pill is not science and even the creators of it don't claim that it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 03:49 PM
4

I think you're generalizing atheists. Yes there are some angry ones, but most mature atheists are not angry.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 03:40 PM
4

I mean, if you go to /r/atheism, a lot of people there say they are happier as atheists.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 03:30 PM
8

A lot of people say though that abandoning religion has made them happier.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 03:20 PM
1

the moral zeitgeist of our time is utilitarian hedonism Well, I don't have to personally agree with that. Like I said I have no problem with free choice, but I am unconvinced that choices in a system like that are completely "free".
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 03:13 PM
8

We all know that women prefer good-looking, successful men. That's the big revelation? That "Nice Guys" don't get laid, while "bad boys" do. Hell, yea. If by "Nice Guys" you mean the type that is only nice for the sake of getting laid and acts like an entitled kid when they get rejected, then give me a bad boy any time. I agree with OP. A lot of what TRP says is common sense. They just exaggerate to appear edgier.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 03:12 PM
2

NGHYAAAAAAARGH!!!! Make up your mind! Were women getting paid less than men THEN or is "muh wage gap" still real NOW?! The gender gap that exists now is a result of different factors than it was back then when the capitalists actually paid women less for the same work. what exact "rights" of women are "attacked". I have seen people here advocating for hardcore patriarchy, including Red Pill ECs like Archwinger. (I think it was him, if not then it was another EC) Also, the vast majority of RPille…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 02:51 PM
1

Someone else posted a link that 1 in 3 women worked in the 50s. Therefore the majority still didn't work.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 02:28 PM
4

As if domestic violence didn't exist in the patriarchy...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 01:41 PM
2

I completely agree that women should be judged with the same standards as men in these situations. I can't support women getting enlisted in the army since I am against the army in general for imperialist states like the US, but I would support men not being forced to enlist for the draft either.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 12:47 PM
2

I had already pointed out in the OP that some women did have to work and in worse conditions than now.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 12:23 PM
1

Sure, working class women always had to work.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 12:19 PM
1

Yes my grandmothers worked too, but I don't know how it was in the US. Based on what people say, my impression is that most women stopped working once they got married.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 12:14 PM
1

I don't doubt that women had to work, but my perception is that they generally stopped working once they got married. Do you have any data?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 12:10 PM
5

Who attacks the "red pill" family? Outside of a loud minority, nobody even cares.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 11:55 AM
-1

Well, I don't live in the US, so I don't know how it was there. In my country most people definitely had to work, but these studies about female happiness are UScentric. Do you have data about how many women actually worked in the past in the US? Also, as far as I know, many women worked but stopped once they got married.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 11:50 AM
2

You think women in the Depression era were unconcerned about the outside world They didn't have to worry as much as they have to worry now that they have to carry the burden themselves. If they were more dependent on men, they also had less responsibilities. Women are more unhappy because they had been sold a story of a life of freedom, interesting careers in meaningful exciting professions at good salaries. And what they got is what men have always known it to be: long hours in meaningless, sou…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 11:42 AM
1

Now even more women have to work than before. That's why they are less happy. Sure a lot of women had to work, but a significant number of them could also stay at home.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 11:37 AM
5

How much did financial dependence really matter in the past? Could the women not just move back in with her parents instead of suffering the abuse of her partner? In certain cases her family wouldn't even take her back, either because they couldn't (for financial reasons) or because it was considered shameful to leave your husband. Personal anecdote: I have a friend who is Albanian and comes from a very conservative Albanian village. He personally knew someone who wanted to kick out his wife and…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 08:01 AM
4

I fully support women making their own choices when it comes to these things, I don't care if someone wants to be submissive. I just wanted to point out that what you said about putting more faith in your career being riskier is wrong because women's partners are usually the biggest danger for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 07:55 AM
3

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/07/homicides-women/534306/ Over half of the killings of American women are related to intimate partner violence http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/06/us/domestic-intimate-partner-violence-fast-facts/index.html Each day - Three or more women are murdered by their boyfriends or husbands on average, according to the American Psychology Association.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 07:46 AM
9

who is attacking women's right to work? Many people actually. I have seen people here who want a return to the patriarchy. There are also alt-righters who unironically want White Sharia and we all know there is a connection between TRP and the alt-right. I don't care about what you do in your personal life. We're talking about women's rights. Edit: Haha. Downvoted for what? This is the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 07:37 AM
2

when their feelz conclude that submissive equates to abuse Can you even read? That's not even what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 07:36 AM
8

What you are failing to recognize is that there are a number of users on this board who would be perfectly okay with women having their rights taken away. I know, that's why I posted it. As a civilization progresses, it becomes more advanced, it allows people to have more freedom. With freedom, people get all of the benefits of freedom, and in addition to that all of the dangers of freedom. Females are more safe when they have less rights and freedom, because freedom does come with a danger. Gir…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 07:31 AM
2

How about you let women themselves decide what they want? I personally don't want a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 06:51 AM
2

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/14/early-men-women-equal-scientists Having gender roles doesn't mean they weren't equal. Women participated in decisions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/17 06:24 AM
3

No, societies haven't always been patriarchal. Hunters-gatherers societies were much more gender egalitarian.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 09:37 PM
2

Marriage sucks. Can we abandon it already and try to find something better?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 09:35 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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