TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

RegressionToTehMean Archive

View 0 posts and 35 comments by RegressionToTehMean on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
16

Why do you think that choosing to work fewer hours is a sign of disadvantage? That's pure bizzaro world. Do you also consider it an advantage for men that we die earlier?
/r/MensRights24/10/23 11:44 AM
8

Typically because of how those fields scale less well. It's hard to improve efficiency when it comes to taking care of the elderly, but super easy to increase efficiency in software development. You can only treat one person at a time, but you can sell software to potentially billions. A different factor is risk. Female dominated fields tend to be less physically risky (dangerous) and/or have higher job security and/or pay more stable income. Or a combination of all three.
/r/MensRights24/10/23 11:42 AM
5

"4.8% of incidents (N=193) were judged to involve deliberate harassment or aggression (such as verbal abuse, or revving and beeping); 110 participants reported one or more such incident. Despite the low numbers, we did find a statistically significant (p<.05) difference between those whose diary day was during the week compared with those making journeys at the weekend as to whether or not they experienced a deliberate incident; deliberate incidents affected a bigger proportion of trips at the w…
/r/MensRights22/06/23 03:46 PM
6

Pretty sure Europe had the original postmodernists, but yeah, thanks for adding your delicious flavour to that disgusting curry.
/r/PussyPassDenied22/09/22 01:11 PM
3

All these things funded by taxes that disproportionately hit men, of course.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 08:59 AM
1

Report the guy for disinformation.
/r/MensRights21/03/22 07:28 PM
13

Because of eg. breastfeeding.
/r/MensRights16/02/22 02:38 PM
14

Don't misquote him.
/r/MensRights16/02/22 02:35 PM
20

This "they just choose not to" is apparently a valid argument when it comes to men, but not when it comes to women. It's pretty blatant hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights13/02/22 02:33 PM
9

That's such a lame argument. But "power" is a useful term, because it can mean whatever feminists want. Majority women? But THIS subsection further up is still majority men. Oh it's now majority women? But THIS subsection even further up is still majority men. The list will soon end at billionaires; meanwhile, women have it better in the 99.99 percent rest of society.
/r/MensRights01/02/22 04:40 PM
9

It's funny how life expectancy isn't a measurement of life quality. Almost sounds like being alive isn't a basic requirement for having a good life... Also, the same people think life expectancy IS a great measurement of how life quality is in third world countries...
/r/MensRights10/11/21 01:22 PM
12

Because the media, politicians, etc. are pushing for (formal or informal) positive discrimination of women, but ONLY IN VERY SELECTED FIELDS (ie. only in desirable fields). This will be the trend in the next few decades, as it has been in the past few: women will get ahead at the top, and men will continue to be behind at the bottom. And feminists will continue to ignore the hypocrisy of it all.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 08:21 PM
2

If the types of intelligence measured by IQ are also the ones leading to economic success (eg. logical and spacial reasoning), then the argument is perfectly valid.
/r/MensRights08/09/21 05:11 PM
1

I think this type of article is fine, IF it continues with the logical conclusion: that women have it pretty well and should stop pushing for positive discrimination.
/r/MensRights07/08/21 07:52 PM
1

Wait, what? Foreigner here..
/r/MensRights18/06/21 07:18 PM
2

Fair enough, but if modern feminism is defined by influence and not number of adherents, then it is the point in this case too. Edit: I reread the OP, and you're right.
/r/MensRights13/05/21 02:39 PM
12

Maybe not numerous, but really influential, which is what actually matters.
/r/MensRights13/05/21 02:36 PM
4

Also, white led businesses. Christian led businesses. Heterosexual led businesses. The logic is totally bonkers.
/r/MensRights22/04/21 07:56 AM
13

It's racist because he/she cares at all about skin colour.
/r/MensRights03/04/21 02:28 PM
17

Focus on the positives, sure. Don't let the stats dictate your life, sure. The problem is that feminists are using this strategy, and successfully. They are getting formal discrimination implemented everywhere on the basis of their versions of these stats.
/r/MensRights03/04/21 02:24 PM
9

You seem to think that marxism is only what Marx wrote. That is wrong. Even if you think it SHOULD be what Marx wrote, you should concede that marxism by most accounts and usages is more than that. You seem to be quite far to the "ignorant yet confident" part of a dunning - kruger diagram.
/r/MensRights24/03/21 07:12 PM
10

But what if one's socioeconomy is directly determined by overarching gender structures, ie. THE PATRIARCHY? The direct line is clear, although of course Marx himself didn't study these things.
/r/MensRights24/03/21 05:29 PM
4

There is a direct line from old school university marxism to modern university identity politics to contemporary society-wide identity politics. And from "positive discrimination" to "equality of results" and to taking away men's rights. But I doubt that anyone will ever convince you of this, since your opinion is so firmly set that you dare call other people "retards".
/r/MensRights24/03/21 05:14 PM
17

I think what comforts me is taking a logical, rational approach to things. Logical approaches can per definition not be wrong. If I encounter illogical actions or statements from others, I know that they are in the wrong. For instance, claims that men should be cancelled/fired for allegations about things happening many years ago (= obviously a double standard) or various claims that men and women are not different (= obviously and plainly wrong). Taking this approach grounds me and, well, prote…
/r/MensRights23/03/21 07:27 PM
1

I'm not saying, personally, that it is logical or a smart move. But it COULD be a smart move if 51 pct. of the members feel very strongly about the issue, and the 49 pct. don't care being the butt of discrimination.
/r/MensRights12/03/21 07:05 AM
2

I have never heard mainstream media use that term. That would require way too much introspection on their behalf. But maybe its because of where I live.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 06:02 PM
0

It would be strange if women were less aggressive negotiators, but not less aggressive in general. If higher productivity is correlated to higher aggression (eg. being more focused, determined), then it is fair to pay the aggressive more.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 05:59 PM
2

I've never seen a union that wasn't woke/feminist. My experience is that they are one of the drivers of the development.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 04:47 PM
4

Do send sources. I assume that you also look at factors such as suicides, homelessness, victims of crime, life expectancy, who net gains from public spending / taxes, etc.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 04:38 PM
3

Why wouldn't they already be paying them fairly? There is literally no reason not to.
/r/MensRights11/03/21 04:28 PM
2

This is meme material.
/r/MensRights25/02/21 07:51 AM
18

Let's NOT fight for gender equality, unless you define it to be rights, not results. There's no reason to become as bad as feminists.
/r/MensRights22/02/21 12:51 PM
17

But defining terms mean using logic, and logic is a white, male concept.
/r/MensRights22/02/21 12:49 PM
1

Why do you need to present a solidarity project? Is this some curriculum thing, like minority projects?
/r/MensRights20/02/21 05:40 PM
265

It's almost as if their thinking isn't logically consistent!
/r/MensRights16/02/21 01:34 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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