TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

appropriate-username Archive

View 1 posts and 252 comments by appropriate-username 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

No wonder redpill teaches men to withhold commitment in order to excite women with chaos and uncertainty. Its because of women like this that get turned off by safety and certainty. A general approach shouldn't be promoted because of anecdotal experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/24 02:18 PM
3

It's the mom's fault, and the kid needs to toughen up How's it fair for the kid to be punished for his mom's fault?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:02 PM
1

That's the way it usually works.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:00 PM
–

Please, go ahead and define for us what exactly a “fully developed” brain is Brain that finishes dendritic pruning and myelination. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3621648/
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/24 08:09 PM
0

Brains not fully developed until 25 (infantilizing adults) This is just scientifically true. Victims of age gap relationships (as though they were forced into it) Who says that? Victims of pump and dumping (even with consent) I don't see how this is related to any other points. Yes, women would prefer to not be abandoned after sex, what of it?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/24 01:21 PM
–

After putting in so much effort into self-improvement You're poisoning yourself. Self-worsening? Also, women aren't gachapon machines you put coins in and get sex in return.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/24 01:21 AM
1

Companies will literally choose women to be the face of their business because they come off as "less threatening” for something as mundane as selling insurance. Which further highlights how manipulative and dishonest people can be amongst both genders. But not as leadership. Also, women get slutshaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/23 01:02 AM
3

You are doing something worse - discouraging some endangered internet critical thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/23 12:15 PM
5

How so? Sexism. This sub has tons of it, whether deliberate/overt or "oh, you know what I really meant."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 03:24 PM
2

Yeah because vigilantism leads to an orderly, peaceful society and there's nothing wrong with letting people axe others in their sleep if they claim abuse afterwards. /s
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 02:04 PM
1

And let's not even get started on the extreme hatred that liberals spew against short men There's absolutely no sign of "extreme hatred" towards short people off the internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:41 PM
3

Report your situation to child protection services, they'll probably find the kids some food. Move to a relative's or a friend's house. Pawn your belongings for food and moving expenses. Take out a loan.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:40 PM
1

There are tons of other discrimination sources due to race and sexual orientation than just employment. And I don't see how implicit bias is systemic in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:33 PM
2

All of those choices cause more risk or more damage than the alternative. Cheating on someone is risky. One can control when someone finds out that one is breaking up with someone, one can't control when someone discovers that on is cheating. So one can reduce the risk of the fallout from breakup/divorce but it's harder to do so for cheating discovery. And the last is just ridiculous... expect kids to wait for food until a divorce can be lodged? Food pantries are a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:28 PM
4

There are probably better arguments to defend the personal freedom position - for birth in particular, I'd argue that the conservative position is for personal freedom of the hypothetical baby. But for big government yeah, everyone in all parties is perfectly fine with expanding the government power until it has an iron grip on whatever is their policy preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:23 PM
2

but I'm talking about spiritual beliefs here. I think you might need to clarify further that you mean spiritual beliefs that align with yours because I'd imagine the left has tons of beliefs and ideas about the spiritual consequences of various acts, they're just not aligned with any major religion.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:19 PM
3

Yeah if the study referred to in the post actually exists, it may be interpreted two different ways by the groups being asked. Wrong can mean unethical or wrong can mean something that's as much of a sin as wearing mixed fabrics is.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:16 PM
2

Make it safe to leave. Get a restraining order, get your things and bounce.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:15 PM
2

What about if your boyfriend you were with for six months has been missing two years and isn't there to be broken up with I think breaking up with someone in absentia makes sense. Send them a text on their last known means of communication and then I'd argue that it's not cheating. What about if the partner is in prison and never getting out and will never be a proper spouse again Divorce them. After the divorce, it's not cheating. What about if the partner is also cheating and had been for year…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:06 PM
1

I ctrl+f'ed "extramarital" and "affair" on the page that supposedly talks about the research and didn't find anything. That linked article is about abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 01:04 PM
1

Sure, but so what? Why does the fact of what is being complimented change how objectifying it is? In either case, it does not reduce a person to a mere end, therefore it is not objectification If a person's immutable object is being complimented, it enforces the idea that their worth is tied to/composed of that object (rather than any actions they've taken), which is essentially objectification. Yes, that is true, but once again what relevance does it have? All value is socially constructed in t…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/22 11:57 AM
1

but you gotta look at the most reasonable interpretations of the statements Sure. and it is a huge far cry to interpret “nice tits!” as a denial of agency or value besides what is provided (tits) - just like it would be a far cry for a barber to interpret “nice haircut” as a statement that his only worth derives from the haircuts he does and there is no agency he has over who and how he cuts the hair of. On the surface level in a vacuum, I see your point. This may be the most straightforward int…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/22 02:33 PM
4

If a maidenless man is a bad relationship choice because "there must be something wrong with him", I don't agree with this either.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 04:24 PM
1

sleeping with random women and never getting married is bad for society. 'getting bitches' is bad for society. Orphans exist. People can sleep with random women and never get married and adopt and I think society would be fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/22 11:04 AM
0

IMO your comment could use one or two (more) examples. Though you did give a few and I've got some thoughts on them. I could argue that saying a woman has nice tits could be interpreted as situationally objectifying because it could be interpreted as denying them any other agency besides having tits. The wife example is a bit less objectionable but similar logic can be said to be inappropriate - denying the woman any value outside of her boobs. I also think it's interesting that you talked about…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/22 10:43 PM
2

Yes, it's not ok to dehumanize people. Everyone should just avoid people who do that sort of thing. I dunno why that's not an obvious thing to say apparently.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/22 01:50 PM
1

Time-travel buddies! Though that can get dangerous.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/22 01:19 PM
1

Now my question for you is this - you have a time machine to turn back time. Would you still support her to enter that relationship? Well first of all, if I have a time machine I suddenly have much bigger priorities, though apparently they can't include killing Hitler. Then when all that's done - no, I'd encourage her to find someone else. So I'd still encourage her to go into a relationship, just not with that guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/22 12:06 PM
2

It sorta doesn't make any sense to just throw away the self-reliance and independence that we've learned Your SO doesn't mind-wipe you. You can break up and still have the knowledge. We could get hurt again if we're with a negative partner, and that would just puts us back into square one. You're not, you still have the skills you previously learned. And you could get hurt in a variety of ways, the only way to be 100% safe from any hurt is live in a bubble.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/22 04:52 PM
1

I help some others (e.g. I help people on /r/advice); helping literally everyone is impossible and is not what being selfless means and it's not what I'm asking of others to do. Also, like I said, selflessness means helping people without them having helped you first and without expecting anything in return.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 10:19 AM
1

How are you helping him or me? I help some others (e.g. I help people on /r/advice); helping literally everyone is impossible and is not what being selfless means and it's not what I'm asking of others to do. Also, like I said, selflessness means helping people without them having helped you first and without expecting anything in return. Why are people entitled to other people's help? More so why should others help others? Why should I help you? Team work makes the dream work. If nobody helped …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 07:21 PM
-3

Sounds like there are things you'd miss if societal support disappeared so sounds like you do very much give a fuck about society because without it you wouldn't have computers, games, etc. But that's beside the earlier point, it sounds like we both now agree that this sort of thing is selfish.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 12:57 PM
0

Yes. People who don't help others, while expecting no reward, are selfish. That's the definition of the word.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 12:02 PM
1

I don't think "selfish" and "selfless" mean what you think they mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 10:44 AM
-2

A selfless act is not one that repays a debt. If everybody "lived their best life" and only did selfless things when it was part of a debt repayment system, there'd be way less scientific progress, no public transportation, no public roads, and open-source wouldn't be a thing. This kind of mindset is why insulin (and other drugs) cost as much as they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 10:32 AM
1

How is it not? There's nothing in the comment about helping anyone else with anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 10:29 AM
-3

That's a pretty selfish life.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 12:31 AM
-1

Periods and pregnancy suck, as does the increased likelihood of being raped. So, no.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 12:30 AM
1

FDS is a troll sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/22 12:12 AM
1

If all subs allowed all types of content, all subs would be clones of /r/worldpolitics.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/22 11:28 AM
4

Take a trip to the non monogamy sub reddit if you dont believe me. The posts are all the same 93% upvoted post, Zero links to any kind of research, random 90% statistic and a reference to a place which is vastly more likely to host posts about problems with stuff rather than things working out. /u/MicksBlue , if someone has a happy, fulfilling poly/open relationship with no issues...They won't post about it. Because why would they? I'm sure they have other problems in their life that they'd much…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/22 06:49 PM
5

If less people attack women as a result or the woman feels less bad after the attack, I think it's still a positive result regardless.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 06:38 PM
1

You are talking as if marriage is essential for a man's survival. (Like food or water or something.) NEWSFLASH! Its isn't. You can live a happy and fulfilling life without marriage. What gave you that impression? I only argued that it's a viable option and just because something is a viable option doesn't automatically somehow make it a requirement or vital. We live in a world where that norm has changed. Today both wife and husband earn (or at least are capable of earning). So that assumption s…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/22 10:14 PM
1

A lot would mean more than half and it's physically impossible to have met more than half of all women to have made that opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/22 11:47 PM
1

Thousands is enough. Please google "representative sample." I'm not waiting with dread for them to grow up and be the exact same. So you can't make your argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/22 04:36 PM
1

It wasn't my comment. That's why I said, I don't agree with the exact words. But I agree with the principle. Fair enough, though I'd like to make sure we're on the same page that the principle you're agreeing with is not that all of a single gender is bad. and even kids. ....? You don't invest kids, you support kids and then kids support you. Even prenups protect only premarital assets. Yes, because there's the assumption that either both partners contribute equally to post-marital assets or the…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/22 01:42 PM
1

Based on both anecdotal experience and extensive research Almost every single study in the thousands that have been done has concluded I don't get the point of saying any of that without linking anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/22 02:36 PM
1

It's physically impossible to have judged enough women to make the assessment that the only thing literally all of them provide is abuse. And even if you have met literally every woman on earth, guess what - millions of new ones are born every day. So your judgment will be just a pointless blip in history.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 11:20 PM
2

When anybody does it, it's just enforcing preferences and assuming that's not true for an entire gender is sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 11:54 AM
2

Why do you think sexism is funny?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 11:24 AM
4

Uhh a couple of things. If you disagree with avoiding women, why'd you say literally the exact opposite in your last comment? "There was also someone ... who shamed me ... for avoiding women when I have valid, professional, and logical reasons for doing so." "But I can give you a completely logical and sensible reason to avoid marriage, cohabitation and LTRs. " That's a way harder argument to attack than just the blatant irrational sexism inherent in avoiding all women at all times but sure, I'd…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 11:07 AM
2

Just because people don't call out power disparities doesn't mean they cease being problematic. Things don't just start existing depending on whether people are paying attention or not, people were dying of germ-caused diseases way before anyone has imagined a germ.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 02:06 AM
2

Men who want to make a woman feel special are not psychopathic. Men who want sex aren't psychopathic either. I agree with this, though not the other part of this comment that was removed. There's a pretty fine line which separates expressing love and just pulling strings. Maybe for a psychopath.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 01:59 AM
3

That's sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 01:56 AM
8

I have valid, professional, and logical reasons for doing so. I'd be interested in debating this.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 01:54 AM
6

Freedom isn't an invitation to abuse, I dunno why you'd think that it is. Sexual freedom doesn't mean courting should be done anywhere and at any time.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/22 01:53 AM
1

It's a debate sub, it's the right sub to debate any feelings and it's the wrong sub to try to shut down debate like you're doing. And I think it makes sense that everyone should deserve a baseline of respect until they act to raise or lower that baseline.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/22 03:27 AM
1

It's a sexist sub. I think TRP at least made an attempt to hide blatant hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/22 03:21 AM
1

I dunno what room there is to debate when it's just your individual experience of a relatively small group of people. If anything its the other way around. I guess the only thing to point out here is that just like others shouldn't use your experiences to make sweeping conclusions, you shouldn't do the same here either. Just because people you've met fit this pattern doesn't mean they all do.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/22 03:25 PM
1

That's impossible to know (because it's impossible to tell who gets away with crimes) and beside the point I was making which is that guys are judged more than girls. You were wrong. And being able to do things is completely related to guys too. Guys are enslaved right along with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 08:42 PM
0

Men are the biggest percentage of inmates. Their actions receive the most judgment.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 07:15 PM
2

This can't be used to draw any conclusions about anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 05:39 PM
1

I have nothing solid to challenge the 15% figure or the 5% for men and responsive sex Not super solid but the first free scholarly thing I found: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267215395_Gender_Differences_and_Similarities_in_Sexual_Desire
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 05:37 PM
1

*people And *whatever ethical and legal thing they want
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 05:35 PM
1

A blog that links to a book as your source...There's not much to talk about here that's free. Many papers online on the topic are pay-gated too but the one I found that's free disputes your assertion, or at least questions that conclusion or interpretation: Throughout this review, we have argued that the methodology used to assess sexual desire, whether it be a single question about sexual behavior or a validated questionnaire, assessed at one point in time or longitudinally, influences whether …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 05:32 PM
-1

We want to feel completely free, and absolved of the responsibility of initiating sex. Sounds rapey.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 05:21 PM
1

if there was a possibility of those advances eventually being wanted. There is, women aren't all asexual. unless you ask before doing literally everything. I think asking once and not proceeding if she volunteers a no is good enough. But it's usually in jobs where it's difficult to quantify performance that negotiation skills play the biggest part. That's one of the most important responsibilities of a manager. If you guesstimate performance, you're leaving money on the table. Not only that, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/22 01:36 PM
1

Via conversation that comes after a match.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/22 08:16 PM
1

That doesn't follow logically at all. I don't want to be friends with incels or a celebrity for instance. It's not because I believe they are inferior to me or anyone else. Then why? You don't need an academic study to know which way the wind blows. You go outside, go back inside and claim that the wind always blows east everywhere and you don't need a study for that. If you want to make a claim about a large population or anything as enormous as half the earth's population, yes you absolutely n…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/22 12:52 AM
1

I'm at a loss how you feel she believes men are inferior to women based on what she said. If men were equal to women, she'd want to be friends with both. Not wanting to be friends with someone means there's something about them that makes them inferior to those one does want to be friends with. Oh c'mon is well known can even call it a fact that most men try to bang their female friend at one point or hoped it would happen. Can't say that without citing a study. As I said, your personal experien…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 10:40 PM
1

or believe a person should is inherently inferior based on sex This is the exact belief that is being discussed. The belief that because of one's sex, someone is inherently inferior to someone else and therefore one shouldn't be friends with them. I don't understand how you can say that as an example of sexism yet disagree that what was being discussed is sexism. Now it seems having a preference, making an insensitive remark, or having a bit of discomfort for whatever reason with with so and so …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 10:09 PM
1

It's discrimination based on sex, it's sexist by definition. And I dunno about you but to me reasons behind someone behind sexist are rarely understandable and definitely not in this case.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 09:23 PM
2

I have been sexual assaulted by a woman while drunk did i care? no. How else can "not caring" be interpreted? "Not caring" and "ok with" are equivalent.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 11:30 AM
1

I'm sure you do but we were discussing a situation where you could never get a friend because everyone around you was sexist/racist, etc. and you couldn't afford to move. It's nice that life worked out for you in your current situation but I was saying it's kinda sad that you'd be perfectly fine with living without IRL friends just because everyone else wouldn't want to be friends with you due to your immutable physical characteristics and you couldn't afford to move.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:54 AM
1

Are you saying there's no situations in which a woman is buzzed/ a little tipsy and is more than enthusiastic to fuck whoever it is while under the influence? No, there probably is but per previous logic she's unable to consent regardless of her enthusiasm while tipsy. So alcohol is just a get out of responsibility free pass? Yup, for guys or girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:51 AM
1

You haven't delineated yourself as different apart from words here. I agree that I haven't. I'm saying if seeing someone do something is your required level of evidence, there's not much of a point in being in a text-only place.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:49 AM
-1

I believe I said they "tend" to annoy me, not that they are guaranteed to. And that's sexist, because you're making a judgment about people you haven't met based on their gender. It's also a misunderstanding of statistics because your sample size is too tiny to make that judgment. Apathy? If you're saying they're annoying, that's not apathy. After these last couple of years, I'm rooting for the aliens when they get here. Be the change you want to see.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:47 AM
1

Are you saying people are only ever pinned to a bed by their sex partner in movies? So any rape victims who testify to that are lying?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:45 AM
1

most people would not give a fuck if a sober girl fucked a drunk guy though, so I have no reason to think you are any different. This isn't a logically consistent thought. If there are "most people" in a group, there are obviously people who aren't "most people" and it makes complete sense if you randomly talk with somebody who's not "most people."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:44 AM
1

Wow, ok. I dunno why you wouldn't be concerned about society missing out on all the good that comes out of culture mixing but if you don't care about ever being IRL friends with anyone, you probably don't care about lots of other positives too. IMO being ok with such a lonely lifetime of existence kinda sucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:42 AM
-2

How so? It's how I feel, wouldn't repressing my emotions be toxic masculinity? You don't have to repress your emotions to recognize that you haven't met literally all women and so it's impossible that all of them are certain to annoy you. It's not your feelings towards women you know well that are sexist, it's your feelings to those who you haven't even met yet. Look, they're just human beings and human beings aren't great overall. That's speciest.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:38 AM
1

as I said in my initial point we always rightfully blame everybody else who drinks and puts themselves in certain situations Not when it comes to sex and I'd argue the blame is rightfully placed elsewhere because of other factors I discussed. But If you think someone being pinned to a bed is a situation where it's as easy to escape as walking out of a bar, I don't think there's much for us to discuss further.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:36 AM
1

One more related question - would you be ok if you had nobody you could be friends with your entire life and couldn't afford to move somewhere where people would be friends with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:34 AM
1

Sure but if you don't trust words, dunno what you're doing in a place where that's pretty much the only thing on offer.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:32 AM
2

Personally (and this changes depending on the situation) for an average sized woman I just met, if she goes over two glasses of wine or two mixed drinks, more than that I'm not risking it. If that's consistent with what alters the judgment for the vast majority, looks like we're on the same page. I've met girls that like sloppy drunk sex AND tell me that before we start drinking. So long as both of those are true, I don't see an issue. Bullshit, if a guy claims he was raped because he was drunk …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:28 AM
1

You wouldn't feel bad if nobody was friends with the only black guy in a white school? Would you argue that the guy should remain friendless for the years that he attends the school?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:24 AM
-4

That's sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:21 AM
0

No clue what those are, but you saying that a woman accidentally swallowing mouthwash makes consent too difficult a concept for her to understand Eh, ok, fair point, most lightweight excepting outliers. ... doesn't that seem more misogynistic? No because I'll argue the same for all sentients.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:18 AM
0

especially by not drinking in the first place🤣 We're not examining this scenario. Though I do agree that nobody should ever drink. And every scenario I named there was room to "escape" Not when someone is drunk and is about to be fucked. Or do you disagree with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:16 AM
0

The deciding factor was person A decided to drink alcohol The laws disagree. My framework rationalizes this discrepancy. Then you should be careful with consuming alcohol, which is literally my whole point lol And my point, and the rationalization of what the laws say, is that the deciding factor is whether another sentient being is involved (and whether there's room to escape), not only whether there's alcohol involved. I'd be interested in seeing why that framework doesn't make sense, if you h…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:08 AM
1

So ok would you be ok with people's friendship preferences being based on race? Sexual orientation? Religion? Would you be fine if only gay people were ever friends with gay people? If white people used a color chart before deciding if they'll befriend someone?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:06 AM
1

You'd need to argue that your judgment was genuinely hindered by alcohol to claim manipulation, and I'm not buying that at one Margarita. Like I said, I'll agree on whatever limit you like for the most lightweight drinker affecting judgment, I don't really care what it is. Hey, more infantilizing women, what a shocker. That's like saying Japan's women-only cars are "infantilizing women." People should feel safe drinking (and riding trains) and ensuring that is not infantilization. Though there a…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:03 AM
0

but my point still stands an action was taken while under the influence Yeah the deciding factor is not whether action was taken but whether there was persuasion involved and whether it was trivial to back out. Yup and by that logic so is the girl who took too many tequila shots🤷‍♂️ People usually have sex in positions and places where it's much more difficult to walk away.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:59 AM
1

I'm sure most women don't actually obide by this law/rule. Still their fault if they break the rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:57 AM
4

After the fact she did mention she felt butt hurt I rejected her. She felt like I had decided how sober she was and had basically decided on my own she was too drunk. I think her feeling hurt was irrational. IMO you did the right thing here. I had the opposite happen on a rare occasion I was buzzed, a friend drove me home, invited herself in and we hooked up. It probably wasn't my best performance ever but we both had fun. IMO you could potentially claim rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:56 AM
3

Especially given how easy it is for a man to loose a lot from just the accusation alone, regardless of a conviction. This isn't fair and shouldn't be a thing. This is the other problem besides rape trials going nowhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:53 AM
1

They should be.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:50 AM
0

so you need to create a law affecting majority of people There are a lot of laws which affect the majority of people. Drunk driving is illegal, for example. This contradict with your philosophy of we" assuming the worst is bettter" Nobody is assuming the worst. There's still a trial involved and the standards you cited still apply. Third this is similar to the logic that used against allowing drugs It's a different situation, that doesn't mean that this logic is bad. That allowing it would lead …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:47 AM
1

Whether it's one party or two party has no bearing on your ability to make the decision. Yes it does, people are infinitely more persuasive than inanimate objects because the persuasion power of inanimate objects is 0. So the factor here is outside persuasion or lack thereof. If you're at .08 BAC, you think that's enough for a woman to claim rape? One margarita and a woman can no longer consent to anything sexual? Whatever is the limit of where the most lightweight drinker's judgment is affected…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:41 AM
1

So do you think casinos shouldn’t be allowed to serve drunk people This, obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:36 AM
1

If somebody gets drunk and does damage while drunk driving, we blame them, Yeah, the car didn't ask the guy to drive it. if somebody gets drunk and gets into a bar fight we blame them Yeah, nobody asked the guy to fight. Also the guy fighting is typically in a situation where it's simple to walk away.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:35 AM
18

women are in general so much physically weaker they are much more vulnerable That doesn't make sexual assault ok. You said you were ok with the sexual attention so what happened to you wasn't assault.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:32 AM
15

If it's not acceptable for anyone to grab anyone then physical control or lack thereof doesn't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:30 AM
1

I never hear men say "Lisa fucked me while I was drunk should I file a report"? Just because they don't say that doesn't mean they couldn't or shouldn't say that. It's not a double standard if the other opportunity is completely available but nobody chooses to take advantage of it of their own free will. So no, nobody should fuck anyone else when drunk and there's nothing inconsistent about that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:29 AM
0

One party consent vs two party consent. If the car was sentient and asked you to drive it that'd be a situation where it'd be taking advantage of your state too.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:27 AM
1

if that’s sexist, I don’t care. Which is kinda my question, would you be OK with anyone else saying the same thing in other situations, that if what they're doing is sexist, they don't care?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 01:05 AM
1

Are you saying you're ok with sexism?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:52 AM
1

That's sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:46 AM
1

Or have a talk and be crystal clear. I'd advise this. Maybe the friendship can be salvaged, worth a try.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:46 AM
1

That's sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:42 AM
2

Everything everyone of us does, it's for our own benefit. No it isn't, selflessness is a thing. Even if the intentions are purely pure, people still GET a sense of satisfaction for helping someone. Ego boost fare I say. Just because people get a sense of satisfaction doesn't mean that's their only motivation for doing something.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:40 AM
2

There's absolutely no difference between a platonic friendship where neither fantasizes about the other and where both fantasize about the other but act the same as the first friendship.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:37 AM
1

Unless someone is obviously hitting on you, assume nobody who you're interacting with normally wants to bang you. Then if they get offended about you not realizing, say that it's their fault and that if they want to say something they should use their words, like you're doing right now. Because that's the truth and you shouldn't have to deal with people who say nothing and expect everything. If people don't communicate, whatever happens (or doesn't) is on them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:34 AM
1

people only engage in altruism because it makes them feel good, if it didn't then they wouldn't do it. Source?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 03:58 PM
2

Nobody is inherently supposed to pay for anything based on their gender, I disagree with the premise of the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 01:37 PM
1

Being a slut shouldn't be put on a pedestal but sluts should be given the same respect any other average person gets. I don't see anything worth disrespect in being a slut, do you? I'll agree that being a male stud is more difficult but I dunno why you'd think everything involved in that means the guy deserves more respect than average. It's a pretty selfish interest for a fairly shallow cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 01:33 PM
0

Uhhh wow, feeling good is selfish? Your definition of the word doesn't fit the accepted definition. Definition of selfless : having no concern for self : unselfish Just because someone feels good while doing something doesn't mean they're concerned about themselves and that's their primary motivator for doing that action. If someone whips themselves when giving a dollar to someone, that doesn't somehow increase their concern for the other person.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 01:30 PM
1

I think you're underestimating how many women do this, they'd be cutting out a large portion of potential suitors from the dating pool, and men already have greater difficulty dating than women do. The alternative is unintentional unwanted sexual advances so I think it's worth at least exploring ways to make sure she says yes before you go for it. Not having sex is more morally acceptable than risking doing something one of the parties doesn't want to do. Sometimes it's not easy to quantify what…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 01:23 PM
1

I think people definitely should read stuff focused on outside of their filter bubble so that they get an overview of diverse opinions on things. The important part is using critical thinking to find best-supported outlooks.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:32 AM
1

You're blaming the system instead of the people. They're interrelated. If people fail biology without consequences or are homeschooled with the bible, you can't blame them for thinking four burgers a day plus diet soda is a healthy diet.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:31 AM
1

Saying that the actual law is sexist is different from saying that the justice system is sexist. You're talking about the justice system in this comment and about the law in the comment I was responding to. Judges are biased towards women in custody cases, I don't need a source for that. But that doesn't mean laws themselves are sexist, that's judicial interpretation of the laws that's sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:25 AM
1

Women are allowed to go get themselves artificially inseminated and have babies with absolutely no man involved financially or otherwise, and it's supported by legislation and government programs. Which supports my argument that this is related to children's rights. Women are at the top of the hierarchy, then children, then men. I dispute your hierarchy, per arguments I provided above. There are even baby dumping boxes for women to get rid of babies they don't want to have to be responsible for …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:22 AM
1

Just because you've never heard of it doesn't mean it isn't a thing, some women enjoy being pursued, you've never heard of "playing hard to get"? The whole point of that is to invite pursuit, at which point men are then expected to intuit the line between persistent and creepy. Which itself varies depending on how physically attractive you are. Just because there are women who say no but don't mean it doesn't mean guys should assume the woman they're with is playing hard to get. Guys should just…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:20 AM
1

I once saw an article saying that even when there's more than twice the amount of women studying in college than men (70/30), men where more present in engineering and that they where to blame for that. Like wtf on so many levels. This could make sense to me if women are ostracized when they try to study Engineering.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:11 AM
1

I think this is more of a child's rights issue than a gendered issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:10 AM
1

I don't argue with personal anecdotes, there's plenty of empirical evidence that supports my position. I know this sub isn't /r/science but I think this thread has a distinct lack of evidence and sources and a lack of people complaining about this absence, who instead choose to make yet another point that's not supported by anything they link. I'll go ahead and take your comment -- that explicitly references this evidence that nobody is providing -- to lodge my own complaint about this absence.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:08 AM
1

There's a guy who went from a billionaire to a millionaire by giving away money to various causes. How's that not selfless?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 05:00 AM
1

Are you saying it makes sense that something hat's easier or harder to do is evil?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 04:52 AM
1

IMO is perfectly acceptable. What's the basis for the opinion? Is it only the difficulty of gaining the status?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 04:50 AM
1

Who says that? Citation needed. This is the problem with this entire post. The difference between men and women is that women bear the majority of the risk of sex. And no small risk and responsibility at that. State support, social services, adoption services and child support payments were supposed to address this.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 04:48 AM
1

Men are blamed for everything by you in this post but you only have one link for one of those opinions and that link doesn't demonstrate a widespread belief. So your post is about ways men could be hypothetically blamed for various things by a select few individuals but you haven't demonstrated that that's actually happening. I get why you'd post it (circlejerking/clickbaiting/rage-baiting) and why people would upvote it (rage-baiting) but this seems like something that'd break rule 5 if it's no…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/22 04:42 AM
2

Lots of women are nice people, I guess. I'd like to disagree with your assertion that people shouldn't be nice because hypothetical mean people exist. I'd also like to disagree in general that people shouldn't do good things because of hypothetical (unproven) downsides. People also shouldn't do bad things because of hypothetical (unproven) dangers. Building the atom bomb because someone else could potentially build one is dumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/22 01:48 AM
-4

Nothing in the post suggests this.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/09/20 10:40 PM
0

One or two individuals seeing behavior like this is a tiny drop in the ocean of "average US woman." It's like someone saying there is racial strife in the US, and someone responding with "Show me the data." Someone can link news articles with statistics pretty easily in that case.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen20/08/20 10:48 PM
-2

This is a perfect summation of the mindset of the average American women in 2020. lol why? The post is just one person, you'd have to provide a lot more evidence for a claim about millions more people.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen20/08/20 09:29 PM
1

Cool story, I never said sex work outside of a relationship was cheating either, so your entire spiel is without point or merit. Your assumption that this is entirely and only about cheating is a YOU problem. It's about whether people are more likely to cheat if they've been involved in sex work. Well, it's a good thing I never strictly limited myself to just cheating as a cause of relationship failure, It would be helpful if we just talked about cheating because it's easier to talk about one th…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen10/08/20 01:23 AM
1

Just because the promiscuity had a dollar sign attached does not magically make it no longer promiscuity. I didn't say it wasn't promiscuity, I said it's not cheating and that it's not necessarily something that will lead to infidelity. One can be very promiscuous in an open relationship and everything is fine. Promiscuity and cheating are two very different things. Smart men don't build their mate selection strategies on hoping for outliers. I'd argue that smart men should also realize that per…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen10/08/20 12:03 AM
1

Past habits just don't go way just because the Kumbaya Fairy showed up and took a rainbow sparkle shit everywhere and wished for peace on earth. As I said, sex work (when not in a monogamous relationship) isn't cheating so I don't see why a cheating habit would form. Increased sexual partner count in women regardless of the reason correlates hard with a probability of their future relationships failing. Correlation =\= causation. So it behooves a man to simply exclude women with that risk indica…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 02:51 PM
0

But any man in a relationship with a prostitute will not be able to set and apply boundaries. He will be a provider only. This seems entirely unrelated to the main discussion but I don't understand your reasoning for this conclusion. Also your tone is wrong for this sub we teach men here We dont Shame them. The person I was responding to wasn't teaching anyone anything with that insult so I'd disagree with this statement as well. I'm not sure why you didn't include the guy I was replying to in y…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 02:40 PM
-1

Sex work while not in a monogamous relationship? How so?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 02:27 PM
1

Then start off saying so instead of leaving it conveniently ambiguous for goalpost moving later. The original comment was ambiguous on this. Sure, and not every chamber has a bullet in it in a game of Russian Roulette either. It's not about the times it goes OK, it's about when it goes so very bad. Basic risk management. Yes of course. Anyone could potentially cheat, our conversation is about whether sex work makes it more likely. My arguments were meant to demonstrate that it doesn't, not that …
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 01:22 PM
-1

Relationships with a loved one release dopamine too. Also sex with a loved one that someone is actually also attracted to is better so the hit is better. I have a hard time believing that rote, unimaginative sex with some old fat ugly person, where one has to fake satisfaction all the time and one has to do things they are not into sexually, is nearly as satisfying as genuinely satisfying sex with someone who one is looking to settle down with long-term because of mutual compatibility. I'd there…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 12:00 PM
-4

Children learn self-control when they grow up. Also, sex workers don't all necessarily have to like sex with tons of different old, disgusting men/women, they may be in it because they want the money and think it's, e.g., better than flipping burgers or being a cashier.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 11:40 AM
0

I was talking about sex work before a dedicated, closed relationship. And someone with a history of low quality short term contracts does not give a good impression that they can abide by the terms of a high quality long term one Why not? I can argue they may be more likely to go for a long term one because they're tired of poor short term ones. Though a better argument is that (pre-dating) work doesn't really absolutely have to have a direct correlation to what happens in a relationship.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 11:30 AM
1

Agreed, I was talking about sex work before a relationship.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 11:19 AM
-1

Ah yes, good ole "I ran out of arguments so now I'm just going to call people names like a four year old."
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 10:03 AM
-11

If sex work is not cheating, why would it affect whether someone knows or doesn't know how to stay faithful?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 10:00 AM
-13

and coupled with no assurance of her ability to stay within the bounds of the long term contract So ok then why else would sex workers have less ability than everyone else to not cheat?
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 09:36 AM
-19

Sex work isn't cheating.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen09/08/20 09:05 AM
2

Try to nonviolently restrain her because vigilante justice is not justice.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/05/20 10:54 AM
12

Yes, that's exactly what the comment you're replying to said.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/05/20 10:26 AM
2

The popularity of /FDS proves otherwise. I dunno for sure but my theory is that FDS' popularity biggest factor is that people love to hate and they love to hate the most when they can be on a team hating another team. So it's essentially /r/sexism and it being about dating and relationships is just incidental - maybe all the subs closer to blatant sexism have been banned and this one is just the leftover. They are in no way comparable. I wasn't comparing. That the sexes put importance on differe…
/r/PussyPassDenied10/05/20 03:07 PM
8

Yeah that describes the above linked sub way more than it described the femcel sub when I was there.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/05/20 02:01 PM
-2

I think femcels are looking for romantic love rather than sex, though the name is a bit misleading.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/05/20 01:56 PM
1

Lol what, why does "not having a case thrown out" also apparently mean it will likely go in his favor? It will go in someone's favor based on evidence - just because a judge hears a case doesn't mean it will automatically likely go in someone's favor, otherwise there'd be no point in actually hearing the case.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/04/20 09:46 AM
0

Who says it is emotional harm? Not me. I haven't said if it is or is not, I just thought that people were saying it's ok even if it is emotional harm and wanted to say it's not. I haven't really talked about the eventuality where it's not emotional harm.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/19 01:01 PM
2

If it never causes harm of any kind - emotional harm is still bad - then yeah, I wouldn't even call it emotional abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 04:21 PM
3

People shouldn't support bad things. That seems pretty self-explanatory to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 04:05 PM
5

Everyone should do both of those lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 03:55 PM
3

And that's unfortunate, so everyone should stop supporting it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 03:45 PM
3

Then why do you share perspectives or make use of the internet if you don't care about other people or what they've built?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 03:32 PM
1

Do you care about the world surviving before you're gone?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 03:22 PM
2

You responded with this: My username is a lot more appropriate for this (and any other) situation than that of the person who said that. I almost feel offended that you confused my perfectly appropriate username with theirs or that you haven't paid my perfectly appropriate username the attention that such perfect appropriateness clearly deserves.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 03:12 PM
1

Just because women may respond well initially to things that turn out to be emotional abuse does not make emotional abuse a good thing. I didn't. I said "if it turns out to be emotional abuse." If it's not an edge case and if the good response is continual then I don't think it will turn out to be emotional abuse and the comment above wouldn't apply.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 02:34 PM
3

I don't care of I die either Do you care if the world dies? Do you think that's an objectively rational perspective to take for everyone?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 02:24 PM
0

It's probably kinda hard to disambiguate malicious/bad tactics from genuine/positive interest/actions -- likely by design -- but if one succeeds at this then yeah, agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 02:13 PM
3

Murder is an easy and well-working method of resolving a disagreement. If someone disagrees with you, do you think it's objectively better for them to kill you than keep talking?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 02:03 PM
0

Then, unless it's a special circumstance/edge case like stockholm syndrome, I wouldn't classify it as emotional abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 01:53 PM
1

If it's bad, it being easy and working well doesn't make it better.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 01:32 PM
5

If it's bad, women rewarding it doesn't make it better.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 12:56 PM
3

you feeeel that way. Stop being an example of the boy who cried wolf by calling anything you deem uncomfortable as "emotional abuse." I don't feel either way. I'm not going to claim whether it is or is not emotional abuse. I'm making my argument from the perspective of it is being emotional abuse. Whether it is or is not in actuality is a different conversation that you nor anyone else seem to be having. a system that works. This is what women respond to However, if it is indeed emotional abuse,…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 12:55 PM
8

Just because women may respond well initially to things that turn out to be emotional abuse does not make emotional abuse a good thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/19 11:45 AM
13

This is two people being sexist, why would it belong on this sub?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/12/19 10:26 PM
4

mindfulness Per merriam-webster: : the practice of maintaining a nonjudgmental state of heightened or complete awareness of one's thoughts, emotions, or experiences on a moment-to-moment basis I don't see why this necessarily has to be religious. This seems to be more of a meditation/health/psycho-exploration thing to me.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy27/10/19 10:53 AM
3

All known gods actively conflict with the way we know this universe works I don't think that makes much sense. An all-powerful being could contort itself to fit pretty much any universe's workings.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy27/10/19 10:51 AM
2

Why would someone believe or disbelieve the existence of a god if they believe that the truth can be either way? What's the point of making an opinion?
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy27/10/19 10:50 AM
15

Spiritual just means one believes the world and universe is bigger than they are and it's all connected in ways they don't fully understand. That's just science. This is where stuff like karma comes into play, that the thoughts and actions you put out into the universe will eventually come back around, because of that connection. This seems more like spirituality to me because this is talking about superstitious things that have limited/no basis in science. In contrast, religion is more of a bel…
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy27/10/19 10:48 AM
3

Wait, what? There are no women on the internet and there are no men here.....So who's here? spooky music playing
/r/MensRights08/03/18 06:49 PM
9

They might be bad apples but nobody seems to call them out on it. It was sent to me as a private message, I don't get it, how was someone supposed to call out a private message? Mean PMs suck but I don't think it's fair to use them as an example of a community encouraging/supporting anything or its behavior as a whole. was called a blathering idiot in a comment on a different post, That comment sits at its 1 original point. Here, I'll give you that nobody called them out but there wasn't any sup…
/r/MensRights08/03/18 06:45 PM
-13

Well yeah I figure there are three modes of thought -- you believe something happened, believe it didn't happen or don't believe either. I guess the article is about it not being obvious that the police should act as if they don't believe either.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 12:38 AM
-25

Why spend effort on investigating something that one doesn't believe happened? Though I guess the most correct way of proceeding is to categorize belief as irrelevant and just investigate everything and punish people based on the results. So the police chief seems to miss the point a bit.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 11:01 PM
-16

Doesn't the police work by automatically believing and investigating all crimes as they are reported?
/r/MensRights26/12/17 10:45 PM
1

Why is that a better alternative than getting a fair trial?
/r/MensRights24/12/17 11:59 PM
1

So are you OK with someone else deciding to "not be a victim" and breaking down your door and stabbing you to death in the name of revenge for whatever they (correctly or incorrectly) think you've done?
/r/MensRights24/12/17 11:52 PM
1

Any criminal is part of someone's family and a fair fraction of them gets caught, because of police and the justice system. A fraction of people also become victims of violence because people ignore the rule of law and hurt them, partially for revenge.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 11:39 PM
1

There's no need to get revenge just to survive unless you're a caveman living in an African prairie. That's what intelligence, civilization and the rule of law are for. Have you noticed that criminals aren't breaking down your door at all times? That's because the cops get them.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 11:13 PM
1

I never said it's rare. I was saying it makes no sense to say "other people are evil so I should do evil/unethical things too." That would just mean that the number of evil things done will only get bigger.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 10:32 PM
1

for some reason. Vigilantism is what leads to stupid shit like the salem witch trials. Reddit itself is pretty well known for screwing innocent people, like with the whole Boston bomber thing. Shit like that is why there are all the witch hunting rules and why laws and due process are a thing. Buy FYI most ppl would do my idea or worse. My idea is pretty mild compared to what I've heard of ppl doing for revenge. Yeah, there are people who do horrible, nightmarish stuff to other people for no goo…
/r/MensRights24/12/17 08:44 PM
1

A few have been proven and made the front page of reddit. What you can do is gather evidence and turn it over to the appropriate authorities.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 03:45 PM
2

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean morals shouldn't be involved. I think people should go to the cops when something bad happens instead of becoming a vigilante because that's how one gets to keep a functioning society.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 03:35 AM
3

You wouldn't want other people giving you a morally sound punishment for stuff you've done?
/r/MensRights24/12/17 03:06 AM
3

That doesn't mean it's ethical or moral or something that should be done in general.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 03:02 AM
7

.....One of these days I should start a /r/killthosewhodisagree - type sub for mocking posts that promote vigilantiism and completely ignore the existence of a justice system. Did you miss your "two wrongs don't make a right" lesson in kindergarten? Or would you be completely fine if other people took justice into their own hands for things they think you did?
/r/MensRights24/12/17 01:44 AM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 06:33 AM
1

The basis was that she was drunk when they had sex. The "regret=rape" was just something made up afterwards to screw with people, according to that article.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 06:18 AM
1

I think doing women favors solely because they're women goes beyond kindness and respect. If you've experienced several IRL situations where the above wasn't what was happening and the guy was still made fun of then touché.
/r/MensRights03/12/17 06:14 AM
1

Lol wasn't aware that was a controversial idea.
/r/MensRights03/12/17 06:10 AM
1

Suppose you show sources, you will say they are not sufficient; Unsufficient sources are better than none at all. I will give an example. Law doesn't work on statistics. Just because unrelated 90% people of one class were subjected to some harsh environment, you don't punish randomly the 10% people who weren't part of that class. The way law MUST work is irrespective of ANY statistics, given THIS situation, who is in the wrong? This is pretty garbled but laws are meant to ensure the oppression o…
/r/MensRights03/12/17 06:06 AM
1

However, that doesn't excuse it from lacking sources. THANK YOU. So many people think it makes sense to just base opinions on absolutely nothing worthwhile. current trends in what people like to watch makes me worry. People liked watching violence since ancient times (coliseum, etc.). Isn't that worse than sex with a sibling? If watching something meant degeneration, shouldn't humanity be extremely violent after such a long history of watching violence? Not saying women can't serve military, but…
/r/MensRights03/12/17 06:01 AM
1

He sued the school, claiming gender discrimination and that the school’s Title IX officer, who carried out the investigation, had said “regret equals rape” at a campus event. (She denies this.) Lol you left out the most important part. If I say that you said you were selling crack last week, that doesn't mean anything about crack statistics.
/r/MensRights03/12/17 05:52 AM
2

I was more talking about "treat women with kindness and respect" nice, not "try to anticipate women's wishes" nice; I think the latter is a bit overboard unless one is trying to start a relationship.
/r/MensRights01/12/17 05:47 PM
0

Statistics show that people, who had many partners in the past are less happy I can do that too. Statistics show that appropriate-username is the objectively greatest redditor that has ever deigned to visit the website, and will be so long after the visit is over. It is scientifically impossible, as confirmed by dozens of studies, for there to be any other greater redditor. On a much less important topic -- Does promiscuity augurs ill? Not necessarily. A longitudinal study that followed 1000 chi…
/r/MensRights01/12/17 05:36 PM
3

No name scribbles/censoring? Is she a celebrity?
/r/MensRights28/11/17 05:53 PM
4

So yeah, at this point, I'm thinking of all the times men have sacrificed their lives fighting civil wars and revolutions to overthrow ruthless dictators to make their society a better place, Lol that felt so random. They fought in wars so that there is an HR one of you can go to, instead of a dictator who'd just kill both of you.
/r/MGTOW23/09/17 11:22 PM
7

I wonder why photobucket's still around. But thanks for the pic, saved.
/r/PussyPass27/08/17 06:02 PM
94

Literally 5th top post of all time on this sub.
/r/PussyPass27/08/17 07:13 AM
11

BOOM do you want it?!?!?! BOOM do you need it???? BOOM LET ME HEAR IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT!
/r/MensRights27/08/17 02:54 AM
1

The tweeter didn't say females deserve to more easily acquire government positions. "Imagine what could get done" VERY strongly implies that the female gender will magically make any applicant more qualified for half of government positions than a male applicant because more would get done if the female applicant takes the position. If that line wasn't included in the tweet, I'd agree with you.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/08/17 04:45 PM
1

Getting a government job because of one's gender rather than any qualifications is not a privilege?
/r/PussyPassDenied13/08/17 04:23 PM
1

It's a woman asking to be granted certain privileges based solely on gender. I think it at least fits better than all those posts where the gender could be swapped or made ambiguous and it would remain exactly the same.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/08/17 03:35 PM
3

Someone who upvoted the post here. I didn't see it before.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/08/17 02:52 PM
1

It is not REALLY ever possible Sure, nobody can read thoughts, but I thought this sub is more for something that appears to be someone using their gender to argue about something or get something, like in this pic. In that respect, men do the same thing so this does target women over men, though not in a way I believe is actually sexist If it ignores male obnoxiousness in order to focus exclusively on berating women for something both genders are known for doing, how is it not sexist?
/r/PussyPassDenied03/06/17 06:59 PM
1

Sure but I don't see anything to suggest that she was thinking her gender will let her get away with it. To me the vid seems like she wants to get away with being obnoxious in general rather than get away with being obnoxious because of some specific reason.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/05/17 03:19 AM
-2

How would the situation be any different if she was a guy?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/05/17 11:24 PM
3

"He's pulling something that is disrespectful, expecting that it's a thing he can get away with." Changing genders changes nothing -- this isn't a gendered issue so I don't see why anyone would be expecting it to be this way only because she's a woman, i.e. her getting a pussy pass.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/05/17 11:23 PM
-5

She was being obnoxious, this has nothing to do with her gender. This doesn't belong here.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/05/17 10:06 PM
48

Where? It's just people saying what can make the opposite gender look prettier than they are.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/05/17 05:13 AM
60

What does this have to do with this sub?
/r/PussyPassDenied17/05/17 04:40 AM
7

Hey mod what does this pic have to do with one's pussy pass being denied?
/r/PussyPassDenied27/04/17 04:52 AM
4

This isn't /r/femalecriminals.
/r/PussyPassDenied08/04/17 06:34 AM
3

Yeah, she doesn't get jealous of gay men.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/04/17 02:53 PM
10

I bet OP likes it, the fucking retard.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/04/17 02:51 PM
3

Uhh it's like a million to one odds that your mental issues and the mental issues of the woman in the vid have the same symptoms. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here lol.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/04/17 02:49 PM
2

Did you try to get construction/menial labor jobs?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 11:56 PM
1

Lol k deleted. The post over at /cringeanarchy didn't show that it was posted here so I figured I'd try it.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/03/17 09:13 PM
0

publicly fund it's proliferation *its
/r/PussyPassDenied10/03/17 09:13 PM
2

Lol the trp sub family isn't exactly a general subreddit. Something like /r/self maybe could count as a general sub.
/r/askTRP12/01/17 10:59 PM
0

/r/misogyny
/r/MensRights12/01/17 10:49 PM
-1

Merriam-webster Feminism : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests Definition 2 means that your argument is irrelevant. But ok, let's use definition 1. hypocrisy a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion I dunno where you got your definition of hypocrisy but that's not what the word means. It's not higher s…
/r/MensRights18/12/16 11:09 PM
0

How is the rule hypocritical?
/r/MensRights18/12/16 10:52 PM
1

You can switch genders and it wouldn't make a difference in the scenario. SITUATIONS WHERE WOMEN DO SOMETHING THAT IMPLIES THEY WILL SUFFER NO REPERCUSSIONS
/r/PussyPassDenied15/12/16 06:17 PM
2

This has nothing to do with her being a woman.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/12/16 03:16 AM
2

Oh shit thx for the warning --/amiugly mod.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/16 04:07 AM
23

TL;DR this sub's always been shit.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/02/16 04:45 PM
6

Top post of all time is someone not using their gender to get away with something either.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/02/16 04:41 PM
1

I went through some other threads and found out he is the creator. It's not like it says who made the sub right below the sidebar in all subreddits, unless that person deletes their account.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/03/15 11:14 PM
-2

Would you be OK with one where three insults against anybody get you banned? I can make an alternative sub but that's the rule I have in all subs I mod that are big enough where this is an issue.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/03/15 11:11 PM
0

So you know every single law of the place where you live?
/r/PussyPassDenied31/12/14 10:49 PM
1

Post it to /r/prettygoodof :) I tried to make a sub where you could get karma for pretty much any kind-of good post.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 09:49 PM
0

Not even. Your quote is a very specific rule targeted at a very specific set of subreddits and shows nothing about how the admins feel about all subreddits that do not have suggestive content featuring minors, i.e. those that discuss pedophilia.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 05:04 PM
2

Yeah, two reasonable people on /mensrights, who'da thunk it, eh.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 02:09 PM
1

Direct quote from an admin please.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 02:08 PM
3

Yep. The admins have realized this and are trying their hardest to stay away from that, we just need to get the rest of reddit to realize that.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:50 AM
1

Always appreciate any appropriate assistance :)
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:47 AM
5

urgh, there's also r/beatingwomen and r/rapingwomen. Those subs are up not because of any misandry bias but because pictures of violence and talking about violence in a violence-themed environment is much more legal than what r/jailbait was doing.....Pretty much 100% legal.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:39 AM
7

You're not getting the point. Admins can't ban content of a certain kind and then turn a blind eye to other content of the same kind and legality without the banning being obviously biased and ultimately random. In other words, admins shouldn't ban a type of content that's not against the rules just because you think it should be banned. And they can't make a new rule without including r/trees. Whether you care or not about /trees is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:32 AM
11

Yeah but the whole point of the thing is where you draw the line. If you move the line back enough that discussing pedophilia is bannable, you'd probably make /trees discussion bannable too and I'm sure many redditors would be against that.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:23 AM
8

.........So okay, welcome to reddit, Reddit Enhancement Suite. The first two links have probably just been overlooked, it's not any sort of statement by the admins. Yeah, it's a discussion sub about drugs and getting high. It's been mentioned in other similar threads often enough that it's probably true--people do talk about where they can get weed on r/trees. For example, searched for "get weed" and found these three examples. Long story short, if we start banning for discussion on something, w…
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:18 AM
3

The first two are kinda bad but talking about pedophilia is as okay as talking about weed in /trees and I didn't see any suggestive underage photos in the latter two.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 06:09 AM
1

ah cool, ty, upvote.
/r/seduction15/11/10 12:40 AM
1

SS?
/r/seduction15/11/10 12:21 AM
2

Tip: Going WELL </grammarnazi>
/r/seduction15/11/10 12:15 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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