TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

babycarrotman Archive

View 1 post and 61 comments by babycarrotman 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)
-9

I'm sure the guys at r/drugs feel the same way about the guys at r/trees
/r/MensRights03/06/14 06:53 PM
-12

You should tell TRP to stop visiting mensrights so much then. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/26wcbu/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/ If you run the same analysis on other subs you'll see some other ingesting community overlaps. r/judaism has r/israel at the top, r/drugs has r/trees at the top, r/hiphopheads has r/nba at the top. The overlap is real.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 05:57 PM
-1

other than the fact that it's considered heresy to your religion (Cultural Marxism)? Is everyone here conservative?
/r/MensRights03/06/14 09:22 AM
-1

Go check out the work on other subs. r/judaism has r/israel at the top, r/gaybros has r/askgaybros at the top, r/drugs has r/trees at the top, r/hiphopheads has r/nba at the top. Are you going to argue that evidence doesn't indicate community overlap? I'm still waiting on that counterexample. A shared base is implies shared values, because... the communities overlap. That's it. "Proof" only exists in math. It's strong evidence of a community overlap. Will you demand that I do a comment by commen…
/r/MensRights26/05/14 07:44 PM
-6

Sure, the raw data in isolation could mean anything! You have demonstrated that there is a small overlap in members/commenters--you have NOT demonstrated that the people in that overlap agree with each other on anything. The raw data provide evidence of similar userbases. And with a similar userbase, comes similar opinions. Also, common sense tells us that there's overlap between TRP and MensRights. The situation you imply might exist (one of mutually high comment crossover but high disagreement…
/r/MensRights26/05/14 06:20 AM
-4

You presented evidence that about 200 people (out of over 50,000 in TRP and 90,000 in MR) means there is an overlap of opinion between the two subreddits. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what those numbers mean. The sample is not out of total subscribers, it's out of active commenters. Let's extend this logic: AskTRP has no connection to TRP because only 576 use AskTRP (576/50000 is about 1%). That conclusion, is of course ridiculous. You don't believe that AskTRP and TRP are unrelate…
/r/MensRights25/05/14 10:31 PM
-4

I sympathize with having to put up with being in the intellectual minority, because I think we're on the same page there. But, How does presenting data turn MensRights into an echo chamber? How is hard data about how our communities are organized irrelevant? My loyalty is to the numbers first. When people bring anything at us, we need to be ready with the data.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 09:34 PM
-1

Great! I love data! What you cite is a perfect example of evidence that againstmensrights is trolling mensrights. The attention againstmensrights pays to mensrights is not simply not reciprocated. The similarity calculations bear this out in a more quantitative way. AgainstMensRights posters are not like MensRights posters. Unfortunately TRP is about as old as the data itself, so it's impossible to see where it fits in using that data set. My position is that data are important, useful and infor…
/r/MensRights25/05/14 08:48 PM
-5

Stop making assumptions about me or my motivations. Take a step back, and analyze the data. the overlap proves nothing It's the same way the overlap of SRS and thebluepill proves nothing. ShitRedditSays Drilldown Of 1907 Users Found Top 10 overlapping subs: Subreddit Overlapping Users SubredditDrama 203 TheBluePill 173 againstmensrights 162 cringepics 122 circlebroke 114 SRSDiscussion 112 TrollXChromosomes 108 creepyPMs 107 SRSGaming 101 lewronggeneration 80
/r/MensRights25/05/14 08:08 PM
-4

Here is the same post with the /r/ removed before againstmensrights and other subs mentioned. 1. It's true I've posted this multiple times. I happen to think data is important to the conversation. 2. If I told you that the majority of users who are active in both subs are actually TRPs trolling MensRights[1] , could you prove me wrong? Proof? Hardly. But there is evidence that goes against the supposition. Primarily in the fact that the posting relationship goes both ways. From MensRights to The…
/r/MensRights25/05/14 03:37 PM
-5

Holy friendly fire, batman!
/r/MensRights25/05/14 05:11 AM
-22

(PUA) forums, which is competely unrelated to the MRM The user overlap is real, unfortunately. It's something we should work on. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/ TheRedPill top 10 user overlap Subreddit Overlapping Users asktrp 576 AskMen 281 seduction 202 MensRights 198 NoFap 164 relationships 153 sex 147 RedPillWomen 123 trpgame 112 leagueoflegends 111
/r/MensRights25/05/14 02:54 AM
0

Ah, I can understand how this data can be confusing. The number of active posters in any given sub can be relatively small.
/r/MensRights25/05/14 12:39 AM
-3

we should also point out that PUA's are not the same as MRA's The user overlap is real, unfortunately. It's something we should work on. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/ TheRedPill top 10 user overlap Subreddit Overlapping Users asktrp 576 AskMen 281 seduction 202 MensRights 198 NoFap 164 relationships 153 sex 147 RedPillWomen 123 trpgame 112 leagueoflegends 111
/r/MensRights25/05/14 12:27 AM
0

Fair points. The meaning of the raw data is open to interpretation. And in my experience, hard data has been welcome here.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 11:19 PM
-1

I can understand how the chart might be confusing. It's a count of how many redpill posters post in other subs. The top 10 are listed there. You really should check out the opensource bot used at subredditanalysis. It's very interesting.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 11:16 PM
6

OP just seems interested in hauling his political baggage with him.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 11:13 PM
-7

I see how that could be confusing. It's a listing of how many posters in the red pill, post in other subs. These are the top 10.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 11:06 PM
0

Yep, the bot does it by looking at comments.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:57 PM
-5

Ah, I can understand the confusion in the chart. Most subscribers comment very little. If you're curious about how the bot makes its calculations you should check out the opensource bot at subredditanalysis. It's interesting. TheRedPill top 10 user overlap Subreddit Overlapping Users asktrp 576 AskMen 281 seduction 202 MensRights 198 NoFap 164 relationships 153 sex 147 RedPillWomen 123 trpgame 112 leagueoflegends 111
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:46 PM
2

Examples?
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:20 PM
-14

edit: Why are we downvoting data? We should be better than this. we should also point out that PUA's are not the same as MRA's The user overlap is real. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/ TheRedPill top 10 user overlap Subreddit Overlapping Users asktrp 576 AskMen 281 seduction 202 MensRights 198 NoFap 164 relationships 153 sex 147 RedPillWomen 123 trpgame 112 leagueoflegends 111
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:17 PM
-1

edit: Don't downvote data, we're better than that. Even though most MRAs have distanced themselves There is objective overlap, however. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/ TheRedPill top 10 user overlap Subreddit Overlapping Users asktrp 576 AskMen 281 seduction 202 MensRights 198 NoFap 164 relationships 153 sex 147 RedPillWomen 123 trpgame 112 leagueoflegends 111
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:10 PM
-12

MRM has nothing to do with PUA. At all. Maybe there is some membership overlap but MRM has nothing to do with picking up women. Some membership overlap indeed. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/ TheRedPill top 10 user overlap Subreddit Overlapping Users asktrp 576 AskMen 281 seduction 202 MensRights 198 NoFap 164 relationships 153 sex 147 RedPillWomen 123 trpgame 112 leagueoflegends 111
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:09 PM
3

Men's Rights is right-wing, got it.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:01 PM
15

He may SAY he hated women but his actions tell us he adored them. Not to be a buzzkill, I think his actions say he murdered them.
/r/MensRights24/05/14 10:00 PM
-15

Men''s rights is a category of posts, and has its own flair. Also the user overlap is pretty huge. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/
/r/MensRights24/05/14 09:44 PM
-3

Take a look. http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditAnalysis/comments/25zy6a/rtheredpill_drilldown_may_2014/
/r/MensRights24/05/14 09:43 PM
1

To break down the Lisak study: 1882 men total: 120 men met the criteria for rape or attempted rape (6.4%) 44 were single act rapists (44/1882=2.3%) 77 were serial rapists (77/1882=4.1%) The serial rapists, however, account for 91% of the rapes or attempted rapes. (439/483=91%) So the serial rapists, raped on average 6 times. And with the increased number of rapes, there also seemed to be a correlation to increased physical violence. Within the universe of 3,698 violent acts that the 1,882 men in…
/r/MensRights22/05/14 12:58 AM
2

The number 23 comes from an even smaller group of rapists, which excludes the single act rapists. Of the 76 repeat rapists, 23 (30%) used overt force The rest of the repeat rapists used threats of physical force, or drugs to rape or attempt to rape their victims. So to break down his sample as it is in the slide: 1882 men total: 120 men met the criteria for rape or attempted rape (6.4%) 44 were single act rapists (44/1882=2.3%) 77 were serial rapists (77/1882=4.1%) The serial rapists, however, a…
/r/MensRights20/05/14 10:51 PM
11

In the Lisak study referenced, the definition is quite more specific. See page 5. For a participant to be classified among the group of rapists and attempted rapists in this study, he would have to have responded "yes" to one of the following questions Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not coop…
/r/MensRights20/05/14 10:27 PM
2

Ah, I see what you mean. Concerns about time as an issue should be somewhat allayed by the similar findings in the US Navy study in 2009.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 05:46 PM
3

The main studies here are from 2002 and 2009. But yes, the numbers are interesting.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 05:08 PM
7

The headline numbers are not from accused rapists, they're from admitted rapists. People who describe prior sexual acts that explicitly meet the legal definitions of rape. It's on page 5. For a participant to be classified among the group of rapists and attempted rapists in this study, he would have to have responded "yes" to one of the following questions Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by usi…
/r/MensRights20/05/14 04:22 PM
8

There was some pushback on the scientific literature at TwoX too. But from the other side. The scientific literature is inconvenient for any simple narrative.
/r/MensRights20/05/14 03:31 PM
7

Citations of some research mentioned: http://www.davidlisak.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/RepeatRapeinUndetectedRapists.pdf US Navy research www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA519627 The video mentioned in the piece. http://vimeo.com/73388289 Youtube timestamps: Myths of Campus rape: http://youtu.be/_iZCWfYZ9IU?t=7m Pie chart breakdown of population: http://youtu.be/_iZCWfYZ9IU?t=11m40s 76 Serial rapists committed a total of 1,045 violent or sexual offenses: http://youtu.be/_iZCWfYZ9IU?t=13m30s Th…
/r/MensRights20/05/14 03:24 PM
8

Let's not pat our own backs too hard. Her book "Save the Males" was written before /r/MensRights existed. She was already on board.
/r/MensRights22/02/14 02:50 PM
1

You should read this circular reasoning article. It's fascinating. Really, it's an excellent read. Sorry that you had to lose an argument today, but chin up kiddo! Tomorrow's another day!
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:33 AM
-3

This argument is about one point. Is the quote in question misogynistic? I believe I made a case that the quote was in fact misogynistic. Is your contention that it is not misogynistic? If not, why not? Please present your case. Thanks!
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:16 AM
23

If you lead with the subreddits you're subscribed to, no conversation with a woman is going to go well.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:08 AM
-1

Do not tell me what I have and have not read. If you think viewing this as a war that has feminists as the enemy is productive, then good luck with that.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 12:59 AM
-4

This argument is about one point. Is the quote in question misogynistic? I believe I made a case that the quote was in fact misogynistic. Is your contention that it is not misogynistic? If not, why not? Please present your case. Thanks!
/r/MensRights04/11/13 12:56 AM
2

A lot of men fear a world where women and men are truly equal. I don't. Calling it war really just doesn't appeal to me. I feel like it allows you to see a disagreement for a battle and that is not terribly productive. Also, why the downvote? Here, have an upvote.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 10:31 PM
1

Completely agree. Which is why I wasn't expecting blowback when I said it was a bad platform for criticizing feminism and that we shouldn't let bad arguments dilute good ones.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 10:17 PM
2

Too many in the MRM are far too sensitive to the feminists crying "Misogyny Victim". Let them whine and whimper and continue to use tactics of blame and cries of victimization. Whenever we censor ourselves and each other to please the feminists, we lose ground. Is this some kind of war that has feminists as the enemy? I didn't realize that.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 10:14 PM
11

1.) The "tone" argument: Referring to women and their moistened cunts is intentionally inflammatory and gendered language. If someone calls you a "nigger-lover" because you have black friends, they're not trying to be nice. 2.) The substance of the claim: The poster is literally saying that there is science that shows female students are using their vaginas to get ahead. From the tone we can tell he means that they are doing this deviously. Why would you say this fails to meet the definition of …
/r/MensRights03/11/13 10:08 PM
-1

Oh there it is, found the crazy for you.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 09:49 PM
1

Your point about the article/headline dichotomy is a good one. I wish it were something that was addressed before, because it's an excellent point in analyzing what happened. Unfortunately that was not ever brought up. Also though it is an ancilliary point to the one I was trying to make, the interpretation doesn't fit the piece. Ancilliary point: Where was the satire actually directed? The body of the onion article did not have any other bits showing that the satire in this piece suggests a gen…
/r/MensRights03/11/13 09:34 PM
5

Uhh... maybe you missed this line? The evidence is that the female students are totally aware of what they are doing and knowingly using their moistened cunts to lubricate romantic and professional relationships.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 07:57 PM
6

Let's not backpat too much, there is still work to do. I posted a submission asking MRA not to make stupid arguments and was met with complete misunderstanding. MRAs misunderstood an onion piece and made fun of one feminist sub for "misunderstanding" it. It was an alienating experience. edit: I'm being downvoted for talking about being self-critical in reply to a post talking about how good this place is for self criticism.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 07:02 PM
3

Sad, but is this really an MRA issue?
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:45 AM
-4

It's an article about a narcissist that thinks yakking about Radiohead, Gladwell and the New Yorker makes him smart. He doesn't understand why he's not getting second dates. He says women are attracted to dumb men, because they are on a woman's level. When he tries to approach women he's already alienated at a party again, he doesn't understand why they aren't taking back. I don't know many straight women who try this approach. It's a funny article to me because (minus the radiohead) I knew this…
/r/MensRights20/09/13 02:26 PM
2

This is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 04:14 AM
1

That guy's life in normal society would be over. ... Unless of course he was a star QB.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 04:08 AM
1

That being said, this case exposes a disgusting double standard in the law: When a woman kills her unborn child it's "her choice, her body". So the child is clearly not a person and doesn't have rights. Okay fine, but... When a man kills his unborn child it's "murder". So wait, the child is a person after all? But you just said the child wasn't a person and it was okay to kill it? These aren't the same people making these arguments. This is only what the prosecutor has put forward.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 11:38 PM
1

You don't have to take this "no stance" stance about burglaries or murders to understand why someone did it. In fact, many crimes can be explained by someone's poor situation. But understanding is not the same as "not condemning or condoning." If you said, "that's terrible, but I understand what might have driven him to it" then I wouldn't have posted anything. I understand that he might not have thought he had great options, but he poisoned somebody to get away from having to care for a child. …
/r/MensRights19/05/13 11:05 PM
1

You're not condemning? What the fuck?
/r/MensRights19/05/13 08:34 PM
1

The victim in that case is male. He is the one not consenting to the penetration. It would also be rape if some woman forced a man to finger her without consent. The definition is written this way so it explicitly includes males who are unable to give consent (e.g. statutory rape). I could find no men's rights publication that voiced your concern about the new FBI definition of rape. If you honestly feel that the legal definition leaves out true male victims of rape, you should be furiously writ…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 09:30 AM
1

Instead of relying on reports and PR about what the definition is - why don't you read it for yourself. I did. Now you should give it a try. The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim. That's it. Seriously, that's the whole definition. If we set up hypotheticals, we see that a woman can rape a man under this definition. If she penetrates him anally with anything…
/r/MensRights11/03/13 10:55 PM
1

The new definition says women can't rape men. http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2012/01/09/u-s-expands-its-definition-of-rape/ "it will now acknowledge male victims as well as female" http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/us/definition-of-rape-is-shifting-rapidly.html "all forms of penetration, as well as cases involving male victims" http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/January/12-ag-018.html The justice department memo: The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any bod…
/r/MensRights11/03/13 10:08 PM
1

For example most rape of men simply is defined away by the government (at the request of feminists). Thankfully, not anymore. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-rape-crimes-idUSTRE80520I20120106 And for whatever else you think of feminist groups, they pushed for the gender-neutral wording. http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=13401 There's reason for hope.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 09:17 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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