TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

bostonbob1987 Archive

View 1 posts and 137 comments by bostonbob1987 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)
3

bostonbob1987/r/MensRights23/09/16 02:51 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

The average person can't see past their own crumbling self image into the blinding light that is your future. Because most of the people who talk about "corporate slaves!" and becoming a millionaire end up never actually trying to do anything. They just talk about how great they are all the time. At a certain point, someone has to respond "you aren't a trail blazer, risk taker, future millionaire - you're a chubby loser who sleeps in until 11 every day and lives off his parents."
/r/TheRedPill23/10/17 07:44 PM
2

Two more accurate titles to summarize the content: "How to be a man, by some lady" "Don't view women as weak, but treat them like they are incredibly weak"
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/17 08:25 PM
21

Meanwhile young girls literally chase young male pop stars down the street, scream at the top of their lungs, throw underwear and flash their breasts at the performer during concerts, and none of these things are ever seen as sexual aggression.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 04:57 PM
1

These stories ways read like horrible neckbeard fanfiction. "Balls deep in her love tunnel"? What the fuck, man? ever-curious researcher of the mating tendencies of the human female, Jesus fucking Christ.
/r/TheRedPill26/09/17 02:21 PM
14

She said the surgery could be more accurately understood as a cosmetic modification like labiaplasty. Yes. And anyone who would advocate labiaplasty be performed on infant girls using "guys think it looks better" as a justification is a fucking psycho.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 03:45 PM
4

I don't think the advice exists because women are more crazy. I think it exists because a man dealing with a crazy woman is on his own. A crazy woman has several ways to completely fuck you over, and she will be enabled by society and the legal system if she chooses to do so. Nobody is going to give a "Man of Courage" award to a guy for harassing, beating, and stalking his girlfriend. Meanwhile Emma Sulkowics engaged in a multi year campaign to harass and defame a man who rejected her romantic i…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/17 04:31 PM
1

You can't stop an adoption unless you provided material financial support to the mother during pregnancy. And even then, the adoption can still go through over you.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 05:44 AM
1

All a putative father's registry gives you is the ability to receive notice if a child is put up for adoption.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 05:36 AM
1

What do you mean by "assert his rights via the correct legal channels" - describe the steps you think a father should take.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 04:11 AM
1

I don't know what I'm after - what's in the "best interests of the child"? Is it in the best interest of the child to cut the father out of his / her life without the father's knowledge or consent?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 03:30 AM
1

that's nature No. It's an unfair legal system. However you can register in case of a possible pregnancy. Requiring a person to register their sexual partners with the state in order to have parental rights is unfair.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 03:17 AM
1

Untrue. Signing up for a putative father registry only gives you notice. If you contest the adoption, and prove that you provided material support, you can still have the adoption go over your objection. However, "what is required" is overly burdensome on men. You have to literally register your sex life with a court in order to have rights. That's insane. Plus, there's really no way for you to provide support IF YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PREGNANCY!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 03:10 AM
1

If you are paying child support, you get the rights automatically No. You don't. You don't get obligated to pay child support then have the child adopted away from you. Whether you have a child support obligation, or have the child adopted away from you, is almost entirely in control of the mother. You, as the father, have no choice, and very few rights. All you have is responsibilities - but your responsibilities are entirely contingent on the mother CHOOSING that you have those responsibilitie…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 02:50 AM
1

First - it's hard to do that for a kid you don't know about. Second - no such requirement exists to impose a financial obligation on the father. What happened to "best interests of the child?" Suddenly, when the father wants rights, instead of just responsibilities, it becomes all about him and not about the child. Can't you people just admit that when you say "best interests of the child" you really mean "what the mother decides is best"?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 11:09 PM
1

single person's income in the capitalist system Is there some other system where single people do make more money?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 03:52 PM
1

And all a putative father registry gives you is right to notice. If you have not provided financial support to the pregnant mother, the adoption will go through over your objection.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 03:51 PM
1

If the ''father'' isn't paying towards his responsibility, then obviously the state will assume his financial obligations. Why can't the mother (the person who made the decision to have and keep the child) be the one who has the sole financial obligation? She made the choice alone - why can't she pay for it alone?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 03:49 PM
1

Child support is in the best interest of the child, that is why it exists. We don't enforce child support on parents who put children up for adoption. We don't enforce child support payments on mothers who drop infants off at safe havens. Would those polices NOT be in the "best interest of the child"?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 03:48 PM
2

I have done the reading. I also did the reading back when it was "hegemonic masculinity." Try this experiment - get someone who talks about "toxic masculinity" to say something positive about men or masculinity.
/r/MensRights28/08/17 11:18 PM
11

"Toxic masculinity" is the idea that men are raised to violently dominate and subordinate women. It used to be called "hegemonic masculinity." What that idea ignores is that men are not raised to be violent and aggressive. They are raised to be valiant, strong, and protective of those weaker than themselves. People who tout toxic masculinity point to men committing more violent crimes. If you get shot in a random act of violence, it is true that the shooter will likely be male. However, the peop…
/r/MensRights28/08/17 08:50 PM
22

I think it's a good demonstration that all that "toxic masculinity" stuff is hogwash. Maybe posts like this can help people see masculinity is not toxic.
/r/MensRights28/08/17 04:14 PM
1

Now women get custody of the children. Guess what guys? This is a benefit. Sure, if you don't love your kids. Most men love their kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/17 07:51 PM
1

I actually used to like Any Schumer. I thought some of her early specials were pretty good. And I liked her movie Trainwreck, even though it fell into some standard cliche romantic comedy stuff. But she has been over exposed, and she hasn't adapted to the level of fame her movie generated for her. Her latest Netflix special was incredibly bad. To give an example - in one of her earlier specials, she talks about her body type and states "if we were making a cheerleader pyramid, I would be a base"…
/r/MensRights23/08/17 05:25 PM
1

Because it helps women justify that the "nice guy" is being rejected because he is really a bad person, when in reality the guy is being rejected because he's a pussy. Bitching online about "nice guys finish last" makes you look like even more of a pussy, and women detest a weak man. But they wont admit that. So they make up a bullshit "he was just pretending to be nice!" meme.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 04:44 PM
1

So are women lying or is it mostly just a case of mixing up the opinions of two different individual women Neither. It is just that women will be coy when asked directly about their preferences to spare feelings and try not to appear shallow. So, you can watch a girl go gaga over Channing Tatum, but if you ask that same girl "what kind of guys are you attracted to" she will respond with "I like guys who can make me laugh" which is misleading for two reasons. First, she leaves out the physical at…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 04:34 PM
3

There's even a relatively new, socially acceptable slur for such men: fuckboy. Before "fuckboy" there was "player" and before "player" there was "womanizer." None of them were compliments. Which makes the whole argument about "men get praised for sleeping with lots of women!" thing complete nonsense. No, they don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/17 09:53 PM
4

The existence of an atypical mental condition does not require redefining entire concepts. I am fine with transgender people living as they see fit. I will even refer to them with their preferred pronouns. But I am not going to cede that they actually are the gender they believe themselves to be, any more than I will concede that a person with schizophrenia is hearing real voices.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/17 06:47 PM
5

So your argument is "it's not 99.9% it's 99.5%"? I fail to see much of a difference. The "gender and sex are different!" people have a completely inconsistent and self contradicting position. They claim gender and sex are different, and that gender is a social construct. But if gender is purely a social construct, then how can transgender people even exist? Were they just immune to the social conditioning? They seem to be arguing both that gender is a social construct, except for trans people wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/17 05:44 PM
6

Because for 99.99% of people gender and sex align such that separating the two makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/17 01:53 PM
3

To #1 - don't you think it's a little odd that the feminist society insisted that any attempt to create a men's issues group be under their purview? To #2 - I cited it more for the arguments being made. "You can have a men's space, but as long as feminists control it" appears to be the argument. To #3 - the student government at Ryerson denied the men's rights group multiple times, citing "safety concerns." The main group alleging that the men's rights group was unsafe was the "Ryerson Feminist …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/17 11:54 PM
2

Sure thing http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11670138/Why-are-our-universities-blocking-mens-societies.html http://www.vancouversun.com/McMartin+barricades+students+arms+over+centre/6669021/story.html https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/avyxwb/a-toronto-mens-rights-group-says-its-being-discriminated-against-in-lawsuit-against-university-student-union
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/17 10:41 PM
2

I am not aware of any state that has passed shared custody legislation.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/17 04:52 PM
3

Shared custody bills. MRAs supported legislation to make 50/50 the default physical custody presumption upon divorce. The National Organization of Women sent out an action alert to oppose that legislation. In the action alert, NOW warned that father's rights groups' true motivation was to give men more power to abuse women. Alimony reform - there was a recent attempt in Florida to reform alimony laws, strongly opposed by feminist groups. Attempts to start male issues groups on college campuses. …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/17 04:51 PM
1

Better yet, post it on Menslib and simply title it "Evidence of discrimination against men."
/r/MensRights30/06/17 09:47 PM
11

The idea the Communism is peaceful is also a joke.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/17 07:47 PM
3

No. I really don't. I do think this helps illustrate why men may be wary of getting into professions like teaching, and that sort of thing. But I think wariness over dating single moms is a separate issue. The reason I would not date a single mother is because I think it shows lack of responsibility, and I dont want to impose on a child's life that I have nothing to do with.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/17 04:28 PM
2

Unless your going for a professional You're* can you recall everything you learned in undergrad. No. Can you recall every weight you've lifted and every mile you've run? No? Was it still worth doing? how about those 2 year electives? Choose interesting electives. There are plenty. What does regurgitating material on an exam prove? To who? You are trying to prove to the professor you learned the material. If you have a better way of doing that than an exam, feel free to propose your alternative. …
/r/TheRedPill23/06/17 08:35 PM
13

I have always found the "formal education is useless, educate yourself" point to be incredibly facile and immature. Formal education is a tremendous advantage and a terrific opportunity IF YOU MAKE THE MOST OF IT. If you just show up and go through the motions, it may end up being a waste of time and money. "Take the time to educate yourself and enrich your soul" sounds like rich kid bullshit to me. There are plenty of young people in third world countries working in sweat shops who would kill f…
/r/TheRedPill23/06/17 01:59 PM
9

"There are no good men" is to express frustration at a woman's dating prospects. It's a general "men suck" from women who are having trouble in that area. Men do the same sort of thing. The problem is, men complaining about women has been labeled sexist. Personally, I think it is perfectly healthy for men to bitch about women and for women to bitch about men. As long as you dont become obsessed and defeatist, it's fine. There are tons of comedians who have made their entire careers on pointing o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/17 04:29 PM
2

I use humor to put people at ease, and wit to deride wannabes who try to look tougher than they are. No you don't. That shit works in high school or a limp wristed office environment, but in an environment where violence is somewhat more loosely regulated you'll get fucked up. lol. What the fuck are you talking about? This place comes off like neckbeard fanfiction so often. Guess who will get the girl. Obviously you, stud. Once you pull out that katana sword you bought at the mall, the panties a…
/r/TheRedPill16/06/17 02:01 AM
2

Wit absolutely helps with women, and with social interactions in general. You can dominate a room with a strong wit.
/r/TheRedPill15/06/17 08:11 PM
6

I am a man and was raised as such along with my two brothers. I went to school all of my life with boys and girls. I did not witness boys being raised to be confident, aggressive, and strong, and girls being raised to be meek and passive. If girls are being raised that way - how? And by who?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/17 03:45 PM
3

No you aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/17 05:58 PM
1

First, I disagree. If you look at school as an example, girls tend to be more submissive to the teacher's authority and instructions than boys are. If you look at the workplace, women are much less likely to take risks - like asking for a raise - and tend to be much softer in negotiations. In fact, feminists have even sugfested that negotiations need to be changed to compensate for women's difficulty in that area. Second, I dont think it necessarily follows that lack of submissiveness in other a…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 04:41 PM
1

What do you base that conclusion on?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 04:04 PM
1

Not really. Women want to be submissive much more than men, in general, want women to be submissive.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 03:27 PM
2

Because you are questioning religious dogma. Feminism is a religion.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 05:12 PM
1

The definition of reproductive coercion is whether the pregnancy was achieved by coercion or deceit. Where is this definition located? And even on your definition my point remains the same - men who try to trick women into impregnating them are punished - women who try to trick men into impregnating them are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 03:34 AM
1

Says who?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 03:11 AM
2

I dont care which gender is more prone to particular behavior. I care about the law and societal incentives for doing so. The law attempts to prevent men from coercing women. "Stealthing" or poking holes in a condom (when you are a man) is sexual assault (rightfully so). If a man commits such an act and it results in a pregnancy, the woman is free to have an abortion, drop the child off at a safe haven, or put the child up for adoption. If they are a married couple, those last two options are mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 03:29 PM
2

I like that she interpreted the children reacting negatively to "you dont know how business works" as entitlement. It is more lilely they were reacting negatively to a clear insult and a dodging of the issue.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 01:33 PM
1

My last word will be - I remain as entrenched in my position as you are in yours. And I continue to find it very humorous that the only thing you have to do to get a staunch feminist to sound like a hardcore conservative is suggest that men should have reproductive rights.
/r/MensRights09/05/17 05:42 AM
1

So you're ignoring my "what if it's past the abortion cutoff" question and just stating this outright. OK. The answer to your question is - yes, even if it is past the abortion cutoff. Any other rule would simply incentivize keeping pregnancies secret until the time period runs out. I don't quite understand your angle on this point. Because we as a society recognize that nine months of pregnancy and a lot of pain upon delivery weed out all but the most desperate girls and women from putting thei…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 03:33 AM
1

Coercion is using force or threats. A threat of withdrawing the funds necessary to raise a healthy child is coercion. But a threat of withdrawing the presence of a fatherly figure necessary to raise a healthy child is not? The details are extremely important here, and when I press you on them, you back out by saying "the particulars can be worked out". No, it doesn't work that way. Well, the details are quite easy. There are two really easy ways to do it. Either you tie the running of a particul…
/r/MensRights09/05/17 01:50 AM
1

This is just not true as a general proposition. You can slice and dice what types of coercion we should be OK with as a society, but it's always going to be coercive. It's baked into the concept of childrearing; you're just wildly wrong about this. I don't understand what you mean. Would me telling a woman that I do not want to be a father also be coercion? I don't understand what definition of coercion you are using. Well, OK, woman doesn't notice she's pregnant until past abortion period. You'…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 06:44 AM
1

"Changing the calculus" is not coercion. As far as your "Women will lie to men, therefore your idea is bad" argument - those problems are easy to get around. Tie the right to legal paternal surrender to the notice of pregnancy/child. Guy has three months from learning of a pregnancy or child to exercise the right. Whether a particular man received notice would be an issue of fact, easily handled by our court system. This is the only situation in which there is a child. Not a zygote, not a fetus,…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 06:19 AM
1

It's not an ultimatum. It is simply informing the mother that the father has no interest in being a father, and chooses to relinquish all rights and responsibilities. The mother is then free to make her own choice. She can choose to abort. She can choose to carry the baby to term and put it up for adoption. She can choose to carry the baby to term and raise it herself. There is no coercion. Refusing to pay for the consequences of another person's choice is not coercing them. I do believe that if…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 03:37 AM
6

The idea that society in any way "hates" women is crazy. The "Women are Wonderful" exists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Women_are_wonderful%22_effect One of the easiest ways to get people to care about an issue is to suggest that women are being harmed. The education system favors women. The justice system favors women. The family court system favors women. Basically, by any measure, society seems to like women much more than it likes men. What evidence is there that society hates women?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/17 02:08 PM
1

What do feminists mean when they say those words Which ones? Here's a Wikipedia article on "Hegemonic Masculinity" and a short snippet from a different article that references feminist views on rape. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemonic_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_violence#Feminist_theories_of_male-female_rape
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/17 01:19 AM
11

"Good boyfriend" meaning what? It seems like you are still buying into a lot of bluepill ideas about what women want in a man and how men should behave.
/r/TheRedPill05/05/17 05:30 PM
4

No. I'm talking about basic feminist academic theory. It is very much part of mainstream feminist discourse that rape is about male entitlement, hegemonic or "toxic" masculinity, gender dominance, etc. They do the same thing with domestic violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/17 05:26 PM
9

Feminism is what gave men paternal leave Most men dont have that. Made it socially ok for men to be SAHD. SAHDs are still looked down on in society, particularly by women. and stood up for men who get raped. Feminist theory posits that rape is a tool of.oppression that men as a class use against women as a class. Feminist researchers have long tried to downplay the numbers with respect to the number of men raped by women. Feminist Mary Koss, author of the famous 1 in 4 study, did not count men f…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/17 05:12 PM
1

Yeah. He makes declarative statements on points in contention and then uses his own declarative statements as proof for his argument. When his declarations are challenged, he defaults to moral grandstanding and insulting men who do not want to be forced into fatherhood. Which I can deal with - those types of arguments are easy to counter. I only got annoyed when he suggested that I was the one being evasive.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 05:26 PM
1

I am completely confused by your responses. I had such high hopes for this conversation when it started. I don't know where it went wrong.
/r/MensRights03/05/17 06:50 AM
2

Which points do you feel I ignored? I try to stay organized and attack your main points. If you feel that I have ignored any of your main points, feel free to point out how and I will be happy to address them. I assure you that I am not trying to dodge anything. No legislature (be it state or federal) or high court will ever rule in favor of mens' right to abandon their living children. I know that. Society is very uncomfortable with men deviating from their traditional gender role, and society …
/r/MensRights03/05/17 06:38 AM
1

I'm ignoring everything after that, because you're applying a very bad standard that our legal system rejects on purpose. There is no right to positively reject one's living children. Our legal system does not reject that logic. It was used to deny damages to future generations (in some of the environmental cases), it has been used to deny children born with fetal alcohol syndrome the ability to sue their mother, and it is absolutely a part of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. No, you…
/r/MensRights03/05/17 06:04 AM
1

Pretending like abortion is an "unfairness" that needs to be "righted" is a transparently bad argument, because anyone with two eyes can tell that biology is unfair. But when biological unfairness goes AGAINST women, the Federal Government typically steps in. For example, it is against the law to fire a woman for getting pregnant. "Suck it up, biology is unfair" did not win that argument. Title IX requires colleges to provide equal athletic opportunities for women, despite the fact that women ar…
/r/MensRights03/05/17 05:10 AM
1

I am going to try to keep this organized. But, I have two broad responses to the "pro social outcome" argument. First, if a right exists, it does not matter if the law aims for a "pro social outcome." Take abortion as an example - there is an easy argument that preserving the sanctity of human life is a "pro social outcome." However, women have the right to an abortion, and therefore the intent of a law restricting abortion does not matter. With legal paternal surrender, there are two potential …
/r/MensRights03/05/17 02:35 AM
3

If you look at studies on sentencing disparities, black women tend to have it better than white men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 06:29 PM
1

I hope that you do. Because I have yet to get a straight answer on a lot of this stuff from people who share your view.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 07:28 AM
1

How do you define a child's right to be raised in a safe environment with plenty of resources? No such right exists - nor could it. "Plenty of resources" is a vague term. Are you saying that poor couples are violating their children's rights? Are you saying that we should just seek to maximize the amount of resources available to children, the rights of others be damned? If a father dies while his wife is pregnant, would you support a law imposing child support obligations on the deceased father…
/r/MensRights02/05/17 07:20 AM
1

Casey confirms what I wrote before. What the fuck are you talking about? You just claimed that abortion rights exist because of medical privacy and bodily autonomy. The Casey decision says nothing about either of those things. Which makes sense - because the cases that lead to Roe v. Wade had nothing to do with medical privacy either. The Supreme Court recognizes this vague concept of reproductive freedom. I believe that one of the cases even uses the term "reproductive destiny" or something lik…
/r/MensRights02/05/17 06:55 AM
1

No, men also receive bodily autonomy and medical privacy, which is the basis of abortion law. No it's not. Go read the case law on abortion. It's about personal privacy and the right to make reproductive decisions for yourself. O'Connor's opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in particular, demonstrates this point: Our law affords constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education. Carey v. Popula…
/r/MensRights02/05/17 06:40 AM
5

This post is good in the sense that you should recognize that you being in the "friendzone" is something you should simply refuse to be a part of. If you are attracted to a girl who is not attracted to you, move the fuck on, analyze the mistakes you made, and work to fix them. However, this post ignores how women tend to manipulate their orbiters into remaining orbiters. They keep just a hint of sexual attraction / flirting sufficient to make the orbiters think "maybe I have a chance." This is d…
/r/TheRedPill28/04/17 04:59 PM
2

I appreciate your insight on the topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 04:35 PM
3

No. I have never practiced in family law. But I know the general rules. But, even if the situation is "men can get close to 50/50.if they negotiate wisely and fight hard" that still does not imply a fair system. If I have to fight hard to get something the mother receives for showing up, that is not fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 04:20 PM
2

But we're not talking "more time than standard visitation" - we're talking about getting equal time with the mother, or even getting more time than the mother. As an example, if I go into Court as a father and say "I earn substantially more money than the mother, such that I can reduce the amount of time I work, spend more time with the kids, and provide a better overall quality of life for these kids, therefore I should have primary custody and the mother should have visitation and make support…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 04:03 PM
12

That comment is factually correct, but purposefully obtuse and misleading. Yes, most custody arrangements are agreed to out of court. HOWEVER, those agreements are entered into with full knowledge that were the case to go before the judge, the judge would favor the woman. This gives the woman an insane amount of leverage in those negotiations. Yes, when men actively fight for custody, they have decent success rates. HOWEVER, this conflates legal and physical custody, and ignores that men are onl…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 03:51 PM
1

Right - but what the parents agree to is influenced by the likely result should conflict arise. The mother/wife has all of the leverage in those negotiations.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 03:25 PM
5

I actually am a lawyer - though I do.not practice family law. Lawyers in family law likely tell their clients that the Courts strongly base custody awards on the "primary caregiver" standard, which is going to typically favor women, which means that is is irrational for men to fight hard for joint physical custody. To add on to what other posters are saying - the other reason the "men who seek joint custody get it" statistic is misleading is because there are two types of custody - legal and phy…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 03:23 PM
1

What I take from all of this, is that there are a lot of NEETs on TheRedPill.
/r/TheRedPill27/04/17 04:28 PM
3

The flaw in your transparent analogy is that plenty of the guys on dating sites (probably a large majority) are looking for more than just sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/17 04:28 PM
59

Yes. Absolutely. Doctors are held liable for negligence if they cause damage to an unborn fetus. Companies are held responsible if their products damage an unborn fetus. Individuals are held responsible for violence against an unborn fetus that causes damage. The only person who has immunity to harm the unborn child is the mother. Children who are born with fetal alcohol syndrome, addicted to crack, or otherwise disabled because of the mother's negligence, should be able to sue her.
/r/MensRights08/04/17 06:12 PM
106

All the stories posted on this subreddit sound so fake. The language used reads like neckbeard fan fiction.
/r/TheRedPill06/04/17 02:55 PM
5

So where does this idea come from that no woman ever enjoys it rough? It's not an idea, it's just a lack of knowledge. The lack of knowledge comes from lack of sexual experience, and a common cultural message that women are angelic and morally superior to base desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/17 02:31 PM
2

should look to improve themselves Improve themselves HOW? The question the OP poses is specific. "Improve yourself" is vague. What do you mean by "improve yourself"?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/17 04:00 PM
2

After he's married he could cheat as much as he wants With who? If all women are strictly punished for sex outside of marriage, who is this Lethario having sex with? Again - sex with an unmarried woman could literally be a felony, and you still want to go with "men were allowed to fuck whoever and however they wanted"? Really?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 12:02 AM
2

Single men who had sex with single women could be found guilty of the crime of seduction, and could be forced into marriage as a result. This idea that men had any sort of "sexual freedom" is nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 09:43 PM
5

This whole post is nonsense. Men were not allowed to sleep around. "Shotgun weddings" were a thing - there was even a crime called "seduction" that men could be found guilty of if they had sex with a woman without intending to marry her. This idea that men were allowed to be promiscuous is stupid and wrong. Men who have affairs on their wives have always been viewed negatively. Even today, the terms "womanizer" and "player" are not compliments. There is this idea that men who have sex with a lot…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 09:36 PM
9

Because nobody wants to be someone else's Plan B.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/17 08:02 PM
1

The thread this is backpacking on had men getting pregnant and having periods.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/17 06:48 PM
1

You came off looking like an over-sensitive little bitch to a girl who was teasing you. Congratulations.
/r/TheRedPill24/03/17 06:00 PM
1

It's not even a "less charitable manner." You can literally quote directly from feminist theory, and directly from feminist advocacy groups and you will be told "that's a strawman."
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/17 02:31 PM
26

Menslib cares about men's issues the same way people who support conversion therapy care about gay issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/17 02:26 PM
1

"I used Reddit for help with my dating life because I struggled with women and my own self confidence" will turn off any woman instantly. It's not so much about the red pill ideology as the fact that you needed help from the internet on how to pick up girls. That reads "loser."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 11:12 PM
3

Toxic masculinity is an internet bastardization of "hegemonic masculinity" which is very much a feminist concept. Hegemonic masculinity is the idea that masculine traits are taught to men in order to dominate and subjugate women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 11:04 PM
0

You are defending the bizarre idea that long hair makes a woman attractvie. No. Re-read. Also, just to help you with your critical thinking skills: "people wear their hair long to look more attractive" does not imply that anyone who wears their hair long is attractive. Fact is, hair length has little to do with sexual attractiveness or finanacial status. Not so much any more. But we're talking about how and why the "men have short hair women have long hair" thing got started.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 01:39 PM
0

So, you would fuck Lena Dunham? Somehow you took "People use hair styles and clothing to signal status" to mean "I would have sex with Lena Dunham." Not to mention that most ales aren't stupid enough to think the working class woman next door must be rich just because she has long hair! You are fucking dense. We are talking about how and why the practice began.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 01:34 AM
0

And how does being upper class make a woman more attractive? Are you asking me why people signal wealth and class by the way they dress and wear their hair? It seems like you are just being intentionally obtuse.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 01:10 AM
1

"Long hair" doesn't mean anything unless compared to something else deemed "short hair." It's relative. If everyone was bald, the dude with the crew cut would be deemed to have "long hair." And why the fuck would longer hair make women more attractive? Longer hair has traditionally been associated with signalling "I am upper class" or "I do not have to work."
/r/MensRights16/03/17 12:49 AM
1

I mean, "long" is relative, isn't it? http://time.com/4348252/history-long-hair/ What is your explanation for the reason nearly every single society in the history of humanity had women with longer hair than men? Coincidence?
/r/MensRights16/03/17 12:40 AM
1

Find me a society where men typically had longer hair than women in that society. If those examples are non existent - why do you think that is?
/r/MensRights15/03/17 05:33 PM
3

I agree with you, and would simply add the "when convenient" distinction to my claim.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 06:36 PM
2

But then why isnt it the standard for the men too? Because long hair and makeup was not conducive to work, specifically manual labor. The men in society who would wear wigs, heels, and makeup were upper class men. Biology is what led men to be the gender doing more of the manual labor. Some very minor things are "just a social.construct" but those are not the things feminists care about. "There is no biological reason for boys to be coded blue and girls pink" is the easily defensible claim, but …
/r/MensRights14/03/17 05:14 PM
1

Interesting. Not what I was expecting at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 06:46 PM
3

Any term for woman has been called sexist at some point. Woman was said to be sexist because it included "man" and made women seem inferior and dependent on men to exist! Ladies was said to be oppressive because it sought to constrict women to "ladylike" gender norms. Girls? Chicks? Dames? Dolls? Infantalizing! Female? Overly clinical and dehumanizing.
/r/MensRights07/03/17 06:42 PM
2

Why? To be more specific: why do you prefer he keep it to himself? Do you have the same view about his entire sexual history?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 06:03 PM
2

I used prostitute as an example because women look down on men who have sex with prostitutes. Women dont tend to look down on men who have been a little promiscuous, because minor promiscuity in men simply signals that the individual man is desirable. Using a prostitute, however, signals that the man was unattractive and undesirable. It's not 1:1, but if sexual beliefs and attitudes can change, who cares that he used to bang hookers? The past is the past. Or is it?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 04:53 PM
2

How would you view a man who used to have sex with prostitutes a lot as a young man, but who now claims to have different views on sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 03:51 PM
2

Being cordial and pleasant with friends/co-workers etc. is not dread game.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:43 PM
1

I am saying that there is a difference between a woman having friends, and a woman actively leading men on and revelling in the attention. Your girlfriend openly bragging is an indication she is revelling in the attention. And also a sign that she is not humble. Both bad signs in a girlfriend. It has nothing to do with my feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:00 PM
1

If your girlfriend is surrounded by dudes who want to fuck her, and she allows them to linger around her, she is probably a cunt. If she brags to you like that, then she is a huge cunt. What your GF was doing was wrong - to both you and the guy in the situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 09:46 PM
3

No that's not at all what dread is From RooshV: Dread game is a technique to use in relationships where you make a girl worried that something is wrong or that you may leave her for another woman. This increases her anxiety levels to a point where she wants to alleviate the stress by trying to please you and make sure everything is okay, which prevents her from getting bored in the relationship and straying. It comes from her knowing other women want to fuck you and that you will have potential …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 08:05 PM
7

Which step of dread game? The entire concept: From RooshV: Dread game is a technique to use in relationships where you make a girl worried that something is wrong or that you may leave her for another woman. This increases her anxiety levels to a point where she wants to alleviate the stress by trying to please you and make sure everything is okay, which prevents her from getting bored in the relationship and straying. That's some highly manipulative nonsense, and is a very mean thing to do to a…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 07:52 PM
3

what's your point? That if you spin plates and have a lot of promiscuous sex, you are probably going to get herpes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 07:42 PM
3

I have a general understanding of dread. It ranges from "have some self respect, and don't put up with a woman fucking with you" (which is perfectly reasonable) to "actively try and make your girlfriend think you are cheating on her" which is fucked up. Condoms don't work all that great to prevent herpes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 07:40 PM
4

Dread game. That shit borders on emotional abuse and is similar to the way girls with borderline personality disorder treat their significant others. Also, the hyper focus on promiscuous sex goes overboard sometimes. The constant "spin plates" stuff. That is a recipe for contracting herpes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 05:59 PM
10

Lame as fuck. Don't kiss women's asses. It does not make them respect you. It does not make them sexually attracted to you. Any decently attractive girl has tons of supplicating guys doing cutesy bullshit for her. Dont be one of those guys. Have some fucking dignity.
/r/TheRedPill27/02/17 10:13 PM
1

Sure. But if your wife demands to move to Pensacola against your wishes and for her own interests, and you follow her to Pensacola, she will probably lose respect for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 04:11 PM
1

In my experience, most women prefer to be lead. I prefer a more equal relationship. However, the women I have dated do not like that arrangement, and typically use subtle pressure to get me to lead them. Seriously, try and get your girlfriend to pick what you have for dinner. Many times, she just wont fucking do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 04:04 PM
2

"Tits or gtfo" or "send nudes pls", which is probably the majority of the messages women get, is not validating. That is not the majority of messages women get. In real life I have an equal number of male and female friends. Neither of them are showered with attention. Maybe some women are approached a few times, but they're not showered with attention. "Showered with attention" may be hyperbole. But, the average woman gets far more attention than the average man. Guys who are very successful da…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 07:41 PM
2

Of course they do. Go on any dating website - women are flooded with messages, men hardly get any. On OKCupid, for example, every guy (no matter how attractive) was labeled as replying often. Almost every woman was "replies very selectively." Even overweight single mothers with poor grammar and no job get more attention in online dating than good looking dudes with their shit together. This would seem to reflect that women get quite a bit more attention than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 07:01 PM
1

Not well. You have not answered it well. You still dont seem to understand the logical misstep you are making.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 05:54 PM
1

So you are telling me that women rated 4 out of 10 . . . are being bombarded with attention? Depends on what you mean by "bombarded." Women receive significantly more attention than men overall. So, those "mediocre" women likely receive far more attention than their similarly mediocre male counterparts and likely even receive more attention than much more attractive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 05:41 PM
1

Your study did not even attempt to look at the amount of "attention" these women would get. You just assumed that women getting a certain score means they would not get attention, you then used that premise to prove those women did not get attention. That is just circular reasoning. You are either not very smart or a troll.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 02:30 PM
2

It is a reflection of some very mild contempt that is mostly tongue in cheek. Men do the same type of thing with women: "take my wife, please." Men and women are very different. As long as it is allowed to go both ways, I have no problem with some gentle ribbing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:32 PM
2

The same thing that's so great about being a male rock star fawned over by groupies? It is nice to be considered sexually attractive. Makes life easier in a lot of ways. It is not all sunshine and roses, but it is certainly better than the alternative.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:22 PM
5

People call me one of the “world’s greatest female athletes.” Do they say LeBron is one of the world’s best male athletes? Is Tiger? Federer? Why not? Because the world's greatest male athletes are the world's greatest athletes. The world's greatest female athletes are nowhere near the level of world's greatest athletes. A man with the exact same skill set as Serena Williams does not do well at all in men's tennis.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:27 AM
7

No. Nothing wrong with her doing what she wants. But most men dont want to be the beta in the scenario you described. Theredpill exists to help those men avoid that fate.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/16 11:14 PM
1

I think girls often play coy and will offer token resistance at times that they expect you to overcome. Personally, I dont play around with that shit. I stop. This has led to a girl once telling me "you need to learn the difference between a playful no and a real no." But I set my boundaries pretty early on - I dont play around with that coy bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/16 05:50 PM
27

They fought for the right to vote, with no obligation to serve in the military. They did this almost immediately after WWI, a conflict that killed tons of men who were drafted into the military. So, yeah, I would say there was hatred among that first group of feminists. I think that is what it takes to look at the soldiers returning home and concluding "you know what's unfair? The fact that women cant vote!"
/r/MensRights01/12/16 06:05 PM
1

Because women are much less comfortable being social outsiders, and because women have more access to easy "cheats" in terms of looks. I think those are the two main things going on. With makeup, push up bras, yoga pants, etc. a 5 can make herself look like a 9. No such things exist for men, and if they did, any man availing himself of those things would quickly be shamed by women. Take height as an example. Women like tall men. Imagine how much women would flip out if men started using lifts in…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/16 04:23 PM
15

Six months from now - young women claim discrimination because older male colleagues unwilling to mentor them as much as the younger male employees.
/r/MensRights14/11/16 11:46 PM
1

"Why would a man not want to pay child support?" "Why would a man not want to be forced into fatherhood?" The answer you will get for these questions is "Who cares! He should have kept it in his pants if he didn't want to be a father!!"
/r/MensRights21/10/16 02:37 PM
18

were women being heard in politics 100 years ago? Yes. It was women's lobbying that led to alcohol being banned. It was women's lobbying that led to the tender years doctrine. It was women's lobbying that led to all of the preferential property entitlements that women received. (community property laws, life estates, freedom from obligations attached to their property, and eventually, alimony). This idea that women had no voice in politics is insane. Male politicians AND female politicians both …
/r/MensRights14/09/16 04:07 PM
23

Two reasons: He had the audacity to suggest that his accuser was lying. And two, the guy openly admitted to having casual sex. Feminists typically hate it when men only want a sexual relationship when the woman wants a relationship. The judge, who is a feminist, likely saw the guy's flippant view towards sex and his "open relationship" as objectifying and disrespectful to women.
/r/MensRights28/07/16 05:09 AM
7

I saw the new Ghostbusters. It is not sexist. They shoot one ghost in the balls, and it is a standard "hit in the nuts" type of joke. It is not done for "female empowerment" or any of that nonsense.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 03:43 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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