TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

cheeckycheecky Archive

View 0 posts and 12 comments by cheeckycheecky on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Women in their 30s aren't extinct, so there's no reason to go for younger women for you are an old hag yourself. Also rich can mean anything, a man with avg income spending nicely for his wife/gf can also be deemed as a good investment for women. Yet men cry and complain about women 'only' caring for the man's money, which frankly isn't unrealistic, just broke men who are upset do that.
/r/MensRights12/04/24 05:43 PM
2

The same way it's a broke man getting mad at women for only wanting to date rich men
/r/MensRights12/04/24 08:41 AM
0

Conflict has nothing to do with this argument, like you said the "original" point was that male attacker is needed for protection as well, what's so hard to understand? You're just making anything up to avoid the ACTUAL topic here. Again, conflict is where everyone is involved while the idea of male protectors is due to male attacker and not just war
/r/MensRights02/01/24 05:34 AM
-2

This has nothing to do with it rape. Sorry that happened to you but we both know that's not the argument here, it's about shaming for sex. No patriarchy was mentioned, any person with basic history knowledge would know that polygamy was more widespread than polyandry. In most tribes polyandry was done due to conflicts of lands and family and not because "women can". Don't view this from westernised pov either, polygamy was not limited to the elites, anyone who could "afford" multiple wives had i…
/r/MensRights01/01/24 08:27 PM
1

Says the mf who came with all the slurs and personal insult over a comment. Men are emotional creatures, anger being the 1st one.
/r/MensRights01/01/24 08:06 PM
0

You're just saying anything at this point rather than just saying that it is factual that male protection exists solely due to male attack as well. Men wouldn't have to protect women if they weren't being attacked.
/r/MensRights01/01/24 08:04 PM
-2

None of that changes that most societal structures hate the idea of women who sleep around while men have had the history of polygamy in multiple cultures. You cannot play the victims when it comes to sex
/r/MensRights01/01/24 07:58 PM
1

But I don't see abused women raping men and becoming mass murders unlike men? Hmm logic is in your ass that's why you're running from the debate and going everywhere else to insult. Men being hoes isn't a women's problem, keep yo legs shut if you're that mad
/r/MensRights01/01/24 07:05 AM
-2

The men were dangerous because the roles that society placed onto them made them dangerous. So we are excusing murder and rape because men are forced by society to commit those crimes far more in numbers? Lol. Your last para answers itself, men are the one who are more dengerous to both men and women. Male protection is only existing as result of other men being violent towards women, it cannot exist otherwise. It only boiles down to good and bad men.
/r/MensRights01/01/24 06:38 AM
-1

If women are gonna be in rough times, then it definitely doesn't mean they are in "minuscule" numbers. Also you pretty much summed up points, men protect only because men are the one attacking.
/r/MensRights01/01/24 06:32 AM
-2

We also know the history men had and cultures they practiced, so it's definitely also not men either. Most of the "dangerous" women would be facing will likely also be due to a man, so the man being the protector doesn't matter as they themselves are also the dangers
/r/MensRights31/12/23 10:01 PM
-3

Ironic when women are shamed for liking sex and slurs are thrown but men flaunt that as "manly" and natural
/r/MensRights31/12/23 09:44 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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