TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

compersious Archive

View 0 posts and 28 comments by compersious 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

So whilst I was never redpill, I related to plenty of the thing you are saying. I used to have ready bad face, neck, back, chest etc acne. I didn't manage to resolve it until 28. I have a pretty crap jawline. Not very wide and and chin is also pretty shit, goes backwards away from my face. Also loosing my hair pretty full on. So I can relate quite well to all of those things. Lost my virginity at 21. Also used to feel I just had very little idea if I was attractive at all, very ugly etc. And I f…
/r/ExRedPill17/05/21 07:16 AM
1

So whilst I was never redpill, I related to plenty of the thing you are saying. I used to have ready bad face, neck, back, chest etc acne. I didn't manage to resolve it until 28. I have a pretty crap jawline. Not very wide and and chin is also pretty shit, goes backwards away from my face. Also loosing my hair pretty full on. So I can relate quite well to all of those things. Lost my virginity at 21. Also used to feel I just had very little idea if I was attractive at all, very ugly etc. And I f…
/r/ExRedPill17/05/21 07:16 AM
9

Yeah. In the instance that I became aware of it I know it was accidental and they treated it as a cool discovered they both liked and then both consensually agreed to try and do it deliberately because the both enjoyed it. I agree. Usually the major redpill fuckups are serious manipulation, dishonestly, lack of consent, appealing communication, stereotyping certain behaviours as "only for women" or "only for men", assuming that only one dynamic can exist and deciding that all women must either f…
/r/ExRedPill18/04/21 03:22 PM
18

Haven't read the story. Not going to either as am expecting it just just be depressing. But just as a side note. It is actually possible for people to come on command. An ex partner had this happen with her partner. He said certain things often enough at the point of orgasm that a kind of pavlovian conditioning took hold. Was an accident but then they started to have fun with it and do it deliberately. When she and I were playing it still worked because of what they had done previously. So a gen…
/r/ExRedPill18/04/21 03:12 PM
4

Good to reach out like this I think. You are already hitting many of the right notes by posting this in the first place. A good level of introspection, metacognition kicking in just fine, pragmatism in your approach, seeing self improvement as an achievable, desirable and reasonable goal, looking at what you can change / control rather than blaming others or being angry and indignant at what you can't change. Some of the main things I was about to suggest you mention in your last paragraph. Emot…
/r/ExRedPill04/04/21 10:04 AM
1

I would say keep the good from it, by that I mean what's both effective and moral, and did the rest. The best topics I have found for getting good at making decisions, getting desirable outcomes are something like: Logic (proper logic, not logic in the colloquial sense) and how to actively apply it. Logical fallacies. This is useful both for spotting errors in your own thoughts and reducing the likelihood of being mislead by others, accidentally or intentionally. Cognitive biased. We all have bi…
/r/ExRedPill09/09/20 06:24 PM
2

First and foremost, redpill taught me to put myself first and not the woman im dating, or pretty much anyone such as in work aswell(dont be a pushover). Think that's essentially reasonable. It can be taken to an extreme but provided it doesn't push to the point of selfishness. I would frame it more like, know your self, if there is an aspect of your personality that is negative work on it. If there is a an aspect of your personality that is positive don't compromise it for others. It also taught…
/r/ExRedPill09/09/20 04:28 PM
7

If you want us to critique your position specifically you could let us know specifically what you believe to be true based on a redpill philosophy. Secondly you could tell us in which ways you think you behave differently based on red pill beliefs as opposed to how you would behave without redpill beliefs. Otherwise we are just really talking about the broad idea of redpill and the beliefs that its adherents commonly have. But you might differ in many ways from the average redpiller. So: What tr…
/r/ExRedPill09/09/20 08:09 AM
16

Broadly speaking, it's not very factually accurate. This is a problem with many many philosophies, aspects of culture, religious beliefs etc. First any belief that stereotypes large groups tend to be wrong. Men and women all share the same behaviours, the behaviours are just not equally distributed between the groups. Some behaviours are more common in men, some in women. However you can find all of them in either group. There are of course women out there who are only interested in money, a par…
/r/ExRedPill09/09/20 07:58 AM
2

I agree with pretty much all you just said. Sounds like you already have the right direction and now it's going to take plenty of work. Good luck
/r/ExRedPill13/03/20 06:42 AM
3

You are echo chambering yourself, or you were. You have just shown a really mature and positive trait. You have started looking for other opinions, angles, checking yourself, knowing you could be making a mistake. Also you can clearly see, or feel, there are things that are... off about the blackpill, redpill, purple pill, pua etc type communities. They types of women some of these people talk about do often exist. There really are women who only care about these things, success, money, a perfec…
/r/ExRedPill11/03/20 07:31 PM
6

If think the issue being pointed out is with putting rape in commas suggesting it wasn't rape, or wasn't nesseccarily rape. Assuming things happened as described, then no matter what was going on in the guys head, no matter the motivation etc it was rape. If person A truly sexually forces themselves of person B then whether it was because of mixed signals, person A thinking "B wants it really", person A being unable to read body language, person A being drink, person A being a sadistic repeat se…
/r/MensRights10/02/20 10:36 AM
1

;)
/r/ExRedPill07/08/19 09:31 PM
1

Haha :) 5.9 and a half. Bang average (for where I live anyway)
/r/ExRedPill07/08/19 09:20 PM
4

Okay so sounds like you already rationally understand that women are not all interested in men purely for status but you are trying to stop irrational thoughts that are motivated by something else, possibly fear, possibly just a learned thought pattern you have that you need to adjust, or something similar. Will approach this from a few angles. First my own experience and secondly looking at well documented facts. As a quick preamble. I am not especially good looking, okay, but I don't get looks…
/r/ExRedPill06/08/19 06:55 AM
3

Welcome.
/r/ExRedPill24/06/19 08:33 AM
9

Relationships are a learning experience. I had to have a couple of serious relationships to learn what I actually needed in a partner, to understand strengths and flaws in myself. I went into the first couple of relationships not even aware of certain traits some people have that I just am not compatible with. I wasn't intending these first few relationships as a tests, they were serious relationships. But by the time I was considering whether to persue relationship 3 I had a very clear idea of …
/r/ExRedPill24/06/19 07:55 AM
1

I am not only interested in your interpretation. Yours is as good as mine or an other individuals. But what I am interested in is how effective this particular phrase is at communicating a specific concept. As there are people who use the phrase to mean A) I can't tell which men might rape me so I have to treat all men as potential rapists And others (some Radfems for example) who use the phrase to mean B) All men by nature will rape you if they get the chance. It's clearly a pretty ambiguous ph…
/r/MensRights22/06/19 01:22 PM
0

Not an MRA, just a lurker and partially disagree with you. I think there is a problem of equivocation here. The phrased is used to mean at least 2 different concepts and can be understood in different ways as well. I understand it's possible that the sentiment being expressed in the phrase "every man is a potential rapist" could be more along the lines of "some men may infact try to / actually rape me. I can't nesseccarily tell these men from the men who wouldn't and so I have to engage all men …
/r/MensRights22/06/19 11:12 AM
1

There is some validity to this but I don't think it is what it seems. When you look at the stats on men who are raped by women the women don't tend use physical force to overpower men as they generally can't. So some of the advise is not relevant to men as the type of behaviour used when women rape men tend to not be force related. Some reasonable percent of rapes of women do involve force or at least the knowledge the a man could overpower her so the advise is more relevant to women. Men are ph…
/r/MensRights04/10/18 03:00 PM
2

Correct.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 09:15 PM
1

Ah! https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/presumption+of+innocence The presumption of innocence, an ancient tenet of Criminal Law, is actually a misnomer. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the presumption of the innocence of a criminal defendant is best described as an assumption of innocence that is indulged in the absence of contrary evidence (Taylor v. Kentucky, 436 U.S. 478, 98 S. Ct. 1930, 56 L. Ed. 2d 468 [1978]). It is not considered evidence of the defendant's innocence, and …
/r/MensRights20/09/18 07:22 PM
1

You are basically committing an equivocation fallacy here. We are discussing several concepts and you are using the term innocent to refer to them all. However they are actually different though very similar concepts and you are not understanding what I am saying, which could be my fault. Several of your responses agree with what I am saying and mine actually agree with what you are saying but yet you think we are disagreeing. We are only actually disgareeing on one very small nuance of a single…
/r/MensRights20/09/18 07:02 PM
1

I am arguing for literally exactly the system we already have. It's just you don't realise it. Let's go back to Merrian Webster again. Belief 1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing. 2: something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion : something believed By either definition if a jurer goes in with any leaning regarding the actual innocence or guilt of a defendant then the definition fits. So no there is no problem in th…
/r/MensRights20/09/18 06:41 PM
0

Okay let's simplify this. Say you are on a jury. The trial is about to begin. Are you working on the basis that: A. You believe the person is innocent or likely innocent. B. You won't agree to a guilty verdict unless guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Otherwise you will return a verdict of not guilty. Now of course you could do both. However B is what you should be doong. A is just a bias. Your job is simple, only return a guilty verdict IF the prosecution meets it's burden of proof. You…
/r/MensRights20/09/18 06:05 PM
1

You are not understanding the difference between the negation of an assertion and its opposite. They are not the same thing. I am not talking about legality but the logic that underlays it, the foundation of it. The reason that the laws actually are what they are. Also I am agreeing with you in terms of the legal system we need and that it should be the way it is due to needing to keep innocent people free over imprisoning the guilty. But "innocent until proven guilty" is, when you really analys…
/r/MensRights20/09/18 12:25 PM
0

You are treated the same as if you are innocent. But you are not found innocent. To be found innocent would mean the defense demonstrating you were innocent as opposed to the prosecution failing to demonstrate you are guilty. If not guilty was the same as being found innocent then the defense would have a burden of proof. But they don't, the prosecution must demonstrate guilt. There is no burden to prove the defendant innocent, that would be crazy. The null hypothesis here is surely not guilty a…
/r/MensRights20/09/18 11:22 AM
3

My understanding is that you suspend judgement of innocence or guilt until you have enough information to make a decision. It's guilty or not guilty, not guilty or innocent. Not guilty is not the same as innocent and there is a reason courts work this way.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 06:44 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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