TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

gaivsjvlivscaesar Archive

View 0 posts and 132 comments by gaivsjvlivscaesar 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)
0

I’m questioning the point of the sub.
/r/EverydayMisandry11/11/24 09:43 AM
0

oh it is but I'm questioning the point of posting tweets of what extreme randoms say online and then getting mad about it
/r/EverydayMisandry11/11/24 02:00 AM
-3

Is this subreddit just random ragebait at what twitter crazies say online
/r/EverydayMisandry10/11/24 09:38 AM
5

Rape is only banned in 50 countries? Out of 190? Geeez
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/21 11:51 AM
3

How much is the overall hours? Are men still doing more paid labour? If so then it’s unreasonable to still expect them to do 6 hours of the unpaid labour as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/21 09:31 AM
2

Like I already stated, it doesn’t matter what it’s about. It’s hypocritical to give women all the agency over the child during her pregnancy years and later while giving men essentially none. Plus men’s bodily autonomy is also being taken away since they are forced to work harder to pay off their child support or else they are thrown in jail.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/21 02:04 PM
0

And financial abortion is about financial autonomy. It doesn’t really matter what it’s about either way, it’s hypocritical of us to give women all the agency of what they want to do with their child over their pregnancy years, whilst giving men essentially none.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/21 01:56 PM
0

Telling women to be more responsible and use birth control has always been a classic conservative argument for denying women abortion, since they “should have been more responsible” and that now “they should bear the consequences”. If women are given the unequivocal right of abortion, which I believe they should get, then men should also get the option of a financial or paper abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/21 01:47 PM
-1

The exact same thing could be used as an argument against abortion for women. “sterilization exists, take birth control pill, or tell him to wear a condom.”
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/21 01:41 PM
0

Because the woman had the option of aborting the child….. The man did not… In fact he most likely didn’t even have any say in the matter…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/21 07:38 AM
1

I gave an extreme example. A house worth $439,000 would cost around $23,428 in mortgages annually. That is including property taxes. And the 550,000$ example I gave already accounted for property taxes, although it was around 400$ monthly rather than the actual 504$, if accounting for LA property taxes. And the overall increase would be of about $1,560 from the initial $30,000 I quoted.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 05:35 PM
2

what?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 09:03 AM
2

No. Per capita personal income was $65,000. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCPI06037 It's per capita, so it does mean everyone individually. Personal income includes all sorts of other incomes as well, so the statistic you show might be discounting that.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 08:58 AM
2

Again, this is the initial cost. Once they accumulate enough capital they can have children. Moreover, per capita personal income in LA county was $65,000, so 30% higher than the 50,000 estimate that I presented.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 04:46 AM
1

This is bullshit. I found a house in LA that had 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, located in suburbs, for 550,000$. Assuming total costs come to 600,000$, the mortgage monthly would 2,500$ a month, or around 30,000$ annually. If you earn around $50,000 a year, which is what most people earn, you still have $20,000 a year for any other expenses. The average monthly cost of health insurance is around $896 for a family of two per month. This means health insurance costs $10,752 a year. That still leaves yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 03:50 AM
4

Huh, then why, out of the 900,000 cases of sexual abuse in juvenile prisons, 89% were by female staff on boys? Why is it, that according to recent BJS data, that 46% of male victims of rape reported it happened by a female predator?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 03:11 AM
1

Looking at the extremes is the most bullshit and disingenuous way to make an argument. Most studies have found zero differences between similar age and large age gap couples in terms of marital satisfaction or relationship style. 74% of large age gap couples had high marital satisfaction. Most of the issues actually occur due to shaming by society rather than the idea of the older man being abusive. The study you stated again looked at the very extreme, since it was completely about teen girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 03:07 AM
4

Rich people are more likely to enter long lasting committed relationships
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/21 04:59 AM
1

Maybe not, but they’re not stupid, and they’re gonna grow older and smarter, and figure out the difference
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/21 07:15 AM
1

Disingenuous. Feminists demand that trans atheletes be on hormone therapy for a significant length of time before being qualified, and also say very explicitly that trans women are “women”. Whether you agree with that assessment or not, their argument that they believe is that men and people with a male hormone profile should not compete in women’s events. In other words… they also believe that men and people with massively higher testosterone levels should not compete in women’s competitions. B…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 03:55 PM
2

Not really a motivator for me, but I guess this is a subjective topic. For me, the desire to not die is a great motivator for me to do things.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 03:00 PM
0

It’s pretty easy to just say they’re the same women based on nothing but your desire to claim all feminists are idiotic hypocrites Well first of all, I never stated nor implied anything of the sort. So maybe rather than trying to guess as to my desires you should focus on the actual argument I am putting forward. they’re talking about things that aren’t beating the shit out of people when they talk about women being as good as men I can easily cite several articles from well reputed "feminist" o…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 01:56 PM
1

The same women who support "stop violence against women" are often the same ones who support women being beaten up by trans women in MMA fights.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 11:19 AM
1

Ehhh we really don't. It's just that overall usage of technology has grown so much that people don't really like going outside. Plus there is no risk or cost. If you ask out a stranger over text, and she rejects you, you didn't really lose anything. If you did that in public, you would essentially be facing people who would laugh at you and degrade you for getting rejected, or see you as creepy. This wouldn't really happen in an online text based setting.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 11:09 AM
3

What?!! When you’re young you’re fit, strong, healthy, immune to almost any disease, and have so much potential. You’re almost unbeatable. Why would you wanna trade that in?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 06:45 AM
4

No I mean it never existed in the first place
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 06:43 AM
1

The unemployment rate has now fallen to less than 5% at 4.8%, and is only 1.3% away from the prepandemic low of 3.5% in 2019. The GDP has risen back to pre pandemic levels. In September alone 194,000 workers were employed in non-farm payroll.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/21 01:45 AM
1

Ahhh, yea I usually don’t participate much just tend to read the discussions
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/21 07:18 AM
1

Ehh I just dislike alcohol in general, I have tried it before since my parents are very liberal about it, but I just don’t think I wanna do something like that to my body. Wdym by “this place”? Like my country?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/21 07:02 AM
1

Well I’m 17, a virgin, I’m against drinking(primarily because I dislike the taste, and also cause its bad for my liver), I like partying and clubbing, I do have friends, although I prefer a small group of friends that I’m comfortable with and can trust, I dislike promiscuity(both male and female), not the female sexuality, and I don’t really know what you mean by the hymens thing. Am I an outlier?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/21 04:42 AM
1

Oh okay, so it's just the poors in traditionally poor areas being poor cuz they can't 'manage' themselves. No, the Southern states have a pervading backwards ideology, racism, and poor state management and infrastructure planning all contribute to the underperformance and poverty of their citizens. Most major corporations, as well as businesses don't touch those states with a ten foot pole. This has nothing to do with "wage slavery or exploitation", just poor management. They even rejected Medic…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 02:24 PM
0

The fiscal stimulus check were still a major reason why the economy is recovering so well, and has exceeded expectations. However there are still many issues we still have to deal with overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 11:25 AM
0

Most of the poverty is concentrated in extremely poor rural states like Mississipi and Alabama which have horrible management and infrastructure overall, and it doesn't represent life in the least for most Americans in other neighbourhoods. Of the 40 million people living in poverty, 16% or around 6.4 million is just concentrated in ten Southern states.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 11:23 AM
1

Men’s overall unemployment is decreasing because more men are getting retired, and are staying longer in school. Prime age employment for men is still very high.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 06:54 AM
2

Ehhh not really. Unemployment rates in 2019 were at record lows of 3.5% and America was going through one of the longest periods of economic growth it had ever gone through. So even before the pandemic, the economy was doing fine. Moreover, in September 2021, the unemployment rate has fallen below 5%. During the pandemic itself, only like 97,000 small businesses failed or went under, of the total 31.7 million. Pandemic entrepreneurs started 4.4 million new businesses during 2020, breaking record…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 05:47 AM
1

Your source does not show the graphs for prime age, that is, between the age groups of 25 to 54 years of age for men. Just because my data is concentrated in the Fifth District doesn't mean its wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 05:37 AM
1

Ughhhhh this again. Less than 2% of American workers working hourly are paid at the minimum wage or less. The economy was performing quite well, at least pre pandemic. Let's look at the data shall we? The US economy had a record long period of economic growth for almost a decade up until 2020. Unemployment rates had fallen to record lows of 3.5%. Even of the 3.5% who were unemployed, men were less likely to be unemployed than women. The median hourly wage for Americans was 19.22$ an hour, almost…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 04:45 AM
1

I believe you are stating overall labour force participation rate, not prime age labour force participation rate. According to this source: Between 2000 and 2019, prime-age male LFP fell from 92 percent to 89 percent See?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 04:15 AM
1

What source do you have for this?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 03:55 AM
1

Sure. Male aggression is usually called toxic masculinity. The problem is aggression is not necessarily a bad thing when channeled the right way. Men are innately more aggressive than women, but they can channel their aggression into productive way, like sports etc. Moreover, men are told to control and suppress their masculinity, rather than embracing it, but the hypocrisy is that women are encouraged to behave and be more “manly”. In my opinion, the whole term itself is stupid, it should just …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 09:42 PM
3

Sure is.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 09:32 PM
1

Ehh he is somewhat right in some sense. Our society does a pretty horrible job at encouraging men or masculinity in general. There are several men who go years and years without even hearing a single word of encouragement. There are also several instances where men's masculine ambition to compete or take their place in society is denigrated, as people believe they are taking their place in "the oppression of women" and in the "patriarchy". This is at least one of the reasons why men are dropping…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 09:21 PM
3

women can't be courageous, assertive, or independent? Sure they can, but the current focus was on the men. Men are the ones who are falling behind. Moreover, courageousness, assertiveness and independence are traditionally masculine traits, but that doesn't mean women can't have them. All he is arguing for is to inculcate those "traditionally masculine values" into men as well, to help get them ahead in life. Women usually have a more biological sense of when to become responsible, primarily due…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 09:09 PM
4

Sure there is plenty of causation. Recreational computer time for males increased by 60% between 2004 and 2017, and that three quarters of the decline in average working hours by younger males was attributed to technological improvements in computers and video games. Is that enough causation? They found that the percentage of men in that age group working zero hours nearly doubled between 2000 and 2016. Perhaps shockingly, they also found that recreational computer time for males ages 21 to 30 b…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 09:01 PM
4

The economy is working quite well. Jesus I have heard this so many times. "Men are falling behind because of the economy! Men are being made wage slaves!". None of that is true. Overall labour force participation rates have fallen for men, that is true, but that is primarily because more and more men are getting retired, and the average age of Americans has risen. Moreover, after the 2008 financial crisis, men's labour force participation was affected more heavily than women's, but it stabilised…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 08:56 PM
1

Ehhh, between 2000 and 2019 it prime age labour force participation fell from 92% to 89%. 3 percent difference over 19 years is not really that big of a difference, and not very indicative of a long term trend. In overall labour force participation rates as well, the graph looks like a big decline for men during the 2008 crisis, but then the rates stabilised for both men and women from 2012 to 2019, with women's participation being consistently lower, at around 57% for women, compared to 69% of …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 08:23 PM
1

Well I was the one that gave several examples of female comprised movements succeeding, prohibition being one of them, then you decided to nitpick on prohibition as being a failure just because we don’t have said ban today, and so then I responded as to why I think it was a success. As simple as that.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 10:57 AM
1

How was it nitpicking?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 10:50 AM
1

You would gleefully call feminism a historical failure if women rejected the right to vote and got back in the kitchen. Please stop assuming what I would or wouldn't say. And stop making up absurd hypotheticals to support your argument. In other words… the movement fell apart as a failure. Nope. It lasted 11 long years. The movement succeeded in getting the legislation passed, which is what the end goal was. But the legislation did not work out, and those same people that got the legislation pas…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 04:39 PM
1

This is called moving the goalposts. It succeeded but then was undone rather quickly. The prohibition leaders didn’t get to keep what they sought. The leadership didn’t decide they thought booze was good for people, they just accepted they couldn’t keep the win. Nope. Maybe you should read up on the history of prohibition. See? The same women that had Prohibition instituted supported its repulsion. Most of the people were incredibly tired of the ban, including the women who supported it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 02:45 PM
2

Well I was simply speaking from the perspective of men in general, kind of like a devil’s advocate
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 04:29 AM
2

Are you a woman?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 04:24 AM
3

Well the problem isn’t just that its treated more seriously with men than with women. It’s that women then complain about not being treated the same as men in other areas. You can’t have it all. For example, if we can accept that maybe male rape and domestic violence cases should be treated differently, maybe we should accept that women should stop complaining about having to be more cautious than men while walking down a street at night?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 04:10 AM
2

wut
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 03:45 AM
4

This gave me a stroke
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/21 06:42 PM
4

Nope. Even with no fault divorce laws that dont ruin men, women are still divorcing men at a higher rate than vice versa
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/21 05:16 AM
1

Just because a war broke out between a more patriarchal society and a more liberal one, doesn’t really make it a war for women’s rights movements, its mostly for the rights of the sovereignty of the nation as a whole, especially considering that most of the people that actually fought and died on the vietnamese side were men. The prohibition movement was centered around the banning of alcohol yes, and they succeeded in getting that passed. But they realised that the results of their success were…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/21 12:41 AM
1

Meanwhile, the narrative seems to be that women contributed very little aside from childbirth, and most of their labor was unnecessary and not valuable to society or civilization. And what narrative is that? Maybe some more specific examples that I can address more meaningfully? The reality is that men are not even quite twice as strong as women, and it’s not like everything economically necessary in the past was only possible to be done if you have the amount of strength of the average man, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/21 02:44 PM
3

I didn’t say men only did “a little” of the heavy lifting. Yes, the men did a little of the heavy lifting, Huh. I pointed out men actually weren’t even the only ones doing the heavy lifting for much of history. You are devaluing the labor of farm animals and the vital importance of domestication in assisting human labor for most of written history. I already stated that most small time farmers(which made up most farmers) didn't really have access to domestic animals like oxen that helped them, s…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/21 11:54 AM
3

Yes, the men did a little of the heavy lifting, but actually, a lot of the heaviest lifting was done by oxen and horses. To say that men did a little of the heavy lifting not only devalues the hard work that they did, it doesn't really give them much credit either. First of all, oxen and cattle weren't domesticated until well into the agricultural revolution, and even then, most farmers historically couldn't really afford to keep even oxen, or cattle in general, considering that they cost so muc…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/21 04:58 AM
2

Why are you under the impression farmers' wives weren't farmers also? Farmers' wives and children all did a ton of critical work on farms, including help with the harvest and the preservation of food. No farming man in the late 1800s wanted to marry some foppish woman too prissy to get her hands dirty with farm work. Read what I wrote. I did write that women did make massive contributions to farming overall, and obviously a synergy between a woman's homemaking and a man's job working was necessa…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 03:10 PM
1

But more women than men are in college. Sure but that is primarily due to the incredibly hostile culture that has been created against men in universities and is a widespread problem. Moreover, college doesn't really predict success in the real world. Women have been doing better against men in colleges for the past 30 years, but still lag behind men in pay, jobs, and unemployment. More men are going NEET. Nope, 21.5% of young women were NEETS, compared to 13.8% for men. It's never going to be 1…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 09:46 AM
1

The trend is not necessarily linear. Just because something has risen up till now doesnt mean it will continue to rise in the exact same way till it changes the nature of society. Just like how womens labour force proportion grew very quickly at the start and has now pretty much stopped at about 50% of the labour force. Other trends are that there are more millionaires than there have ever been, and they are growing at a phenomenal rate and most of those people are male, more billionaires, and m…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 07:28 AM
1

Ehhh. Its not really very easy to attribute that to a single factor. I mean considering the fact that these men aren’t even in relationships, your idea of wives working while their husbands stay at home isn’t really very viable. In fact married men earn higher than any other demographic of people, and also work longer hours. Most of these men are people who dropped out of school and don’t even have a diploma. That doesn’t really show much of an overall trend for society, or men in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 07:19 AM
1

Nope. Women did become a slight majority(51%) during the period right after the recession, since the blue collar jobs were hit way harder, and men occupied mostly. But after some time men are back in the majority. And unemployment for women has consistently been higher than unemployment for men. Unemployment overall was down to around 3.5% before the pandemic in 2019.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 07:00 AM
1

Not really. Men on average still work longer hours than women at work. They still pick and do all the dangerous and dirty work.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 06:52 AM
2

There are a lot of misconceptions about "what feminism did for women" overall. People think that all the liberties that women have today is because of what feminists did for women. In my opinion, feminism didn't really impact the rights of women, and the rights that are afforded to women today would still be there without feminism. Now while it is impossible to objectively attribute just how many of the rights that women have today to feminism, we can sure make some guesses, or some subjective i…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 05:31 AM
1

Sarcasm?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 04:14 AM
1

Telling someone to know their place is an incredibly condescending way to start off a debate, you wanna rephrase your post?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/21 05:15 PM
1

Its mostly just a mockery of the concept, people dont actually believe it lol
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/21 06:25 AM
1

how is being alive doomed?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/21 06:19 AM
2

Exactly
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/21 04:32 AM
10

Yea im pretty sure everyone is a hypocrite in some aspect
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/21 07:50 PM
1

wait is that not something you should do? Im stupid lol
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/21 12:38 PM
0

Personally I dislike both male and female promiscuity
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/21 03:27 AM
2

The people who say porn leads to unrealistic expectations for women are the same people who think video games cause violence in children. Its utter stupidity. Anyone who is old enough and watch porn and understand what it is knows that is not a reflection of real life. Are there some people that do stupid shit because of it? Sure. But it is in no way representative of reality or even the majority.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/21 05:12 AM
1

Yea i prefer monogamy way more than promiscuity or polygamy
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/21 04:55 AM
2

Men are not judged as harshly BECAUSE THEY FACE FEWER CONSEQUENCES FROM RECKLESS SEX. men cant get pregnant, which is one of the biggest reasons why they face fewer consequences. I dont understand why you cant seem to get this into your head. Moreover the slavery that Rome had was quite humane, at least relative to other crueler forms of slavery, and slaves often held public office and performed important administrative tasks. Beating up or raping slaves was looked down upon quite harshly, despi…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 05:34 PM
2

I literally said that I dislike both male and female promiscuity. The riskiness of the act has nothing to do with it. Just because something is low risk doesn’t mean you do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 05:25 PM
2

Yeah, and we made up stupid moral reasons for discouraging incest as well, whats your point? Moreover, male promiscuity was absolutely restricted. In most societies, men who impregnated a woman were expected to marry her and take care of her for the rest of her life and her children. Sex work and Prostitution was discouraged in several societies as well. Rape was a capital crime in Ancient Rome. A scientific study in 2005 concluded that both promiscuous men and women were judged derogatorily. In…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 05:24 PM
2

“Its entertaining to watch you flounder”. “Im just playing with you” The definition of ad hominem is to direct arguments at the person rather than their argument or position, which is what you just did.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 05:13 PM
2

As I already mentioned, I do not like male or female promiscuity. It doesnt really matter what moral reasons we made up in history, it was usually pragmatic. Just like we made up moral reasons for making incest taboo. It was still pragmatic. Trying to reduce promiscuity is absolutely not the same as reducing sexual freedom. No the cost of sex for women is still higher, even with birth control. Except for sterilization, none of these methods are 100% foolproof, and if you do get pregnant you will…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 05:02 PM
2

Huh still making ad hominem attacks, and still losing to a high schooler lmfao.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:50 PM
2

Promiscuity increases chances of unwanted pregnancies, which can be harmful, and even if aborted, can still have large effects on women. Promiscuity also increases chances of STDs. Is promiscuity still a fortunate outcome for you? And as I already proved, FEMALE promiscuity has doubled. I dont have a moral beef with promiscuity, but to say that it does not have a harmful effect on society is wrong. Promiscuity is also a factor contributing to the rise of single motherhood.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:50 PM
2

Moreover, the cost of reckless promiscuous sex for women was still higher, which was my original point. Syphilis affected both genders, and so women not only bore the cost of pregnancy, which was dangerous enough in and of itself, but also STDs like syphilis. That is again a reason why female promiscuity was discouraged.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:45 PM
2

The earliest record of syphilis was in 3000 BC. Even if you consider only the time since the agricultural revolution as history, which happened 12,000 years ago, its still not most of history. Try again.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:41 PM
2

It doesnt matter what sex positive is, one of the unfortunate side effects is the encouragement of promiscuity in women. Now if you want me to actually provide individual tweets from feminists who encourage women to be promiscuous then I cant really help you with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:31 PM
2

I told you why the article was wrong, and your vast historical knowledge is nothing without evidence. I don’t know your credentials nor do I care. You clearly must be just a feminazi single woman who stays at home all day lmfao. I explained why the article cited benefits me, but you seem too illiterate to read clearly lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:28 PM
2

I never said evil sex beasts. Stop strawmanning lmfao. Jeez you’re desperate. There is a brand of sex positive feminism that supports the sexual liberation of women, and one of the ways in which it does this is by encouraging promiscuity. And like I keep saying, it doesnt matter that overall sex has gone down, what I stated was that feminism encourages FEMALE PROMISCUITY, WHICH IT DOES, which is why promiscuity for women has doubled. Go look up sex positive feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:22 PM
2

Ah yes, still zero evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:16 PM
2

The first recorded outbreak of syphilis was in 1495, five hundred years ago. Hardly most of history. Moreover, the overall cost of sex was still clearly far higher for women than it was for men. Pregnancy was not easy, and was incredibly dangerous, whereas men obviously never had the risk of pregnancy. I like how you try to criticise my point but actually dont provide any evidence as to why it is wrong. You just call it vague, without any evidence. Moreover, people did have more sex, but in mono…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 04:15 PM
2

Female promiscuity has doubled, has it not? And feminism absolutely encourages women to be promiscuous. Rather than calling me a high school student, try coming up with a stronger argument for why I am wrong. If you can’t then congrats you can’t even win an argument against a high school student lmfao.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 03:57 PM
2

I literally said that feminism encourages female promiscuity, which it does, read again. I already mentioned my problems with female promiscuity.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 03:17 PM
2

The reason why female promiscuity was shamed was not because of arbitrary reasons like oppression, it was because the cost of reckless sex was way higher for women, and it still is. Women can get pregnant, men can’t. That is literally the reason. Birth control only came about recently, and even then the risks are far higher for women than for men. A man could have reckless sex with 10 women and he wouldn’t really face any consequences, unless the state decided to step in. Whereas a woman could g…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 03:16 PM
2

Yea you did, or you at least implied it by saying that you have a career and a marriage to attend to, and making the assumption that I don’t have other relationships that I have to attend to as well. . Just because people are having sex less is not proof that promiscuity is declining. This article proves it. I don’t really care about the philosophy, I care about the people who follow said philosophy do or say. And most feminists usually encourage women to have more sexual partners just like men.…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/21 07:31 AM
2

Ah yes, using ad hominem attacks to discredit my argument by calling me lonely. Just accept the fact that you can’t even win an argument with a stranger online. Do you have any evidence that feminism has made women less promiscuous? I mean don’t feminists encourage women to have more sex as a way of “celebrating their sexuality”? Why are songs of women like Cardi B considered “sex positive” by feminists? Aren’t feminists encouraging women to have more sex since they believed that female promiscu…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 08:08 PM
1

I never once said old men, I said older men. Theres a difference. Just like men prefer younger women. And like I already demonstrated, women do like older men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 05:30 PM
2

Well older men tend to be richer and have more resources(obviously), which might be one reason for why women are attracted to older men. I mean the average age difference in most relationships is 2 and a half years in the usa, with the woman being the younger one. Moreover several studies have shown that women find older men more attractive. The peak age of attractiveness for men was estimated to be 50, in one study. I can link it if you want. Please note I am not saying women are gold diggers o…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 02:10 PM
3

Men tend to find fertility attractive and younger women are usually the most fertile. Pretty much almost all surveys state that men find women in their 20s the most attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 01:55 PM
4

The red pill and the blue pill both have a massive impact on society at large. You're trying to downplay why this sub exists. If you were looking for something else go and find another subreddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 10:54 AM
2

Clearly you have no argument, that is why you don't respond
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 10:52 AM
3

Obviously no one is seeking that out. People might not be seeking it out, but rates of single parenthood are rising very fast, especially single motherhood, so it is still rising very quickly regardless of whether people are seeking it out, and that is an issue that we need to deal with. THOSE OBSTACLES not just the lack of a father or the fact that they’re women are more likely the deciding factor in a child’s success. Those obstacles will always remain there. Obviously two parents will be able…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/21 11:46 AM
3

As you can see, there are societal factors that contribute children of single parents having disadvantages. I never said there were no societal factors. Obviously there are. But fatherlessness and the absence of a male role model have well documented negative effects on children. 71% of high school dropouts are fatherless. Fatherless children tend to perform poorly academically and a range of other negative effects. Even same sex families have a so called “male” role model and a “female” role mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/21 03:48 AM
3

Oh absolutely its the single parents fault, being deprived of a father or a mother can have significant negative consequences on the children, so single parenthood is not something that should be encouraged ever. You might know people who are single parents who have stable families, but thats just anecdotal evidence. The real statistics show that single parenthood has been associated with a range of negative consequences for the children. And just how exactly has society failed single parents?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/21 10:53 AM
7

Its been well documented that single parent families are less stable, and that children in single parent families are at increased risk of a lot of other issues that like dropping out of school. If you want a link here you go
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/21 03:25 AM
3

Love the flair lmfao
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/21 12:14 PM
7

Oh absolutely its easily one of my favorite subs even though it kinda tilts to the right
/r/MensRights15/10/21 06:30 AM
8

what kinda bullshit is this, its only rape if it happens to the woman?
/r/FeminismStopsWhen10/10/21 10:02 AM
1

I guess considering the fact that women so rarely become a majority in parliaments i might be inclined to agree that this might be something to be celebrated(the issue of quotas)
/r/MensRights27/09/21 09:13 AM
1

It is quite possible that the people who are celebrating this think that, but the problem is that it is quite possible that many of the women in the parliament got there via quotas, considering that two out of the three parties forming the coalition government had gender quotas in some form. If none of the parties had gender quotas and women got there purely based on merit, then I would be right there celebrating with them. But it is most likely that the opposite is true. Another problem with th…
/r/MensRights27/09/21 08:54 AM
1

I didnt really understand your question. Can you just rephrase and ask again?
/r/MensRights27/09/21 02:11 AM
1

Also considering the fact that there are like 8 political parties in total, calling the Pirate Party the sixth biggest is kinda misleadind. Like if there were 8 athletes and one came 6th, calling them the 6th best is wrong. More like second to last.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 06:14 PM
1

My argument was never that you cant form a political party, my argument was that you werent qualified and so most likely shouldnt be elected. Based on your definition of ordinary, is a blind law graduate an ordinary person? How many blind law graduates do you think there are? It is very easy to think that ordinary people should run the country, but the problem is that countries are incredibly complex, and governments are incredibly complex, and laws are incredibly complex. The ordinary person do…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 06:08 PM
1

I am sorry but that is a totally false equivalence. You are neither qualified nor have the experience to choose a list of people who also might not be qualified or experienced enough to take on a humongous task like leading a nation. However these political parties are.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 05:47 PM
1

You’re comparing a politician to a surgeon? Well, if anything, a politician is even more important considering that a surgeon, considering the fact that they manage the entire nation. A country should try to elect the best possible people it has without regard for things like quotas which inherently discourage qualification and merit. I didnt say that the current mps got there via merit or not, i just said that it is quite possible that there might be a more qualified candidate for the mp who mi…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 05:40 PM
1

If you want a society that functions based on merit, then quotas should by definition not exist. And especially on stages of political discussion, which can have huge impact on people’s lives, then having politicians that didnt get where they did through pure merit and hard work is wrong. If the women in the female documented parliament got there based on merit, then I am fine with that. However its not something to be celebrated, just like having a male dominated parliament is not something to …
/r/MensRights26/09/21 05:25 PM
1

My argument isnt based on whether voters are for or against quotas, its that having female-dominated parliament is not something to be celebrated, especially if those women got there through quotas.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 05:11 PM
1

Three of the biggest parties, the Progressive party, the Left Green movement, and the Social Democratic Alliance have some form of gender quotas. The womens list was a party that had exclusively women. These three parties combined had 26 seats out of 63 in 2017. Also the progressive party was the biggest gainer this year.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 05:01 PM
1

My point isnt even about who gets to form coalitions. First of all, the president decides who gets to form a coalition based on the biggest gainers, and considering that the most of major political parties in Iceland have gender quotas, they are also most likely to be able to form a coalition, and beat any other party. And the fact that most major Icelandic political parties have gender quotas proves that the woman who got in to parliament and were given a seat didnt get there via merit
/r/MensRights26/09/21 04:22 PM
1

It’s literally written in the article that these three political parties have formed a coalition. After the coalition gets elected, the percentage of votes that each party got determines how many seats they get in parliament. For example, if the Centrist party got the most votes, it would get the most seats, followed by the rest of the parties in coalition. Also, the party that got the most votes gets to decide most of the policy decisions, based on what percentage it got.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 04:07 PM
1

Here you go
/r/MensRights26/09/21 04:02 PM
0

Well even in the 1900s, the birth control pill didnt exist. It still doesnt change the fact that only 4% of women in massachusetts were actively for women being able to vote. It is quite possible that women didnt hold political offices because they didnt want to.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 03:36 PM
1

You said that historically women have always struggled to be elected. Historically means throughout history. I can pick any time in history that I want. If you wanted me talk about only 100 years ago jn the usa, you should have mentioned that. The reaso that most women didnt have voting rights is because women themselves did not want the right to vote. In massachusetts, where the suffrage movement started, only 4% of women wanted to be able to vote. Most women were either indifferent or against …
/r/MensRights26/09/21 02:47 PM
2

The problem with your argument is that most of the dominant parties have formed political alliances, and these dominant parties have quotas, in fact one party exclusively has women. So most people dont really have to vote for these parties because they disagree with the policies of other parties even more than the dominant ones. Moreover, most people dont bother to research and fond out about the candidates and how they got their position, so they are unlikely to know or care about the fact that…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 02:20 PM
2

If they got there through a quota, then by definition they did not get there through merit. And women haven’t historically struggled to hold office. There have been several female rulers all throughout history. Many of then are incredibly famous. In fact, Ancient Sparta, one of the most conservative and traditionalist nations ever to exist, allowed women to hold property, and slaves, and had an incredibly powerful group of aristocratic women that were even richer than the two kings.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 02:16 PM
6

OP was simply saying that a female dominated parliament wasnt something to be celebrated, , and if a female dominated parliament js to be celebrated, that means that the BBC wants women to dominate over men. especially considering the fact that almost all the major parties in Iceland have some form of gender quotas for women, so they didnt really get there via merit.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 02:06 PM
3

You explained how the Icelandic ballot works to me, but that wasnt the basis of my argument. My argument was simply that since most of the major Icelandic parties have quotas, even if voters disagree with said quotas, they dont have a much better alternative.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 02:03 PM
8

Here you go Go ahead and see this source. Rather than insulting me because of a simple spelling mistake, go ahead and do your own research first. PS- You don’t need to live in a country to know about it. The internet exists. There might be things about a country that its own citizens might not know, but people who have conducted thorough research on that country might.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 01:59 PM
8

Oops sorry meant Iceland it was a spelling error
/r/MensRights26/09/21 01:53 PM
9

The problem with your argument is that out of the 8 main political parties in Ireland, 4 of them have some form of gender quotas. One of the parties is literally an all womens party. So even if people disagree with the party and the candidates, and some of their policies, there might be no better alternative. For example, a person might disagree with certain Democrat policies, but they still have to vote for Democrats, because there is not a much better alternative. Also, out of the 4 parties th…
/r/MensRights26/09/21 01:51 PM
20

Voters vote for parties, the candidates that the parties choose to sit in parliament are at their own discretion. If you vote for the right wing party , and they get elected, they get to choose who gets to sit in parliament, voters dont vote for every person individually, they vote for the parties.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 01:24 PM
53

Whilst the Icelandic parliament itself does not have gender quotas, all the political parties have some form of gender quotas, so, no, not all the women got elected democratically and with merit.
/r/MensRights26/09/21 01:04 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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