TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

iwillnotgetaddicted Archive

View 1 post and 78 comments by iwillnotgetaddicted on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

This is a question one reporter asked at a press conference. You may be making a bit too much of it in the context of the state of our nation.
/r/MensRights07/06/16 07:49 AM
7

You are wrong. Consider yourself corrected.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/16 01:11 PM
13

Lol, someone has no idea how a court works. The only actual outcome is "your evidence is not admissible in court." Your counterargument is that if the court won't allow your evidence, then it's not doing its job to protect you, the innocent victime of false rape accusations. Let's stop back here. The reason we don't allow certain kinds of evidence in court is because the behaviors that lead to that evidence being collected are illegal and should not be encouraged. Let me make an analogy, since y…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/16 02:35 AM
1

It's pretty amusing that you claim "I argue ideologically" but then you make one of the most egregious straw men one could make. You imply that I said "Why can't men and women appreciate the good parts of each other?" when of course I never said such a thing. Way to stick to logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/16 12:44 AM
0

Pretend that some RP guy is making the argument that as soon as sex bots are invented, men will no longer need women for anything.Then some BP man pops in and says, "Not true. Men still need women for companionship. Men need women for love and validation. They need women to be mothers to their children. I would say the same thing: some men need those things. When you say all women need mothers, you insult every gay couple raising children. And notice, by the way, that you sanitized your list for…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/16 12:42 AM
2

Her statements were not restricted to her own choices, they were very broad. We would get lonely without them. We need men to love us and kiss us and have sex with us. Our babies need dads and men are really good at that. We need someone to motivate us to take showers and brush our hair. We need someone to do crazy things and inspire us to take risks and be creative.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/16 12:33 AM
1

Heaven forbid there be an example of a male plumber. I must be a chauvinist to have pointed out a real life example. What are you trying to say? You argued that we need men because we need plumbers. I pointed out that this is dumb. Is that really your argument, are you really defending that? You're getting way off track here. This article is about sexual/intimate relationships. It's not about eliminating all men from society. I agree, diversity is great. I'm glad we have men and women, flautists…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/16 12:30 AM
2

While you're clearly a borderline sociopath and likely bring more harm to society than good, I will address the ideas you are sharing. We are considering the case of an individual who is not getting sex from the group he wants to get sex from. First, we are making an attempt to define the problem. That's not straightforward: this is certainly a problem for the individual, but is it a problem that society should be obligated to address? Will it create net good for society if we solve this problem…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/16 12:01 AM
0

I listed stuff I think is great about men. ...and it was irrelevant I said nothing about women except that they need men In this context, we are talking about a sexual relationship. So you were wrong. This is true because all humans depend on other humans to survive and be happy. So you are trying to make the general claim that any group can be said to need any other group, because all humans depend on each other. So let's go ahead and use logical substitution to test the claim of this argument.…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 09:07 PM
4

Okay. So unless you're daft, you concede my point. It's not about you. OP suggests that men can't get sex, so they must have prostitution or sex robots. I'm pointing out that men can have sex, but some have unrealistic standards. If a person is 23 years old and feels sex is his right, and that he should be able to obtain it, but isn't attractive enough (physically, personality-wise, etc) to obtain it from very attractive young women, then he needs to expand his range of "acceptable" women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 09:01 PM
1

Your argument was about need. Mine is about preference No. Your argument was about "all women." My argument is about not generalizing your views to all women. Which you continue to do. Women would rather have men around than not have them around. So... all women, eh? In context, again, we're not talking about killing all men. We're talking about telling women that they need to have close relationships with males. The post we are discussing is about sexual relations. It's not about plumbers, whic…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 08:14 PM
0

I am sure women would rather have men around than not have them around You really, really aren't getting it. Yes, most women feel this way. No, you shouldn't claim it as the natural state of things, imply that it should be that way, or generalize it to all women. Insert the word "most" in your sentence, and you're golden. Keep saying that "women would rather have a man around" in the context of this discussion, talking about individual, close relationships (no one is talking about eliminating me…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 06:57 PM
-1

A) No one is arguing you have to be extremely independent or don't need anyone. That's a straw man. B) Some people choose to be more independent than others. What's your point? C) Switching gears and arguing that most people need companionship is entirely irrelevant to what we're arguing about. D) The fact that most people need to feel companionship from someone of the opposite sex does not make it okay to assert that everyone does, or to continue strengthening the social stigma on choosing to r…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 06:36 PM
9

If women don't find you attractive enough to sleep with, why should you get to sleep with women you find attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 06:31 PM
0

Erm, yes, for children there is a biological need to have a parent in order to exist. The discussion is whether a woman needs a man around. My most recent comment may seem off topic, but that's because the person arguing women need a man in their life is getting further and further off topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 06:29 PM
4

My boyfriend makes art out of old bike parts and it's really awesome. Oh so art will disappear if not for men. Gotcha... that male-dominated field of creative whimsical art... As far as "where would we find doctors?!": In 2015, there were 781,602 applicants to med school who met the minimum requirements; 45.8% were women; 47.8% of those accepted are women. If we didn't have a single male applying and didn't have any men enrolled, Of the remaining pool of 390,000 women applicants, I think we coul…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 10:50 AM
1

Seriously, I wish you'd cut it out. I am a man, but I have 2 friends who hear that bullshit all the time, and it makes them want to scream. They are happy single, and don't need a man. I don't know what your child situation is, but on the off chance that you don't want children, I hope you can empathize... think about how it feels when people constantly tell you that you won't be complete without children, that you need to have children, etc... You want a man. That's fine. Most women want a man.…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 10:41 AM
9

Your real argument is that the current system is unfair to men who want no strings sex, without even being able to guarantee their partner an orgasm. Don't forget, they're looking for no strings sex without an orgasm with young, highly attractive women-- not those shudder mildly overweight or ew over 30 year old things. http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-case-for-an-older-woman/ Check out the "shape of the dating pool." Basically, the pool of 18-year-old women is tiny, and there are a million…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/16 10:36 AM
3

When the first reaction to hearing that someone got raped is to ask what she was wearing, why she didn't be careful and why she didn't resist it reinforces the belief that the victim is responsible for it. I know, I know. We're specifically referring to warnings that happen prior to someone being raped. That's why they're calling it "precautions about not getting raped" rather than "lectures after getting raped." I don't think anyone in this discussion thinks it's okay to respond to a rape by te…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/16 04:03 PM
1

I suppose that's a valid perspective. Men are also victims of random sex crimes, but I agree it's probably far less common. But I generally hear it phrased not as "don't get raped" but rather "be safe, protect yourself."
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/16 03:55 PM
4

As a related point, I think that when we focus on women walking alone at night, we actually do a disservice to men. This advice is based on a warped, sexist ideology that men are powerful and strong, and are therefore not in danger. In fact (google it, it's very clear) most victims of violence (not limiting that to sexual violence, but including muggings, assaults, murders, etc) are males. So when we tell women specifically not to walk alone, it's hard for me to see how it would be victim-blamin…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/16 08:04 AM
4

I think because the "victim blaming" argument is now being used as a response to campus education even at matriculation events, before any crimes have taken place. I agree with you-- that would be a reasonable justification. I've been wondering myself whether most self-identified feminists would agree with that, or whether the viewpoint that educating women not to walk alone at night is inherently victim-blaming, even before the fact. Glad to see some evidence of the former.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/16 08:01 AM
1

By what logic? The comment you're responding to has not made any claims about privilege, rights, etc. You're not even addressing the comment. This comment literally deals with one concern, which is that the person I'm replying to didn't listen to OPs comment. This makes me feel like I am losing my sanity, to read both of you respond again and again to my comments, which are saying "wait, that's not what OP said," with further comments about men's rights. I'm not even addressing men's rights! I'm…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/16 09:40 PM
1

I hope you're not writing a reply right now, because I'm impatient and decided to get going on a debate with myself. Actually, I'm trying to imagine which of these posts you might consider "harmless" or an example of a real good dude who is being unfairly mocked. I shouldn't put words in your mouth, but I also don't want to get out of bed so here I am doing exactly that. My first candidate for "misunderstood nice guys" is https://www.reddit.com/r/niceguys/comments/43o03d/3772_nice_guys/. The ima…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 11:22 PM
1

Wow. I just followed your link. My initial response to OP was going to be something along the lines of "stop grouping everyone into small boxes"-- because people behave differently and while some women may be wrongly calling men Nice GuysTM, the majority of women who talk about Nice GuysTM are legitimately talking about shitty men who fall into the category. I decided not to comment because it seemed pointless without actual, IRL examples to discuss. But that subreddit gives sheets of material. …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 10:50 PM
1

There is no explanation for this other than that you are a) a bot, posting pre-written comments in response to keywords/phrases, or b) a feminist trying to pretend to be an MRA to discredit their movement. I refuse to accept the possibility anyone with the capacity to spell words correctly could honestly be so clueless and obnoxious. If you would like to discuss the issue with me further, please PM me at http://www.cleverbot.com/. At that address, I promise to reply to all of your comments with …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 04:03 AM
1

This comment continues and exacerbates the flaw I described in my last comment. You are not having a conversation; you are posting speeches unrelated to what you are being asked or accused of. Not a single word, phrase, or even clause of your latest response addresses the comment I wrote to you in any way. Are you capable of a two-way interaction where you listen to your opponent and comprehend their words?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 03:58 AM
0

I don't know if you realize it, but this copy/paste response quite illustrates the truth of your opponents' claims in this thread and the surrounding context. They accuse MRAs of willful ignorance and failure to actually engage with the feminist view, instead wanting to simply trumpet their views and force them on others. This sentiment, though not in the same words, has been given as the main reason that MRAs are often booted from r/feminism. Look at the exchange that has happened. Bad Kitteh d…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 03:37 AM
2

I'm interested in learning a little more about what you mean here. I typically think of gender differences as arising from social problems, eg how people think and act as groups. You've framed the issue in a way that I don't understand. (By the way, yes I'm a dude, but 99% of the time when I comment in here it's anti-TRP pro-feminism. I may be incredibly ignorant, but I hope you'll at least accept my positive intent and recognize that my ignorance isn't willful.) So, for example, you are excludi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 03:33 AM
3

...and so are half the people RP derides as BP. By your definition, basically being a good person with their shit together is RP.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/16 07:25 PM
2

I'm sorry, but this is a crazy assertion. I have lots of poly friends, and nearly all of the men are undeniably blue pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/16 07:21 PM
4

blue-pill man here-- beta as fuck, nice guy, vegan, passive, not very self-confident etc. The answer is basically "as often as I want." I have a casual friends-with benefits, but she understands I'm looking for a long-term partner. I like the arrangement-- very low-stress, we play a lot of GTA together, watch Game of Thrones, etc, and we fuck a couple times a day when we're together. She really likes giving blow jobs, so I often get that mythical blow-job while playing x-box. But I am also very …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/16 08:57 PM
1

I'm leaning towards you being a troll... but not 100% sure yet, so I'll try one more thing. Saying mean things is neither a valid nor an invalid logical syllogism. An argument cannot actually be invalid, provided it is syntactically correct, either using the formal definition of an argument (a general assertion of a fact) or the specific case here (where I assert a fact about OP). In other words "you are blue" is not valid or invalid; it is only an argument. (It may be true or it may be false, b…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 02:56 AM
1

Let's make a distinction. If you are accusing me of an ad hominem fallacy, where I draw an unrelated conclusion from personal characteristics of my opponent rather than from reasoning, you are objectively wrong. If you are accusing me of an ad hominem and you mean nothing more than "you wus a meanie-weenie pants and I didn't wike it wahhhhh," then yeah, you got me. I said mean things.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/15 09:43 PM
2

It's some combination of being obsessive and enjoying it. Also I was sitting on a beach in a resort in Cancun, and it really didn't seem like much work to sit on that beach chair for a few more minutes. And I enjoyed creating an image of Hillary Clinton sticking carrots in her ears. That made it worthwhile for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/15 03:22 AM
3

That's a lot of angry caps locks. 2 separate issues. 1) When are you "making something your business" and 2) when are you applying actual social pressure. For point 1) none of your reply here matters. It doesn't matter if someone overhears it. As I explained in my other comment, "making something your business" means discussing it/thinking about it/judging it. So for example, if a person, in his own house, says to his spouse "I think the neighbor is a little too eager to greet the milk man" the …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/15 08:15 PM
1

No, they are making what you do their business. They're discussing what you do, deciding whether it's okay, etc. They're making it their business. Maybe you should talk to people in general to get a sense of how that phrase is used. "Mind your own business" doesn't mean controlling someone physically, it means talking about, gossiping, and judging.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/15 07:54 PM
2

...but loudly and repeatedly calling something repulsive applies social pressure to not do that thing. No one accused you of physically entering their rooms and stopping them from having sex. When they say you are making it your business, this clearly counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/15 07:53 PM
33

You have a simplistic, reductionist thought process, and apparently anger issues with feminism. You didn't think rationally and arrive at a conclusion; rather, you started from a conclusion and shoehorned something into place that you think supports it. You didn't bother even for a second to error-check your own reasoning, because the early parts of your post already answer the latter part and defeat your own conclusion. I realize that is a lot of time to spend criticizing you instead of your re…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/15 02:27 PM
3

I don't get your point. You spent time with women and you feel that, from that time spent, you now know about women?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 04:42 PM
1

In my experience, it is true in the world we live in. Obviously you disagree, and that's fine. I definitely don't think the penalty for using your femininity to get what you want should be the same as the penalty for rape. I'm sure you don't either, just making sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 04:41 PM
3

Well I don't have a specific cutoff for what is a high enough standard, and to be fair, feminism (or sociology in general, or economics in general) doesn't often meet the bar that I like to have-- systematic reviews of large bodies of double-blinded, placebo controlled prospective experimental studies. I'm not saying I throw out everything but the best, just that it seems unwise to throw out everything from academia, especially if you're going to accept things written from the opposite bias. I w…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:13 AM
3

surely you'd see why engaging with very biased sources is problematic? Why yes, which is why I explicitly stated that. Again, I ask you for an alternative. Certainly you don't assert that using no studies at all is better than using studies from biased sources that are based on statistical methodology designed to minimize bias as much as possible and create the highest degree of objectivity as can reasonably be obtained? I would use the standard evidence-based medicine hierarchy here. Uncontroll…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 12:34 AM
7

I have no idea where you got the idea that the Manosphere doesn't recommend interacting with people to learn behaviour. I have no idea what the Manosphere is, but you are the one who gave me this idea. I pointed out what I thought was an obvious, uncontroversial fact, that interacting with women is a useful way to learn about women. It was your stridently worded objection to this claim that made me think you, personally, disagreed with it. I applied none of this to any broader movement. Or to pu…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 12:28 AM
8

Well you'll note I gave a list of several things. I believe the combination of these things is the best approach, but I certainly would like to hear your alternative. I'd argue that for non-psychopaths, the more time you spend with them, the better you get to know them. I also assert that mask or no, you never understand all things about a person. These are all spectrums, not black-or-white. But if you don't believe that spending time with a person allows you to know them better, then I again as…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 11:58 PM
11

So, just to be clear, I'm wrapping up what I consider my major point in entering this discussion, and you seem to agree with my point. Your second point here--the one you also made above, that I [possibly rudely] dismissed as irrelevant ranting-- is also kind of interesting. I think I actually disagree with it as well... well, at least I disagree with the controversial part. I of course accept as trivially true that self-improvement allows you to have greater selection of partners. You don't den…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 10:41 PM
11

Your last two paragraphs are just irrelevant rants. No one said it isn't bad to get into a relationship with a bad women. Obviously it is, so that's a straw man. Obviously, men should avoid losing their children, homes, and assets through divorce from a bad woman. Obviously, men should avoid being cheated on. Obviously, men should avoid being shit on by women. Obviously, men should minimize these risks and maximize gain. But you don't minimize these risks by making false generalizations about wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 10:24 PM
13

Huge difference between the two assumptions you're comparing. A woman's conduct in terms of being alone with a man is an issue of safety, where minimizing risk is the goal. Discussing the nature of women does not have safety as a goal; rather, accuracy should be the goal. As an analogy: hopefully most of us wear seat belts. We all recognize that the chances of getting in a wreck are pretty much insignificant, but this small precaution will protect us from that rare occurrence. But if we were sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 09:52 PM
-1

Well sorry I was an ass then.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/10/15 08:07 PM
-15

I suppose you didn't mean to be insulting, but I was insulted. First, if I don't know a word while on Reddit, I am capable of using google. Second, I am very familiar with the word "proprioceptive." General word of advice: if someone wants you to define a word, they can ask you for it, or they can look it up. If you are using words that you presume others are too ignorant to understand, maybe you should choose different words. Using a word and giving it's definition is pretty insulting to the in…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/10/15 07:28 PM
-10

Why did you link me to the definition of "proprioceptive," but not "physical", or "tactical", or "vigor"? I did interpret his comment as referring to behavioral, but on re-reading, it doesn't necessarily carry that restriction-- so I agree, you're right.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/10/15 05:47 PM
1

But he can't even do it successfully. Okay maybe he does eventually, I admit I stopped at 5:30. But he says women objectify men by offering sex as a reward for doing what they want. But by definition, that is not objectifying them-- they are still given agency to act as they choose. This doesn't come close to being objectification. Yeah, he uses the same type of language that feminists use, but if he can't succeed at reinforcing his claims with reasonable arguments, how does that end up being a …
/r/PussyPassDenied27/10/15 09:42 AM
-14

100k years of hunting evolution built into us. That's where you lost me. You really think behaviors evolved to help hunt is a significant factor in boxing?
/r/PussyPassDenied27/10/15 08:42 AM
0

+4 showed that on average, members of the sub upvoted more than they downvoted.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 06:02 PM
-1

subject!! I would be fine if a Muslim living in the West Bank said "I hate Jews, and will tomorrow and the day after, but only the Zionist Jews who believe that they are entitled to our lands and that the lives of our family members are disposable as long as we live here." I also wouldn't have a problem if a male said this about women who abuse the legal system to take advantage of men. CONTEXT does matter. I also have no problem with the statement about men, in the context offered. If I could t…
/r/MensRights13/09/15 05:54 PM
0

It was at +4 when I commented, so you're welcome.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 05:46 PM
10

It won't be considered "insignificant" by anyone in the mainstream. If anyone starts to take MRAs seriously, all a feminist or member of the media has to do is link to literally any of your pages, where comments like this are overwhelmingly upvoted, and that credibility will be lost.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 09:46 AM
14

I don't understand why we need comments like this in a Men's Rights subreddit. I mean don't get me wrong, we shouldn't have to sanitize our opinions to appear "acceptable" to the other side either, and no one should judge an entire movement by the words of a few… But if the general community of people who are advocating for Men's Rights thinks it is swell to respond to the arguments of a woman by saying she's ugly and no one should want to touch her, then Mens Rights will always be no-platformed…
/r/MensRights13/09/15 09:11 AM
-12

Article titles are chosen by editors, not writers. The editor of the 2006 article "I hate men" chose a profitable title because it grabbed eyes. The headline/sub are actually just quotes from the article pulled out of context. Why did OP have to go back a decade to find something that made his point? You can clearly see the next line: "At least those who perpetrate crimes against women and those who do nothing to stop it." And the entire context: "I will say loud and proud, yes, today I hate men…
/r/MensRights13/09/15 09:04 AM
2

If you're looking for an oppressed group to support, consider food animals. The vegan movement is growing, and is key to improving the environment and will relieve an incredible amount of animal suffering. There may be more women than men, but no one's voice will go unheard based on gender. Although I will say this: if you're afraid of offending the sensibilities of someone not already in the group, you're going to have to write a lot more than 5,000 words to make non-vegans happy with your atte…
/r/MensRights13/09/15 08:47 AM
1

….seriously? This is literally one of the most famous lines in the English language of all time from any medium.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/09/15 06:47 AM
1

I know I'm a pig and I'm being superficial and I shouldn't be saying this but HOLY FUCKING HOW THAT WOMAN IN THE BLUE DRESS WITH THE THIGH SLIT…. that is the only thing I was actually paying attention to from about here on.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/09/15 06:32 AM
1

My first question when I heard the name was "Is there any chance this person is related to Christopher?" Then I heard him talk and saw his face, and there was no doubt.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/09/15 06:00 AM
1

"She just wanted them to use their judgement and let her in." Well let me think about this. It's after hours, I'm fucking tired, someone is pounding and kicking my window. I will use my judgement… and this is what happens. By the way, how stupid do you have to be to still be at this when the police arrive? It's not like the cops make it there in 2 minutes flat, she had to be pounding on that window for several minutes before they a) decided to call the cops and b) the cops actually showed up.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/09/15 05:43 AM
2

He spend 30 seconds telling her to "respect herself" and pointing his finger directly in her face. If someone did that to me, and I could get away with it (as in, no, I'm not going to get my ass kicked out of principle, but if I'm bigger, more sober, surrounded by friends, etc) i would definitely have punched him.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/09/15 05:31 AM
35

I realize that there are different ideas on the philosophy of this community, and I may be in a minority, so obviously take my advice with a grain of salt... My advice would be to keep in mind the idea that she doesn't know what your intentions are up to and through the F-close. If you've led her to believe that you're doing this as part of a relationship, and that it's going to lead somewhere, then... well then you're a douche, and I'm glad my advice won't help you. But I think it's more likely…
/r/seduction01/08/11 10:17 PM
2

It's easiest to look for one in a loosely guarded purse, but the more talented among us will try to bump into someone and make it look like an accident, and use the contact to mask a reach into a back or side pocket.
/r/seduction22/07/11 04:29 AM
-1

Lawyers are probably an exception, since most lawyers go into the field for the money because of their desired lifestyle. I suppose probably a lot of medical students do as well; maybe I should stick to the profession I know (vet students.) Generally the vet students in it for money are not the brightest, or they would have gone into human medicine to work fewer hours for many times as much money. [edit] Also, NYC is by no means a campus town. NYC is a big city, and NYC top law schools likely ca…
/r/seduction27/06/11 07:17 PM
3

Ah, thanks! Previously we were speaking fantasy, thanks for getting us on track and starting a realistic conversation! Anyway, the point you're trying to make applies only to people finished with school. Lawyers, doctors, veterinarians-- they all make good money, but only after going into debt for many years. (Not really relevant to our main argument, but: Many grad students will never make really good money. And TBH, vets make okay money-- like $60-70k starting salary, so we're not talking abou…
/r/seduction27/06/11 12:20 AM
2

This statement made me laugh. Still, I have to offer a counterpoint... I think it may depend on what time you go/where. I know a lot of veterinary students at my school go to yoga, because it's a great way to relax and get some low-stress exercise. However, they tend to go on weekends, crazy early, or after 7pm because that's the only time they can make it. As to "where" I have no idea if any general rules apply, but it does seem pretty likely that girls go in groups if they are in the same clas…
/r/seduction26/06/11 09:19 PM
2

You're right, I shouldn't have said eliminates; my point is it doesn't select for. I also think it may select against, but that's just conjecture.
/r/seduction26/06/11 09:14 PM
5

I don't understand how your arguement is relevant. It's actually fairly simple. While I agree there are some dumb med, vet, and grad students, I think it's fairly safe to say there are a higher percentage of smart people among them than in the average population. You can deny this, but it will be just that: denial (for the sake of argument.) My example (note, it was an example, not an argument) merely demonstrates that your suggestion eliminates a population that is smarter than average. Is it r…
/r/seduction26/06/11 08:20 PM
8

No, they're not mutually exclusive-- obviously you find spoiled/rich girls in both, but I don't understand how that's relevant. (The question isn't "can spoiled/rich girls be smart" but "where do I find smart girls.) There's no reason that a high end bar should have a higher proportion of smart girls than anywhere else, including cheap bars. Medical, veterinary, and graduate students, for example, generally can't afford to go to high-end bars.
/r/seduction26/06/11 07:57 PM
56

Classy bars where you need to dress up? He said smart girls, not spoiled/rich girls.
/r/seduction26/06/11 07:37 PM
1

I tried to find other articles about it, but only succeeded in finding a few forum discussions. One indicated that the penis was erect, and this was the problem. (Again, in a sex museum?)
/r/MensRights11/05/11 03:26 PM
1

Here's my question: if you have secondary and tertiary tasks for today, tomorrow, and the third day... do you make them all the same? If not, do you keep adding undone ones to the next day's list? Or... something else?
/r/seduction11/05/11 05:17 AM
0

If the goal was making the sub-reddit seem more respectable as KBC suggested, then hiding the problem would be fixing it.
/r/seduction30/04/11 09:21 PM
1

Related post from a blog on rational thinking... Just try it: Quantity Trumps Qualilty
/r/seduction07/04/11 03:10 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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