TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

kimb00 Archive

View 0 posts and 94 comments by kimb00 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)
2

Sure, vague PTSD from some undetermined childhood trauma... But PTSD from war and/or treating a kid with their face ripped off is pretty understandable.
/r/TheRedPill08/05/18 08:18 PM
4

...so how all people react when they hear terrible news from someone? My dad's dying of cancer right now... Wanna know how weird people (men and women) get when I tell them that? Emotions make everyone uncomfortable. It's your insecurity that's the issue, not her.
/r/TheRedPill08/05/18 08:12 PM
2

"Boys will be boys". Got it.
/r/RedPillWives24/01/18 12:13 AM
1

Why? Is there some reason that would make you think that WHM isn't a feminist?
/r/RedPillWives23/01/18 11:33 PM
1

It was a trite response, save your outrage. The point is that there was a culture of exploitation and inequality that was rampant through Holloywood that men either directly contributed or tacitly approved. It comes back to that whole "locker room talk". It's the men that are in the locker room and the men that should be shutting that down that talk and the subsequent behaviour. Regardless, when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. I feel like this speech sums up the m…
/r/RedPillWives23/01/18 09:46 PM
1

I don't feel like Macy had to support her to appease feminists either, because if he were just silent on the matter I don't think Rossum would have dragged his name into it. Rossum didn't drag his name in, he volunteered it.
/r/RedPillWives23/01/18 09:38 PM
1

Yea, well, white slave owners shortly after emancipation probably felt the same way.
/r/RedPillWives23/01/18 06:28 AM
8

Except that a successful show requires more than a single star, it requires an entire cast. Rossum has said that she was comfortable accepting a much lower salary when she first started with the role, but now that the entire show has become critically acclaimed --and that she is a leading cast member if not the lead-- she should be paid a similar salary.
/r/RedPillWives23/01/18 06:28 AM
0

"Intelligent".
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 05:00 AM
6

If you think so, but that still doesn't change the fact that your concept of rape culture was (is?) completely and entirely inaccurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 03:13 AM
3

Look, men are physically stronger than women and control the use and application of force exclusively. Sure, but that has nothing to do with rape culture. If there was a rape culture, women would be in chains and the world would be an /r/freeuse wet dream. There's not a rape culture, there's a pussy worship culture. No, that's a gross misunderstanding of the term. Maybe actually read up on it instead of getting your information exclusively from MGTOW (and probably incels).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 03:08 AM
2

assertive =/= confident
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 03:04 AM
4

Men and women exhibit sexual dimorphism. The language centers of male and female brains are configured very differently. A neurologist can look at an extreme close-up of one of the brain's language centers and accurately, reliably tell the sex of the individual. Source? Because everything I've read points to men and women as whole being identifiably different, but at an individual level/comparison these so-called differences become effectively meaningless.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 03:04 AM
2

Wrong. There definitely is, it's just a highly misunderstood concept.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 02:58 AM
1

The amount of bad science and outdated, ignorant information in your post is scary... especially since you're likely constantly congratulating yourself for thinking you're soooo smart. For instance, talking about "on average" when speaking about a company that hires less than 1% of its applicants is idiotic at best...not to mention all the other blatantly incorrect extrapolations. Source and source
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/17 08:16 PM
1

People used to say the same thing about races and eugenics.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/17 05:57 PM
1

Mainstream media, academia... politicians... public figures...
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/17 04:43 AM
2

...so a random (and completely incoherent) forum self-post is your only example that he's being called a fascist?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 10:34 PM
3

... you keep using those words. I don't think they mean what you think they mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 09:45 PM
1

North Korea is fascist country therefor it can't be oppressed.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 09:19 PM
1

Then you didn't read it very thoroughly. He makes it abundantly clear that women are predisposed to have a great deal of attributes that are needed at Google. Right, and where's the part where he links how the statistical/biological differences in men present differently but equally as negatively? If you refuse to acknowledge that Google is acting in its best interests, and that the best interests of a corporation often involve saying what's popular instead of what's true, you just aren't living…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 09:18 PM
1

Where was this? Can you provide a link?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 08:52 PM
1

Those statements are not mutually exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 08:51 PM
1

I absolutely did. And if you're just going to come from a perspective that everything google says is fake news and everything that this guy is claiming is "real science", there's really no point in having a conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 08:45 PM
5

Second, it's his job to "criticize" his workplace. He didn't get fired for criticizing how Google approached diversity (a fact they've clearly stated), he got fired for implying* that inherent biological differences are the reason why women aren't as successful in STEM fields. That would be like me saying "maybe men aren't as likely to be successful teachers because they are biologically predisposed to be pedophiles". Or that "maybe men are more likely to go to jail because they're biologically …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 06:35 PM
1

Did you ever think that maybe if men didn't act like you, more women would be interested in casual sex, and then everyone wins?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/17 02:40 PM
1

And yet you're bothered that women don't want casual sex...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/17 01:14 AM
1

Do you only speak in extremes? What about alcoholism?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/17 01:12 AM
1

If he treats her like an escort or hooker, it's rarely a bad time. rofl. Please elaborate.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:34 PM
1

Would you say that beating a drug addiction is a comparably "minor" effort?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:21 PM
1

Definitely not. The best sex comes from men who have actually been in long term relationships. Suave dudes who deal exclusively in casual sex seem to take all their cues from porn instead of their partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 05:56 PM
1

Does that work?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/17 06:22 AM
1

You don't think a person without a physical flaw exists on the planet ? Nope. Not a single scar... single cellulite dimple... perfect curves... definitely not. For instance, you can see that even her "perfect" body has cellulite. I've always believed 10s only exist in the eye of the beholder. I think it's a tad creepy that you think of women as possessions, but regardless, have you ever seen so-called perfect 10 in person? I deliberately qualify that with in person, photoshoots don't count.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 11:04 PM
2

You seem to be glossing over the part where you think Lily Macapinlac, Yovanna Ventura, and Monica Alvarez are 7s? lol He said any girl who looks similar to them is a 10. And why aren't they? Am I the only one who is misunderstanding "SMV"...? which (to my understanding) isn't about just someone's physical characteristics? For instance, I'm in my 30s which knocks my SMV down to a 7... but if we narrow that to my age group, it's quite a bit higher. Isn't that why we don't just reference looks alo…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 09:13 PM
2

I mean, maybe she's a 9 I can't tell because facially she does look pretty but two pictures don't really tell the whole story. No, but their instagrams do. Lily Macapinlac Yovanna Ventura Monica Alvarez As for a 10, I wouldn't even go that high for anyone. Unless the person is super freakishly undeniably beautiful with virtually not a single physical flaw So someone who doesn't actually exist?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 08:11 PM
2

No, he said that any woman who is an international model, or Justin Bieber's girlfriend, is objectively a 10. Because you apparently think that Lily Macapinlac, Yovanna Ventura, and Monica Alvarez are "objectively 7s". Which objectively makes you an idiot.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 08:06 PM
3

Why would being Justin Bieber's GF necessarily make you a 10, Because he's a world-famous 20-something popstar known for being attractive? Do you think he would choose someone who is not a 10? and how does it logically follow that being Mark Zuckerberg's wife should be a 10? For one, Mark Zuckerberg isn't known for his looks, he's known for his brains. It would be unlikely for him to want to choose someone solely based on their looks. But since I'm new to this TRP language, isn't it called "SMV"…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 07:46 PM
2

The idea that a super-model will necessarily be found attractive according to her locale is bunk. That's likely the difference between "beautiful" or "striking" and "attractive". There are almost zero male models that I find attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 06:49 PM
1

The key difference is that women have the option to completely opt out of the consequences (abortion) while men don't have any such option. Sex: Both parties are equally responsible. Pregnancy: The woman's right to her body trumps everything, including that of the fetus. No one can make you amputate your arm, no one can make you abort. Child: The rights of the child trumps both parents, and so the child is entitled to financial support from both parents. Putting the child up for adoption require…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 08:16 AM
1

I'm less than 5'4"... Height isn't really an issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/17 12:09 AM
1

You think you can get a rise out of me with these pathetic ad hominem tactics? Dude, you called me a hamster. Stop pretending like you actually wanted a discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 11:04 PM
–

Argue that without making it about you, specifically. I am and I'm not. I realize I'm setting myself up for "well I guess you're the exception to the rule" and they can still dismiss me on that level... but I find when they actually speak to a real live person who goes against their worldview, it sometimes is enough to make them question their assumptions a very tiny bit. Maybe if they hear about enough so-called unicorns they'll stop acting like unitards. but I've never posted it here, because …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 08:23 PM
–

Done. I was going to remove it within the next few minutes... I'm pretty aware of how these things go. It's just that (as I said in the reply) it seems like most RPs won't listen unless they can assign you a number.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 07:59 PM
–

Figgy's comment, however, like most comments here, was generalizing, Right. I get that. But my point is that they're generalizing to the point of meaninglessness. Also, I wouldn't post my picture here .... just saying .... we have some .... creative users. You'll be getting pms for days. I've been on the internet since before it was the internet, I am aware, and it won't stay up for long... but I've found in the past that RPs seem to only value insight from women if they aren't able to dismiss o…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 07:56 PM
–

Not even a little bit. What percent of women are attractive, as educated as they are intelligent, body able, mentally healthy, have a career, goes to the gym everyday and has interesting hobbies including impressive creative outlets? I'm reasonably attractive, look ~10 years younger than I actually am, no mental illness, have a white collar career in IT, and am a very active person (high level competitive soccer at least 4x/week... not to mention dog walking and hiking and whatever else happens)…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 07:40 PM
–

Those that are half this good are married by 30. Because quality women who want commitment get it. At 36, I guess I never wanted commitment or I'm simply a morbidly obese cave troll. Got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 07:13 PM
1

First, you are implicitly admitting (for the limited set of cases that pertain to cheating and abuse) that the threat of very adverse rulings in contested divorces are what force men's hands in going this route with a settlement. No man would willingly sign away money and assets otherwise. Nope. I said none of those things. Nor implied. Nor admitted. You seem to be unable to tell the difference between "contested" divorce" and "uncontested divorce". Feminist hamster. Third, it contradicts my own…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 06:19 AM
1

No cheating or abuse. What is left? None of that has anything to do with a divorce being no fault. You can abuse someone, you can cheat, and the divorce is still (by default, generally) be settled as no fault in most of Canada and the US. It has nothing to do with whether or not cheating and abuse did (or did not) happen, it's just cheaper and easier to just grant the divorce instead of spending time proving why. Right. Lawyers are wrong, your BP beliefs are right. I didn't say lawyers were wron…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 12:20 AM
1

Recreational or no fault divorces are the majority of divorces in the US. Since when are "no fault divorces" inherently "recreational"? Many such divorces made reference to an agreement reached between spouses. The implication was obvious - divorce rape worked well with the threat of adverse family court rulings. ...that implication does not actually follow at all. You heard what you wanted to hear. Nor does an "uncontested divorce" necessarily include an unwanted custody agreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/17 11:56 PM
3

When you erase consequences and put me in a hypothetical place where I'm 100% likely to get away with it, what's there to stop me? Isn't that the logic behind religion? That if we didn't have god looking over our shoulders we all turn into immoral fornicating bloodthirsty savages? Dude, I don't murder people because I think ending a human life is a terrible thing to do. Same with assaulting people (sexual or otherwise). Would I steal from a giant corporation if there was zero chance of getting c…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/17 08:59 PM
3

Do you think you could judge a woman's age based on her genitalia? Like rings on a tree?
/r/MGTOW16/06/17 12:49 AM
2

/r/madlads
/r/PussyPassDenied26/04/17 06:21 AM
–

Actually, I was pretty sure that it largely had to do with dowry customs. Either way, what does the original article have to do with mensrights if the norm is overwhelmingly the opposite?
/r/MensRights19/04/17 03:52 PM
–

Definitely not the norm.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 03:23 PM
3

http://howmanyofme.com/ There are 6,557 people in the U.S. named "Michael Adams".
/r/PussyPassDenied07/02/17 10:11 PM
7

So, similar to a [fairly common] first name/last name?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/02/17 09:19 PM
6

Wouldn't IP logs also be doxxing?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/02/17 08:22 PM
1

No. That was a threat that never took place. No suit was filed. The Post reported on Cook’s heart-wrenching dilemma last November, when the intended father from Georgia threatened to financially ruin the 47-year-old surrogate mom by imposing monetary damages if she refused to abort one of the fetuses, citing a provision in their contract that allowed him to request a “reduction.” It was a threat to try to get her to abort. She never did (resulting in triplets instead of twins), but he also didn'…
/r/MensRights06/01/16 06:57 PM
–

No. Cook’s lawsuit claims she is the legal mother of the triplets and seeks custody of at least one who was targeted for abortion. For his part, the intended dad plans to claims parental rights to all three kids, according to his attorney.
/r/MensRights06/01/16 06:34 PM
–

Not quite the same tho. The difference is that the contract stipulated that she should have the abortion. So the opposite of your scenario (she made a bet that she must have an abortion before she's 30 in order to win $10,000). Either way, at this point the decision about the abortion is moot. He's not suing her for anything... she's suing to keep the child that she did not abort.
/r/MensRights06/01/16 04:33 PM
–

terminate her parental rights against her will. Abortion has nothing to do with parental rights (as she did sign those away), it has to do with bodily autonomy. Parental rights are often terminated (for example, when neglected children are taken from their parents by CPS). She's already made the choice to carry the three to term... and he couldn't do anything about it. It's now moot.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 10:38 PM
–

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that you can sign a contract that waves your right to bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights05/01/16 10:27 PM
–

Is it always some form of "ism" if you want your event to include a certain subset of society? I mean, theoretically you also must be a "top performing student that wants to work in management and consulting". If you don't meet that criteria you are also excluded...?
/r/MensRights05/01/16 06:10 PM
3

I realize it sounds a bit pedantic, but to me that's basically the crux of the issue. If the laws were obviously discriminatory towards fathers, then it would be reasonably easy (or at least straightforward) to argue for change. But since the "fix" requires a fairly significant shift in the mindset of society (and the old guard of the legal system --judges are overwhelmingly old men who are statistically more likely to believe in traditional parental roles), it is much harder to tackle.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 08:02 PM
1

It's not so much the lack of a spark that sucks, but the expectation that such a spark needs to be there. I'm sorry but physical chemistry is a very real requirement to a healthy relationship and it is extremely rare for it to "develop over time". No one here is claiming that "love at first sight" is a thing, but that initial attraction (or spark) is a very real thing.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 07:52 PM
–

I'm sorry, but I always thought that the laws weren't discriminatory, but they're statistically applied in a way that is preferential towards mothers (i.e. it's the mindset of judges/humans involved in the process rather than the laws themselves). Is that not the case?
/r/MensRights04/01/16 07:40 PM
1

Of course it doesn't give you the right to do that because assaulting someone is illegal. :P I'm just admitting that I'm human and perhaps I've never resorted to violence because I've never been provoked to that extreme.
/r/MensRights17/07/11 01:56 AM
1

Really? You can quote me on that? Could you point out where I said that please?
/r/MensRights16/07/11 09:14 PM
0

I, personally, have only used violence in self-defense (childhood not included). I don't necessarily have a moral opinion on it... I just generally think less of people who resort to it. That being said, I also haven't been spit on multiple times.
/r/MensRights16/07/11 09:03 PM
0

I'm stupid, eh? Did you even check out the entire context, or did you just read what the OP posted? I'm not deleting my comments because (aside from holding a very valid opinion) I think it very clearly illustrates how mensrights has simply degenerated into a massive circlejerk.
/r/MensRights15/07/11 09:17 PM
2

That is exactly why I called him a troll... And look what happened. Your post is entirely what I was getting at.
/r/MensRights15/07/11 09:06 PM
1

I posted it all over this thread. The lynch mob was all over me before they even read the entire context.
/r/MensRights15/07/11 08:55 PM
–

Context that i've previously posted. Original context link.
/r/MensRights15/07/11 07:54 PM
–

So yes, if a woman hits a dude, and she happens to have a glass jaw, it's her own goddamn fault. Maybe. But I still think it's a poor choice to break her jaw and knock her unconscious.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 05:06 AM
–

As for what the person did: Sounds a lot like what many women do on the MensRights subredit all the time... .... what? Perhaps you should stick around more than just trying to defend yourself. I am not going to stick around if the only invitation I get is an entire thread devoted to downvoting me... and you wonder why I'm on the defensive? How about you stop playing the "poor me" bullshit On a thread entirely devoted to attacking me... hm. and look at it for what it was: Regardless of where it w…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 05:05 AM
-13

I'm trolling a thread about me?
/r/MensRights06/07/11 04:41 AM
-8

Well, "drop her".... Did she "drop" you? I really don't think that fighting is the solution to anything... But we're all human. I think if anyone strikes anyone else, then they are entering a fight --even if it's a very small man fighting a very large woman, or vice versa. I think the key here is knowing your own strength. If a woman slaps you in the face, with poor upper body strength, and then you break her jaw and knock her unconscious, that would be considered a poor reaction... but slap her…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 04:28 AM
–

I don't disagree. As indicated by my post.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 03:22 AM
-1

What I do not see is OP calling the hate brigade. Did he blur out the names so no one could find me and downvote me to oblivion? Did he post the original thread that said the woman was spat on multiple times every time their paths cross? I think he was trying to add to the discussion by pointing out that a kick to the testicles was not warranted by the situation. And that was absolutely the incorrect venue to do so. There are plenty of threads that are posted to 2XC that are serious, rational di…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 03:20 AM
-5

Hardly. Your statement is rather clear. Ever heard of Darwin Awards? Are you profoundly offended by those as well? I suggest you actually go learn what trolling is before you start an attempt at a man-bash and get upset that someone is defending their position. Oh fuck off. Man bash? Really? That's the language that you guys use here? Hm... Let's see. Goes into a women-oriented subreddit, looks for thread on "worst date ever", picks the most off the cuff comment he can find, then bitches when no…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 03:13 AM
-24

That's not actually what I said. Thank you for taking it even further out of context.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 02:55 AM
-14

I just hate it when people derail arguments like this, which seems to happen all the time around here. Since when is it an argument on the "worst date ever" thread, in the twox subreddit, in response to an off the cuff comment a valid venue for a rational discussion on female vs male violence? Who's doing the derailing?
/r/MensRights06/07/11 02:54 AM
0

No, that's what the OP deliberately tried to imply. And then called the hate brigade... Over an off the cuff comment that he [again] deliberately portrayed out of context. Once again, if someone wants to have a mature, rational discussion about female on male violence, I'm all for it. But the OP jumped into a completely unrelated thread and hijacked a silly comment for his personal agenda. I personally view that as trolling.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 02:52 AM
–

Any male would rather be spat on or even shot. I think that spitting on someone is probably one of the strongest messages of disrespect that one can possibly give. And while in north america, you might think that this is the case, there are many cultures in the world where guys would rather take a shot to the nuts.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:42 AM
2

I don't think anyone really was. It was a comment taken way too seriously. But keeping in mind, this is the context of the original nutshot comment: wakatopatopa: ...Then one day, he mentioned that he loved using prostitutes, and would often call one over when I left. That was a bit of a deal breaker for me, and when I told him that, he started spitting in my face over and over and over again. I'd see him around town and he'd still spit on me til next boyfriend punched him in the face for it. So…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:39 AM
2

I'm surprised that this is worthy of the mensrights hate bridgade.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:25 AM
–

I'm glad you're willing to make assumptions about me. Here's what I actually believe: "I personally don't think anyone should resolve anything by spitting, and especially not hitting. Nor do I think that the best way to resolve a conflict is by escalating it into a fight.... however, if someone does hit someone, then they are entering in a fight, and they're opening themselves up to the possibility of being hit back. Man or woman."
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:23 AM
2

How about you take a look at the original post: wakatopatopa: ...Then one day, he mentioned that he loved using prostitutes, and would often call one over when I left. That was a bit of a deal breaker for me, and when I told him that, he started spitting in my face over and over and over again. I'd see him around town and he'd still spit on me til next boyfriend punched him in the face for it.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:20 AM
5

And to be fair, here's the context of the spitting: Then one day, he mentioned that he loved using prostitutes, and would often call one over when I left. That was a bit of a deal breaker for me, and when I told him that, he started spitting in my face over and over and over again. I'd see him around town and he'd still spit on me til next boyfriend punched him in the face for it. I think he had some issues I didn't pick up on.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:14 AM
-7

I reason perfectly fine when the situation calls for it. On a thread about "the most bizarre date ever", I don't think it does. Nor do I think that an irrational downvote brigade is necessary. Do you want to have a mature and logical discussion about female violence against men? Because I am more than willing to do so. But if you want to make sweeping judgments based on one facetious comment, you're going to get the level of response you deserve.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:09 AM
-2

Nope, the hate brigade has been called. With you guys knowing absolutely nothing about me. How about I direct your attention to this thread. Go on, make an example of me... I'm obviously the femnazi that you guys are looking for.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 01:01 AM
-5

Way to include context. How about you include the ORIGINAL post? wakatopatopa: ...Then one day, he mentioned that he loved using prostitutes, and would often call one over when I left. That was a bit of a deal breaker for me, and when I told him that, he started spitting in my face over and over and over again. I'd see him around town and he'd still spit on me til next boyfriend punched him in the face for it. monstermash-up: He...he...spit on you? Oh, I believe that calls for a shot to the nuts…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 12:51 AM
1

I think that's the problem.
/r/seduction04/02/10 03:07 PM
1

I don't think you realize how much sex is part of everything. Being sleazy won't charm many women, but being able to carry on a funny, intriguing conversation with complete strangers is not on great at the bar, but it's also great in life.
/r/seduction04/02/10 02:50 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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