TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

mavdoru Archive

View 0 posts and 35 comments by mavdoru on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Any source for this ISIS claim?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/23 12:51 PM
21

That means most people take movies as a blueprint for real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/23 02:12 PM
4

I agree. Fact is: they have this autonomy, regardless of their reason for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 02:54 PM
15

They have autonomy to do what gets them benefits. For some men — I'm not saying most or half, but some — what gets them benefits is treating women in a certain way most people wouldn't say it's the correct way.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 11:50 AM
8

If it's about personality, why I've seen plenty of men with horrible personalities getting plenty of women with all sort of personalities? When you say that it's about personality do you mean it's about having a bad personality? Anyway, if having good and bad personalities don't interfere on getting women, then it's not about personality. This just makes personality irrelevante, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 02:01 AM
1

My goal was achieved already: to find a good woman to date. I couldn't do it without all the years I spent studying this stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/23 10:42 PM
4

Again, as I said, you IGNORED "this one" (women getting lesser sentences) "and others" (that I've already said: men getting the most dangerous jobs — which is by the way one of the reasons they make more money, because dangerous jobs usually pays more —; men being the vast majority of homeless people and so many others I didn't quote that you would have known if you have had your own search when I gave you the key words to do so, like "implicit association test", "women are wonderful effect" and…
/r/BlackPillScience16/04/23 01:41 AM
4

No one here said anything about wrong/right profession. Now, if you want to deny men usually choose professions that pays more than professions women choose, you can show a source. By now, I assume you accept this. And, yes, I did show you what this bias looks like. You just voluntarily chose to ignore it. "No female bias that is meaningful in any way"? Again, I showed you ways this bias is very meaningful, like when I show women get lesser sentences for the same crimes men commit. You just chos…
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 09:15 PM
6

Where did I deny it? Even though you didn't show any (any!) evidence for this claim, I didn't deny it. I actually accepted it. Now, that you think this bias is meaningless we already know. And there is no problem with that. I wasn't talking about meaning. I was asking if you accept the bias exist and if no, where are the counter study or any refutation/critique to the IATs (implicit association tests)? And again: How does men chosing professions that pays more are in any way a critique or a refu…
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 08:59 PM
8

And? You're in a circular argument again. An infinite loop. Of course there will be more women working in dangerous jobs if you exclude men from the equation. My point is simples: Why do you have to consider a different reality to make your point? Why can't you make a point considering this reality we're already in. It's not that difficult.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 08:52 PM
5

Of course there is not evidence, because the evidence is dismissed once a small percentage of men are rich, isn't? As I said earlier, no evidence is important, because there are rich men, but apparently you didn't read this part too.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 08:36 PM
6

And? How people in general attributing more good qualities to women than men, which is what the implicit association test shows, is in any way refuting the ideia men own power and wealth in the middle of the social pyramid?
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 07:25 PM
7

You didn't refute the study in any way. Didn't show why its methodology is wrong, didn't show why its results are wrong, and I will assume you didn't even know what implicit association test means. All you did was saying there's no way any bias favoring women exists because there are a small percentage of men who are rich. This is no way a critique/refutation/contestation in any field I know. Anyways, this study don't aim to show how the bias functions. There are other studies showing it, like t…
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 06:49 PM
5

No you didn't. I asked about the women are wonderful effect and you ignored. You already proved that you are just sealioning.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 06:43 PM
7

You didn't answer my question even though I reiterate you didn't answer it. Why should I answer yours?
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 06:38 PM
5

I could ask the very same question about any single piece of information I'm giving you here.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 06:26 PM
7

Ok, remove them then. When I see none of them anymore, we return to this conversation.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 05:57 PM
6

About your first point: You already ignored the socio economic implications of this bias, you see? Because anything you can say "but a small percentage of men are rich!" to refute. For example, is not important that most homeless people are men, because most billionaires are men too, and this, somehow, causes a balance in your mind. Not important if most people doing the most dangerous jobs to keep society functioning are men, not important if men get longer sentences for the same crimes women d…
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 05:07 PM
8

Again, you didn't answer my question. You just wanna sealioning. And as you are showing that you won't read them, I'll give you some clue: these studies are about implicit association test, not about whatever you are thinking they are.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 04:15 PM
9

Ok, you definitely didn't read them. I think you also fail to see how the women are wonderful effect operates in society since a tiny percentage of men who are rich share their wealth with their wives and not with the whole world, am I right?
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 04:06 PM
9

So basically you didn't read the abstract or the psypost link someone left in the comments? Because the answer to your question is in them
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 04:01 PM
8

So you admit the pro-female bias?
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 03:58 PM
22

Funny how you beg for "actual data" while dismissing the very actual data about gender bias just because you judge society based on a fallacy.
/r/BlackPillScience15/04/23 03:25 PM
1

Wait what? Are there woman here claiming personality is important?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/23 03:27 PM
2

It's called gynocentrism.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/22 05:35 PM
1

How is it possible for people to believe that women don't go for "shitty men"? I mean, there's tons of horrible men around us every day in our school or our work, and they're getting tons of women. Even you're blind that's not a good excuse because blind people can hear too. They know what's happening around them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 10:20 PM
2

Yes. It it's just survival of the fittest. Guys complaining about it doesn't make it any different. It stills the survival of the fittest. What's the point?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 07:07 PM
1

And I'm saying personality plays no role at all, for women. No man is lonely because of their personality. That's simply a lie. Personality is just useful AFTER you've already with a woman. BEFORE that, you HAVE to be with her FIRST OF ALL so she can finally see your personality. She's not seeing your personality if she's not even with you at first place. And, in order to she be with you at first place, she need to first of all finds you physically attractive so she can at least give you a chanc…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 06:49 PM
1

Good luck trying to have a ltr without the initial interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/22 12:14 AM
1

The initial part is simply the most important part of ALL. How can you have a chance to win without being able to get started?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 08:47 PM
1

?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 04:40 PM
1

"Yes, personality plays a role in matchmaking" Source? As long as I know, physical attractiveness is the strongest predictor of initial romantic interest in both sexes and there's no evidence male personality plays any role for women according to Luo & Zhang, 2009.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 04:01 PM
1

Yes, they would. A nice lie is worse than a bad truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/22 05:38 PM
1

4 long term relationships in her mid 20s? What is LTR anyway?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/22 05:36 PM
4

Besides r4pe, it's women who chose which men will have sex. If a lot of "bad men" are having sex/relationships, it's mostly because women have decided it. That's why we say it's a "certain type of men", because it's the specifically type of men women chooses, not the type of men (majority of them) that women don't even consider its existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/22 06:18 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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