TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

orthodexy Archive

View 0 posts and 102 comments by orthodexy 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

It's not that I don't like what you said. You're telling me you said one thing and you said something else. Your communication is pitiful at best, and incoherent (lol) at worst.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 04:16 AM
0

I highly doubt incoherent is the word you're meaning there. Yet again, language fail on your part.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 04:00 AM
0

Language is funny like that. If only you "understand" the wording you're using, it doesn't work.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 03:57 AM
0

Obviously it's not.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 03:23 AM
1

"She's only good for sex" denotes that's the only thing she's good for in her life. "She only wants sex from me" means that's all SHE wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 02:31 AM
0

The difference between what?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 01:38 AM
-1

If it makes you feel better that you think you understand both my original argument and also my response, then sure, you schooled me. Unfortunately our discussion shows you have absolutely no idea what either my first post or my responses mean. Regardless, I have no more time for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:06 PM
0

It's unfortunate how lowly TRP really thinks of themselves and other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:01 PM
0

Your reading comprehension leaves a bit to be desired in this and other responses you've made to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:00 PM
1

You're saying people should not be sluts but but that you should be one yourself. What is not hypocritical about that?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 08:52 PM
0

So you think a 80 year old woman who is 100 lbs and who cannot wipe her own ass, with genital herpes and who shits out of her vagina can get sex whenever she wants? Honestly? You really think EVERY woman can get laid whenever she wants?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 08:40 PM
0

No, it's the exact same kind of hypocritical. You want something for yourself that you don't want other people to do/have. The reason you don't see it as such is because you don't think of women as on the same level as you. So it's either hypocritical or misogyny. You can choose which one you'd like.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 08:36 PM
1

Obviously he did not use those exact words, but to quote: There was a thread over in the Misc forums that dispelled this. The game was to use the most hideous woman imaginable and see if they could get any guy desperate enough to bone them. The results were shocking -- lots of dudes were willing, and some were even good-looking guys. They literally couldn't make a single woman incapable of having sex. The last sentence is the most important part.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 05:40 PM
0

And then we say: you a) aren't a woman so you don't get to speak for how easy it is to get laid as a woman and b) you aren't all men so you don't get to say whether or not men are averse to promiscuity. Simple as that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 05:37 PM
0

That's not what the person I was talking to was saying, so regardless of that "most here already agree" on, that is what that redditor was saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 05:27 PM
-2

Look, I can tell it's futile for me to try to discuss this with you as you're just pulling up personal experience at this time that I can refute with my own personal experience and we can go round and round with this all the time. Essentially what this boils down to is that you're upset that it's harder for you to get laid than it would be for a pretty woman to get laid. We can even pretend that all women have to do is snap their fingers and have sex with any man they want and that all men have …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 04:58 PM
-1

I'm assuming that it's because they are sexually jealous. These men who believe this ("any woman can get sex any moment of any day with any man" -- a ridiculous concept) have had a hard time finding people who are attracted to them. They themselves would fuck any woman any time (for whatever reason) and because of that they believe every man is like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 04:39 PM
2

The problem with this is it excludes both ugly women and hot men: attractive men need to do nothing but exist to get hit on and ugly women are ignored by men. Either you and I had this conversation before or RP sounds like parrots to me at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 04:23 PM
2

I don't care if red pill dudes think women who have casual sex have low morals if they themselves also don't have casual sex. The problem for me is the double standard. If you are a slutty guy and you want a virgin wife and shame women who have sex as low self control, then it makes no sense. If you hate casual sex and want to find someone with the same "morals" as you, more power to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 04:17 PM
3

So I assume you do not have one night stands or sleep around yourself?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 04:12 PM
2

What's wrong with being only good (to you) for sex? If that's all she wants from you and frankly all YOU are good for, what's wrong with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 04:07 PM
1

People use each other. Men use men and women use women and women and men use each other in different ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:58 PM
0

Neither is your mouth. ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 06:16 PM
0

You're the one arguing SRS is a "feminist space" in the first place, which is even more hilarious.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 05:55 PM
0

The fact that you think that disagreeing is not possible in any of those subs means you haven't read any of them. There is a difference between disagreeing and trolling. Go in to any post with a lot of comments and there will be dissenting opinions. People are not banned from these subs for disagreeing; they are banned for trolling.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 04:30 PM
0

Posts left up doesn't mean the user wasn't banned, but okay. I'm pretty sure it's impossible to "prove" anything to you in the first place since you still haven't shown me a feminist safe space that does not allow "dissent."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 04:07 PM
0

No, it's not, but okay.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 03:26 PM
0

Same thing happens when people go in to MRA boards and state "as a feminist, I ____." What's your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 03:18 PM
0

Where do any of those say they ban "dissent"?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 03:03 PM
0

Can you show me a feminist space that DOES ban "dissent"?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 02:30 PM
0

Sorry, I'm not 100% well versed in feminist spaces or even what your personal definition would be and I don't really have time to do research for you. There are plenty of feminist groups that allow men. If you honestly think all feminist groups are echo chambers only allowing people to all speak the exact same statements and agree, you're missing out. Even within feminist groups, people disagree. This is how feminism has changed in the past 50 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 01:49 PM
4

"Every" is a leading word -- not all feminist spaces are denoted safe spaces, and "safe space" does not mean "no dissenting opinions."
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 05:07 PM
2

Funny, I found out I'm a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 08:11 PM
2

I think there's a lot more problems than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 09:07 PM
3

Hey, it's not my fault I'm only 5'0". It's science!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:53 PM
4

This is because reported results can be manipulated to give whatever kind of fact you want based on how you run an experiment. There, I hope that helps your pedantic nature as your statement didn't really dispute anything I said. You are still agreeing with me that these studies can be manipulated.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:45 PM
0

My kind?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:43 PM
6

I agree -- I think that the interpretation of results is the major location for "failure" with science. Two people can see the same study and offer wildly different interpretations.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:38 PM
2

I'm sorry you have a hard time with analogies. In the analogy I made, math and science are comparable to "black people being inferior" and the KKK is equivalent to the understood "source of the study." I apologize for using an analogy as it seems it was too complicated for you. If I could just clearly spell out the message I was trying to convey for you: if a study stating something or science stating something is brought to attention, the means used to gain that "fact" need to be explored for b…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:33 PM
0

I am asking a question regarding the practices of science and the source of where studies come from. I'm sorry if this is too intense for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:14 PM
1

If the KKK put out a study stating that black people were inferior, would you believe it?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/15 08:00 PM
5

What do they look like?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 11:15 PM
3

This only accounts for ugly men and attractive women. Attractive men are offered sex and ugly women have to work for it. Please explain how your formula works for ugly women and attractive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/15 01:18 AM
1

I guess I do have one last question: are you sexually promiscuous yourself? My statement about poly was sarcasm, sorry you couldn't tell.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 08:49 PM
1

How would you feel if the woman in question had been with 5 men emotionally but never had sex with any of them? She was very much in love with them, maybe even vacationed and lived with them, slept in the same bed, but never sex. Maybe I wasn't clear enough -- when I say "pair bond with multiple men" I mean "have sex or relationships with multiple men in their life time" not at once. These men who believe this think that women lose the ability to love a man if she's previously loved any men. I w…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 08:38 PM
1

Agreed, but I'm pretty sure most guys will just respond with things like "vaginas are locks and penises are keys" which doesn't help me understand the irrationality of the double standard. One last question specific to you: if this hypothetical girlfriend we've been talking about who we say has had 5 (instead of 50) women and 0 men had also been in love with all of those women and in LTRs with them, living and sharing their lives, would you still not care? Many RP men believe that the reason wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 08:21 PM
1

None of those posts directly answers any of my questions. This is why I asked them specifically in my original post. I have read many RP posts, I hate to admit, and none of them can truly answer the questions I ask. The answer in the original references the key/lock analogy which not only is stupid but doesn't work. Nods to another Jeffries reference though.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 08:03 PM
2

Your reasoning doesn't answer my question though. You are speaking for yourself for specific partners. I am asking for the objective (obviously partially subjective) "for all women." TRP claims a lot of "objective" facts about the world and one of those is that a high partner count means a woman is broken or something is wrong with her. Your beliefs can be dismissed as nonsensical because they are largely based on your insecurities and fetishes, as I said, and so therefore are not applicable to …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 07:30 PM
2

All of this just sounds like your insecurity and fetishistic interest to me rather than any moral reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 07:13 PM
3

So the problem is ONLY because it's easy to get dick? There's literally no other reason? You're saying that in your opinion, it's better for a woman to have eaten 50 pussies than touched one other dick, just because that one dick would have been easy to touch? What if she had sex with women who were easy to get? Do you think it's just as hard for a woman to get sex from a woman as it is a man to get sex from one?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 04:35 PM
2

So if you have all these examples, why can you say it cannot be measured?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 04:04 PM
3

Why then is it wrong for a woman to have interactions with dicks but not with vaginas? (We've removed the STD rationale as I've said there is no penetration.)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 03:47 PM
1

But what if she's had a ONS with a different guy once a month, enjoyed the sex, and wants regular sex with a steady partner? Would a man with the same history also be a red flag?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 03:46 PM
1

Quoting a comedian for truth isn't really a good idea and just makes you seem like you can't personally explain your own beliefs. And that is why I asked in my original post, what if she's only just sucked like 50 dicks but not had vaginal intercourse. Is that okay? Does only the actual penis in the vagina make her a slut/broken?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 02:33 PM
2

So if it doesn't matter how many women she's been with, why does it matter how many men she's been with?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 02:21 PM
3

You have not answered my question: Emotional abuse is yelling, screaming, insults. What else do you think people are declaring as "emotional abuse" or are you just making things up with no proof?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 01:49 PM
5

I asked this the other day and got no response, but it's a similar thought process: What is the precise number where someone goes from "experienced" to "damaged goods"? Let's put out of 100, like percentage. Is it the amount of times they take new dicks/pussies (100 different dicks/pussies), or can you math it like "fucked one guy 90 times and 10 other guys" counts the same amount? How do you know the difference between someone who has fucked 100% of the people to tell they are damaged goods? Ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 01:47 PM
3

Emotional abuse is yelling, screaming, insults. What else do you think people are declaring as "emotional abuse" or are you just making things up with no proof?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 01:40 PM
10

Why do you believe emotional abuse cannot be measured? It is easily measured and there's a checklist to describe the elements of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/15 08:17 PM
7

Do you think you can seriously answer any of the questions I asked?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/15 09:28 PM
8

What is the precise number where someone goes from "experienced" to "damaged goods"? Let's put out of 100, like percentage. Is it the amount of times they take new dicks/pussies (100 different dicks/pussies), or can you math it like "fucked one guy 90 times and 10 other guys" counts the same amount? How do you know the difference between someone who has fucked 100% of the people to tell they are damaged goods? Are any virgins damaged goods or do you have to have sex at least once? What if she on…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/15 09:21 PM
8

This only works as an insult if she actually cares whether or not she's married.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/15 09:17 PM
6

It only matters if Karen herself said she was empowered. In addition, it only matters if she really felt empowered vs. just saying she was but not actually feeling like she was.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/15 05:58 PM
2

I guess the question I always have is why are people surprised that humans seek out the best spouse/sexual partner they can find? Are you surprised that hot guys get all levels of girls looking to hook up? If so, why?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/15 09:52 PM
1

I'd suggest reading up on what "incel" actually means in the slang way before you call yourself that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/14 10:02 PM
3

That's not really what that means, but identify as you will.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/14 09:57 PM
6

Can you really be incel and have a boyfriend? I thought it was a term for people who can't find anyone to have sex with them ever. You found someone who wants to be with you but who is in a different country.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/14 09:15 PM
6

It's hard to leave when someone will kill you if you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/14 03:10 PM
13

Because I'm not a doll, I'm a person.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/14 12:41 AM
0

Even Charles Manson had followers.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/14 10:44 PM
1

Why does a backlash give something more legitimacy?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/14 08:21 PM
1

You are arguing something I did not say.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/14 08:08 PM
1

If TRP's response to "this theory/technique isn't really the best way to go about helping other people" is "well, that's just like your opinion, man" then no wonder it's so looked down upon.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/14 07:56 PM
-1

I'm sure. Good luck with your endeavors.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 08:57 PM
1

You are arguing something I did not say.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 04:46 PM
0

The problem is that if you want to get self help, being negative to others is less helpful than focusing on yourself and improving yourself. You can either get better or just "seem" better by making the others around you worse. If RP dudes would prefer to see everyone else as inferior while not becoming superior, that's up to them, but I don't see it as being true "self help."
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 04:09 PM
1

I am very unsure as to what your question is asking, my apologies. I don't believe that AWALT or AMALT is a good strategy to self help in any way, regardless.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 03:31 PM
1

No, I have never heard AWALT used in line with something that wasn't about how women are all hypergamous sluts who will cheat on you and leave. I have never heard "my girlfriend made me dinner! AWALT" or "my wife shot down this guy who was trying to get her to hook up with him, AWALT!" It's always about how "my wife is cheating on me, AWALT" etc. That's what I mean. I understand your point that it's trying to keep these men from treating women like glass but brings up my question again: why does…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 03:02 PM
2

Men who smile and agree with statements like that are equally ignorant. AWALT is not about basic biological needs; it's about trying to denigrate women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 01:40 PM
-2

I've read quite a few books published on it including reading The Game when it was released years ago. I understand all the acronyms like the back of my hand and express so much joy when men attempt to use it on me and fail because they have no fall back when their stupid script fails. I've successfully used negging myself to prove points to both female and male friends (and yes negging works VERY well on men, unsurprisingly). And yet, clearly I know nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 01:39 PM
1

If you're doing "game" properly, you're not doing game, you're just being a fun and charming person.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 12:31 AM
1

I don't know if that's possible to do but I assume that Game and AWALT are brethren and trying to dissolve their bond is impossible.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/14 12:11 AM
2

So your rationale is that if AWALT harms someone, they don't understand AWALT? Do you have any basis for that?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 10:40 PM
2

Do you think the core concepts of game work on men? What about women who already know what game is?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 09:32 PM
2

The treatment? That makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 09:27 PM
0

That highly doesn't answer my question. If it's about the man's reaction, why is the acronym not about his reaction?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 08:31 PM
2

Depends on what you consider a RP person, but I have seen multiple posts from people saying their girlfriends have left them due to treatment re:AWALT. I even saw a PUA artist's brother post that his brother is being accused of sexual harassment because he was touching women against their will because of PUA/RP theories. I mean, and there's the whole "designating an entire group of humanity as a conglomerate group" issue but RP people do that not only to women but also to anyone they see as "inf…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 07:41 PM
2

It does cause problems for RPers and you thinking that AWALT is nothing but positive is pretty naive.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 05:55 PM
2

Because it is a logical fallacy to say. Humans are unpredictable in their actions individually in many ways and while AWALT may give you a better chance in being successful with a certain type of person, it is such a vague descriptor and does way more harm than good, imho. As I stated in another comment, if your true goal is to better the man, a more successful acronym would focus on the negative trait of the man to self help.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 05:36 PM
4

Where did I say it didn't bother me? Edit to add: I don't think that saying "it doesn't hurt my feelings" means it doesn't bother me. There is a big difference. It bothers me from a logical standpoint. I don't give a fuck about what my gender is vs. what RP believes.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 04:15 PM
8

If the acronym is truly about preventing men from letting women walk all over them as another poster is claiming, why can't the acronym be about controlling the situation and not being passive to someone who is trying to hurt you. Maybe like "BADBAP": Be Assertive, Don't Be A Pushover.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 04:00 PM
2

It's not that it "hurts my feels," but it's just completely inaccurate and doesn't even describe the negative behavior. Using it in the manner you're describing right now... it's essentially trying to make men strong by denigrating women instead of putting the blame where it really is, on the man for letting the woman walk all over him. If it was truly about making man stronger it would be a different saying. Instead it portrays women inaccurately, which isn't really helpful for either men or wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 03:58 PM
2

Where did I say men should be supplicating?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 03:44 PM
1

So why not give them a more accurate statement to follow rather than to pretend all women are alike when in reality it's the man who is acting passive, meaning his negative trait is the one that is pervasive over all of the situations?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 03:32 PM
3

Then why not have a less threatening and more accurate statement? If all that AWALT does is push people away from accepting your "operating instructions", then why use it as one?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 03:15 PM
7

If AWALT is true, why isn't there AMALT?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 03:05 PM
5

Isn't that what "all" means though?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 03:05 PM
2

Yeah, I read that. But the attitude that just because some woman doesn't value her "number" and doesn't want to be involved with men who do means she's got "sour grapes" is just on the same judgmental side of the coin. "Sour grapes" meaning -- you find women who get rejected for having a promiscuous history feel upset by that and then don't want to date guys who would reject them for their number? How insightful of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/14 01:48 PM
1

Well, fortunately, you have no idea how many people I've slept with, so you can take your projecting somewhere else.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/14 01:32 PM
2

The problem with your comment that you wrote here is that I stopped reading when I got to the point where I noticed you completely misread my original comment. I'm sorry to express that, but what I said was not that my sexual past has nothing to do with the kind of person I am, because all decisions I've made in my life are part of "who I am" but that my sexual past is NOT "who I am" but just part of what I've done. If a man was only interested in that part of my past, he's not the kind of perso…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/14 11:40 PM
7

You could be a hard partier and be a virgin. You could never party but sleep around with all of your friends. You could have sex with 300 people once or 300 times with one person. What's relevant is the conduct they performed with their partners, sexual and not. If you slept with 30 people but were honest with all of them I'd prefer that to someone who was a cheater on a serious relationship. The only relevant point is any diseases you may have permanently gotten.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/14 09:43 PM
15

If some dude thinks the amount of people I've slept with is "who I am" ..no thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/14 08:33 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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