TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

polite-1 Archive

View 0 posts and 60 comments by polite-1 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

There's a ton of studies proving job discrimination, regardless of companies supposedly "boosting their diversity numbers".
/r/PussyPassDenied04/04/21 01:02 PM
1

You don't think discrimination in job applications exist?
/r/PussyPassDenied04/04/21 12:23 PM
1

Not the first...?
/r/PussyPassDenied04/04/21 12:15 PM
0

Sounds like you have an opinion formed and are not interested in any kind of good faith discussion.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/03/20 01:42 AM
1

I mean, you're wrong. Knowing someone is by far the easiest way to get hired. If you want to look at data, in the US you're significantly less likely to get a call back for a job application if you have a black sounding name. Doesn't exactly sound meritocratic.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/03/20 01:39 AM
-1

Which ones do you think are meritocratic? Also not being meritocratic does not mean corrupt.
/r/PussyPassDenied02/03/20 10:01 PM
-2

That's a strawman.
/r/PussyPassDenied02/03/20 02:34 PM
-4

Racism, sexism and nepotism are things that exist. Among other things.
/r/PussyPassDenied02/03/20 02:33 PM
-6

Good that meritocracy is still the rule/norm for some jobs Meritocracy is not and has never been the norm.
/r/PussyPassDenied02/03/20 11:44 AM
1

6% per year is something you'd expect over a 10 year timeframe from an index fund. You'd never expect that from a single stock and drops like this aren't a big deal at all. GOOG dropped 4% earlier this year. A quick look at the stock chart for NYT shows that it's made huge jumps in the past year. 5% drop really is nothing.
/r/MensRights09/08/18 01:57 PM
2

Did no one else think this was a me_irl post before reading the reply?
/r/MensRights27/05/17 03:09 PM
0

You ventured out of your safe space for that?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 05:33 PM
0

Lol the definition of life is 100% necessary when you're potentially talking about two bodies and not one. Actually no its not. The womens right to bodily autonomy trumps the fetus'
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 05:23 PM
1

But a heartbeat is entirely arbitrary. You could define life as at conception or after X amount of brain activity or when the fetus can survive outside the womb. If your position is "Here is where I draw the line personally" the fine, I have no issue with what you're saying. If you're extending it to "Here's where the line is and no one should have an abortion after the line or be punished legally", then I do have an issue, again, because the line is entity arbitrary.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 05:19 PM
1

Their argument is that who are you to define what is a human. I largely don't care. This is why the argument of bodily autonomy is used since the arbitrary definition of life is not necessary
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 05:15 PM
1

But it won't necessarily be. There are tons of complications that can occur. Not only that but a fetus literally isn't the same as a kid, unless you have a completely weird definition of one.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 05:02 PM
1

It's not the same as an actual real child, post birth child, no. Surely you agree with that. Even you agreed with that, pre - heartbeat. There are tons of complications that can occur between that point and viability outside the womb that are entirely out of anyones control. If you're defining a child as a fetus that has a heartbeat then that's a little weird, but whatever. Isn't it just a semantics argument at that point?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 04:45 PM
1

But stop acting like what YOU believe is automatically the only correct belief. It's ridiculous. This is what you said. I'm saying I'm happy to agree to disagree. The position of pro life fundamentally restricts bodily autonomy decisions for others.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 04:35 PM
1

Like I said I don't care what you define it as. Feel free to disagree. Unless you're using it to force decisions on others
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 04:29 PM
2

It's not a child though. At best you could say it's potentially a child.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 04:18 PM
1

Except it's not a child. It's a bunch of cells and then a fetus that can't exist outside the womb.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 03:56 PM
2

I don't care if you view things differently. Feel free to not have abortions. Just don't force others to do the same.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:52 PM
2

It's no longer just your body. It's your partners body too now? lol I just asked you what reasons you found valid.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:48 PM
2

So in your view abortion is never permissible unless the sex is non-consensual?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:36 PM
2

I see why people would prefer giving birth instead of aborting although I am against their views. Isn't that the whole premise of pro choice
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:29 PM
-1

For what reasons would you give up control over your own body?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:25 PM
1

and what's your response to the argument of bodily autonomy? Do you not have domain over your own body?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:25 PM
1

It seems you care more about the intention rather than the act itself. I agree that a man has just as much a right to decide about abortion as the woman. Why? Can you justify this?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:18 PM
-4

I can understand their argument. It's still not very and it definitely doesn't trump bodily autonomy.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:10 PM
2

You can acknowledge an argument exists while also acknowledging it's not good enough. Though if you're characterising abortion as killing children it's pretty clear you've got some deep seated bias.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:09 PM
2

I'm not a mind reader buddy. I don't know what points u/kiduncool considers legitimate and which ones he doesn't.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 01:03 PM
0

what was valid?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 12:59 PM
-1

My bad I'm thinking of r/pussypass
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 12:58 PM
-1

I just realised we're in a white supremacist sub.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 12:42 PM
2

Uhuh and what points would those be?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 12:40 PM
-2

A r/the_donald poster against abortion? I never would have guessed.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/05/17 12:08 PM
2

Because the post hit r/all
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 06:40 AM
22

The dumbest thing about the graphic is that highest paying jobs are not at all correlated with high deaths or injuries or physically demanding work or a less comfortable working environment. It's disingenuous at best and retarded at worst.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 04:06 AM
295

Pretty sure this sub was always a shithole.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 04:03 AM
5

Just because bias is present in every source does not mean the magnitude of bias is equal across sources.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 04:00 AM
7

But it makes me so livid when people pretend that the genders are built exactly the same with the same advantages/disadvantages/wants/needs. Have you had a look at the trends in what each gender? They aren't consistent with any inherent biological distinctions.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/03/17 05:27 PM
1

What proportion of women he meets does he think are gold diggers? It seems nuts to inconvenience himself by driving a shitbox for that reason alone. I mean, what else does he do? Wear shit clothes from Kmart? Speak like a bogan? Pretend he's unemployed? Live with his parents?
/r/PussyPassDenied23/02/17 07:31 PM
1

Lol so youre not a fan of social science, but you're a fan of evo psych?
/r/PussyPassDenied14/02/17 03:24 AM
0

k
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 07:33 PM
0

Thanks for the good "dead" chief, I bet all that knowledge came from your qualifications in a "rigourous" science discipline. Keep spouting bullshit son. You should learn to deal with facts and or taking a course in academic research and writing. Or just writing in general.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 07:22 PM
1

being a moron you probably often make baseless assumptions based on no evidence because you are a proven moron. so much of a moron infact you dont even know what a typo is and think (like some sort of stupid child) that somehow including a typo is some ground shattering reflection of intelligence. if i was a betting man i would place my funds on the bet that i was significantly more qualified than you in a rigourous scientific discipline. you are simply a proven moron, and the best part is peopl…
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 07:11 PM
-1

terrible mix of clueless and stupidm you have my sympathies. lul I'm gonna go ahead and assume you have zero formal education in any science discipline.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 07:05 PM
-7

When idiots (read: u/BukM1) presume to know more than entire fields of science then, yeah, that triggers me.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 06:21 PM
-8

If you're saying some animals the females are generally more pickier than males when it comes to mates, then yeah, maybe. I'd also say the presence of monogamy in other animals means your argument regarding the parental investment isn't really cut and dry. Finally the bullshit I was callout was his "distinct advantage" and that males are "risk takers" and females "seek security" and this is all apparently purely due to mating strategy. Oh and it's "really good science'. Fuck off. That guy has no…
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 05:29 PM
11

the actual interesting science is that evolutionary there is a distinct clear advantage in males being risk takers and females seeking security. it is actually really good science Spoken like a true redditor.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/02/17 03:16 PM
3

I...literally did just address the findings. The quote you linked doesn't say what you think it does. It's talking about the experiences of lesbians and gay men. It doesn't discriminate if the violence they experienced in past relationships was caused by men or women. So for that, we look at the raw data which is included at the bottom of the link I posted (http://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/PASK.Tables6.Revised.pdf) edit: here are the quotes of the ones that explicitly talk about the gende…
/r/MensRights07/01/17 05:37 PM
3

Huh? No offense, but it's very clear what the evidence is. ARCHS report says: 41% of male-identifying respondents, and 28% of female-identifying respondents had experienced physical violence within a same-sex intimate relationship The report you linked does not have specific rates of physical violence. It only takes about abuse generally, combining verbal and physical abuse. So if we're talking about physical abuse, it's much more present in gay relationships than lesbian. Finally in the OP it's…
/r/MensRights07/01/17 05:34 PM
3

Please look at the results of the included studies at the bottom. The quote you have talks about the rate of experienced DV and not whether or not the DV experiences were within same sex relationships or not .
/r/MensRights07/01/17 05:27 PM
3

Please speak plainly. I don't understand what you're trying to say here.
/r/MensRights07/01/17 05:19 PM
2

You quoted a statistic that didn't mention same sex DV. I then read up on the link you provided and found the stats they are using for same sex DV. http://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/PASK.Tables6.Revised.pdf
/r/MensRights07/01/17 05:18 PM
2

Again, each of the points is not specific to DV (physical abuse). Also what about the quote in my previous response, from the much larger ARCHS report that says DV rates are higher in gay relationships compared to lesbian relationships?
/r/MensRights07/01/17 05:03 PM
4

I actually did lol. It seems the site you linked is an aggregate of multiple studies and all the ones that measured violence in LGBT relationships found female on female DV to be lower than all others.
/r/MensRights07/01/17 04:59 PM
3

That doesn't mention anything about same sex however
/r/MensRights07/01/17 04:35 PM
10

Well you may want to check your definitions. You say domestic violence in the OP and now you mention abuse and then sexual assault. They may be related but they are not the same. Now according to your own link 41% of male-identifying respondents, and 28% of female-identifying respondents had experienced physical violence within a same-sex intimate relationship Which directly contradicts your point. Finally there seems to be no comparison with heterosexual relationships.
/r/MensRights07/01/17 04:23 PM
12

None of those links seem to say that the rate is higher...can you link to a specific study? According to the US DoJ Women living with female intimate partners experience less intimate partner violence than women living with male intimate partners. Slightly more than 11 percent of the women who had lived with a woman as part of a couple reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a female cohabitant, but 30.4 percent of the women who had married or lived with a man as part of a …
/r/MensRights07/01/17 04:07 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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