TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

silver1ining Archive

View 1 post and 16 comments by silver1ining 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)
5

silver1ining/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 04:06 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

I agree, especially about the different conceptions of respect causing a largely pointless semantic debate. I made a post about respect earlier to try to draw some attention to this. As an aside I think another concept that might cause similar sorts of disagreements is "responsibility".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/14 02:56 PM
1

I'm not RP. "Words are wind" is almost exactly my point: you saying that this thing is love and that thing is not love, is silly. The significance of someone saying "I love you" is only that there isn't any better method for determining if someone feels love: yes they could be lying or mistaken but any other measure would have similar faults. You can never know someone else's subjective feelings. So you either take them at their word, consider them a liar, or decide that you know better than the…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 09:31 PM
4

If someone tells you "I love you", nobody has the authority to say that that person is wrong. Even if that person's behavior isn't consistent with your narrow concept of love. Different people love differently, I don't think this is controversial. And it is not merely semantics; they are feeling love. It becomes controversial, I think, when TRP makes claims to the effect that all (or most) men love differently than all (or most) women, and then values one more highly than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 12:43 PM
3

My understanding of the RPers' position is that they think women cannot love men in the same way or to the same extent that men can love women, not that women cannot love at all. Were you unaware of this?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 12:46 AM
6

Indeed. If I had been a RPer with a similar predisposition to snark, I might have a made a reply like: "And Red Pillers are loved by their partners." But I think such flippant responses don't necessarily add very much.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/14 10:11 PM
1

Let's set aside the obvious "no true nice people" reply, because I was talking about Nice Guys (tm) explicitly. My point was: Nice Guys (tm) are following your advice. Do you disagree? Regarding manipulation: If you and I are both following "treat others as you would wish to be treated", and you treat me a certain way, then I know that you are telling me something about how you wish to be treated. From this point of view, Nice Guys (tm) aren't trying to be manipulative, they are trying to commun…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/14 10:44 AM
8

Treat them as you would wish to be treated? This is one place where Nice Guys (tm) come from. "I want attention and affection from the people I am interested, therefore I will treat the people I am interested in with attention and affection." And when the people of interest do not reciprocate, they might get angry: "I treat people how I would wish to be treated because I am a good person. But they are not treating others how they would wish to be treated, therefore they are not good people."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 10:30 AM
1

I think so too. "Respect" can mean a lot of things, and I hadn't even considered "deference", but I can see where that could come from ("Respect your elders/betters/etc."). I think there is also the sub-problem of what is considered respectful in just the courteous/polite sense, because different people do have different standards for that, which might even be mutually exclusive (ie: an act considered respectful to one set of observers is considered disrespectful to another set).
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 05:01 PM
1

I interpreted Denswend's post to mean that the meaning of word "respect" has been expanded to include what Denswend would otherwise call "tolerance". Denswend might not be happy about that, but as far as I could tell they were NOT using it as an excuse "to stop treating other people with the respect they deserve", and they were NOT claiming to be the arbiter of what the word meant, instead they appeared to be acknowledging that the word's meaning had changed. I admit I may have misunderstood, bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 04:48 PM
2

treating other people with the respect they deserve What does this mean? How do you treat someone with respect? How do they deserve that respect? Just by being people? By doing something you deem "worthy of respect"? By being people and not doing anything that you decide makes them unworthy of respect? I may have misunderstood your tone and/or Denswend's posts, but it seems like you might be doing exactly what Denswend was complaining about, which is conflating "respect" with "tolerance", and as…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 03:23 PM
4

It matters to TRP, doesn't it? But it doesn't necessarily matter to the "Captain and First Mate" dynamic, which is what you were asking about in the OP. They do make that assumption. And they don't treat it as an assumption, they treat it as a fact. That's the problem with sexism; it's treated like a reality, not a tendency or average. My point was: TRPers might not see any contradiction between wholesomeness and sexism. But regarding treating an assumption as fact: TRPers in this thread (alphab…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 12:51 PM
1

It was not me, but I'm glad to hear that other people see that these distinctions can be made. Remember this when you see people talking about respect in these subs: Are you sure you know what they mean by respect? Are you sure they know what they mean by it? Are you sure you know how the target(s) of their (dis)respect will interpret it?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 11:52 AM
1

Thank you for your response. I actually think conflating respect with courtesy is a disservice to both concepts, because I associate respect more closely with the "admiration" conception of it, but I know people use either or both. I can respect someone (in the admiration sense) without necessarily knowing how to show that respect (in the courtesy sense) in a way that they'd appreciate.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 11:43 AM
1

What do you mean by respect? Do you mean that no woman could ever earn your respect under any circumstances? Even if they did something that would earn your respect if they were a man, like say cure cancer (or insert something else that you personally find impressive)? Or do you mean that you know longer treat them with respect? In which case it's important to know the specifics of what you think that means. Does treating them with respect mean paying for dates to show how much you value their t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 11:28 AM
5

You don't appear to understand. TomHicks didn't write that block of text, it's copypasta (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/copypasta). That particular copypasta is old enough that it was reasonable to expect many redditors to recognize it (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/navy-seal-copypasta). In this context as a response to HeNeverLies4, he's basically saying something like: "Your bragging/posturing makes you look absurd, like this guy."
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 03:42 PM
3

There's a couple ideas here that could be separated: *"Captain and First Mate" is just a way of dividing responsibilities in a relationship, it is not inherently sexist. You could be captain, or your partner could be captain, it doesn't matter what your sexes are. (Or you could each be captains in different spheres or at different times, but that might be a tangent.) *Assuming that the man should always be "captain" in all things, and that the woman should always be "first mate", does appear to …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 02:57 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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