TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

somehaizi Archive

View 0 posts and 125 comments by somehaizi 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)
–

Like I said, "no hard stats to back it up"
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 12:23 PM
–

About as much projection as confidently stating ugly/low status/beta/whatever men cheat less with no hard stats to back it up. If we're playing the game might as well go all in.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 11:59 AM
–

Yup
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 11:57 AM
–

They only cheat less because they have less options, not because of personal integrity or character strength.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 11:41 AM
6

Okay, what data is this based on?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/24 09:45 PM
5

What data is this based on?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/24 09:07 PM
9

The same way two differently sized men can have the same genetalia size.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/24 08:56 PM
1

Not willingly but I've encountered a black bear, if you yell they leave. The real logic gap is everyone assuming bear automatically means grizzly.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/24 01:29 PM
2

How many people are killed in the woods by other people vs bears?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/24 12:57 PM
1

Most bears don't eat people so I'm not sure what you're on about
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/24 12:55 PM
0

Depends on the bear
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/24 12:49 PM
1

Natural is such a funny word. Arsenic is natural, ptsd is natural. Women are free to pick and choose what parts of patriarchy to follow. Unless our entire system is drastically overhauled, there is no way to avoid it completely.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 10:56 AM
1

No because their brains aren't fully formed and they are not capable of sustaining themselves. You could argue the same held true for women but that was only because the knowledge needed to be fully function was systematically denied. Toddlers are not capable of holding a job because they do not understand what needs to be done. Women weren't able to hold a job because men refused to hire them. These are not the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 12:54 AM
1

So the laws classifying women as property were all a hallucination?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 08:10 PM
3

Men had thousands of years to realize we are complementary beings and instead they restricted women's ability to do anything outside of raising kids. Now you want women to speed run that same realization in a quarter of a fraction of that time?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 06:20 PM
2

Who's getting into combat when we can use drones?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 06:17 PM
1

Every choice they make would reinforce patriarchy because there is no other system to enforce.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 06:17 PM
2

Feminism gave women some degree of choice concerning what they want to do. Previous women had no say in whether they become a concubine, now they do. Previous women had no say in: having children, being a housewife, opening a bank account, voting, holding "mens" jobs, etc, now they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 06:43 AM
5

The movies don't get it right on the women or men's side. Nobody is going to be fighting with their bare hands in the land of the second amendment. They'll be using the great equalizer.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 06:35 AM
6

Patriarchy is what created the concept of a concubine in the first place. Can't outdo the doer
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/24 06:32 AM
–

It's still permission. They agreed to let you use their space, or agreed to give up their half of the space.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/23 03:43 PM
–

Let was only used in the garage example and completely tracks. A garage is a shared space. If one party is using most of it then the other partner is absolutely "letting" them turn a shared space into what is effectively a hobby cave. The same applies to women who redecorate the house. He is letting her style the living room pink because since it's a shared space, he gets to have a say in how it looks. His say is that it's okay for her to take over hence, "let".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/23 02:47 PM
1

So tell me how normal relationship arguments or a man being childish is abusive Only person saying this is normal is you
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 09:12 PM
1

Show me where your source wasn’t 10 years old. I didn't say that. I said yours was older, which, oddly enough, is what you told me originally. Yours is from 2007, mine is from 2012. 2007 is older than 2012. Doesn’t even make up that many marriages. Domestic partner homicide, no. Homicide overall, yes. And any amount is still too much.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 09:10 PM
1

It’s why I asked what the consider to be provocative. If it’s something as simple as arguments or a man being petty they absolutely can leave. And this is victim blaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:54 PM
1

“Among relationships with nonreciprocal violence, women were reported to be the perpetrator in a majority of cases (70.7%), as reported by both women (67.7%) and men (74.9%). “ Older source than the one I quoted with no mutual starting stat so I'll give you half a cookie. ​ I'll save the other half for myself Of homicide offenders for whom gender was known, 88.0 percent were male. Females made up 70% of victims killed by an intimate partner in 2007, a proportion that has changed very little sinc…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:53 PM
1

"Are they not capable of leaving" is you asking what provacative is, or are we just gonna ignore that part of the sentence?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:37 PM
1

“However, women who participated in mutually violent behavior with their male partners were more likely to display a pattern of repeated violence than men. Men’s violence was more likely to be isolated and unlikely to be repeated.” This doesn't talk about who started what, which is what you originally said. But at the end of the day even your stat proved me right. Which I HAD to hold your hand through. Are you confused? I at NO POINT argued women were less physically abusive than men in a domest…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:33 PM
1

even with emotional women still do it overwhelmingly more. lol even if you add it up women do more emotional abuse. Actually yeah, these are perp rates not victimization so you would be correct. The very next stat(psychological abuse) goes by victimization so they all smashed together in my mind. I'll hold the L on that. Quote me where I made that argument. Did you or did you not say We don’t know what the provocation was. Are they not capable of leaving?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:30 PM
1

Damn you’re terrible at reading. Even when I put the direct quote. Show me the direct quote for women being the perp in 70% of RECIPRICAL abuse cases. We've already been through unilateral(which I had to hold your hand through). I will post your quote again and break it up so you can see what I am referring to. “In relationships where violence was non-mutual almost 70% of the violence was perpetrated by the woman. Not this part. This part mentions "non-mutual" meaning only one party did it. ​ ​ …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:15 PM
2

It literally proved my point lol. Actually, the stat directly states women receive more emotional abuse than men. Just because you tried to discount a section of it because you personally believe it's nonsense, does not alter the facts presented. Literally add them together women(40% and 41%) vs men (32% and 43%). And it’s harder than others sure. But that still isn’t an argument for doing the same thing or a worse thing. And yet that's literally the argument you made for provacative abuse. Why …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:05 PM
1

Yes it doesn’t say who does so when the abuse goes both ways. So even then we still don’t know who starts in your own source. Idk what’s hard to understand about that. Interestingly enough, if you actually read the study(the original one not whatever you linked) that 70% stat for women being the starting perp in reciprocal violence doesn't exist. So either someone quoting the link freestyled on the study, an error was made when typing it out(most likely), or you freestyled on the study. No shit …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:59 PM
2

You literally posted a source. Yes but my source contradicts with what you said. If you think just because some may be victim to something that if they do something just as bad then it’s justified then lol idk what to tell you. In that case why mention verbal abuse at all? Can't they all just leave?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:36 PM
1

For one my original point was that women often start domestic violence. Which again your stat didn’t show who started what. It actually does. I'm starting to think you can't read stats. If it is unidirectional then the perpetrator is the person who started it because the violence only goes one way. From the part you quoted “In relationships where violence was non-mutual almost 70% of the violence was perpetrated by the woman. In other words, in almost 7 out of 10 cases of mutual violence, the ba…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:35 PM
2

lol yes. Source? We don’t know what the provocation was. Are they not capable of leaving? Oh my~ is this victim blaming?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:26 PM
2

We also know women commit more emotional abuse too. So are you gonna start telling men to stop getting into relationships with women and that women are more abusive? Do they? ​ 80% of individuals have perpetrated emotional abuse Emotional abuse categorized as either expressive (in response to a provocation) or coercive (intended to monitor, control and/or threaten) Across studies, 40% of women and 32% of men reported expressive abuse; 41% of women and 43% of men reported coercive abuse
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:24 PM
3

You are forgetting that small companies exist and often face bankruptcy of something like this occurs to them. They do and that's very bad. And it’s crazy that you described why it’s wrong for companies to discriminate and explain why people should discriminate I'm sorry, I wasn't aware my company was going to be impregnating me and half sway over all my life choices. In that case, I'd actively encourage companies to be quite discriminatory since apparently this is a major life-altering event th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:18 PM
1

If your point was it happens more sure. I was asking specifically for the 70% stat because that's insane. My point was that men commit acts of violence on women more than women do on men. Domestic violence is only a subset of this which doesn't change the overall statistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:15 PM
1

And if you squint hard enough I never said it was the same. If you never said it was the same, then there was absolutely no point in saying I could see it. I could not, hence me having to google it myself. Yes, it also said that was only for when the man abuses the woman which is still less than both parties abusing each other. It literally said unilateral. Ummmm that is not what it said. I quoted the whole stat that covered both men on women AND women on men. Do I have to break it down line by …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:10 PM
4

By your logic companies Companies are not the public. Companies are subject to discrimination laws. Companies hiring people is not the same as an individual choosing who they will be in a relationship and have sex with. I know in America we like to pretend companies are people and they should be treated like people but I'm sorry to inform you that they are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:02 PM
1

No I could not, I literally googled the part you quoted after you said the link worked for you. If you squint, you'll even see the link I posted is different from yours. And literally in the text I quote from the meta analysis not only does it talk about if it is one way or both parties, it talks about which party is doing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:58 PM
1

The stat I produced is from a meta-analysis that was published in 2012, of which there is no source that is from before 2010. Your particular stat is from a study conducted in 2007. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:52 PM
1

Oh you mean where I correctly point out the rates of violence so nobody is left scratching their head as to why one gender is viewed as more of a threat? Somehow, though, people are still confused. And I asked to see the link because the stat that I see on one way violence is very different from what you posted. Among large population samples, 57.9% of IPV reported was bi-directional, 42% unidirectional; 13.8% of the unidirectional violence was male to female (MFPV), 28.3% was female to male (FM…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:44 PM
1

If that's what I'm doing now by rephrasing what you said, then you're guilty of the exact same thing. Also this link won't load for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:38 PM
–

"Probably" isn't good enough. Maybe he isn't a rapist, maybe he'll just spit in your face and call you shallow instead, maybe he'll break a bottle on your head, maybe he'll stalk you in a misguided attempt to rom-com you into seeing his heart of gold, maybe he'll throw himself a pity party because nobody ever gives him a chance and get his friends to preassure you into giving him a "fair" shot, maybe he'll just kill you. None of it is worth the risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:35 PM
2

Can I get the stat on women starting domestic violence? And again black people ( I am black) commit a good chuck of crimes and I’m not talking just about murder. So are you gonna go around saying how we are mainly criminals? White people also commit a good chunk of crimes. If we're adding them all together white collar crimes like embezzlement is a Caucasian stronghold. That's why I broke it down by specific categories. Unless you want to go around saying white people are scammers.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:30 PM
–

Of the women that are victims what percentage have perpetrators that are male? My statement isn't that women are more likely to be killed overall. It's that women are more likely to be killed by men. Compare the stats for women with female perpetrators and women with male perpetrators and show me on the board which is higher. Also when you add relationships into the mix the stat gets even crazier since women are overwhelmingly more likely to be the victim of homicide from a male partner than the…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:25 PM
–

They're also more likely to kill women as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:09 PM
–

Both of my statements were accurate. Men commit more violent crimes than women, and people are more likely to be the victim of a crime from their own race. Tell me, which one of these was incorrect? You would have had a point if when you swapped race instead of gender the stats would still be correct. When you swap race in, it no longer is. Women are wary of guys because, as a whole, guys are stronger AND more violent. Nobody feels like figuring out if the guy interested in them is good or will …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 05:34 PM
–

It wouldn't work because men commit more violent crimes across all races. You're also more likely to be a victim of a crime from your own race than another.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 05:06 PM
3

True thinking. I have never once in my life been afraid I'll get physically assaulted for rejecting a woman. Meanwhile, we have articles about guys hitting women in the face with bottles and bricks.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 05:03 PM
–

Statistically it is unsafe. Which gender commits more violent crimes? If the danger was simply a verbal lashing most people wouldn't care. I've heard of waaaaay less cases of a woman drugging and assaulting another woman than I have of men doing the exact same thing. Once a guy becomes interested in a woman the interest itself is the threat, not his unattractiveness. Any attention from a man that a woman does not want to reciprocate is a veiled threat because who knows what measures he'll take t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 04:27 PM
1

Do you really don't know the difference between a conclusion based in a hyphotesis and a hypothesis based in another hypothesis? The difference doesn't matter because you are not making a hypothesis based on any data because you have no similar instance of a massive grid failure in which women were completely unable to acclimate. Meaning your hypothesis is based on nothing but speculation. This only works if you make an hypothesis over another hypothesis like you did, if men disappear you would …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/23 10:19 PM
1

A possibility, you base it in a possibility, everything you base is A POSSIBILITY lol. That's what happens when a HYPOTHETICAL situation is offered. Everything you've said is just a possibility as well. Just because you strongly believe it will happen doesn't make it true. Yeah because women don't need to do violence they have men for this, a women don't need to steal and mug someone for money when she have a man doing it. This would make sense if men weren't mugging and stealing from each other…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/23 03:06 PM
1

Yeeeeeeeaaaaah because women reproduce by osmosis. Even so without women at least I will still have tap water and electricity running. Actually, there's research being done on producing sperm from bone marrow. It's only been done in mice but the results indicate it could be possible in women. It's when you use it in order to deflect and answer a point no one made. Except my point was that very statement. If men don't need women to survive, then tell that to the incels claiming the exact opposite…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/23 12:30 AM
1

No, I call it is a straw man because it's a strawman, you pick the easy target aka incels to dunk on and never bother to prove that men need women to survive. Picking an easy target isn't the same as building a strawman. Also, men quite literally need women if they don't want society to fall apart in 1 generation simply from a reproductive angle. I'm not even going to address the violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/23 09:40 PM
1

If men don't need women then why do incels exist? What is their ideology based on? Why do they react poorly to being told they don't need sex or a gf to survive? You can call it a strawman because you personally feel this isn't related to the main argument but the question still stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/23 07:15 PM
1

Strawn Man This is false
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/23 01:43 PM
1

Please tell this to incels and FA guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/23 06:24 AM
1

You didn't answer his question though. Which would you prefer, to start where everyone else is, or to be the one lagging behind?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/23 07:30 PM
-1

When did compatibility become 100% lockstep conformity?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/23 12:56 AM
–

I can believe it. When I interact with women who have autism I can tell something is off but it's not as in your face as men with autism. Sometimes the difference is so visceral I feel really unsettled. It's like I'm talking to someone who is capable of anything and I can't gauge what they'll do.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/23 03:12 PM
1

I've watched a lot of ND women speak on their dating experience and wanting to be NT wasn't the reason they listed. It was more that ND men tend to double down on established gender norms/expectations as a way to maintain some control in social situations. Like a person who wants to make new friends reciting jokes from a "how to make friends" book. Oddly enough, I've experienced this. In various labs I have been partnered with a women and man with autism. The woman asked the TA a lot of question…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/23 03:38 AM
2

To then what? Stick them back in jail? To AVOID THEM. Why risk it? You're literally asking someone to gamble on something that is low reward AND high risk. Either we address the issue; or we say ‘not near me.’ Not my problem. Their ‘social consequence’ is to be ostracised out of society. Or if not entirely out of society, out of ‘my’ society. We're already saying not near me. And schools are saying not near me to child predators. And yeah, that is their social consequence because, once again, wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/23 12:58 AM
2

Which is my point. Currently, we stick perpetrators in jail. To however what end? To ‘rehabilitate’ them? To re-enter society? No, that's the legal consequence. The social consequence is something else. For example, if you steal my food from the workroom fridge and I report you to HR, your written warning is the legal consequence. Me not saying hi to you anymore because you're a dirty lunch thief is the social consequence. What consequences negate the risk of re-offending? I don't know and it's …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/23 12:03 AM
6

Nobody is saying they should live the rest of their life in prison(unless it was extremely violent), but at the same time, that doesn't mean people have to live next to them or interact with them. People get to pick their own actions. The rapist chose to rape, and the regular citizens chose not to interact with them. Actions have consequences.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/23 11:20 PM
8

Not many people want to reintegrate or rehabilitate a rapist. They would prefer to live very faaaaaaaar away from them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/23 10:46 PM
5

Agreed. I'm waiting untill I'm married to lose it but I'm not interested in bitter virgins. Why marry someone who would've given up their virginity at anytime and hates the women who did?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/23 02:12 PM
1

Same, I'm not interested if it's higher than mine. I'd rather stay single.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/23 05:59 PM
1

I guess I can understand that. I also like touch(specifically hugs) but I get that just fine from my friends.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/23 06:40 PM
1

Is sexual intimacy needed anyway? I really don't get the hype. Just get some close friends.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/23 06:14 PM
5

Yeah, it's easier to get taken advantage of when you don't have many options. And I'm not even strictly talking about financial abuse within a relationship; employers do it all the time when they know you can't afford to lose your job. The less money you have the more scummy people will try to force you into unpleasant situations because of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 10:08 PM
29

Raising a kid with little to no money is a very risky gamble.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 02:03 PM
3

Exact same level. Men will have sex with anyone if they're desperate. Men wanting to bang a woman is not a flex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 01:52 PM
12

Lmao cause chads are the only men who use people right? Don't kid yourself for a second thinking if billy couldn't cheat he wouldn't. All that means is if he ever gets his money up and drops a couple of pounds that relationship is imploding.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 01:50 PM
1

Your assumption is that men don't put effort into their looks with makeups etc. That wasn't my assumption. Did you really read my post for comprehension? My actual point is that because cosmetics and certain styles are no longer considered masculine, men's threshold for what is considered attractive has far less elasticity than it did in previous ages. Men cannot contour their face, wear heels, and gaudy clothing, and even though surgery exists, it's less acceptable for men to get it solely for …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/23 09:59 PM
8

I think that user’s point is that the physical variables men are judged on can’t be “maintained.” They’re out of your control. Yeah, I'm saying that it could be maintained in older cultures. Even facial structure can be enhanced with enough drip. Now we have modern surgery but men are also less likely to get those. I can take basically any man, regardless of his grooming habits, cosmetics, or fashion, and make him totally sexless by manipulating his baldness, height, and race (note that I didn’t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 12:56 AM
12

I genuinely believe this is the fallout from men having options in what they're valued for. Looks is probably the most volatile thing you could place value in, and historically for women it was a large part of their stock. If we look at a lot of early cultures we can see men also had special grooming habits, clothing and cosmetics to enhance their beauty, but why continue to put time/energy into that when there's a much more stable way of attracting a mate? Just ban women from owning property th…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 11:59 PM
1

There are no ethical billionaires so no
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/22 05:42 AM
6

I can't speak for other areas but I think romantically the initial contact is probably where a lot of red flags get set off. I have a very expressive face so meeting someone who's facial expression doesn't "match" what they're saying gives me red flags. Kind of like when someone smiles but the light doesn't reach their eyes so it seems artificial. For men there's the added danger of me not knowing if they're like this because of autism or because they have toes in their freezer. It's odd because…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/22 03:13 AM
3

Isn't there a saying that like 70% of communication is non-verbal? It's probably why people can tell something is "off" about people with autism relatively quickly. Sometimes they don't even have to saying anything for someone to clock them. Being able to read faces and tone is a large part of NT communication.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/22 02:52 AM
14

Honestly same. If I'm saving myself for marriage he needs to be as well. incels doesn't count because they don't want to be virgins.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/22 07:50 PM
1

"Women get laws passed" Aka Men petition other men to pass laws on women's behalf and then blame Women for it passing. to make sure they don't work in dangerous jobs I'll take what is nursing for 400 Next generation of women vilifies men for doing what women wanted. " Buck passing, classic. It's not our fault a gallery of men passed this. The women hypnotized us! And so what if we did, it's what they wanted anyway!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 06:47 PM
2

^ Men passing laws isn't the fault of the men who passed them. It's actually women's fault. And working class women didn't work dangerous jobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 09:04 AM
2

Like I said, a bunch of propaganda. Obviously it's the same as today. Women don't get added to the draft because the vast majority of women don't want to be pushed into something that's risky or dangerous. Women got it made illegal to push them into dangerous or risky work, because the vast majority of them didn't want it to be possible. \<sup>Anything</sup> I don't like is propaganda, even the stuff that actually happened.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 08:34 AM
2

Again the " all women were desperate to work hazardous jobs" is simply propaganda that's the opposite of reality. Except nobody said all. You're literally arguing a point I never made. Google says women in the military on active duty is around 15%. You're pushing propaganda that ignores that vast majority of opinion, and pushes the opinion of a very small group. No, what I'm doing is pointing out that you cannot blame women for not working in an industry they were not allowed to work in. I notic…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 07:51 AM
5

In order to push women into the workforce, we get these "all women were desperate to work hazardous jobs" narrative, which simply isn't true This was occurring well before WW1 so I'm not quite sure what push you are referring to here. And like I keep saying working class women have ALWAYS existed. I simply have to look at all the complaining when they tried to add women to the draft. The vast, overwhelming number of women did not want these jobs. They still don't today, despite that things are f…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 06:40 AM
4

Yes, women were banned from hazardous occupations that women didn't want to be stuck in. Not quite true. I listed construction as one of the jobs women worked but the catch is they were also barred from that. They were seen as too weak and slow to work the job. This caused women to dress up as men or simply forgot their gender for a bit to get the job. But not soldier, ship builder (a high hazardous occupation apparently), etc etc. And most of the time when women found themselves in hazardous oc…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 06:04 AM
6

violent jobs were common as well, which as always women largely pushed men into and avoided being in themselves. Many violent jobs such as laying railroads and fighting in wars barred women from participating. Even chain making which was dangerous in the past tried to bar women. When they finally allowed women to make chains as well they only allowed them to produce the small link ones. Unsurprisingly, your pay was based on the weight of the chains made. Women were also often routinely excluded …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 05:26 AM
3

Correct. My siblings dynamic is 3 girls and 1 boy. Guess which one of us never shared a room.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/22 03:56 PM
2

My god I don't know how you flipped my cat example on its head lol Probably because at first you discounted them. You can find an exception to anything. I thought that's what we were doing. OP said male groupies don't exist. All the threads are basically proving or trying to prove they do. Doesn't that make all these threads exceptions? That not men's behavior was my point. Do you want a study showing that men aren't groupies? Do you want a study proving women like status magnitudes more than me…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 06:00 PM
3

I can see that happening. Someone tried to chainsaw off two members of AKB48's fingers a while back. And then a different member received a crazy amount of criticism for spending the night with a guy. She shaved her head and released an apology video and the fans still wouldn't forgive her.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 05:03 PM
2

I said 50% because you grouped sjws and the left together so I wasn't sure where to draw the line. I also said "up to" 50% not just 50%. AWALTs are also reproducing with the left so then the claim that the bullshit reinvented version of masculinity is the okay one still stands. Secondly isn't that what the right is doing now with their call to harken back to the good ol days of traditional masculinity?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:46 PM
3

Ah this makes sense. Thank you. In that case Beyonce's fans don't match up, but the man who tried to kidnap sunny still does.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:42 PM
3

I can also find cats that have 3 legs. Does that mean my statement of cats have 4 legs untrue? Groupieism simply is not a behavior of even a subgroup of men on average. Except this isn't the case. I stated beyonce has male groupies and could provide proof. You then stated those groupies were gay which apparently discounts them. If I were to translate that to your cat analogy it would go something like: Me: Cats with three legs exist You: No they don't Me: What about this cat here? You: That cat …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:40 PM
3

Does AWALT no longer include all women? Do you truly believe up to 50% of the voting base is comprised of bisexual people? If that is the case why did it take so long to pass LGBT rights related bills? If masculinity is constantly changing and being reinvented on both sides, can you even call it true? As long as the men are being chosen for reproduction, cuckolding or not, doesn't that mean their brand of masculinity still remains the okay version since it's "working"? And what does masculinity …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:32 PM
3

Aren't male sjw's getting women as well? Aren't betas getting women too? The left has to be reproducing, if not then our voting wouldn't be so split. Doesn't that mean the bullshit reinvented version is the okay version?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:20 PM
3

Isn't traditional masculinity constantly reinventing itself as well? What makes their version bullshit but not your unstable version? Who determines when a reinvent is okay?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:15 PM
3

Unless you want to define what a groupie is, or give me some proof to the ridiculous claim that beyonce has no straight(because gay men aren't men I guess) male groupies you aren't really saying anything at all. If you believe I'm so wrong then just wait for Atlas B to inevitably prove how mistaken I am because you are doing nothing of the sort.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:11 PM
5

So where does the traditional aspect come into play if it's always changing? Is the competition the tradition part with everything else just being symptom? Isn't a tradition something inherently stable?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 04:07 PM
3

Normal changes depending on the time period, which is part of the reason why I want to know what traditional masculinity is.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:59 PM
3

Isn't toxically masculine a relatively new phrase though? And weren't certain ancient cultures that might fall under that banner really gay?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:50 PM
3

I've always thought it was someone who wants to be a close as possible to the celebrity of their choice and basically obsesses over them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:48 PM
4

Honest question, what is the traditional understanding and when did this tradition come into practice?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:46 PM
2

Someone who spends their rent money buying 10 limited edition copies of the same album is a fan? Jeez the bar must be pretty high then. Same for all the guys buying their favorite pornstar/camgirl presents and complimenting them everyday. I must be the shittiest of fans.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:44 PM
3

???
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:42 PM
6

I'm aware of what a groupie is. when i said "men dont like beyonce" i meant they arent "sexually driven by her" My point still stands then, except I'd ask for some proof that beyonce has no male groupies that aren't gay because that's a huge claim. female celebrities get GAY male groupies, its a wholly different thing than FEMALE groupies of male celebrity And female pornstars? Are their groupies gay too? K-pop and J-pop girl groups, are the people using their rent money to buy 10 copies of the …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:41 PM
7

Are gay men not men???????? And are you really trying to tell me the only men who like beyonce are gay? That sounds plausible to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:25 PM
11

Are you sure because I can find men fanboying over beyonce's songs/albums on youtube and twitter right now. Is this really a claim you want to make?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:22 PM
9

Male Groupies exist. Especially when you head over into the k-pop genre. I'm pretty someone tried to kidnap sunny from girls generation while she was ON STAGE. There's a video of that floating around somewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:17 PM
7

There is no obsession over the celebrity status and certainly no attraction to a person just because they're popular One word Beyonce
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:15 PM
1

I did address the point, go back and read it again.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 03:36 AM
1

Nope the party was pretty much over if not completely. Also you're replying as well so I guess we both wanted an excuse. P.S. I'm not bluepill
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 09:02 PM
1

When in my analogy did I say it was an anti-booze party? Don't straw man me. And while some blues do say "be yourself" if they haven't said it by the time the "party" is over(when you showed up) they probably weren't going to. Which is why in my first comment I said you were "late" .
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 08:45 PM
1

Nobody even said it so it was unnecessary. I'm beginning to think nobody was going to say it. It's like showing up to a party 5 hours late and saying "here before everybody starts drinking", and then nobody ever drinks.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 07:48 PM
1

Because the line doesn't actually mean virgins against their will. It means they can't find a girl to get laid with or they didn't work hard enough to lose it. It's not a good enough approximation since I listed three different ways they could lose their virginity above. If I want to make money but I only put in applications to places where I want to work and they don't hire me, am I broke against my will?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 07:42 PM
2

I thought the issue was he didn't want to die a virgin against his will not he wanted a loving meaningful relationship. Desperate times call for desperate measures. It doesn't matter how you lose it as long as you lose it right? (excluding rape)
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:18 AM
7

That doesn't mean he'll be refused every time. All he needs is one escort who pities him enough to take his virginity. Also he could have gay sex(be the bottom). He'll lose his virginity that way. Or he could have sex with a 1-2 girl who is also super desperate.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:03 AM
2

Against their will? Do escorts not exist?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 05:15 AM
1

I can read, the point I was making was "inb4" shouldn't be used if you're late to the party.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 05:09 AM
1

You're already pretty late to the party and nobody has said "be yourself" yet.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 04:47 AM
3

a guy who's an inexperienced virgin at 25 sends up red flags to women because to them it shows that the guy is likely to be socially maladjusted and thus not fuckable Depends on the woman. For me it would mean he is pure/looking for the one. Which would be a very helpful thing when I decide to start looking for a husband. I automatically rule out any guy that isn't a virgin because if i'm giving them my first they better be giving me theirs. The thought of a guy slutting it up in his teen years …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/15 01:01 AM
2

Ah, thanks for the info. Also what about the Hair? A lot of people find that sexual, and I see that advocated for a lot when talking to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/15 01:13 AM
1

This post gave me cancer.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/15 09:29 PM
1

I don't like people I don't know touching me. Of course light conversational touching is okay. Isn't that what the redpill advocates....kino? Doesn't that include touching people you don't know? Also what all can be included in light conversational touching?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/15 08:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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