TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

theredpoo Archive

View 4 posts and 133 comments by theredpoo on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Good points!
/r/ExRedPill30/07/15 06:21 PM
2

You're right it's pure pseudo-science. Overall I think this is what happened, imo: Men used to dominate everything, every part of life. Women eventually did not like this. Women started to work, vote, and become part of society. The 60s gave us feminism, which was supposed to bring women up to equal standards with men. Feminism turned into extremism. It turned into women are not only equal to men, but better. (see every sitcom ever with a dopey useless husband). This led to men starting pickup c…
/r/ExRedPill30/07/15 04:21 PM
15

What you don't understand is that women only like sex because it makes them feel good! They don't care about you. Because science. AWALT. You must not have read the sidebar. If you are still wanting pickup then you haven't taken the red pill. An alpha doesn't pick up he just posts pics on Tinder with no shirt in the mirror and women can spot that alpha and come flocking. Before you know it you're spinning plates. Of course these girls are valueless sluts but hey, they all are. AWALT. If you disa…
/r/ExRedPill30/07/15 10:11 AM
14

Yeah I was trying to make the point that there is a world beyond TRP, one with empathy instead of seeing women as the enemy and using "pump and dump" strategies. I posed the question to one person, "Are women incapable of empathy?" and then BAN. Funny, actually. TRP guys are RIGHT and anyone who disagrees is WRONG and refuses to believe in scientific FACT.
/r/ExRedPill29/07/15 05:25 PM
0

Again, 3.0 isn't about poly vs monogamy. It's about choice. If you want to spin 10 plates, it's much easier and more fulfilling in 3.0. You don't have to hide anything. You want to just be with 1 person? No problem. You can even decide if you're okay with that one person having sex with others or not, and if you're wanting multiple partners or just the one. Everything is a choice, unlike in 2.0 when we must hide the fact that we are sleeping with more than one person most of the time. Sex 3.0 is…
/r/TheRedPill05/05/15 03:46 AM
0

Jealousy and possesiveness are a major problem with the current dynamic. This essentially takes them out of the equation. Nobody has "power" when you have freedom, at least not to the degree women have it now. All the game playing currently is simply fear being played out. You cannot have love where there is fear. 3.0 is no guarantee but it gives the good things about relationships a fighting chance, whereas 2.0 relationships are set up for disaster. I realize some do survive but this is despite…
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 11:00 PM
0

You're right the author is quite the lefty, but just because others don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't have value.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 10:56 PM
0

I meant incorrect. How is rebranding polyamory incorrect? I'm not saying that's what Sex 3.0 is but if so I don't see how that's a bad thing. Many guys on this forum are polyamorous but society shuns them. Why not make that more acceptable.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 10:55 PM
-1

No I don't think so. Right now as things stand, relationships are a mess, and the power is in the hands of women. You're saying this would make that even worse, I'm saying it would go a long way to making it better for both sexes. The second part of your argument is that it's wrong because most people aren't doing it that way. That's like saying the Blue Pill is correct because most people behave that way, or that collectivist governments are right because that's how most people in the world are…
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 10:16 PM
1

The banks are tied to governement. Any "regulations" are just government bureaucrats getting deeper into bed with them. Who regulates your regulators? Do you really think these unelected bureaucrats cannot be corrupted? Ah, you had to pull out the Somalia card, I see your brain has stopped functioning. Somalia is a tribal society and isn't even remotely like the US, and actually has done much better when it hasn't had a government than when it has. I can point you to the evidence but your brain …
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 09:18 PM
1

I didn't invent 3.0. I fully understand TRP so I can't be "plugged in". Well I am for freedom. I'm curious how you know your plates aren't fucking anyone else. Are you honest with them? Do you tell them about other plates? Do you think they are happy with the arrangement? I have plated women for a while only to find out they are going along with it but are sad about it. I'm not happy if my woman is upset but just holding back. I'd rather have fulfilling relationships which I believe is possible,…
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 09:14 PM
1

It sounds like you are anti-freedom. There's really no where else to go with this discussion.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 09:12 PM
1

Sex 3.0 means having a choice. You can be married in Sex 3.0. That's the point. It's not a system that dictates the way things must be done. Ownership of someone's sex parts is a ridiculous idea that is what 2.0 is all about.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 08:33 PM
0

Sex 3.0 has nothing to do with creating a polyamorous instinct. It recognizes that everyone is different, and is offering a choice. If you're plating, you are already practicing polyamory. Sex 3.0 is just saying, hey, that's okay, you can do that, or you can be monogamous. There is not "right" way of doing things, and trying to control people does not work.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 08:29 PM
0

Well, if you understand it, Sex 3.0 is not actually a "system" like 2.0 is. It's not saying everyone should have multiple partners. It's not saying monogamy is bad or wrong. It's not saying there is "one way" of doing this. This is what 2.0 does. Meet-date-marry is the prescription. Fall outside of that, and you are cast aside as immature, not "manning up", whatever. 3.0 is an anti-system, where there is no control involved in relationships. Does this sound bad to you? Not me. I like having rela…
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 08:27 PM
0

I don't think you're right. 3.0 is about more freedom. Many will still choose marriage, but many will opt to have lifelong relationships with multiple people. In a 3.0 world, both are 100% acceptable. How many people do you know that have harems? I know 1 guy, out of many single guys. Most can't pull this off. The idea of 3.0 is to give everyone a choice- instead of the current system where 99% of people are brainwashed into thinking meet-date-marry is the only possibility.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 08:19 PM
-2

3.0 has zero to do with feminism. 3.0 doesn't say "monogamy is wrong" or "monogamy is bad". It's simply a choice. You can have fenced or unfenced relationships. Neither are right or wrong. Brother, if you are fucking your plates you are already sharing them. 3.0 is just saying, hey, that's okay- you have a choice in the matter and don't need to follow some rulebook of 2.0 that clearly doesn't work anymore.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:58 PM
1

Yes this is true but most marriages either break apart or are completely unhappy, so this is apples to oranges. Most kids currently raised by non-married couples are not enlightened by any means or trying to live a 3.0 model. All, married or unmarried are trying to live in 2.0, which is a disaster where some people succeed despite the rigged game, not because of it.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:56 PM
0

Come on man, you can do better than that. Let's stick to the topic.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:54 PM
0

Jealousy isn't actually an emotion. It's a construct made up of other emotions like fear and insecurity. I personally enjoy relationships that are drama-free and don't have jealousy and possesiveness as core tenants. They aren't necessary and certainly don't create healthy relationships.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:53 PM
-1

"The Game" and games are 2 completely different things. I don't play games, ever, and have plenty of respect. The more you play games the less satisfied you will become.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:18 PM
1

The 2.0 rules state that marriage is good and "good for the kids", but all the data about people staying together because they signed a contract handcuffing themselves to each other shows it doesn't work. At all. So divorced or unhappy parents are not good for kids. There are lots of ways to do things, the one we have now is not the end all be all system. This is simply saying that 1) The current prevalent system of meet-date-marry is a failure, 2) Choice and autonomy are needed, and 3) none of …
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:17 PM
0

That's because we've all been taught that monogamy is the way to go. So everyone tries to be monogamous. Some make it work. Doesn't prove that monogamy is successful or the way to go. "Respect of their peers" is just getting over confidence issues. No one said getting what you want was easy, or that people would cheer you on. It's just like everything else in life. If you are not naturally monogamous but are playing a role to get sex, you won't be happy. That's the point here, to try to get more…
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:05 PM
-1

Depends on what you mean by successful. Clearly, under anyone's definition, our current system of control has produced a very unsuccessful and unsatisfying amount of relationships.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:02 PM
0

I do buy some organic where it makes sense. Not sure why you laugh at this or why this proves anything.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:01 PM
1

Ok, but 3.0 isn't saying everyone needs to comply with any "system". That's the whole point. 2.0 is certainly a system of control. This isn't a system of control. This is saying, do things as you please. You want to be married in a 3.0 world? Great! You want to have multiple partners? Also great! The difference is choice vs. complying with society rules that clearly don't work.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 07:00 PM
1

The 1.0 deal had it's merits, but there was no such thing as property so 2.0 came around. 3.0 recognizes that sexual ownership doesn't work.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 06:58 PM
-2

The 3.0 model is about choice. The current model is about doing "what everyone else is doing", which is, monagamy without thinking, and jealousy/possesiveness as the norm. It's a shitty way to do relationships, we were taught this is the CORRECT way but it is not making anyone happy. Just look at marriages. 50% divorce rate and the vast majority of the rest end up very unhappy. Surely, we can do better than just accepting this pile of shit?
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:56 PM
-2

Not at all true. Rape & murder are not at all natural. "Everything" isn't natural. You might as well say "there's no such thing as natural" in that case, and most of TRP becomes false and so does every theory about relationships.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:52 PM
0

Completely not true. Many things are taught to us at a young age and many people accept them as "natural", but they are anything but natural.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:50 PM
-5

Hmm, maybe, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:49 PM
-1

No that's not what the book is about. It's beyond that. You'll have to read it to understand. The conclusion was not that polyamory is superior, it's that what we are taught, that we are all the same and monogamy is the way to go is flat out wrong. Different people have different preferences.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:48 PM
-1

Sure, it may not "work", but it seems more natural to me. If we keep fighting our natural tendencies, we end up unhappy, right?
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:05 PM
-2

I hear you. Have you read Sex at Dawn? It changed my thinking on all of what you mentioned.
/r/TheRedPill04/05/15 05:04 PM
1

Yes, she claimed the she "has a higher sex drive" than me. Which was amazing for me to hear, after we recently had a morning where I was all over her and she was only half into it. That was mainly it that time. There were other times where she changed the story as to what happened later.
/r/TheRedPill30/04/15 06:15 AM
1

Went into an open relationship (no quotes, we were living far apart and neither of us saw any other way of doing things, but wanted to maintain the connection) last summer with a girl I had dated more seriously earlier. She had been seeing 1 other guy on a FWB basis. I knew all about it. They literally did not date and just had sex about once a week. I was fine with it as long as they were safe. So on one of my visits, I start telling her about a girl I went out with 3 times who I didn't have se…
/r/TheRedPill29/04/15 10:38 PM
0

you sound pretty bitter man.
/r/TheRedPill23/04/15 03:39 PM
1

kevkos is right about oneitis. Oneitis does not mean you are only dating one at a time. It's the unhealthy obsession with 1 woman. Also he never said anything about the importance of being nice as you claim here. His point, and I agree, I think was that there is such a thing as a guy that's nice, which is different from the stereotypical Nice Guy. A guy that happens to be nice could also have a lot going for him, not get oneitis, do his own thing, etc. Some guys on here live by too many rules. I…
/r/TheRedPill23/04/15 03:04 AM
3

Yet another reason to never marry. Anyone. Ever.
/r/TheRedPill20/04/15 04:47 PM
1

Great idea! I'm not as anti-alcohol as you, but I'm not interested in women who make getting drunk a part of their lives. I think the Whole Foods weekend morning idea is solid. Have you had any success with this?
/r/TheRedPill20/04/15 04:32 AM
1

This is a really great point. However, how do you find women who don't drink "socially"? I don't get that. Most do drink somewhat, I definitely avoid the alchies, but a girl that can have 2-3 drinks at a party I don't see a problem with.
/r/TheRedPill20/04/15 12:12 AM
1

Wow, this girl is completely nuts and probably has an alcohol problem. I think you're right, you should have just walked away when you thought about that. At this point, NEXT her like there is no tomorrow, and adjust your picker. The next girl you decide to LTR, just vet her a lot better- make sure she is only minimally crazy at most, as opposed to batshit insane like this one. Good job not getting arrested. You getting physical with her would be a dumb move anyway, cops or no cops. Know that wh…
/r/TheRedPill20/04/15 12:10 AM
2

I totally agree. And great sex is....well, great, but to me it doesn't even compare to the satisfaction of building something in your life, like business, or making progress, like in weightlifting. And sex with shitty women to me isn't worth it at all. I'd rather use my hand than to get it on with a woman that wants to make me pass all of her tests before getting naked. The way TRP moves men forward is this, to not place as much emphasis on sex but rather on improving your life all around. Sex w…
/r/TheRedPill20/04/15 12:03 AM
1

I like what you're saying for the most part and I agree with your philosophy about all this. However, I think Craig needs a little more empathy. Is he really a "fucking asshole"? He definitely did not handle the situation like you did, but that could be for thousands of reasons that you have no idea about. I agree that these functions are pretty fucking annoying with all the do-gooders patting each other on the back. I think if more people acted like you, there would be far fewer problems in the…
/r/TheRedPill18/04/15 08:35 PM
1

"...women are backward retards, who crave abuse and despise goodness..." Why would you ever want anything to do with someone like this? I'd rather be celibate.
/r/TheRedPill17/04/15 05:20 PM
13

I totally thought the same thing. It sounded very made-up.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 08:44 PM
0

Hmm. I know women that would blow up if they heard their BF say any of that. "YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO JUST SAY YES YOU'RE THE HOTTEST!" In this case, NAWALT.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 08:42 PM
1

Unless you don't want children.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 05:05 PM
1

Disagree. I don't want children, yet, I want love.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:01 PM
0

Interesting. I haven't tried them but have used Lifestyles Ultra thin, which weren't really that good AND I have broken 2 of them WHILE cumming. Sounds like the Trojans don't have a much better track record.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:53 AM
1

Totally agree. Once you've had real sex, going back to a condom makes you realize that's almost not even real sex. If you've been having condom sex for a while and get to go without it...look out! I usually last about 2.3 seconds. :)
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:49 AM
1

You've never fallen in love? I have many times and...love the feeling. I'm not a believer in "together forever" or happilly ever after or any of that nonsense, but I don't believe falling in love = BP. And you're forgetting that condom sex is vastly inferior to naked sex.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:47 AM
1

I didn't find Models to be in line with TRP all the way around. Lots of things were different in that book.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:39 AM
1

Another male ego/sex trope that I'd also like to rail against is the often supposed superiority of first time sex. This has rarely been the case for me. Rather once the deal has been sealed you are both more able to enjoy yourselves Totally agreed. Not to mention, sex is WAY better when you can not wear a condom (ie in an LTR when she's on BC).
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:36 AM
1

Totally agree. Funny how this got voted up after your preface. :)
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:35 AM
1

Marriage? Horrible idea for so many reasons.
/r/TheRedPill14/04/15 03:34 AM
1

Uh, never a good idea to wife up anybody, and...notch counts are bullshit so no point in even playing that game.
/r/TheRedPill11/04/15 01:52 AM
1

This is why having a conversation about "numbers" is beyond pointless, it's actually harmful. There is no upside.
/r/TheRedPill11/04/15 01:46 AM
1

Marriage as a concept fails, 1.0, 2.0 or 3.0. You can't change the fact that "together forever" is an impossibility, since both parties have to change in the same way, at the same rate, which almost never happens.
/r/TheRedPill11/04/15 12:38 AM
1

Right. Marriage makes ZERO sense. Nobody can predict what someone will be like 10 or 20 years from now. "Forever" is a silly notion. You can't capture a feeling in the present and force it to remain forever simply by signing contracts.
/r/TheRedPill11/04/15 12:36 AM
1

I felt this was one of Molyneux's worst videos ever. So many horrendous points it is tough to know where to start!
/r/TheRedPill11/04/15 12:05 AM
1

This is actually an argument in favor of my position. Making, "all drugs legal" is bringing them under the monopoly of violence that the state has. This means that disputes are resolved in the courts, rather than by gunfire. If you got rid of all laws tomorrow, sure, drugs would drop in price and you may even see less deaths related to drugs. Drugs are pretty cheap to manufacture after all - especially since you got rid of patent laws, quality control laws, and obviously controlled substances la…
/r/TheRedPill31/03/15 06:19 PM
1

That's archaic and ridiculous. Drugs should be legal everywhere, people need treatment not jail.
/r/TheRedPill31/03/15 05:39 PM
2

Private ownership. If you owned a road for profit, you would have a much greater incentive to fix problems than government currently has. In our current system, there is very little incentive to get things fixed. Votes, sure, but that's very low compared to an entrepreneur providing a service. The government can put off fixing roads and maybe a few people will complain, but nothing major happens. An entrepreneur can't afford to have even a few unhappy people. He will fix those roads because he c…
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 02:50 PM
2

By having a state we are providing a place for the most controlling, the most power-hungry, and the most sociopathic among us to gravitate to. Illegal activity is created by the state. For example, if you made all drugs legal, the prices would plummet, and people wouldn't be getting killed (or jailed) over them. The state causes unnecessary deaths in this and many other cases. The war on drugs, a government creation, causes rampant violence- not free trade. Actually, we've come this far despite …
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 02:46 PM
1

Thanks! Agree with your points. I'd like to write a longer post on this but the downvote brigade of dudes in anger phase looms.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 02:30 PM
4

People could figure out how to fix roads without the middle man of government. Tax dollars are always wasted by bureaucrats. Every. Single. Time.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 04:30 AM
11

One system is built on human ingenuity. The other system relies on bureaucrats backed by guns to build a perfect society. Night and day. Rely on yourself or rely on politicians. I don't think a "blend" is appropriate here. Your life is too important to leave up to other people who don't have your best interest at heart.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 04:22 AM
16

With capitalism, you have to make things happen on your own- self-responsibility is key. With socialism, everyone is "equal" and the state has your back, you are being supported by a massive tax structure and there isn't a need to "make something of yourself" because so many things are handed to you just for being born.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 02:23 AM
1

Traditionalist meaning pro-marriage, and anti-individual. I see no hope.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 01:46 AM
2

Kind of sad to see that, it's like the selective red pill.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 01:45 AM
1

Which country the middle east is a democracy? Where is the evidence that democracies are a good system?
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 01:44 AM
-4

There is no need to as long as you aren't constantly killing their brothers, they won't feel the need to get revenge.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 01:42 AM
1

Finally, another true "red pill" person on TRP. Usually when I post about anarchy I get downvoted to hell. Keep up the truthful posts!
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 01:07 AM
5

Yes that's what we were taught in government schools. But you're presenting a false dichotomy. It doesn't come down to tribalism or being ruled by authoritarian sociopaths. Government is just a group of men and women who have power over you and will act in their own self interest, not yours or mine. No one watches the watchers, so we have things like war and jailing people for having a plant that most people do not support. Power-over dynamics are not in anyone's best interest, they don't help y…
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:56 AM
2

I've stated similar things on here before and the downvote brigade came out in force. Many are simply not ready for the red pill of government, that it truly is not out for anyone's own good and that it doesn't actually protect anyone but itself. I contend that it's harder to swallow the red pill of the state than the red pill about women.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:45 AM
2

You're exactly right. It's also a collectivist society, not individualist. No place for a Red Pill Man.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:41 AM
0

Finally some truth being spoken about politics here! You're exactly right, but many will downvote out of ignorance. Authoritarianism is the opposite of what a Red Pill man should want. Freedom is the only answer.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:39 AM
1

If you want to turn all your freedom and power over to a dictator, you ain't red pill. That's the opposite of going your own way and carving out your own path.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:37 AM
4

Bingo. You will get downvoted by those that are operating out of fear. Individualism is the only thing that could be considered "red pill", if the red pill means uncomfortable truths. I would contend that the ultimate red pill system of government would be self-governance.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:36 AM
0

Sorry...what do you mean by "the other extreme"?
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:26 AM
1

I'm not interested in being anyone's daddy, nor am I interested in using a woman as my mommy. The black-and-white solution here won't make you successful with women. Unless success means lots of plates and little emotional connection.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/15 12:25 AM
-2

It's not all or nothing. I'm not saying guys should go crying to their women at every last thing that happens. I'm saying emotions are a huge part of relationships. You need to be connecting with her emotions or you will lose her. That doesn't mean caving to her or being weak, it means creating the connection you want with her. Sorry, bros are great for a lot of things, but you can't simply avoid her emotions if you want to be fulfilled. If you want sex and no commitment and light fun topics, ye…
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 10:08 PM
6

Thanks for backing me up. I think TRP is helpful in some ways but drops the ball when it comes to connecting with emotions. Doing that is the farthest thing from a "weakness", instead it takes incredible strength to do this effectively. To me there are 4 levels of handling your woman's emotions: Flying off the handle and getting pissed off, yelling and screaming, blaming her and having a fight. Caving in to her emotions. Giving her everything she wants to avoid conflict or her getting upset. Bru…
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 10:03 PM
1

Haha I hear ya man, best wishes.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 09:53 PM
2

That is a healthy attitude, and one that I follow. If you could do it again, would you get married...I mean in the traditional sense? Marriage, at least on paper, is supposed to be "together forever", which I realized is an impossibility to predict- after I got divorced.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 08:32 PM
0

Then she's more like a plate than an LTR, right? I totally get not getting emotional with plates. Stick with "fun", light topics, and lots of sex. But for LTRs, I don't understand having no heart to hearts, and being emotionless. What's the point? I wouldn't even want to be in an LTR if it meant shutting off my feelings.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 07:43 PM
2

I thought you said you were married?
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 07:38 PM
2

What? So should he treat her as a cyborg with a hole instead? Might be okay if she were a plate but he said it's his wife dude.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:51 PM
1

From what I can tell by your story, religion is the main issue here. Religion teaches kids to hate sex, hate their bodies. You are somehow born a "sinner" according to Christianity. It's completely unhealthy! Check out the book Sex at Dawn when you get a chance. It will blow your mind.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:35 PM
-9

Actually possessing a pack of gum will get you a whippin!
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:22 PM
-11

Of course, there's always a reason. Threatening people with violence, however, is never a good solution. Especially when it comes to tiny things like gum. Otherwise, the drug war would actually be working, instead it's filling prisons and creating more addicts.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:22 PM
3

She sounds like a stress case. Have a heart to heart conversation and see what's going on with her. It's likely deeper than you think. This relationship sounds like a ticking time bomb, sex or no sex. What is it that you see in here to want her as your partner forever?
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:15 PM
1

Life isn't all about getting laid for some. Vegas could be fun for a while but I can't imagine wanted to be there for a year or two even.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:12 PM
4

Where's the list? We were promised "the completed list" and you gave us San Diego, LA and NYC.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:10 PM
14

Great post. This is the difference between capitalism and socialism. :)
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:08 PM
-6

Exactly. This guy is no badass hero. He has used violence to force economic progress. He also has people whipped in the streets for things like chewing gum. Self government is the only true "red pill" way to go if you want freedom, prosperity, and peace.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 06:00 PM
-42

He also has people beat up in public for such atrocities as chewing gum. Not awesome in my book.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 05:58 PM
-8

Democracy doesn't work, the US is built on a system of bribes. However, having a dictator also doesn't work. This guy's government still institutes public canings for such horrific crimes as chewing gum in public.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 05:57 PM
-8

His government also canes people in public for chewing gum.
/r/TheRedPill29/03/15 05:55 PM
2

OH yeah there are definitely exceptions, I hung out with a 39 yo a couple years ago who was easily a HB9, had very few wrinkles and a perfect body. It happens, more so in California, but the average 40 year old woman has diminished quite a bit from when she was 30. What is "wife goggles" btw? I think I like the term!
/r/TheRedPill28/03/15 04:27 PM
2

Yes and the ones who get hit on the most somehow have no idea what guys go through, as if guys have the same experience of the ability to have unlimited sex with as many people as they want at any given time. You want to have a ridiculous conversation, talk to a cute girl who has done online dating and start comparing notes.
/r/TheRedPill28/03/15 04:24 PM
1

Can't disagree too much. Curious where you moved to. I prefer the attitudes here over anywhere else. It's a bit more of a growth mindset. I've spent time in Austin as well, which I like, but Texas overall felt kind of stagnant. Also Southern California has some of the best looking women in the world, and many even continue to look hot into their late 30's/early 40s.
/r/TheRedPill28/03/15 04:21 PM
5

Ah, no. 30 is still young enough to where if they kept themselves in reasonable shape, they can get 95% of guys out there with a reasonable sex drive. Here in California, the Wall doesn't hit most women until around 36 or 37. It's very competitive and most people don't get married before 30 so you have tons of hot girls in their 30s who call all the shots. 40+ is a different story.
/r/TheRedPill28/03/15 08:02 AM
6

"Dry spells for women are like dry spells for fish, happens only when they forget they are a fucking fish." Great quote. +1.
/r/TheRedPill28/03/15 07:56 AM
1

The marriage structure was never about a 100% gaurantee that every man and woman would be happily married. All it is meant to do is set the framework where it is possible for the average guy to pursue and achieve it. This can all be done, and in a much healthier way, than in a marriage where "together forever" is the assumption. No we need to return to the old framework. You have yet to provide a better alternative to marriage 1.0. All you have done is cry about how marriage 2.0 laws are broken …
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 10:07 PM
1

Or...just not get married at all. Even without government nonsense, agreeing to be with someone "forever" is a losing proposition from the start.
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 08:21 PM
0

And we should use the government to enforce this? I'm not following.
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 05:33 PM
1

Except that it did work for a few thousand years or so... Just because nobody got divorced, doesn't mean it "worked". Everyone was happy in the US in the 50's too right? If this is so impossible then how exactly did governments and millions of people change their views from marriage 1.0 to marriage 2.0? Views evolve. Things change. At one time there were only monarchies. This is why Sex 3.0 makes sense. We need a new framework for relationships as the current one is completely failing. Hmm the e…
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 03:17 PM
2

You're not responding to my point. Yes modern marriage is horrible but trying to put an old framework onto today is not going to work. First, it's still marriage and "together forever" and all that mythology that simply doesn't work. Second, you'd have to convince millions of people, including governments, to change. Not going to happen. Marriage involves the state. LTRs do not. If you want to get married without the state, then it's not really a marriage, it's an LTR with an agreement between t…
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 06:07 AM
1

Infrastructure always gets funded by violence when it involves government. You have to threaten people with violence to make them pay extortion, i.e. taxes.
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 06:02 AM
2

The best kind of government is no government at all. Red Pill also means seeing the truth behind what government actually is- simply violent force.
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 02:09 AM
2

Wow, total generalization about me, and completely off-base. Have you been married? I have. My ex and I are also friends, there was 0 bitterness. But that experience contributed to my view here. My point was LTR does not equal marriage. Yes it was the only way people knew how to do things in a fucked up society in 1.0. Slavery was also all anyone knew. That isn't my point. Marriage is a fantasy concept on it's own. LTRs are not. That doesn't mean NOBODY is happy & married, but some around here t…
/r/TheRedPill26/03/15 01:59 AM
2

Right, which is why I said it's an idiocratic (word I made up) law that is helping nobody.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 08:33 PM
2

Yeah, common law marriage is yet another idiocratic law from the government which can't do anything right that actually helps people.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 06:44 PM
2

Doesn't sound like things were so rosy back then. Glad we have evolved a bit.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 06:42 PM
3

I deleted my comment that was in poor taste, admittedly. To address your points: Yes, some people stay together in marriage, but it's a bad idea. Most marriages that do not end in divorce are not successful either. Many people are simply too afraid to get divorced. I know- I was there at one point. If you want to be with someone badly enough and they want to be with you, why would you feel the need to "look up and down the street" and sign that contract? Yes, I understand that it's your choice t…
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 04:04 PM
1

Fine. I realized my post was a bit petty and deleted it.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 03:49 PM
0

That's great but it doesn't respond to my post. It's not high-risk, it simply doesn't make sense in reality. Marriages end all the time for all kinds of reasons. In fact the divorce rate at least in the US is around 50%. Forcing yourself to be with another "forever" through a contract is no way to prevent a breakup. This is what married guys here are afraid to admit. Marriage doesn't just fail to protect a man's wealth, it fails to keep a couple or family together and as I've said in my OP, it's…
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 10:15 AM
3

You still need to WANT kids first, whether you are ready or not.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 10:08 AM
2

Good points. I've never wanted kids. I believe it's a myth that you'll die alone or get lonely in your old age without kids. All of that is fear-based thinking. I also think marrying is a bad idea with or without kids. You cannot know what the future will hold, therefore contracting to someone "forever" is a risky proposition at best. Kids will know if you're not happy together, might as well be in a voluntary relationship.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 10:07 AM
2

Ha, good points. As far as making a baby, marriage still doesn't protect against anything. Your odds of divorce are even greater if you have kids actually. And then you have an even bigger mess on your hands. In the case of a breakup, marriage is at best terrible for the father in the picture, and at worst terrible for everyone involved. And, staying married "for the kids" because you are afraid of divorce rape or even divorce stigma is not a good option either. Your kids will know if you are fi…
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 09:56 AM
2

Parents and family have such a fundamental influence on women while they grow up that you can tell a lot about who she really is and who she will be by her family. If her family is a shitty one, congrats, you've just strapped a time bomb to your chest. Ok this is sometimes true, but this doesn't go against anything I said. So is civilization. Without marriage, the modern world wouldn't exist at all. Sure, it's been twisted in the united states and britain by the government and the courts, but th…
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 09:52 AM
12

Numbers are meaningless. Anyone can fuck 5-6's all day long. I'd rather beat off most of the time. I would focus on self improvement rather than tying your self confidence to how many women you can bang in a year, especially the ugly ones.
/r/TheRedPill25/03/15 02:02 AM
22

Really bad idea. You gotta have taste. Many women do not deserve you fucking them. And when you dip low you actually lower your self esteem. Have some pride, be selective, avoid STDs at all costs.
/r/TheRedPill24/03/15 11:43 PM
19

Bad analogy. Fat women can stop putting pies down their hole, 5'2 men can't control their height.
/r/TheRedPill17/03/15 01:54 AM
74

Man payback is a bitch. Many women like this one had their glory days in HS and college, riding the CC while some of us dudes stood on the sidelines jerking off. Now they are mad? This is just how things work. Women peak early, men age and mature like fine wine. A 39 year old women who's not completely fallen apart probably has about as many options as an average 21 year old dude. This is the reality of it.
/r/TheRedPill17/03/15 01:04 AM
2

Totally agree. "That's alpha because..." "That's beta because...." "Blue pill act!" "Red pill act!" "AWALT!" "No not AWALT!" "Marriage is totally RP!" "Marriage is totally stupid!" "Hide your feelings every time, if not, you're a BETA PUSSY!" BTW, I also played D&D a ton as a 13 yo in the early 80's. Ha!
/r/TheRedPill16/03/15 10:53 PM
1

I hear ya. Like I said I'm an Ozzy fan so I'm just sort of geeking out on it. :)
/r/TheRedPill16/03/15 10:39 PM
11

She sounds like a wreck. Next.
/r/TheRedPill16/03/15 06:37 PM
2

I think he's 70 now. I love Ozzy. I'm just saying, there certainly were side effects of his partying!
/r/TheRedPill16/03/15 05:05 PM
9

Well Ozzy is practically brain dead but other than that, yeah no side effects!
/r/TheRedPill16/03/15 03:29 PM
1

Well it is kinda the government's fault too but I get your point. :)
/r/TheRedPill16/03/15 03:00 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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