TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

unicorncuddles Archive

View 0 posts and 46 comments by unicorncuddles 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)
3

The only time it correlates is in outlier situations. /u/RobotPartsCorp is right that we're watching the IQ of women steadily rise at a faster pace than men, and they recently surpassed men at a mean IQ. There was a series of studies that found brains that were smaller due to lead exposure at young ages effected intelligence. So in abnormal cases, yes, brain size does correlate to intelligence levels. That doesn't mean that a smaller brain was the cause of a lower IQ, however, but rather a resul…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/14 12:02 AM
6

Who determines what is unhealthy. Doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health professionals, and decades of research determine what is unhealthy. Pretty unanimously. Why is it that someone is not allowed to determine that a behavioral pattern is or is not generally healthy, but they can determine an entire gender acts/thinks a certain way? Personally, I follow the research and consensus of the field. That consensus is that full-blown sociopathy is not healthy for the individual who is s…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 08:34 PM
2

I'm going through his post history (the first couple pages of it anyway) and I'm pulling out the posts with less than 0 points, and 20 or more. There are several with 0 points, and a good amount with 10-19 points. I'd say the majority are within 1-9 points, however. Obviously I didn't dig very far, but I don't want to post something longer than this probably is already going to be. Less than 0 1 -21 points So, what did you learn from this experience? Here are a few takeaways: •Don't give it up o…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/14 08:35 PM
1

Every single feminist blog I ever posted on...has told me, in no certain term, that the issues men have is "patriarchy backfiring", that femmephobia is why men get shat on for showing feminine behavior. That women don't get shat on for showing masculine behavior. Maybe this is pretentious of me, but I prefer to use information that is peer-reviewed, and published by people of credit to form my opinions. Blogs don't tend to be either of these things, so, to me, they're not valid examples. I under…
/r/MensRights01/07/14 11:07 PM
1

It did skip that point, yes, but I don't think it's making the assumption that women don't get insulted with manly insults. It just chose to focus on this specific aspect in which men are attacked using feminine words. I don't think it's entirely fair to assume that because something is not included, that it is not included out of malice or ignorance. Is there other work that this person has done that illustrates that they believe that only men get insulted with womanly insults? Or that women do…
/r/MensRights01/07/14 08:08 PM
1

However, the same point could have been made without using "girly" or "woman" and using "not manly" and "not a man". In fact, it would be more accurate. You're correct, the point that men suffer from sexism could be made without being specific about the insults thrown at them. That wouldn't address the issue of the nature of these insults, however. And the nature of these insults is very key to the problem of sexism as a whole. I think the goal of this comic is something more complex than just p…
/r/MensRights01/07/14 01:32 AM
4

I don't see this as making sexism toward men be an affront to women; I see it more as pointing out that men and women are both hurt by sexism. Men are insulted for being like women, are insulted using female-related words, and are looked down upon for being anything but what society deems masculine. It's a horrible thing, and it is both bad for men and women. I don't want men to suffer for not fitting their sex's stereotype, and I don't want being called a woman to be a demeaning thing. The same…
/r/MensRights30/06/14 11:17 PM
2

That seems like an extremely unfair double standard to me, but, hey, there are women out there who wouldn't think so. I always want to know what my partner has done in the past, or if we're in an open relationship, what they're doing currently, so that I can know if they're being safe (using condoms, getting tested, etc). If they're interested in knowing what I've done/am doing, then I share for that very same reason. Not all people are going to be like that, though, and I can understand that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 10:35 PM
6

I agree that it'd be wise to be skeptical, especially if it's not something that your SO has done before. People enjoy the idea of an open relationship, but sometimes they can't, like you said, work through the feelings that come along with the sex. I didn't mean to come of like, "OH, YOU'RE TOTALLY WRONG, LOOK AT ME!" I just wanted to show ya that we do exist. My default assumption of either sex would be that they couldn't handle it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 09:41 PM
3

Yep, I'm female.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 09:32 PM
3

Are you kidding? Humans are not even remotely unique in terms of parental investment. Look at almost any bird species. You're absolutely correct. Birds do this, as do many great apes, monkeys, and, as a specific example, beavers. As a rule of thumb, if an animal is primarily monogamous or has a small group containing both females and males, we find that it is very likely for both parents to aid in raising the young. When you have strictly polygynous groups, or an animal that is solitary, that is…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 09:31 PM
4

I actually responded to a post with this idea in it last week. Sex is emotional for me only when I allow it to be, and I have been able to handle multiple partners before without any emotional issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 08:11 PM
8

The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place. This theory is talked about in relation to sexual selection, of which mate selection, aka intersexual selection, is one component, as /u/poop40 said. It's believed that humans have sexually selected for traits in both males and females. This indicates that not only are females being choosy about mates and altering ev…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 04:13 AM
1

Sorry I had so many replies unread I must've misread it. No worries, it happens! I feel as though rape statistics are grossly inflated by a multitude of factors. I disagree, but I feel that this is probably something neither of us are willing to change our minds on.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/14 10:02 PM
1

I think you may have misread what I said, so that might be a reason to take another look at my post. I did not say that 1 in 16 men were raped, I said that 1 in 16 men will attempt to or successfully sexually assault someone. What I said in its entirety was: Throughout my degrees in psychology and sociology I've had the statistics of 1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted, and 1 in 16 men will (attempt to) sexually assault someone thrown at me over and over again. I was not making the claim tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/14 08:01 PM
1

Oh, yep, you're right. They don't include a few groups of people (minors, prisoners, mentally disabled individuals, etc) that are usually exempt from studies. The study report should state that in the sampling methods if I'm not mistaken.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 08:58 PM
1

My best guess is that they're not considering all women to be "women". What do you mean? Do you mean that they are leaving out a percentage of the population and/or sample? They're both pretty bad. I totally agree. I just don't think we should be using known-inaccurate scare numbers. 1 in 4, 1 in 5, 1 in 5, 1 in 6 were the numbers found from this group of studies. If we take the average of those results, we get 1 in 5. I don't think that we're using known-inaccurate numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 08:48 PM
1

They state that it's 1 in 5, not 1 in 7. The 18.3% they get from weighting the data. You did the math using the tables they gave? You'd need the raw data, like you said earlier, along with their equations and weight metric. You can find info on how and why they weight the data on page 9, under methods. Regardless of whether it's this statistic or that one, 1 in 4 and 1 in 7 are both absolutely terrifying, IMO. They're relatively close compared to claims like the 7 in 10 or your 1 in 14, as well,…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 08:34 PM
1

THANK YOU THEIR BOT! <3
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 07:59 PM
1

They could have included the data for us, I agree, some of the other studies did. For whatever reason, the CDC study you posted didn't. However, the CDC study you shared does say that 1 in 5 women will be raped in their lifetime, using the same measure of completed and attempted rape as the NIJ study. Page 1, first point on the very bottom right of the page, just under the heading "Key Findings." I'll copy it for you, to save you some time. "Nearly 1 in 5 women (18.3%) and 1 in 71 men (1.4%) in …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 07:55 PM
1

Please look again at table 7.5. 7.2 does exclude rape, you're correct. I stated that 7.5 is the one that explicitly includes rape, and it does. They were mentioned because the data was collected, it just didn't amount to enough data to be of use at this time. Again, the report says that they will be factoring it into future studies. Why they didn't include it is stated in the report, why they chose to not jump through the hoops of explaining the data they did have with alternate error bounds and…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 06:51 PM
1

I'm sure the raw data is available somewhere out there. It's likely too much for someone without the software to analyze the information to use properly, which is why they don't just throw a giant spreadsheet of numbers and replies at us on the front page of the study. I posted those tables specifically because you said that you had wished the study had included error bounds. Rape against men is definitely mentioned. Tables 7.2 and 7.5 are about men. 7.5 explicitly includes rape. Made to penetra…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 03:42 PM
1

Lifestyle choices are always something people like to push their opinions about on to others. It works for them, it should work for everyone, god damnit! I mean, look at some of the discussion here. This is a sub where there is a lot of people shouting down others because they believe their opinion is the right one. There are some amazing examples of how people don't respect personal choices that they have no business pushing their opinions on to. I'm just after reaching a point of mutual respec…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 03:35 AM
3

It's working. I'm happy. That's all I really need to know. I don't really care how well it would work for anyone else. This, this, this, this. This is exactly the point, IMO. If both people are happy, and no one is being harmed or forced into a scenario where they are not comfortable, then why does it matter how two consenting adults go about their relationship? I don't agree with the RP views, but I can respect that they lead to healthy and happy relationships for some.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 03:17 AM
1

Would you be apprehensive about marrying a man who had been married and divorced many times, and had other women break off engagements? I would be apprehensive. The men I have put similar weight on sex as I do, and have put similar weight on marriage as I do. Someone who viewed marriage as a throw-away thing would not be someone I'd date casually, let alone long term. Someone who viewed sex as something you do with only one person you love would not be interested in dating me, as I have casual s…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 03:08 AM
2

Thank you for your reply! If you have questions you’re not comfortable asking in an open forum, you’re welcome to PM me. My life and my choices are not things I’m ashamed of or hide from. Besides, a little exercise in defending my approach to life is always beneficial to me. I hope you understand that you are still very far from the norm. I don't think I could make a definitive statement as to what the norm is regarding reasons for high partner counts, or how the majority of women handle themsel…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 02:45 AM
1

I hope you're basing your belief of someone having a mental health issue on more than just their partner count. I'm tired of reading this line of reasoning. If a high partner count, alone, is not good enough for psychologists and psychiatrists to come to the conclusion that the person is mentally ill, then it's not good enough for us to, either. You're perfectly fine saying that this behavior is, perhaps, part of a personality type that you don't want to date and/or associate with, but that does…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/14 01:15 AM
2

I have a high partner count at age 23, it isn't 30, but it's close. I’m not arguing that all women are like me, I’d just like to post my thoughts and experiences as a woman with a high count. I welcome your feelings on any and all of this, if you’re feeling up for it. I'm not looking to use men; I do not view them as disposable. I simply enjoy sex. I suppose this can be viewed as using someone, but it would be mutual usage of one another, and I don’t see much difference in using someone to be se…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 11:11 PM
1

That isn't quite true - it also could mean that the data size is extremely small. Yep, you are correct, I should have added that in my comment as well. I apologize. I did a little digging to get the data they used in their calculations and found this. Go crazy, there's lot of stuff to look at there!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 10:07 PM
3

This is probably going to be like most other posts here, but I figured I’d throw in my two cents. Most rapes go unreported. So, when we see the high numbers like 1 in 4 or 1 in 5, that factors in both reported and unreported rapes, sexual assault (reported and unreported) AND attempted rape. This statistic, when used, is usually not saying that 1 in 4 women will be raped, it's saying that 1 in 4 women will be sexually assaulted or someone will attempt to sexually assault her in her life. If you'…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/14 09:49 PM
3

Ah, yeah I understand the jury is still out on the evo psych, but I think there is enough evidence for me that some minor trends develop. I mean we are all still human so it's not necessarily the full extent of what TRP says but I think some of it is on the right track. Totally fair. Like I said, some of the points in mate selection they have, I agree with. There's plenty of evidence that both men and women try to get with the most attractive mate physically. I think it's left out, however, that…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 04:16 AM
3

Yep, that's all I was trying to get at! I don't know if asking others to research information to disprove their beliefs themselves is a good way to go about it. In scientific research, people set out to disprove their hypotheses instead of prove them. If a scientist of any kind is trying to prove a point, that should be a red flag to you. We are constantly trying to disprove parts of theories so that what we have left is the probable answer, we have accounted for every other possible answer, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 03:34 AM
2

I think where we differ is the belief that social norms lie in biological reasons. There is obvious sexual dimorphism present in humans, like all creatures, but human sexual dimorphism is relatively low when compared to most other species. I don't think a lot of the evolutionary psychology that is used as evidence to support those beliefs is reliable, nor is it particularly well thought of within the sphere of the psychology of human sexuality. That is why I choose to not believe those things. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 03:20 AM
6

Traditional gender roles are completely acceptable, as long as the people filling those roles LIKE that they are filling them. There's nothing wrong with you for wanting a family based around those traditional gender roles. Being a masculine man is totally okay, too. Kudos for finding the you that makes you happiest and most successful, that's all anyone could ask for out of life, I think. The problem I have is, and I'm not saying you do this, insisting that the idea that the traditional gender …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 02:17 AM
2

I read that, assumed that you were presenting it as your personal experience, and using it as evidence to form your argument. I apologize. Some of what I said still pertains to the conversation as a whole, I think. There are individuals commenting with quotes from a few feminists, giving anecdotal stories of things they've experiences, or just throwing their opinions around without data to back up claims. I wanted to point out that in order to bring validation or weight to an idea, ordinarily mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 02:00 AM
2

You can tell me that isn't true but until I'm exposed to anything different then that won't change how I think of them. Anecdotal evidence is not often representative of a truth. ie: Not all men are rapists because I was raped by a man. Not all people over the age of 50 are Republicans because the ones I know are. Etc, etc. This is not always the case, but you have a much higher chance of being wrong than if you were to look into demographic polls and whatnot. An important part of looking at any…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 01:24 AM
2

Hi again! I see you've carried over our conversation to here, so I thought I might weigh in as well. Language is fluid, the meaning of a word changes depending on numerous factors. Slang is a perfect example of this. Using words like misandry/misogyny and sexism interchangeably is common practice among both groups here; it doesn't necessarily mean that you are exactly as the dictionary describes that term as being. I said this several times. Following these rules, we merely have to label the vie…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 12:04 AM
1

Not all of us BPers are trolling, though (I know that you said most. Thank you for making that minor, but important, distinction). There are some here that are genuinely interested in debating and learning about points of view that are different from our own, and we're being treated just as poorly as the people who troll. I'm new to the sub, so maybe I've just come at a terrible time, and should try again after the purge. Or maybe I'm just wrong for thinking that this is the place to have those …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/14 10:35 PM
1

Like I've said several times, that is noted. I'm sorry for offending you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 08:13 PM
1

Have I upset you, or are you attacking me in order to pull some sort of volatile reaction from me? I feel that you've made your stance very clear, and I've also tried my best to do the same. I explained that when I was saying misogynist I meant something more in line with sexist and I agreed to use that term instead if that is what you preferred. It was an issue of miscommunication, and I feel like was easily solved. I'm not sure what else you're looking for other than for me to agree with you. …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 08:04 PM
4

Where's that chair gif? Oh, there it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 03:49 AM
6

Thanks for the conversation! I don't think there's much more perspective to gain from this since we just keep rehashing the same points. I really appreciate the replies.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 03:10 AM
5

I don't think loving one woman means a person does not hate women. They just don't hate one woman. I'm not sure why liberal and conservative are terms being used, I'm not interested in a person's political views within the topics of this post, I'm only interested in the views they have considering the sexes. I've said this a few times, and I feel like it's important to reiterate: when most people use the term misogynistic, they use it much like they use sexist. To them it means something a littl…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 02:15 AM
6

Would you rather the term misogynist not be used, and instead be called sexist? I'm not purposefully being dishonest, when you look around at this sub, at the red pill and blue pill subs, or at discussion about this topic in general, the terms are used interchangeably, like I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 01:42 AM
7

This is long, I apologize. I never once said you hated women. When I say I love men, I mean that I respect and care about men just as much as I do women, and want men to be treated exactly like women should be. I was just using "love," it might not have been the best word choice. If you have certain beliefs, not necessarily political, you can very well fall into the category of misogynist because those beliefs are assigned that title. Sure, some misogynists hate women, but not all misogynists do…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:49 AM
9

It's completely possible for you to be sexist and still love/like someone of the opposite sex. I also don't think it's particularly shocking that a sexist or a misogynistic person is able to find someone who likes or loves them. It's possible for someone to be sexist against their own sex, and women who share the same ideologies as you do will most likely get along with you. You can love the women in your life, but that doesn't mean you don't engage in behaviors, or believe in things, that are h…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/14 11:52 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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