~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Pornography_saves_li
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Excellent post. Respect has to be maintained and guarded. We have discussed the importance of being respectful of our men (both when we're in their presence and when we are away from them) on this sub in the past. Guarding against outsiders that try to get us to bad mouth our SO's is extremely important. When everyone else is trying to tear down their relationship (or undermine the integrity of yours) it's essential to speak up and set the record straight. The ladies on this sub know how important it is to speak well of their SO's to outsiders. Women love an equal playing field - when they're unhappy in their relationship (or discontent with being single) they will do everything they can to get you to commiserate and gripe alongside them.
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
It's a little to churchian for us, but I'll approve it. I'm not sure what input you think you'll get, as it's preaching to the choir
You know we aren't the Christian "man up" crowd, yeah?
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
right, of course, but its not a new insight, its the ideas we are based on. but it was a good story that hit great points
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
This shows an example of the terrible hypocrisy that feminism has caused within the church.
I'm prone to preaching about religion, so I'll try to be concise. A Christian Woman is called to be bride to her bridegroom, just as the church body is supposed to be to Christ. Theologically, she is supposed to submit to her husband as a measure of her faithfulness.
Put succinctly, her devotion to her husband should be comparable to her devotion to God. The epistles are quite clear on this.
That Pam was so easily swayed is disgusting. However, the fact that the church condoned her faithlessness sickens me with moral indignation. His ostracism in spite of the fact that she continued her relationship with the bastard-sire is beyond ludicrous.
I've got a lot to say of the religious implications of the situation, but as this is an agnostic space I'll hold my tongue. Secularly, it's disappointing that feminism can erode a firm, long-standing cultural tradition of respectful reverence towards good men.
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
Spiritual discussions are based on premises which can't be proven. It's irrelevant to talk about spiritual points that others don't agree on, and condescending to speak as if your listeners have already accepted the dogma that is the foundation one's arguments.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
It's not disallowed, It's just irrelevant and weird to most of us. The religious language comes off alien and unnecessary--it doesn't add anything and we already agree with the nonreligious part. I read sunshine Mary and other religious blogs as well, but for the nonreligious points
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
Like most MRA's, You sound just like a feminist. Feminists regularly crop up here proclaiming that we have false consciousness because we haven't been sufficiently exposed to feminism. Now you are claiming we just haven't been sufficiently exposed to religion. Atheists make up a small minority and almost no one in the US grows up simply ignorant of religion. FWIW, my undergrad degree is in religion studies concentrating in Jewish and Christian Scriptures culminating in an Independent study project translating the book of Ruth from Biblical Hebrew. To say I'm familiar with religion would be an understatement
This is a space for redpill ideas, not for feminism and not for religion either. We may intersect with some religion blogs occasionally but we aren't here to be preached religion at. I understand from your posting history that you consider yourself to be a founding member of the men's right movement and such, but that confers no status upon you here and gives you no right to try to change our tone. I would say the same thing to any feminist trying to get her nose under the tent to try to change our tone as well
[–]alphabetmod 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I understand from your posting history that you consider yourself to be a founding member of the men's right movement and such, but that confers no status upon you here and gives you no right to try to change our tone. I would say the same thing to any feminist trying to get her nose under the tent to try to change our tone as well
I knew you were for equal rights! :p
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes, shrill mras and shrill feminists are equally invited to stfu on my sub. You should see his butthurt response
Are you insane?
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
As a non-Christian woman, I often notice this kind of hypocrisy in the Church(es). This post shows it fully but also shows how bad non-Christians can be too, because the same things often happen whether you're religious or not.
Here, we understand that respecting your husband and making him the happiest you can is most important. I never badmouth my SO around him or others and am careful about even "playfully" bad mouthing him (e.g. "You're so silly," or "You're such a dork!"). Even if we're having problems, I don't bring them up around other people. I work it out between us. If they are brought up, if someone tries to only he was in the wrong, I remind them I screwed up too (most often more so than he ever could) and that we're both human beings. Then I work to steer the conversation away from the topic.
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
I believe so, yes. I police myself often so I don't fall back into the old patterns of thinking. The herd mentality is strong despite women often screaming about individuality. It's a terrifying thing once you're on the outside of the herd.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
The new groups have already begun forming (see: here and TRP), but calling it a herd makes it sound like we aren't trying to be better than the "original," so I'd say new terminology is in order.
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
I'm not sure what you mean by "you dismiss that effort and wisdom at your peril." Please clarify.
[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
True. TRP and RPW both aim to move beyond the ignorance created by TBP, though.
[–][deleted] 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Self-policing fosters the habit of objectively identifying one's own shortcomings. This sort of introspection is vital to increasing one's own value, which is the crux of red pill theory.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (11 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]alphabetmod 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (15 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (11 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (9 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link