TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Marriage is Dead, Long Live Marriage | Feminism denies that woman are moral agents even capable of choice – like blacks, homosexuals, and illegal immigrants – they exist only as victims, moral mascots to be subsidized by kulak white males

0ccidentalist

April 5, 2014
35 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Marriage is Dead, Long Live Marriage | Feminism denies that woman are moral agents even capable of choice – like blacks, homosexuals, and illegal immigrants – they exist only as victims, moral mascots to be subsidized by kulak white males
Author

0ccidentalist

Upvotes 35
Comments 10
Date April 5, 2014 1:24 PM UTC
(12 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/229p76/marriage_is_dead_long_live_marriage_feminism/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/marriage-is-dead-long-live-marriage-feminism.230498
https://theredarchive.com/post/230498
Red Pill terms in post
feminismthe red pill
Top posts by 0ccidentalist

'Tokal' | A serious look at polygamy

6 upvotes
June 15, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Comments

[–]atleastitsnotaids19 points20 points21 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We talk about female solipsism ego-centrism so much here, but I think it is impossible for most guys to ever grasp the true extent of it.

Never, ever forget that you only exist in her world as an accessory. A temporary, replaceable extension of herself. You are not a fully formed human to her. You are an automaton whose worth is directly proportional to how well the services you are able provide relate to her desires in that moment.

It is impossible for most guys to fully grasp this because, try as they might to view women as nothing more than sex objects, to be used in discarded at will, it is extremely difficult to overcome the instincts they feel to care for and protect women as we do children. Women have no such instincts towards men. They do not care about us except for what we can do for them. Remember this and comport yourself accordingly.

[–]12FAM0US34 points35 points36 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

always entertaining to see how feminists claim minorities as part of their camp "we are all allies against the white patriarchy!" failing to realize that hispanic culture is highly family oriented, that african-american culture is one of the most male-dominant in the world, and that for most eastern cultures the women are straight up property. at the end of the day, your average young white male (the absolute epitome of evil and injustice) is likely the most liberal and tolerant person you can encounter. all this false sympathy for minorities is only popular because it makes their cause (feminism or liberalism in general) seem noble. assume ulterior motives until proven otherwise.

[–]jacks100018 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's the irony of the leftist coalition. Gay marriage was defeated in California largely by black voters, which tend to be "economically liberal" but quite "socially conservative" and Christian.

Whites in the lefty coalition are usually there for socially liberal reasons, which makes them strange bedfellows with peoples of color.

It's even more ironic for Ashkenazi Jews, who tend to vote Democratic 85% plus, are extreme liberals on most social issues, and very much consider themselves to be victims of the evil WASPs who kept grandpa out of the golf club.

So Jews vote with the very populations that actually are "anti-semitic" - blacks, mestizos, etc.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedPillDad7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fascinating... Seems the only thing uniting them is a personal sense of victimhood and a common enemy to rail against.

[–]2renzy778 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As for the women who don’t want to return to a more honorable practice, they should be treated accordingly. They want temporary emotional satisfaction, momentary excitement, and no commitment.

Pretty much, they still expect commitment from men, they just don't want to have to provide any in return. Men are still expected to be "reliable husbands and fathers" [1] but in return they get the privilege of being treated as disposable fifth wheels to be discarded if and when the little woman decides that she's "not haaaapppy".

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/181041/

[–]WanderRhino2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I am not white and I live in North America. This woman doesn't represent me or speak for me

[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes she does. Why do you hate your race, shitlord?

/s

[–]JJTheJetPlane56570 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What really killed marriage was its transformation into a celebration of individual love and personal choice. Once it’s conceded that love is simply a question of opinion for the two people involved, how can one oppose liberalizing divorce laws? Love fades. Why not legalize interracial marriage? After all, the heart wants what it wants. And once, racial considerations are dismissed as irrelevant, as Slate reasonably asks, why not polygamy? In fact, why “privilege” this social construct known as the family at all? And of course, smoothly pivoting from arguments about why gay marriage is about “love,” the homosexual movement is now admitting that is their real position, logically enough. Get ready for a tenured parasite to lecture you about your “family privilege,” cisgender scum.

What's the point of this paragraph? I'm reading it as racist and anti-homosexual, but I wanted to check my comprehension before I wrecked myself..

[–]2johnnight3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

No, that's not it. It's a weak copypasta of what Aurini wrote.

The point is that marriage was in the modern times purposefully defined as a "union of loving people" and this was the moral argument behind the legalization of interracial marriage. If somebody was opposed to it, he was a bad person, who is against love. Gay marriage is also about love and whoever is opposed to it is therefore a bad person.

The issue here is that marriage historically was always a procreation contract (sanctified by the authority of gods). It's sole purpose was to create a family unit, which is much more efficient at producing quality offspring than anything else we know. Since homosexuals are not capable at having offspring by natural means, they should not enjoy the legal privilege that the state gives to what is called a family. (I know, in vitro and surrogacy change that, but two homosexuals still cannot have a child with a combined DNA).

The issue here is not to be anti-homosexual but to understand what exactly this thing called marriage is and why people should enter into it. There are consequences to the definition:

  • If marriage is about love, then it should be dissolved when one of the persons entering into it is no longer in love with the other. This is the moral basis for frivorce!
  • If marriage is about children, then the person demanding a divorce is an immoral monster, who puts HER personal happiness above the well-being of her children.

[–]JJTheJetPlane56571 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ahh, okay. Thanks for helping clearing that up for me! My reading comprehension failed me a bit

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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