~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
saintgeorge777
[+][deleted] 5 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[+]Maxdalf-14 points-13 points-12 points 5 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
What the fuck do you want, then? A goddamn Mennonite?
[–]Odd-Reference-3216 points17 points18 points 5 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
He's just stating a fact. It's pretty much the modern version of Briffault's Law. Briffault was born in the 1800's in case you didn't know.
[+]Maxdalf-15 points-14 points-13 points 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
“Stating a fact”
You have to provide arguments for things, not just state them as fact. Access reason for your arguments, it’s available to all of us.
[–]Odd-Reference-329 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
I did provide an argument. Read Briffault's Law, and you'll see that what he said pretty much the modern version of it. Briffault's Law is a fact. Where's your counter argument, Mr. Master Debater?
[+]Maxdalf-8 points-7 points-6 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
That isn’t any kind of argument, and you know it isn’t. This sub is just turning into a neck beard circle-jerk.
[–]Odd-Reference-321 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Here's an idea! Try pointing out what you disagree with, specifically. You know that way we could have civil discussion? You're engaging in the fallacy of ad hominem. It's is way worse than simply having a bad argument.
[–]Maxdalf-2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
You made a positive claim, so you have to provide an argument supporting it. That’s the difference between positive and negative claims or beliefs.
There are women who are around men that they do not gain anything from. So, “Briffault’s Law” is false.
Even if it was true, there is no way you can derive “any woman with a smartphone is a lost cause” from it. I would have committed a fallacy if I based my argument upon your idiocy, but I only pointed it out.
[–]Odd-Reference-320 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Let's be clear about something. Are we going to have a civilized discussion or not? If you want to stick to name-calling, we can terminate this right now. Stop acting like a petulant child. No, I did not just call you a petulant child. However, you are acting like one. Anymore of this neck-beard idiocy bullshit, and we're done.
Your pointing out that there are exceptions to Briffault’s Law doesn't make it false. There are exceptions to every rule. In fact, you haven't even gone through the trouble of citing even one specific exception to prove your case. How's that for a non-argument?
It’s all but impossible to conceive of a rule concerning human female psychology that is appropriate for every single case. In a world where 3.5 billion females exist, you'd most certainly be able to find a handful that don't fit Briffault's parameters. However, for the majority of women, Briffault's Law does hold-up.
All Briffault’s Law does is describe what hypergamy looks like. Women can decide to obey their hypergamic instincts or not. 70% of divorces are initiated by women, because women derive a benefit from breaking the marriage contract. That single stat shows me that a majority of women are more likely give-in to their base instincts than to act in a moral manner.
u/Losus4 makes a valid point. If we're playing the odds, and I only have a 30% chance of winning. I'm not going to play that game.
[–]Maxdalf-1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Your words are an extension of your intelligence, so I’ll judge you by such. If you’d prefer to hear that you’re acting like an idiot or a neck beard, then read my previous comments as such.
Briffault’s Law states an absolute, so any exception leads to a contradiction being derived. This is impossible. What evidence is needed? You just granted that there are exceptions, validating my point. Besides, even if you thought some sort of empirical evidence is needed, you would need to prove every single woman on the planet is that particular way, as you, again, have the burden of proof.
Again, majorities make no difference when speaking in absolutes.
Divorce rates do not necessitate some psychological difference. As you’ve stated it, Briffault’s law is a psychological claim. Without some evidence and reasoning to show that there is causation there, then there is no reason to assume that phenomenon is a consequence of an exclusively female psychology.
I don’t care what games people think they are or aren’t playing, as they have no bearing on the argument.
[–]tsundokume6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I think he’s trying to argue that in excess of constant attention, something that is readily and consistently available with smartphones nowadays, these women will adopt a new addiction to attention. I don’t have numbers to back this up but this is so self-evident in society, women will put themselves in harms way for a selfie and there are so many teen girls desperate to e-date older guys and post nudes of themselves online before graduating high school. Even when we all know it’s bad, you can’t shake off that addiction because the dopamine rush from being validated on your looks to these women is too great. That’s why we have a million different porn subs here on Reddit.
[–]Maxdalf1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
First decent reply I’ve gotten on this sub in ages. Thanks. I agree with your argument, as I went through public school and undergrad and saw the way a good majority of women act I started to understand how women are conditioned by culture to act in those ways. I don’t see how people then get “any woman with a smartphone is going to cheat on you” out of that, though. There’s a big difference between pointing out trends in current culture and making some angry, generalizing statement that doesn’t follow.
[–]tsundokume1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This sub has people from many different walks of life. And from that many different beliefs come with it. You have cosmopolitans like I’m assuming you and then you have traditional “reject modernity bring back traditionalism” types like OP. I honestly think the political posts are ultra cringe here because being MGTOW doesn’t mean traditional or conservative, it just means not caring about what other people say. I also don’t like the posts where men here complain about how other men dress or act. It’s not our place to say what is best or not. Letting people be is what it’s all about.
[–]beatstorelax2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
is simple. just google any tinder research... or even instagram.
[–]fiasco_jack2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nahhh man Amish chicks are where it’s at.
[–]69jakes691 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
So your Mom is Mennonite?? Lol
[–]Maxdalf-1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You’re in MGTOW trying to make some shitty joke, yet your profile is full of you fucking your fat, ugly, Asian partner. You seem a little confused.
[–]69jakes690 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not as confused as your mom she thinks your too sensitive and should chill !
[–]gentle_lemon11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Nothing sexier than track marks.
[–]YonnieFrodo6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Holes in face by meth picking. Only way to go bro
[–]DorenAlexander2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dunno man. There's something about dragging a girl through a weekend coke and x bender.
After it's over, they will never be the same.
[–]dbfkf8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're eliminating 99%. Good.
Now GYOW.
[–]beatstorelax4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
you forgot "raw doggy with drug dealers"
[–]Bri-701 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
These bus stop ads are too real.
[–]Bri-700 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Wait,.. did Twitter and MySpace exist in the same time and space?
[–]22160303210 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Twitter took off in '07 and MySpace peaked in '08 so there was at least a couple years of overlap.
[–]Usual_Sir0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Do they understand the word ghost?
[–]marcmil10 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
MySpace?!?
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[+][deleted] (19 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[+]Maxdalf-14 points-13 points-12 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]Odd-Reference-3216 points17 points18 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[+]Maxdalf-15 points-14 points-13 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Odd-Reference-329 points10 points11 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]Maxdalf-8 points-7 points-6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Odd-Reference-321 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Maxdalf-2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Odd-Reference-320 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Maxdalf-1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]tsundokume6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Maxdalf1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tsundokume1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]beatstorelax2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fiasco_jack2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]69jakes691 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Maxdalf-1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]69jakes690 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gentle_lemon11 points12 points13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]YonnieFrodo6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DorenAlexander2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dbfkf8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]beatstorelax4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Bri-701 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Bri-700 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]22160303210 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Usual_Sir0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]marcmil10 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link