TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • 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/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/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • 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 Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

The Progressive War on Science

Are_You_A_Real_Man

April 1, 2013
0 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Archived from /r/TheRedPill

r/TheRedPill is a subreddit for discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/TheRedPill archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title The Progressive War on Science
Author

Are_You_A_Real_Man

Upvotes 0
Comments 14
Date April 1, 2013 7:50 PM UTC
(13 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1bg3rk/the_progressive_war_on_science/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/the-progressive-war-on-science.235008
https://theredarchive.com/post/235008
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill
Top posts by Are_You_A_Real_Man

Men, the Gender Wars Are Over — We Won

27 upvotes
April 23, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Don’t Date Girls With Borderline Personality Disorder

27 upvotes
April 16, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

idatedthatdouche.com, hamsters gonna hamst.

27 upvotes
March 28, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Crazy People Shouldn't Own Guns, But Who Decides Who Is Crazy? Politically Progressive Women.

25 upvotes
April 21, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Google Glass: More technology to ruin the dating market

23 upvotes
April 27, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

GQ magazine pandering to feminist ideology

23 upvotes
April 9, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

This is what we're supposed to find attractive?

14 upvotes
April 22, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Dr. Seuss's Anti-cuckolding Story

10 upvotes
March 19, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Comments

[–]themoor14 points 13 years ago [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

I interact with academics a lot, mostly "progressive" social science types.

I'm often sympathetic to some of their views but not all.

A funny thing I've observed. Most left/progressive/feminist academics have no problem slamming the attempts by creationists to get intelligent design and even biblical creationism into the schools. Almost to a person, they all accept evolution by natural selection as the explanation of the diversity of species. As such, they accept that humans evolved from the family tree of sapiens/primates.

That said, they also tend to see gender as 100% social construct. This they tend to believe basically because their theories tell them this and they tend to have little knowledge of actual hard research on the issue that looks at biology and psychology.

Anyway, I've often asked them this question: Are you arguing that the influence of evolution and biology simply stopped the moment the modern human genotype came to be? That our primate ancestors were strongly influenced by biology and natural selection but once our genetic cousins evolved that influence simply ceased to have any effect whatsoever?

They often look a bit nonplussed, like they have never even entertained the question.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There really is no scientific argument supporting the whole gender is a social construct argument. Plenty of evidence pointing towards there being a biological argument, where a bulk of gender differences can be explained via hormonal balance.

[–]rkg-pua-1 points 13 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

There really is no scientific argument supporting the whole gender is a social construct argument.

Hmm... There are instances of children who were raised in isolation which strongly supports the gender as a social construction idea; isolation stories also support the impact of socialization. With that said, I do agree with your point about biology, though evidence does exist on the sociological side as well.

[–]themoor7 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Correct, but to a point. And that was one of my points in the original post.

Different cultures have different "norms" when it comes to how to display their version of femininity and masculinity. They also have a massive variety of sexual behaviors. That said, the social constructionists tend to simply argue/conclude that male-female sexual attraction is 100% fluid and socially programmed.

That is a conclusion by argument and wishful thinking. The OVERALL pattern is males are attracted to females - only related to physical criteria here - that have an hourglass curve with displays of fertility and health. There is certain a bell curve around this "ideal" that varies with individual and cultural factors, but there is NO PLACE that idealizes women who are 300lbs and sloths.

Because of the manophere's bent, they will emphasize the sexual/physical sides of attraction, and that's fine, though it is not all there is. At the same time, the progressive apologists for dogma will argue that it's all invented, which is a lie, and thus they need to be called out on that BS.

Also, they seem to argue, implicitly that the construction of sexuality is mainly done to men.... it is us who are trapped in socially invented notions of sexual desire. Have you ever seen a woman argue, EVER?, that a 300lb shlub should be sexually desirable because of his achievements and beauty on the inside? Where's that Cosmo article?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Academia is like religion. Science should be fair and impartial, just like Christianity should have been about love and the common man and charity. Yet we still end up with the Catholic Church and the bureaucracy of Academia being similar.

Don't get me wrong, there's still a ton of good science out there, but sometimes it seems like the simple presence of a study denotes truth to people who want to believe the truth.

[–]r_rships_account 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Just BTW, are you "go at birth for Al Gore" or "goat-birth for Al Gore"?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Duh

[–]Colorful_Harvest1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Someone should do a research study on cognitive dissonance in Academia.

Personally, I'm a fan of teaching creationism in all school curriculums, on the basis that it'll be hilarious.

[–]Heuristics[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I went to a government run school in Sweden and during biology class we actually were taught about creationism, the teacher invited some Jehovas whitnesses that explained their views and the class asked them questions afterwards.

And you know what? it was fun and not one of the students got killed in the process. Apparently this is very unusual and people get a bit surprised when i tell this story...

[–]Are_You_A_Real_Man[S] 7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In America, we frequently hear the bromide that conservatives are mainly responsible for the war on science.

It's time to reexamine this notion, as just as much codswallop is uttered on the liberal side.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Codwallop and pablum!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Richard Lippa, a psychologist at California State University, Fullerton, has recently observed that “[c]ontemporary gender researchers, particularly those who adopt social constructionist and feminist ideologies, often reject the notion that biologic factors directly cause gender differences.” Feminist beliefs are so contrary to mainstream biology, Berezow and Campbell concur, “it is fair to compare their anti-science rhetoric to that of evolution-denying creationists.”

If you haven't seen it before, I'd recommend the documentary Brainwashing, which compares and contrasts "gender researchers" and actual scientists. It would be very funny if it wasn't for the fact that the "gender researchers" are the ones who get to design policy and legislation.

Modern leftist intellectual liberals aren't always classically liberal, in the sense of being prepared to let the facts lead them to a conclusion, as opposed to deciding in advance what an acceptable conclusion must be. This can lead to some bad science..

Such people also usually think themselves to be axiomatically intelligent, good and decent because of their obviously (to them) righteous ideals. They take it as a given that anyone who disagrees with them on any fundamental issue is, ipso facto, stupid, ignorant, selfish, mean-spirited, or just plain evil.

[–]r_rships_account 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Modern leftist intellectual liberals [2] aren't always classically liberal

"Aren't always"? Try "are almost never."

[–]Are_You_A_Real_Man2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And the steady trickle of downvotes continues.

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