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

What's your most controversial redpill belief?

trpill

February 12, 2014
16 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 What's your most controversial redpill belief?
Author

trpill

Upvotes 16
Comments 152
Date February 12, 2014 11:32 AM UTC
(12 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1xp8xv/whats_your_most_controversial_redpill_belief/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/whats-your-most-controversial-redpill-belief.11228
https://theredarchive.com/post/11228
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill
Top posts by trpill

A must read! Drive Thru Boyfriend by Solomon II.

450 upvotes
November 21, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

A must read! "Meat Market Economics"

317 upvotes
December 13, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Study: women tend to exhibit bias against unattractive men if they “mess up,” while being more forgiving toward attractive men.

104 upvotes
May 29, 2015
/r/TheRedPill

The Ultimate Truth Of Our Age: There Are No Consequences For Women

91 upvotes
March 15, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Man discoveres the redpill and rants about the nature of women.

86 upvotes
February 27, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Female teachers give boys lower marks, does this match your experiences?

83 upvotes
December 24, 2013
/r/TheRedPill

Man finds himself victim of visual assault from pervy women.

83 upvotes
January 16, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

TIL why lambos are so expensive, you learn a new language when you sit shot gun.

80 upvotes
July 24, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Comments

[–][deleted] 51 points52 points53 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

That there is nothing wrong with power or privilege. It is an aphrodisiac. Don't hate on power or privilege. GET IT.

[–][deleted] 38 points39 points40 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Ever since I was a kid, whenever someone talked about the man keeping everyone down people would generally want to end the keeping down part. I wanted to become the man.

[–]chill_geddy 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Dam son you were like the Gordon gecko of junior high n shit hahha

[–]orographic 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're either a wage slave or a slave driver. I want to be the latter

[–]Haraklus -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Same here.

"Why not become powerful? If you want to keep people down, you can. If you think that's bad, you can prevent others from doing so. But power is necessary for either one."

That's rough paraphrase of something I probably said a million times to deaf ears in high school and college.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The good thing about beeing privileged, is that everything can be your interest, and you don't have to work your self to get it.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Everyone has to work except maybe the 1% but if they slack too much and make bad decisions, they too can bankrupt (although that almost never happens and they can sometimes avoid the consequences when it does).

[–]Manuel_S 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Better to rule in hell, than serve in heaven.

Ole Milton got it right

[–]1 Endorsed Contributormordanus 47 points48 points49 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Women make shitty friends. The average woman can't be as good or loyal of a friend as the average man. They will always look at a friendship as a "what's in it for me" situation.

[–]FinalEquin0x 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Completely agree.

Always keep one though, wing women are extremely effective.

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

I have several extremely attractive female friends. A lot of my male friends call me a "fag" for not fucking them. I have no interest in fucking them, but I do care for them a great deal.

I am part of their world and I always try to help them see things from a man's perspective. I've seen their string of boyfriends/hook ups over the years and learned a lot myself.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can relate, 100%.

[–]HeadingRed 35 points36 points37 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That your personal views on religion, politics, finance, work, climate change, the Illuminati, ford v chevy, paper v plastic, stout or IPA has no bearing on how women think. From the most ardent earth-is-6000-years-old tea party only listens to country music to a crunchy atheist guy that restores old furniture the women we encounter will be surprisingly the same.

Don't let your own views make you think that will change the women in your life. They don't care about what you care about as much as you think- they only act that way.

[–]ss4james_ 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe that men don't define masculinity and women don't define femininity, the sexes do that for each other through sexual selection...

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

sounds like a trollpost. Ill bite.

radical life extension will destroy hypergamy by meddling with supply and demand. this will severely reduce the value of femininity to nothing barely above the resources a female can secure on her own.

[–]mccdizzie 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Wouldn't that just increase the number of old ass bitches I don't want to fuck?

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's essentially what he said.

[–]softclone 0 points0 points0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

no, dummy. That will tear down the wall, and all those old ass bitches will look just like they did when they were 21.

[–]mccdizzie 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Naw he said keeping people alive longer not cracking open the fountain of youth on walled bitches

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

you can't really keep people alive longer without addressing youth. its like making stronger and stronger drugs for heart problems or alzheimers when the chance of developing those gets higher as the population ages.. profitable, but to a point.

everyone worth his salt in medicine knows that personalized preventative treatments that everyone wants will make him far more rich than the latest and greatest statin drug.

people would happily shell 30% or more of their income for true youth/health , they spend more on placebo anti aging creams sometimes than plain medicine.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah I think it will be easier to do the cosmetic changes before they could make over the "engine" itself

you can only speculate now. but a lot of the cosmetic changes are already in. there was a time when the wall hit much faster. the only thing thats masking it is the obesity problem

[–]phoneprofile 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What if they can reverse aging? I think science has made progress. If that's true and women can stay looking younger for a longer time, beta men are screwed even harder lol

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

they will be able too eventually. lack of serious research into this = lots of low hanging fruit.

maybe betas will be screwed forever, maybe supply and demand will shift. maybe rooshVs prediction that you will either have to be super rich or super famous to get laid regularly will come true.

[–]puaSenator 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That the Red Pill was really just a deliriant and Neo is just tripping balls thinking he's some crazy superhero of an alternate reality, when he's really just getting his home robbed.

If you've ever taken a deliriant before you'll know what I'm talking about. You are awake and dreaming at the same time, but just like dreams, you have no capacity to determine what's real and what isn't. You can sit there staring at a powered off TV but swear to God, you've spent the last 2 hours talking to a lion at Disneyland.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That explains the sequels

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It makes more sense to spend money on legal, regulated prostitutes than on regular women.

[–]nninja 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

or spend the money on something better than pussy

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I like your thinking.

[–]nninja 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"You can lose a lot of money chasing women, but you'll never lose women chasing money."

[–][deleted] 36 points37 points38 points 12 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

I believe that anyone recieving direct government welfare or alimony or child support should not be allowed to vote. (This does not include social security.)

[–]TRP VanguardWhisper 31 points32 points33 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Makes sense. People who get free cookies tend to vote for more cookies.

Eventually you run out of dough.

[–]Mintaka7 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

This is the first time I've heard that. Care to elaborate?

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points 12 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

It's a possible solution I'm developing to dismantle the Nanny State and reverse the helpless and dependency mentality that has infected society.

If there are (millions) of people who are incapable of making the necessary decisions to support themselves, why should they have the power to make decisions for all of society through voting?

In early America voting was limited to land-owning white males. Regardless of the ethics of it, this system worked extremely well (relative to today) at preventing the expansion of an oppressive Nanny State. I think women's suffrage has hastened the downfall of society and the American Republic, but removing suffrage from all women is undesirable and unethical. To me it seems that only removing the power of voting from women (and men) who are dependent on the State is a workable compromise.

Also I think it goes without saying to the unplugged here (but maybe not to some lurkers) that voting should have nothing to do with race. A requirement of land-ownership worked when there was a lot more available land, but times have changed.

[–]mccdizzie 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Instead of land ownership, for the modern era it should be tax brackets. If you are sufficiently successful to contribute to funding the state, you get a vote - - you are a share holder. Those who contribute nothing have not earned a voice; simply claiming suffrage because you exist is absurd.

[–]Tringi 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Thats something radically libertarian ancap... I like it :)

As for the land, well, my opinion is simply: if you contribute to the system, you have right to steer its direction, if you don't then you don't.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also it's pretty similar to votes being bought by politicians who will keep the governmental aid policies in place.

[–]mrscumface 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Long-time lurker here, and I've been thinking about what you wrote for a while now. I've come to the conclusion that this would work, but only in a hypothetical society where there is equal opportunity for all of its citizens at birth. This way individual say would be proportionate to merit and merit alone.

However, we do not live in a world with equal economic and social opportunity. For example, generational poverty goes completely unmentioned here in America, but it is an unresolved plague. As another user mentioned, people who get free cookies tend to vote for more. Unfortunately, the reverse of that also seems quite true. To disallow those dependent on the state to vote would remove their protection in a democracy because those with power would only make the disparity larger.

I'll readily admit that what I've said here is a little left of what it seems most TRPers view, and that I did not actually offer a solution to "dismantle the Nanny State" but only critiqued your comment. I do believe the Nanny State is a HUGE issue, but I'm not sure of a way to resolve it that doesn't involve either fucking over disparate groups or completely dismantling the US government.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

You need to re-evaluate your understanding of red pill. Sexual strategy is an aspect, not an encompassment.

You sound like a pissed off liberal. Emotion, a horrible explanation of red pill, and telling me I have "no understanding of history" while offering nothing counter me.

[–]KJL13 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't understand, he said he was right. It's not his job to educate you. /s

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I quoted what this sub is about from the sidebar. You're expanding this redpill stuff to try to wrap your politics in the perceived legitimacy of this subs thoughts about gender relationships.

The logical chasm between the idea that boys were lied to by Disney movies about how to treat women in romantic relationships, or that they didn't have good male role models growing up, to "dismantling the nanny state" is equivalent to an event horizon.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[M] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

The red pill goes beyond sexual strategy.

Read George Orwell's 1984, there's no sexual strategy and it's pure red pill. Ironically the bluepill masses love that book.

It's you who needs to heighten your understanding of the red pill. We are anti-feminist, and feminism is inherently political. Politics are relevant to the red pill to the extent that feminism is relevant to politics.

[–]LickMyUrchin -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

1984, there's no sexual strategy and it's pure red pill

Elaborate?

[–]ModMachiavellianRed 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

The red pill is ultimately about breaking down the illusions which society has constructed around you in the form of smoke and mirrors. It is about using pragmatism and rationalism to break down those barriers and discover the truth behind the paradigm of which you live in. Ultimately - understanding the context with which you live, what your place is and how to elevate that position rather than be a mere product of the system, but how to use the system to move up in it. That's why we focus on self-improvement as well as sexual strategy, they can go hand-in-hand but they are not mutually exclusive. You do not need to improve yourself solely to acquire pussy, you can improve yourself for much greater causes. Sex is like Call of Duty, once you hit a prestige or two you don't really give too many fucks anymore.

In order to get somewhere in your life, you need to understand how things work, what works and why they work. This is why we discuss things other than sexual strategy, some posters share information on the dark triad, an RP area of interest borrowed from psychology which looks at personality traits that lead to great power. These elements are not just useful in attracting the opposite sex, but in making money and securing your interests, whatever those may be.

Being "plugged in" is to be unaware and incapable of recognizing bullshit and swallowing it as false gospel.

Now sexual strategy plays a huge part in this "matrix" of life, however the matrix's red pill and blue pill offered by Morpheus were to do with more than sexual strategy - but to see things for what they truly are. Inclusive of but not exclusively, to do with women.

1984 looked at the repression of civil liberties under the guise of it being for reasons of "betterment" words were taken out of the dictionary as it was understood specific words elicit a certain kind of perception or thought pattern (in real life feminists tried to gender neutralize words by editing professional names such as businessman to businessperson etc) the book speaks of doublespeak, saying one thing on the surface but implying another on a deeper layer. That is to say, they rename the Ministry of War the Ministry of Love and shit like that, everything is upside fucking down - just like the society we've inherited now.

In England the people in London in charge of the military who go and bomb the third world for resources are called The Ministry of Defense, or MoD, if you go back in history you'll see it used to be called The Ministry of War. Coincidence? No. They call war money "defense spending" there's only so far you can go and call something defense. Going half way across the planet and fucking up another governments piece of land is never defense no matter how you hamster/rationalize it, it's an invasion plain and simple... but then the Ministry of Invasion or Ministry of War wouldn't sound quite so palatable to the sensibilities of a "developed society" where barbarianism is looked down upon whilst everyone feigns sophistication is it?

Government's learned to be more Machiavellian and convey an image of self-composed professionalism as to conceal their true image, the shit governments do is horrific, whether they do it out of corruption or in the name of the people is irrelevant - it's all bullshit and lies. The red pill is about seeing through the lies so you can make an informed decision about your life.

There are ideas out there saying how in some places they force you to attend state schools rather than be home schooled and how this allows the governments to shape our minds from a young age, there are strong arguments for how many of the less prestigious schools are simply teaching subservience as to make able menial workers for adulthood (as children are typically quite unruly and difficult to command)

I could go on and on but I think you catch my drift now.

[–]LickMyUrchin -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I suppose I can see where you're coming from. I thought you either meant that the protagonist was somehow a red piller, which seems curious since he ends up totally defeated by the system, or that "Big Brother"/the Party were the embodiment of RP philosophy (it's all about power - boot stamping on a face for eternity).

But you seem to say that 1984 is RP because everyone who has 'taken the RP' seems to believe that every society on earth is moving closer to the dystopian world featured in the book, which seems incredibly alarmist unless you happen to live in North Korea.

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

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Women want a "nice" guy.

Its all the same thing. 1984 is definitely an early version of TRP.

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

Who are the ones that are disproportionately being taken care of by the nanny state? Who are the ones that are disproportionately taking care of the nanny state? What "ism" made this happen? It's easy as hell to see how this is red pill material.

[–]icallmyselfmonster -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree. I also think politicians wages should be tied to the GBP of the country.

[–]RedPill_Rorschach 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That a great deal of mothers, if given a choice between lifetime alimony or the right to see their children would pick the money in a heartbeat.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

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

I have an unusual trend of men raising their children mostly alone in my life. My dad, me, and my best friend and other real-life but more anecdotal examples. It seems the women that are most vocal about how awesome they are at motherhood(not the ones sharing useful info on facebook though) are the first to dump the kids on grandparents or the dad and disappear for periods of time. I suppose it happens at least as often as there are dads that are good at typical "mom's work."

[–]KJL13 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I will say that my mother picked money over my sister and I in the divorce, but it did not mean she would never see us. We saw her every other weekend, lived in the same town, my sister left for college in a year, and I left for college in 4 years. So in reality we were leaving relatively soon anyway. However, I think that my family's case is bizarre to say the least and most mother would pick the kids unless they knew the father could do a better job raising them.

[–]Endorsed Contributorredpillbanana 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Once they invent reasonably-priced sex robots that look and feel like real women, all bets are off for women.

The robots would have to be reasonable at sex. It would be nice if they self-cleaned and would clean up around the house a bit better than a Roomba. Anything beyond that would be icing on the cake, like being able to dress nicely or cook, maybe do some accounting and bill pay.

Guys would have collections of these robots and swap them with buddies when they got bored with them (again, it would be nice if they self-cleaned).

"Let's see, I'll have the one that looks like Ana Delia De Iturrondo. And Christina Hendricks. Throw in Hitomi Tanaka and Kimberly McArthur while you're at it. Finally, give me a Raquel Welch and one of those cavewoman outfits."

Once guys are sleeping with a harem of 10s to their heart's desire, women will have to bring something other than their vagina to the relationship. Careers based on attractiveness such as modeling and porn will disappear, gold-diggers will have nothing left to negotiate with, and there'd be no more nice guys.

[–]Noolaw 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I just hope sex robots dont cost as much as lambos.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No way, rich people dont need sex bots.

[–]CropDuster33 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

At first they would like all new technology, but the price always goes down.

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

Yes, it's the beauty of Moore's law - all we have to do is wait.

[–]BetamaxFaggle 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It would be nice if they self-cleaned and would clean up around the house a bit better than a Roomba.

Roomba + Fleshlight = glory for incel crowd

[–]CropDuster33 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Real women will only be good for having kids, assuming we don't clone humans in the future. She would have to bring money into the picture but women could just buy they're own sex robots that act like billionaire investment banker alpha males.

[–]Endorsed Contributorredpillbanana 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd love to be the person in charge of the billionaire investment banker alpha male personality module. "I'm rich, bitch!"

The "problem" is that the billionaire-like robot doesn't actually have any resources that the woman can extract, and in fact she has to pay to buy/maintain the robot. However, at least she can get off on the alpha behavoir.

[–]Deansdale -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Let's be honest, robots suck. They will probably suck real bad for another 100 years. Contrary to the popular feminist mantra men do want more than a slab of meat to put their dicks into. I'd say the way forward for novel sexual exploits is brain/sensory manipulation. Your brain experiencing having sex with a living, breathing Katy Perry is on a whole other level than having a robot lookalike.

Of course we're not there yet technologically, but I bet some of us will live to see it (just like realistic sexbots).

[–]Endorsed Contributorredpillbanana 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I've never had sex with a robot so I can't comment on the current state of things. However, I hear that sex dolls are quite popular, and they don't even move or talk or do anything but lie there.

As they start introducing robotics into the equation, the experience will start getting more realistic - anything is an improvement over what is available today. And, as thing start improving, they'll be come more popular.

Yeah, it could be 100 years before sex robots stop sucking (or start sucking). Hell, they can't even make a realistic moving image of a human on the big screen yet, and they'll have to struggle with the uncanny valley. But once they come....

Also, never underestimate Moore's law.

Ultimately, it may be easier to do super-realistic VR than super-realistic sex robots.

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

Uncanny valley:


The uncanny valley is a hypothesis in the field of human aesthetics which holds that when human features look and move almost, but not exactly, like natural human beings, it causes a response of revulsion among some human observers. Examples can be found in the fields of robotics, 3D computer animation, and in medical fields such as burn reconstruction, infectious diseases, neurological conditions, and plastic surgery. The "valley" refers to the dip in a graph of the comfort level of humans as subjects move toward a healthy, natural human likeness described in a function of a subject's aesthetic acceptability.

Image i - Repliee Q2


Interesting: Uncanny Valley (Midnight Juggernauts album) | Uncanny Valley (Birds of Avalon album) | Midnight Juggernauts | Masahiro Mori

/u/redpillbanana can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words | flag a glitch

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll probably get downvoted into oblivion:

*I believe most posters on /r/theredpill are primarily concerned with getting validation from women.

*The standard of living will decrease over time due to income inequality. We'll hit a choke point and become a flourishing world after.

*Time spent trying to be a PUA is a waste of time. The time spent going out with the sole purpose of picking up girls is time that could have been spent honing your craft, networking with people who can advance your career and banging escorts.

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points27 points 12 years ago* (25 children) | Copy Link

I don't trust RPW. At least the ordinary cunts and femnazis are overt and easy to spot with their innate foulness. RPW, however, are coaching each other on how to "control/manage" or, as I prefer to think of it, hide these tendencies. This, however, then collides head-on with AWALT.

tl/dr: No woman can be trusted.

Edit: So, yeah umm this thread is supposed to be about controversial ideas. Why am I getting shit again?

[–]arinot 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

... explain to me what's wrong about women recognizing and attempting to control their tendencies? Because I thought this sub was also about controlling yourself.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's not that something is "wrong" with it, it's that it's not possible. For example (and i'm assuming you are hetero here) try to make yourself attracted to dudes. Imma bet you can't do it. So they, no matter how hard and earnestly they try, will never rid themselves of their hypergamous, solipsistic ways.

[–]MSoftHarem 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

All men have natural tendencies to kill, plunder, and fuck everything they find attractive, but most of us are able to balance these out and form fairly peaceful societies. While I won't disagree all women have similar destructive instincts if left unchecked, why aren't they able to also balance them out? AWALT, make no mistake, but that doesn't mean all women are like that to the same degree. It was never about getting rid of our instincts for either sex, because that is impossible, merely recognizing these instincts and calibrating accordingly for your desired sexual strategy.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

RPW doesn't turn women into lesbians. Besides, a natural tendency is not a 100% guarantee, it's just a tendency, that, if checked, absolutely can be controlled. What you are trying to say is that if anyone want anything it is impossible for them to resist, which is false.

[–]12FAM0US 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I always thought that was a useless sub. woman's sexual strategy works just fine. women get to fuck the hunks and then leech money off the geeks. very few of us men get to fuck the sluts and then marry the virgins, that's a privilege :) really the best subreddits for female sexual strategy are /r/fitness /r/makeupaddiction and /r/cooking

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Disagree. RPW preaches submission and the woman making themselves sexually available. Nothing works better IMO to create a happy relationship. RPW is not about getting laid but about securing commitment in return for poon-tang since, as you point out, female sexual strategy works fine. RPW's want a LTR and are a very honest group IMO.

[–]Myrrun 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

By that logic, wouldn't the best way thing to do to just ignore this subreddit and go browse /r/Investing, /r/PersonalFinance and shit like that?

[–]12FAM0US -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

you want girls to like you just for your money?

[–]Myrrun 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

As much as I'm sure girls want to be liked for their body and cooking skills.

[+]12FAM0US -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the difference being that if you're the provider and nothing more, she will still want to seek out men she's actually attracted to. whereas if a girl offers me nothing but sex and food, i am very much satisfied. that shit will keep me around. a wise girl will understand that if she wants to be wanted, that's the way to do it. that's not to understate the importance of financial security, even if not for sustaining a family but just for your own sake. i do not disagree with you there.

[–]2comment -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, but geeks aren't equivalent to virgins in women's eyes in SMV. The hunks are. They 'settle' for geeks. So in a way they fail just like men, but with the 80/20 rule meaning that most women gave it up to the minority of men.

[–]12FAM0US -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

good point. a woman who fails to find a quality man to impregnate her is failing from a biological perspective, but when she fails to lock down a provider then she is failing financially. carousel-riding is a lose-lose for almost everybody. these things used to come in one package until all the FeelGoodBullshit™ and progressive era, now girls have to choose between a real man and a good man. the point of my post is that a lot of girls still get both, just not in one package. whereas men get screwed unless you're cream of the crop

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

The way I see it, every man should look for a RPW. I think just fucking around like a monkey is something a boy does, an alpha finds a woman worthy of monogamy just out of respect for finding the woman who is better than them all.

I've had my share of pussy, I don't need to keep chasing it or deceiving stupid women into fucking me. At a certain point it just becomes boring, and I crave a true friendship with the person I have sex with. The end goal is to find one that's worth a damn, and keep her.

[–]Kharn0 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Wouldn't you want to be with a woman that knew that she had to keep in shape, pull her weight(sometimes more) around the house, had sex even if she wasn't in the mood and fought her instincts to cheat?

[–]ModAerobus 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Upvoted not because I agree with it that much but because it is controversial.

[–]Deansdale 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So, yeah umm this thread is supposed to be about controversial ideas. Why am I getting shit again?

I didn't read the replies yet but it's a conversation, my friend. People tend to weigh in on interesting issues. Just like I will do now:

What you described here is a very low-level way of looking at things. Most people know nothing about their own instincts, and so they are controlled by them, just like animals. They way out of this, the way up is to learn about your instincts, understand them, and bring them under conscious control as much as possible. (95% of modern people haughtily imagine they're already at the last step but they are nowhere near of even the first.) This not only elevates you to a higher existence than that of animals and allows you to have more control over your own life, it also helps you to enjoy those instincts more. What RP women are supposedly doing is exactly this. They have a higher level of consciousness than the average woman, and you should appreciate this instead of being suspicious.

[–]enticingasthatmaybe 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

All women are Red Pill Women

It's never news to her that she prefers strength and dominance. It's only news to men who lacked a proper education.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

glad someone said it.

RPW content is surprisingly obvious and mainstream.

[–]NakedAndBehindYou2 points 12 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

I've always viewed RPW as sort of... female groupies of TRP; girls who are trying to be "in" with the guys here but who don't actually believe or use the information presented here. Since TRP was originally conceived by men, for men, it really makes no sense to have women involved in the community. This is especially true since all of our dictums are based on "believe what women do, not what they say" which by default requires no female input on the matters discussed here, since all of our theories are based on observation of women, not communication with them.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

i normally dont intrude here, but i do have to say that if you think we are just groupies of TRP you havent read us. trp is young men who dont want relationships, and thats fine, most of us come out of the man-o-sphere and dont even read TRP. some of our best girls are the girlfriends of guys who read TRP and showed it to their girlfriends and they got it. we're trying to give women advice on how to be better partners to masculine men, that's all

[–]TempestTcup 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No we go by the same principles as TRP but we are going for commitment and marriage (instead of riding the cock carousel) while improving ourselves by looking good, staying thin, being sweet, cooking well and being very enthusiastic towards sex. Our goal is happier husbands and marriages.

[–]fiat_lux_ 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sounds a lot like an Original Sin that can't be forgiven or even dealt with. I thought we were supposed to judge based on action more than feelings and "inner character".

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We do. With women it isn't a question of if, it's when.

[–]no_game_player -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Think of it from the mod perspective: what better way to keep TRP pure than to exile those who can't be trusted to a separate sub for their issues and ignore? ;-p

Not say's that's this case. rps is far more benevolent than I would be. I'm more from the Dogbert School of Modship style...

Edit: Speaking from a very light skimming of the sub a while back. Not referring to anything recent or anything in particular. Not intended to be construed as anything other than glowing praise to rps, may the name be writ forever, et. al. etc.

[–]Endorsed ContributorMarsupian 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Not a TRP belief (Im not sure there is such a thing, TRP is about observing nature, understanding it and then base a life strategy on it all mostly based on evolutionary biology as that is the basis of what we are doing on this planet, I dont see where beliefs come in).

Anyway I think that medical care is getting out of control which leads to overpopulation, keeping people alive to suffer needlessly (imo), absurd costs and reducing the urgency to lead a healthy active life. All because we put way too much value on peoples lives and are afraid to let someone pass away.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

World Pop is stabilising, expect it to peak off it about 8 Billion and slowly decrease for a while, unless people live much, much longer.

[–]Endorsed ContributorMarsupian -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You are probably right, still I think a lower population would be a good thing.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I understand the reasoning, but its not just medicine that explodes a population.

[–]nninja 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol BP is gonna be all over this for weeks.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The only women worth marrying were either raised by traditionally-minded parents, or are devoutly religious themselves.

[–]TheCasualHistorian 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That sleeping with women involved in any kind of commitment is totally okay.

My policy is that if I know the guy and/or have some modicum of respect for him I won't do it. But, she's a big girl and can make her own big girl decisions. It's not my job to decide for her whether or not she sleeps around. If she's willing to do it with me, she's willing to do it with someone else - so it might as well be me.

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

I've always been surprised this was controversial around here. I agree.

The corollary of course is not to have a relationship with someone after something like that, but that's obvious.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe the female nature comes in phases and that women in some ways are incomplete males as far as psychological development is concerned.

Children, male and female are solipsistic but boys are forced to move past this because their needs and desires are less important than everyone elses and their desires and instincts are counter intuitive to a peaceful and prosperous civilization. This shit get's Redirected and reprogrammed in our youths so instead of forming clans and murdering each other over land and women at 15 we play and compete in more directed ways, we're given outlets redirecting our energies. Girls aren't redirected and channeled like boys. Maternal instincts are cultivated and sexuality is programed; in the old days women were shielded, not allowed to remain naive but raised to be vigilant protectors and gate keepers of sex and remain pure. It was a market and "scarcity" was used to drive up demand and value, like with Diamonds. Over time the market changed and women tried to adapt strategies to keep their market value. Most lie about everything so that they look like a good deal but some women actually have the balls to be what they think is a good deal. It boils down to hedonism and solipsism which are cultivated or destroyed over their development.

The Hypergamy is fundamental in female psychology but it can carry more or less weight based on her up bringing factors like sexual experiences, religiosity, male and female role models, music, radio, and television all of this builds a platform where she either fights natural tendencies, flies from them or folds to them this creates the illusions of NAWALT and AWALT. Except for a few freaks of nature all women are playing by the same rules in that they share reproductive instincts like hypergamy.

A step further, western child rearing used to be solid but is now shit; boys are taught wrong and girls aren't taught at all another way of saying this might be that boys are taught to be women and girls are taught to be teenage boys.

TL;DR: Solipsism is a product of imaturity not a fundamental part of female psychology; hypergamy is a fundamental part of their psychology which means means there are snowflakes but compare them with normal rain and they are both just water.

[–]Stopher 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I can't believe it's not butter is actually butter.

[–]mccdizzie 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

http://i.imgur.com/EdYMwkw.jpg

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bitches be crazy, man.

[–]MSoftHarem 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No women in politics, big business, or combat, period. Also, severely restrict voting rights criteria so most men, and the vast majority of women will not meet it.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow, and I thought I was the only one who secretly wished for this. Except that maybe not strictly all women. Because some women are really manly and logical/reasonable, more reasonable than most men are. So it would be a loss to restrict those of participation. But a test/requirements - absolutely.

[–]unsungman6 points 12 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

The standard of living will dramatically decline going forward...and this will be a good thing.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]unsungman2 points 12 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Well, it's a conclusion I've drawn from both my research and investment analysts. One even joked that they hope there's enough gizmos to keep people "entertained" (aka distracted) enough to not notice the relative decline. I think you're spot on for the timeframe but the world in 20 years will probably be really different than what we know today. I'm always hesitant to project that far into the future...but I read stuff by people who do (like George Friedman and Jacques Attali)

Anyway, I say it's a "good" thing because I think the whole wasteful/mindless consumption in the US isn't healthy (esp for building personal relationships and a solid family). I'm not one of those hippy anti-consumer types (I <3 Wall Street)...I just think think materialism is feminine.

Shoot, the root word for materialism is mater. That says something about its femininity as a phenomenon. I understand that having fly clothes and a nice car can pull chicks...but it's just a means to an end. I'd like to imagine that most guys understand that that their manhood isn't determined by their car/clothes. I'm not too confident in that though....esp with people my age.

Don't want to ramble here...so I guess I can attempt a decent TL;DR:

Women my age (millennials) were raised expecting princess living standards in life. As the decline comes...it will become clear that it's impossible to attain the princess standard of living when more and more people are living as paupers.

Kinda twisted, but I think this will be a good thing.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're very, very smart. I'm going to stalk your comments and see what else you've written.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]whateverdipshit 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The concept of survival of the fittest and egalitarianism are incompatible.

[–]futurama8908 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Women should get the same rights, respect, and protection that are given to children. No more, no less.

[–]Lovesbrownies 8 points8 points8 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

As much as I would like to agree with you, that means they wouldn't be allowed to drive a vehicle, shoot a gun, get a tattoo, drink alcohol or have sex... Correct me if I'm wrong but all sexual intercourse involving a woman would be illegal. No heterosexual couples or lesbians would be allowed, only homosexual men would be allowed to have sex with each other.

[–]futurama890-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well actually correct me if i'm wrong, but I don't believe it is in any way illegal for minors to have sex with each other. But your point is taken that 'protection' would be a definite exception.

[–]Lovesbrownies0 points 12 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

You're right, so lesbians would be allowed. However, heterosexual couples would still be off the table if woman were considered "children" in this scenario. It would be considered statutory rape, not to mention every nude photo of a woman would be considered child-porn.

[–]jamboy1 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

So no voting?

[–]Lovesbrownies16 points 12 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

and free movie tickets.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If they don't sign up for selective services at 18 like males do, then no, no voting.

[–]Deansdale -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women should get the same rights, respect, and protection that are given to children. No more, no less.

Erhm, let men, women and children be three distinct categories all having their own balanced set of rights and responsibilities - just like it was in the old days. The century-long experiment in the west trying to prove that men and women are the same failed miserably.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Call me crazy; but I want to date a woman who is capable of more than simply bringing cooking cleaning and fucking. What limited individual would confine themselves to a woman who is so weak-minded and dull to actually believe most if not all of this horse shit, is beyond me.

What would this world be like without the great women of past, women like Amelia Earhart or Rosa Parks. Without the women who have won the Nobel Peace Prize for the last 110 years. To me it sounds like a pretty dull life, but then again to dull-witted personalities like you, probably take the 'bigotry' route and fail to see what a shitty world you'd live in without the strong independent and versatile women who've helped craft the world into what it is today.

[–]feelsbeforereals -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

still plugged in? every woman is rosa parks and amelia earhart apparently

there is a reason you can name 2 influential women and i can name 200 influential men.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well of course you can name 200 influential men because we've spent the last millennium oppressing women and making them feel like they are inferior then us when they aren't. Keep a dog caged and then yell at it for not accomplishing anything, pretty much what you are a doing.

Also, rattling off 200 names defeats the purpose of an example. But if you'd like me to start shooting out influential women who have accomplished more than you. I'll be more than happy to.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Call me crazy; but I want to date a woman who is capable of more than simply bringing cooking cleaning and fucking.

I don't.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That's your loss. And an incredible one at that. You are all looking at this in the absolute wrong manner. You think being a man is dominating over those you think are weaker then you. Instead of seeking out those who will make you stronger as a person. Sad to think after the thousands of years of advancement in the human race people like you still fucking exist.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You don't know what I think. You know nothing about me. You however are being condescending and belligerent. You have projected much into my post. After thousands of years you would think the human race would be more civil on the Internet.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't have to know what you think or anything about you. The fact that you would only want a woman who cooks cleans and fucks is so narrow-minded and shallow.

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

Again that's just what you think.

[–]Jessie_James 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That men who pick up women who are not single (i.e., married/have a boyfriend) are basing their success off of a mistaken believe that dishonesty is an attractive trait to women. As a result, they mostly experience women who themselves are dishonest. This leads to the belief that most or all women are dishonest and ultimately leads to dissatisfaction with women for a large number of these men who then end up single because they cannot find a woman they trust to not cheat on him!

[+]1spicy_fries -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

That the promotion of homo culture is damaging to society. For young men to honestly believe that it is totally okay to paint their fingernails, try on hosiery, and take it up the ass is beyond ridiculous.

That kind of behavior should be kept in the closet.

Just this morning this young guy working at the deli handed me my order. I thought he was a lesbian because his T-level was so low. He almost had tiny breasts. He had earlobe plugs and was wearing nail polish.

I was completed disgusted. "How can your father let you dress like that boy?"

Sadly, his father is probably no where around.

Even in this subreddit, too many peeps have swallow the "gay pill" and call anyone who believes otherwise "bigots."

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]KJL13 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I agree. If you're gay, fine keep it to yourself. This gay pride bullshit and flaming homos are ridiculous. You're still and man and you should act like it.

[–]nninja -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I dunno I see gays as somewhat confused, there must be some imbalance or whatever. I just don't give a fuck about them

[–]erich_von_stalhein -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Maybe they're smart and got sick of women early on.

[–]nninja -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

only way to win is to not play right?

[–]erich_von_stalhein -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How about a nice game of chess?

[–]KJL13 -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Obviously they are off. If they weren't they wouldn't be fucking dudes, but that statement isn't PC.

Gays are totally normal. /s

[–]heist_of_saint_graft 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not sure if this would be controversial here, but it seems not be talked about at length. My background as a Dominant in the BDSM world has taught me this: women need to be fucked violently. Your domination cannot start or end at the bedroom. Long hair is best for pulling. All girls can be made to follow you by judicious application of hands to her pressure points. Don't ask permission to come on her face or mouth, just do it. Etc.

[–]Endorsed ContributorLastRevision -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women should have never been legally permitted to vote.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Truth, by it's very definition, cannot be "controversial". I smell a troll.

[–]birdwontquit 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It was once a controversial truth that the earth was not the center of the universe.

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

Right. And before TRP, it was a controversial idea that women were hypergamous sluts. Once upon a time , some would argue otherwise, that these women were all princesses who were very selective and prudent about who was allowed in their vagina, i.e., they were looking for guys who were "nice" to them and who proved themselves as worthy suitors. But now we have TRP, so we've now proven the truth. Over and over again.

[–]KJL13 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's retarded. Truth can be controversial. This entire sub is proof of that.

[+]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The sky is blue. Debate me.

[–]KJL13 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

First of all, you never responded to my truth that is actually controversial.

Secondly, sure the sky isn't blue. It is actually clear. It just appears to be blue because the atmosphere scatter blue light the most strongly. Thus is appears blue under normal conditions and changes colors when those conditions change.

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

Truth can be controversial when society is sick enough to reject truth.

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

Even if so, I found some exchanges here actually very interesting.

[–]TfahsNoriEht -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The moon is really a secret government space station for conducting tests on extraterrestrial beings.

[–]Mintaka7 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

woah, that was unexpected.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TfahsNoriEht 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's obviously a joke

[–]HatchbacksandTattoos -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Learned this from Patrice O'Neal in talking about a woman he said "I'm better than you!", he went on to say basically that men are better than women in most ways, and I feel like to really leave the matrix and embrace the red pill way of life...you need to internalize that belief with humility

[+]ilike2partyhowaboutu -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is no such thing as "unplanned pregnancy" one of the people having sex planned for an unprotected penis to be inside her.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

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