TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

2ndclassgender Archive

View 0 posts and 43 comments by 2ndclassgender on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

It's "Rice Warner Actuaries". Here's a link to a newspaper article on the subject: http://www.smh.com.au/business/win-for-women-in-bid-to-hike-super-pay-20130730-2qxa1.html The Sex Discrimination Commissioner (Elizabeth Broderick) appears to ENDORSE this. She retweeted news of this on 30th July 2013: https://twitter.com/BPWAustralia/status/362415135148617730 In fact, if you look at the Twitter feed of Australia's Sex Discrimination Commissioner (https://twitter.com/LizBroderick) you'll see it's …
/r/MensRights15/11/13 08:09 AM
7

Very cunning: you changed the subject very subtly, but it's still noticeable. The girls did not consent to their pictures being given out to other people, and that's what got them [the boys] in trouble. NO: the boys were charged with "producing and distributing" child pornography, not for violating the trust of the girls. Remind me again how the boys came to be in possession of photos of under-aged girls? That's right: the photos were PRODUCED and DISTRIBUTED to them by the girls. Who weren't ar…
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:53 AM
1

Women can be charged with sexual assault; over the years many have been. Re-read the article: it describes a situation in which a male & female are both violated, however while the person who does it to the female is guilty of "sexual assault", the person who does it to the male would be guilty of "indecent assault". Both victims would feel equally violated, however the punishment is very different in each case.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 09:48 AM
3

Brilliant article. I have long maintained that manipulating a man's penis without his consent should constitute rape / sexual assault: http://2ndclassgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/not-all-genitals-are-equal-before-the-law As the submitter of the article says above, if it is considered rape to insert a penis, finger or other object into a vagina without consent, it should also be considered rape if a penis is handled by a vagina, mouth, hand or other object without consent.
/r/MensRights13/10/13 10:20 PM
-1

reinforces and perpetuates a patriarchal myth ... I stopped reading when I saw that
/r/MensRights06/10/13 09:47 PM
3

And NSW (Australia) and while I'm not a lawyer, I suspect all the other states as well: http://2ndclassgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/not-all-genitals-are-equal-before-the-law As I mention in the above link, some sex acts committed against males without their consent are not even considered sexual assault, merely indecent assault (a much lesser crime).
/r/MensRights06/10/13 09:34 PM
7

Have you also noticed how often women get reduced sentences (or found not guilty) because of hormonal reasons, however when men commit crimes because of their hormones (elevated testosterone -> aggression) they only receive HARSHER sentences? Women have successfully used PMS (menstruation) in court. Think I'm kidding? See these government reports: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/proceedings/16/easteal2.pdf http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/2/4/7/%7B24751E93-85A8-4533-AE23-5C769034…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 02:37 PM
6

Exactly what parent post says: they forced the rules to be changed so that they could get girls onto boys teams (so as to benefit girls) however now that they see that boys are benefiting they want the rules reverted. Disgusting.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 02:29 PM
3

I'm inclined to agree with you: I actually hope this does go ahead ... it'll not have the effect that they're hoping for. This is just blowing a lot of hot air to appeal to the women's lobby. As for the article opening with "women should ask their male colleagues how much they earn if they want to get equal pay", perhaps men should start their own investigations. are they performing more activities than their female colleagues? are they working longer hours than their female colleagues? do they …
/r/MensRights06/10/13 02:10 PM
7

There are just narrow-minded people that think any sexual encounter a man is involved in is one that the man wants. Of course. Never mind that the woman may have HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis, herpes or syphilis. Every guy "wants it".
/r/MensRights07/09/13 03:12 AM
8

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Gandhi Well, on the plus side, it seems the men's rights activists in Toronto have progressed further than blokes in other cities around the world.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 10:19 PM
4

How about women getting paid MORE for doing the SAME work? Do you think a female Sex Discrimination Commissioner would object? http://www.smh.com.au/business/win-for-women-in-bid-to-hike-super-pay-20130730-2qxa1.html
/r/MensRights05/09/13 11:52 AM
3

Great article. There's a similarly disproportional gap in funding and awareness of male versus female cancers in Australia. The Cancer Council NSW 2011/12 financials show that female-specific cancers continue to receive more funding than male-specific cancers. http://www.cancercouncil.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/CNN13820-Cancer-Council-Annual-Report_WEB.pdf And while it's great that our sportsmen and sportswomen do their bit to raise money for health issues, again there is an overwhelming …
/r/MensRights05/09/13 11:33 AM
1

What an unusual response. Did you honestly read in my post that I think someone who rapes a girl should be punished less severely than someone who rapes a boy? I think a heinous crime perpetrated on anyone should be severely punished. You will NEVER catch me saying otherwise ... because in my heart I don't believe otherwise. Quite simply, you posed the questions: What would you say if this was a male student and this was a woman-behaving-badly post? Point out the unjust laws? And I did just that…
/r/MensRights02/09/13 07:16 AM
11

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html
/r/MensRights02/09/13 07:03 AM
13

Unfortunately, for the moment, governments & politicians have no incentive to spend money on men or boys: we don't yet have an organised lobby that let's politicians know that they will earn (or lose) votes depending on how much money they invest in men & boys. Contrast this with the very organised and vocal women's lobby, giving rise to resource allocations of this magnitude. And as I've mentioned before, despite saying there's no money left in the budget, Australia manages to find over $2 bill…
/r/MensRights01/09/13 06:12 AM
2

Also: The woman, who was supported by family in court, pleaded guilty to three counts of aggravated sexual intercourse and also admitted indecent assault. Now, this is purely speculation, however I wonder if the crime in bold refers to her fondling/masturbating the victim. In which case, if it was an underage girl, the crime may have been considered "sexual assault". (I have a posting here.)
/r/MensRights29/08/13 07:52 AM
5

In recent years, Australian schoolboys have been very under-represented amongst the ranks of high school achievers. Now, whenever Australian females encounter any discrimination as a group, the government spares no expense in addressing their issues. In fact Australian females even have their own federal government minister with a hefty-sized annual budget. Heck, each year Australia even allocates over $2 billion to be spent on females overseas. And yet, every year, Australian schoolboys continu…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 11:01 PM
1

Must have: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html
/r/MensRights28/08/13 10:48 PM
3

Point out the unjust laws? I'd probably start out by questioning how a statutory rape victim can be successfully sued for child support. But then I'd realize the rape victim was male, and wouldn't bother.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 10:36 PM
-4

the tests are only for women because the current take-home STD tests only work for women Then one could again assert sexism in that research is only being conducted into assisting women. Citation? The dollars spent on women's health far, far overshadows dollars spent on men's health. In other words, this is part of a broader tapestry of outright discrimination against men.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 02:35 PM
10

Which is precisely why you need to voice your disapproval with your local representative. Let them know your vote is conditional on them supporting YOU.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 02:15 PM
6

In fact, it's common knowledge that women take more sick leave than men.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:57 PM
13

Yep, I see the same thing when I go grocery shopping here in Australia. I only ever see guys lifting and stacking boxes. And curiously, I've never seen a woman working in the frozen aisles. (Which can get pretty cold even when passing through as a customer.)
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:53 PM
1

Also, would they even have dared do this to a female?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 09:09 AM
10

Is the husband also the father? It's not necessarily the same person.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:41 AM
2

If they're not peeking over the stall who gives a shit. First-up, bad choice of words. Secondly, you seem to be forgetting that men's toilets often have urinals. In other words blokes are usually standing in the open, penis in hand, urinating. Now, you may well be comfortable doing this while conversing with a woman about the weather, however a lot of men are not. Public toilets are gender-segregated for a reason. The original poster flagged that some women (in many cities around the world) igno…
/r/MensRights24/08/13 07:42 AM
1

I think parent post was referring to the notion that women are somehow unable to sexually violate a male, which is plainly false as they can, and do, in countless scenarios. However you are also absolutely correct: legislation covering sex offences in many, many jurisdictions is heavily biased towards protecting females ... I have an example regarding the Criminal Law Code in NSW, Australia. (For the record: I ain't a lawyer.)
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:14 AM
6

Replying to myself: Ouch !! I just found this article ... men will pay $15,000 more for car insurance over a lifetime.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:00 AM
11

Hilarious that so many feminists will vehemently oppose females being charged more for healthcare -- after all, isn't insurance all about spreading risk / cost (??) -- and yet they have no problem with younger males paying higher car insurance premiums. Seriously: how do they reconcile these inconsistencies in their heads ???
/r/MensRights23/08/13 11:46 PM
1

For many years now, Australian boys have consistently been under-performing in high school exams, and are under-represented in university placements. And yet look at just how much money the Australian government spends on girls in OTHER COUNTRIES !! http://www.ausaid.gov.au/aidissues/gender/Pages/home.aspx
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:58 PM
2

Well, even a FAMILY COURT JUDGE has gone on record as saying mothers are increasingly INVENTING child sexual abuse claims to secure exclusive custody.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:52 PM
1

Most males do not have the problem you experience; if you ever have a son, he also may not have this problem. Let him choose when he grows up. Why risk unnecessary surgery? You do know how many males die around the world every year from circumcision? Or how many circumcisions are botched? And you do also know that the skin provides protective benefits to the penis; including, but not limited to, anti-baterial protection. And good luck with whatever you decide for yourself.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:46 PM
2

To say nothing of the fact that it reduces sexual pleasure for the poor male. Without the soft skin covering the glans (the head of the penis) the outside of the glans ever-so-slightly toughens over the weeks and months following the circumcision. Remind me again why female circumcision is vocally opposed? Oh, that's right: because it reduces / removes female sexual pleasure.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:41 PM
2

In fact, the New Testament explicitly tells Christian men NOT to go and get circumcised
/r/MensRights23/08/13 01:29 PM
-1

Actually, over the years many men have gone to prison on the say of a woman sobbing in court, only to exonerated months or years later. And even more innocent men have had their name turned to mud, lost their job, even their family, on false accusations, while the identify of the alleged victim was suppressed by the court. Not to say women aren't sexually assaulted. (One assault is one too many.) Just saying that in the West, this particular offence places a slight burden on the alleged perpetra…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 07:33 AM
5

People (and someone correct me if I am wrong) I don't think the change in police policy assumes the alleged perpetrator is guilty ... it just assumes the alleged victim was in fact assaulted. The alleged victim is therefore entitled to a whole heap of services to which they weren't previously entitled. However the alleged perpetrator is STILL innocent until proven guilty. (Though they will still be dragged through the courts and have their name turned into mud.)
/r/MensRights19/08/13 07:22 AM
2

Absolutely not ... it appears I've been misunderstood. I think the alleged perpetrator (as with all crimes) is INNOCENT until proven guilty. And I think it should fall to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defendant should NOT have to prove their innocence. I hope that's clarified.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 10:31 PM
-1

Well, from what I read, I SUPPORT this change in the police department's response. However as I've said before, we ALSO need to protect the wrongly accused. So the names of alleged perpetrators, like those of alleged victims, should be suppressed until the matter is resolved by a court.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 01:37 PM
0

I don't live in the UK, so perhaps someone else can answer: are these same feminists taking an equal stance against all ... "literature"?
/r/MensRights18/08/13 01:16 PM
7

This is another example of why those ACCUSED of sex offenses need to have their names withheld from the public, just like we do for alleged victims of sex offenses. Of course, this wouldn't have saved him from spending time in a custody cell and undergoing "an intrusive and personal medical examination" (it's in the article ... I don't even know what that means ?!?) but at least his name & reputation would have been protected.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 10:24 PM
9

Same here. I was completely oblivious to the Men's Rights Movement until earlier this year (2013). Some time during the year, feminists in Australia suddenly became ... well, I can only really describe them as "rabid". Finally, I saw one male-bashing article too many in our national papers. And here I am: active on numerous MRA websites and with my own Twitter feed.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 10:17 PM
3

The courts decide what's best for the child The same courts that used to rule black people should be segregated from white people? I'm surprised, blarghargh2: I would have thought you would object to such a court ruling. The judges sitting on those same benches have changed over the past two hundred years, and now it's rightly considered disgusting to segregate black people from white people. I also believe that one day we'll look back at how fathers were readily trivialised or even dismissed by…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:55 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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