TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

49rows Archive

View 7 posts and 57 comments by 49rows on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Complain about? Yes. Do they "shame" women for doing that? Not really, no.
/r/MensRights17/05/13 09:16 AM
-3

haw, haw, because guys are subhuman, right ladiezz!!
/r/MensRights04/05/13 02:44 AM
0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky
/r/MensRights22/04/13 03:44 PM
3

He's an anarchist
/r/MensRights20/04/13 07:42 PM
16

The food service industry in the US has utterly no interest in labor law. The people who work there might consider themselves lucky to get paid at all. OP: "10 dollar bill" = must be from US or Canada
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:07 PM
18

Put cameras around the fire alarms.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 05:00 PM
8

If women do it, it must a chore that they are compelled by powerful social forces to do, which they do not want, they don't want anything, they just want what's best for everyone. Eating bonbons would be a selfless burden that shows they need social aid.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 04:56 PM
0

Because then you can't make shit up and call it a valid way of discovering the truth.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 05:49 PM
3

It's a rhetorical tactic but it's not even a fallacy if it isn't in response to a specific argument.
/r/MensRights16/01/12 06:53 PM
10

It's not ad hominem. Ad hominem would be calling you a chauvinist in lieu of an argument. This is a case of begging the question, thought-stopping cliche and/or kafkatrapping. EDIT: On second thought it's actually ad hominem circumstantial but not an ad hominem "attack" (which would be ad hominem abusive)
/r/MensRights16/01/12 04:03 AM
3

If left unexplained through certain lenses it could mean that women did not have a good reason for some of the things they do. This is unsettling. So it is comparatively satisfying to produce and keep repeating explanations that nice guys are secretly inner horrible villains or whatever. These explanations have their own consistency problems so you have to keep repeating them in order to not notice that.
/r/seduction11/01/12 11:20 PM
2

I wish. Problem is the subject gives girls cognitive dissonance.
/r/seduction11/01/12 09:21 PM
1

This is your girlbrain fear instinct. Your brain gives you a fear reflex and you rationalize it. 99.999999% of men are not serial killers. You're only slightly more likely to win the lottery, but you don't go out with the expectation that you might win the lottery. Girls want sex but they have a fear instinct kicks in that inhibits them from following through with it. If you ask them they will say essentially this, that they feel turned on or lustful but then they find they feel afraid simultane…
/r/seduction18/11/11 10:16 PM
2

I bet anyone 14.6 gazillion dollars he would absolutely, positively get called creepy by someone with his recommended propositioning technique, which he admits he's never actually tried.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 12:03 PM
2

found
/r/MensRights05/04/11 05:54 PM
23

Girls like abs, but they don't ogle them I think you've been misinformed
/r/MensRights14/03/11 04:02 AM
5

I think this interview is fake. why you as a dude have the right to completely interrupt and insert yourself into a woman’ s night. This is a woman talking about a man, not a man talking about himself. A man would not say "as a dude" unless he's hyper-aware of his own gender, which he isn't. Only someone of the opposite gender would say this. can lead to problematic outcomes Canned feminist weasel words. Men do not talk like this. I just don’t get why, as a culture, we abandon asking for consent…
/r/seduction10/02/11 02:57 AM
4

There was an askreddit about girls doing this and like half the women said it was obviously meaningful and the other half said it was obviously not meaningful
/r/seduction07/02/11 01:09 AM
8

My favorites are more subtle, e.g., she "accidentally" brushes against you even though she had more than enough clearance to get around you
/r/seduction06/02/11 04:19 PM
8

If she's seriously interested in you then it's not really fair to her
/r/seduction21/01/11 06:22 PM
1

It should also count for something that the south asian girl was way hotter than the other ones
/r/seduction21/01/11 06:20 PM
1

For the science of attraction this wasn't all that scientific. They should have had lots of women and have the actors rotate which roles they played.
/r/seduction21/01/11 06:18 PM
1

Hmm how so?
/r/MensRights25/12/10 02:23 AM
0

If you have reason and facts you don't need ideology
/r/MensRights24/12/10 02:50 PM
4

If he's seen the proof, then why doesn't he leak it?
/r/MensRights13/12/10 02:09 AM
1

Canadians do not normally differentiate between people and moose
/r/MensRights06/12/10 08:22 PM
1

Based on the same British common law
/r/MensRights06/12/10 06:38 AM
5

I think the poster is complaining that mainstream feminism does not give a shit about injustice against men yet still like to think of themselves as being for gender equality.
/r/MensRights06/12/10 06:36 AM
2

I think it's actually British common law as the underlying root of this. (not defending feminists though)
/r/MensRights06/12/10 06:26 AM
4

Royal Canadian Mounted Police, aka The Mounties. It's basically a part time position held by a allotment where every Canadian gets to be a police officer for a few days out of the month. As a reward you get a very pretty sash and can serve in parades to be seen by literally dozens of other Canadians.
/r/MensRights06/12/10 06:23 AM
2

They're probably black, too. So they have two strikes against them.
/r/MensRights18/11/10 09:41 PM
4

My hipster sense is tingling.
/r/MensRights18/11/10 09:39 PM
10

2xc is pretty reasonable most of the time.
/r/MensRights30/10/10 07:17 PM
3

buy her drinks until she takes you home with her Shit, you mean that always works?
/r/MensRights03/10/10 02:20 AM
13

Expect us to take all the risks; if it pays off then they should get some of the benefits, if it doesn't then there is no need to respect us.
/r/MensRights23/05/10 05:47 PM
7

Did he seduce you?
/r/seduction18/04/10 04:13 PM
2

I heard that Dallas County is one of the few jurisdictions where DNA evidence is preserved after the trial is over. Rather perversely this is why they get so many convictions overturned years later: this suggests that there are probably proportionally about as many other innocent incarcerates elsewhere where the evidence to clear them no longer exists.
/r/MensRights02/03/10 11:27 PM
6

http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/b72yd/reddit_i_got_a_book_deal_thank_you_the_oatmeal/c0lab7u http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/b7e25/today_i_learned_that_one_of_reddits_most_active/ http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/b7hpb/re_the_alleged_conflict_of_interest_on_reddit/
/r/MensRights01/03/10 01:43 AM
9

if feminists aren't going to fight for men's rights then they shouldn't say they are in favor of equal rights
/r/MensRights14/02/10 04:48 AM
1

studies also show that men do more work-work
/r/MensRights08/02/10 12:27 AM
7

The questions were worded such that if you weren't reading carefully it sounded like they were asking "has a man ever bought you a drink to try to have sex with you" it's not as if people cite that study because they think it has the best methodology, they cite because it had the most extreme result.
/r/MensRights27/01/10 04:25 AM
7

so why no attempted murder charge then, on top of manslaughter?
/r/MensRights22/01/10 09:43 PM
11

I bet that if you were asked to predict the results of this study without reading it, given a "high school mentality" you would expect an even stronger confirmation of the preconceived notion of women being unfairly judged. I think that this is clearly a non-explanation.
/r/MensRights21/01/10 06:50 AM
18

Not sure how this is a paradox
/r/MensRights21/01/10 04:50 AM
5

Women currently represent about 60 percent of university students in Sweden, a pioneer in gender equality. Some genders are more equal than others, apparently.
/r/MensRights14/01/10 04:33 AM
5

http://www.cancer.org/downloads/stt/CFF2009_EstCD_3.pdf according to the above, breast cancer has about 194,000 cases and 40,000 deaths, while prostate cancer has about 192,000 cases and 27,000 deaths annually.
/r/MensRights12/01/10 04:33 PM
8

See but that's actual criticism where this is just pointless ranting
/r/MensRights29/12/09 12:07 AM
1

You've never heard of culture? Culture cannot think. You've never seen or experienced people doing things, believing things, because they wanted to fit in? Those are individuals, those can think Those thoughts and actions can only be described as belonging to the group. This is some new definition of the word "only" that I wasn't familiar with. Perhaps it demonstrates a lack of imagination on your part? Surely you can think of some other ways of describing it. However many ways you can think of …
/r/MensRights13/11/09 04:06 AM
1

Groups have thoughts just like individuals do. I don't have words for the absurdity of this proposition.
/r/MensRights13/11/09 12:59 AM
5

completely missing the point entirely, again. are genders the medium of morality or are individuals? Whether being kicked or receiving an ice pack is a good metaphor for affirmative action is beside the point. if moral action A occurs to person B, is an appropriate response to moral action A applicable to person C because persons C and B have the same gender?
/r/MensRights11/11/09 10:10 PM
9

You're missing the point entirely. Your analogy would be giving an ice pack to some person who had the same gender as someone who got kicked. Also in this scenario there are a fixed number of ice packs so giving one person an ice pack takes one away from someone else.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 09:04 PM
14

So apparently she thinks that the agents of morality are gender groups, not people. So for example, if some guy kicks you in the face, would it make sense to kick some other guy in the face as revenge? It wouldn't make sense, unless you think that gender groups are really the only moral agents as long as both guys were male. Ask her if she agrees with that. Restate the problem in these terms. Does it make sense to discriminate against individual men for what other, different individuals did befo…
/r/MensRights11/11/09 05:24 PM
3

i believe you are standing on this man's lawn
/r/MensRights21/09/09 02:41 AM
1

It would be better to foster the belief that you have the power to handle situations that you don't like. Stoking fear inherently disempowers you and prejudices you against men. Even here you seem to point to scenarios that involve strangers and so are therefore scarier, but sexual assault is much more likely to occur with someone you know. Strangers on the street are probably the least likely people to attack you, but they're scarier.
/r/MensRights26/08/09 01:09 AM
-3

I don't think that's the point I intended, though the title was a bit childish. The point is that they are justifying being prejudiced against men based on a hugely improbable event. Your chances of being caught in a spree killing are worse than winning the lottery -- but this is presented as a valid reason to fear all men.
/r/MensRights25/08/09 08:50 PM
2

False rape accusations disgust me almost as much as rape itself does, because women who are genuine victims of rape could be taken less seriously as a result. Is destroying the accused's life worth mentioning at all, or ..?
/r/MensRights21/08/09 02:11 PM
2

Yet strangely women are generally more religiously observant than men. Why is that? It's true that most religions were founded by men. Men are more likely to have the borderline mental illnesses that lead to founding new religions. It's a gamble: if you are born a man, your chances of founding a religion are improved, but by a much greater degree so are your chances of being burned alive or cast out of your society for attempting to do so and failing, something that has happened thousands times …
/r/MensRights13/08/09 03:57 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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