TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ABitterSatireHeWrote Archive

View 3 posts and 123 comments by ABitterSatireHeWrote 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

For sure! :)
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/11/20 11:16 PM
1

To say the politiburo specifically owned the means of production makes as much sense as saying Stalin personally did or Gosplan. The state did. Either way, if the state (or some section of it) privately owned the means of production (meaning only a section of society has exclusive ownership), then that leaves the laboring population dispossessed of their means to life and thus forced to work (the state mandating work at that point is simply redundant in that sense). There is thus a working class…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/10/20 01:54 AM
1

Leftcom/ultra here. Interested in what you think the problems are. Perhaps I can clarify some stuff? Also I really liked The Right To Be Greedy. But more simply as a description of how we might think in communism, and some parts of how I see things now, but not as a real current revolutionary perspective.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/10/20 08:39 AM
2

Old news fam
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/04/20 11:06 PM
3

Fucking, that sucks m8. What a piece of shit
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/04/20 02:13 AM
5

Legitimately gross tbh
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/04/20 02:03 AM
3

A few months ago a fascinating evo-psych paper came out discussing hazing as an evolved mechanism to prevent free-riding. We report the first cross-cultural and cross-organizational evidence for an evolved hazing motivation. Using experiments performed in the United States, Japan, and among members of a hazing and a nonhazing organization, we demonstrate an invariant set of core hazing predictors. In particular, we show that the perception of near-term group benefits, which would have been ances…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/20 06:31 AM
1

Not really. Fourier really put it on the map. But Engels theorized and laid out its development in "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State". Most of which remains correct to a great extent. Not to the same extent everywhere and throughout all time, but overall, yes. However, female power still remains largely not understood, with some really interesting details in peasant societies. My thesis is simply that what was described finished development in the 19th century and transfo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/03/20 04:48 AM
1

I'm not a leftist/left-winger (read: more or less some version of social democrat). I'd for the most part fall into the "ultra-left" umbrella, am a Marxist. Economics: The abolition of value and the division of labor and the re-establishment of the material human community. Production put under the control of the entirety of humanity, the development of a common plan, and the end of production as a separate category of life. The over-arching principle would be "from each according to their abili…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/20 08:58 PM
1

Absolutely nothing...well except to deplatform, doxx and crush \ Yep *sighs* I agree, it's a chimera which mutates. We can no longer control it. Fascism is always popular since it promises the illusion that we CAN take back control, lol We never really did (control it). The nature of capital is one that is self-perpetuating/expanding. Once "value" (abstract, socially necessary, human labor) became "capital" (the *self*-expansion of value), and capital became a socially relevant force, then the d…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 11:22 PM
1

Goddamn we agree again...this is rather depressing Sorry about that… Not the most optimistic view The left cannot in my experience listen to a description of a situation which has even the potential to be 'resolved' by reactionary backlash. If we’re being so flexible/generous with the words “potential” and “resolved” that we break their meanings altogether, then sure, haha. But yeah, I get your point. I think this is why they try and suppress speech on such maters esp. And suppress they do. We h…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 11:03 PM
1

Not exactly. I’m not a fan of the “privilege” phraseology, but that first part is kind of true. Female sexuality has been more alienated, but has been – finally – brought back under their ownership. This does give them an edge, is the material basis for their increased power relative to men. This does NOT make them “bourgeois”. If you want to draw a comparison, the closest is probably land ownership. They are not accumulating capital through it (there is no M-C-M’, no expanded reproduction). And…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 11:00 PM
1

Yeah man. I hear you. I've listened to some FAR right MRAs, understand where the reactionaries are coming from, essentially alienation and a distrust that socialist revolution will ever bring them the happiness they seek. I wouldn’t call it “happiness” per se, but control and some promise of material security. And leftists don’t give them any reason to trust it, those who truly believe they can appeal to someone’s self-interest in any convincing way don’t use moral bludgeons. In many ways, this …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 10:57 PM
1

To me those three things are essentially synonymous. It’s just a range from the center- to far-left of capital. Social Democracy, or “Social Democracy at the barrel of a gun”.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 10:54 PM
1

This is all a really good analysis. There's a lot we agree on and I understand these arguments/the rationale of the 'bootlickers'. Thanks! And sorry if my following responses are poorly written. I’m running off like one night worth of sleep for the third or fourth day. Just figured this responses was late enough as it was. Perhaps it's ultimately nothing more than moral philosophy which decides whether we choose left or right. I think the science is pretty clear certain personality traits natura…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 10:54 PM
1

You're right, lol. Sorry about that! Brainfart.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/03/20 08:06 PM
12

ContraPoints couldn't understand "reaction" if her life depended on it. She does the opposite of "engage". She puts on a superficial facade of giving two shits about the other side, but it's obvious she doesn't mean it or draw any theoretical lessons/conclusions from it. Her "understanding" that reaction comes from "problems" people face is that of a bourgeois academic/sociologist and that's where it stops; it's totally intellectual, and has no emotional underpinning or proletarian class basis. …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 08:51 PM
2

I'm too depressed :/ I've posted my thoughts in r/mensrights before and intended to write like a pamphlet explaining all this shit for like half a year. Then when ContraPoints "cancel culture" video came out I wanted to make a YouTube video critiquing that (I'm sure you can see where I would be coming from given her videos completely dismissing right-winger's complaints about leftist's disdain for "freedom of speech"). However much I sympathize with her, she really drew no lessons from her exper…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 08:09 AM
1

Does the obsession with the generalised shittiness and entitlement of middle class women identifying as progressive, liberal, feminist cause the assumption that we need to do away with progressivism to resolve it? Or is it the innately authoritarian tendencies and/or, well...dogmatically liberal (capitalist/meritocractic) way of looking at the world that they brought to the movement, the reason why their solution to progressive women, feminism, misandry is reactionary and 'negative equality' bas…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 01:17 AM
1

I haven't quite figured out what it is: Does the MRM attract right wing men because critique of feminism/gynocentrism is forbidden on the left? Or is the MRM actually making men more right wing? To what extent is feminism itself responsible for reactionary politics? That’s certainly part of it. But that phenomenon is most certainly not limited to men’s issues. The function of the left of capital / leftism is the prevention of radical activity and consciousness by the proletariat against capital …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 01:16 AM
2

The, for example, lack of interest in the violation of male sexuality can only be understood in this context. From female pedophilic predation on boys to how gay men complain how women feel entitled to simply grab their genitalia (or use some of the mental components of their sexuality as tools for their [the women’s] beautification [intra-sexual competition, before even as a means to attract a mate]). And how does feminist theory respond? Is it an example of female power or a superior position?…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 01:15 AM
1

More than that, there is a certain humanity – entirely missing in our oppression by capital – we, mostly viscerally, see in past oppressive systems. The “First Reich” was the Holy Roman Empire, and the Holy Roman Empire (remember what Voltaire commented on the name) thought of itself as Roman for a reason. This is the crux which the vast majority of the left will never understand about “reactionaries”. The slave is less free, but more human, than the worker. The serf is near-godly in comparison.…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 01:14 AM
3

Long, thoughtful post, deserves long thoughtful response. Below is the results of my own attempts I’ve had over the past couple years since I’ve been “red-pilled” to synthesize various viewpoints with my unabashedly Marxist (in the ultra-left umbrella) perspective and address what you brought up here. You seem to be a social-democrat, so fair warning, this very much will not align with your politics. And this touches on so many topics, that quite a bit of background explanation is going to need …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/20 01:11 AM
1

I'm working on an answer to this, but it's long, I'll probably have it finished by tomorrow, sorry!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/03/20 09:33 AM
1

There are and have been societies where women are oppressed (not necessarily synonymous with "patriarchies"). I do not believe that the advanced capitalist countries can be included in that category. The error in the analysis you presented here though regarding past and present is (mostly) two-fold: Less oppressed = better life 1a) Assuming that those higher up in the food-chain / those with more power / etc. have a better/longer/healthier/happier life. If I were to pick at random who I would be…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/02/20 09:38 AM
5

Distinguish between: a) Direct social relations underneath gendered phenomena, their most immediate manifestations, and the coercive structures that reproduce them. b) The general social attitudes and actions which are consequences of it and may serve supplementary roles in the reproduction of the above but are not themselves essential. c) Phenomena you can't put into either of the above, probably means that it is unrelated. Anytime you evaluate how big a deal to make of something, first ask you…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/02/20 08:46 AM
2

niggardly adopting the other sides views and vocabulary So I assume you got this by debating with racists? Lol, nice meme.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/02/20 08:31 AM
3

You can look it up by name using Sci-Hub. Isn't that just for academic papers and science journals (I use it for evo-psych and quantum mechanics stuff all the time). Tried what you said, got nothing. Signed up for the account (not the subscription though), and got mostly stuff like: From a policy standpoint, the emphasis should be on battered women, because women suffer by far the most injuries, So, basically what I expected. Are you really going to fixate on and discuss only the single remotely…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/20 05:05 AM
4

Are there reasons, overall, to treat male violence toward women as a more serious matter than female violence toward men? Of course (as Straus, the pioneer in research on partner violence by both sexes, repeatedly stressed) . Which are? Got paywalled trying to read the article linked in the quote. Or is this just the necessary women worsting and pandering to female victimhood necessary if she wants any of her plea to be heard at all? Does she actually believe it / is she just gynocentric (she do…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/02/20 02:00 AM
1

Holy shit. Well, uh, I guess you're just going all in, showing your cards right off the bat. So, I was gonna ask if you hate poor people or just the black ones? But then I saw some of your post history. You didnt really post responses or even coherent arguments/responses to what I said, just hateful screeches. So 1) Are you just trolling? 2) If not, what, exactly is your line of reasoning as a "tankie" who defends the police in what every tankie in the world would agree is a capitalist country (…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 09:38 AM
1

Kay, you're a communist. Cool? It means I’m for the abolition of property and for the organization of life to be taken into the control of individuals themselves, by the violent overthrow of capitalism and the bourgeois state by the working class. That still doesn't give anyone the right to destroy things that innocent people worked to create I disagree that property is created by the free actions of “innocent people”. Commodities are overwhelmingly created in the capitalist production process w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/02/20 02:23 AM
0

Can you point me to the evidence that Brown had a knife and initiated the encounter by threatening the officer's life? And how it was "well known"? I'm only seeing a knife in a shooting that came after and the best case for "self-defense" being that Brown charged the officer after being assaulted by him. And before any bullshit accusations I'm not requiring it be left-wing media. Also, literally no one claimed the term was neutral before this one incident and became racially charged because its …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 03:46 PM
2

"Can't" is a strong word. Perhaps they will miss the opportunity, but they have a basically unparalleled spin machine.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 03:34 PM
1

Hey, just a thought, maybe address the sentence literally directly after the one you quoted. I'm a pretty strong defender of free speech. Although not out of a fetishization of freedom nor simply as a mere tactic until "my side is in charge". I'm not saying he shouldn't have been allowed to say it, nor that he should be assaulted for doing so. Although when it comes to someone as high in the food chain as Obama they aren't exactly my biggest concern. All I'm doing is analyzing and criticizing it…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 12:06 PM
1

I was talking about the party apparatus/functionaries/politicians/donor/etc. Not the voters per se. I'm anti-idpol and all attempts at fractuting the working class. And my criticism of proletarians who are racist is not a moralistic one, but one of attempting to demonstrate to them why unification and liberation is what's truly in their interests and the only path towards true control over their lives and avoiding pauperization, complete loss of control, the ravages of war, and the eventual comp…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 12:03 PM
2

"Thugs" is an extremely racially-charged term. It isn't necessarily always. But in that context it was pretty clear that was how it was meant, to pander to racism. And "WTH?" They're "thugs" because they destroyed THINGS in response to one of the democratic state's most repressive arms KILLING a HUMAN BEING?! And, IIRC, "armed" with the gun that killed him, and that the police officer who shot him put into the evidence bag - later received as an unsealed envelope - on his own? And a witness who …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 11:24 AM
0

How is it racist in the slightest? I didn't imply he was "affirmative actioned" into the presidency, he was a perfectly competent figurehead of the bourgeois state. More competent than many, probably most. Nor am I implying he began his presdency with malintent. Or that most people voted for him simply because he was black. Many did in spite of it who would've preferred a white version of him. Where is the racism in my statement? You're putting a lot of weight into that "only" that you used that…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 11:08 AM
4

Sure. Just don't get your hopes up. Nobody cares. Most women certainly don't, and men who's future relationships are or they believe to be conditional on them also not giving a shit, and want relationships, also won't give a shit or will at least try and fake they don't. After a few days they will stop "faking" and also not give a shit. If they are abuse victims themselves, they will almost certainly shut the fuck up and not impinge on this arrangement with women and other men. Nobody will give …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 03:57 AM
7

Never underestimate opportunism and selective short memory
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/20 03:39 AM
3

Remember when obama called black kids in Ferguson "thugs"? That's not racially-charged. Not at all. Or Stop-and-Frisk. Or dumping all the remaining money in the inner cities after they cut vast swathes of the welfare system into the police departments? Etc., etc., Not that the police are being treated well either.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/20 11:51 PM
7

Or when Democrats do it. Like that whole Obama thing
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/20 11:44 PM
22

No it isn't. It's a chance for Feminists to say "look we actually have men's best interests in mind too" and then shut everything up. #CheckYourOpportunism
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/20 11:11 PM
2

Ah gotcha
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/02/20 02:04 AM
2

I might literally have never seen so much idealism in one post. material relations and state policies to reproduce them and the ideologies associated with it are irrelevant because look over here at the least putrid parts of some descendant ideology. Nevermind, "idealism" is too generous. At least idealism makes some sort of logical connection.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 02:25 AM
1

No it isn't. It's phrased in a way I wouldn't prefer, but the spirit of it isn't wrong. Men use more violent methods because they actually intend to die. I was talking about this with a therapist who identifies as a feminist, the topic came up and all I got out was the difference in methods before she outright said "because they intend to actually kill themselves". One could even argue "from a feminist perspective" that this supports the idea of "himpathy" and that women have to threaten suicide…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 02:12 AM
1

You say that as if work and exploitation are mutually exclusive rather than work being the dominant form of exploitation in capitalism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 01:59 AM
1

wages post-capitalist The best emetic is always leftism -_- Wage labor is literally what defines capitalism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/02/20 01:54 AM
16

I don’t think any men have been sent to jail unjustly because of the Duluth Model ? Like in any way? Or do you mean solely because of the Duluth model? I'd argue that the Duluth model was the theoretical expression of the relations which entail men who were abused going to jail. So if you are saying that it isn't the root of the issue that's fine, but if you're saying it hasn't played a role in the arrest of men who were abused that's retarded.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/02/20 10:00 PM
1

"Should belong to the labourer"? Marxist theory is very clear that according to the rules of capitalism, surplus value rightfully belongs to the capitalist (in this day and age, usually the company or state). You sell your ability to work in general. The capitalist owns the results of the labor performed. It's exploitation, but a "should" doesn't really mean anything. Even more so because of the way surplus value is distributed through the market, it's not specifically the surplus labor of their…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/02/20 09:46 PM
2

Help capitalism to more efficiently exploit the working class Kill me
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/01/20 11:05 AM
1

I think we're all better when we have time to formulate what we want to say. Yeah, I'd agree to that. And for those of us who have "processing speed" related disorders, the difference is particularly marked. I have moments when I look in the mirror the next day and come up with the perfect comeback. For instance, in the Wolf example, what I should have said was, "You're a best selling author who was married to a Clinton speech writer. I'm a waitress. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree on th…
/r/MensRights27/06/19 10:59 PM
1

Oh, OK. Thanks so much for responding! I, for personal purposes at least (if not rhetorical ones), accept it; from what my quick browsing on the topic has informed me about Reimer's character, her saying the line in question is totally believable. I was just wondering if there was a source I could point people towards, like something Silverman wrote somewhere (the original comment of yours which and the one [also yours] which spawned the "You the random person on the internet are the true femini…
/r/MensRights26/06/19 11:34 PM
2

Oh... Well, that's not a response one gets particularly often, I assumed from the "bow" that it meant you were being sarcastic, lol. RIP me. well, sorry then. My apologies!
/r/MensRights26/06/19 05:14 AM
2

Do you have an argument against the reasoning I gave, or some way you think it doesn't hold up? The usual (and rather grossly overused) charge of a "No True Scotsman" fallacy I don't think can be applied here at all. Neither can the "you just think everything would've worked out if you were in charge". If you've seen any of my other posts, you're probably aware that I'm not exactly typical for the "Marxist" traditions. But the comparison between Marxism and feminism given doesn't really apply ev…
/r/MensRights26/06/19 04:38 AM
5

Yeah, I saw that one before but somehow didn't pick up the implication that he personally told her. Thanks for pointing that out!
/r/MensRights26/06/19 01:05 AM
4

Ditto and agreed that she's terrible
/r/MensRights26/06/19 12:57 AM
3

Thanks! So that's where it's from! I'm still having trouble finding a source though, neither Google nor Bing is being of much help. She doesn't give one in the comment that was in. You have any ideas? Edit: The friend she speaks of was Earl Silverman, who is apparently the source, but I can't find where he stated that the producers told him this after Jan Reimer refused to go on.
/r/MensRights26/06/19 12:21 AM
7

Pizza > Vasalgel > Nachos > Vasectomy Fight me
/r/MensRights26/06/19 12:08 AM
10

They targeted gamers Lol
/r/PussyPassDenied25/06/19 06:46 AM
0

If by "socialism", you mean "wealth redistribution" (and by "socialist" those for it), and/or the state or workers owning the means of production in and of itself, or any other superficial changes to capitalism, initiated by peaceful reform or otherwise, then no, not particularly, at least not any with any significance or size. And that is perfectly appropriate to the role of the left in locking down, dividing, and immobilizing the working class, especially during capitalist crisis.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 05:39 AM
2

Their use as "workhorses and disposable producers" is precisely some of the most important secondary features of the proletariat (the primary being what centrally defines it - the lack of property and thus being forced to work for a wage). Men, at least in the advanced capitalist countries (and the distinction is maximally wide, at any given point in time, in urban metropolises), are more proletarianized, and they are seen and treated accordingly. This, of course, will take advantage of capaciti…
/r/MensRights25/06/19 05:28 AM
0

This line is regurgitated by MRA's all the time. It doesn't make any sense. It is, to an extent, accurate in terms of what they tried to do in some cases. But this, insofar as it gained any mainstream feminist acceptance, was only really around 2nd wave and later. But the line also exposes a rather complete ignorance of Marxism by the utterer, as it implies that the attempt to do so is in any way coherent or meaningful, or even accomplishment, that the relation between proletariat and bourgeoisi…
/r/MensRights25/06/19 03:57 AM
1

Gender roles have both biological and cultural components No. They have are set upon biological (sex) differences, but the "roles" are socially determined, founded upon and informed by those biological differences. Sex is a biological reality, but gender is socially created (albeit not a "social construct" in the sense used today, meaning an ideological construct). The cultural "component" derives from their social definition and is shaped by our biological reaction to the already-existing socia…
/r/MensRights16/06/19 02:19 AM
1

You should probably establish that either of these things are true By "relative preponderance" I didn't mean to say that the majority of the MRM is right-libertarian, but that a much higher percentage than the average population. I probably could've phrased that better. Just So story explaining them In the larger work I'm also using evolutionary psychology (unless you're going to make the same criticism of that). It'll have tons of statistics and be making, and Marxism isn't "just so stories", i…
/r/MensRights15/06/19 11:55 PM
2

http://www.sciencedirect.com.secure.sci-hub.tw/science/article/pii/S1090513809000646?via%3Dihub "Correction to Pollet and Nettle (2009): 'Partner wealth predicts self-reported orgasm frequency in a sample of Chinese women'" As they show, the effect of partner income is no longer significant once the control variables have been accounted for. We therefore wish to correct the conclusions of our article. The association in the CHFLS data between partner wealth and self-reported orgasm frequency is …
/r/BlackPillScience10/06/19 11:28 PM
1

WSWS and the affiliates of the IFCI are consistently some of the least obnoxious leftists when it comes to gender issues. To even state that the presumption of innocence should be a thing in accusations of sex crimes, or even more, admitting that it is in fact being violated and that is a bad thing, is really swimming against the current to say the least, and takes some actual courage. It must be stated, though, that on their part a substantial amount of the concern emanates from a fetish of dem…
/r/MensRights09/06/19 05:42 PM
1

oh to clarify, this was comparing, with the exception of the first list of [relatively] minor modifications, each side taken as a whole/combined, and with no implication of frequency, unless otherwise specified so it was, for example: Complete removal of the exposed clitoris + labia + infibulation Sorry, should've been more clear (Did you include subincision when you wrote "circumcision"?) I did, on accident. I just fixed it, thanks for pointing that out Third, Subincision is easily worse than a…
/r/MensRights07/06/19 08:30 PM
1

From memory: Piercings, scrapes, pricks, tattoos, etc. on any part of the exposed female genitalia = similar procedures on male genitals (probably moderately worse on female genitals because this typically targets the clitoris where the nerves are very densely distributed, comparable to the frenulum, but that isn't a common location for [involuntary or culturally pressured] modifications besides complete removal) Complete removal of clitoral hood = not as bad as complete removal of male foreskin…
/r/MensRights07/06/19 08:23 PM
6

It was 53%, and it's a bit more complicated than that: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38796457 From what I gathered skimming the article, it's like the 8% number used here, but just the inverse. The 53% is just cases that were dropped. That doesn't anywhere near prove that they were in fact false. Just like 8% of cases being proven false doesn't anywhere near show that all the rest were true. The evidence from the Commission for Women is in fact far from conclusive. It classes as "false" all …
/r/MensRights07/06/19 01:01 PM
1

tl;dr: It's time to give up the means of reproduction /s?
/r/MensRights07/06/19 11:49 AM
3

This really needs more upvotes :/ Like, really bad. ​ 88% upvoted? That's fucked.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 04:58 AM
1

I think he's referring to you assuming that it is wholly their fault that, for example, they "formed the lowest socioeconomic tier in their community". Blacks habitually inhabited right next to other races Geographical proximity doesn't necessarily mean that the circumstances are the same, that they are treated the same, have the same opportunities, etc. habitually inhabited choosing...is a choice There's a g[iTch in the matrix
/r/MensRights07/06/19 04:54 AM
9

Fucking sickening
/r/MensRights07/06/19 04:40 AM
1

choosing to break the law is a personal choice choosing...is a choice Nice meme. is a choice, not a result of social forces Those are not mutually exclusive. To demonstrate the false dichotomy here, let's look at one of the go-to MRA examples to show the position fathers who are trying to protect their kids and themselves from an abusive mother are in: You can stay and continue to subject yourself and your kids to the abuse. You can leave, in which case you, in the eyes of the law, will have imm…
/r/MensRights07/06/19 04:31 AM
2

Haven't read the article, but I'm 99% sure they're talking about HPV, not rim jobs -__- ​ Anyone remember how it took a fucking decade for the UK's NHS to start giving the vaccine to boys, instead of only girls? And the exploding rates of throat cancer in young men (from getting infected by HPV when performing cunnilingus [throat cancer usually only affects older men]). Cervical cancer does not affect boys and men because they do not have a cervix. But other cancers that can affect men, such as …
/r/MGTOW07/06/19 03:06 AM
1

Richard "Workers' Self-Directed Enterprises" Wolff Marxism Pick one
/r/MensRights05/06/19 09:10 AM
2

(crosspost from my comment on this in r/MGTOW) resident soft boi here: This is fucking stupid ​ Also, resident revolutionary communist: Capture the Flag is nakedly militaristic Is the dumbest thing ever written by a human
/r/MensRights05/06/19 02:54 AM
1

Our psychological functions and faculties are determined by hundreds of thousands of years of evolution The nuclear family is natural and the best environment for raising children Pick one
/r/MensRights05/06/19 02:51 AM
6

men's rights movement is debunked by the mainstream media debunked I don't think that word means what you think it means
/r/MensRights05/06/19 02:48 AM
1

this is truer than the general case, but the meaning of"influence" becomes pretty murky at that point. it is unlikely that there are 0 male teachers at the school, so, while it may be very little "influence" it is more than the 0% required for a 100% female influence. in fact, from the stat in the OP, we don't know the distribution of male vs female teachers across different grades. But, in general, its true it wont be very much. Actually. IIRC, there is a higher percentage of male teachers in h…
/r/MGTOW04/06/19 07:57 AM
1

resident soft boi here: This is fucking stupid ​ Also, resident revolutionary communist: Capture the Flag is nakedly militaristic Is the dumbest thing ever written by a human
/r/MGTOW04/06/19 06:42 AM
4

~80% of teachers are female so an 8 out of 10 chance of 100% feminine influence at school That's perhaps the most badly hidden attempt to deceptively reword/spin something to make it sound worse I've ever seen. Or, "best"-case scenario: the author's fucking stupid and doesn't understand the difference. This is "60% of the time, it works every time" but even dumber
/r/MGTOW04/06/19 12:59 AM
1

this should be mandatory reading for anyone interested in gender issues
/r/MensRights03/06/19 10:34 PM
0

Dude. Their name is "non-troll_account" Pause think about it really hard
/r/MensRights03/06/19 08:21 PM
26

It isn't a "great" personality trait to be "loyal" when there is no benefit being offered to him, only pain and suffering, and yet he has been brainwashed and had the idea instilled into him that he must stay anyway. I think you should really ask yourself how you and the surrounding culture have raised and continue to influence him in such a way that would lead to him being unable to leave and be "disloyal" even in such a situation. If people are being rude to you, that's only because there is n…
/r/MensRights02/06/19 04:16 AM
1

Wasn't that "women control 80% of domestic spending" stat debunked? https://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/do-women-really-control-80-of-household-spending-1054/
/r/MGTOW30/05/19 07:28 PM
2

This is pure, abject, inarguable proletarianization and transfer of labor from one class to another. "Socialists" covering their eyes and plugging their ears on this issue and ones like it really says a lot about the nature of the left and the class contradictions behind it. ​ "In all revolutions up till now the mode of activity always remained unscathed and it was only a question of a different distribution of this activity, a new distribution of labour to other persons, whilst the communist re…
/r/MensRights30/05/19 06:40 PM
1

Ah, that clears things up
/r/MGTOW30/05/19 05:55 PM
1

They'll hide all their sufferings and pain not letting their loved ones know. That's a bad thing. Men bottling up their pain and trauma and not telling anyone, causing trauma and damage to themselves on behalf of others, as dictated by their gender role, is not something to be celebrated. The circumstances around it are to be abolished, and the obligation, men are to be released from. Imagine some white bitch saying that "Not all Hispanics are trash and we should take some time out to appreciate…
/r/MensRights30/05/19 06:38 AM
2

Adding on top of what everyone else has already said: Bourgeois science, academics, and media of course portrays "paid work" with a briefcase, as if everyone is the imaginary all-expansive middle-class white-collar 50's office worker. Look at those graphs and then replace the briefcase icon with a shovel, a pickax, a chainsaw, a hardhat, a drill, a garbage truck, a wrench, a blowtorch, etc. Even more the "housework" that men in a relationship do are usually the things that are a bit harder than …
/r/MGTOW30/05/19 04:28 AM
1

drawing out their nature This is the same argument as when someone is drunk that you are actually getting a truer look at who they are. That this "true" nature is usually locked inside, is now being expressed uninhibited. It's a chapter out of the feminist handbook (well, at least by particularly inept ones), treating someone who is an "angry" drunk as evidence that men are actually "aggressive" and "mean", but that it gets covered up. It makes no fucking sense. If evolutionary psychology and co…
/r/MGTOW30/05/19 04:13 AM
0

high-end school with families who teach their kids right and wrong Subtle ​ Get fucked
/r/MensRights30/05/19 12:57 AM
2

I wouldn't be surprised if it was related to some of the same neural circuitry as the, I can't remember the name of the effect of the top off my head - the effect where males actually went more for non-conventionally attractive females, because they thought they would be the only ones going for them, or at least would have a better chance. The issue is that so do all the other males, resulting in females lower in "looks" receiving more matches and having a higher average (but much more polarized…
/r/BlackPillScience28/05/19 08:55 PM
9

yep. There are more, but these are just by far what is "the face of the MRM" (and it's earned [in the good way]) And I'm not even an MRA, lol
/r/MensRights28/05/19 04:38 AM
22

Look up "The Honey Badgers" https://honeybadgerbrigade.com/ These are by far the most famous MRA's, the majority of them are women ​ Two of them are also here on reddit, on this sub often: u/girlwriteswhat (Karen Straughan) u/typhonblue (Alison Tieman)
/r/MensRights28/05/19 04:34 AM
1

Google the phrase with quotes around it Or did you already know, comrade?
/r/MGTOW27/05/19 11:05 PM
-1

fUn sCiEnCe fACt: This is the most cucked sentence ever spoken in the English language.
/r/MGTOW27/05/19 07:59 PM
1

P.S. I've bookmarked you as someone who would be interested in forming a group to create these changes. A “group to create these changes”. With what? Let me guess, the state, backed by some cultural movement of “the people”? Or some anarchist “definitely not a state” state? And “a group”. Like a party? Or some anarchist “definitely not a party” party? The communist party doesn’t “create the changes”, neither do “the people”. The working class does. The party guides them but can’t do anything on …
/r/MensRights26/05/19 04:44 AM
1

rather than insisting on one revolutionary push (a desire, imo, that has more to do with one's ego than any true commitment to the betterment of humanity). A gradual reformist way path from capitalism to communism is impossible on every level of analysis. Economically – Capitalism is rule by capital (exchange-value), Communism is the conscious human production of life (broken into objects and activities, use-values). One cannot gradually turn into the other. It is commodity production, or it isn…
/r/MensRights26/05/19 04:43 AM
1

Also, I firmly believe that we should consciously transition from capitalism I’ll come back to this “conscious transition" at the end (of part 3). before the roboticization of the workforce encourages the wealthy elite to slough workers off the earth like the chaff they think we are. The links I gave before to the economist talked about how that is impossible. Or rather, it is, but not in the way you are thinking. The economy doesn’t the work the way it does because “haha, rich people bad”. Neit…
/r/MensRights26/05/19 04:42 AM
1

How does that differ from anarchism? In many (but not all) aspects of these descriptions of the resulting society, they appear on the surface to be the same. The differences, however are rather vast: Anarchism, while it has had much proletarian influence in it it, remains a collection of petty-bourgeois, essentially liberal ideologies. In the most modern incarnation (save the post-modernist variations) they see “irrational, oppressive” hierarchies and power which is unjustified and therefore, in…
/r/MensRights26/05/19 04:41 AM
2

If feminists really do accept that men can be raped, like they say they do. And men under-report being raped at however many times the rate of women. Then how does one come to the conclusion that fighting false rape accusations is a "war on women" (rather than a war on rape victims full stop, if it is a war on any at all)? ​ H M M M M M M M
/r/MensRights24/05/19 11:10 PM
1

I would respond to all this tonight, but I haven't slept in two days, lol. For now, though I will recommend (he's a demsoc, but the rest of it is good stuff): https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2015/08/23/robots-and-ai-utopia-or-dystopia-part-one/ https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2015/08/29/robots-and-ai-utopia-or-dystopia-part-two/ https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2015/09/24/robots-and-ai-utopia-or-dystopia-part-three/ "Let me sum up the conclusions of my posts on robots and AI.…
/r/MensRights24/05/19 11:53 AM
5

By definition, a parasite has to be of another species. hence the "basically". and the absence of a "literally" or "actually" If we think of all animal offspring as a parasite, we may as well end it all with this generation and say goodbye. That doesn't follow. Parasites are bad because of what they do, which was the basis for the analogy, not because of how define them
/r/MensRights23/05/19 10:45 PM
2

You’re a moron. I try. Communism is far left If by that you mean that many far-left ideologies call themselves and their glorified make-overs for capitalism "communist", then yes I agree with that. If you mean that what I'm laying out is also leftist simply because I speak of replacing capitalism with this "communism" then that does not logically follow in light of the argument I just made. You could argue that the premises and explanations of the nature of leftism offered are wrong, but that is…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:43 PM
2

Interesting. A good explanation I tried my best to condense both the explanation of the usual understanding and the critique into a few paragraphs! The base concepts aren't particularly complicated, but there is a ton of background info which is hard to sum up in that short a space. But thanks! I'll take that to mean I succeeded at least to some extent! but I don't think many share that interpretation with you That would be absolutely correct. The umbrella categories of theories and movements/or…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 09:22 PM
2

Leftism = the left wing of capital. Leftists essentially seek nothing more than a change in management, not in the system of production. State-owned enterprises don't change anything fundamental. Neither do syndicates, neither do co-ops. The expansion of economic value, by value - ultimately, money turning into more money - which is called "capital" (which is also the separation of humans from the means of life), is still the ruling force in all of them. Such situations involve: workers, enterpr…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 06:11 PM
1

Just because it's inconvenient doesn't mean it's not your responsibility Just because something is convenient doesn't mean it's right Woah, that was like, totally my entire argument! You defeated it so well bro! https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
/r/MensRights23/05/19 05:43 PM
9

All of the parties of the world are as bad as one another. Workers: do not vote for any of them FTFY
/r/MensRights23/05/19 05:24 PM
3

I'm not right-wing either lol (nor centrist, nor "third position")... Google my username with spaces between the words and the whole thing in quotation marks for a hint stop and smell the communism
/r/MensRights23/05/19 05:13 PM
7

I'm not a liberal (nor any kind of leftist). And fetuses are not conscious, so they are not "babies".
/r/MensRights23/05/19 04:46 PM
8

the pain of getting their son aborted so it doesn't hurt when their daughters get aborted? even when they wanted the pregnancy to go full term right, and it sucks, and if they believe in "life at conception", then it must be really traumatic But it isn't their body, and it shouldn't ultimately be up to them, nor should they get an "equal say". It's a really shitty situation, but that's the way it has to be. Whether or not the fetus is "alive" and has its "own" body doesn't really matter, what ma…
/r/MensRights23/05/19 02:26 PM
7

another tweet by that account says rape victims shouldn't get an abortion because abortion won't erase the trauma that is actually nauseating
/r/MensRights23/05/19 02:00 PM
137

Tradcucks GTFO. Her point was that both men and women should be "held accountable" for their own actions. A woman being forced to bear what is basically a parasite for months and a man being nearly a slave for two decades is "holding adults accountable". How liberating and supportive of both.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:12 PM
3

This is obviously absolutely horrific. One must be able to revoke consent at any point before or during any sexual activity. HOWEVER, it is telling how something which limits the withdrawal of consent is seen as an attack on women. The only reason it could possibly be reasonably interpreted as this to any extent at all, is because, as other users in this thread have pointed out, there is no protection or ability to not give consent at any point for men, not just a revocation during the sex act. …
/r/MensRights22/05/19 09:53 AM
2

I don't use this phrase often, but here it applies: ​ Turns out, the description of the all-pervasive abuse by fathers before feminism was and is literally bourgeois propaganda.
/r/MensRights22/05/19 09:29 AM
1

What happened to you was awful. And I'm sorry that happened to you. But I would criticize one thing:You shouldn't be "checking/acknowledging your privilege". While what you said about how boys/men would be treated might be - or rather, is - true, there is no reason to minimize what happened to you or draw attention away from it to what happened to someone else. It's okay to be upset about something that happened to you. Just because you don't go out of your way to make note of the fact that it c…
/r/MensRights13/05/19 09:57 PM
1

I was literally sobbing the first time I read this, and so I instantly remembered this story when I read OP's question.
/r/MensRights09/05/19 03:29 AM
3

"My wife walked in and caught me crying, She was concerned and immediately came over to hug me, but her entrance was like a finger in the dyke. All of a sudden everything stopped. No emotion at all was spilling out, like a door had slammed shut. We hugged, I said thank you and I thought that was all it would be. She was visibly upset that I had shut the door on 'an intimate moment'. She came at me with 'why don’t you love me, is this relationship going to continue without any emotion?' Why did I…
/r/MensRights09/05/19 03:23 AM
2

imho, the communist movement is barely re-awakening after being dead since 1924ish and dominated by counter-revolution since 1921. The movements since then i don't see as anything else than attempts at reorganization of capital (which is what I would argue leftism is). They all wish simply to put the state and/or workers in charge of capital, without transforming the relations which make it capital, leaving capital, to, by definition, stay the dominating force.
/r/MensRights08/05/19 12:22 AM
1

ah, leftcom here. What parts do you still find useful/agreeable?
/r/MensRights08/05/19 12:09 AM
1

material conditions username checks out. So what were ya before? trot, ML, some other tankie, demsoc, (old-style) socdem, leftcom, ancom or other libsoc? If you don't mind my asking
/r/MensRights08/05/19 12:05 AM
2

Literally this. Males = evolutionary vanguard (higher phylogenic variance, lower ontogenic variance) Function is to gain and transfer information from the environment to the species' genome through selection. Other structures with the same meta-function: forebrains, heterogamety, homosexuals, cancer
/r/BlackPillScience07/05/19 11:21 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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