TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

AstroTibs Archive

View 4 posts and 96 comments by AstroTibs 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

I see your point. Personally, I don't really care about either day so much as I care about the one-sided celebration from various social media platforms. It was nice to see that not all of these websites celebrated, because it was consistent. Honestly, is it really a significant holiday? As I said, I'll post again on IMD 2019 and see what these same sites look like, and then again in a year for IWD. I just want consistency and respectfulness.
/r/MensRights09/03/19 02:13 PM
1

I wouldn't have done that. The responsible, respectful thing would be to happily and unironically celebrate IWD on IWD. Don't try to make it about men, because that seems petty. The better tactic would be to wait until IMD and if they don't post a celebratory message, to ask why not, and to link back to the IWD post.
/r/MensRights09/03/19 02:09 PM
1

A few months ago, I submitted a gallery of the same sites on International Men's Day, and said that I would follow up today. What's of note is that not every one of the sites I highlighted is celebrating today. But of course, there still is a difference between the two days. I'll post these sites again for IMD 2019.
/r/MensRights08/03/19 11:57 PM
25

If you put /s, you're not really trolling anymore
/r/MensRights17/02/19 02:45 AM
4

Well I think the message is sensible, but to be a believable statement about society, it has to accommodate equal numbers of men and women, so the blue and pink areas for both sides of the graphic should have the same area. The right graph is closer to half-and-half than the left, but still not quite there: https://i.imgur.com/GbHPfp0.png
/r/MensRights24/01/19 03:29 AM
2

According to our votes counts, some rogue forum philosopher was personally slighted by our observations.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 08:10 PM
0

Precisely, and it pisses me off every single time I see it. It's not a bannable offense to violate reddiquette like that, but it does reveal that people would much rather get short-term gratification for their feelings than to contribute to the long-term quality of conversations across the entire site.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 12:59 AM
1

Don't downvote this person, or anyone, for asking a question to start a discussion. I don't even care if you suspect or know it's a bad-faith question. Downvoting is the opposite of reddiquette, and it makes you look like overly-emotional babies.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 09:45 PM
1

Not really. The police has to investigate if they suspect one happened. And how would they know to investigate if there wasn't a complaint?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 10:35 PM
6

Lily Dedman, a Kent Union Student Trustee, who signed the petition, told InQuire: ‘I have no issue with promoting free speech and people having opposing opinions to myself, however I am also a liar.”
/r/MensRights23/11/18 02:41 AM
3

Sorry to disappoint. But the sites speak for themselves.
/r/MensRights20/11/18 07:47 PM
5

I hate to bring more glumness to this. Not that I care about celebrating holidays like this, but it's worth noting that I didn't even realize it was IMD until like 15 minutes ago. Here I am, 10 minutes from the day being over. I might see what these sites look like again on International Women's Day (March 8th), and then again on IMD 2019 (so long as I realize it in time).
/r/MensRights20/11/18 04:51 AM
5

Nobody said "feminists." The modern court of public opinion will have most people who see this pre-emptively siding against the dentists.
/r/MensRights02/10/18 04:36 PM
1

Sure there should. If they have a public place for them to do it (not here, obviously) and where we can mock them, then they won't have the "coordinated censorship" card to deploy to the new recruits they gain in secret.
/r/MensRights07/08/18 11:29 PM
3

Nothing quite like emphatically wanting to help someone because they're doing something that you deeply enjoy. Also, nothing quite like those early formative years that will nearly permanently define you as a person. Yup.
/r/MensRights25/07/18 09:49 PM
-14

Many hours late but no, I don't like it. It's negativity. We don't need negativity on Father's Day. Edit: whoops, I guess we do! Thanks everyone for the thoughtfully-crafted counter arguments.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 02:48 AM
10

Then we should contact Peter Noone and get his advice!
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:48 PM
25

You didn't present a worldview. You said something that literally nobody in here disagrees with or has indicated to the contrary.
/r/MensRights07/04/18 09:23 PM
3

God of the wage gaps
/r/MensRights15/03/18 08:57 PM
1

So far as I know, masking only occur if a comment already has votes. If nobody touches a comment it remains at 1. Regardless, this is a controversial sub so it was reasonable to assume that someone was simply angry—a couple apparently were.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 06:09 PM
4

See, you don't even know for sure. Regardless, "downvote" does not mean "disagree," and you can't disagree with something that is factually true. If his claim is not factually true, then you should state what is true. You're jumping to conclusions about me, my reasoning, and my motivation. If I'm an idiot, then what does that make you?
/r/MensRights11/03/18 07:37 AM
2

I heard a little, but that does fall into the maybe we're missing context category.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 07:31 AM
4

I don't think it's device-dependent but it's possible that it was upvoted back into the positive since I posted. I also am aware that random "comment fuzzing" obscures the real total, and I might have seen an exceptionally improbable negative number given its +/- count at that time.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 07:25 AM
12

Okay, then help me out. Why am I an idiot for seeing his comment in the negative and responding to people who have and would downvote it without response?
/r/MensRights11/03/18 07:19 AM
8

Your comment right above mine ("He is an atheist who...") was at –2 when I posted.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 07:07 AM
13

My feelings on this depend precisely on what Arel's comment means. 1) Maybe he means "I believe people who claim they are raped." 1a) If someone says they've been raped, I'll believe them and help them get the resources and take the steps they need. 1b) If someone accuses a specific person of rape, I can't believe that wholesale without evidence. Now someone's reputation is on the line. 2) It's pretty unlikely, but maybe he means: "I believe people victims of rape" as in they've been proved to b…
/r/MensRights11/03/18 07:00 AM
11

Why was OP downvoted? Is this assessment incorrect? If you downvoted because of an incorrect assessment, why didn't you provide the correct one?
/r/MensRights11/03/18 06:52 AM
18

This comment is not helpful in the least, either to this subreddit or the movement in general.
/r/MensRights13/12/17 03:56 PM
-1

Punctuation. The man can't "die" food. Save users a re-read.
/r/MensRights13/12/17 02:28 AM
8

Crime is cunning. Pervasive.
/r/MensRights08/12/17 10:07 PM
-2

And you crossed the line because you'd rather just take a sarcastic jab at Burchill than to leave a compassionate comment about her son, the victim. People here are more obsessed with hating the wicked than helping the unfortunate.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 06:06 PM
1

Well they don't have to listen to me, but it's a disgusting thing to say. Just ignoring this person's suicide just so we can take a hollow jab at this woman we don't like. It's also disgusting how much I've gotten downvoted for leaving such a sobering suggestion. People here need to grow up.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 06:01 PM
-32

To anybody reading this and considering adding another comment like, "she's probably overjoyed because she hates men": Don't. Just don't. Go do something else with your time instead—something constructive.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 10:29 AM
-37

There was a line and you crossed it.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 10:26 AM
2

You said this was a serious sub. Only a pre-teen would use the term "asshat" in full seriousness. I see no problem with "she just found some potent D." It's a harmless joke and to call it insulting or sexist is a huge stretch. Or is this sub so serious that it's a "No Fun Allowed" type?
/r/MensRights29/11/17 03:16 PM
2

"Hell hath frozen over" sure strikes me as the most serious statement imaginable. As does "asshat."
/r/MensRights29/11/17 04:58 AM
8

...You responded. If he's a troll, then his game is perfectly fine.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 03:56 PM
1

Well, I didn't want to say it, but some people are idiots. They falter when things aren't clearly and unambiguously spelled out.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 09:47 PM
1

Because maybe, however rarely, there is a person who would think "wait is this a men's room or a women's room?" You have to admit that outright stating "all gender" completely removes ambiguity. But let's not lose track of the point. I am not assuming the worst or most politically manipulative intentions by Taco Bell from this move.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 07:13 PM
1

I'm skeptical. If it says "all gender" then it eliminates any possible ambiguity about who the room is intended for.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 06:50 PM
1

It's not about the semantics, it's about how this is refreshingly symmetric w.r.t. men and women.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 05:27 AM
2

Okay. Well. So the Democratic party has time and again expressed that they do not want my vote. So... where should I cast it then...?
/r/MensRights02/11/17 05:14 AM
21

No, this is a sincere post. We've seen a ton of "Women's room / Unisex room" posts lately. This is refreshing.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 05:05 AM
1

It's not hypocrisy unless we know that Reddit has refused to run a "mirror-image"-style ad. For all we know, nobody's making such ads and that's not something Reddit is responsible for. Again, I say we wait until we see that hypocrisy first-hand instead of assuming it.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 07:11 PM
1

Well let's dial back on the "what if"s. When and if that happens, let's just argue that the ad is not that bad, and similarly dissuade people who take the most violent interpretation out of it. Seriously, this is an "injustice against men" only in the most circuitous and hypothetical way.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 07:58 AM
4

I don't think it's that bad. I think it's just a roundabout way of saying they've got shit for brains. Just low-level battle-of-the-sexes harmless stuff, not actually making a joke about violent brain surgery. Part of MensRights is to justify that men can express feelings. Let's not overshoot that goal and become oversensitive.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 12:20 AM
1

Who craps in their jack-o-lantern? I mean honestly...
/r/MensRights17/10/17 12:17 AM
7

Stopped reading there. I was about to give this one to MSNBC but they let their ideology show.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 12:04 AM
0

This sub always complains about "feminism" and how modern feminists react and behave—how they can't take a joke or handle dissent or critique their own... but we're careening toward that very state at mach speed.
/r/MensRights08/09/17 01:04 AM
-12

This is precisely what happened. Hirsch said, "ship yourself this device instead." "What if you can't get something shipped to you?" He does not clearly answer that question. He confuses things by going into technical details about something that does not answer this question. She did not need to fall back on that shitty "mansplaining" term, and I hate that she got so many likes for it, but his answers stopped being helpful after "what if I can't obtain the better option?" People in this thread …
/r/MensRights07/09/17 07:49 PM
7

By necessity, DARVO only really applies when the true victim has been proved to be the victim. But I'm going to guess that this term is intended for manipulation before the evidence is settled.
/r/MensRights29/08/17 10:38 PM
6

Kind of an odd offering from a game with the words "against humanity" in its title.
/r/MensRights29/08/17 10:23 PM
5

I switched about a year ago when they showcased this. Look at this bullshit she was spouting. But it's okay, because she's a minority woman activist who demonizes the US government, so it doesn't really matter what she says—she's progressive! Side note: bing landing page has awesome pictures every day and I'm still glad I switched. Today's is a Canada lynx—oooh!
/r/MensRights08/08/17 03:03 PM
77

Definitely overly so in this case. "Hello fine sir" is a flag to watch out for imminent shitposting, but none occurred.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 12:34 AM
3

Thanks, that's a good response with a thoughtful interpretation. Earlier, a socially retarded phone number came on to strawman us, and that wasn't particularly satisfying.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 08:14 AM
2

No it doesn't; that's not the same thing. People can know from its title of "gay bar" whether or not they'd be interested in going. People are not being disallowed from entering. "Sports bar" is the same thing for me. I have zero interest in sports or in bars. But I could certainly go if I chose to.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 12:01 AM
20

As I understood it, this professor didn't care that they were discriminating, and only took action because of the theater's reaction to criticism. Is this true?
/r/MensRights13/06/17 09:57 PM
1

Either way, she's not completely innocent in this. They both have done something illegal, and I hope prostitution charges aren't dropped or even reduced simply because she's a woman who was lied to.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 08:12 PM
1

I didn't know prostitution was legal in Florida.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 05:29 PM
3

That is indeed fair.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 01:06 AM
14

I don't know who she is either. She made a decent joke at MLB and SeanMichaelKane failed to pick up on it and insulted her. Fair enough, worth a laugh. She decided to frame this as though she mansplained MLB and some idiot mansplained her back. OK... But then one of her followers made a joke to her but she did the exact thing SeanMichaelKane did, minus the insults. So she "mansplained" Jennifer for "mansplaining" a joke at her. So it's a combination of perpetuating the "mansplaining" nonsense bu…
/r/MensRights11/06/17 07:38 PM
23

That sounds like "worse than useless" to me
/r/MensRights30/05/17 07:00 PM
2

Yeah, I guess "funsized tub" is just a synonym for "bowl"
/r/MensRights26/05/17 03:24 PM
2

Well stated. You're a gentleman and a scholar. And a king. And a robot prince.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 02:42 PM
18

gross gross gross what
/r/MensRights09/05/17 08:47 PM
17

If you're coming at me and you're an attack helicopter... you win, pre-emptively. I surrender.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 10:21 PM
3

"based on her political biased"
/r/MensRights28/04/17 02:41 AM
1

OK so this is twice I've seen this mistake in this thread. ..based on her political bias. Bias is the noun. Biased would be the adjective (she is biased). Bias/es/ed/ing is the uncommonly-used verb. It's especially strange because people used to make the mistake the other way around: only ever writing bias for any given usage.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 12:19 AM
1

No it isn't the perfect response, because, like I said, it makes you look like an idiot by calling someone a literal horse. How do you plan on convincing either your opponent or the spectators—any of whom may be belligerent, or eager to mock and dismiss you by distracting the topic—that you have a valid point, when you use an example that's rife for mockery and begging to distract the topic? Use a down-to-earth example. Not a horse.
/r/MensRights11/04/17 09:00 AM
4

Well, you don't have to do so defiantly.
/r/MensRights11/04/17 12:17 AM
1

Don't do this. It makes you sound idiotic. It's obvious she's not a horse. You need to pick something plausible, but not nasty enough to warrant further retaliation.
/r/MensRights11/04/17 12:12 AM
5

you can really tell she has a passion for foreskin which is admirable It's amazing that, within the context, none of this statement is sexual.
/r/MensRights06/04/17 03:02 PM
2

I'll call that "uncertain at best."
/r/MensRights05/04/17 10:51 PM
2

Name any situation that isn't improved by kielbasa.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 09:04 PM
10

Could use a bit of polish but I think you've captured the essentials
/r/MensRights04/04/17 08:37 PM
17

oppression of literally half the planet ...Which planet?
/r/MensRights26/03/17 07:53 AM
3

I'd never seen the term before here and yet I knew immediately what it was, probably because of terms like "power creep" in trading card circles and the like. So I'll take a shot at it: "Mission creep" I assume means that your primary moral/ethical objective that you're fighting for has mostly or entirely been achieved, but it's possible new smaller objectives have cropped up along the way—usually that's fine. But as time runs on, you adopt increasingly trivial causes to fight for, until, in the…
/r/MensRights16/03/17 12:04 AM
31

"Mission creep" is one of the many things wrong with the feminist movement, we shouldn't copy it. Fantastic and concise statement. Edit: to add to that, I don't think we're in danger of copying it—we're more in danger of not being aware of it early enough to head it off. It's inevitable that it will occur if left unchecked.
/r/MensRights15/03/17 04:25 PM
1

you have to listen to a fetal heart before you can abort No excuse for this. It's out-and-out a morality play.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 10:25 PM
2

Please correct me if I've got my facts wrong, as I just recently found out about this: OK on the one hand, the bill is a joke meant to point out how stupid the bill is that requires a hospital to bury fetal remains. On the other hand, that bill applies to the hospitals. This satirical bill targets private citizens. I know it's a joke, but it feels vindictive.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:28 PM
13

You're not really sweetening the deal
/r/MensRights11/03/17 06:05 PM
38

All right George, this is usually the time that I'd ask you to support your claims but I don't really want to see your 3-year-old's penis.
/r/MensRights11/03/17 05:50 PM
5

welding: Put on cool gloves Put on cool mask Play with fire and sparks Welding kicks ass. Wait what were we talking about?
/r/MensRights07/02/17 09:10 PM
16

"Even if she was completely not at fault ... execute her." Are you hearing yourself?
/r/PussyPass31/01/17 01:00 AM
28

No. This is more in line with /r/SocialJusticeInAction; or if there's some kind of "sick burn" or "Cosmo sucks" subreddit, it should go there.
/r/MensRights28/01/17 08:08 PM
2

Is it easier to rob a bank and live off the cash? You need to: Be successful by coming away with a livable amount of money Not be caught/killed before or during the robbery Manage never to be caught or killed over this robbery, regardless of how much money you got or have spent If robbing a bank truly was easier, nearly everyone would rob banks all the time rather than work. Or, using a bottleneck argument, every bank would be robbed every day, and the less fortunate suckers who didn't hit the b…
/r/MensRights25/01/17 10:53 PM
1

Maybe. But from what I hear, the citizenship application process is a long bureaucratic nightmare. For many people it's just easier to break the law and not think about it for years. For many people, going through the motions could take too long to be safe for them. Or they may not know about or have access to information regarding the application process.
/r/MensRights25/01/17 04:07 PM
4

I like it this way. It's like when a video overdubs a new voice saying a completely different word over the original.
/r/MensRights24/12/16 03:51 AM
13

I'll take the sense of humor, please. But what's important to note here is that my sense of humor isn't gendered.
/r/MensRights20/12/16 02:10 AM
81

Well yes, it was a joke when she said it. But ask yourself this: when a male celebrity passes away, do you think BBC will feature his joke about screwing over women? Do you think such a joke will be as funny to them?
/r/MensRights19/12/16 11:12 PM
5

This is only peripherally related to Men's Rights. For maximum coverage, plunk this over on /r/SocialJusticeInAction, /r/ThisIsNotASafeSpace, and maybe /r/TumblrInAction too if it's not there already.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 09:18 PM
0

I'll never defend mainstream media's choice to represent the pertinent information in the way that they have.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 05:39 AM
126

A Whitehall, New York, teenager is charged with having sex with a 13-year-old girl. So, a teenager is charged with having sex with a teenager. Zachery McClure, 17 Not a legal adult, and currently only accused and not convicted... and yet his name is out for all to see. 13-year-old girl a victim under the age of 16 the girl She Wait, where's the name of the other underage person relevant to this case? I mean, no names should be made public at all, but certainly news media wouldn't only name the a…
/r/MensRights15/12/16 07:47 PM
-3

This submission is not about men's rights. This is about opposing the stupid dime-a-dozen comment responses, all while assuming them to be defenses of feminism. Let's be better than that, please.
/r/MensRights11/09/16 06:47 AM
1

Yeah, let's ask the 140-year-olds if this campaign is any more effective than youtube and facebook were back in the late 1800s. Times change, dude.
/r/MensRights30/08/16 06:54 PM
1

Maybe the DePaul debacle is part of why UC is being vocal about this non-controversial position.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 04:12 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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