TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Beatsters Archive

View 1 posts and 50 comments by Beatsters 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)
2

Your analogy is fairly poor. Telling a gay person to be pretend to be straight in order to protect themselves against hate crimes is like telling a woman to pretend to be a man to avoid rape. You can't compare "make some changes to your behaviour and choices" to "change your identity". They're just not the same.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 04:09 PM
1

I agree that the don't-dress-slutty "advice" needs to stop, but you haven't really encapsulated the poor logic in this graphic. Men don't form a homogeneous group with uniform behaviour; just because some men rape doesn't mean others do, and acknowledging that some men rape is not the same as saying that the natural state for every man is "rapist", as this graphic suggests. If someone tells you to lock your door at night to keep out home intruders, are they implicitly stating that everyone in th…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 03:53 PM
2

Can someone point out where it says that women have it worse than men? It seems to me like this article was just writing about the challenges faced by veterans that are unique to women.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 04:06 PM
6

The article asks a question but never even tries to answer it. Are you even trying to be a journalist when your article is almost entirely composed of twitter screenshots?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:01 PM
6

Don't listen to assholes like that.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:17 AM
9

Neither can I. Discuss your options with a lawyer. A lot of the advice on this forum is terrible.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:06 AM
4

That's hardly a gender issue.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:20 PM
3

Demonized? I think the point is that people that claim to be "nice guys" are potentially deluded as to why girls don't like them, and then rationalize their rejection by assuming that women only go for guys that are assholes. Getting a woman's attention is about more than being nice.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:18 PM
2

The criminal aspect is something that isn't really being discussed in this thread, from what I can see. An unwanted child undoubtedly has a much higher chance of becoming a criminal, and the financial and social costs of that are likely much higher than the welfare costs of supporting that child, which are already higher than the birth control costs, as you point out.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 08:02 PM
10

Not to mention that the oldest and arguably most powerful intelligent race in the galaxy is all female. EDIT: The important fact is that asari resemble females, whether or not they can be defined as being female. Considering the topic in this thread is representations of females in video games, it would be silly not to consider the Asari females in this regard.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 06:02 PM
-2

This doesn't belong on this subreddit.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 11:19 PM
9

The right to express an opinion has nothing to do with the validity of the opinion being expressed. A person that can speak freely can express an opinion that is logically incoherent or factually incorrect. Controversy = valid opinions on both sides No, that's not correct. Controversy arises when there are multiple competing opinions that gain popularity, not when there are multiple valid opinions.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 05:58 PM
2

If this is what the Crown wanted, then why did they bother appealing at all?
/r/MensRights22/01/13 11:20 PM
1

She does raise a good point though. I wouldn't assume that it is a mark against him, but there has to be some reason why the Crown didn't call Mr. Ryan to testify.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 04:56 PM
2

I agree. Too often Facebook posts and shitty blogs end up at the top of this sub.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 08:07 PM
-2

Which has nothing to do with their point.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 08:04 PM
1

Ah yes I've been phrasing it incorrectly. I'll be sure to read that study, thanks!
/r/MensRights09/01/13 12:50 AM
2

I don't recall denouncing the data, if that's what you're implying. I merely echoed the point that the sample size is too small to generalize nationally, which is a conclusion drawn by the study itself.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 08:51 PM
3

Kanin says in the conclusion of the study that the small sample makes it difficult to generalize the findings. He says quite plainly that he does not suggest that the results of this study can be extrapolated to other populations. He suggests that more studies under similar conditions in different cities need to be conducted to corroborate his findings.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 07:34 PM
6

Didn't you read the comment above mine? The sample size is too small. That's no strawman.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 05:37 PM
47

Seriously. It seems like people are too busy patting each other on the back for including sources in an infographic that they can't be bothered to actually check those sources.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 04:25 PM
5

The actions that are discouraged by realistic expectations are actions that should be discouraged.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 11:08 PM
4

Of course, the person in question presents no evidence to support her assertion that these kinds of events are perpetrated predominantly by white men. Why should she? Clearly, she has no interest in testing whether or not her worldview is supported by empirical observation. On the contrary, she has espoused this opinion specifically because of how neatly it fits into her framework for understanding the world. Unlike her, I'm not a bigot, and I don't assume that white men are more likely to becom…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 10:44 PM
24

Remember how the protesters at Warren Farrell's UofT event were chanting "no hate speech on campus" just before they chanted "fuck Warren Farrell"? Yea, that's basically what this article is about. Anyone that challenges my worldview is fundamentally flawed and must be a woman-hater, so my profane outbursts are justified.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 09:15 PM
–

The man who committed the murders at the Polytechnique massacre was severely abused and abandoned by his father. The incident is hardly reflective of wider societal violence against women; rather, it was another tragic case of an abused child developing anti-social and violent tendencies. If anything, the response to the massacre should have been a conversation about mental health and intervention into abusive homes.
/r/MensRights06/12/12 10:37 PM
2

I don't see anything wrong with simply identifying this woman. She entered a public space and acted in a certain way; her actions should be associated with her identity. If she has the courage of her convictions, then she should have no problem with being identified.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 11:03 PM
13

The second part of the video is worth watching as well.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 09:27 PM
1

The page details the backlash that has resulted from the event, including this: Technical: Our website has been blacklisted by the Web of Trust (WOT) and there is evidence of a coordinated effort to give our website poor ratings by flagging our site as having malware and viruses despite there being none. Our ability to send email has also been compromised by similar efforts. Seems like they were right.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 08:14 PM
6

After the guy said that his friends had committed suicide and he just wanted to understand better... man, that was painful to watch. And the "why not feminism?" response is just so heartless and self-centred. You suffered a personal tragedy? Well, make sure you only look for answers in feminist-approved spaces. Otherwise, we'll assume that you hate women, you rape-loving scum. Be sure to read the response from the Canadian Association for Equality. This sums it up pretty well: We’re open to deba…
/r/MensRights05/12/12 05:52 PM
13

I doubt that. Any organization with an internal investigation process, like a university, would not discipline an employee until the investigation is complete. In a case where criminal charges have been laid, an internal investigation generally can't be completed until the charges are dealt with.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 08:24 PM
2

The student federation at my school, as far as I'm aware, was not afiliated with this group while I was there.
/r/MensRights01/12/12 06:34 PM
2

At the very least they're committing libel/slander. I'm not a big fan of hate speech laws, but someone saying or writing something that is demonstrably false and has a negative effect on a group's reputation needs to face consequences.
/r/MensRights01/12/12 06:24 PM
-3

You're taking this way too personally. She just doesn't want to talk to you. Leave it at that. If you feel like this will adversely affect you professionally, then talk with HR about it. This really isn't an issue for this subreddit.
/r/MensRights17/11/12 01:12 AM
0

That's like saying that someone who sells sandwiches exclusively to men isn't discriminating against women. Seriously, are you even reading what you're writing? You're just making yourself sound like an idiot now.
/r/MensRights17/11/12 12:43 AM
-4

Not sure I understand what your issue is then. Sounds like this girl just doesn't want to talk to you and is too immature to tell you to your face.
/r/MensRights17/11/12 12:37 AM
4

What exactly did HR say to you? Did they call you a pervert?
/r/MensRights17/11/12 12:24 AM
-1

Yes, because I agree with the small business owner, I am a misogynist. No, you're a mysogynist because you're attempting to trivialize a legitimate complaint against a discriminatory practice and belittling this woman by making it about her feelings. It's not discrimination, its his religious beliefs. Wrong. It is discrimination; whether or not it is justified is debatable, but suggesting that it isn't discrimination is just stupid. Yes, it is about his religious beliefs, and those beliefs happe…
/r/MensRights17/11/12 12:18 AM
1

That's an issue that could be raised at the Tribunal. In the case of the man who filed a complaint against a women's only gym in BC, the Tribunal found that he did just that -- looked for a situation in which he would be discriminated against -- and cited that as one of their reasons for ruling against him.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 11:24 PM
-2

If he does have someone to cut women's hair and they weren't there then on that day he was operating a business that discriminates against women, so I'm not sure what your point was there. Man you sound like such a misogynist. Of course this isn't about discrimination, this is about an overly sensitive woman getting her feelings hurt. Sure, she could have gone to a different shop, but she wasn't the one breaking the law, was she?
/r/MensRights16/11/12 11:12 PM
-1

He's free to move to another jurisdiction where they allow gender-based discrimination, or he can attempt to have the human rights code changed. Or he can, you know, hire someone to cut women's hair? For all we know, the OHRC might rule in his favour. Either way, unless you're Canadian, why do you care what our laws are? They don't affect you.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 10:59 PM
0

The OHRC can't force him to cut a woman's hair. They can force him to comply with the law, but as I said, he can simply choose to stop cutting hair altogether. Again, how is this hard to understand? The only thing that he's being forced to do is comply with the laws of the jurisdiction in which his business operates.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 10:45 PM
0

But she can't force him to cut her hair. So why does it matter if she said that? How she felt about it is also irrelevant; what matters is whether or not this business is discriminating based on gender, which is prohibited in this jurisdiction. How is this hard to understand?
/r/MensRights16/11/12 10:17 PM
4

This is not an abuse problem. This is a communication problem. First, it's a communication problem in the sense that she couldn't adequately communicate to you that she didn't like what you were doing without hitting you. To be fair, it can be difficult to communicate effectively in that kind of situation; saying "no" can sometimes be a playful way of encouraging the behaviour. In order to prevent this situation from recurring, you need to establish a way for both of you to communicate when some…
/r/MensRights16/11/12 09:05 PM
0

No, not at all actually. He is providing a service within a legal system that prohibits discrimination based on gender. No one will force him to cut any woman's hair; they will only prevent him from discriminating against women. He can then either choose to stop cutting hair altogether or choose to cut women's hair as well.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 06:37 PM
1

With regards to women's only fitness clubs, I could only find one case: Stopps v Just Ladies Fitness The Tribunal ruled in favour of the gym because the complainant failed to demonstrate that he was adversely affected by being refused membership and could not prove that his dignity was adversely affected. Among the reasons listed, I find this one to be relevant to this barbershop case: Although ultimately he was denied a membership, seen in context, the denial did not adversely affect Mr. Stopps…
/r/MensRights16/11/12 06:26 PM
2

No, I got your point, it's just wrong. There is no evidence to suggest that a woman wearing revealing clothing is more of a target for rape than any other woman.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 10:34 PM
1

Or maybe because the study only looked at college men? Either way, you supplied a study that didn't support your claim and actually cited literature that argued the opposite. Did you even read it? Or did you just skim for abstracts that supported your position? Regardless, I'm still waiting for those percentages.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 08:17 PM
1

If it increase the percentage chances, then there should be percentages that demonstrate this, no? The first study I was unable to find a full version of, so I can't comment on it. The second study deals with how people attribute cause and responsibility for rape, not with what actually causes rape. The literature cited in the study actually argues the opposite of your claim: They found that dominant and submissive college women displayed visually different appearances (e.g., submissive women wo…
/r/MensRights08/11/12 05:55 PM
0

Dressing more moderately is, on a percentage basis, safer. On a percentage basis? Does that mean you have some percentages to share to back up your claim?
/r/MensRights08/11/12 04:55 PM
7

Rape is about power and opportunity, not about attraction. Rapists look for women who are vulnerable, not women with revealing clothes.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 04:39 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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