TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

BladesMan235 Archive

View 0 posts and 43 comments by BladesMan235 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

It’s obviously satire
/r/MensRights11/03/20 07:30 AM
15

Here’s the one I’m referring to: https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/124524
/r/MensRights07/03/20 06:33 AM
144

Pretty sure a petition for the same thing already reached the threshold to be answered by the government and they basically said no.
/r/MensRights06/03/20 08:14 PM
1

No I didn’t lol, that’s why I said you admit it “can be an order” therefore clearly implying that I understand there are two possibilities. You chose to ignore the part about you admitting to being wrong though lol
/r/MensRights02/03/20 01:48 PM
0

Yes lol.. so you admit it can be an “order” which is a rule to be followed, therefore you agree your title is misleading.
/r/MensRights02/03/20 01:45 PM
0

No. Look it up in a thesaurus or something mate, you’ll find it’s synonymous with things like “order” or “command”. She didn’t tell people not to talk about it, she gave her opinion on what she thinks about it. And the person talking with her on the radio disagreed. If something as weak as one person giving their opinion on a subject can be explained as them telling a whole country what not to do, there’d be a shitload more articles with misleading titles like yours.
/r/MensRights02/03/20 01:37 PM
-1

Yes, it does lol. If you are “told” not to do something then that is a rule they are telling you to follow. If my boss told me to arrive at work at 9am and I get there at 10am, I’ve broken the rule. The woman in your article didn’t tell anyone to not do anything, and if she did it’s meaningless anyway because neither she nor her organisation have the power to enforce such a rule.
/r/MensRights02/03/20 01:24 PM
0

Well then you’d be wrong because as I said, the title implies there’s some new rule to ban people from talking about it when there clearly isn’t. The Chartered Management Institute have no power over other businesses and therefore cannot make people talk or not talk about certain topics.
/r/MensRights02/03/20 01:16 PM
-2

They haven’t been “told” not to talk about it, that implies there’s some new rule about it. This was just the opinion of one woman.
/r/MensRights02/03/20 12:54 PM
1

Don’t you have anything better to do on the day that you die other than watching this movie?
/r/MensRights08/10/19 12:13 PM
5

If police assume that a crime was committed, this leads to confirmation bias and therefore false convictions... The police should not assume anything.
/r/MensRights08/10/19 12:06 PM
13

This was posted a few days ago. I’ve seen the movie and there was nothing in it about toxic masculinity. It’s failing at the box office because it’s a boring turd of a movie.
/r/MensRights26/09/19 03:58 PM
16

There’s already a word for people who believe in equality for all - Egalitarianism, which I think was in use before feminism.
/r/MensRights26/09/19 10:49 AM
6

Well the objective of the Supreme Court ruling was to overturn the proroguing of Parliament. You said it hadn’t worked, but yet, Parliament is no longer prorogued. If I’m misunderstanding you then I’d be happy to hear your explanation of what you’re talking about.
/r/MensRights25/09/19 03:16 PM
4

Well it has worked because MPs are now back in Parliament.
/r/MensRights25/09/19 02:10 PM
1

And evidently, so are you😃
/r/MensRights24/09/19 12:15 PM
1

And evidently, so are you 😊
/r/MensRights24/09/19 05:38 AM
1

No I can’t
/r/MensRights23/09/19 12:02 PM
1

80% of statistics are made up
/r/MensRights23/09/19 05:34 AM
2

Neither piss or ass germs, since I use soap/hand sanitiser after using the toilet.
/r/MensRights22/09/19 10:28 PM
1

But we are talking about the OP’s comparison between eating with your hands and from a toilet seat.
/r/MensRights22/09/19 10:28 PM
6

Unless you’re properly cleaning the toilet after every single time it gets used, there’s no way it’s safer to eat from a toilet seat than with your hands. Especially when you can wash your hands in a few seconds right before eating.
/r/MensRights22/09/19 09:48 PM
9

Yeah if you consider it safer to eat food covered in people’s piss and ass germs lol
/r/MensRights22/09/19 09:29 PM
3

The judge is in the UK and is therefore not bound by US codes
/r/MensRights08/07/19 12:01 PM
1

I’m replying to a dude who said false accusers don’t get sent to prison, by sending an example of one person who has been sent to prison for it. I’m sure there are more examples.
/r/MensRights03/06/19 05:38 AM
-1

She got sentenced to 10 years, what are you talking about?
/r/MensRights02/06/19 08:58 PM
-1

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47738892
/r/MensRights02/06/19 07:57 PM
1

Technically correct is the best kind of correct
/r/MensRights27/05/19 06:10 PM
1

You actually vote for the person in a General Election, not the party. That’s why MPs are allowed to continue as an MP for their constituency if they leave their party. If you legally voted for the party then they would be forced to have a by election when this happens.
/r/MensRights27/05/19 06:19 AM
2

Neurology actually shows that no human brains are physically equipped to “dual-process”. Some are just better at switching between different tasks quickly.
/r/MensRights27/05/19 06:00 AM
1

We still do that because it’s part of our constitution, and it is ceremonial. The Queen has never, and will never refuse permission to form a government if the party has the most seats. Just like how the Queen has to sign a bill from Parliament for it to technically become law, but also will never refuse to.
/r/MensRights02/04/19 05:35 AM
1

The Queen is our head of state but she doesn’t rule over anything. She holds no legislative power. The Monarchy is politically neutral here.
/r/MensRights01/04/19 10:52 PM
-3

Presumably the same way that there are lots of things you’ve never heard of
/r/MensRights26/03/19 06:43 PM
10

She even admitted “if I can’t have him, no-one can” and still they paint her as the victim.
/r/MensRights04/01/19 12:38 PM
2

An NPC is a “Non player character”. There’s no such thing as an actual human NPC because an NPC is a character in a game.
/r/MensRights08/11/18 07:34 AM
1

It also doesn’t stop them from going to the police if they don’t truly believe they were raped
/r/MensRights07/09/18 06:25 AM
30

She admitted it
/r/MensRights05/09/18 06:56 PM
1

Why are you replying to me?
/r/MensRights01/08/18 04:26 PM
1

You think its a good idea to be legally obliged to let random strangers into your house to use the toilet?
/r/MensRights28/07/18 01:36 PM
0

Not
/r/MensRights27/01/18 11:39 AM
0

Irrelevant
/r/MensRights26/01/18 11:07 PM
1

Yeah you are. Just not BBC iPlayer.
/r/MensRights26/01/18 07:24 AM
1

Surely it would be our tax pounds, not dollars.
/r/MensRights17/12/17 10:38 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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