TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Caujin Archive

View 3 posts and 49 comments by Caujin 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)
4

QuestionsCaujin/r/MensRights05/08/15 11:41 PM
2

Caujin/r/MensRights12/04/12 12:20 AM
2

Caujin/r/MensRights29/12/12 12:04 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
8

This article only provides a single instance of a mass shooter lacking a father figure. The writer might could be right or wrong, but either way they make a poor argument for their own title.
/r/MensRights29/05/22 08:11 AM
4

This needs to be answered. I'm not talking about financial abortion or anything like that. If you support a man having a physical impact in the pregnancy of a women (as in his decision has implications on the pregnancy independent of the woman's desires) then how do you want that to manifest? So many people in this thread say it the man should have a choice but they don't define what they mean. What are we saying this choice entails?
/r/MensRights14/06/16 03:43 PM
-1

I'm interested in this point. If the man also has part of the choice then what does a conflict of interest look like? What happens when the man says yes and the women says no? I think understanding that would allow us to define terms better.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:49 PM
-2

You broke the first rule by bringing the focus away from the situation at hand into a moral argument. If you would like to claim bias then we'd have to know if the other poster who was arguing with you was also banned. I do think he should be informed, though. It may be that "have a say" carries the wrong connotations, implying that he should have a portion of the choice. I believe he should be able to contribute to the discussion before she decides, though not make any part of the decision for …
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:12 PM
1

This is a much more concise and digestible explanation. I understand what's being said a bit better, though I still feel it too extreme to say women that don't act this way are a "tiny minority" like John does. I'm young and many of the important women in my life (excluding my mother) have been too empathetic and aware for me to have yet developed the cynicism he has. I only hope that's a good thing.
/r/MensRights06/08/15 04:21 AM
17

I don't know a lot about marriage, but to me prenups seem to "focus" all the mistrust into a single point before the actual marriage. After that point you would have significantly less need for micromanaging assets in the case that you do divorce, unlike if you had no prenuptial agreement. It feels like it'd allow you to relax more. Just an opinion, of course.
/r/MensRights11/04/15 08:11 PM
11

Can this be a generic parody of a reader writing in and not this reader in particular? The girl in this has an SO with radically different beliefs and that makes her uncomfortable. It may seem ridiculous when looking at it while knowing how much damage Feminism tries to do, but from her perspective her group has done nothing wrong and he hates them anyways. I don't blame her for not being able to just put up with it. She's not writing in asking how to subjugate him, she just wants to achieve a b…
/r/MensRights25/01/15 08:53 PM
4

Spent a day in custody; that probably wasn't fun. I hope she learned her lesson and isn't derided about it for the next 4 years by her peers.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/01/15 08:07 PM
33

Let us keep in mind that this is still ongoing and the fact that he had a learning disability is irrelevant to the case at this point in time. On another note: 11 times, holy shit. That seems like a bit overkill for a self-defense scenario.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 10:38 AM
4

Is it legal to ignore those court hearings? From the sound of it it seems like she's not being pursued for not attending. So if I'm unmarried and want the child the mother can just avoid DNA testing until birth and give it up for adoption and if I don't want the child I can just be finger-pointed as the father and made to support it if I don't prove I'm not the father within a certain period of time? Of course these are from two different stories, but put together it makes the situation look fai…
/r/MensRights03/12/13 02:30 AM
9

That's riding the fence between biting satire and antagonism. Let's not trivialize their relationship, which we have little personal information about, by bringing it to numbers. I doubt this man felt like he was hiring a hooker for twenty years so I don't think we should act like it.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 03:42 PM
11

An appropriate response to an 11-paragraph entry biased out its ass and equally misdirective.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 05:59 AM
3

Ahh, that's fairly generic. So just about any way you approach this you're going to sound, in some way, like you're trying to be provocative. The thing about inflammatory speech, though, is that the more accurate/truthful your statements are the less fucks that can be given about being controversial (i.e.: pissing people off). I'm of the opinion that if you wish to write this essay you should keep to social and biological context with a neutral/passionate tone (depending on how much you care abo…
/r/MensRights11/09/13 07:33 AM
1

In any case: what was the prompt?
/r/MensRights11/09/13 07:07 AM
1

I suppose I should first ask what the essay's guidelines are. I get the feeling that you want to write a paper oriented in a "Men's Rights" direction specifically because the wording in the prompt/guidelines is facing towards the other pole. Do tell.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 06:54 AM
1

I know about TheRedPill, but they seem to have a clear identity distinctive from the MRA movement. I suppose I haven't had much interaction from them, so I don't know how much they fly under the banner. Even then, that's one example in the corner of the internet; where are they in the news?
/r/MensRights31/08/13 04:37 PM
3

The prevailing arguing point in this thread went somewhere along the lines of "radical feminists and radical MRAs are both bad." There was a sufficient amount of commentary on the actions of radical (or mainstream, if you prefer) feminists, but all I saw in terms of 'extremist MRAs' was that they wanted to "dominate the conversation with totalitarian ideologies" and that they "slander women." Nearly every time the words "extremist feminist" or "radical feminist" were seen they were in tangent wi…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 06:06 AM
4

The desire to be distinguished and revered above thy fellow human beings is the most ubiquitous, prevailing, and sought-after life goal in all of human history (even above the desire for immortality); I would place my life and fucking soul on the bet that every human who's ever ascended above the rank of mindless drone has spent much of their life wanting to be considered better than those around them, whether it be in intellect, strength, beauty, ingenuity, ect. Excuse me for ever thinking to a…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 07:00 AM
4

A lot of individual cases of abuse of the law, physical abuse, emotional abuse, and other heinous perpetrations by women are submitted to this subreddit because it serves as an arsenal against the social mindset that women are less prone to these things. It's essentially an inventory for when someone says "it's not a problem;" you can go and pick out piece after piece where it's obviously a problem as rebuttal. While society knows that women can be angry, I can see this being used in the context…
/r/MensRights25/07/13 02:54 AM
3

I love the message and I usually like typographic videos, but I must admit that this was done terribly and is a pain to watch. The consistent switch in voices is annoying and there's no flow to the speech. No variance in volume or tone. Everything seems to be jumbled because the pacing is so quick, yet the music is so slow. Overall it just gave me a headache. -- Good message, but I'm of the opinion that it was executed poorly and isn't something you'd like to show someone you're trying to get in…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 04:19 AM
5

Synthetic voices are often used by activists from various groups. RazorBladeKandy is a good example of this. It's the break in speech to switch to another voice and awkward pacing that is irritating.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 04:08 AM
82

Here; while the man may have been rude, it was nothing the women didn't reciprocate tenfold. He was poking fun, but she was wholly antagonistic. To top it all off she acts like she's tough for macing someone who never touched her and even moved away when demanded.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 11:55 PM
6

It didn't take me all too long. He's a good speaker.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 08:21 PM
1

I would understand if the race was still going on, but things are essentially over at this point: no more high-speed. At minimum the can-throwing posed no threat. Still, we're left with little detail of what's going on with those two immediately so it's hard to judge.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 03:55 AM
3

This is Jimmie Johnson's victory celebration at the Spring All-Star Race in Concord, NC. You can see the cars lining the pits in the background. I don't believe you can celebrate on the track or on the green before all cars have completed or exited the track so Johnson is the only one even near the vicinity of the can (and moving at slow speeds to boot). Since the chances that the man both wanted to and could throw so far and accurately as to hit the windshield are so low I'll consider it fairly…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 01:33 AM
1

That depends upon whether or not you consider conscription an act of violence. In general it's not going to be relevant to your enemy whether you're a man or a women, so the only thing 'gendered' in this scenario is the conscription. Whether or not the idea or enacting of drafting soldiers is violent is what determines whether or not it's gender violence. Gendered + violent = gender violence. What Duke has described, "maintaining structural gender inequality," can be gender violence, but not alw…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:30 PM
3

Ahh, I believe I've located the semantic source of the issue. When someone says 'gender violence' it is being presupposed that the cases being talked about are have gender as a relevant component. I understand what you're saying: gender violence meaning simply 'violence against men, women, and everything in-between' is the same thing as 'violence.' If I were to say 'gender violence,' though, I would be speaking of situations in which violence was being enacted partially or entirely due to one's …
/r/MensRights23/05/13 07:18 AM
3

That seems like a fairly silly request. The latter is simply a subgroup of the former. A specification to be used in context to some social or cultural climate. It would appear that, in many cases of activism, it is more difficult to combat something the more generic it is. Specifying subsets of a particular subject of activism often serves as a lens, concentrating and burning hotter upon a certain area to eliminate it more quickly or thoroughly. Is this the best way to approach a problem in-who…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 06:23 AM
5

The term isn't sexist, though the way some organizations have chosen to define it is. This differs from things like racial slurs because the term 'gender violence' is comprised of words which define itself. While the definition of 'chink' or 'spick' couldn't be derived through a basic English vocabulary, I feel that 'gender violence,' when heard by anyone who hasn't been indoctrinated into their own ass, is going to think "violence against a gender." For this reason I believe the term's general …
/r/MensRights23/05/13 06:05 AM
1

Yes. Yes she does. She has to carry it. Until it is born it is entirely her burden. You do not and never will you have the right to by legal or physical force subject someone to 9 months of burden, caution, and pain that they themselves do not wish to endure. The only time you will find such ability is under a totalitarian rule, because that's what it is: totalitarianism.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:52 PM
1

Are you literally suggesting that you should have the right to force someone to nurse an entity that they do not desire in their body for nine months and have them painfully expel that entity for you to have? I'm all for being able to say "I don't want this child" and surrendering my rights and responsibility to it, but it's lunacy to suggest that you should be able to make someone else go through a pregnancy that they do not desire to go through simply because you want the product.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:31 PM
1

These are two different things, though. I can't accuse her of any wrongdoing for having an abortion if he wanted the child because, in the end, she has the final say. If she doesn't want to have the child then she doesn't have to, independent of the father's will. What wrongdoing I can accuse her of is not allowing any input from him whatsoever. For leaving him out. Whether or not the final decision was up to him, he should've been allowed to speak his mind about his child.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:05 PM
1

Of course it's not just her story. I never said it was; I never said I "wanted" censorship. I'm implying that she thinks it's just her story and that's part of the issue.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 05:14 PM
1

I'm not talking about the pregnancy, I'm talking about the abortion. That's what I meant when I said "the decision that she refused to involve him in." You simply can't say that he was involved in the decision to abort because the entire post is centered around him not being allowed to give input. That's the entire issue: she didn't "criticize him for her own decision," she said 'You weren't involved in deciding to abort so you aren't allowed to talk about it.' The issue here is both that it's h…
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:40 AM
2

Because he didn't know about it at the time. You can be involved with an action or entity without being involved in any or every decision relating to that action or entity. If I kill someone and the family decides to cremate instead of bury the deceased without consulting me then I wasn't involved in the decision of what to do with the body even if my action created the corpse. edit: Essentially what I was saying is that "criticizing him for a decision she made" doesn't make any sense because yo…
/r/MensRights14/05/13 06:47 AM
2

I'd like to note that, from her perspective, she didn't make the decision against his will, but purposefully ignorant of his will. As well: she didn't criticize him for her own decision, but for talking about the decision that she refused to involve him in.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 06:24 AM
3

Time-based screenshots of videos has been the most useful feature added to Youtube in quite a while. In other news: I'm confused as to this video's purpose... mainly because it's posed as a question.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 10:34 PM
1

This is the thing that I'm not getting: why does it seems so widely accepted that these two things are inconsistent? If I must quote my biology professor: All behavior has a genetic basis All behavior is modified by environment I don't see how you could argue that there aren't differences in behavior between genders innately, but I also can't see how you can argue that the environment that a child grows up in has no influence on its behaviors from a gender-perspective.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 08:27 PM
4

While I do agree with this and believe that we nurture children to like a particular set of careers almost to the same extent that we nurture them to like particular toys and colors, I must ask why you continue to post? RES is telling me that I've upvoted you before, but looking at your comment history, you have more comments to this subreddit (exclusively to this subreddit? I'm not sure) than the absolute value of your comment karma. What drives you to continue to express opinion in a place whe…
/r/MensRights24/02/13 02:45 AM
1

Indeed; my college seems pretty chill. People chalk the ground everywhere, put posters everywhere, ect. The only thing I'm aware of them 'suppressing' is a particular act of graffiti vandalism of a building in which the campus rallied against in the following days. To generalize that western universities restrict speech in a contemporary sense would take quite a bit of evidence.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 11:21 PM
2

Let's shove a bunch of people of varying focus on a panel and have them improvise for an hour with no preparation. I dislike it when convention panels appear so horrendously makeshift.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 03:18 AM
9

"(misogyny) is evidenced in our culture in all sorts of things: the prevalence of rape and rape jokes..." later on In a refutation to internet-misandry: "They're making fun of you." Conclusion: Rape jokes in any context are misogynist and gender-based genocide "jokes" are benign. TIL.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 01:54 AM
6

I had that thought, but it the subreddit holds a bit different than /r/circlejerk and the like; I feel that it has the underlying notion of 'but it's kinda true' to it, meaning that the postings are considered sickly humorous, but not bullshit. To a further extent, you could say that the idea 'men want sex' is such a common mindset that the joke, as a whole, isn't "twisted" in relative terms; OP even goes on to say "but apparently it left the dude mentally scarred," as if it shouldn't have. I us…
/r/MensRights29/12/12 12:46 AM
-2

Alright. That's fine. It's a joke and a reference. So why is it here, then? All i'm saying is that if it's meant as a joke, then why isn't on /r/funny? From a comedic standpoint, it serves no purpose here, yet it's being treated like it does; that's my only issue.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 10:08 AM
-4

Exactly! This is hardly any different from the original and I have no idea how it got so many upvotes; I understand it's comedy to make fun of the original, but set in the MRM context, all it is is the assertion that masculinity = physical strength. This would be fine from a comedic standpoint if so many comments didn't seem so oblivious to what it is; this thread is mockery of stupidity without being aware of the hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 08:31 AM
2

This. This teen has no reason to be embarrassed simply because there's a women next to him while he's naked, nor should anyone next to anyone else that isn't harassing or stalking them. I doubt he'd have been as uncomfortable if it was a homosexual man (who he knew the sexuality of) standing there, yet I still feel like he'd be embarrassed because he would be getting "judged". It's something about the opposite gender that gets to us for no good reason. I suppose this is diverging from the Mens-R…
/r/MensRights29/11/12 08:23 AM
10

This article started off good, but ended up striking me the wrong way. It calls for a retreat to natural gender positions, a surely WTF component after the advancement of the last two centuries. We are sentient beings: partially liberated from our genetics by our ability to reason and use logic. There is no reason anyone should have to surrender to their natural masculinity or femininity because these things are not at the apex of morality: nature is not perfect. I do not want to be my girlfrien…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 07:01 AM
3

Well you found a good use for that post quickly.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 11:10 AM
1

It doesn't seem to be bashing fathers as much as much as it's bashing abusive or temperamental fathers. Hell, the writer is a father. Where do you find fault in this? I'd like to discuss it.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 02:54 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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