TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

CheapCheepChirp Archive

View 0 posts and 50 comments by CheapCheepChirp 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)
-12

Hahahaha @ complaining about men being 'whores' Fooling no one, ladies
/r/MensRights08/04/12 10:55 PM
2

Speaking of people who could leave
/r/MensRights06/04/12 09:40 PM
6

Yeah. I think the point is that women's interests are overrepresented relative to men's. Relevant: "men's" is underlined in red, while "women's" is not. I suppose it's incorrect to think that men, collectively, can have anything.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 09:38 PM
1

Feminism is not working towards the removal of the presumption of innocence, that would be ridiculous. It is ridiculous, and yes they are. Go read something. However, as a masculinist, I think the movement would be better helped by listening to groups like No Seriously, What About Teh Menz, rather than misogynist and counter-feminist groups like The Spearhead. You aren't a masculinist in any way I understand the term. That idiotic site you refer to was an attempt at co-opting the MRM discourse i…
/r/MensRights06/04/12 09:33 PM
1

Divide and conquer - I get it. I guess to a feminist, 'improving the movement' means emasculating it.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 09:28 PM
0

Do you really want to be on the side of website that begins articles by claiming most feminists are "sexual deviants, the mentally ill and pornographers"? Yes. Why would you even ask that question?
/r/MensRights06/04/12 09:27 PM
6

Except it was always on the 'side' it's currently on.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 08:49 PM
5

Another one who does not understand that generalisations do not apply to every specific case.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 08:45 PM
14

As I have said in the past, arguing with traditionalists is like arguing with feminists. Pretty funny that you say this while ignoring what dicipres said, calling him names, and failing to offer a counter-argument. Hmm, where have we seen that before? You do realise you actually need to offer a counter-argument, yes? I have no horse in this race. Doesn't make much of a difference to me if men or women are the main cause of divorce. But right now, dicipres has offered up evidence. So I'm inclined…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 08:44 PM
10

After just half an hour of Tetris, I felt like going out and throwing bricks. And that's when I realised. I had learned this from the game.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:54 PM
6

A lot of men like to play video games Thus, feminists criticise video games It works in the same way for anything men like to do.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:52 PM
20

You learn to enjoy this sort of thing when you realise that in refusing to 'settle for less' than her fantasy white knight, she will end up settling for nothing at all. Sit back, smoke cigars, watch the slow burn.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:49 PM
1

Well, unlike FRS/COTWA, the Innocence Project actually employs persons, including attorneys, that have some knowledge of the law. COTWA has attorneys with knowledge of the law. It's difficult to argue they don't know the law when, you know, they obviously do. It doesn't hide behind dubious anonymity, with its founder changing usernames and using sockpuppets to post on /MR. This sounds like paranoia to me. It actually does something to help people FRS/COTWA have helped enormously. Simply by compi…
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:11 PM
1

It's really incredibly obvious that forcing someone to have sex against their will = wrong. This isn't something that needs to be 'taught'. It's only when feminists make up a billion arbitrary rules that must be followed "or it's rape" that anybody needs to be taught anything.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:34 PM
1

Except mens rea so this is inapplicable. The idea that men are going around accidentally/unknowingly raping women really is one of the shittier anti-male arguments I've heard.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:33 PM
1

Fair point. Add that as #3.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:31 PM
15

Well, speaking personally, I actually have a positive view of women. But then, I have not known/moved in circles with psychotics that trash their exes rooms, etc. If you can think of a better or fairer way of judging people than by their deeds, I would love to hear it. Generalisations are not invalid; but they are generalisations. By their nature, they do not apply to each specific instance ... Let's say that my regard for women generally took a hit upon seeing an audience full of women laughing…
/r/MensRights04/04/12 05:25 PM
92

To be fair, it's one of the crimes women can still be prosecuted for.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:16 PM
141

There's no need for equivalence. Put it more like this: "Well, I have an opinion on women, regardless of what you say; I do not seek out your permission to form an opinion on any subject. My opinion on women will depend on what women do. I do not have to meet anybody's criteria for this to be the case."
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:15 PM
1

Feminists don't generally know very much about male sexuality. The ones who talk about sex the most get it the least etc.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:11 AM
2

"I'm not sure why that is. what do you think?" Maybe because you mentally block out women saying crude things like "it's medically impossible for a man to be raped, so just man up" to male rape victims?
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:09 AM
1

Except mens rea so actually they haven't. It's possible to just go on redefining rape endlessly to include all sorts of non-criminal behaviour. And then you end up like Sweden where 'consensual rape' is a crime. We will not engage in this rapeflation. Rape is one of the following: 1. Sexual intercourse physically forced against another's expressed will 2. Sexual intercourse coerced against another's expressed will e.g. through blackmail. That's it. No rapeflation will be permitted. No "she conse…
/r/MensRights04/04/12 10:07 AM
23

"Men, don't rape." Men who aren't rapists: "okay, we already weren't doing that, so back to business as usual." Men who are rapists: obviously do not listen to feminists. The purpose of this propaganda is to shame the men who don't rape, not to attack those who do. Only a prime idiot would believe that a rapist is going to be stopped by a woman telling him not to rape. I mean that's the whole point, isn't it?
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:36 AM
7

Interesting how you support this organisation that campaigns to free innocent men And yet you hate the news aggregator website FRS/COTWA
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:34 AM
1

Take back the knight.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:33 AM
2

"Viewed in a certain light, the entire feminist movement can be seen as an example of this." Violence by proxy, yeah. AVfM has done much to push this meme. Or as Paul used to put it ... feminism is not 'against' patriarchy. It's the twisted exploitation of it.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:33 AM
2

'StrawberryStef', everyone. Clearly an authority on dumb shit.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:32 AM
5

the "Friend zone" is not an issue of mens rights. You're right. Everyone needs to forget about the relationship crap and focus on the legal and political.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:31 AM
4

"When you start comparing humans to animals, you head down a dark road to nowhere." Humans are animals. It is incomprehensible to me how people can actually refute this. Get over yourselves ...
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:16 AM
2

We certainly are 'slaves to biology.' What you just said is like saying we're not 'slaves to gravity.'
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:15 AM
1

"The great thing about humans is our ability to overcome biology." It is not possible to 'overcome biology.'
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:14 AM
1

"With that in mind, I'm tired of women complaining about guys staring at other women, fantasizing about other women, flirting with multiple women or always thinking about sex. That is the equivalent of men gettting angry at women for having periods." Actually ... it's the equivalent of men getting angry at women for dressing like they're in heat. Lordosis/intromission behaviour. Female/male instinctual equivalents. Getting angry at either signals an uneducated mind.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:13 AM
2

Feminists won't switch to egalitarianism. It's anathema to what they believe.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:09 AM
-5

"but why should we expect them to fight for mens issues?" LOL!!! Does anyone - you or any MRA on this sub - expect feminists to fight for men's issues? It's pretty obvious to me that the fight for men's issues is the fight against feminism. I don't expect my enemies to start advocating for my civil and human rights. Not after the decades they've spent trashing them.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:08 AM
3

Don't forget Agent Orange / Radicalhub. Those wimminz actually refer to themselves as SCUM. And they include legislators, lawyers, professors, etc.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:05 AM
2

I agree, their hostility and hate for all men is unnecessary. But that's the world we live in, and to counter what they're doing, we are going to need to go after them pretty hard.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:04 AM
5

"That's quite hostile don't you think mate?" Deservedly so. Edit: I take this back. Having read further down the thread I no longer consider you a concern troll.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:03 AM
0

"The people who think like that are feminism extremists, I don't think they represent the movement as a whole." Think whatever you like. The fact is that they do.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:02 AM
2

"If so, please tell why. You are both after all, fighting for the same thing." Feminists are fighting to persecute men. MRAs are fighting against that. So no, not the same thing at all. Good luck next time, though. I really enjoy all these feminists coming here and femsplaining to us how we've got it all wrong and they just want to be friends. Edit: I take the last paragraph back. Having read further down the thread I no longer consider you a concern troll.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:02 AM
1

Sadly, Factory, a lot of the younger/newer guys here have a long way to go. When they've seen 'radiojojo' a few dozen more times, the penny might drop. Until then they will continue to believe that these 'offers of help' are made in good faith. BTW: very happy to hear you're okay.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 09:00 AM
2

They love to "help," don't they, by telling us how we're doing everything wrong, despite them having only been aware of the movement and its issues for 5 minutes.
/r/MensRights02/04/12 08:57 AM
4

Nobody who has been in the MRM for any real length of time is going to believe for a single second that you 'want to be let in' in good faith. You do know, don't you, that MRAs in the 1970s-80s tried to take these issues to feminists in good faith? And the only response we got was mockery. Feminists would routinely heap scorn on men who had been put in prison and raped for losing their jobs while owing child support. They continue to attack men, claiming that anything bad that happens to them is…
/r/MensRights02/04/12 08:55 AM
0

And for rape, mens rea applies. Like Whisper said. I.e. the intention must be present for the crime to be committed. I do not know why Whisper was downvoted for stating a fact.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 11:36 AM
6

And let me guess, any man who disagrees with you is gay, lives in a basement, and has a small penis? Consider yourself outed as a hostile ... now fuck off back to pandagon or r/SRS or whatever ideological sinkhole you crawled out of.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 11:19 AM
2

"Because, unlike (I expect) many people on this board, I don't get my impression of feminism from radical excerpts" Too bad the feminists in power do precisely this. You are nothing but a useful idiot, college-credentialed girly who knows nothing of our complaints and wants to tell us how to think. Been dealing with your sort for decades, hon.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 11:09 AM
0

"While I admit that some feminists take it too far" Then why don't you go clean your own house first. Who do you think actually has the power to scapegoat and subject other people to legal and institutional abuse - MRAs or feminists? "Women's rights activism" in practice often does mean the systematic removal of men's human and civil rights. So yeah, we're going to keep hating feminists. But thanks for your concern, troll.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 10:59 AM
-1

What's offensive is you acting like the legal and institutional abuse targeting men is in any way comparable to wimmin's ishoos. What's offensive is you coming into a space for the discussion of men's rights and telling MRAs to stop being so concerned about their own civil and human rights and focus on whatever trivial issue feministing is talking about today ("omg, this guy on the subway looked at me!!!")
/r/MensRights01/04/12 10:47 AM
19

Good question. I think it started around the time that feminists began systematically removing the civil and human rights of men and boys.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 10:37 AM
5

So what you meant to say is that this subreddit should stop being about men's rights. You are the new kid in town, and your opening line is that we're all doing it wrong and should change our whole mission to accommodate you. Do you understand how fucking arrogant that is? ... fuck off.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 10:27 AM
3

Oh look, guys! It's Achievus Consensus! "I'm new to Men's Rights and I am a feminist ... I agree with the basic tenets of MRAs, if not the language and attitude of it." ... and? Why come here and tell us this? Why do you presume we are in the least concerned with what a feminist, of all people, thinks about our 'language' and 'attitude'? "Why, then, are so many MRA so violently opposed to feminists" Violently? Oh, look guys. A feminist comes into our space, calls us violent, and tells us we shou…
/r/MensRights01/04/12 10:17 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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