TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

CmonYouGuys Archive

View 1 post and 64 comments by CmonYouGuys 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)
327

CmonYouGuys/r/MensRights28/02/12 10:18 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Rape prosecutions should be just as difficult to process as any other prosecution. The fact that it's a damaging crime does not mean that people should be thrown into prison on mere allegations. Hard evidence should be required, and never, EVER, just a verbal testimony from the alleged victim.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 02:54 AM
4

This entire thread is retarded as fuck -_- This is a freedom of speech issue because it affects people who are in public and not just in work environments. It's that simple."Wolf-whistling" is not a threat, it's a (perhaps crude) display of interest. Making non-threatening speech illegal is a human rights issue.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 01:07 AM
6

Obviously he was in the wrong. Obviously it's strange to be separated and living in the same house, they did at least verbally agree to separate.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 01:02 AM
2

I actually have no issue with private companies being sexist. If you don't like that, then don't give them your business (spoiler alert: you still will)
/r/MensRights08/03/12 03:55 PM
4

seewhatyoudidthere.jpeg
/r/MensRights08/03/12 03:00 AM
16

Unless they're selling something sexual (perfume, clothing, etc) and THEN the male is cool and sex, and the woman (never portrayed as his wife, btw) is drooling over him. Like as soon as we put our dicks back in our pants our IQ drops 40 points.
/r/MensRights08/03/12 12:54 AM
2

I agree, and I didn't really see it as much of a joke. It was more of an "OOOhhhhhh SNAP!"
/r/MensRights08/03/12 12:44 AM
0

Its not really funny so much as empowering to men. Women (some, not all) too often use sex as a tool. For a guy to refuse to play into that and state that women enjoy sex with him as well is awesome.
/r/MensRights07/03/12 05:54 PM
1

I'm not sure what you're implying. Is that the subreddit for atheism is stupid, or that the fact that some people don't understand what 'religion'?
/r/MensRights04/03/12 04:02 AM
4

Atheism isn't a religion in the same way that bald is not a hair color.
/r/MensRights04/03/12 02:02 AM
-9

But isn't MensRights just REVERSE FEMINISM?!?
/r/MensRights03/03/12 07:08 PM
1

I'm not wrong; I'm preempting the conclusions of those who are.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 09:31 AM
2

But we're talking about statements being taken out of context, so fuck whatever else you said. I stand by the truncated quote, even. It doesn't need explanation because it's true. it doesn't make it any less satire If it commonly won't be understood as satire, then it can be addressed as if it's not. In the same way I wouldn't normally point out the empirical issues with Lord of the Rings, but if people were to take it as non-fiction, I would.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 08:33 AM
1

Actually I stand by that entire statement. It's valid and I explained why in the body of that text. You have to understand that there is a difference between taking a statement out of context by selectively quoting it, and taking a form of media out of context of an entire series. If one piece of that media doesn't convey satire, it's GOING to be taken as is.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 07:41 AM
1

Past tense of Mislead. I used it correctly afaik. EDIT: Actually you're totally right. I thought I had put "misled". My mistake.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 06:55 AM
2

When we find them to be poorly communicated. I understand that it's probably satire, but it isn't good satire, and therefore it probably will not be taken as satire.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 06:17 AM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 03:21 AM
2

Read specifically the 6 prior to this one. It's a series inside the series.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 02:44 AM
1

I understand your point, but this seems to adopt the mentality that we have to take a step backward before we can take a step forward.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 02:40 AM
10

If you read the other comics in the series, they're a bit more obviously satirical than the original version of this comic was. That being said, the satire isn't particularly biting or pointed, and is more situational than political.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 02:39 AM
7

I suppose.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 01:42 AM
16

As I stated in that thread, I found it to be poor satire. The mockery is much too subtle to be understood out of context (IMHO) and therefore I made this.
/r/MensRights29/02/12 12:55 AM
14

oh ok. I definitely agree. For the purpose of this comic, though, I think the term "reverse discrimination" is important because it's pointing out the hypocrisy of discriminating against one group in order to grant privilege to another. If we lived in a society where it wasn't necessarily to point out the uselessness of the word "reverse" then we wouldn't need the word in the first place :P
/r/MensRights29/02/12 12:48 AM
7

Can you clarify what you mean?
/r/MensRights29/02/12 12:24 AM
2

I don't like the message that there are "real men". This promotes the idea that men are homogeneous, especially in their degradation of "manhood" upon being raped by another man. "Men get raped, too" would be better as it doesn't flaunt the shame that "real men" feel.
/r/MensRights28/02/12 09:46 PM
2

I found the original to be poor satire, so I made this one instead. http://i.imgur.com/ByrKk.jpg
/r/MensRights28/02/12 08:26 PM
1

Vote boting has been around for a long time, dear.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 10:10 PM
1

Welcome to the internet.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 09:12 PM
1

You don't know that. There are things called "scripts". Let me introduce you to technology.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 08:25 PM
3

You need to go straight to HR and tell them what is going on. Also, maybe wear a hidden tape recorder and ask her about the situation again, so that you have proof (at least valid to HR) that she acted as you claim.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 02:27 PM
-1

If you look into the comments you'll notice that first comment on the thread was a copy of the original text because it was a suspected troll. SRS puppets come and post stupid shit like that and then down vote other people.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 02:42 AM
-1

"someone who defends the honor of someone because she happens to have boobs online?" How is that functionally different from my definition? "Defending honor" is the same shit. They defend the woman because she's a woman, and not because of the legitimacy of her dismay. "If you call stopping sexual harrassment/groping/rape white knighting" I never, ever, said or implied that. I'm pointing out the state of the patriarchy where men are assumed and encouraged to protect women who are in dismay regar…
/r/MensRights26/02/12 12:11 AM
-2

No, I'm actually implying the opposite. The man who comes to the woman's aid does so whether her distress it legitimate or not. That's how knight whiting works. It's actually reverse sexism and is a problem in the MRA community.
/r/MensRights25/02/12 10:46 PM
-4

White knighting refers to guys who get involved when women are in distress whether the distress is legitimate or not.
/r/MensRights25/02/12 11:08 AM
-6

This is bullshit. By stander affect does not apply to women when large groups are present due to white knghting.
/r/MensRights25/02/12 07:36 AM
3

To raise awareness of gender discrimination, adblock will only block ads for men.
/r/MensRights21/02/12 03:27 AM
1

My girlfriend is actually less feminist and MRA than I am, but it's a topic I've actually studied. She is pretty open minded and appreciates the effort for equity within the relationship.
/r/MensRights14/02/12 09:38 AM
1

Not sarcastic at all. As soon as we put the majority before the individual's personal liberty, we break the NAP as per mob rule.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 04:56 AM
1

Themselves?
/r/MensRights03/02/12 11:33 PM
1

No. That is terribly stupid. The minority's personal liberty is the most important thing is society.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 11:32 PM
3

how so?
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:53 AM
1

Who said it was less likely? A free society can still pay for defense.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 01:03 AM
3

That could happen in our current society, too.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 11:09 PM
-3

I would like to point out that alimony debt prison is not as likely in some US states due to logical limitations on alimony. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alimony#Factors_affecting_alimony As for child support, I've yet to research limitations.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:47 PM
3

Without a state, all rights issues fade away.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:45 PM
2

Take it to a dean, or just be quiet and pass the class. There are soap-box teachers out there, and if you can't get them reprimanded or removed, you just have to consider your own future and bear the annoying propaganda they inject into the lessons.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:18 PM
13

Is there no way she could stop them? I would assume there is (e.g. taking the child support and then returning it to him as a personal gift). She obviously doesn't care about him or his personal liberties if she's left him, taken the kids, and wants alimony.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:11 PM
5

Yeah r/anarchism is headed by people who make anarchism into more than it actually is. r/anarcho_capitalism is more likely to give a shit, imho.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:09 PM
6

The point being: Do what the government says or they'll fucking spank you.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 10:06 PM
1

There are things which the general populous can use, but they are owned privately rather than by a government. Rivers, lakes, and roads all represent land, and as such, they will be property. This doesn't mean they will be unused by the populous, but only that they will be rented and maintained by private individuals or companies (like utilities). Air isn't really property, but if you're referring to a means by which to regulate pollution, there will be business incentives to maintain a low foot…
/r/MensRights02/02/12 06:54 PM
0

True, but that's not the point. In a free society, there is no public property, so if a known murderer steps onto someone else private property, they will probably kill them.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 06:15 AM
1

In a free society, those who commit violence against others will be killed in self-defense.
/r/MensRights02/02/12 03:38 AM
1

What is "that bad"? Child molestation?
/r/MensRights02/02/12 02:33 AM
1

"get rid of them" meaning "kill them"?
/r/MensRights02/02/12 01:42 AM
6

Equality is great. Sigh, if only I believed in incarceration. daydreaming
/r/MensRights01/02/12 07:14 PM
5

Look to your left, look to your right. Statistics say that one of these men will rape you. "I'm not gonna rape you." "I might"
/r/MensRights29/01/12 03:56 AM
11

Does anyone see where in the linked gov doc it states that women molest more children than men? http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm10/cm10.pdf
/r/MensRights28/01/12 08:29 PM
7

That's a rapin'
/r/MensRights26/01/12 08:43 PM
3

I know this will sound aggravated and irrational, but I can't help but feel true, deep, rage when a woman uses rape accusations as an out. It really sets feminism and gender egalitarianism back. Funny thing: If the roles had been switched she would have gotten off easily.
/r/MensRights12/01/12 09:23 PM
8

Only Google's auto-dictionary returns that definition. The first actual link result (Dictionary.com) is gender neutral.
/r/MensRights09/01/12 12:21 PM
4

Only Google's auto dictionary has that definition. if you look at the first result (dictionary.com) it's gender neutral.
/r/MensRights09/01/12 12:20 PM
2

Then our discussion must swing haphazardly into the realm of consent and whether young people are mentally developed enough to consent to sex.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 07:45 AM
14

The opposing argument is basically "what will replace the law?" My answer is "nothing. There should be no law dictating custody decisions ahead of time based on sex, race, or other irrelevant information."
/r/MensRights06/01/12 07:42 AM
3

You can make the point that sex crime laws are too harsh and/or that there is a punishment inequality between male sex offenders and female sex offenders in similar crimes. If you're making the former argument, you're also implying that a male teacher who sexually solicited his underage female students should receive a reduced punishment.
/r/MensRights06/01/12 03:41 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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