TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Cookie Archive

View 1 posts and 114 comments by Cookie 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

Cookie/r/MensRights03/11/10 03:57 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

This just in: Men are human.
/r/MensRights15/05/14 05:00 PM
4

I wonder how much of his writing on feminism is part of his attempt to convince himself he's invincible. I wouldn't wish it on anyone, but perhaps one day he'll encounter a more determined accuser and find out how quickly allies go under the bus.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 08:14 AM
3

No, of course not. Including a woman on a show with mostly men makes it more equal, but a show with all women is already as equal as you can get.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 06:44 PM
9

I'd guess it's here because it's an update on a story that was here before. I agree it's not very interesting. People plead all the time. 1st degree murder being dropped doesn't mean she didn't do it, just that they didn't want to take their chances in court. And pleading guilty to 2nd degree doesn't mean she did it, just that she doesn't fancy her chances in court.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 09:13 AM
1

It's much like any of the other things that they really know aren't true. If you challenge this, they'll immediately drop it as any sort of evidence on its own of discrimination. It's just that society views men as superior to women, so calling boys girls vs. calling girls boys has to be interpreted in that light. I find it very hard to productively argue further at that point. I guess there's some value in unmasking "everything is anti-women because feelings" each time, until the more logically…
/r/MensRights20/11/13 07:45 AM
4

They're not interested in being convinced. They just want to be given something that allows them to say "actually that's been debunked, it's not true".
/r/MensRights30/10/13 10:10 AM
5

"The prosecutor said the man asked the woman ... and she said no." Rape!
/r/MensRights29/10/13 02:59 PM
7

Much of the recent focus here on female prisoners is painful. If you take it at face value, all women in prison in the UK are there because of some evil man and should be let out. However, this one small measure, to spread out the female prisoners, does just make sense. There are far fewer women's prisons in the UK than men's prisons, and this leads to women being held further away from their homes than men.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 09:30 AM
2

They haven't thought this one through. What this really proves is that women are so hated and downtrodden that companies would prefer to hire men even when a better woman is 20% cheaper.
/r/MensRights25/10/13 08:28 AM
2

TIL science is a library.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 06:36 AM
10

Ah, the fallacy fallacy.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 06:32 AM
28

That's not privilege, that's benevolent sexism. Those poor girls.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 09:21 PM
73

They decided to take away some privileges from the students. Obviously, only the male students have privilege, so that's where they took it away! Simple really.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 05:35 PM
14

There are valid reasons for single-sex clubs, places, courses, etc. I don't mind this at all directly. It's just annoying because, while the need for women-only things is recognized and there's seen as no harm in it, anything men-only is disallowed as unnecessary and misogynistic.
/r/MensRights13/10/13 03:30 PM
14

We're not shy about saying hostile, unpleasant and true things about men either.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 05:59 PM
9

Wow, that sure sucks. dropped due to no evidence...ie- false rape allegation. No no no, hang on there. These two things aren't the same. I mean, assuming that you're telling the truth, then both of these things are true - the charge was dropped due to lack of evidence, and it was also a false allegation. But forget your inside knowledge for a minute. From outside, these are very different cases. There may be many cases which are dropped due to lack of evidence despite being true, just as many fa…
/r/MensRights06/10/13 04:14 PM
2

If a Daily Mail hate mob were indicative of impending social change, we'd have abolished benefits and thrown out all the immigrants by now. I am generally encouraged, though, especially by legislative moves in Northern Europe. It seems to be just a matter of time now before some country reaches gender equality in its laws against cutting up children.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 08:08 AM
4

Downvote brigades aren't allowed. SRS is allowed. Therefore, SRS is not a downvote brigade. Edit: /s, for the humour impaired.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 10:10 AM
84

Gender equality means women. Fewer than 50% women is unequal. 50% women is equal. More than 50% of women is even more equal. All women is as equal as you can get.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 01:18 PM
7

Censorship is bad. Letting Facebook know about content which violates their content policy is perfectly reasonable.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 09:55 PM
2

I find the red pill / pua communities to have a lot of interesting things to say about the sexual behaviour of both sexes, what we're taught that it will be, what it seems to actually be, how this differs and why. In terms of MR, the problem is that the red pill community says unpleasant things about women. These things may well be true, or at least illustrative of true trends even if they are over the top. It may well be another double standard that it's considered fine in polite company to com…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 01:38 PM
10

My history, and I think the history of a lot of people who are liberal and pro-choice and so on and so forth but really wary of feminism and social justice - is that we spent our college years totally supporting social justice and helping out in the superweapon factories because it's our duty to fight rape and racism and so on and since we were nice respectful people obviously the superweapon would never be used on us. Then we got in some kind of trivial disagreement with a woman or a minority o…
/r/MensRights07/08/13 07:42 AM
15

To be fair, they're also working hard to reduce that 40% figure as much as possible. So they are on the way to equality. One day all students will be able to vote for women's officer!
/r/MensRights27/07/13 03:26 PM
-1

Fair enough. If we can't prove it, we can't prove it.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 09:16 AM
34

I particularly enjoyed the section at the top, about how trivial grilling on a barbecue is: "How best to position the meat on the grill? Er, how about arranging it, equally spaced, above the embers? And how, then, to cook it? Well, simply prevent it from burning by moving it around. If it's burning, take it off. That's it." Followed, of course, by the section at the bottom: "These blokes don't know about temperature, don't think about distance from the heat source and never consider the fat or w…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:56 PM
2

Well yes. Some trends are very strong. Strength, throwing ability, those are the most commonly mentioned. It's still wrong (in both senses - incorrect and detrimental) to refer to things which "all women think". This is entirely an actual and relevant contribution. Who pissed on your chips this morning?
/r/MensRights17/07/13 08:05 AM
1

Whatever the topic, women think a variety of different things about it. It's almost as though they're people.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 06:42 PM
28

I don't like to be a doubter, or to criticize, at what is, if you're straight up, a very difficult time. So please ignore the rest of this comment if you're being honest, because it's not for you. You accidentally tripped, hit the door with your foot and cracked the doorframe? Exactly at the time when you happen to be breaking the no-contact order, by your own admission? Right.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 11:33 AM
3

You were being penetrated by a phallic needle despite your reluctance? You're just proving that this is about rape!
/r/MensRights11/06/13 07:13 AM
2

Despite all of the changes in our society, for many feminists, the view of society is still the same. They are still the coming revolution, sweeping away the established old ways with their fresh and obviously correct ideas. They don't realise that they're the establishment now. In this view, there's room for two sorts of men - supportive and agreeable, or misogynists. Say anything about gender issues apart from "I agree" and you've just volunteered to go into the other box.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 05:44 PM
1

Because anybody is allowed to post anything here.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 02:36 PM
1

I clicked through to the Mansplained Tumblr. First three examples - an interviewer is condescending to a candidate, a doctor is condescending to a patient, and some men dare to argue that they have something to say about what they think and why. How can anybody read that and not get it?
/r/MensRights25/05/13 09:11 AM
7

I hope not. I can't stand utilitationalists.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 04:40 PM
-9

I think this is a good thing. Yes, I know I sound crazy, but bear with me. The material in a gender studies course is all around our children at school anyway. Putting it into a class focuses the discussion. Some of these courses are really good and balanced, and even if you get a bad one, it can be the catalyst for children to share their dissent with each other, talk to their parents, etc. tl;dr: Thinking and talking about gender is a good thing, even in cases where the course is ideologically…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 09:05 PM
1

Only when it fits. Only when it's people falsifying primary evidence. Re-branding misinterpretation or differences in terminology as false accusation will help nobody in the end.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:33 PM
2

Ah ok, we're talking at cross purposes then. I'm not saying that your usage in this title is wrong because it implies the feminists reported the man to the police. I'm saying it's wrong because it implies that they are fabricating evidence, whereas actually they're interpreting published words differently.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:12 PM
2

The word "informal" appears only once in that article, splitting accusations into informal, quasi-judicial and judicial. That supports my assumption, not your usage.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:53 PM
1

I had a google around for "informal false accusation" but didn't find much. Do you have a definition? Did you coin the term? To me, an informal false accusation an accusation made informally rather than to the police, like "Oh yeah, that guy, he raped my sister back home, but she was too upset to prosecute so nothing ever happened about it." It still carries the connotation of pretending to primary knowledge which is in fact fabricated.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:50 PM
0

We've started overusing the term "false accusation" in a way I find really disturbing. A false accusation, as usually used, and used on this sub until a few articles over the last week, is a situation where one party makes a factual claim of witnessing actions of the other party, said claim being false. It's extremely insidious and potentially life-destroying, if the actions being claimed constitute a crime and the accuser is believed. What we're now calling a false accusation is when people int…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:34 PM
-3

Our apparent policy on doxxing sounds a bit like walking up to people in the street, slapping them in the face and then saying "Waaaaah I saw a woman do that once and she wasn't arrested!"
/r/MensRights26/04/13 01:02 PM
19

Hang on a moment. She's just published a piece in the WSJ standing up for due process and the rights of the presumptively innocent, even when they are men accused of sexual misconduct. That's more to stand up against injustice done in the name of feminism than I've done today, and I'll wager it's more than you've done too.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 03:08 PM
5

For me this was one of the main reasons that I found that feminism was a poor fit for my thinking and rejected the label. Academic feminism seems to be well accepted as a theoretical basis for the whole thing, and it's just complete twaddle. Of course now I'm here I'm misrepresented as thinking that there are no valid women's issues and that feminism is the cause of all men's issues, but I can live with that more easily than I can live with being identified with that nonsense.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 07:12 PM
21

I've known mothers who won't allow their children to get a few tens of yards ahead of them while walking, in case a ninja pedophile snatch squad screech to a halt in a white van, bundle the child into it and zoom away before they can catch up. Neither the fact that this has happened exactly never to anybody in the whole of ever, nor the fact that they'd be hard pressed to fight anybody off if it did happen, stop them from limiting their child's freedom over this fear. I'm willing to be corrected…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:37 PM
4

The issue is that groups are taking it as axiomatic that innate ability is identical, and therefore consider any difference in representation as proving discrimination. Only one way around, of course; if an area becomes female dominated the identical ability axiom vanishes, and possible reasons one gender might be innately better in that area suddenly switch from a firing offense to perfectly sensible points. Suggesting discrimination becomes unacceptable. If you try to draw attention to the sud…
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:57 PM
21

I've never seen a clearer demonstration that "patriarchy" means "everything I don't like about the culture".
/r/MensRights30/03/13 12:59 PM
3

I agree with what you're saying, and I think it's a useful distinction, but it's also useful to recognize that it's a distinction which isn't made in the other direction. For example, if I preferred to hire men than women (which I don't, it's an example), then I would be called a misogynist. There's no room for me to claim that actually I'm fine with women, it's just that I really love men.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:30 PM
2

Try your statement with another group. "What the actual fuck, India? You over-prescribe anti-biotics and cause major diseases like tuberculosis to become resistant, you fuck with women in unimaginable ways and you still have the audacity to ask for more rights for children there?" Or even "What the actual fuck, India? You over-prescribe anti-biotics and cause major diseases like tuberculosis to become resistant, you fuck with women in unimaginable ways and you still have the audacity to ask for …
/r/MensRights29/03/13 05:16 PM
23

It's because men have no dignity, no sanctity. Their sexuality is based on consumption. It's impossible to violate a man, there's nothing there to violate. Having sex with a man who doesn't want it is the equivalent of giving an unwanted gift; potentially a small annoyance to the recipient, but in the end it should just be enjoyed as far as possible, or ignored. There's no way it can be considered actually bad. Sure, people will tell you things about erections being consent, or being penetrated …
/r/MensRights29/03/13 02:58 PM
1

Abusive people say what works.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 07:33 PM
12

You know they won't be general changes, though. The case will be treated like a dolphin caught in a tuna net, and the outcome will be efforts to ensure no woman ever again suffers the injustice of being treated like a man.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 08:18 PM
0

It's not a question of fault, it's a question of proof. If the facts of the tackle and the lack of consent to it are uncontested, then obviously the tackler is guilty. Tackling me to the ground uninvited is a crime, clothes are irrelevant. Usually, however, the facts are not uncontested in cases like this. If the jury are trying to decide whether my story of an unprovoked attack constitutes proof beyond reasonable doubt, or whether the defendant's story of an unfortunate accident in a consensual…
/r/MensRights23/03/13 09:37 AM
0

Raising money is like that, you do what works. If I needed to raise money for a study decrying how rich white men are portrayed in our society, you can be sure I'd use all my rich white man contacts to try to do it.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 08:50 AM
64

Men pushed out of universities; women hardest hit.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 03:35 PM
7

Yeah, if it's a legitimate rape, the male body has ways to shut that whole thing down. Edit: s/genuine/legitimate/
/r/MensRights13/01/13 11:03 AM
2

I don't think it's directly a shit test. I do think that it's harder to build compassion and empathy towards maleness because of the expectations of the sexual marketplace.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 08:25 AM
3

If a girl hits a man, she should expect to be hit back. I don't mind mutual play-hitting. If it's a real attack, then she should be arrested. I do agree that allowing women to play-hit men but insisting that men play-hitting women is never acceptable is ridiculous, as is minimizing the seriousness of real attacks if it's women attacking men. If a girl can joke about my big nose, I'm allowed to make fun of her meaty calves. This sort of reciprocity is dangerous. It tends to end up as "If somebody…
/r/MensRights31/12/12 10:44 AM
2

MRA, like feminist, is best left as a self-chosen label. Once you start to try to make it a definition as well, you get problems, because the definition will never be clear. An inconsistent group of opinions get lumped together into one outlook. It's easier to see this effect with feminist, and the recent women who've announced that they aren't. It goes like this: I'm not a feminist, but I believe in strong women and equality. If you think women aren't crap, then you are a feminist by definition…
/r/MensRights07/12/12 11:34 AM
21

It's a common tactic in various forms in the debate on re-defining rape. Essentially, if there is anything that somebody thinks constitutes rape but you think does not, then your comments will be bent into saying that rape is ok. Here's another hypothetical example. "Sharing a bottle of wine and then having sex is an enjoyable way for my wife and I to spend an evening." Oops! Some people argue that this is rape, since alcohol precludes valid consent, so now I can be reinterpreted as saying "Rapi…
/r/MensRights05/12/12 08:13 AM
7

I don't think it's that at all. Those men would be violating an extremely clear social rule if they were to criticize that woman, or accuse her of anything, or speak up against her behaviour in any way. It takes another woman to be allowed to do that. Edit: Maybe it's 50% that. The first group of men seem to just feel that there's no need to help. The second group failed the way I suspect that I would - they just can't manage to speak up.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 08:45 AM
38

I believe it's essentially a failure to understand the emergent nature of culture. You and I know that we don't control the world, we just have to live in it and somehow make do. We don't decide what the culture will be like. We try to influence it in the direction we think it should go, but there are many voices pulling in many directions, and the end result isn't really what anybody would choose. However, not everybody knows this. Some people think that, since we are men, we in fact can and do…
/r/MensRights19/11/12 03:32 PM
3

Talk a lot about the future, and see if you can decide together what to do. In the end, things work if you agree, and they don't if you don't. Imagine that you had a fantastic job offer in Portugal, but your SO wanted to remain home. If you can't agree, then yes, you can move to Portugal and leave him at home - you have that right, and he has no right to stop you - but you've still wound up living in different countries, and this is unlikely to enhance your relationship.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 11:31 AM
3

They can bring up in court the fact that you refused to answer, or that your answers given at the time don't match what you're saying now. This isn't about whether or not you waited for your right to legal advice before answering, though. So, the advice you get from your lawyer might involve more answering of questions, but you still can and should lawyer up first.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:19 PM
17

Seems fair enough. It's not the victim's responsibility to stop theft. They should be able to wrap up their possessions any way they wish. Just because they choose gift wrapping and a "To:" label and hand it to you, doesn't give you the right to steal it. You bastard.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 01:35 PM
5

What we did was basically "lemme see yours. lemme tocuh yours (each other)" You abused her FOUR TIMES!! /s
/r/MensRights17/09/12 07:34 PM
2

Dear Fr4t, You're male. There is no sanctity of your body or sexuality. You cannot be violated because there is nothing to violate. You should have just enjoyed it. Sincerely, Society. PS: You're a pussy for being upset.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:02 PM
8

You need to tell us more. You could be describing anything between a nervous wreck who is terrified to say no or stop you and is enduring sex she doesn't want to have, or somebody who likes you to do all the work and sometimes gives a bad review.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 05:09 PM
-3

So you support marital rape then. /s
/r/MensRights18/07/12 03:29 PM
1

You seem to be taking my comment very personally, despite the fact that it doesn't even mention you. I guess I've grown used to mr being a "male-style safe space", where it is safe to be mad about the widespread use of an argument and what that says about the wider culture without being seen as attacking the person who happened to mention it. But hey, successful communication depends upon those speaking taking responsibility for being heard as they intend to be, so let me try again. I'm not angr…
/r/MensRights15/06/12 09:26 AM
1

I don't think you're playing anything in a certain way, nor am I making your argument out to be anything. Aside from the feeling you have that I'm against you, do you disagree with any of the things that I actually said?
/r/MensRights15/06/12 08:42 AM
2

This isn't an unreasonable argument, but it still enrages me, because it only applies on one side of the line. When something is currently socially acceptable, you might hear this. But then go and suggest that a symbolic pin-prick is not so bad and the rules all invert. "No! FGM is FGM!" It's all wrong! So when I hear these arguments it just reminds me how far behind we are, that going near a baby girl's bits is just always wrong, but if we want to chop up baby boys we can consider each way of c…
/r/MensRights15/06/12 07:41 AM
2

Do you think it's a reasonable step, assuming that this warning sign as described is the only information she has? No I'm going to stop you there. Let's focus on this point of agreement. Beyond that, I think we're debating terminology.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 04:35 PM
2

This seems to be how these studies always work - the trick is in what they measure, vs. what they say it means. They've measured attitude to working women essentially by asking these men about family structures, and they've found that there's a correlation between men with a wife at home and men who think a family with a wife at home is a good thing. Then they've called this a "negative attitude towards working women" and equated it with all sorts of nasty behaviour, without any evidence. This r…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 09:20 AM
3

I'm not sure that this is pedophilia hysteria. Which bit? I would say, wondering about this behaviour is reasonable. Finding out more is reasonable. Keeping an eye out, having a talk with children about what's appropriate, not leaving them alone with untrusted adults (and not particularly trusting this adult), this is all reasonable. Cutting off all contact right now with this adult? I think that's over the top, and not likely to be the best thing for the children. It's taking what should just b…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 08:28 AM
0

Feminism is not a bad thing. This doesn't really follow. Feminism could still be a bad thing, even if some self-identified feminists have some good features. It's a different argument.
/r/MensRights09/06/12 08:18 AM
1

What you say is true. These establishments don't hate men, or actively aim to disadvantage them. They just don't care about equality, so they do what works even if it is unequal. But there's another double standard here. In order to be branded misogynistic and hounded to change your ways, you don't have to hate women, or actively aim to disadvantage them. If you fail to sufficiently actively care about providing equality to women, such that you do what works (even though it is unequal) and disad…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 07:53 AM
6

You are literally an apologist for domestic violence.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 08:45 AM
4

Sympathy on demand. Or else. You shouldn't give in to that one within a relationship, let alone with an ex.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 08:43 AM
5

I don't think raising a child that's not yours is a waste of money or time. Many people choose to do it and find it very fulfilling. What it is is a huge and intensely personal commitment, which needs fully-informed consent. I'm not trying to minimize the harm here - quite the opposite. You don't discover your child is not your own and react with "Damn, I just wasted x months and y dollars", any more than someone gets raped and reacts with "Damn that's another evening wasted on a date that's goi…
/r/MensRights01/05/12 06:11 PM
1

That's quite possible. I'm afraid I didn't check the article's statistics.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 12:13 PM
3

This is an interesting article: http://www.physorg.com/news150954140.html Summary: In Germany, there are 16 times as many active male chess players as female, and their respective ratings are more or less consistent with whether you're a man or a woman making no difference at all. This is in line with my own experience in software engineering. There are fewer women doing it, but the women who are doing it are doing it just fine. There's some distortion caused by large companies preferring to hir…
/r/MensRights12/03/12 12:07 PM
2

They were overwhelmed with all the privilege, and couldn't work out what to spend the extra 30% in their paycheck on.
/r/MensRights06/03/12 03:21 PM
9

Women are raised to fear men, you say. It's not a gender issue, you say. I'm not sure how to reconcile these two statements.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 02:26 PM
8

I don't think this is that sort of movement. If I can get angry about child custody issues despite still living with mine, and get angry about the workplace death gap despite having a safe job, and get angry about the problems in education for boys despite not being one anymore, is my anger any different to yours? Are our issues as males that different from yours as females, so different that we imagine you can't hope to empathise the way other men could? This isn't feminism with the genders swa…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 08:35 AM
3

Perhaps it was poor strategy to include this joke, given how other people have reacted to it. Personally, I'm not political correctness minded, so I just thought it was funny.
/r/MensRights18/02/12 02:18 PM
1

It's because of the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights27/07/11 01:22 PM
27

It is still being done away with. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12606610 The change will come into effect in December 2012
/r/MensRights27/07/11 01:16 PM
2

This is spendid. "Renounce and repent the evil /r/mensrights, or I shall taunt you a second time!"
/r/MensRights22/07/11 10:18 PM
1

It doesn't mean crazy as in "somebody who turns out to be crazy". It means "somebody openly crazy from the start". Many men find crazy attractive in a woman, and, without this advice, will be open to sex with openly crazy women. I don't think "don't stick your dick in crazy" applies to men who find themselves in an unfortunate situation with a secretly crazy woman, who appeared to be sensible and wasn't waving red flags at them from the word go.
/r/MensRights22/07/11 07:17 PM
6

Just the reference to testosterone. In the particular sub-genre of feminism PZ seems to go for, the genders are held to be identical, except in physical form and strength and in the results of socialisation. It's thus worth pointing out the double-standard that makes it ok to refer to testosterone when discussing poor behaviour in men. I'm not quite sure how the theory works once testosterone is added in. I guess it means that men and women are identical, except men are worse because all the tes…
/r/MensRights22/07/11 01:56 PM
4

It's safety advice not victim blaming.
/r/MensRights22/07/11 07:21 AM
2

But I see what you mean, but I am still not sure how they can coexist happily in the same movement. Well, we're not really a movement. More a complaining club. What unites us is what we don't like.
/r/MensRights17/07/11 10:02 AM
11

There is a mix of people here with a mix of opinions, so if you try to narrow down the single opinion of the subreddit through a process of elimination, you'll conclude that it is hypocritical and inconsistent. This is true of more or less any group of people, any movement and any "ism". Personally I'm all about the freedom and equality.
/r/MensRights17/07/11 09:32 AM
5

Fuck taking sides. I'm here because I want to see more moral responsibility for women, not less for men.
/r/MensRights06/07/11 08:33 AM
13

Exactly. Sexually violated? You should have just enjoyed it. At worst, an unwanted gift, just disregard it.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 03:28 PM
10

It's not just one comment either. The prevailing view, both over there and of course now coming over here to put us right, is that the comment is perfectly fine, unless you misunderstand it by treating the stigma as the only harm. It just boggles the mind. If we were talking about women, the idea of invalidating the victim's experience and claiming that you know better than they do what they feel and why they feel it would be utterly anathema to feminism in all of its varied flavours. But when t…
/r/MensRights23/06/11 08:55 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights22/06/11 06:04 AM
6

They've gone too far for /r/feminisms though, see here.
/r/MensRights21/06/11 03:50 PM
3

Yes, that says more or less what I'm trying to say. In terms of concern being genuine, I ask myself what an article from somebody who accepted the validity of the techniques of feminist criticism but wanted genuine gender equality would look like, and it doesn't look much different than this one. I'm slow to assume that people are being fake. I think the truly scary thing about social pressures and the way things are moving is that people involved are generally being genuine, and usually not bei…
/r/MensRights21/06/11 11:41 AM
6

I think it helps if you start with the initial post that kicked off the blog, here: http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com/2011/06/who-cares-about-mens-rights.html The first half of it at least, the paragraphs that start with "I care..."
/r/MensRights21/06/11 11:16 AM
7

Yeah, mixed feelings. I mean, it's obvious that the concern for men and the advocacy for men's rights here are genuine. These are clearly people who don't think that sexism is something that can only happen to a female, and that privilege is something that can only be held by a male, and so on, and who feel genuine empathy for (and are not blind to) the genuine problems of men in our society, as well as the problems of women. So hurray for that! However, the vast bias towards woman victim man ba…
/r/MensRights21/06/11 11:02 AM
1

No, it's a joke.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 08:48 PM
13

Due to the patriarchy, it is evil, controlling and abusive for men to possess things, therefore the possessive form "men's" should not be used.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 10:42 AM
1

To be fair, their "Was I raped?" checklist is pretty reasonable.
/r/MensRights18/06/11 09:20 PM
-7

I've noticed many women demonstrate an almost zealous aversion to empathizing with men or men's perspective. Precisely. Feminism may have started out as "the radical notion that women are people", but it's become the truly radical notion that only women are people.
/r/MensRights16/06/11 01:31 PM
12

Perhaps it's shitty advice. I don't know. It's certainly not advice I'd ever offer, as I generally only offer advice when I know something about something. But the advice is not generally attacked on the grounds that it is shitty. It is attacked on the grounds that it is wrong to offer advice on risk factors for rape, because that is blaming victims. It is usually followed up not by useful information on the real risk factors for rape - which in other contexts it seems fine to talk about - but b…
/r/MensRights10/06/11 03:05 PM
8

And yet, advice on how to avoid having your drink spiked is seen as completely acceptable.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 02:50 PM
1

Is any of this true? I could only see a link to an abstract, not any actual information. Anyone got any links to this actual research, or discussions of its validity?
/r/MensRights09/06/11 04:35 PM
46

We must find the man who forced them to do it!
/r/MensRights31/05/11 06:44 PM
6

That won't help men though. It'll be like that case a while back with the woman falsely accused of rape. Everyone will treat it like a dolphin caught up in a tuna net, and if there are any changes it'll be to ensure no more women suffer the injustice of getting accidentally treated like men.
/r/MensRights11/01/11 09:01 AM
5

Professional sports and games are entertainment. If there is interest in watching women-only poker, then it will be provided. It's business, fairness isn't involved.
/r/MensRights25/10/10 05:35 PM
0

This is a common trick, to have an adjective phrase which has one meaning when deciding whether or not somebody qualifies to be so described, and an entirely different meaning when it is used to describe somebody. It comes up a lot in the demonization of drug culture. In order to be a drug dealer, one must only sell drugs to somebody - including, for example, buying on behalf of both yourself and a friend at the same time, and then passing some on. But once the term "drug dealer" is applied, an …
/r/MensRights30/07/10 07:01 PM
18

In the story as told, it was not a flirtatious remark; it was persistently repeated lewd remarks. There's a big difference.
/r/MensRights12/05/10 05:54 PM
3

Don't worry, you'll soon get used to the idea of being 24. Of course, by then you'll be nearly 25...
/r/MensRights05/04/10 05:55 PM
9

All women: No. All women who make false rape accusations: Quite possibly.
/r/MensRights12/04/09 08:06 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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