TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

CriticalThinker007 Archive

View 0 posts and 23 comments by CriticalThinker007 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)
2

Yes, most people who are made aware of this report will mistakenly assume that "gender equality" means equality for both men and women and that the differences in each case are taken into account. That is what is most disturbing about this report to me. It clearly states in the document that it is "one-sided" and yet when people talk about it they seem to work under the impression that it is two-sided instead. Most people are not going to read through the methodology section to find out how they…
/r/MensRights25/06/15 02:28 AM
16

I have been very critical of this report since it was originally put out. As it currently stands this report does not measure what most people believe it does based upon it's title. I will summarize some of the major issues with this report quickly: 1 - The most significant issue with the report is described starting on page 4 of the 2014 report (similar statements exist for all previous versions with slight variations from year to year)) "Gender equality vs. women’s empowerment The third distin…
/r/MensRights24/06/15 11:11 PM
1

I understand that this is video is supposed to reference the painting "this is not a pipe". The main problem is that her piece completely fails to comprehend the nuance of what it means to be a meaningful representation of something. Her video in reality is NOT a representation of a rape because everything that happens within the video is consensual. The reason the statement "this is not a pipe" works is that the artist is saying that while they are able to depict some elements of a real pipe in…
/r/MensRights14/06/15 07:58 AM
9

This entire course of events has gone beyond sad... blown past pathetic... and has achieved a level of insanity and delusion that is rarely witnessed. So let me get a few things straight here because I refuse to watch her video as I don't want to directly participate in the mind game she is trying to play with her audience (I have read the accounts of others with regard to this video, so to the extent that they have accurately reported the contents my analysis will be also be accurate, if their …
/r/MensRights13/06/15 04:27 PM
2

"No. I have implied that in many cases, what is happening is a crime that is different from rape, and therefore should not be treated the same as rape." The crime is called statutory rape. What you seem to be implying is that even though the behavior is illegal, we should somehow give these adults a pass even though they are breaking the law and taking advantage of minors. You can disagree with the law all you like, but let's not pretend that a crime hasn't been committed and that this crime isn…
/r/MensRights04/06/15 10:40 PM
5

"Where have I said that the adults shouldn't know better?" You have implied that in some sense what is going on in these scenarios is not a crime or at the very least shouldn't be treated as such. "Someone having consensual sex with a teenager cannot necessarily be assumed to have malicious intent. After all, teenagers are perfectly capable of having consensual sex with each other." The point is that adults cannot have consensual sex with minors. This is the part that you are glossing over with …
/r/MensRights04/06/15 03:50 PM
28

"It's a physiological drive, and a powerful one, especially during puberty and late teens. And it's harder for them to get sex because of sexual power dynamics." Which is all the more reason for adults to leave them alone. Look, children and adolescents may want to do lots of things that are stupid ideas... that is why they need guidance and are not considered to be fully independent. Why is it that I only ever see this type of argument when it comes to adolescent boys and sex with adult women? …
/r/MensRights04/06/15 12:48 PM
2

Here is the part I can't seem to wrap my head around. Based upon Sulkowicz's own description of the events, Nungesser was drunk. She then claims that their sexual activity started off consensual and only later became non-consensual when she alleges that Nungesser became physically aggressive. Now Nungesser claims he was just buzzed as demonstrated here: "He claims not to have been drunk, as Sulkowicz alleged, only “buzzed.”" However, this should have been immaterial so far as Sulkowicz was conce…
/r/MensRights23/05/15 07:01 PM
1

You aren't talking about the same thing anymore. This conversation was specifically about consensual sex. You acknowledge as must when you said this: "Having sex with willing women..." The key component here is willingness between the parties to engage in consensual sexual activity. You can't suddenly switch gears now and say: "Assaults are not taken seriously..." We weren't talking about assaults or physical abuse. Then you go on to say this: "I personally know men who have pulled rapey shit. I…
/r/MensRights23/09/14 09:04 AM
11

Can you please explain the following statement in detail: "Having sex with willing women, and then calling them whores, and treating them as lesser creatures for it is real, and every bit as damaging as false rape charges." I am having trouble understanding how being an insensitive jerk is every bit as damaging as intending to send someone to prison for a crime they didn't commit. In the first scenario the individual is degraded, which is obviously unacceptable, but they are still free to live t…
/r/MensRights20/09/14 08:31 PM
5

In discussing this topic with your friend it is critically important that you bring up to her the fact that the definition she has specifically chosen is woefully incomplete. This happens whenever someone takes a word and selects one definition to the exclusion of all other equally acceptable definitions. Imagine for example you were talking with your friend and pointed to an object and said something innocuous like "I think you should buy golden holiday decorations for next year". It would be s…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:10 AM
0

I'm still not convinced this whole story isn't an April Fool's hoax. In the unlikely event that you are on the up and up, you should still solicit the advice of a legal professional and find out where you stand given the details of your situation. Now that things seem to have calmed down for you I hope the rest of your day off goes well.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 11:32 PM
3

What does age have to do with it? Google runs an April Fools joke every year and it isn't being run by people who are 16 years old. Here's the deal. You claim to be almost 30 years old, that you work as a "senior financial advisor" who earns over 100K per year... and you decided the best place to obtain legal advice is online??? When you have that much disposable income the logical place to go for legal advice is a lawyer. Someone whose almost 30 years old, well educated, and earning "well over …
/r/MensRights01/04/13 06:05 PM
14

Posts that beg for help with a very emotionally charged subject on April 1st are often fabricated.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 05:34 PM
11

My advice is to deconstruct her argument in a way that arrives at a reasonable conclusion. First you need to recognize that her argument is structured in this way so as to justify her own prejudices against men. You see, for her it is okay to be prejudiced because she isn't being sexist. However that misses the more fundamental point. That point is that it isn't justifiable to be prejudiced against anyone. Now as you note, the dictionary defines sexism as discrimination on the basis of sex. This…
/r/MensRights01/04/13 09:29 AM
2

I am fully aware that there is a host of genetic abnormalities that occur which result in extremely severe medical conditions. Harlequin-type ichthyosis is just one example of such a terrible developmental condition (I could offer other examples but it is immaterial to the main point under discussion). Unfortunately you have selected a very poor example to make your case. The reason for this is that this type of horrific genetic condition is one that medical science has advanced to the point whe…
/r/MensRights01/04/13 07:56 AM
3

While I agree with you that abortions are not usually performed on fetuses that are capable of living outside the womb. The question at hand is what should occur in the unlikely event that the child is viable given the current state of medical technology (please keep in mind that this is a target that keeps moving as medical knowledge advances... for example premature infants who would have died 50 years ago are now able to survive). The "noncommittal answer" is actually telling not because the …
/r/MensRights31/03/13 07:45 PM
12

This is an unnecessary and counterproductive response for several reasons. The first reason is that there is absolutely no guarantee that this individual is actually enrolled in that university (they have lied about everything else so why would this nugget be true), so you'll probably just be ranting and raving to these people for no reason. The second reason is that like it or not, the tenants of free speech permits people to express themselves in this manner and as advocates of free speech peo…
/r/MensRights10/04/12 04:34 PM
4

Based upon this person's behavior I am convinced that if they are typing, they are lying. Their excuse doesn't even make any sense. They claim to have deleted the second comment because they thought it said something "inflammatory", but left up the first comment because it was "particularly vile"? This is stupidity of the highest order. If this person was purging "inflammatory" comments from their blog, what would be the purpose of leaving the "particularly vile" post there, wouldn't that one be…
/r/MensRights09/04/12 03:20 AM
4

Of course it was flawed. By your own admission, you classified this group as people who suffered from a particular form of paranoia. You then presented a scenario that was specifically designed to illicit a fear response associated with that form of paranoia. Then you draw very general conclusions based upon responses to that scenario. Please keep in mind that paranoia is not an "irrational hatred", it is an "irrational fear". People who are paranoid will enter panic mode when presented with the…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 04:07 AM
3

Okay, so then you admit that your method was inherently flawed and hence any and all conclusions you have drawn from it are invalid. I'm glad we agree. "A claustrophobic person does not say it's ok to hit women." A claustrophobic person might say it is okay to hit a woman that is trying to lock them in a closet. That is the reason why your method is completely and utterly flawed. When you strive to provoke peoples irrational fears they will often do things that are out of character. A claustroph…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 03:05 AM
6

Arguments about methodology aren’t an “evasive technique MRAs” use, it is a technique intelligent people use to discern whether or not we can conclude anything useful from a test. Saying that you deleted it “on principle” is a silly sounding statement coming from you as you have not actually displayed yourself as a principled individual. You have demonstrated time and time again in this specific situation that you are willing to lie, deceive, manipulate, and prevaricate. These are not the action…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 01:59 AM
7

Wow, just wow... you really don't have any integrity at all do you. Just in case anyone here is interested, here is something I posted to this individuals blog that was summarily deleted for no other reason than this person apparently didn't like my chosen name. This is the post verbatim: "Eschatology, I honestly have a great deal of sympathy for you because you seem to be trying very hard to do what you think is right and are failing miserably at doing what is actually right. I hope that you pa…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 06:51 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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