TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

DogBotherer Archive

View 11 posts and 96 comments by DogBotherer on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Eleven stab wounds pretty much proves intent to kill, no question. Well, only needs to be intent to cause GBH, so it seems a given. English law. Then for it to be murder, the accused has to be male. Certainly, far fewer women are convicted of murder annually than men. For example, during 2008, the last date for which I have figures, 415 men and 24 women were convicted of murder (so approx. a 95/5 split). Whether that means conviction rates for women are lower or women are less likely to be charg…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:54 PM
2

Murder doesn't have to be premeditated in English law. Murder requires intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. If the defence of self-defence fails, stabbing someone 11 times is pretty good evidence of intent to cause grievous bodily harm at the very least.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 12:26 AM
1

What about it particularly? As far as I can see, to the extent that it applies to socialism, it applies to corporations.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:31 AM
2

Hmmm. Talks about bigotry + named after a Greek fascist party = irony overload.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 07:30 AM
2

Defend it against what specifically? And which particular theory of value, considering there are several (Smith's, Ricardo's and Marx's just to pick the main ones, but several more since). I mean, there were huge numbers of strawmen thrown up by ill-schooled economist wannabes who either didn't read or didn't understand Marx or math, but there were also genuine deficiencies which were identified (e.g. subjectivity). What was ill-informed on a practical level? Marx was almost entirely about criti…
/r/MensRights14/03/12 07:35 AM
2

Hep C is almost exclusively transmitted via blood too (mostly through sharing injection equipment). Hep B can be transmitted "domestically" (think, sharing a toothbrush) and sexually, but still highly unlikely via this route.
/r/MensRights05/05/10 11:29 AM
4

When you're in my phone book. (Bill Hicks)
/r/MensRights25/04/10 11:23 PM
3

So they do initiate most DV - albeit only by a slight amount. Pedantic I know, but hey...
/r/MensRights06/04/10 05:44 AM
2

I don't know where you live, so the flip answer is it depends and it depends if you would. In the UK though, for example, who started an altercation isn't the determining factor (in an arrest certainly). You have a right to self defence (just), but - in general terms (and this applies guy vs guy or group vs group too) - the person/group who is most hurt in a fight will be identified as the victim. There are exceptions, but that's the way the police usually go about their business.
/r/MensRights01/04/10 04:11 PM
1

I'd like to see the law applied fairly, uniformly and equally - regardless of gender, race, age, sexuality, whatever. Isn't that supposed to be the way of things? I'd also like to see laws passed being gender-neutral insofar as that's possible and meaningful. I don't live my life in fear of women, I never have - I like and get on with about as many women as I do people! Edit: Not saying women aren't people, quite the reverse - I meant the proportions are the same because they are.
/r/MensRights01/04/10 02:31 PM
5

The problem is not the woman (most men could probably handle most women in most circumstances - there are always exceptions, women with training, particularly fit/aggressive/insane women, women with weapons etc.), it's the law. If you did respond as you describe, you'd be arrested and incarcerated so fast it'd make your head spin. And that's almost (almost) independent of the circumstances.
/r/MensRights01/04/10 06:50 AM
5

Pummeling someone into a bloody pulp because they slapped you is clearly abuse and illegal in most civilized nations, however, if I felt truly threatened - e.g. an all-out attack or an attack with a deadly weapon - I'd certainly feel justified in responding with vigour until they were no longer a threat. Frankly, anything less not only isn't self-defence, it's downright dangerous (i.e. you might end up just making them more crazy/aggressive).
/r/MensRights01/04/10 06:45 AM
5

Also, getting involved in "domestic" incidents almost always ends badly for the intervener (often with both parties verbally or physically attacking him/her). I'd be very reluctant to get involved either way round, however I would if it looked really serious (probably by calling the cops unless it was clear immediate help was needed).
/r/MensRights01/04/10 06:38 AM
0

I'm a left liberal (and I sometimes phrase it left libertarian). I'm also a firm believer in the free market, I simply don't believe what we have currently under corporate capitalism constitutes one - nor are most free trade agreements anything to do with freeing the market. It's more a old/new, European/USAian thing I think. I mean, if you do your historical diligence in depth, the actual origins of the terms left and right have become hopelessly confused down the years into meaningless "packag…
/r/MensRights31/03/10 11:28 AM
0

As Fitzgerald said, the rich (and powerful) aren't like you and me.
/r/MensRights31/03/10 11:17 AM
2

I think that's a very interesting point, and I agree it'll certainly be a positive outcome if it does. Although I think there are probably also more biological reasons which explain some of the discrepancies.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 01:46 PM
2

OK, I understand why you say what you do, but this was an official complaint (I wasn't serious, just curious, but they didn't know that so they should've been treating it so). Therefore, I don't think they were bullshitting. I don't have the letter to hand anymore, it got lost in one of my moves, but from memory, they referred to legal precedents in similar cases (so there must be some case law out there) and they were basically saying, pursue it if you wish but you'll get nowhere. Sadly, that's…
/r/MensRights28/03/10 04:04 PM
5

I once complained to the Equal Opps people (just out of curiosity) about local "ladies' nights", offering free entry and drinks to females given that there were never any equivalent men's nights. I was told that it had been decided that, whilst technically discriminatory it didn't raise any important issues and would most likely lead to an award of the minimum coin of the realm.
/r/MensRights28/03/10 09:17 AM
4

And they end up with their dick chopped off, either literally or metaphorically...
/r/MensRights27/03/10 07:11 PM
5

Damn, 2 handed sword...
/r/MensRights27/03/10 07:08 PM
9

To state it in a less confrontational way, a major cause of suicide is relationships/relationship break-up and all the associated crap.
/r/MensRights24/03/10 05:29 AM
2

I could understand blind judging - I'm pretty sure I have a world-view prejudice against female authors - but this doesn't make any sense beyond ensuring a female victor in a female contest. Whoopy doo.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 06:55 PM
1

That was a nice read, got to go find my son and give him a hug.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 02:29 PM
4

Well, it is a paper published in "Cosmic", not a science journal after all. He's obviously into all that new age chakra shite (California, huh!?), but it doesn't necessarily speak to the other paper at all (and that was just the first one I found, it's a fairly widespread finding - the fact that this is a review article points to that, but yes it'd be nice to have the whole thing and the references in particular). EDIT- A few more links: http://news.ufl.edu/2006/07/13/women-attackers/ http://pn.…
/r/MensRights23/03/10 01:20 PM
7

I'm certainly not suggesting there aren't exceptions, however the prevailing research on violence in relationships and unreported levels of domestic violence against men compared against prosecution and conviction rates of violent women necessarily lead one to conclude that they either aren't making it as far as the police/courts or aren't being handled in the same manner.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 09:43 AM
25

Female violence against males is often downplayed/downgraded legally speaking.
/r/MensRights23/03/10 06:34 AM
2

Indeed, in the UK it's circumcised guys who are in a massive minority and so would be viewed as "freaks" if anyone was. Frankly, it was never an issue when I was in school - guys were either cavaliers or roundheads, so what? Girls are split on the issue as far as I'm aware, in fact, anecdotally, many actually prefer (the feel of?) intact men, although I know of no serious research into it. So long as a man is hygienic, and all the lubricants are working according to spec, it shouldn't make too b…
/r/MensRights25/02/10 08:05 AM
2

A lot would be an exaggeration, certainly multiple times though. I say it's inevitable more as a critique of a general societal assumption that heterosexual men are necessarily up-for-it with any random female based purely on the presence of secondary sexual characteristics. We're often assumed to have an almost dog-like lack of discrimination.
/r/MensRights23/02/10 03:33 PM
7

Agreed, I surf both here and there. XX just represents a cross-section of women, not a bunch of she-devil femi-nazis.
/r/MensRights22/02/10 10:14 PM
8

Try turning a woman down for sex and you'll find plenty of women have ego issues too. I've had everything from outrage, through incredulity to physical attack. Edit: Oh, and the inevitable "you must be gay" comment (I'm actually rampantly heterosexual when the right opportunity presents...)
/r/MensRights22/02/10 10:07 PM
2

You forgot to switch the "For men in our culture" to "For women in our culture" but bravo, excellent parody. You should post it to her article as a comment and see if she dares leave it up!
/r/MensRights22/02/10 10:04 PM
10

Just another weapon in the increasingly disturbing armory which allows gender relations to be chewed beyond all recognition and will doubtless do much to destroy children's lives.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 06:00 PM
2

Yes, but no legal aid, so he'll have to be substantially wealthy to make a reasonable go of it.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 05:58 PM
2

If he's rich and she has any money to make it worth his time and effort.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 05:57 PM
1

Google isn't being too helpful today. There are definitely a family of studies I recall from university looking at this. Taking various men living in social/sexual isolation and comparing them to periods where they were mixing socially/sexually. From an evolutionary/behavioral stand point, both when mixing with other males and mixing with women, men would benefit from increased levels of testosterone, but I can't honestly recall whether all-male or mixed environments led to higher levels. Only t…
/r/MensRights19/02/10 10:48 AM
6

One of the external influences is the presence of women. There've been studies done with facial hair growth amongst sailors at sea in an all male environment and on shore leave. Presumably, this would be different for gay guys, but that's one of the environmental cues for testosterone.
/r/MensRights18/02/10 10:12 PM
1

Or that pro life is anti death for that matter, it's not as if they're linking arms and blocking graveyards is it? (Copyright, Bill Hicks of course).
/r/MensRights14/02/10 10:03 AM
1

Weird Al could do anything...
/r/MensRights13/02/10 08:59 PM
3

I just don't see how all those syllables fit either...Gonna take some work.
/r/MensRights13/02/10 11:02 AM
3

Damn, I think I've been raped more than once then...
/r/MensRights29/01/10 10:46 AM
3

Being raped can cause and has caused relationship breakdown, but agree with the rest.
/r/MensRights19/01/10 04:32 AM
2

Never said that, never imagined that was the case. Pretty clear this man's rights were abused though.
/r/MensRights16/01/10 10:18 AM
2

Nicholls said she became “frustrated” with Mr Gardner when he would not contribute to household chores, but told the jury tearfully: “I still loved him.”
/r/MensRights15/01/10 05:30 PM
7

Apologies for the deliberately tongue in cheek headline, but this is interesting science for men to know. Part of the role of any men's movement is to establish the validity of maleness and its future, and this relates to that.
/r/MensRights14/01/10 05:12 AM
2

Dunno about American law, but in the UK the distinction you make is only part of the civil law (i.e. suing for damages). In criminal terms (in the UK): Common Assault = contact but no actual harm. ABH = Actual bodily harm = bruises, abrasions, scratches etc. GBH/Wounding = Grevious bodily harm (broken bones, deeper cuts, etc.) Edit: In the UK at least, what you term "assault" would probably be charged as "threatening words and behaviour" (or if appropriate "threats to kill" which is more serious…
/r/MensRights11/01/10 01:44 AM
10

Sarcasm noted. Additionally, men should have their peni (that is the plural right?) kept in little cages too, we can keep the keys at the local feminista boot camp and bring them out for their weekly donor sessions at the local sperm bank.
/r/MensRights09/01/10 01:04 PM
2

Because the majority of people are heterosexual and the majority of inmates are male?
/r/MensRights08/01/10 10:29 AM
1

I'm not arguing with that. Even currently, men and women use drugs at approximately equal rates. Problematic drug use (measured via proxy of drug treatment centre sign ups) is somewhat skewed towards men. But if you were to look at arrest, prosecution, conviction and incarceration rates for drug use, you'd think it was almost exclusively a male problem.
/r/MensRights02/01/10 05:16 PM
4

No, men and women should be dealt with in a similar fashion by the criminal justice system. Where crimes are committed, prosecuted and individuals convicted in equal numbers, equal numbers should receive custodial sentences. That's what equality means.
/r/MensRights01/01/10 07:26 PM
1

Indeed, nice to find an intelligent nugget in an article about brain dead TV.
/r/MensRights01/01/10 07:20 PM
1

I'd love to see the figures on Western male migration (to SE Asia for example) over recent years (more male-friendly), to find out if this vote-by-feet is actually occurring as you suggest. I suspect the figures would be revealing. Of course, as Asian society becomes more "Westernized" the relative attractiveness may reduce. Edit: Indeed, one way feminist legislators might seek to prevent an exodus of this sort would be to attempt to globalize Western gender politics.
/r/MensRights28/12/09 11:37 AM
1

No idea, having multiple "wives" was/is common in Asia, though I'm not sure on the marital angle. Here in Vietnam there are words (a little archaic now, but only for a generation or so) for "little wife" etc., for a second partner. The upper limit on numbers was always to do with wealth. The male female ratio wasn't really an issue as rich people just did what they wanted and poor people either shared or didn't get.
/r/MensRights25/12/09 06:42 PM
5

Indeed, I recall a pretty well-researched academic paper on why polygamy favours women. Monogamy (or rather bigamy) is a law which actually serves male interests (at least assuming a man wishes to marry).
/r/MensRights25/12/09 05:55 PM
2

I thought polygamy was still common amongst rich Chinese men, it certainly used to be. What's the law now? (obviously, according to this illegal, but when did it change and what are the rules?)
/r/MensRights25/12/09 05:51 PM
1

I'm certainly not debating the moral truth of your point, but legally lying about fidelity is unlikely (on its own) to amount to fraud.
/r/MensRights22/12/09 05:32 AM
1

I presume the writer means he'd have to prove she actively lied to him about his status as "father" after some point at which she became aware that he wasn't. Arguably, she may've never been specifically aware he wasn't (simply knowing she'd been with (an)other guy/s wouldn't be enough). Her statement that he wasn't the father is evidence of her belief/knowledge, but not conclusive since she could argue it was something said in the heat of battle when she was pissed at him. Proof is more than ju…
/r/MensRights21/12/09 04:47 AM
1

Do I get a prize?
/r/MensRights17/12/09 07:37 AM
1

Huh? You were the one advocating a wholly discredited form of contraception. I'm largely guessing, but I imagine most of the guys here are quite comfortable with condom use, with the exception of those who double up with a vasectomy if they wish to ensure they don't end up on the wrong end of a paternity suit and have no desire for (more) children.
/r/MensRights17/12/09 05:45 AM
1

So... You know it contains sperm and basically means the withdrawal method is without merit as a form of contraception?
/r/MensRights16/12/09 05:26 PM
2

You've heard of precum right?
/r/MensRights14/12/09 01:37 AM
1

Broadly agree with your post, but technically, legally speaking, theft (in the UK at least) requires an intention to permanently deprive. So borrowing a pencil with the intention of returning it wouldn't cut it for a conviction. That's why (again in the UK) they had to come up with the separate crime of taking and driving away/taking without consent for "joy riding" where people could reasonably claim they didn't intend to keep the car and assumed it would be returned once found, after they'd ha…
/r/MensRights11/12/09 09:09 AM
4

Sounds like men are a bit like left-handers. As a left-handed man I now feel doubly stigmatized. Just hope I'm on the correct end of the bell-curve...
/r/MensRights07/12/09 08:12 AM
1

Not only do men hit women and men hit men, women hit men sometimes too. The writer overlooks this point. Indeed...
/r/MensRights26/11/09 09:01 AM
2

Yes, exactly - dangerously baby/bathwater approach to say men or women make better doctors; both bring a large overlapping skill/temperament set, and points of difference. The right people make good doctors, be they male or female.
/r/MensRights26/11/09 08:51 AM
2

I have a few very good female friends, but most of my good friends are male. I find that those women who make it into my friendship network (which I hope is as much a pleasure for them as for me) tend to be more guylike in their attitude. They tend to be more interested in issues and less in the minutiae of personal relationships and so ọn. I also have one or two male friends who tend towards this more stereotypically "feminine" manner, and frankly I find them much more wearing socially. Very ne…
/r/MensRights15/11/09 09:28 AM
3

Those alleging rape should always be dealt with sympathetically, but they should neither be believed nor disbelieved by professionals (family/friends and someone solely responsible for counselling are a different matter obviously). Those responsible for collecting evidence should collect it, and those responsible for deciding whether to prosecute should do so on the basis of what is collected.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 06:38 AM
1

We could always ban women from bars? Edit: Or men. There you are, totally fair and balanced now.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 06:35 AM
0

Not denying any of the above (in fact agree with it), but the failure to detect drug exposure does not mean no drugs were administered. Some of these drugs are quickly eliminated.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 06:34 AM
1

It's is in the UK.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 06:30 AM
3

I certainly agree with you that, as a general point, excessive amounts of ambiguous all-embracing and badly worded laws are a boon for authoritarian governments. It's also true that the UK's current government has produced masses of legislation, much of it, on the face of it, very poorly thought out and put together. It seems inconceivable that this isn't a deliberate ploy. I'm not usually sympathetic to the Torygraph, but I thought this was an excellent piece.
/r/MensRights21/01/09 06:43 PM
2

Yes. I'm not disagreeing with that point if you reread what I said. I'm just saying that the current law is the correct law, and the fact that it disadvantages women (assuming it does) is merely an accident of psychology (men are more impulsive and thus more likely to be able to rely on a defense of provocation). Edit: I mean, personally, I can't think of a factor more likely to provoke sympathy for a homicidal act (outside self/other defence) in the mind of a neutral third party than catching t…
/r/MensRights21/01/09 04:46 PM
3

More terrible legislation from a government which hold's the UK all-time record for terrible legislation (both quantity and quality). I mean, it does happen to break down as a gender issue (most of the time), but that's not why the law is the way that it is. If my wife hits me and throws cups at me (my ex did that) and I burn her to death while she's sleeping, I'll now be able to say manslaugher, whereas if she catches me shagging the family help she'll be a murderess if she freaks out and throw…
/r/MensRights21/01/09 03:55 PM
2

Interesting article, and obviously outrageous. Frankly though, I'd rather not be seated next to unknown children in such a confined environment. It's bad enough taking my own children long haul, and they're reasonably well behaved.
/r/MensRights16/01/09 07:46 AM
1

What an exceptionally well-written and intelligent piece. Bravo.
/r/MensRights12/01/09 10:43 AM
5

Just wish I had the cash to afford a sugarbabe! :-)
/r/MensRights02/01/09 11:29 AM
1

Like homosexuality?
/r/MensRights01/01/09 02:22 PM
1

Gotta love orangutans! Wish more people did and stopped buying palm oil and palm oil foods and products. Won't be any orangutans left soon...
/r/MensRights24/12/08 11:20 AM
2

I know it's not strictly relevant to our subreddit, but I wonder why the UK has the highest self-harm rate in Europe too? Answers on a postcard.
/r/MensRights16/12/08 02:55 PM
8

Never excuse him, but if you don't seek to explain him you'll be picking up a lot of bodies down the years.
/r/MensRights13/12/08 06:07 PM
2

Jeez. Crackdown this, crackdown that, whatever happened to Britain?
/r/MensRights09/12/08 05:19 PM
2

Well I can certainly see the public health argument for funding such intervention in high risk and/or low sanitation environments, in low risk developed countries your chance of contracting HIV is overwhelmingly a product of your risk behaviour. Edit: However, in the spirit of openness (and because my beliefs are influenced by evidence), I'm interested by this letter in the BMJ which makes a strong case, however, this is a change from the position a few years ago. This is an interesting review t…
/r/MensRights08/12/08 11:43 AM
2

I'm pretty sure you mean neonatal unless they hack open the mother! Opinions are mixed on the medical pros and cons and, although there've been some studies recently which appear to show a reduced risk of HIV, these have been in developing world low hygiene scenarios.
/r/MensRights08/12/08 10:36 AM
1

Sure. I mean, I'd certainly support an adult's right to have an elective (privately funded) circumcision if they desired. Be it for aesthetic or religious reasons or beliefs they might have about hygiene/health. The issue is really about making permanent medically-unnecessary surgical changes to a boy's genitalia.
/r/MensRights08/12/08 08:59 AM
1

Unmodified then?
/r/MensRights08/12/08 07:41 AM
3

Yes. It seems a ridiculous and poorly thought out proposal to me, one which is bound to drive the sex trade further underground and to put well-run brothels and massage parlours which look after their workers out of business. It'll be bad for the customers, and as a consequence bad for the working women who'll be driven back out on the streets on their own to take pot luck in the back of strangers' cars (and they'll have to make up their mind quick as the guys won't want to hang about). A recipe…
/r/MensRights20/11/08 11:35 AM
3

But it wouldn't help someone to get that sort of assurance anyhow. This will be an offence of strict liability - if she's being pimped and you had sex with her, you're guilty. Whatever you knew and whatever she told you.
/r/MensRights20/11/08 10:22 AM
2

I'll certainly give you that the price is higher, but that's probably more a result of monopoly than reduced availability. Bottom line is they're there if you want them and can afford to pay.
/r/MensRights28/10/08 06:40 AM
3

In general, drugs are as available in prison as outside, the only difference is in the quality/purity (and the availability of clean needles).
/r/MensRights27/10/08 05:39 PM
7

If it were a 15 year old girl and a 30odd year old man would your answer be the same? If not, why not?
/r/MensRights24/10/08 05:42 PM
4

No idea how the US law on murder works but is it something to do with her not having the capacity for specific intent?
/r/MensRights21/08/08 11:49 AM
15

It's like the old story. If I'm in my garden sunbathing naked and a woman sees me I get prosecuted for indecent exposure. If she's in her garden sunbathing naked and I see her I get prosecuted for being a peeping tom.
/r/MensRights31/07/08 11:33 AM
2

More about it here
/r/MensRights29/07/08 08:35 AM
1

Very old article
/r/MensRights25/07/08 07:34 PM
4

In many important regards the west already is one.
/r/MensRights16/07/08 05:45 PM
7

Non violent offenders, sure, way too many people in jail for the wrong reason, but this is frankly just wrong. The criminal justice stats are already stacked way too heavily against men - for e.g. men and women are roughly similar in terms of life time drug use, but men are eight times more likely to be jailed for drug offences.
/r/MensRights16/07/08 07:42 AM
2

Absolutely, a shocking amount of sexual and physical abuse is perpetrated by women. Society needs to grow up and stop thinking in stereotypes.
/r/MensRights14/07/08 09:32 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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