TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Edward_III Archive

View 0 posts and 62 comments by Edward_III 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)
1

Sigh. I get your objections, but they sound very much so like the excepction. As you mentioned, tax benefits and a more stable legal framework implies that an out-of-wedlock birth is a close proxy for "born with a broken family". For every couple that fit your situation one could argue there were married couples having kids on the verge of breaking up, thus adding to the single-parent statistic. All-in-all, I do not know the data on the kids of "unstable marriages". But the ones from single-pare…
/r/MensRights13/12/22 03:34 PM
1

And you ought to agree that it was terrible, no? I mean, it would be much preferable to grow in an intact family, in an alternate timeline where your father did not cheat and was an upstanding husband. What I mean to say is that single parent households are a very negative stat regardless of origin, though you can argue some are worst. As for the data, best I could find where 1990s stats from the census, quote: "For example, data published in the June 1994 CPS report indicated that 26 percent of…
/r/MensRights10/12/22 08:12 PM
3

10.5M one-parent households - taken straight from census data - is a pretty hefty number.
/r/MensRights10/12/22 04:39 AM
2

Yes. That is a commonality of those totalitarians. All I meant is that your "no" there was a bit unnecessary. Use whichever comparison you prefer, both fit.
/r/MensRights12/11/22 12:43 AM
6

National socialists believed the ones they murdered "ruled the world" and "were oppressing them".
/r/MensRights11/11/22 02:25 PM
1

Yeah. Surprised that feminists in particular seem oblivious to the atrocity China does -- forced abortion is about as unanimous as you can get (for bad) on the whole "pro life" vs "pro choice" debate.
/r/MensRights26/10/22 02:46 AM
3

Well it was technically the opposite, with forced abortions and whatnot.
/r/MensRights25/10/22 12:59 AM
5

There are several different types of FGM (and MGM too for that matter, we are just used to the most common jewish/american/muslim variety). Look it up on the WHO website. At least one of the types of FGM is quite literally done to the female equivalent of a foreskin. So one or two types of FGM can be of roughly similar severity as male circumcision, or even less so. It is a common misconception, but IMO it sounds like just a very cheap "but it is not as bad" cope (for those who use it in bad fai…
/r/MensRights14/10/22 01:31 AM
5

It is already outlawed (at least) in several european countries. It is punishable even if done abroad. Thus, one can say it already is not okay - if you do it to women.
/r/MensRights14/10/22 01:23 AM
1

If ethics cannot move you, then I assume only your self-interest can move you? Ethics is the study of human action and of telling right from wrong.
/r/MensRights24/09/22 03:16 AM
1

The last phrase of yours, I am almost positive the old testament already recognized the abhorrence of blaming a kid for the sins of their parents. Millenia ago. And they were right. As for the other things, there are physical limitations to the influx of people. Sure. Priority understandably ought to go to the ones getting the bitter end of the war -- ukranians. Sure. That is different from a blanket ban, though. Knowing there are practical limitations to the application of a moral principle is …
/r/MensRights24/09/22 01:21 AM
2

I'll be honest, the spy excuse sounds a bit iffy for me. Russian intelligence has shown its limits in this war, but one would assume they could have smuggled assets in the several years prior, or even the several months after the war start before now. A good attitude on the part of Finland. It is in the strategic self-interest of the countries who oppose Russia to deprive it of their manpower and economic future (i.e., young people, they are an aging nation with an already strained-and-sanctione…
/r/MensRights24/09/22 01:03 AM
2

The english version would be, I guess, "the writing was on the wall" -- i.e., there were clear signs it was coming.
/r/MensRights23/09/22 10:53 PM
2

I am not trying to be confrontational on this. Given the context, yes I do agree with you that is the reason she did. Has to be said though that despite a much more severe situation -- an actual war with Russia -- Georgia seems to be for the time being offering quite a bit of asylum to russians. Food for thought. Didn't hear about the refuge to ukranian men. Interesting. What I said about her phrase still stands though -- according to that logic almost all refugees ought to be shipped back.
/r/MensRights23/09/22 10:43 PM
5

Collective punishment is antiethical by definition, despite any attempt at rationalizing it. Citizens have a right to flee authoritarian countries, especially when they put their own lifes on the line -- else we would have no basis for refugee status. By that logic we should throw anyone fleeing Syria or Afghanistan back into the meatgrinder to "fix" their country. A matter of priorities is fine when prioritizing efforts. It is not fine for blanket violations of morality and rights. Ideally this…
/r/MensRights23/09/22 09:54 PM
1

Such as the Prime Minister of Estonia who, in a phrase whose meaning 100% denies *ANY* right for the refugee status for anyone in the world pretty much (if applied to other countries) stated, and I quote: "Every citizen is responsible for the actions of their state, and citizens of Russia are no exception. Therefore, we do not give asylum to Russian men who flee their country. They should oppose the war."
/r/MensRights23/09/22 09:47 PM
20

I believe at the time they were not aware of lead poisoning, but yeah it probably didn't do good things to their health. How recently did we stop using lead in our waterpipes, for instance?
/r/MensRights19/09/22 08:19 PM
70

At around the 2nd millenia B.C. we have very solid evidence that minoan (from Crete) woman used a lot of makeup. Quite a lot of toxic makeup too. Especifically, they used white makeup so they looked more feminine -- to work in the sun and have a tan was considered a masculine trait. That one I can remember on the top of my head, probably even more sexually dimorphic examples from earlier times too.
/r/MensRights19/09/22 05:55 PM
4

It is a crime when commited against men... just a much milder crime (lesão corporal) with far fewer juridical tools to protect the victim/restrain the agressor.
/r/MensRights22/06/22 02:33 AM
39

She does mention Thatcher, but doesn't put her as the "starter of a war".
/r/MensRights16/03/22 05:45 AM
3

You did know before the camps were liberated. There were plenty of intel reports and leaks about the ongoing genocide, including the famous polish spy that infiltrated auschwitz as a prisioner and then escaped. At best, the exact figures were only precisely narrowed down post war.
/r/MensRights12/03/22 03:28 AM
2

I would say the comparison with minority issues is not quite the best fit. Now, don't misunderstand me, for I do not wish to make a dismissal as to ethnic issues, not I think that is the place, but the matter of fact is that whisle ethnic groups can be more or less segregated in everyday life - wheter due to official discrimination or just happenstance - the sexes cannot, in any meaningfull way. Afterall, for most people, during most of their life, their family will include people of both sexes.…
/r/MensRights13/12/21 04:06 PM
3

As many an eunuch throught history will be painfully aware.
/r/MensRights25/11/21 11:49 PM
1

I am not a consequentialist, nor an utilitarian. People should be carefull and watch their backs. I don't think people should be reckless. I live in a very dangerous country and I am not that much of an idiot. Yet, you went a step beyond, and used the exact same arguments people use for racial profiling. You should totally be aware of your sorroundings - men too, by the way, you and I can very easily get killed over a robbery if we don't watch ourselfs. However, the biological sex of those aroun…
/r/MensRights28/09/21 05:45 PM
8

That is, quite literally, the very kind of justification people make for racial profiling. I cannot believe you ignore that in good faith, whisle speaking english.
/r/MensRights27/09/21 07:42 PM
-3

Is anything that I said wrong? If you have good points against marrying, I assume you need not make up false statistics, yes?
/r/MensRights07/09/21 09:19 PM
3

According to the divorce rate link, that does seem to be the case. They calculate it based on yearly marriages and divorces. Of course that is a blatantly incorrect way of calculating it, if that is the case. A correct way would be to take the sum of every single marriage that happened with still extant individuals, and calculate how many of them ended up in divorces, which cannot be done by simply counting the number of marriages and divorces in a single year.
/r/MensRights07/09/21 11:10 AM
5

You can always do your part to help prevent it on the yet unborn boys in your family. Cannot change the past but can always help shape the future.
/r/MensRights24/08/21 12:12 AM
2

Circumcision is also widely widespread among muslims, and IIRC they make up the supermajority of cut men worldwide.
/r/MensRights24/08/21 12:10 AM
3

Thats actually an important detail. If they skip nuance and details on, ahem, coincidental situations where skipping those details promote the prevailing vision... Doesn't seem likely to be a mere coincidence.
/r/MensRights31/07/21 11:00 PM
5

The power argument is flawed in its very premise. It is like saying that the swastika party was not racist in the 20s, as, you see, they had no power! I mean, they attempted a putsch in Weimar Germany, lost it, and had several of its members arrested or killed in the attempt. Certainly, a minority political group under literal arrest commands no power... for the moment. Afterall, they did eventually get into power in the 1930s. But can you see how bullshit the power argument is? By that logic, t…
/r/MensRights31/07/21 10:57 PM
20

Back when I was in late highschool, as we are a developing country, we received a lecture exposing to us a program to study in prestigious UK and USA institutions, all costs covered! Well... girls only. You see, it may have been a very expensive college in the first place (so though the country is poor very few students were), and my country may have a higher percentage of women in all levels of education as well, as is the norm nowadays, but, there is no such thing as a poor and gifted male stu…
/r/MensRights31/07/21 05:01 PM
2

Honestly, as I mentioned previously, the issue seems to see they have a bad system for magistrate selection in the first place. Maybe that could be a "duct tape" solution, but the "feminist push" seems to be only salt on an already open wound.
/r/MensRights21/07/21 10:01 AM
2

I suppose the small size explains it. Pardon my ignorance, but does Malta follow a common-law system due to british influence, or a Roman Law system?
/r/MensRights21/07/21 12:10 AM
7

That is a rather... peculiar (and I would say above-average level of flawed) method of picking magistrates in general. What country is this?
/r/MensRights21/07/21 12:01 AM
0

Well, my experience differs. The nerd types, or the "teacher's close ones" (idk the english version of the term but you get the gist of it) were rather well treated by the school staff in at least a couple of schools I went to, and in one of them there was at least an ambivalent actitute by other studentes (not outright hostility). So, I suppose the sex is at the very least not always the determinant factor.
/r/MensRights20/07/21 09:13 PM
11

Yes, please, for heaven's sake let's not repeat the exact same follies we observe in the feminist movement, such as that "people of the opposite sex cannot at all partake in the discussions, nor take our protagonism away". People can be right or wrong, moral or immoral, and that is, at the very least, not precluded to a single sex.
/r/MensRights20/07/21 09:02 PM
3

OP, it seems to be alive for now here: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheBluePill/comments/onv7dy/red_pill_killed_my_best_friend/
/r/MensRights20/07/21 07:00 PM
2

I actually see no issue with women looking up to a competent men. As I understand it, they look for providers, that means not only those top achievers, but also (and for most), it means people capable of bringing in value to the family, so someone that is disciplined and hardworking, maybe particularly skilled, etc (which is why some broke-ass musicians still seem to be attractive to many even before they suceed finantially). I see that as a positive thing, but maybe it is just neutral. Not only…
/r/MensRights18/07/21 04:11 PM
2

You are correct from a pro-abortion perspective. In my personal one, the fetus is not part of the mother's body, and as such the mother shouldn't be able to kill him willy-nilly. Still, the abortion discussion - wheter it should be legal or not, is a hornest nest in and of itself and we don't need to debate it, agree to disagree and such. But I certainly agree with you - if one can kill the fetus, the father would, in a logical sense, have the right to abandon it, in the conditions you thus ment…
/r/MensRights07/07/21 08:02 PM
11

Does a man have any say in the abortion of his yet unborn child? Can he do anything at all to keep the child, or, if he doesn't want it, to abandon it? Honest question, mind you. As far as I am aware, usually they don't.
/r/MensRights07/07/21 11:59 AM
8

That justification (it was made by your collective identity so it is not an issue) is such a baffling nonsensical one it actually took me a while to be able to explain why it is so nonsensical. I still struggle with it, but I guess the issue is it is hard to convince some people that we are individuals and not hive minds.
/r/MensRights02/07/21 10:33 PM
5

One would think that most of the times a victim is under attack, the attacker deliberatedly tries to make it an unfair fight. Thus, kind of a moot point.
/r/MensRights18/06/21 03:27 PM
12

"Hahahaha casual excruciating pain so funny hahaha" I can never get that. Every single time I see someone in pain, I feel it myself, the worst the pain, the worst I feel. Cannot fathom someone finding that humorous or anything close to positive.
/r/MensRights13/06/21 04:51 PM
21

Looking at the original post comments, a lot of people still won't accept common sense.
/r/MensRights12/06/21 10:47 PM
14

It is not about gendering either, the expression itself is utterly moronic if the usage is meant to be what the comments claim, even if the discussion wasn't focused on sex. "Oh, it actually means the discrimating pressure against men in society!" was something I saw in several comments.Now, by that same token, racism against blacks would be called "toxic blackness". I think thats enough to see how it is an utterly moronic expression to explain racism, in the same way it is to use against male d…
/r/MensRights11/06/21 09:52 PM
5

From my classes of forensic medicine, there is a wide variety of items that are not hard to access that can be used in hanging. I also recall a statistic on men having higher chances of "suscess" in suicide attempts, even when the methods are the same used by women. So I think your point is at least incomplete, though if you find statistics showing otherwise I would be glad to see them too. Edit: most of the examples I have seen from suicidal hanging in those classes were male too, coincidence o…
/r/MensRights07/06/21 03:17 PM
4

Those things are, indeed, not mutually exclusive.I think the point is more along the lines of the fact that a false accusation has one certain victim, which will be directly affected, losing something (even if a bit of its sanity and social standing) in the overwhelming majority of the cases. Compouding that, it may have an indirect effect - or not so indirect, as in your case - on actual victims. The severity of the impact will depend on each case, for sure. But the certain vs eventual, I would…
/r/MensRights24/05/21 01:34 AM
10

See, they actually coded this into law in my country! Officially, the penal code determines it as, and I quote "murder against women for reasons of the female sex's condition". Now, that is, we ought to agree, rather open and poorly explained. So, the law goes on: "[a murder is considered to be caused] by reasons inherent to the female sex if the crime involves: I - Domestic and family violence, II -bellitling or disconsideration to the female condition." The translation is my own and it is impe…
/r/MensRights11/05/21 08:08 PM
1

"I am not advocating morality. I stand for efficiency"That is a moral (or ethical if you will) standpoint. Of course, you are free to adopt it. But it is. Seems to somewhat utilitarian. Pragmatic maybe. Most people in a voluntary army, or in the voluntary part of it will be male, yeah. Agreed. At least that is consistent so far in history.Well, I think that there isnt much else to say. Have a good weekend.
/r/MensRights25/04/21 01:26 AM
1

Of course they do react differently - that has a natural (psychological, I supose) explanation. It is absolutely NOT moral, though. No naturallistic phalacies here, please. Their lives are worth just as much, as invaluable human beigns. Else we should go murdering infertile people too. Yes, they usually are not used as frontline troops, but they are drafted, and mobilized. The army still needs a plethora of supporting services. You seem to somewhat agree with my point, and yet confound a rather …
/r/MensRights24/04/21 06:08 AM
1

It would make sense in the event of a conflict of such catastrophical scale as to wipe out an entire group of people, such that reproductive survival is at stake. That is quite rare in modern conflicts. And when it is a risk, it would be reasonable to make everyone mobilizeable - as far as I am aware, it is what the kurds and Israel do, for example.
/r/MensRights23/04/21 08:53 PM
4

I wouldn't blame her for acting defensively - that is, walking faster/running, crossing the road, things like that. However, gratuitously attacking the guy, cursing him and all (in broad daylight), that was to me quite a dick move. For even if you go to a risky area, statistically you will meet mostly innocent people. Thus, behaving in a protective fashion is fine, but unjustified agression, I don't think so.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 06:15 PM
4

It certainly depends on the specific adept. However, it seems to be a somewhat diffuse trend (I do hope not universal) to focus on equality of outcomes, meaning equal representation (%) on different professions, regardless of how to achieve it, and usually marked by an (unproved) logical assumption that "if there is a difference, ergo discrimination". Well, the issue is, if you want to force equal representation and the cause is, say, different average levels of physical fitness, rather then pre…
/r/MensRights19/04/21 01:58 AM
3

The good old necessary step from correlation to causality: making the question "is this really the case?" And then checking all the probable or possible causes, and verifying how they actually affect a given outcome.
/r/MensRights19/04/21 01:51 AM
5

They were the ones who made me find out how to unsub.
/r/MensRights15/04/21 09:11 PM
1

Well, I supose we are on the same page then! Now as you may be aware any such changes would probaly have to be made through new law, since penal laws admit no "expansive" interpretations. I agree with your last point, even if it is the minority of cases. Though, if we are truly agreeing fully, the honest answer is: we don't know if it is the minority of cases, or by how far. There is no data, sadly.
/r/MensRights09/04/21 04:04 PM
1

I am a law student here, though admitedly I am not an expert on that precise article. Yet, Article 121 of the penal code, under "feminicídio" contais the following disposition:" § 2o-A Considera-se que há razões de condição de sexo feminino quando o crime envolve: (Incluído pela Lei nº 13.104, de 2015) I - violência doméstica e familiar; (Incluído pela Lei nº 13.104, de 2015) II - menosprezo ou discriminação à condição de mulher." Now, as you see, "I" includes broadly "domestic and family violen…
/r/MensRights09/04/21 03:38 PM
3

Maybe for the US, I highly doubt that is the case for Europe. There it seems to be mainly reason 3 (ironically since that didn't stop the ban of FGM in most countries of that Continent).
/r/MensRights09/04/21 03:28 PM
3

I am mentioning the data for my country, Brazil. I have the sources in portuguese, if you wish them. Again, I made it clear that is my country. There is a lack of data for a lot of the points you mention here, people don't even care to record that kind of stuff. I am not wishing to make this a competition stuff - you are the one who brings the divisive "it only matters if a different sex kills another" argument. I was adressing the argument of "who suffer most physical abuse", and I presumed you…
/r/MensRights09/04/21 02:49 PM
9

Though I would tend to think you are right, is that really the case? My country has similar distinctions, yet 92% of the homicides are commited against males, and, get this, there is no official data on male victims of domestic violence. Yep, none at all. Now, that makes me wonder, is it really the case that women, for example, face physical abuse more frequently? Maybe, but without sources, we are left in the dark, and the one about homicide tends to point in a different direction.
/r/MensRights09/04/21 02:18 PM
30

Well at least they are honest.
/r/MensRights03/03/21 12:10 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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