Epicrandom Archive

TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
2	"What Will We Concede To Feminism": UPDATE I can accept that science has traditionally been done by men. But this doesn't mean it is inherently masculine. And even if it was inherently masculine, this has no effect on the validity of its findings. Science claims a monopoly on knowledge because it is a monopoly on knowledge. Of course there is such a thing as 'truth' - even for the less obvious things. Even our evaluation of art (for example) can (theoretically, if not practically) be explained through the structure and function of the br…	/r/MensRights	04/07/13 08:15 AM
16	"What Will We Concede To Feminism": UPDATE Ah - I (think) I see the confusion. When I say statistics I don't (necessarily) mean stuff like police reports, and the like. Acceptable statistics could include you reporting this to a feminist group, or anything along those lines, just so that a record of what you've been through exists. Hypothetically, what should happen is this: Someone has a logical idea but no statistics are available or they believe that existing statistics are flawed. In this case, they believe statistics of threatenings…	/r/MensRights	03/07/13 03:44 PM
14	"What Will We Concede To Feminism": UPDATE Firstly - to answer your question. Not sure, possibly some sort of random sample polling. You're right, it's tricky. Secondly - I think there is an important difference between non-measurable and tricky to measure. This hypothetical situation is (very) tricky to measure, but not inherently non-measurable. Thirdly - I understand what you are trying to say, but I still fundamentally believe that without evidence/statistics to back up your argument then said argument isn't worth a damn. Lastly - A …	/r/MensRights	03/07/13 03:33 PM
65	"What Will We Concede To Feminism": UPDATE How else are you supposed to show inequality without statistics? Anything without them is just wild unsourced speculation. In your hypothetical situation, you'd take the new statistic that only 10% are reported and combine that with the already known numbers to get the real numbers. Sorry if I've missed the point of your post, but if you don't have any statistics to prove something, then yes - (as far as I can see) your argument deserves to be dismissed, or else anyone can claim anything with no…	/r/MensRights	03/07/13 02:56 PM
-1	Radio host asks Prime Minister Julia Gillard about dumb internet rumors that her husband is gay. Host is fired, the PM and Aus Sex Discrimination Commissioner declare questions were "sexist" and demeaning, and that young girls and women politicians should be protected from such questioning. I didn't mean airing it was a waste of radio time, I mean the question was pointless and a waste of Gillard's time which could be better spent on questions that matter (about policy and such).	/r/MensRights	15/06/13 11:05 AM
1	Radio host asks Prime Minister Julia Gillard about dumb internet rumors that her husband is gay. Host is fired, the PM and Aus Sex Discrimination Commissioner declare questions were "sexist" and demeaning, and that young girls and women politicians should be protected from such questioning. He was fired because the question was a waste of time. Who cares and whose business is it if her husband is gay?	/r/MensRights	15/06/13 07:56 AM

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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