TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Evulmeh Archive

View 1 post and 51 comments by Evulmeh 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)
56

Evulmeh/r/MensRights30/01/12 12:06 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

From what I've been reading in the youtube comments, this is a rooming house in Massachusetts and she is the landlord. This appears to be a fairly common scam where a woman cries rape and her friends act as witnesses. When the police come and arrest the tenant, they clean out his room and take his property. It sounds like she was sticking to her script even after the tenant began filming. You can see her partner try to lead her out of the room as soon as the filming started. Edit: Ok, it turns o…
/r/MensRights04/09/12 02:40 PM
1

Logged in specifically to reply to this. I have tried to find a solution to OP's question for a long time and this reply finally made it all clear. Feminism requires the power to be institutionalized power. Just as popi1147 stated: ".. one has prejudices that are mirrored/supported by the larger social power structure, and one doesn't, which means that one has far more ability to act on his prejudices, and those acts have far more potential to harm." Feminism claims men's prejudice is supported …
/r/MensRights30/08/12 03:51 PM
3

Caring about a group of people makes someone special. >Goes into a rage and sets the building on fire.
/r/MensRights15/06/12 07:22 PM
1

"simply wanting to get out of child support payments." Yes! Let's bring the kids to my place, because if they're with me they don't eat or need things. So it will cost less! Logic... ><
/r/MensRights21/04/12 05:15 PM
2

First off part of the artist's intention seems to be that every guest has to make the choice between cake or no cake, with all due consequences. They must 'inflict pain.' However there seems to be a deeper meaning: People finding it funny. It shows the calousness of the participants, which horrifies the observers (you?). Therefore the art isn't made for 'psychopaths' but for the exact opposite, those that find themselves horrified at the laughter of the individuals. If you feel horrified by the …
/r/MensRights19/04/12 12:24 AM
0

Haha, no not really. You seem to have missed the meaning of the film.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 03:04 PM
2

It's art! Art is never this clear cut. Have you all seen 'A Serbian Film'? That's art too, and it's disgusting! I don't think it's supposed to be racist, so I'm interested in what the artist has to say.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 01:51 AM
1

First of all I disagree, with contraception, sterilization & abortion. Also there is great hypocrisy in your argument: You can't seperate a sexual relationship from having children Then any guy that has sex with a woman should be fully ready to pay child support, after all he knows a sexual relationship means hes willing to have kids, as they are inseparable. It's not hypocrisy if you believe that such a guy should pay child support ofcourse, in which case I will simply state you are wrong due t…
/r/MensRights13/04/12 09:57 AM
1

Ok, notwithstanding that incest =/= them having children but only them having a romantic and/or sexual relationships. Let's apply that argument using haemophilia. Since a male receives his single X-chromosome from his mother, the son of a healthy female silently carrying the deficient gene will have a 50% chance of inheriting that gene from her and with it the disease; and if his mother is affected with haemophilia, he will have a 100% chance of being a haemophiliac. Should a female afflicted wi…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 06:21 PM
2

That would be an argument against them having children, not being in a romantic or even sexual relationship, which is what incest really is.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 06:08 PM
1

About it being sexist: Once again same old stereotypes of women always being passive and men always being active. About incest: Words can't describe my rage at this. I've never encountered a well reasoned argument as to why incest should be illegal. It shows we haven't progressed at all since the 50's; people still reason in the same fuckedup way. X is immoral because I wouldn't find it enjoyable. You're only advocating for X because you want to do X. Hey, that sounds familiar! Gay people are im…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 11:17 AM
6

It all depends on the judge afaik. Family courts are equity courts, that is they decide not according to law but according to 'fairness' (which they do by following certain guidelines and gut feeling)[2] As equity courts, they can completely disregard a contract if they feel it is unfair. They can also disregard the Constitution & Bill of rights (it is perfectly okay for a family court judge to stifle free speech)[1] It isn't too weird. It's to prevent people from screwing their ex over. What we…
/r/MensRights09/04/12 04:42 PM
4

I think TwoX did call it out as being low and stupid. But I might be wrong.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 05:38 PM
1

No, a transgendered is someone that turned from sex A to B (either through surgery, on their way to surgery or simply the way they display themselves in public). A non-transgendered, I think, implies someone who hasn't yet made this transition. So a non-non-transgendered would be someone who is not a non-transgendered person because they identify with the current... ah fuck it, now I'm confused.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 07:20 PM
1

I find the term "patriarchy" to be riddled with assumptions and suppressed nuanced axioms that tend to be misandrous. I'm very interested in this part. Which exact Axioms are you speaking of, and what parts do you find to be assumptious.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 01:58 AM
6

This indeed.
/r/MensRights06/04/12 01:27 AM
2

9th grade is like, 14-15 iirc Unless things have been changed... God I'm getting old..
/r/MensRights06/04/12 12:57 AM
3

Was thinking of the same thing. Although it can't be done NOW because we just made a thread about it =(
/r/MensRights06/04/12 12:56 AM
2

He's like what, 14-15? It's pretty sad, she gets off free or goes to jail, either way there is injustice...
/r/MensRights06/04/12 12:49 AM
1

You probably won't even remember this thread, but I think this reply is important. You know good and damn well that most of the MRM supporters on this page are not fighting against feminists like Bell Hooks. I didn't know, I assumed, I didn't know till you explicitly told me. I read the posts here, I understand the ideology that most MRAs follow, but this message is not being send out clearly. Take the parent comment: One of the most infuriating things to a Feminist is a man who says and believe…
/r/MensRights05/04/12 07:00 PM
7

And their response? :)
/r/MensRights18/02/12 09:02 PM
1

Everything is a repost repost.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 12:08 PM
-2

You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It’s just common sense.
/r/MensRights17/02/12 12:12 AM
3

I totally agreed except the final part, as he seemed to imply what's already happening in schools today, which is quotas. People seem to forget that it's about freedom of choice, not equality of outcome. If women choose the education that end up paying less, but they're happy, things might be better but it's not all that bad. If women are driven into education (and thus men out) simply because they will give better jobs we will end up with gender equal pay, but a large population of unhappy peop…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 08:18 PM
5

One of the most infuriating things to a Feminist is a man who says and believes that he isn't intrinsically evil. -That one concept shatters their entire model and justification for existing. Bell Hooks, a radical feminist, does not believe this to be the case at all. "And that clarity helps us remember that all of us, female and male, have been socialised from birth on to accept sexist thought and action. As a consequence, females can be just as sexist as men. And while that does not excuse or …
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:30 PM
0

Bell hooks would disagree, and she's a radical feminist.
/r/MensRights13/02/12 11:56 AM
1

I remember a similar situation with sauna's / spa's, where the massagers (masseuses?) had to be same-sex because it was considered somewhat intimate, which I can understand.
/r/MensRights11/02/12 09:33 PM
2

Spouses make sacrifices on the individual level, to benefit the communal level. ...while simultaneously benefiting by being a SAHM, not having to get a real job or deal with anyone she doesn't want to deal with. Of course!! That's what communal good means, good for everyone in a community. And what about the money that a non-working spouse didn't bring into a household that a working spouse would have? Will the spouse who worked and had to support two people be compensated for that? These couple…
/r/MensRights11/02/12 12:54 AM
1

Hmm I'm not sure about that. If they both continued working etc. alimony would unfair arrangement indeed. But because she is staying home whilst he is working, she isn't getting any job experience or further education so if they do split up, she will have the exact same job opportunities as before the marriage. As she sacrificed this extra experience, which was part of their mutual agreement, she should be compensated in alimony (it should ofcourse not mean she can live without working) the amou…
/r/MensRights10/02/12 07:33 PM
-1

No :p Well, maybe it depends on the situation ofcourse. I'm talking about a natural break up.
/r/MensRights10/02/12 06:48 PM
-3

Although she should be entitled to half, and alimony too :)
/r/MensRights10/02/12 05:08 PM
1

You make me tired as you don't seem to read what I stated; stop reading into things that aren't there. Did you even notice that this articles reinforces my comment, instead of refuting it? In this exact AVFM article: The sine qua non of sexual violence is the absence of consent. Either there is consent or there isn’t, and there’s nothing “vague” or “broad” about that. Indeed! So let's make it clear: Consent is not the default. You get it by either explicit or implicit confirmation. And, as state…
/r/MensRights07/02/12 12:40 PM
-3

HOLY SHIT THAT'S MY COMMENT! :D:D
/r/MensRights05/02/12 02:42 PM
1

In order for sex to not be rape, we must first have consent, for: rape = sex without consent. Now, we know that she didn't want to. But we also know that she cooperated. Unless he deliberately used an unlawful form of coercion to secure that cooperation, he is not a rapist, because that implies consent. Actually she did not cooperate, she was passive, cooperation is active. It's non-resistance. Non-resistance does neither imply consent nor lack of consent, it's neutral. As consent was never impl…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 09:18 PM
0

Prison isn't just about vengeance. It's about rehabilitation. 40 years aint gonna rehabilitate anyone!
/r/MensRights04/02/12 02:00 PM
2

yes. Have you seen the american prison system? :P
/r/MensRights04/02/12 01:59 PM
2

very nice :) 1 up for you
/r/MensRights04/02/12 01:59 PM
-2

40 years seems to much, but yes these kids are sadistic and should go to prison for a long time.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 07:44 PM
3

Like most reactionary philosophies, an undercurrent of anger informs its theories and practices. The manosphere is not just pro-man; it is really mad at women. Like feminism in the opposite direction? lol
/r/MensRights02/02/12 01:07 PM
1

Sex noises are often difficult to interpret, and if he was drunk... Unless we can give two clear and certain "no" answers to those questions, calling it rape is a stretch. He went through with it, because in his addled state, he couldn't tell the difference between the resistance of someone who doesn't want to, and the resistance of someone afraid of slut-shaming, or between reluctant compliance and succumbing to persuasion. I just can't justify holding him to a higher standard of legal or moral…
/r/MensRights01/02/12 04:06 PM
5

As well, it would mean admitting that violence against women is not an inherent impulse in men, but contingent on historical and cultural circumstances. This one, this one! Would be such progress for them to finally understand that 'the patriarchy' is just a false conclusion!
/r/MensRights31/01/12 08:39 PM
10

Dutch people seem to be very down to earth. They voted no on ACTA so they're doing something right ^
/r/MensRights30/01/12 12:16 AM
5

Obvious troll is obvious, just wanted to comment about it to any lurker that might agree. Thinking this is okay, is horrendous. We're talking about the conception of a fatherless child who's primary caretaker has mental issues, which will worsen due to the incoming shitstorm.
/r/MensRights28/01/12 10:46 PM
2

I told him I didn't want to have sex when I was drunk, but he continued to progress what we were doing until he lifted me to the bed. He didn't stop when he was hurting me, I actually started crying and I feel as a humaann you should stop doing what you're doing if you're making someone cry because you're physically hurting them. link The entire story she sketched seems to be of a person's spirit being broken, followed by submission. She also mentioned she did leave, but the guy pulled her back …
/r/MensRights27/01/12 11:40 PM
2

When did you make those statements about it not being rape? Because she elaborated on the story which showed the boy did a lot more, such as forcing her back into the room, pinning her down etc. I do think that constitutes rape.
/r/MensRights26/01/12 11:42 PM
5

Whats wrong with asking the child what they want to wear? Because of this quote: "Denying him any clothing that is 'hyper-masculine' " This shows its not about freeing the kid of 'gender pressure', but about preventing him from wearing clothes that happen to fit a stereotype. Their notion of 'hyper-masculine' is in itself prejeduce and sexist. Skulls and knights are 'hyper-masculine'. But what if a girl liked these clothes? I don't think you'd hear them complain. It's all about 'surface-equality…
/r/MensRights21/01/12 08:50 PM
1

so she would have someone to blame makes her responsible for the key evidence that put him away. This is an assumption of malice. Innocent till proven guilty. My argument explains her actions without the need of motive, you would have to prove the malicious motive first. makes her responsible for the key evidence that put him away. This fault is with the courts. They failed to give proper weight to her testimony (too much) and thus gave an incorrect verdict. She should have testified, the courts…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 02:16 AM
1

Imagine you were raped. Several weeks of investigation and questioning follow. You see the rapist in a line-up. You testify in court, point out the rapist in front of a judge and the rapist is convicted. Later the rapist gets declared innocent in light of new evidence. How would you feel if this person could then turn around and sue you for massive civil penalties? You never meant to hurt anyone and honestly believed this person raped you, and now you can be thrown in jail. How is that fair, jus…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 02:03 AM
-1

People were instructed to watch a film of a traffic accident[...]researchers found that, those people who were asked, “How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” gave higher estimates than those who were asked, “How fast were the cars going when they hit each other? Goff and Roediger [50] (1998) asked participants to imagine that they performed an act (e.g., break a toothpick) and then later asked them whether they had done such a thing. Findings revealed that those partici…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 01:42 AM
-3

Yes the mind tricks you, don't try to downplay this as mere 'qq'. She deserves 30 years in jail? For what? What did she do that warrants 30 years in jail? "...stop giving into the constant 'victimization' of women that feminists have embedded in the Western world..." Implying because my argument supports the female, my motive must come from feminist indoctrination. My argument is gender neutral. I said our brains, not female brains. If the article was about a woman being falsely convicted by the…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 01:11 AM
-11

This woman should not be charged! She is not to blame for the wrongful conviction. Our brains play tricks on us all the time. She had a traumatic experience, the brain alters memories to protect itself. The fault lies in court, for not acknowledging this fact and convicting this man on non-verified eye witness testimony. The fault lies in the justice department for showing him in 2 different line ups (corrupting an already traumatized mind). The greatest fault lies with the demonization of skept…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 12:26 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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