TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

FluffyBallofHate Archive

View 0 posts and 116 comments by FluffyBallofHate 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

What the fuck is a cunt- or a cock-waffle? I mean, waffle isn't traditionally part of an insult at all... Waffles are actually quite enjoyable.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:29 PM
3

Check your fucking privilege, you fucking cockwaffle. Oh look, a cuntish SRSer. Nothing said to you would have any impact. You're just a trolling asshole. You lie, you cheat, you scream bloody murder and rage and anger. I would suggest that you learn how to comport yourself.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:26 PM
1

What kind of 'friends' do you guys have? Seriously, not one of my friends would ever do anything but back me up unless I was really, really, really wrong. You college kids... these people are not your friends. They hang out with you because they think you're cool or progressive, not because they genuinely like you. If someone won't have your back, they are not a friend.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:25 PM
1

I'm familiar enough with Utah to know that we should all believe what we here about the mormons there. Elsewhere, they aren't such bad people. But the kind of authority their control over the Utah government has given them has made the Mormons of Utah truly monstrous people -- the worst kind of theocrats and fundamentalists.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:21 PM
1

If people outside of Utah understood how fucked up the LDS church is there, Mormons would have been driven in the sea decades ago.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:18 PM
2

I don't buy this 'god of the gaps' nonsense. IF there's more to the story, prove it. Don't demand that other people assume it's there.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:17 PM
19

Yes, and increasingly they have been doing this in a lot of places that aren't specific to women -- /r/science, for instance, regularly deletes anything critical of feminism or women in general, while allowing things that are critical of masculinity or men. /r/TodayILearned is the same, as is /r/Askhistorians, /r/Politics, /r/WTF, /r/Changemyview, and /r/Offmychest. If it reflects badly on feminism, and a sub has a feminist mod, that mod will delete the post.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 12:16 PM
1

/r/relationships is well known for giving men no sympathy while excusing even the most psychotic behavior from women. It's one of the most widely reviled subs on reddit, like /r/sex.
/r/MensRights22/11/15 12:11 PM
1

No. Let the feminists do it. It's not like they police people for misandry. I am not interested in proving that I'm the better person. I don't give a shit if I'm the better person or not. None of this is going to be decided on the basis of moral purity, because pretty much nothing ever has been.
/r/MensRights20/11/15 11:27 AM
2

The problem being, /r/askfeminists generally isn't for non-feminists either. And that's about questions, not statements.
/r/MensRights15/11/15 03:53 PM
1

Men don't owe it to women to protect them. Maybe in the olden days, when women felt that they 'owed' men something too -- even when it was just gratitude. But not now. We tore the old contract up. We're still in the very rocky process of starting a new one.
/r/MensRights15/11/15 03:23 AM
60

She was already convicted, and they were still going to withhold her name.
/r/MensRights12/11/15 02:57 PM
1

That's the point I'm at. No Democrat is going to get my vote so long as they are the party of feminism. I don't care if an individual politician is a feminist or not. Party's tend to vote together. It is damned obvious that elected Obama seriously empowered these people. They only pipe up when a Dem is in office -- First Clinton in the 90s, now Obama. And I'm not going to vote for this SJW, PC bullshit.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:27 AM
3

a sitting Senator shouldn't be telling voters to shut up, period.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:25 AM
1

In my experience, people like you don't actually see attacks against men in anything. So I have a hard time taking your arguments seriously. You will always find a way to make something you want to be acceptable, acceptable.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:24 AM
0

A few bad apples spoil the whole barrel. So why the fuck did you invoke that phrase again?
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:13 AM
2

She is clearly trolling, and judging by vote totals, likely brought a brigade with here from wherever the fuck she originated.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:12 AM
1

Again, none of those early 'feminists' were actual feminists. They never called themselves feminists. They did not have the same ideological underpinnings as feminists. It's like claiming that Native Americans were the ancestors of Irish men just because the latter eventually settled predominantly in the united states.
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:12 AM
2

That's just propaganda nonsense. The 'first wave' were not feminists. There was no feminist movement back then. Suffragettes were usually church groups, also usually pro-temperance. There were not feminists. Feminists simply adopted those groups and decided to pretend that they were part of one contiguous movement, but that doesn't remotely make it true. Feminism didn't become a real thing until much later. This is like claiming that all of those people the mormons retroactive baptize after thei…
/r/MensRights11/11/15 11:10 AM
1

Sounds like OP's father's inability to get over his ex was the bigger problem. No one, man or woman, should be required to stay in a relationship they're not happy in. You can't expect men to make a commitment knowing how commonly and easily women will break that commitment. It is indisputable that the overwhelming majority of divorce is initiated by women. So either women are less capable of love than men are, or divorce is horribly broken in such a way as to incentivize women into it. Either w…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 12:10 PM
14

For some reason, while men will get 'MISOGYNIST!!!!' screamed at them for showing even the slightest sign of bitterness of being mistreated, women are allowed to go full on man-hate over anything at all and nobody ever says anything to them. And as near as I can tell, feminists think that's awesome.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 11:57 AM
2

The 'fudging' on reddit only seems to go one way. Millenials are the least feminist generation since real actual feminism existed (first-wave feminism is not feminism. They were women's groups who were mostly church-based and wanted things like temperance and women's suffrage. They were not feminists, as that movement hadn't really gotten off the ground yet). Fewer than 10% of male millenials call themselves feminists. So how on earth is reddit -- with it's demographics -- so fucking feminist? I…
/r/MensRights08/11/15 03:41 PM
1

I agree. A bird won't fly with only one wing.
/r/MensRights06/11/15 02:49 AM
16

I'm sure some shitheel will come in here and explain why it's perfectly acceptable to name male minors, but not female ones...
/r/MensRights05/11/15 06:59 PM
36

There are a lot of people in this society who indulge women like this in their hatred of men. That makes it seem acceptable to them to act like this. When people have shouted 'You Go Gurl!' at your obnoxiousness your entire life, you come to believe them that you're awesome.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/11/15 01:06 PM
3

That wouldn't be treating them equally thought, by the very definition of 'equal'. Because other people have already been punished. Pragmatically, your position breaks down to 'We shouldn't punish this woman, because we shouldn't punish anyone. But we already have punished other people... but we still shouldn't punish this one'. And that's not a defensible position to take. If you don't like a law, change the law. Arguing that it should just be ignored is not acceptable, because it will only eve…
/r/PussyPass04/11/15 01:08 PM
1

The attacker thought the victim had spiked the woman's drink. Am I supposed to care what they claim to have thought? It wasn't a reasonable suspicion. You can't attack people because you think they might have done something wrong. You can't be a vigilante.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 01:03 PM
6

That is not required under this statute, and has not been the standard in the past. There is a man in jail in Britain right now for saying nothing more than 'The Jews always show their true colors' and posting a picture of a Jewish person with a gold star super-improsed over it. So tell me again who the fuck this verdict -- which exempts only feminists from having to follow the rules -- is a victory for free speech? Are you all shills, or are you all just god-damned morons?
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:55 PM
9

But it's not true. By the very definition of truth, this is not true. These laws have already been upheld against other people for doing far less than she did. So this isn't a victory for free speech. This doesn't help free speech at all. All it does, is prove to leftists in britain that they can pass laws like this with impunity, because they will never get bitten by them.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:53 PM
14

And if mean tweets are going to start being prosecuted then we might as well just give up on Free Speech entirely. Again, because you fucking idiots are ignoring this simple truth: Other people have been arrested and are already in jail for this crime. This does nothing for free speech. It's pure Pussy Pass nonsense.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:52 PM
5

Other people have already been convicted. The precedent has been set. And it is a crime to do that. As I've said, other people are sitting in jail for this right now, they just didn't target white men. You might want to argue that it shouldn't be a crime, but it is a crime. It's a law on the books in Britain. The precedent letting her go sets is: the left doesn't have to worry, because these laws will never be applied to their chosen people.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:50 PM
3

I can't tell if you are being intentionally obtuse. are you?
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:49 PM
8

What is matters more than what should be. I don't see anything relevant in your posting. Either repeal laws, or apply them fairly. The government choosing to ignore the law because it doesn't want to prosecute certain people is fascism, plain and simply. One rule for all.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:49 PM
19

But the laws won't be. And dropping them in this instance makes it more likely that they never will be, because only one side is getting their ox gored here. The left will never abandon these laws until they get stung by them. That's reality. Your candyland fantasies are fucking irrelevant. As is your deliberately obtuse cuntishness.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:47 PM
19

Indeed. I am sick of people like this idiot applauding when the law isn't followed because in their delusional minds, it 'proves' that the law is on the way out. It proves no such things, you fucking morons, any more than 'Separate But Equal' proved that segregation was on the way out. All this does is essentially codify with precedent the notion that only certain people have to fear these laws.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:45 PM
2

Australian law was pushed for by feminists. Just because the article refuses to name the villain here, doesn't change who the villains are. These government orgs are staffed full of feminists.
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:27 PM
3

Notice that i don't need to blame one specific gender to say that. No, you don't want to blame one specific gender. But every time one of those stories pops up where a dad gets the cops called on him for going to the park with his kids, the caller is always a woman. The people tut-tutting about men working with kids in those news stories are almost always women. The feminists screaming about rape culture at college are almost away women -- the overwhelming majority of feminists are women, despit…
/r/MensRights03/11/15 04:25 PM
-7

There are 63 idiots in this thread... Suicidal ideation is not nearly that common. A bunch of /r/iam14andthisisdeep going on here.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 04:08 PM
6

Until Democrats control the Supreme Court It's a fucking tragedy that we have to be worried about this... I can't support a Democratic party this feminist, this anti-civil rights and liberties, and this pro banker. I'd rather put a conservative in charge and hope that losing will make the Democratic party rethink their neoliberalism, than I would allow a neoliberal to win and doom this country to two conservative parties forever.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 04:31 PM
10

Most 'gender issues' haven't even been proven to be actual issues, though.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 04:26 PM
1

You've only been on reddit 3 years so why don't you follow your own logic and show yourself the door? Why don't you go eat a fucking dick?
/r/MensRights31/10/15 10:40 AM
1

And I have officially lost all respect for this sub.
/r/MensRights31/10/15 10:39 AM
0

I hate that we hold teachers to such absurd levels - there needs to be room to be human. I don't think 'Don't sexualize minors' is a terribly absurd level to hold a teacher to, and I personal find it shameful that this sub upvoted this kind of drivel to the extent that it did. This isn't 'victimhood culture'. That phrase seems to indicate that you don't believe that men should be allowed to complain about being victims, and that simply runs counter to the general message of the MRM. This is not …
/r/MensRights31/10/15 10:38 AM
3

No, she's wrong. She's always wrong. This woman is a fucking monster. She mentioned 'cotton workers'. What the fuck do you think that was a reference to?
/r/MensRights29/10/15 02:31 PM
54

The boy scouts shouldn't cave. Boys and men have a right to be around boys and men if we so choose. I am sick and tired of women deciding that men should have no safe spaces, but that the entire world should be covered in nerf for them.
/r/MensRights29/10/15 02:23 PM
1

It is not as dubious as it sounds. These things happen a lot at Oxford union debating society or even any debating society. People have to (convincingly) argue points they are not or only partially in favor. I don't believe people who claim to be playing Devil's Advocate. Too often, they are use that phrase to avoid criticism of what are very clearly their real views.
/r/MensRights28/10/15 11:59 AM
0

It is the DUTY of the government to keep its prisoners reasonably safe while they are incarcerated. Why does this not seem to matter when it comes to male rape, then? That, too, should be a matter up for discussion, and it seems like you repeatedly use the first sentence as a way to dismiss that topic.
/r/MensRights28/10/15 11:57 AM
2

The government is legally required to keep its prisoners reasonably safe while they are incarcerated. They don't seem to actually give a shit about this in general, so it's hard to consider this a legitimate concern in this specific instance.
/r/MensRights28/10/15 11:56 AM
2

They are trying to push censorship of the internet, and will use any excuse to do so. The feminists are either corruptly colluding with them on that front, or they are useful idiots. But either way, the feminists are, as always, the minions of the government.
/r/MensRights24/10/15 11:57 AM
-3

It means I'm doing everything possible to make sure a Democrat doesn't win in the Us next year. I'm not a Canadian. So I will focus on my own back yard. Sanders, Clinton... it doesn't matter. Leftists hate men, hate male passtimes and are in the pocket of feminists. I would rather die at this point than vote for a leftist party. I will vote for whoever wins the Republican party nomination, no matter how crazy, because the other side is every bit as crazy against men.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 01:58 PM
23

This, /r/mensrights, is why you can't trust a leftist politician on anything male-related. They will lie. They will suck up to the feminists in their party. You will always be a sacrificial lamb in their eyes.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 01:54 PM
16

That's the idea. There is a reason the media has started doing away with comment sections. The sad thing is, the comment sections are one of the few things that actually bring people in, and without them, most of these sites will simply die.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 01:53 PM
-2

It is the BBC's job to police all speech they choose to broadcast. They are responsible for all claims which they choose to air, because with their broadcasting of these claims, they would have had a far more limited reach.
/r/MensRights23/10/15 01:52 PM
11

Eh, the degree to which I've heard otherwise normal women talk about men as 'dogs' or 'pigs', and the degree to which I've heard them endorse 'special rules' that only men should have to follow -- and special burdens in court -- I just have to agree. There's a reason why ads depict men as stupid and incompetent, and it's not the bias of advertisers. It's the bigotry of your average American woman they are pandering to.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 11:21 PM
1

The middle isn't always right. That is a fairly well established logical fallacy. You can find the proper answer anywhere on the board. It's foolish and childish to think that all of the answers will be found in the same place, be that place the middle, the left or the right.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 01:15 PM
3

When 'equalization of genders' is code for 'giving women all of the resources and attention'. In other words, always. You're a liberal brit who hates the notion that a conservative party won an election. Stop pretending that this is about anything more than that.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 01:14 PM
5

This would be blatantly illegal in America, at least. The more I learn about Britain, the shittier it sounds.
/r/MensRights19/10/15 01:03 PM
6

If she called it that, it will be every bit as biased as the title suggests. Right now, she's just hoping to convince the MRM otherwise so we'll tie our own ropes by giving her a donation.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 07:16 PM
16

Morcotte doesn't have the balls to debate anyone. Even back when she rand Pandagon, she would regularly call people out on front page blogposts after banning them from responding in comments so that it looked like they just didn't have anything to say in response. She's an evil woman, through and through. She's a coward who gets off on the ability to silence others, to hurt others, and she hides behind a rape that happened 20 years ago (if at all) to defend against it when called on her psychosi…
/r/MensRights18/10/15 07:13 PM
11

Alcohol can't make you do something you don't want to do. It can only make you do something you do want to do, but would otherwise be too worried about the consequences to actually do. If you fuck a man you wouldn't fuck sober, it's because you wanted to get fucked more than you cared about who did the fucking. Ever man who has ever woken up next to an unfortunate-looking understands that.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 07:11 PM
1

The problem is that reddit is too leftist, and that seriously hurts their ability to fully commit to men's rights or even opposition to feminism. They've been taught to believe one set of things their entire life, and they only recently realize that at least some of those things are nonsense. But it's sown too deeply into their sense of self to go against it. So they need to believe that the feminism their mothers, father and teachers taught them about was useful at one time, or would be useful …
/r/MensRights18/10/15 07:08 PM
-7

This guy sounds like an /r/protectandserve apologist to me. Good luck getting a real answer that doesn't completely absolve the police from wrongdoing.
/r/MensRights18/10/15 12:05 PM
1

I guarantee you that her contract has language allowing them to fire her, too.
/r/MensRights17/10/15 05:57 PM
2

Time is a factor you're not including. A small woman who has 4 beers in an hour or two can't consent (maybe), but a small woman who has had 4 beers over the course of 4 hours is perfectly fine. Even with the absorption phase, she's not going to be so wasted that she can't consent. Too often these discussions don't include time or the rate or stages of processing alcohol by the human body. 3 drinks is not 3 drinks, it's 3 drinks over x amount of time, and the value of that x is too important a va…
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:16 PM
13

The problem is, that's not what gets taught in these classes. They aren't taught the tests used by court to determine if someone is capable of consent. They aren't taught the law. They are taught that one drop of alcohol makes people incapable of consent. They are taught the feminist view of rape, not the legal view of rape, and that's the problem here.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:13 PM
24

The problem is that these aren't the rules. Feminists want these to be the rules, but the law doesn't say three drinks makes it impossible for a woman to consent. They are taking reasonable laws with reasonable tests, like the ability to walk and formulate speech, being consistently conscious and capable of participating in the act of sex -- and which almost always exempt long-term relationships altogether, and lying about them, claiming that one drop of alcohol makes a woman incapable of consen…
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:11 PM
6

It is, under any other circumstance, against the rules of that sub to call a poster out for lying. But the mods there overlook the rules when the rules are broken against men, because the mods there are psychotic and have an unending hatred for men.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:07 PM
1

I don't get your argument. IF everyone knows that the guy down the street diddles kids, does that mean he should get a pass for diddling the latest kid? IF everyone knows a sub is shit, that's more reason to criticize it, not less of one.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:01 PM
7

Unless women are doing it to men. Then they can call BS all they want with no repercussions.
/r/MensRights16/10/15 07:00 PM
5

No. Adults should not be allowed to fuck 14 year olds.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 12:22 PM
1

The one she was charged under. How the fuck do you think she got in the position she's in without breaking the law?
/r/MensRights14/10/15 12:21 PM
-4

I don't care what you think. You are not the final arbiter of law here. Your opinion is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 12:20 PM
2

Then change the law. But right now, the law is the law, and everyone has to follow it equally. You people only seem to come out of the woodwork to say this when a woman get's stung by the law anyway.
/r/MensRights14/10/15 12:19 PM
1

The cutoff has to be put somewhere, and it would always be arbitrary. If the age of consent was 12, would you suddenly be squeamish about jailing someone for fucking an 11 year old?
/r/MensRights14/10/15 12:18 PM
0

No, you fool. If they ban everything we have to say because the system allows them to, but we allow them to say whatever we want because of our own values, their message gets out and ours dies. Because that's how the real world works. I am sick and fuck of you aspie retards playing this game purposefully to lose because of your sand-box level of morality. You play a game by the rules in place, not the rules you wish were in place, or you fucking lose. That's the end of the story: if you indulge …
/r/MensRights13/10/15 06:39 PM
1

Who the hell is upvoting this guy? The worthless cuck fuckwads who have infested this board since most people decamped to Voat?
/r/MensRights10/10/15 03:04 PM
2

There isn't and you know it. There is never a pro-male day of celebration, so stop fucking 'assuming' that there will be. There never is.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 03:01 PM
3

Not until she wins the primary and is in the general. To attack her on it now is foolish. It would become old news, and she would find a way to counter it by the general if they used it now. Make no mistake: her male Republican opponent is going to milk that line for all it's worth.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 02:58 PM
3

I've had girls fuck me after I've thrown up. Are they guilty of rape, or is this just your white-knighting garbage?
/r/MensRights10/10/15 02:57 PM
1

It isn't evidence of anything but how little experience you two have with drinking, parties or girls.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 02:55 PM
7

I've fucked after puking at a party before, at about the same age. Don't project your wants onto other people.
/r/MensRights10/10/15 02:55 PM
2

Tell those feminists to fuck off, and make them account for Jessica Valenti and Amanda Marcotte.
/r/MensRights08/10/15 06:41 PM
2

That this is universally the response, with almost no responses similar to those on /r/askmen indicated entitlement. /r/askwomen is one of the worst subs on this site.
/r/MensRights08/10/15 03:13 PM
1

6 hours after your comment, the top comments are still exactly what the people above are saying they are. There are no good comments at all.
/r/MensRights08/10/15 03:12 PM
13

/r/relationships is the worst sub on this site.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 12:07 PM
12

I don't believe you. Feminists should distance themselves from all sorts of people, but they never do. So no, the MRM shouldn't do anything suggested to it by you. You aren't being reasonable because you are genuinely reasonable. You're being reasonable as a tactic to get us to fight ourselves instead of you.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 04:37 PM
3

I don't give a fuck about wikipedia's definitions, to be honest. They are not a reliable source on anything, let alone something so controversial as feminism.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 04:35 PM
49

They incentivized the actions by giving college credit in exchange for those actions. So yes, they should in fact be held responsible for her actions. They specifically ok'd her actions and offered her something of immense monetary vaue -- a degree from Columbia University -- as compensation.
/r/MensRights27/09/15 08:14 PM
2

This just isn't true. A lot of these people are likely adults -- some are social workers, some are academics. This kind of nonsense is not remotely limited to teenagers on the internet.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 01:37 PM
12

Idiots can downvote this all they want, but if you take people's future away from them, some fraction of them will react violently. And no, I can't blame them for attacking the same social institution that ruined their lives. If society casts you out, you burn that society to the ground.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 01:35 PM
24

It isn't just belligerent exes, but the mothers and the relationships themselves. You will never build a family with a single-mother -- you can only join the one she already started to build with someone else. You will never spend any time as the most important person in her life. She will never put you first. She will never make time for you. She will never value you as anything but a surrogate father for her children. You will never have that time in a relationship where it's just the two of y…
/r/MensRights16/09/15 01:00 PM
1

When they disavow Marcotte or Valenti, I'll consider this.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 07:35 PM
2

So you admit that the two biggest issues -- family courts and campus rape adjudications -- do put is in direct conflict with feminism? And you don't see how the resulting bad blood from that spills over into everything else? Feminists want to take men's children and freedom away from them. That's the ending point of any discussion about why we hate feminists so much -- because of damned good reasons. Feminism is the enemy of all men. There is no denying that.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 07:34 PM
5

Who gives a shit? Women often call men losers, virgins or 'basement dwellers'. I see no significant difference here. When you start criticizing all of that, I'll take you seriously. Until then, you're just a whiny child squealing because you don't like criticism. That you see nothing wrong with Amanda Marcotte -- one of the most widely published feminists in the world -- but believe that an internet nobody like Elam is so damned important, just further underlines that point.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 07:32 PM
0

Bullshit propaganda and deliberate falsehoods don't belong up top. This woman has a history. We all know what she meant, and this wasn't it.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 05:48 PM
1

But we all know what she meant, and she meant 'listen and believe all accusations'. don't piss in my face, bub.
/r/MensRights15/09/15 05:47 PM
3

The problem being, anyone can diet. 30 years of neoliberal economics has turned a 'decent job' into an endangered species.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 02:37 AM
5

Well, it is meant to signal to others that said woman is 'taken', like a woman reaching out and grabbing a man's arm or hand in the presence of another woman, so it is a sign of 'ownership'. But this is a universal piece of human body language. You can't tell a monkey not to smile when smiling comes so damned naturally.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 02:18 PM
6

It's not even just politics. All it takes is for one guy with a little pull to get a bug up his ass about literally anything -- his favorite anime show not having the proper translation, his preferred side in a historical conflict not getting the proper 'due', etc. -- and even allegedly noncontroversial topics can become full of bullshit with no real recourse due to the immense rankism of wikipedia.
/r/MensRights10/09/15 01:31 PM
1

It carries no connotations. It is the literal truth.
/r/MensRights08/09/15 05:31 PM
2

It makes no sense to put pitchforks away just because this is legal. If rape were legal, would that make it okay?
/r/MensRights08/09/15 05:31 PM
2

Morals change over time, but survival is survival. Men will rise up if it begins to look anything like that, and we will sweep this bullshit away.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 04:31 PM
2

War on Women is a big part of the reason why I won't vote Democratic. It's hard to make it more obvious that you don't give a shit about men, than to invent a BS narrative about a 'war' being waged on women because of a few stupid things said by a republican or two, and a bunch of shit that might be nice for women to have, but that don't constitute any kind of natural rights, while never once mentioning men in their campaign ads.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 04:29 PM
2

There is no irony. They are not comparable positions. 'Men' are a gender. 'Feminists' are an ideology, which indicates that they actually do all have to agree with each other up to a certain extent.
/r/MensRights05/09/15 04:07 PM
-5

They don't really have that in Britain. Yet another reason why America is superior to Europe: we actually know what freedom means here.
/r/MensRights03/09/15 12:11 PM
1

Not a brit, but I'm not taking a pill like this until it's been around a decade or so. Honestly, I'm not going to end up having flipper babies just to test out a new product.
/r/MensRights03/09/15 12:09 PM
2

FEMRADebates is a shithole where no actual debate takes place, calls itself a 'safe space' and generally bends over backwards to make the rules say whatever feminists want them to say.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 04:36 PM
1

Pretty typical for feminists, isn't this? Demand proof hoping that you can't provide any, and then either ignoring you or banning you (if they have the authority) when you give them what they asked for.
/r/MensRights02/09/15 04:30 PM
4

Yeah, because feminism can do no wrong...
/r/MensRights01/09/15 07:21 PM
13

Lmao, yeah, because women don't see muscular men as sexy, and no woman has ever wanted a great rack to make her feel proud and beautiful.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 07:20 PM
1

It's amazing how you people only seem to come out of the woodwork when it's a woman accused of statutory rape...
/r/MensRights31/08/15 07:39 PM
6

Eh, I don't know about that. My dick is average, a little over 6 inches. But If I could take a pill and get an extra inch or so, I still would. I mean, why the hell not?
/r/MensRights31/08/15 07:38 PM
14

The whole thing has an air of smug, upper-class cuntishness about it, tbh.
/r/MensRights31/08/15 07:37 PM
4

Almost none of these things is 'embarassing'. The 'furries' one, maybe. And Limp Bizkit was a shit band imo, but they were massively popular at one time, so... yeah. People have a right to their preferences.
/r/MensRights31/08/15 07:36 PM
4

Okay. How do you stop it without banning abortion? To put it bluntly, how do you prove that they're having the abortion due to gender?
/r/MensRights31/08/15 05:14 PM
4

To the feminist, everything women do is somehow men's fault. Edit: to add, if life doesn't begin until birth, there is simply nothing wrong with this. It's massively hypocritical to pretend that it matters now, and only when female babies are being aborted, while saying that male babies can be aborted at will for any reason. Because feminists already made guiltless abortion their hill to die on, they have no right to make this argument whatsoever.
/r/MensRights31/08/15 05:13 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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