TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Fofalus Archive

View 0 posts and 86 comments by Fofalus 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

Is it female privilege to not be judged for things men are judged for? Or would you and all women throw a fit being told they are privileged as well?
/r/PussyPassDenied15/08/22 03:06 PM
7

You would be incorrect as the man is statistically in more danger.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/01/22 05:09 PM
2

Why not call it female privelege then is the entire point? The phrase is factually interchangeable. Everything negative is because of men is what you are saying. Your insistence that people should just deal with it is itself toxic, but you don't care. Proof that you are more toxic than whatever you accuse men of.
/r/MensRights01/01/22 11:36 PM
2

Again not something I said. I asked why all negative issues are gendered male. That shows the intent behind those terms.
/r/MensRights01/01/22 11:15 PM
2

It is implied and used as such. Stop being offensive on purpose. As I pointed out eise, no other group would be required to accept a phrase that is hostile towards them, so why do you demand it for men?
/r/MensRights01/01/22 11:03 PM
2

Yes the last sentence speaks the truth. I could rename those issues to make them female gendered and it wouldn't change the meaning. Male privelege is just toxic feminity and toxic masculinity is just female privelege. Again why is everything negative attributed to the male gender?
/r/MensRights01/01/22 10:58 PM
1

It's implied, sorry that your desired phrase is shitty and is used to attack men.
/r/MensRights01/01/22 10:56 PM
2

Glad no one made that argument. Still doesn't mean you are allowed to use the term without backlash.
/r/MensRights01/01/22 10:56 PM
2

So why point a finger at me like we’re enemies? Once again, men’s feelings are hurt by the term toxic masculinity? Okay, let me try to explain why the phrase you hate is geared towards changing the way our society treats men for the better. That is all I’ve tried to explain. If you disagree with my argument about the phrase, I don’t care, that’s fine, we disagree. But there’s no basis for your claim that I don’t care. Read through the comments I’m posting. You’re absolutely wrong about that much…
/r/MensRights31/12/21 11:00 PM
4

The problem is continuing to use it after it has been explained that a significant amount of people consider it attack, or that the source of the phrase is from a group outright hostile to men, shows that you don't actually care about how men feel. Your intention is to preach to them and then pat yourself on the back for trying to have done well. You can't nuance your way out of what you said, you are trying to talk out of both sides of your mouth, and that is the inherent problem with the phras…
/r/MensRights31/12/21 10:35 PM
3

In two sentences you said it doesn't label masculinity as toxic and then said it does. In the end it doesn't matter what you mean, using a knowingly harmful toxic phrase doesn't make you a good person trying to help people. It makes you part of the problem by intrinsically labeling bad things as masculine.
/r/MensRights31/12/21 10:04 PM
3

What you believe is not what matters, it is how the majority people especially those who need to hear it take it. People continue to use a harmful phrase and then tell men they have to deal with it. That's toxic and those people are not helpful.
/r/MensRights31/12/21 10:02 PM
6

The point is men are not solely responsible for what you call toxic masculinity despite the phrase implying that. Call them what they are toxic gender stereotypes and stop using something that blames all men.
/r/MensRights31/12/21 08:44 PM
7

The term implies masculinity is toxic. A better way to describe it would be toxic gender stereotypes. Unfortunately feminists have worked very hard to attach male gender to negative issues, ie: toxic masculinity, male privelege, the patriarchy. You will never see the female corresponding issues discussed because those aren't a problem.
/r/MensRights31/12/21 08:42 PM
1

Actually I was the one who got that banned after spamming every report I could. It had a daily thread asking why white people were bad. The FWR mods got really upset when their racist subreddit got banned
/r/MensRights08/11/21 06:36 PM
20

Yep because reddit as a whole celebrates and promotes hating men. Still makes them and you shitty people.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/10/21 08:38 PM
18

So you proved you are a misnadrist, got it.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/10/21 08:32 PM
2

It's still against the rules to ban based on posting in other subs, bot or not.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/09/21 08:09 PM
4

Statistically yes, women get significantly reduced sentences.
/r/PussyPassDenied04/09/21 03:23 PM
2

Don't worry about this individual, they actively support women raping men and think its fine.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 10:46 PM
0

This is ridiculous. You literally state “LMAO not even close” about violence being chiefly from men and then quote statistics where men commit 99% of rape against women and 94.7% of sexual non-rape violence and 79.3% of male rape is also done by men. That is literally not what those statistics say, please try rereading them. Also percentages are exactly that, per cent (or per one hundred if you’re that stupid.) I would love to see some actual numbers. How many women commit violent crimes? How ma…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 10:45 PM
1

There is no leniency, there is no lesser crime, they’re all awful crimes and they are all treated as awful crimes, but different crimes they are. They are being charged of a crime that has lesser minimum sentencing and is statistically given lower sentences. Just because they have the same maximum doesn't mean they have the same penalties. Fact you are less likely to contract an STI if you are inserting your penis than having a penis inserted into you Source that. Fact your sperm going into a ra…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 09:25 PM
1

And it only includes if the perpetrator is penetrating the victim, read the entire definition. Made to penetrate was explicitly left out.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 09:01 PM
1

No rapists are less guilty. You’re getting confused again, still thinking that women can be accused of rape. Remember how they can’t? Which is the entire point I am trying to make and I take issue with. You seem to think women should have less consequences. Show me where a woman being charged with “sexual assault by penetration” means she isn’t held accountable? They face a lesser crime, which is what you are defending. Show me where I said men who get raped shouldn’t be covered under the law? R…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 06:32 PM
1

It’s not rape though is it because it’s not done with a penis. In what way is forcing someones penis to enter the attacker not done with a penis? Do you even understand what you are saying It is also laughable that you consider paying child support equivalent to deciding whether to go through an abortion or through labour and then raise a child forever. Poor little oppressed man. I said half true, they are experiencing trauma that you don't care about. Here’s a thought, how about you just don’t …
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 05:50 PM
0

Because a man cannot get pregnant from this………… a man will never have to go through the trauma of either an abortion or having a rape baby…. It’s such a big difference I am so stunned you haven’t worked this out. Only half correct, there are men responsible for children or paying child support for babies from rape. Women and men are different. Yes they are equal but they aren’t exactly the same. Did you know a woman cannot get anyone pregnant by raping them? It’s true! Ask a doctor! No matter ho…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 05:27 PM
1

Look I cba to argue with you about this because I have the same argument again and again every time this comes up and I’m tired of people not listening and not understanding. Instead I am just going to copy and paste a comment I made to some other ignoramus earlier on which basically addresses the same points. Maybe you have the same argument over and over because you are misunderstanding it. You jumped to something about men on men rape which wasn't even brought up in the discussion, proving yo…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 04:43 PM
1

No the one not reading is you. The point I continue to make is that a woman penetrating a man is the least common form of 'rape' when it comes to women on men, and legally being 'made to penetrate' is not defined as rape. The US definition is only marginally better, but still massively lacking and sexist against men. No idea where you got the idea this has anything to do with men on men rape, which was something I never mentioned.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 04:23 PM
0

Where did I mention that at all? The point is that even in the USA rape is defined in such a way to exclude most women on men rape. It is only slightly better than the UK in that a women pentrating a man would be considered rape, but that is the least common form of women on men rape. I feel like you are intentionally ignoring this.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 04:03 PM
1

Not if a woman forces a man to penetrate her with his penis. That does not fall under the definition of rape, and would only be considered sexual assault. The only way a woman could rape a man is by penetrating the man.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 03:57 PM
2

The point is 'made to penetrate' is still not considered rape by that definition, so legally you cant rape men that way. Bonus note, prominent feminist Mary Koss is the leading reason that is was excluded from the definition update.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 03:54 PM
1

And where is made to penetrate in that law?
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 02:28 PM
0

So still doesn't include made to penetrate, got it.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/21 02:28 PM
3

Where's menslib to tell me it's so easy for men to get custody? Oh wait that sub is full of lies.
/r/MensRights27/05/21 12:02 AM
6

No my arguement is the draft serves a very real purpose. Removing it today would not solve the underlying issue because it could just as easily come back tomorrow. Your arguement is implying that when I want more fathers to win custody that is an attack on women.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/04/21 12:24 AM
3

Or the draft shouldn't be based on gender, since it I ly exists for an emergency, even if it were removed now it could easily be readded during an emergency. If we make it do the draft isn't sexist, we don't have that problem.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/04/21 12:17 AM
4

Let's add the up to 250k fine and loss of federal college aid men have if they refuse to sign up for the draft then. Men only have to do that and it effects their ability to earn money.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/04/21 12:12 AM
3

I gave specific examples. The post this is on could correctly be called toxic femininity. Women being able to share their feelings while men can't could be called female privilege instead of toxic masculinity. The problem is never see the phrases 'female privilege' or 'toxic femininity'. Makes you wonder why that is. This leads to everything being 'toxic masculinity' or 'male privilege' and makes men feel attacked or blamed by those phrases, as that is how its being used.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/01/21 11:39 PM
4

It's taken as an insult because men are told there is no such thing a female privelege, that's just toxic masculinity. Why can women share their feelings but men can't, the answer is toxic masculinity instead of female privelege. It becomes every problem people have gets gendered towards men. I could easily call this issue about dresses as toxic femininity but the moment I do that I called a misogynist or sexist or that I hate all women. That is why it's seen as an insult, because it is used pri…
/r/PussyPassDenied10/01/21 11:18 PM
9

The end game here is you are arguing away every comment that shows female privilege as not that, but are fine with labeled a stupid problem women force on themselves as male privilege.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/01/21 10:38 PM
16

So make genital mutilation is fine but not female according to you?
/r/MensRights05/12/20 08:15 PM
4

r/wooosh
/r/PussyPassDenied28/11/20 05:10 AM
8

That is the law because it was decided people under the age of consent, can not consent. Legally an older woman having sex with a 17 year old is rape, because the 17 year old can not consent. Its hilarious that you think it should be based on gender as well.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/11/20 06:17 PM
7

The point bring women in the UK can not be rapists full stop. Sexual assualt is vague and covers many things but rape us very specific. This causes women rapists to be labeled as something not fitting of their crime.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/11/20 04:30 PM
8

Unfortunately what you consider isn't relevant. By definition it is MGM.
/r/MensRights10/11/20 06:38 PM
7

Why can't you discuss MGM without discussing FGM or is that also only a one way street?
/r/MensRights10/11/20 04:15 PM
7

Then why did you specify only abusive men, as if amber heard was an exception to this?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 02:04 AM
7

Go back and read that again, the judges agrees Depp was drunk when the alleged assault occurred, not that is occurred.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 01:52 AM
11

Maybe you should read the article, those say the judge believes they happen, not there is proof they happened.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 01:07 AM
6

It says the judge thinks it was true, not that there was evidence of it.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 01:06 AM
7

The fact you had to add that means you actually have no problem with abusive women.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 01:06 AM
10

You are the only incel here trying to white knight for amber heard because she was abusive. So congrats on your self fulfilling post.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 01:05 AM
5

I hate trump and I hate amber heard, does that fit your world view or how about you fuck off for supporting abusers.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/11/20 01:05 AM
4

Equal rights for women only. Don't skip the last half of the definition.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/10/20 08:50 PM
56

That wouldn't even remotely be the case, you have to prove they lied, which in a he said she said situation is nearly impossible.
/r/MensRights01/10/20 06:50 AM
-1

Being tried as an adult at all is stupid. You are simultaneously denying them the rights of an adult while convicting them as an adult.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/09/20 04:02 PM
3

You are judged because you advocate for feminism before men's rights. You don't have to hate women, but acknowledging that feminism by definition has nothing to do with men's rights is a pretty simple ask. Instead you double down every time and make it clear who you support when their ideals contradict each other. It's great that you try to defend this but you are actively playing into the hand of people who hate men and acting as if it is fine to hate men. You accept double standards applied to…
/r/MensRights24/07/20 01:35 PM
5

You are not an MRA, you are a feminist only. Every comment by you has been openly hostile to men's issues and protective of criticism against feminism. You apply double standards against men but refuse to explain why that double standard is OK. So feel free to go menslib because that sub has nothing to do with men's rights so you will be right at home.
/r/MensRights24/07/20 12:10 AM
2

You lost the moral highground when you used 'incel' as an insult. Is incel not toxic masculinity based on your definition. Are you not peptrating the thing you claim to fight against. I have never seen feminism fight for mens rights despite their claim to fight for equality. Feminism by definition is only for women's rights. So either you like definitions and think toxic masculinity is only what you define it as, or you have to admit that words can evolve as feminism has to try and be more encom…
/r/MensRights23/07/20 07:45 PM
1

If me bashing "toxic femininity" is bashing women, then you bashing "toxic masculinity" is bashing men. There's no way around that. And you know it. Because you ARE bashing men when you say "toxic masculinity." Then reply to this or admit its a double standard. Is attacking toxic femininity attacking women? If yes then attacking toxic masculinity is attacking men. Otherwise the user was not attacking women.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 07:42 PM
1

Ah I see you weren't the OP of this comment thread overall, but you defended his assertion that the problem was toxic masculinity while moving right past the individuals issue. Yes that is the underlying problem, but as the OP did, he moved right past the man experiencing and issue and straight to "we gotta fix society" ignoring that this person was looking for support. Couple that with the phrase toxic masculinity coming to be an attack on men and you end up with a man who is expressing his iss…
/r/MensRights23/07/20 05:01 PM
1

No what I read is you said the system failed that man and moved past his issues to say the system needs fixing. Yes we agree the system needs fixing, but telling that individual that "We just need to fix the system then you will be fine" is ignoring his problems at the moment. You jumped right past the specific person asking for help to grandstand on a larger issue.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 04:26 PM
2

Where do I tell anyone that their actions are toxic masculinity and tell them to fix it? In this very post, you respond to op by telling him his problems are actually toxic masculinity and that is what he should worry about, not what he actually dealt with. Where do I narrowly describe all gender issues as either privilege based or toxic masculinity based? Society does, and you are helping perpetrate it in this thread by defining the original issue as toxic masculinity. It is nothing but a catch…
/r/MensRights23/07/20 03:59 PM
7

And I am saying the definition is no longer the way the phrase is used. Men are getting defensive because anything they do will be described as toxic masculinity and told it is a problem men need to fix. All gender issues fall under one of two topics "Toxic Masculinity" or "Male Privilege" which makes it pretty clear that those who use those phrases believe men are the problem. You never hear talk of "toxic femininity" or "female privilege" because to do so would be consider sexist and hateful, …
/r/MensRights23/07/20 03:34 PM
7

So again as I said, you are saying all bad things for both genders are toxic masculinity, which is mens fault. This completely absolves feminity of any blame for their actions and is something you are perpetrating by continuing to blame toxic masculinity. The phrase has become what it meant to describe by absolving everything to the fault of men. This leads to men being hostile towards the phrase because even when they are looking for help they are told "well its because men are toxic and you ne…
/r/MensRights23/07/20 03:04 PM
8

I don't have a name for it, but your name has been coopted to mean things men do. It isn't a strawman though, the phrase is now used to encompass all masculinity, which makes it an attack on all men. If you don't like that the phrase has been redefined you might want to talk to them 'feminists' who use it that way.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 03:00 PM
4

No he is basing that off the actual actions of feminism, as the saying go actions speak louder than words, and feminism refuses to allow discussion of men's issues.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 02:37 PM
13

Stop using the term toxic masculinity. No matter how many times you try the true meaning will always come out eventually. It used to blame all men for all gender related problems. It is a tosoc phrase in its own because you end with any man having a problem and people like you come in and blame all men for that problem, which then includes the original victim.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 02:35 PM
10

The problem is everything bad for no the genders is described as toxic masculinity and blamed on men. You should be able to see why people get defensive when they are told all problems are mens fault. Hell the term toxic masculinity is in itself toxic because it presupposes that anything one man does is all men's fault and that we should just accept blame for it.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 02:32 PM
2

Yes because the comment here is all men should not hit all women. Even though we could come up with a dozen cases that isn't a reasonable case.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/05/20 01:25 AM
-1

That does happen and only 9 states are 50/50 communal property states so it is not the norm. I literally did read your comment because you comment if he is unhappy with the situation he should have got a prenup. Which means you think disproportionate divorce settlements are fine.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/05/20 02:15 AM
1

So we should be happy that women get an uneven amount, even in childless marriages and just deal with it?
/r/PussyPassDenied05/05/20 01:51 AM
-1

Good news then, statistically she will get more than 50% of the assets.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/05/20 12:47 AM
6

In many states the man is always arrested during a DV call regardless of who the aggressor is.
/r/PussyPassDenied02/02/20 08:10 PM
21

Basically nothing is good enough for them.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/11/19 12:00 AM
16

This woman is treating all men like they are rapists, so yes.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/08/19 06:29 PM
6

Allow me to wear shorts and a t-shirt then.
/r/PussyPassDenied09/07/19 07:25 PM
5

In what way is the title not deceptive?
/r/PussyPassDenied12/09/18 01:27 AM
3

It just seems like the protest was targeted at the wrong group then. How can anyone support them when you have no idea what message they are trying to send? The reaction from them just seems so horribly misplaced.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 03:38 AM
2

It just blows my mind. Everything Feminism has seemed to work for, worked out exactly as they would have hoped for. This couldn't have been a bigger win for them that happened without any protesting or debate. And then they protested anyways and I am flat out confused.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:47 PM
4

I am confused by what the goal of the walk out was. Was their goal to get him fired, that already happened. Was their goal to get google to support their position, that already happened. The person who gained the most from them walking out ironically was the guy who published the paper.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:44 PM
4

The problem is their protest was pointless. "WE DONT LIKE WHAT THAT GUY SAID SO OUR WORK SHOULD SUFFER" despite Google doing exactly what they would have wanted him to do. If he hadn't already been fired and then they decided to not show up the entire thing would have made complete sense. Instead they basically did exactly what that guy predicted they would do and proved his entire point for him.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:43 PM
14

They didn't have to show up to work with him, he was fired, so they could have gone in. What more are the protesting by not showing up? Google took the most extreme action against him immediately which should have shown to these women they did no agree. Instead the women decided to punish Google by not showing up to work, why?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 04:48 PM
4

The insane part of that is there are occasions where both are drunk but only the guy gets prosecuted.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 12:29 PM
5

Let me clarify two things then. I said your definition as the definition you provided, not meaning the definition you created. Secondly the issue lies in that the definition clearly states only "women's rights" towards equality. This is an issue people have when the argument of feminism is for equality for all as the definition specifically says only for women's rights.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 04:10 AM
5

That is only advocating women's rights though as per your definition.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 03:22 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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