TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

FredFnord Archive

View 0 posts and 15 comments by FredFnord 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)
2

And therein lies the rub. You don't get to simultaneously scream that you're being oppressed and then, oppress others (regardless of being right or wrong). If you believe that that is what is happening, you are using a definition of 'oppress' that is entirely different than that which pretty much anyone from SRS would recognize. And so it is SRS's opinion that they explicitly do not do what you are saying they do, and it is your opinion that they do. And I'm afraid the discussion pretty much end…
/r/MensRights17/10/12 12:43 AM
6

No, what? What I'm saying is, 'we might get attacked' isn't the only reason SRS doesn't use it. 'It's offensive to some innocent bystanders' is another reason, and probably a sufficient one in and of itself.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 12:34 AM
4

These are threads I've seen SRS get involved in, and they were clearly in the wrong. Well, I'm glad we have you around to decide who is in the wrong. Things could get, you know, ambiguous, otherwise. It just alienates reasonable people from them. It's amazing how everyone has the same definition of 'reasonable people', but that everyone then proceeds to put entirely different and sometimes actually disparate sets of people into the group. This may have something to do with the definition, which …
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:48 PM
10

sigh I know Godwin's law is unpopular in these parts, but it really is getting hilariously tiresome to see SRS compared, over and over, to Hitler. It's like people only have one analogy for anything.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:46 PM
12

Some of the things I saw there were legit cases of x-ism but they are way over the top. I honestly don't get this complaint. Let's take where we agree: someone on reddit, in the last week, somewhere, has posted something sexist. Right? It sounds like you agree that that does happen sometimes. So it gets posted to SRS and it gets mocked. And you're saying it's... somehow getting blown out of proportion. What proportion? It's being discussed on a medium-traffic subreddit. It's getting mocked. Tomo…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:42 PM
5

You really ought to clarify whether you're a (highly appropriate) novelty account or not.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:34 PM
9

throwaways don't unsubscribe. Well, be fair. Most throwaways don't have any reason to subscribe, either.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:31 PM
3

I wish it were. Gawker and its ilk are so awful. (I am not offering any opinion here on the VA controversy. I just hate Gawker.)
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:30 PM
12

I'm sure that's one aspect, but it's a bit cynical, in my opinion. SRS really does try not to use slurs against particular groups, even going so far as to ban people who call other people 'stupid' because, let's face it, it's ableist. And 'neckbeard' is certainly being used as a slur against a particular group of people, and it's a descriptive word that would most certainly scoop up people into the group that don't deserve to be there. Given that, why use it?
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:26 PM
16

He's basically saying that because in his brief examinations of SRS he hasn't seen anyone called out for oppressing his particular group, SRS must hate people with Aspergers, and clearly that's an instance of ableism, and therefore SRS is evil.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:23 PM
13

So you're saying, 'I should be able to say faggot if you can say sperg, and I have no evidence that anyone ever said it in SRS but I haven't actually seen anyone banned for it (although I hate SRS and never go there), and that makes you all BAD PEOPLE'.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:21 PM
4

But in the long run, it ain't doing you any favors insofar as your reputation's concerned. Assuming that reddit isn't going to ban SRS outright (and one tends to doubt that it will), I don't think most people in SRS are particularly concerned with reputation. Were ya'll to seem less eager to fight and more willing to listen, it likely wouldn't change anything with your main detractors, but it'd do heaps of good with your relations with the more common redditors. There are a lot of people who are…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:15 PM
7

SRS Discussion is generally a good place to talk about what is going on in SRS. SRS Meta generally isn't the right choice.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:59 PM
0

...so what you're saying is, you think that SRS should change what it is because it doesn't resemble what you think it should be well enough? But you appreciate what it is well enough to subscribe to it and read it. Putting that aside, though, the reason that SRSdiscussion has way fewer readers is that most of us know that if we were reasonable all the time, we'd just leave and SRS would become just another failed subreddit.
/r/seduction23/02/12 04:27 PM
0

Heh. It has been asserted repeatedly that the entire SRS team came from SA. Nobody has ever offered a shred of proof, but a simple assertion is enough, when it comes to people like you, who really really want to believe it. I believe the person who started the subreddit, and then left reddit, after which the subreddit lay entirely idle for more than half a year before someone else took it over, did say he was from SA. It's pretty clear that this proves exactly the same thing as the hypothetical …
/r/seduction23/02/12 04:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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