TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

FreeThinkingMan Archive

View 0 posts and 91 comments by FreeThinkingMan 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)
-3

She literally saves lives for a living you racist dumbass.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/04/21 12:19 PM
0

What do you want an example for? You know it wont change your perspective.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/08/18 06:27 AM
4

There is actually proof for everything I mentioned, you just never leave your right wing circlejerks so you wouldn't actually know. Trump said there is no proof therefore you mindlessly believe him without fact checking despite him being a proven pathological liar.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/08/18 02:08 PM
3

Trump and Republicans were actively covering up the fact that Russia was trying to hack America's election systems for their benefit. That prevents the public from demanding that resources be dedicated to securing our elections, which Trump and Republicans are actively trying to prevent because Russia is helping them win. Trump has done nothing to prevent Russian hacking or interference in future/current elections... he is actively trying to cover up their involvement. You are a shit poster from…
/r/PussyPassDenied17/08/18 08:39 AM
0

No he doesn't and no you don't. He is a confidence man who uses tone and bad arguments to communicate false hoods and right wing conspiracy theories. His claims are more full of projecting and hypocrisy then logic and truth. This is obvious to anyone who knows what a logical argument is and has the intellectual honesty to reflect on what is being told to you, as opposed to confirmation biasing whatever right wing narrative you want. You people are the worst with the confirmation bias. I will sup…
/r/PussyPassDenied17/08/18 06:01 AM
-1

You just have to know what a logical argument is and how to follow one and the intellectual honesty to be logical to see it. I know trying to reason with people who don't know what a logical argument looks like is a waste of time, akin to talking to a wall. Shapiro is an idiot and so is anyone who thinks he is a credible source of information. He is Rush Limbaugh for oblivious uneducated millennials.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/08/18 12:08 AM
1

He is a charlatan and dumbass and this is easily verifiable by looking at his arguments for positions. You just have to know what a logical argument is and how to follow one and the intellectual honesty to be logical to see it. People who fall for the bullshit right wing propagandists like Ben Shapiro spew are always incapable of those two things(knowing what a logical argument is and having intellectual honesty). I truly don't expect a logical thought to come out of your mind if you can't see t…
/r/PussyPassDenied16/08/18 11:08 PM
-1

Ben Shapiro is an idiot, you people just don't know what a logical argument is, so you fall for his dumbshit. There is a reason why he is a youtube personality and not an actual writer. It is easier to spot bad logic with the written word than it is when you have a bunch of sassy inflection and tone applied to what is being said through spoken word. Whenever you read what conservative propagandists are trying to communicate it is such obvious bullshit.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/08/18 05:43 PM
-2

I am not surprised this sub has a toxic and absurd views on what determines if a woman is fat or not. If you look at her waist and arms she is clearly not "fat" unless you read Vogue magazine everyday and your only definition of not fat are runway models.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/08/18 04:53 PM
-17

I don't see how that could be what they meant.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/08/18 11:30 AM
-1

Your are just confirmation biasing your right wing ignorance as was that right wing rag OP posted and frequents. The point was that Ben Shaprio has/had bad intentions and had zero intentions of an intellectually honest debate about ideas. He only wanted to have her on to make a fool out of her by any means. Have you not been paying attention to hit job right wing propaganda is doing on her? I was listening to conservative talk radio the other day and they were saying that she is going to get rid…
/r/PussyPassDenied14/08/18 10:15 AM
-30

I am sure you want women not to fight back after they are sexually assaulted. What the hell is a water buffalo, is that some new racist term for Hispanics that Trump supporters/the right created?
/r/PussyPassDenied14/08/18 09:56 AM
2

. A bit of a punch after you attack a cop 3 times is far from unnecessary. She was hit in the face with a metal rod... wtf are you talking about? You even admitted you saw that. That is obviously unfucking necessary whether it be a man or woman... You are a bootlicking psychopath. You are a horrible human being, I would not doubt for a single second you are a wife beater.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/18 05:08 PM
3

You are a psychopath, even in the US that guy would get in trouble for that. That was entirely unnecessary.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/18 03:27 PM
1

You think that woman being hit in the face with a baton by a cop is funny? This entire thread is full of people ignoring that part.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/18 08:36 AM
3

Did you not see her get in the face with a baton? You think that is justified?
/r/PussyPassDenied16/06/18 07:51 AM
1

I literally held your hand and walked you through the argument and that is your counter argument of my counter, you truly have no idea how logical discourse. You people are a trip. You can't produce a counter argument, I just refuted your last one which was just one giant straw man because you don't understand basic english. Unreal. You are truly lying to yourself and intellectually dishonest.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 05:26 PM
1

Learn the value of statistics and polls so you don't sound like a brainwashed sheep.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 04:56 PM
1

Textbook feminism is supremacist. Amrchair feminism is supremacist. /u/zenhoodman Point proven, just look at how many mindless sheep upvoted your comment based on absolutely nothing, hunches produced by anti feminist propaganda. This epitomizes my discussions with people in this thread. Learn the value of statistics and polls so you don't sound like a brainwashed sheep who can't logically argue your beliefs.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 04:29 PM
1

I guess I am correct you have no polls or data to support your beliefs on what the majority of feminists believe. You aren't even talking about all feminists you are talking about some obscure subsection of it.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 02:51 PM
1

You said if this was the views of the majority they would flock to "the movement" in hordes. What polls show how the majority think and view the world? Sounds like you are making sweeping generalizations based on nothing or anti feminist propaganda.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 01:54 PM
0

Again, show me proof women voted before that time I mentioned. Be intellectually honest. Even if there was no law yet somehow women couldn't/didn't vote is the exact same thing as if there was a law. and this Yeah, because we know that having wealth, property, resources, and opportunity had nothing to do with gender /s. Stop lying to yourself course all those things had to do with gender. Who had and didn't OWN resources was entirely based on gender during that time. The fact you don't know how …
/r/MensRights02/01/18 01:10 PM
1

That is not a fallacy of composition. You simply don't understand English. You state and set the context of the correct reading of my argument. Here in Canada, less than 15% of the men in the country met the income and property restrictions that had been attached to the federal franchise in 1867 (our founding). The very same bill that opened up voting to all white women in the country in 1922 removed those income and property restrictions, because for women to get the vote those had to be out of…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 12:47 PM
1

Present a logical counter argument and explain how I am being fallacious. That is how logical discourse functions, you don't start rambling on about how a person is an idiot, troll, moron etc instead of present a counter argument(did they not teach you that in your logic classes). You communicate like a child regardless of what you studied or who you are friends with, again talk is cheap. Present a logical counter argument that points out how what I communicated was fallacious and incorrect or m…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 09:40 AM
1

Please... you can't logically argue your positions. You don't know what an ad hominem attack is of course, you use it as a defense mechanism to protect your dogmatism. If I present logical counter arguments for everything you said, which I did, and then call you an child(or any label), that is not an ad hominem since I presented counter arguments that address your "arguments". I have found this mental gymnastics maneuver very common in this sub whenever people can't logically defend their argume…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 09:28 AM
1

Okay kid, I presented a logical argument for my position and you couldn't present a logical counter argument against it supporting yours. Talk is cheap, your arguments/responses to my logical arguments speak for themselves regardless if you have a "phd". I find it absolutely hilarious you arbitrarily mention you have a phd in a subject completely unrelated, as if that means anything, especially since your arguments and childish responses, again, speak for themselves.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 09:16 AM
0

Good. I'm glad you concede you're wrong. You are truly illiterate. No. It is factually correct that men and women earned universal suffrage 10 years apart. This is indisputable fact. I never disputed this fact once. I was NEVER talking about universal suffrage I was talking about the ability to vote for who will represent the country... You are fundamentally not getting the main idea I am communicating. This thread here I am linking will help you understand since you don't understand English nor…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 09:03 AM
1

Unreal, even when literally only men could vote and literally only men are in power you people are still unable to see and refuse to acknowledge how that would obviously cause the severe oppression of women. Construct a logical argument or admit you can't kid. Watch that video so you can have a chance at logical discourse in the future.
/r/MensRights02/01/18 07:31 AM
1

If only men's interests are represented, then of course they aren't going to vote people into office that create laws that discriminate and oppress other men simply because they are men. They will however ignore the interests and concerns of women and create laws that discriminate against women simply because they are women. This is obviously significant, regardless if it is only some men in power See this is called a logical argument. This logical argument PROVES and SHOWS that the fact only me…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 07:18 AM
1

You are the one being INTELLECTUALLY dishonest, like the rest of you professional victims. I have consistently said women weren't allowed to vote before men basically all over the world, which means suffrage is gendered. If only men's interests are represented, then of course they aren't going to vote people into office that create laws that discriminate and oppress other men simply because they are men. They will however ignore the interests and concerns of women and create laws that discrimina…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 06:57 AM
1

Do note women in canada couldn't vote until 55 years after men could by your own admission. This comment I just wrote address nearly all of your points. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7n8atv/good_quote_on_feminism_by_evolutionary/ds2ipm3/ This part of my comment to another person also addresses another point in your comment. What you need to understand is that 99.9% of all the men who have ever lived in this world have been plebs at the mercy of the ruling class just the same if no…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 06:43 AM
0

It is factually correct that men and women earned universal suffrage 10 years apart. This is indisputable fact. I never disputed that... who are you arguing with, was your comment meant for someone else. I could have sworn I told you I wasn't arguing against that. I didn't say all men could initially vote. Just that women couldn't vote until hundreds of years after men could. Learn how to read and stop lying to yourself kid. Note I didn't say "ALL MEN". Saying that there was no law is also disin…
/r/MensRights02/01/18 06:08 AM
1

I honestly don't feel like explaining the blatantly obvious to you anymore. LOL, because you can't. I refuted literally all of your points in your last comment and you couldn't refute a single one. plebs who've had absolutely no say in how this world was and is run and were/are at the mercy of the ruling class. Privilage comes from wealth and class not gender...period! Are you a troll? The ruling class has subjugated those who they have subjugated but guess what GENDER the ruling class has been …
/r/MensRights02/01/18 04:50 AM
0

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7n8atv/comment/ds1vsij LOL I refuted all of your nonsensical points and logic, you can't accuse me of having my head up my ass when you ignore them all. That is textbook projecting. Watch that film and read that chapter kid. Only then will you stop being such an angry incel and start respecting the humanity of women.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 10:33 PM
0

You are willfully ignorant I'm afraid. You are projecting. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/the-role-of-british-women-in-the-twentieth-century/the-1918-representation-of-the-people-act/ You are wrong by the magnitude of hundreds of years. I didn't say all men could initially vote. Just that women couldn't vote until hundreds of years after men could. Learn how to read and stop lying to yourself kid. There was no law prior to this saying that women specifically couldn't vote. Yes there was...…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 10:01 PM
0

What you need to understand is that 99.9% of all the men who have ever lived in this world have been plebs at the mercy of the ruling class just the same if not worse than women This is a fallacy, the only thing that matters is modern times when democracies existed. Women got the right to vote hundreds of years after men did, nearly everywhere democracy existed including the UK. The denial of women voting, in modern times when democracy has existed, suffrage was very much indeed gendered. the vo…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 09:48 PM
0

WRONG, educate yourself and don't let your tendency to confirmation bias misogny impede your research or ability to read. Mind you this is just the UK, you act as if that is the entire history of woman's suffrage in the world. It obviously is not. But even that one anecdote you use as some ace up your sleeve is completely incorrect. Suffrage is indeed gendered and that time line produces the grander context that confirms this. Again you are comparing the UK to entire history of women's suffrage.…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 02:47 PM
1

I can't fathom how you can deem tumblr feminists and radical feminist academics as more powerful then Ruth Bader Ginsburg Sonia Sotomator, Kagan(three American Supreme Court justices who are all feminists). I don't get how you can view the former as movers and shakers and not the latter, this proves you are not understanding something pivotal about feminism or power. You should really look into who those real actual feminist icons are and what Supreme Court Justices do/are as well.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 12:48 PM
1

Your first comment was complete ignorance, I listed the actual movers and shakers in my last comment. Or course you can't refute my logical arguments. Of course you can't logically produce an argument for your positions, you paint all feminists as 14 year old tumbler feminists and radical feminists that are not read by most. These are the most influential feminists in the world in your deluded mind. Exactly what my initial comment pointed out was the nature of the people in this sub. You are obv…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 11:56 AM
-1

Don't be willfully ignorant scroll down that timeline and look at the years in which women were allowed to vote. In nearly everyone of those countries men were the voters that determined the laws and representatives for at least 100 years if not more before women were ever able to vote including the UK. The same is true all across the world. Now that you have the context you should have obtained if you were not being willfully ignorant, what is your point, how on earth are your delicate male sen…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 11:46 AM
0

The people that call themselves feminists. Feminism means something different to every single feminist... So who determines what/who is the feminist movement and what issues they are focusing on?
/r/MensRights01/01/18 07:26 AM
1

Who determines what is the feminist movement and what issues they are focusing on?
/r/MensRights01/01/18 07:12 AM
1

I’m talking about the feminist movement and the issues it chooses to focus on and ignore. Who determines what is the feminist movement, who is apart of it, and what issues they focus on? Your inability to answer these questions will demonstrate your irrationality on this subject. All feminists are individual feminists.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 06:55 AM
-1

Do you have polls showing this isn't the majority view or are you just basing this off your antifeminist propaganda you are exposed to?
/r/MensRights01/01/18 06:43 AM
-7

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage#Timeline Note women couldn't even vote in the UK and USA until the 1920's. Skim that timeline looking at the year they were allowed to vote. You know nothing about oppression.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 06:29 AM
1

Your response makes no sense. Then you better take responsibility for all the murders, misogny, and oppression committed by your men's rights activists who magically think the patriarchy doesn't exist, and yet somehow there is a cabal of feminists oppressing men like you do then. Don't forget about your hero and men's rights patron saint Elliot Rodgers. http://time.com/134152/the-toxic-appeal-of-the-mens-rights-movement/
/r/MensRights01/01/18 06:12 AM
1

You made up absurd nonsense that misadrist feminists make laws and policy own up to it. That is complete fiction. You are saying your conversations with feminists informed you of this absurd lie? Stop lying to yourself, you have demonstrated pure pathological delusion. Put down the Kool aid. Obtain some respect for the truth. I had to Google Apex fallacy, you commit the opposite of it, you judge all feminists by the worst of them, which was what my very first comment here was mentioning. Literal…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 05:59 AM
-1

After reading your past comments more thoroughly I need to point out that you are less intelligent fundamentally as demonstrated by your sweeping generalizations about feminists, inability to understand different belief systems, inability to distinguish credible sources of information, inability to distinguish clickbait, and tendency to mindlessly consume anti feminist propaganda without a single application of critical thought. Of course, but the tail is wagging the dog and the silent majority …
/r/MensRights01/01/18 03:37 AM
1

If you are a woman who experiences and combats sexism on a daily basis they most likely identify as a feminist. You extremists sure do have problems reading and logic. Women who experience sexism as women is by definition only experienced by women. Men don't experience the same prejudices and sexism as women experience because they are men. They have different prejudices and sexist attitudes being imposed on them. Your inability to think logically or read due to your extreme dogmatism and hatred…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 03:31 AM
0

I would love it if these people were confined to the internet, as you seem to think, but they are the ones writing the rule books. You from your world view that is only informed by anti feminist propaganda, only angry misandrist feminists write "rule books"? By rule books I mean policy, like laws and employee/student rules of conduct Are you aware of who creates laws and policy? I will give you a hint, it is not women. 20 out 100 Senators are women. In the House of Representatives 84 of the 435 …
/r/MensRights01/01/18 03:18 AM
0

You mean some feminists have blood on their hands, not feminism as a whole. There is no "church of feminism", united feminist belief system, or shared "feminist ideology", that is what most of you kids here don't get. You also mean "some feminists" are responsible for the exclusion of male victimes of absue from taxpayer funded services. When you start thinking in more nuanced ways, like saying/thinking "some feminists" did x, then you will hold more rational positions on these subjects.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 02:23 AM
-5

It is pretty ironic, it is actually you who are paying attention to feminists who are not relevant and assigning to significance to them they don't deserve. The 14 year old girls on Tumblr and radical academics that the vast majority of feminists don't read(neither of the niche groups). The reality is, is that most, (a very high percentage if at not all) , of liberal female policy makers(at the local, state and national level) are feminists and fight for the actual rational feminists things that…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 02:15 AM
-1

they are the ones writing the rule books There are no "rule books". The very first line of my comment you ignored because your dogmatism was this That is a blind assumption there is no uniting philosophy or guide to being a feminist contrary to what your anti feminist propaganda leads you to believe. This is why all of your absurd generalizations on what feminism is and who feminists are is completely incorrect. Hateful people like Mary Koss and Michael Kimmel are who the ignorant feminist polit…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 01:43 AM
-2

Your copy pastas of cherry picked anecdotes are a defense mechanism and a denial of reality. Blatant extremism. My other comment pointed out you didn't understand what I logically argued and it is because of this extreme dogmatism you hold(it prevents you from being able to follow logical arguments). I suggest you reread my comment in the context it originated in so you can grasp its meaning. HINT, replace all of your usage of "feminists" whenever you do some grand generalization and replace it …
/r/MensRights01/01/18 01:14 AM
-3

I didn't say they weren't "real feminists". That is one giant straw man. I suggest you reread my comment since you were unable to accurately extract meaning from it. I will help you along, the context of my comment was the dichotomy presented by Steven Pinker and how you people only view the crazies as feminist/feminism while completely ignoring all the rational, again this is presented in that image. If you can move past your dogmatism and follow what is being argued you will see you are provin…
/r/MensRights01/01/18 01:05 AM
0

think that oppression and adversity is something that happens exclusively to women. I specifically said women who experience sexism. So yes that would be exclusive to women. There is literally nothing I could of said to you to change your warped understanding of feminism. Feminism has destroyed several pillars of our society already and is not giving any indications of stopping any time soon. If you can manage to put down the kool aid for a second, would you mind sharing with us what these SPECI…
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:54 PM
-8

That is a blind assumption there is no uniting philosophy or guide to being a feminist contrary to what your anti feminist propaganda leads you to believe. Your exposure to actual feminists is outrageously narrow. I chalk it up the fact you frequent this sub and get your information probably from right wing information sources that also create this narrow caricature of what a feminist is. The reality is, is that most, (a very high percentage if at not all) , of liberal female policy makers(at th…
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:44 PM
-2

Your exposure to actual feminists is outrageously narrow. I chalk it up the fact you frequent this sub and get your information probably from right wing information sources that also create this narrow caricature of what a feminist is. The back ground you come from as well(ex Mormon, thought you identified with a far right wing group). The types of people below are the actual movers and shakers not your cherry picked list of feminist academics or Twitter feminists. The reality is, is that most, …
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:42 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/7n8atv/comment/ds0luin
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:37 PM
-7

You wrote a whole lot of nothing just to prove you are the exact type of person I was describing. Your exposure to actual feminists is outrageously narrow. I chalk it up the fact you frequent this sub and get your information probably from right wing information sources that also create this narrow caricature of what a feminist is. The back ground you come from as well The reality is, is that most, (a very high percentage if at not all) , of liberal female policy makers(at the local, state and n…
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:35 PM
-8

Very few of you people think the rational stuff in this quote is feminism and most of you people only associate the crazy things in that quote to feminism. Remember feminism is all those rational things in that quote plus a lot more before you generalize all feminists and feminism in the ways that you people generally do and state you aren't one.
/r/MensRights31/12/17 04:51 PM
1

This just confirms you are a child incapable of rational discourse and rational thought. Again, your inability to construct a rational argument for your position and inability to know the significance of logical arguments shows you are the average conservative incapable of rational thought.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 02:47 PM
1

If it were actual horseshit you would construct a logical argument arguing why it is horseshit, instead of responding like you did. You are not able to construct an argument so you just spout off nonsense thinking you are being smart. Quit lying to yourself kid.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 02:37 PM
0

I find it hilarious seeing conservatives trying to come up with accurate analogies and failing horribly. Read that pdf I linked to the intelligence assessment. Stop being willfully ignorant and pretending that your information sources know more than the CIA and NSA which is just ludicrous.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 12:31 PM
-1

Read that intelligence briefing and stop lying to yourself so your grand parents can stop rolling in their graves.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 12:00 PM
-2

You are painfully ignorant of the attitudes that existed during the Cold War. If the Soviet Union determined the outcome of an American Presidential election through a misinformation campaign and psychological operations, and you did everything you could to ignore it as an American and deny this reality, you wouldn't just be called a traitor you would be thrown into prison. Are you completely ignorant of the Cold War?
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 11:45 AM
-2

So you will continue to lie to yourself then. You obviously are a russian apologist and therefore a traitor, at least you would be considered one during the times the cold war. She lost the election by 80,000 votes, this is an empirical fact. Russia hacking the DNC and all of those other operations that specifically targeted swing states cost her 80,000 votes, this is a fact. 1 out of 10 Sanders supporters voted for Trump, so even if every Sanders supporter wasn't attacking hillary all throughou…
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 11:31 AM
-2

When you decide to stop lying to yourself, here are two things you should read. She only lost by 80,000 votes TOTAL, in swing states she needed to win. So that means that Sanders supporters and the Russian government both SINGLE HANDIDLY cost her the election. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf http://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds
/r/PussyPassDenied25/09/17 07:52 AM
1

What mental gymnastics technique are you employing now? Just admit you don't care about reality and you just want to confirmation bias your worldview.
/r/PussyPassDenied10/09/17 10:34 PM
1

What did you ask? I didn't see any question I didn't answer. So which is it, the media get it all just right and with no misrepresentation, or they do have an agenda not always in line with truth, liberty, and the American Way? I already told you that is a narrow minded false dichotomy and strawman. Not just any strawman but one that strawman's me into using an absurd absolute statement. You are lying to yourself. I never said everything an information source that is credible says is true(your s…
/r/PussyPassDenied10/09/17 07:22 PM
1

Please educate yourself on what a false dichotomy is. The fact that you think it is either a or b shows how your information sources have caused you think about complex subjects in simple and narrow ways. What on earth do you mean "American Way", is that some new dog whistle I haven't encountered yet? Did you reflect on the significance of the State Department recommending these sources that Trump considers fake news, what was the significance of this to you?
/r/PussyPassDenied09/09/17 11:56 PM
1

I told you to stop lying to yourself... Of course he literally did not say all media is fake news but he is continuing the conservative myth that any news that is not Fox News is the "liberal media" and objectivity doesn't exist. He has labeled a very wide net of sources that are widely considered credible as fake news including sources like The New York Times(generally considered to be the gold standard and used by academics and policy makers across the entire world), Reuters, The Guardian, and…
/r/PussyPassDenied08/09/17 09:38 PM
1

I believe this comment was meant for another commenter. If it wasn't do you care to elaborate?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/09/17 09:10 AM
1

Do you think this guy's argument, that the Virginia protesters, including the terrorist who killed the counter protester, were larpers is not Nazi apologetics? Do you think him arguing that Nazis don't exist in America is not Nazi apologetics? Do you know what apologetics means? Edit: I recommend you look up the definition of a straw man because I didn't say half the shit you are saying I am. But forget that, answer those three questions, all that can be answered with simple yes or no answers.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/09/17 08:59 AM
-2

I am not saying every single person here is a piece of shit, just the vast majority as evidenced by this video having 124 upvotes. I am also not even referring to the general sexism and misogyny in this sub. I am referring to the overwhelming support of the dumb shit and nazi apologetics this guy is saying. The only way you can think this is a ppd is if you think the white supremacist that killed that protester in Virginia was just pretending to be a nazi.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/09/17 01:12 AM
1

Oh dang you are right my bad. The nazi in Charlotte who killed that human was just joking. Definitely not hating anyone. My apologies for speaking out of place and misusing the word hate.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/09/17 03:59 PM
1

Trump's definition of "fake news media" is all the media. Stop lying to yourself kid.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/09/17 01:53 PM
7

The guy was saying the self proclaimed Nazis were not Nazis, they were larping they didn't truly wish death on Jews, colored people, and those involved in inter racial relationships they were pretending... If you say such dumb shit the people should laugh at your dumbass and then cry at your stupidity and support of hate.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/09/17 01:50 PM
0

Don't be willfully ignorant. This guy is an apologist for hate and the fact that anyone could consider this ppd shows how much this sub has devolved into is a cesspool of ignorance and bigotry.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/09/17 01:45 PM
2

I was looking for your comment that listed credible sources according to you and stumbled across this ignorant and misinformed comment. If this is a ppd you really must get off on seeing women get beat for unjustified reasons. This person was saying that the Nazis at the Unite the Right rally were LARPing. Do you not know what LARPing is? LIVE ACTION ROLE PLAYING... You are a complete idiot and Nazi apologist if if you think the Nazis at the Unite the Right rally do not wish death upon Jews, min…
/r/PussyPassDenied06/09/17 01:29 PM
1

That is a defense mechanism. You obviously have not read anything on this subject and are completely ignorant about it. In favor of views produced by people trying to make money from click bait titles. Here is a chapter from Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States called the Intimately Oppressed. It details some of the circumstances in which women came to early America and it details circumstances and social norms that produce their oppression still to this day(again, you can't den…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 05:42 PM
0

Tell me how this isn't the rhetoric of ethnic cleansers: I don't even want to ask what cesspool of hate and misinformation you got that quote from. That quote refers to a time when women's husband's owned all of the woman's property and when men owned all of the wages women worked for which countless times less than what men were getting paid for the same type of work. It is funny/appalling that you would call to a time when feminism was most needed and essential to the improvement of human's li…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 05:35 PM
0

If you are a women's rights advocate then you are a feminist. Quit lying to yourself kid. What books have you read to inform yourself of the history of feminism(aka the history of women fighting to address the injustices women uniquely faced)? I get the impression that your only knowledge of what feminism is comes from some 15 year old girl's youtube channel who crys and yells all men need to die or comparable sources. Feminists can care about the issues that face men as well such as you and mys…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 05:15 PM
-4

It seems like everyone here has a false understanding of what feminism is. Feminism is simply wanting to address and fix the problems that women face that vary per time, place, and culture. Nothing more, nothing less. Be honest with yourself. Please tell me which history books and non fiction literature you have read on the history of feminism in western civilization or America. What books would you recommend to be properly informed about the history of feminism? Are you properly informed, if so…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 10:52 AM
1

Where are my logical leaps? The one you thought was one I just refuted and showed you how it was wrong(in case you didn't read that correctly as well).
/r/MensRights14/12/16 10:43 AM
1

I said the stereo type of them is that they are red pillers, not that they are red pillers. Again, no leaps of logic. I suggest you learn how to read. Do you care to point out anymore "leaps of logic"? Is it possible that you could ever admit you are wrong or do you not change your positions when presented with counter arguments and logic? Real men can admit when they are wrong and change their positions when proven wrong through arguments and logic.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 10:23 AM
2

You didn't point out any leaps of logic, not even hops. I just provided valid counter arguments to everything in your last comment wtf are you talking about "leaps of logic"? You aren't even trying to defend your position with arguments anymore... Meditate on what the means about your position and its validity. No one's disregarding women's rights just because they're upvoting someone who supports men, Stop lying to yourself. The girl is holding a poster that says she doesn't need feminism becau…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 09:49 AM
-1

What you tried to communicate is a non-sequitor just like the image the OP provided. Feminism encompasses addressing every single problem that distinctly women face. To say that every problem women seek to address is non existent because there "are zero battered men shelters" or "some feminists back in the day that created a program to help battered women that caused the marginalization of men's domestic abuse cases", is a non sequitor and bad logic. Listen to the absurdity of that argument. If …
/r/MensRights14/12/16 08:50 AM
0

I just looked up the Duluth model, what was that supposed to convince me of and why did you reply to that comment with that suggestion? No conclusion is being derived through logic connecting what I said to the Duluth model. Care to help me understand what you tried to communicate?
/r/MensRights14/12/16 08:36 AM
-2

That is no leap. You didn't understand what I said which is why you responded the way you did. Not everybody has to identify with the group that calls themselves 3rd wave feminism to fight for the rights of women, or everyone for that matter. Talk about incorrect logic. Nobody mentioned 3rd wave feminism... That is poor logic and a straw man. "3rd wave feminism" is not all feminism is or ever was. Try to be objective kid. I said I am a men's right's activist too. Feminism = addressing certain pr…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 08:31 AM
0

I believe bartink is referring more to this sub upvoting this image that disregards all feminist issues through a non-sequitor. This reinforces the men's rights activists stereotype that they are red pillers, ignore every single problem females face, they make it an us vs them pissing contest for who has it the worst as opposed to fixing/addressing issues that afflict both communities. The fact that this incorrect logic is used to dismiss all the issues women combat and is widely viewed as a leg…
/r/MensRights14/12/16 08:02 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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