TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Garpfruit Archive

View 2 posts and 397 comments by Garpfruit 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)
216

Garpfruit/r/MGTOW19/02/19 02:00 PM
55

FeminismGarpfruit/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:29 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Race based discrimination is illegal in the U.S., but that doesn’t mean it isn’t still something that happens all the time.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/07/25 10:35 PM
1

The world without men would be one where humanity was extinct. Next question.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 06:40 PM
1

So as someone with autism I feel that I need to point out that autism does significantly alter how those with it understand social norms and approach social interactions. None of that is to say that people with autism can’t cross the line, but it’s a bit like you’re saying people in wheelchairs are perverts because they are always eye level with people’s junk. I think a black brain and a gay brain work the same a white straight brain, but an autistic brain doesn’t work like any of the other thre…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/07/25 09:40 PM
1

It’s conveniently impossible to test.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/06/25 08:40 AM
8

Yeah, actually, I do know about international men’s day. I also know that every year a bunch of feminists complain about men getting a day. There are plenty of women’s shelters for victims of sexual assault. How many men’s shelters has feminism funded? You clearly don’t understand how research grants work, so I’m not even going to bother asking you about that. If there’s free therapy for men, it sure as hell isn’t where I live. At best you’re using a no true Scotsman fallacy, and at worst you’re…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/25 04:41 AM
13

Schrödinger’s feminist
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 08:54 PM
1

The Democrats have always had a messaging issue in general. It means that they often pursue and enact policies that are in the interests of various blocks of voters, but they are really bad at taking credit for things they’ve done, so voters don’t hear about what Democrats have done for them. I don’t think that either political party takes men’s issues seriously, but I think that if Democrats are trying so hard to earn our favor then I see it as an opportunity to at least raise awareness about o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 08:44 PM
1

I think that the proletariat are the proletariat and the bourgeoisie are the bourgeoisie.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 08:23 PM
1

It’s not even necessarily sexual or romantic relationships, nor is it necessarily with women. Men are platonically lonely too.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 08:20 PM
1

I don’t think most people think that. We aren’t a species that could survive something like that. We would go extinct, or have a huge genetic bottleneck.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 08:19 PM
18

What’s that saying? Something like “if you treat people like animals, don’t be surprised when they act like animals” or something.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 07:26 PM
23

The condemnation of every past men’s issues awareness movement as misogynistic has forced men’s issues activism into the margins, where it is ripe for infiltration by true misogyny and incels. There really is very little support for men on the left. That’s a big part of why so many young men have gone to the right recently. Seeing people who openly say things like “we should kill all men” face practically no dissent from the left is very alienating for men. Inclusivity doesn’t mean excluding the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 06:57 PM
35

And feminism implies it prioritizes women, but they’ll tell you that feminism is for everyone while being completely ignorant of men’s issues while calling themselves a feminist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/06/25 06:46 PM
8

If we still have a patriarchy, it’s done fuck all for me recently.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/06/25 04:51 AM
1

Well good place to start looking is in other cultures. What remains the same across cultures is more likely to be an integral part.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/25 10:55 PM
1

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that most people need to wrestle with it. I think most people accept it out of hand. True androgyny is not present in real humans. We aren’t mannequins devoid of all identifying features. At a certain point accepting the limitations imposed by reality becomes much more productive than railing against the imperfections that cannot be avoided in our chaotic universe. Ideals are inherently unattainable. Plato has a great explanation of this. I think it was the parable…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/25 04:34 PM
3

Well with Batman we are specifically told that Batman is his true personality and Bruce is the mask. He is also an exploration of what childhood trauma does to a person, but based on the early 1900s understanding of psychology and trauma. As for a main love interest, Cat Woman seems to be the obvious answer, which I think has undertones of the “I can fix him/her” mentality in both directions because they are both broken, just in different ways. I’m sure there are people who can lay all of this o…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/25 07:55 PM
1

It was a gag, and I was actually thinking about a different episode, but the hopeless romantics in the audience took it a different way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/25 02:21 PM
7

I think that there are a few things to consider: Re:1 The Rock and Michael Jordan are real people with all the complexities and nuances that come with that, they just do a very good job, intentionally or not, of hiding their shortcomings, because nobody is perfect. Also, Superman is a paragon. He’s literally perfect. Nothing can possibly compare to him. However, Superman is only half of that character. He is also Clark Kent, who is mild mannered and somewhat soft spoken, a little awkward, and ev…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/05/25 04:51 AM
3

I’m not defending masculinity as a concept, I’m saying that it is a concept that impossible to eliminate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/25 05:19 PM
0

Masculinity isn’t a category, men is a category. Masculinity’s definition is informed by the contents of men category. I would hardly call it reductive, given that I am considering neurology, etymology, psychology, biology, computer science, and epistemology in my argument. In fact, I’m not sure exactly what you are referring to. I don’t feel like I’ve been at all reductive. To a certain extent I am limited by language as an imperfect medium to communicate, and I don’t think interpretive dance w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/05/25 02:51 AM
0

Normally what people mean is that they want to redefine that archetype, but OP specifically said that they didn’t want to redefine it, they wanted to get rid of it entirely. Archetypes aren’t just a bias, they are integral to the way that the human mind processes and stores information.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/25 06:02 AM
8

The human brain needs to categorize things, including people, otherwise our brains would noticeably lag as we take several seconds to process every piece of information. There is no way to change this. It is like the operating system of the human mind. There’s no way to reprogram our brain’s file structure. It’s also not about being a good archetype or a bad archetype. Masculinity is a scale of how closely a person fits the archetype. Women can be masculine, and men don’t have to be masculine, b…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/25 08:13 PM
3

You are really leaning hard into abstract concepts and philosophy here, and I think it’s not really that deep. Masculinity is just a word that means “man-like” and there’s some other grammatical nonsense because English is just like that, but that’s irrelevant. There’s also been several centuries of corruptions and connotations added onto it. Masculinity is basically a scale to judge how much someone fits the archetype of a man, often called a “man’s man” which is funny. I think your issue isn’t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/05/25 08:09 PM
3

I think that within my lifetime the main factor has been the discouragement of men pursuing creative careers. Writing and other artistic forms of self expression are often seen as too “feely” for men to get involved with. There’s also the matter of it not necessarily being a steady income source, so men are encouraged to direct their efforts towards pursuing more reliable sources of income, because gender roles are still very much a thing, and men are expected to be breadwinners.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/03/25 04:17 AM
5

I think you are confusing the Russian government with the Russian people. Hating the Russian government is good, but the Russian people deserve pity, not hate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 07:06 AM
1

Oh, I know, I just don’t see why they wouldn’t do that more.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 07:00 AM
1

I think that the west is more so just kind of done with Israel constantly causing problems for itself. I’ve seen people take the attitude of there being no innocent parties in the Israel situation. They all have a long list of shit they’ve done to each other in the past. It’s grudges on top of grudges on top of grudges. As for Indian support for Russia in Ukraine, as I mentioned it’s mostly to do with the military equipment, and India’s dependence on the same equipment that is getting curb stomp…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 06:59 AM
2

The Indian government hasn’t taken a stance, but there are plenty of vocal Indian individuals who are more than happy to take a stance. I can’t say whether or not they have been paid because I just don’t know. I would think that Russia could generate its own propaganda accounts, and passing them off as American accounts would be more advantageous to them, but I don’t know any of that for sure.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 06:44 AM
2

There’s a big problem in academia in America right now with Indian department heads disproportionately favoring Indian professors from upper castes, but unfairly keeping Indians from lower castes down. Caste based discrimination is just completely normal in India. There is also a certain amount of geopolitical frustration with India because a lot of Indian people online have been defending Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and spreading Russian propaganda talking points. This is largely because a lot…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/03/25 12:31 AM
5

If you think that it’s normal to hate half of all people for something that they have no control over, then you are just a hateful person.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/25 08:49 PM
1

How many times have we heard that the glass ceiling has been shattered?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/25 08:44 PM
2

Have you considered that fashion is just made up to sell you uncomfortable clothes that you don’t need to make money off of you? You say that men don’t dress for fashion, but men’s pants also have real pockets and not sewn in deceptions designed to force you to also buy a matching purse. If being fashionable isn’t comfortable, convenient, and affordable then I’ll pass on it. Judge me all you want, I have real pockets.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/22 10:32 PM
11

Ok, I get the idea of emoji’s being more concise, but they aren’t considered when you use them like that. Putting a dozen of the same emoji doesn’t convey anything more than would be conveyed by a single one.
/r/MensRights22/12/21 05:42 AM
1

Ok, thank you. I try to be respectful, but sometimes I get confused.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 02:04 AM
1

I’m just trying to be nice here.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 01:27 AM
1

Responsibility for whatever happens as a result of that decision. It could be anything from pregnancy to just being sore the next day. Every action has a reaction, and that’s true in more than just physics. Every choice will always have some effect, even if it’s very small. The only people who can’t be held responsible for their actions are small children and those with severe mental illnesses. Consent is always a choice, but pressuring someone adds a factor to the pro/con calculation that we us…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 01:24 AM
1

Well if I were a fish, and living in water was widely considered to be a negative thing, then I might very well be offended by you saying that fish live in water. Given how frequent and relatable the motivation of revenge is in all kinds of stories, it seems like everyone has those feelings, or can at least understood how someone else would feel those feelings. And what if your family was brutally murdered? Still thinking about how nothing lives forever?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 12:45 AM
1

I think that it comes down to societal pressures. If society became totally OK with any different sexuality then I think a lot more people would change. I would change from strait to bi, because why the hell not? And I think that most people would either do the same or alternate between gay and strait, effectively making them bi over any longer period of time.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 12:37 AM
1

You chose the one about obese Americans. By the way, all emotions are just chemicals in the brain. So tell me why people choose to be sad when their pet dies? According to you, they could just choose not to be sad.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 12:34 AM
0

Are we counting random bouts of hornyness as breaking the platonic friendship? Like that one time you fantasized about them several years ago? Because I don’t think that can be avoided. I, as a strait man, have fantasized twice about some of my male friends. So I think that if we ignore the random bouts of hornyness, then yes, it is perfectly possible to maintain a platonic relationship with members of the opposite sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 12:29 AM
1

You say that you are telling the truth without malice, but that’s just not true. You clearly chose a statement that would offend people. I’m not super offended or personally offended, I’m not going to fight you over it, but it’s certainly made me not like you. Offense isn’t binary. There are many degrees to which someone can be offended, or feel any number of other emotions for that matter. If people could control their emotions like you say, then why is anyone ever sad or angry? According to yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 12:23 AM
1

First of all, any premise that is based on the concept that there is a patriarchy is inherently flawed because it’s making a huge sweeping assumption about every aspect of society that is partially, if not wholly incorrect. It’s just a very bad foundation on which to build any sensible deductions. What it is actually based on is who is the initiator. I once had a woman come into me, which I wasn’t opposed to, but I intentionally ignored her advances for several minutes because I wasn’t sure that…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/21 12:15 AM
1

Yes! That does insult me! Because it’s an insult! Saying anything negative about someone or something in a disparaging manner is an insult regardless of whether or not it’s true. The most potent insults are the ones that are true. It’s easy to shake off baseless and unrelated insults, but it hurts a lot more when an insult actually hits upon something that is true. Normal people can’t control what emotions they feel, however, they can control their actions and whether or not the let their emotio…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 11:18 PM
1

How do you know they weren’t insulted? I’m a man an I felt insulted. So did several other men who replied to you. Furthermore, normal people don’t have control over their emotions. They get sad and angry, not because they want to. The only people who consciously choose what emotions they feel are sociopaths.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 11:08 PM
1

No, I like women who I can share an interest with.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:59 PM
1

Women reach mental maturity at around 27, whereas men reach mental maturity around 32.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:58 PM
1

If you understood other people’s feelings then you wouldn’t be asking why they felt insulted after insulting them.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:56 PM
1

em·pa·thy /ˈempəTHē/ noun the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:54 PM
1

That’s sympathy, not empathy. Empathy is about actually feeling what other people feel.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:48 PM
1

What I don’t have is patience for overly sensitive people Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. So patience for overly sensitive people, why you yourself claimed not to have, is a big part of empathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:41 PM
1

Well, given how you have yet to actually demonstrate even an ounce of empathy in this entire thread, it’s pretty well backed up by the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:35 PM
2

To an extent, yes. Of course context matters a lot, and I don’t know the context in which men have said that, so I could be wrong about that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:31 PM
3

Yes, lie, because the truth makes you look like a terrible selfish person.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:28 PM
1

Ok, you are a sociopath. Don’t get insulted. It’s just the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:27 PM
5

Well, if you can’t find a better reason, then just say you don’t know. This is basic social etiquette.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:26 PM
1

blacks Yikes Where is your empathy? Don’t you care about the feelings of other people? It’s not weird, it’s something that most everyone understands innately. Your lack of empathy is concerning.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:24 PM
5

To answer your question, yes, I would prefer that you just not talk about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:20 PM
0

Genetic engineering humans for anything other reason that to treat life threatening genetic diseases is super taboo.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:17 PM
1

why is it insulting? It’s somewhat true. Well it’s somewhat true that crime is higher in African American and Latinx neighborhoods, but it’s still kind of racist and insulting. Just because something is true, doesn’t mean it’s not also insulting. In fact, insults that are true are all the more insulting because of their truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:15 PM
5

I’m not exactly sure what is so wrong with prostitution, so long as it follows the same ethical labor practices that are expected of every other profession, that is. Obviously women shouldn’t be forced into prostitution, and they should receive job benefits just like everyone else. I have known a couple sex workers in my time, though I have never actually solicited any, and they seem to enjoy their work and find it fulfilling. In strictly economic terms, there is a demand, so there will always b…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 10:11 PM
1

Every time you mention “selective breeding” you are saying something about eugenics. Selective breeding is the definition of eugenics. Using the definition instead of the word itself doesn’t make your views any less unpalatable.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 08:44 AM
1

That’s just strait up false. You are just openly lying. You are also trying to justify eugenics, which is, again, “yikes”.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 08:40 AM
1

Except that I’m literally not. Eugenics is bad on it’s own merits, no Nazism required. If you can’t see what’s wrong with eugenics by itself, then all I have to say is “yikes”.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 07:55 AM
1

I just try not to upset them at all costs.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:29 AM
1

Yet your description of how you treat all men is how most people would treat a potential psychopath.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:24 AM
1

That you do treat all men like they might be psychopaths.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:23 AM
1

Other than not wanting to admit you’re wrong. Because everyone is honest on Reddit. /s
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:22 AM
1

Sure you do
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:21 AM
1

I highly doubt you would want to be unpleasant to a potential psychopath. I think you made up an answer because I did predict what you would do, and you just don’t want to admit it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:13 AM
1

But you can’t avoid all men, so how would you treat a pot ie risk psychopath if you were forced to interact with them? Let me guess, wary of their mental state, polite, try not to be mistaken for flirting, does that sound about right?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:03 AM
1

That’s some cognitive dissonance you’ve got there.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 05:00 AM
1

That’s how you treat a potential psychopath. You just described treating someone like a psychopath.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 04:58 AM
2

No, I only asked if you or anyone you knew was killed. I excluded those who were merely hurt because the vast majority of female violence against men goes unreported unless there is a fatality. How many men have been slapped for hitting on, or being perceived to be hitting on a woman? Nobody knows, but I know it’s a lot more common, and even seen by manny as more acceptable than a man striking a woman over rejection.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 04:26 AM
0

Of course googling two killers will turn up results for killings. And it’s not one in fifty, it’s one in roughly three million, two hundred, thousand. The odds are much lower than you make them out to be. So stop with the hyperbole.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 04:16 AM
1

It took me ten minutes, and most of that was spent making sure that the articles weren’t about the same instance. You have done nothing that would prove me wrong, nor have you presented even a single source.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 03:57 AM
1

Here are ten separate instances of women burning down men’s houses. https://fox8.com/news/im-outside-your-moms-house-woman-allegedly-texted-boyfriend-minutes-before-his-mother-nephews-were-burned-alive/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dispatch.com/news/20190508/was-sentence-fair-for-woman-who-burned-down-boyfriends-house-stabbed-neighbor%3ftemplate=ampart https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.orlandosentinel.com/news/crime/os-ne-florida-woman-set-boyfriends-house-on-fire-after-he-cheated-20191112-af…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 03:16 AM
0

Have you or anyone you know been killed by a man who blamed their victims for rejecting them? I’m going to guess not because it’s just not that common.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 02:54 AM
1

Yes, I do, now stop acting like a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/20 02:00 AM
1

You do realize that eugenics does not mean genocide, right? It means large scale selective breeding. The easiest way to keep someone from breeding just so happens to be killing them, but that’s not the only form that eugenics takes. Your last paragraph is actually a very accurate description of eugenics. Maybe you just didn’t know that you were preaching eugenics because you didn’t know what the word meant, but that doesn’t make it any less wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 11:52 PM
1

There’s a big difference between therapeutic gene therapy and just messing with the human genome to, say, make someone taller or stronger or better looking. And considering that we don’t choose our partners for the sake of modifying the human genome, when you refer to “mate selection” it seems a lot like what you mean is eugenics.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 10:21 PM
1

The fact that you are just sweeping your endorsement of eugenics under the rug shows how little you care about human suffering. Anyone who actually has empathy can see that, but you can’t see it because you are a sociopath.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 09:43 PM
1

I can’t be bothered to explain morality to someone who is clearly a sociopath who doesn’t care about human suffering.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 09:36 PM
1

You know what else serves the purpose of picking genes? FUCKING EUGENICS!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 08:32 PM
1

Genetic modification is dangerously close to eugenics. That’s why it’s unethical. Furthermore, human society and achievement is based on our ability to pass information on and build upon the previous generation’s discoveries and advancements. It has nothing to do with genetic modification. Also genetic modification will start a race war. It’s a certainty. You think that the anti-vaxxers and anti-abortion people will be ok with messing with the human genome? They already bomb abortion clinics. Ge…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 07:28 PM
1

Semantics.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 07:21 PM
1

Comparing natural evolution through mating to genetic modification is like comparing caves and skyscrapers. It’s intellectually dishonest. As for the legality, the reason that modifying the human genome is taboo is the same reason that eugenics is not ok. Go ahead and try to defend eugenics and show us all just how twisted you really are.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 07:20 PM
1

You make a very convincing argument. I change my mind, you are right. When we get information that suggests two conflicting generalizations, that tends to make us analyze the source of this conflict in greater detail. Taking your chocolate plate example, how did you notice that it was chocolate? Because the look, feel, and smell of it all fit the generalization that things that look, feel, and smell like chocolate are made of chocolate. The diner likely consciously noticed that the plate was cho…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 08:03 AM
1

Seeing as I have no reason to believe that there was something wrong with a study, I will assume that it is accurate. Assuming that researchers are wrong without a reason leads to flat eartherism. What you don’t seem to get about generalizations is that even if everyone is slightly different, and even if not everyone fits the trend, we need them to function. When meeting someone for the first time you have to make a bunch of assumptions based on generalizations. You involuntarily assume their ge…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 07:25 AM
0

True, but those switches aren’t exactly accessible. Also modifying human genes for non-medical purposes is illegal and unethical.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 07:11 AM
1

Well you act like scientific studies results aren’t generalizable, but that’s exact the goal of scientific studies: to find an explanation or note a statistical trend that can be generalized.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 07:01 AM
6

You do realize that when you refer to the act of using conditioner in the past tense it becomes the past tense verb “conditioned”, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:58 AM
3

You brought up Eliot Roger, a man who is a serial killer. Why are you having so much trouble with this.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:56 AM
1

I don’t think you understand what goes into a scientific study.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:52 AM
1

“Equal” does not mean “identical”. The sexes can be equal despite not being identical. We’ve built our own environments that make skills like hunting and gathering irrelevant. Men don’t need to face the brunt of nature head on because we made buildings and tools and laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:47 AM
1

Love and hate are not opposites. They are closer than you might think. Sweet love can easily turn into bitter hatred. Just look at how divorces usually go.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:42 AM
1

Men should be more selective and women should be less picky. That is a gross oversimplification, but that’s the gist of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:39 AM
6

Do you know what “conditioned” means? I’ll give you a hint: I’m not talking about hair.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:37 AM
2

You were the one who brought up a serial killer. You clearly had the notion that any men could be a serial killer. And you’re right, they could, just like any elevator could malfunction and launch you through the roof. Both of those situations are incredibly unlikely. There is a 1:3,200,000 chance that any given man in the US is a serial killer based on the statistical estimation that there are five active serial killers in the US at any given time. This is also assuming that all of those five a…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:36 AM
0

As long as human society contains humans then human instincts remain relevant. They don’t come with an off switch. You gotta live with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:29 AM
1

Because we evolved a way to choke to death for no good reason. Our airway does not need to intersect with our esophagus, but it does. Evolution gets rid of the worst, but it doesn’t select for the best. That’s a very important distinction.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:27 AM
0

Women also have the safety net of makeup which men don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:20 AM
6

So your solution is to treat all men like psychopaths?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:18 AM
4

Men aren’t volatile explosives that just suddenly go off and destroy everything in their immediate vicinity, you know. Being afraid to compliment a man because you think they’ll suddenly attack you is the equivalent of men being afraid to compliment women because they are afraid that that woman might burn down their house. If men have a violence issue, then women have an arson issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:16 AM
8

It’s actually just that society has conditioned us to not compliment men, so when someone does compliment a man it seems like there must be something going on beyond the ordinary.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/20 06:13 AM
34

Yeah, but you can’t just expect people to always be nice and respectful. If that was the case then there would be no need for any of this.
/r/MensRights20/12/20 01:30 AM
2

It’s the nature of activist movements that they do tend to lack central organization. The goal of protests isn’t to change people’s mind about an issue, it’s to raise awareness of the existence or severity of an issue. The million man March had an impact not because of well though out rhetoric or branding, but because it was just too big to be ignored. Buzzwords aren’t bad for getting attention, just the opposite. However they don’t hold much weight in a discussion about the merits of an issue. …
/r/MensRights18/12/20 03:48 AM
2

Well these kinds of slogans are often just come up with on the spot, with the only consideration being “is this easy to chant?”
/r/MensRights18/12/20 03:29 AM
2

Of course this is unintentional, but that doesn’t mean that everyone who is exposed to it understands that. Thus the importance of good marketing.
/r/MensRights18/12/20 03:25 AM
11

I don’t like the slogan “the future is female” because it implies that nobody else has a future. It’s something of an implicit threat. I’m perfectly happy for the future to be inclusive, but if that’s the message that they want to send then they need a better slogan. Similarly, while I 100% support BLM, I think that the name could use the touch of a PR specialist. “Black lives matter” as a name for the movement kind of invited the rebuttal that “all lives matter”. I think that if it had been “bl…
/r/MensRights18/12/20 02:06 AM
10

Men are disproportionately more likely to be firefighters. Men are more physically capable than women by default, but they don’t just ignore that or use it against others. They regularly use their strength to help others who need it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/12/20 01:34 AM
1

If they were actually being forced to sell drugs, then that’s extortion, which is a crime that those who forced them are guilty of. If someone knocks you out, puts you in a bomb vest, and threatens to blow you up unless you rob a bank, then you shouldn’t face prosecution. The key part is the “if”.
/r/MensRights17/12/20 08:31 AM
2

A note on draft dodging. There were many people who refused to comply with the draft, but they didn’t make up some BS about bone spurs. They just said no. These people were either jailed or put to work doing dangerous jobs like fighting forest fires as a form of alternative service. Some even participated in human experimentation as their alternative service. These people were called conscientious objectors. I have respect for them, but not for people who just made up reasons not go because they…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/12/20 08:19 PM
11

It’s not insanity, but rather an acceptance of an unfounded assertion without critical analysis because it affirms ones own preconceived notions. It’s still not good, and doesn’t exactly smack of intelligence.
/r/MensRights06/12/20 10:15 PM
2

That’s the point, its irony is supposed to drive the point home.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 02:15 AM
32

This article screams scapegoat. If all of the problems of society were solely dependent on a single demographic then they would already have been solved. There is no insight here, just finger pointing. The world won’t get better unless you get your hands dirty and actually work to solve these very complicated problems one at a time. All generalizations are false.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/10/20 02:06 AM
1

By the time that first article was published (May) there would’ve already been close to five times as many gun murders in Michigan as there were stabbings in the UK for that year alone. I would gladly take a couple hundred stabbing over 1000+ shootings every year. The reason that IK statistics on knife crime are so much more common is because they aren’t being overshadowed by statistics on gun crime. When was the last time I saw someone drive a truck through a crowd? Like two days ago. It was on…
/r/MensRights08/06/20 06:18 PM
1

The statistics aren’t racist, you are. You’re just using the statistics to validate your racism. And even then it’s still only correlation, not causation. Consider that the US, the most diverse country, also allows civilians to own guns. Guns can enable criminals to commit all kinds of crimes. I was actually referring to the “more bombings, vehicular murder, and stabbings” statistics. I want to know where you got those. Like a link.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 09:07 AM
1

Ah, the old “statistically backed” racism...is still racism. You are confusing correlation with causation. There is a correlation between people dying in swimming pools and Nickolas Cage appearing in films. As you said, “the shoe fits”, but there is obviously no causation. Can you provide a source for where you are getting you numbers from, because I can’t find a dataset like you describe anywhere?
/r/MensRights02/06/20 08:03 AM
1

A tool can have multiple uses, but it has to actually do them to be considered a use that the tool does. Knives are used for everything from cooking to carving to surgery. Knives are one of the most versatile tools that humanity has ever created. Unlike gun which can only shoot, and if you’re desperate, bludgeon. Both of which cause harm, neither of which negate harm. Here’s two sources https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1588718/ https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/9/1/48.full You were the one…
/r/MensRights02/06/20 07:54 AM
1

So you think crime is caused by racial diversity? Way to out yourself as a racist there. Aside from that, yes, non-gun murders are more common there than in the US, but there are not more non-gun murders there than there are gun murders in the US. As gun advocates are fond of saying “if someone wants to commit a crime, then they will find a way”, but not all of them do find a way, only some of them. Thus there is a lower overall murder rate. Less murder = good.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 07:12 AM
1

While you are absolutely right, I think that we must be realistic in our goals for reform and realize that change will happen one step at a time. The Suffragettes suspended their calls for women’s suffrage to lend a hand to the black suffrage movement. The sooner we deal with the immediate problem at the forefront of the collective conscious, the sooner we can move on to the issues surrounding men’s rights, which are unfortunately not a widely publicized. The fastest way to have our concerns add…
/r/MensRights02/06/20 05:04 AM
1

Or you could be blown away from outside the house. Wow, that gun sure protects you well, doesn’t it? /s A gun is not a defense, it is an offense. And don’t give me that “tHE BesT dEfFeNse iS a gOoD oFfeNSe” bullshit. That’s like saying the best firestarter is a bucket of water. If you defense hurts people then it’s not a defense. Gun owners are actually more likely to be shot by a gun than non gun owners, and more likely to be killed by their own gun than someone else’s. Your so called “defense”…
/r/MensRights30/05/20 05:12 AM
1

Heavy restriction is not a ban. The UK and Japan have much stricter gun control and are much lower than the US. Stop cherry-picking Canada.
/r/MensRights30/05/20 04:45 AM
1

No, it doesn’t. Canada hasn’t banned guns.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:52 PM
1

Canada is not the UK or Japan. Stop moving the goalposts.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:15 PM
1

Yes, killers will find a way to kill, so we should make it as hard as possible for them to find that way by banning guns. You’re solution is to hand every killer an automatic weapon and... how was this supposed to stop killers? I actually did martial arts as a kid and we learned how to disarm someone with a knife. I must’ve done that exercise a thousand times, but it’s been years since then so I’m probably more than a little rusty. But just because you haven’t seen a 130 pound woman lift up the …
/r/MensRights25/05/20 11:13 PM
0

Nope, you have no idea what real tyranny is. All you have is regurgitated vague NRA talking points that are little more than buzzwords. The shutdown may be killing small businesses, but it’s better than people dying. If you value businesses more than human lives then you need to recheck your priorities. You mean the paramilitary LARPers? Everyone is seeing reports of them and thinking to themselves “such idiots”. Nobody with half an understanding of germ theory supports reopening the country. Ge…
/r/MensRights25/05/20 09:01 PM
1

Do you know what real tyranny is? Real tyranny is Stalin’s Russia, Robespierre’s reign of terror, and North Korea. What the founding fathers fought against wasn’t even real tyranny, they were being taxed to pay for a war to protect them. If taxation without representation is tyranny then DC, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam are the subject of US tyranny, not the states, who have representation. Can you give me three examples of this alleged tyranny in the states? If the second amendment…
/r/MensRights25/05/20 08:00 PM
1

In any number of ways: a long coat, a short barrel and folding stock, or in a piece of luggage. A knife can cause more damage with a single stab than a single bullet, but you can’t stab several people in less than a second. It is also possible to disarm a knife wielder unarmed because they must be at point blank to attempt an attack. You can’t disarm a shooter from across the room, or do you think you’re some Wild West sharp shooter? Are you gonna shoot the gun out of their hand with your trusty…
/r/MensRights25/05/20 07:04 PM
0

A longbow can fire a maximum of 10 arrows a minute, cannons are even slower. It is possible to run away from someone with a knife, but you can’t outrun a bullet. If that guy had gotten on that train with an AR15 then you can bet your ass that a lot more than 29 people would’ve died.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 06:09 PM
1

If there is any injury caused by a gun, then banning guns would prevent that injury. Attempted murder is still a crime, so is attempted robbery. Attempted mass murder that is enabled by loose gun laws is still a serious matter.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 06:05 PM
1

Threatening to murder people if you aren’t allowed to have guns doesn’t strengthen your case, just makes you look like a violent sociopath looking for an excuse to murder people.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 06:03 PM
1

A good reason to ban guns altogether. It doesn’t matter what kind of mag you have if you don’t have a gun.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 05:56 PM
1

They have their own TV channel.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 05:55 PM
1

Not anywhere near as high as the US, and the rate of violent crimes that result in one or more deaths is much lower.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 05:54 PM
1

And the UK. And Japan. And a whole tone of other modern western countries.
/r/MensRights25/05/20 05:30 PM
-1

You’ve descended into nonsensical ravings that don’t form any coherent argument. Your natural state, perhaps.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 09:32 AM
1

Oh, so you’re a selfish narcissist who sees the lives of others as being worth less than your own. You are the last person who should own a gun.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 09:30 AM
-1

The old “but guns are inanimate” argument, I was wondering when someone was going to make a fool out of themselves with this piece of nonsense. Everyone knows that when someone says that guns are killing people they are using implicit meaning, which is taught in public middle school so you have no excuse for not knowing it unless you failed middle school. What people mean, and everybody knows this, is that guns are being used to kill people. Your nonsensical argument is nothing but a distraction…
/r/MensRights18/05/20 09:26 AM
1

The side that has a desperate need to hold on to their implements of death is on the wrong side. Weren’t you guys going to rebel against the government or something? Any plans to actually do that, or was that just an excuse? Because you keep letting the government walk all over you and all you do is go out and play paramilitary LARPing. A mass shooting is a shooting in mass. Who got shot and why are irrelevant. The dead are still dead and they still died from a gun. Those facts haven’t changed. …
/r/MensRights18/05/20 09:09 AM
1

Do you not understand how time works? How one thing happens after the thing that happened before it? Because all attempts to “debunk” my source could’ve only been done after my source was created. Because my source was created prior to any attempts to “debunk” it, it set the goal posts originally. The attempts to “debunk” it later changed the definition of a mass shooting to exclude anything involving police, gangs, or failed attempts. That change was the moving of the goal posts. Why don’t you …
/r/MensRights18/05/20 08:47 AM
1

From what? I’m not the one who is excluding anything involving police, gangs, or unsuccessful attempts.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 08:40 AM
2

I confused the M1 Garand for the M1903 Springfield, but that doesn’t make any of may points any less valid.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 08:38 AM
1

Who was it that was so vehemently against a national gun registry? Oh yeah, the same people who always fall back on the “how would you collect them all” argument once the benefits of banning guns have been irrefutably proven. You created this problem. But regardless, the best solution as I see it is to immediately halt the sale of firearms to civilians and completely outlaw the sale of most common ammunition calibers so that even with guns in the wild, they will eventually run out of ammo. While…
/r/MensRights18/05/20 08:35 AM
-5

I think you’re forgetting to account for two things. Guns are killing people several at a time, context doesn’t matter. Corpses don’t come back to life just because the circumstances didn’t perfectly align to your intentionally-to-narrow definition. And even attempted mass shootings should be counted. Attempted murder is still a crime. Just because the circumstances were such that they failed doesn’t make guns any less to blame.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 06:46 AM
0

By “debunked” you mean you moved the goalpost by changing what qualifies as a mass shooting, then yes. If you mean disproved, then no.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 06:35 AM
-4

I’m not the one who’s constantly living in fear of a nonexistent tyrannical government. I bet you believe the “deep state” too. You’re just chocked full of hypocrisy, aren’t you?
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:59 AM
1

Only if you change the definition of what a day is just like you’re changing the definition of of what a mass shooting is.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:57 AM
-5

you really have no idea how many pies the NRA has their fingers in, do you?
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:56 AM
-1

Robbery and drug use are both illegal, just like guns should be. Don’t worry, even when guns are banned there will still be plenty of people shot dead, since you seem to care so deeply about making sure that nothing is done to stop gun violence.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:54 AM
-2

Why not? If combined with an overhaul of the rail network a reduction in the speed limit would reduce emissions, travel times, and traffic accidents? I want the individual freedom to instantaneously end someone’s life from over 100’ away to be given up. Is inhibiting murder oppressing you? If it is, then you’re a murderer. If you’re not a murderer, then you aren’t losing anything.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:51 AM
-18

Can you provide a citation that isn’t paid for by the NRA? No? Didn’t think so.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:39 AM
-1

So 100 dead people isn’t enough for you? That’s 100 to many dead people according to any sane person. But you’re more attached to your guns because “muh second amendment” than you are to actual living breathing human beings. You disgust me.
/r/MensRights18/05/20 04:38 AM
-27

And it takes just as little time to reload an AK. The greater frequency means that those fractions of a second add up. Every second counts in situations like that. which are so statistically rare that they are considered rounding errors. There were more mass shootings than days last year. That’s not a rounding error. I get that you don’t value the lives of innocent civilians and schoolchildren, but most of us do. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/mass-shootings-2019-more-than-days-365/
/r/MensRights17/05/20 09:37 PM
-2

Larger magazine and integrated potential for full auto are two reasons that AKs are not ok but M1s are. firearms get safer and more robust every year What you omitted speaks volumes about your priorities. Firearms get safer for the shooter, but they only get deadlier for the victims. In a mass shooting, I don’t give a single shit about the safety of the shooter. All I care about is the safety of the innocent civilians that they are trying to murder.
/r/MensRights17/05/20 09:32 PM
-21

In a mass shooting situation where it is being used on unarmed civilians then the longer time to aim and the frequent reloads give civilians more time to seek cover. We’re not talking about a battlefield, we’re talking about mass shootings.
/r/MensRights17/05/20 09:26 PM
-5

That’s strait up bullshit and you know it. If “the only difference is that the M1 takes bigger bullets” then you would have no problem with banning all rifles produced after WWII, right? After all, the caliber is “the only difference.”
/r/MensRights17/05/20 08:43 PM
1

Farther means that you would have to take better aim, making it more difficult. An M1 also has only a fraction of the magazine capacity of an AK. So no.
/r/MensRights17/05/20 08:40 PM
0

A bump stock turns a semi auto into full auto. Bolt action weapons need to be cycled by hand after every shot. It is also not a cosmetic as it actually effects the gun’s performance.
/r/MensRights17/05/20 08:39 PM
-8

I think there a pretty big difference between an M1 Garand and an AK-47. You can put as many cosmetics as you like on a bolt-action rifle, but it will never become an assault rifle. Edit: Wow, the NRAssholes are out in force today.
/r/MensRights17/05/20 03:02 PM
-2

You could define it as a semi or full auto rifle designed for military use (i.e. specifically for killing people).
/r/MensRights17/05/20 03:00 PM
6

You phrased it correctly. Dowries were a thing in Europe and America for a long time as well.
/r/MensRights13/05/20 05:19 PM
1

I mean, I’d be more than happy to let someone else deal with everything while I screw around at home. I get that this is supposed to be a pass at the whole stay-at-home wife stereotype, but it’s honestly not a bad idea.
/r/MensRights04/05/20 06:29 PM
3

I was in a dorm for a year where each floor had one bathroom and it was agreed upon that, regardless of what the sign said, anyone could use use the ones on mixed gendered floors, but the ones on the floors that had only girls were girls only. We didn’t have any floors with boys only. Maybe try to find out if there is some kind of similar agreement that you just weren’t aware of.
/r/MensRights23/03/20 12:43 AM
1

Next time a woman walks into the men’s bathroom when you are in there scream as high pitched as you can. Not sure this will solve anything, but it will definitely draw attention to the issue. It would also probably be pretty funny.
/r/MensRights23/03/20 12:39 AM
3

BuT eVeRy DaY iS mEn’S dAy
/r/MensRights08/03/20 06:52 PM
27

The phrase “roaming bands of tyrannical plumbers” is making me laugh so fucking hard for some reason. Like a cross between Mario and Mad Max.
/r/MensRights05/03/20 06:55 AM
1

That violates the statute of limitations.
/r/MensRights27/02/20 09:13 PM
1

It’s a fine, not a settlement. She has to pay the government.
/r/MensRights26/02/20 07:28 PM
1

And how many people could survive a year without pay? Making $90,000 isn’t that difficult, but having $90,000 is a different story. Most people don’t have a year’s worth of pay just lying around in a savings account.
/r/MensRights26/02/20 06:30 AM
1

I’m not sure if this is in the US, but $90,000 is a lot of money. Not that it excuses the false accusation and imprisonment.
/r/MensRights25/02/20 04:22 PM
2

She said that heterosexual relationships were predominantly based on religion. I’m pretty sure that hetero relationships are predominantly based on the instinctual drive to reproduce and spread our genes to the next generation that is present in all living things, and no religion. Religion arbitrarily forces monogamy on humanity when we as a species do not mate for life naturally. Though it is possible that we did mate for life back when we only lived to around 35 before getting killed by a mamm…
/r/MensRights30/01/20 08:00 PM
2

I’m pretty sure that’s illegal, but I’m also not super familiar with Chilean law.
/r/MensRights28/01/20 04:08 AM
7

That’s just strait up victim blaming.
/r/MensRights02/12/19 11:01 PM
4

The Titanic was actually an exceptional case. In that era there was no standardized evacuation procedure. “Women and children first” was actually an order issued by the captain of the Titanic, not any kind of policy.
/r/MensRights19/11/19 12:18 AM
4

Because they have a longer life ahead of them. If you look at it as a calculus of potential years of life saved then children are worth more potential years of life than adults. We are also obligated to protect children because they are the ones who will be taking care of us in our old age. They are more innocent than us, so that’s another reason to prioritize them as well.
/r/MensRights19/11/19 12:14 AM
11

Lifeboats on most ships aren’t the rubber dinghies that you think they are. On the Titanic they were definitely made of wood. I would like to see you try to tear a wooden lifeboat apart with your bare hands. Airplane life rafts are inflatable to cut down on weight, but they can also hold the entirety of the passengers and crew. And every seat is also a floatation device, and there are life vests for everyone onboard. The reason that so many people died in the Titanic incident was because the des…
/r/MensRights18/11/19 09:11 PM
27

Did you think that I was somehow unaware of the “women and children first” thing? I wasn’t born yesterday.
/r/MensRights18/11/19 08:01 PM
49

I understand putting children’s lives above those of adults, but not putting women’s lives above men’s.
/r/MensRights18/11/19 06:38 PM
10

Yeah, burning buildings don’t care what you are, they will show no mercy to anyone, regardless of how diverse they are.
/r/MensRights15/10/19 08:54 PM
1

I think you mean perpetrators. And it’s not only women, men can hold one another to unreasonable standards as well.
/r/MensRights13/10/19 03:22 PM
1

How can you be clearer? How about you start by actually saying the things that you claim to have said instead of expecting me to read your mind. As for reporting this post, I will refer you for the third goddamn time to the fact that this is a low stakes situation. People are here in large part to vent their frustrations because we know that authorities won’t take a case of discrimination against men seriously because, as was previously mentioned, this is just another example of how system is de…
/r/MensRights11/10/19 10:56 PM
1

sometimes a rape accusation is in the form of a Reddit post You typed that less than 24 hours ago. Have you hit your head recently or something? This isn’t the first time that you have completely forgotten parts of this conversation. As for if I believed a rape accusation on Reddit, the proper thing to do would be to report it to the authorities so that it can be investigated and brought to a court of law where it will be up to a grand jury to decide. Pretty obvious. We have institutions like th…
/r/MensRights11/10/19 09:49 AM
1

No, you didn’t explain anything. You mentioned rape accusations and the possibility of making such an accusation via a Reddit post, but you never linked that to this post. And if you think that the stakes on this post aren’t practically nonexistent then you clearly have no sense of human behavior. This is a post that will be swept away by the ever flowing deluge of new content in less than a couple of days. Nothing will change because of it. Nobody will face the threat of jail time or criminal p…
/r/MensRights11/10/19 09:33 AM
1

Because, as I already explained to you, the stakes are so low as to be basically nonexistent in this situation. You seem to be having difficulty following this conversation. Either that or you have some kind of memory disorder like Alzheimer’s. Either way, I suggest that you quit while you’re behind because the current trend is that you only seem to be falling further behind the longer this thread continues. You should stop before you make yourself look like any more of a fool than you already d…
/r/MensRights11/10/19 09:05 AM
5

Well then it would require unique consideration. Context is important and as a being capable of higher order thought processes I am able to analyze context and factor it into my interpretation of a given scenario. People smarter than either you or I have spent their entire careers trying to figure out the rules that underlie intelligence and human decision making and even after 80 years they still haven’t figured it out. What makes you so sure that you understand what they don’t?
/r/MensRights10/10/19 11:05 PM
5

I am consistent, but the calculus of what warrants intense scrutiny is not as simple as trusting everything or trusting nothing. I examine things of significant consequence more than I do things of little import. An accusation of rape can ruin someone’s life. A Reddit post, not so much.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 10:42 PM
1

Toxic masculinity does not mean that men are toxic, as many feminists think it does. It actually refers to the harmful effects of societal pressure on men. Men being expected not to show emotion or cry are examples of toxic masculinity. The quintessence of toxic masculinity is the phrase “man up”. Men are the victims of toxic masculinity, not its perpetrators. Another example of toxic masculinity is the notion that men can’t be sexually abused. We should always make sure to correct those that mi…
/r/MensRights10/10/19 09:33 PM
6

It must be hard to go through life without being able to believe anyone or anything.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 09:17 PM
1

People like this have taken self acceptance to mean that they are perfect and don’t need to change at all. Self acceptance isn’t about believing that you are perfect, it’s about realizing that it’s ok not to be perfect. We all have flaws and that’s normal, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t also try to improve ourselves.
/r/MensRights10/10/19 08:02 PM
26

He’s a 5 year old FFS! Mentally healthy 5 year olds eat play-doh even when you tell them not to and will hit each other with sticks for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Hugging and kissing is a significant improvement, off you ask me. You seem to have unrealistic expectations of 5 year olds. Remember, at age 5 most kids haven’t even started kindergarten. They have no education and can’t even read or write. Expecting them to understand the legal ramifications of their actions and sexually inappro…
/r/MensRights25/09/19 05:56 PM
2

I don’t have anything better to do right now.
/r/MensRights24/09/19 12:03 AM
3

I don’t know the difference, it’s not my problem, have whatever kind of vote you want, I don’t care.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:50 PM
2

Ok, then it’s not a problem, a second vote wouldn’t change the results, now all that’s left is to actually test your hypothesis with a vote. Listen buddy, people were so upset about the 2016 election results here in the US that they started developing symptoms. People were so upset that they could be diagnosed as having a disease that was caused by how upset they were. I don’t think you understand just how pissed off people can be.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:48 PM
3

Again, I don’t have to get over it because it’s not my problem, but you know how whenever you about to do something drastic in a piece of software like deleting a save file in a game it always asks you if you’re sure that you want to do it? That’s what a second vote would be. If people are really sure that they want to leave, then there’s no problem, but if people have changed their minds or voted to leave as a joke then shouldn’t you take a vote to make sure that the UK follows the will of the …
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:41 PM
3

Then you don’t have a bad time, but why not check what people think again. Just do the exact same vote over again and see what happens. Measure twice, cut once and all that.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:30 PM
3

Listen dude, I’m American. I couldn’t care less what the fuck you do, but it definitely looks to the rest of the world like the UK is gonna be in for a bad time.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:18 PM
3

No, it’s still democracy, especially because many people said they didn’t actually vote the way that they felt.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:12 PM
-1

That is pure democracy. If you don’t think it’s democracy then you are misinformed on what democracy is. And why stop at two votes? Why don’t you do best two out of three? Make extra sure that everyone’s voice is heard.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:05 PM
1

It’s not a literacy issue, it’s an ambiguity issue. This poster could either be (1) a list of sexist stereotypes to put down men or (2) a list of qualities that point out how men are disadvantaged. 1 and 2 are completely opposite and nearly equally plausible. That is where the confusion lies. We are not confused because we can’t find a meaning, we are confused because they’re are multiple possible meanings.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 11:01 PM
2

What? They literally said they want more democracy.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 10:50 PM
2

Not that it’s my political problem, but from across the pond it looks like the UK is careening towards a economic and social nightmare with shortages of food and medicine. Not that it effects me in any way.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 10:48 PM
1

Well I was specifically thinking if ancient Athens where women weren’t allowed on the first floor of the house.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 10:22 PM
2

I agree that humans have always valued women and children over men, but it is important to remember that women didn’t always enjoy being protected, not that invalidates your point in any way.
/r/MensRights23/09/19 08:15 PM
1

“Finger” painting
/r/MensRights23/09/19 08:04 PM
1

There are two types of feminists: the ones who will only talk about it if someone else brings it up, and the ones that feel a compulsive need to make sure that everyone knows that they are the best feminist. The former believes in equality and usually isn’t aware of the plight of men’s rights simply because it isn’t talked about enough. The latter will make sure that everyone knows that they are the most feminist feminist ever and are so desperate for perceived approval and validation that they …
/r/MensRights10/09/19 06:38 AM
4

It’s more about raising awareness than patting ourselves on the back.
/r/MensRights10/09/19 06:27 AM
1

You don’t know what toxic masculinity means. Toxic masculinity does not effect women. It is the toxic expectations of people (mostly women) that men shouldn’t show their emotions and should suffer quietly rather than let their emotions show. A comparable example would be unrealistic beauty standards for women, but it’s unrealistic behavior standards for men.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 03:28 AM
1

If your preference is to depend solely on your gf for all your emotional needs, how can she depend on you? How can the left side of an arch rely on the right side to support it if the right side needs the left side to support it? https://www.angle.org/doi/pdf/10.1043/0003-3219%281966%29036%3C0099%3ATMOTSA%3E2.0.CO%3B2
/r/MensRights09/09/19 03:17 AM
4

Well, you seem to be living in a different universe because everything you said is completely wrong. I’m not exaggerating. Every. Single. Thing.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 03:13 AM
1

You don’t know what toxic masculinity is. Toxic masculinity affects men by forcing them to conform to expected behaviors. Men aren’t the ones who are toxic, they are the ones being poisoned.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 03:10 AM
3

Because you are wrong. Men don’t talk shit about their friends behind their back. Men actually like their friends, whereas women will pretend to be friends with people they hate.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 03:07 AM
2

The one two punch of “women should be allowed into male only groups” and “women need safe spaces where men are not allowed” is particularly disorienting.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 03:00 AM
1

Most feminist have a complete misconception as to what toxic masculinity is. They think it’s everything that wrong with men (rape, violence, anger, etc.) in one bundle and they think that they are the victims of it. In truth, it’s closer to the whole “unrealistic beauty standards for women” but it unrealistic behavior standards for men. Sure, repressing emotions can have some splash damage, but women are not directly hurt by toxic masculinity in the way that many feminists think.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 02:50 AM
5

I personally don’t really see a problem with doing away with gender segregation, but only so long as it is truly done away with. If women are so terrified of men that they need women-only spaces and activities, then men deserve similarly segregated spaces. However, if women wish to be included in traditionally male-only groups then they cannot complain about a lack of exclusively female spaces. The men’s rights movement is not about being anti-progressive, it’s about being anti-double-standard. …
/r/MensRights17/08/19 09:18 PM
7

It’s just a stupid way of reaching the same solution.
/r/MensRights17/08/19 08:55 PM
2

You have met people, right? There are plenty of women who enjoy nature and plenty of men who find nature filthy and uncomfortable. Not every girl is a Barbie princess and pink glitter fanatic.
/r/MensRights17/08/19 08:53 PM
2

Men’s rights are not alt-right, or even regular right, they’re left. It’s not like women’s rights are left and men’s rights are right. That’s a false dichotomy. Though the politics are complicated to the point where a simple right-left scale is insufficient to truly describe the multitude or political views that exist. I’m not here to bash feminists, the vast majority of them are good people, and I am confident that they would support men’s rights if they were aware of what issues we actually ad…
/r/MensRights05/08/19 03:05 PM
0

Does the concept of the exchange of information confuse you?
/r/PussyPass27/07/19 04:15 AM
0

But the concepts didn’t just vanish for 2000 years, they were passed around the Mediterranean and Europe. You can follow these ideas back through history. I have knives in my kitchen drawer, does that mean I came up with the knife completely independently of the people who used knives tens of thousands of years ago? Of course not, because knives as a technology have been passed down for all of those thousands of years.
/r/PussyPass27/07/19 03:02 AM
0

That’s an inane argument to make. I bet you think that every language was developed independently too. First of all, they did survive, though not in every single derivation. Egypt maintained courts up throughout the Ptolemaic dynasty, at which point it had already spread to parts of Greece and Rome. The concept of innocence until proven guilty became slightly perverted at some point to be that rather than assumed innocence, if innocence was later proven than the part making the accusation was ma…
/r/PussyPass27/07/19 01:11 AM
0

Hammurabi’s Code influenced Egyptian law, which influenced the laws of many Greek city states, which influenced Roman law, which spread via conquest all across Southern Europe, the Middle East, and Northern Africa. Britain was a part of the Roman Empire and was therefore influenced by its laws, which, in tern influenced British Common Law. It’s not a direct connection, but it’s also not hard to see how it influenced almost all modern law. It’s like a game of telephone, but across thousands of ye…
/r/PussyPass27/07/19 12:37 AM
1

I’m familiar, just not intimately familiar. It’s not l said that Russians ride unicorns to work on Fridays.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 08:56 PM
27

It was an experiment. Her motivation was curiosity. Curiosity is a powerful motivation. We put people on the goddamn Moon because we were curious.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 08:18 PM
1

You could change the legal definition of “bird” to mean “pig” but they still won’t fly. The dictionary definition of rape is a sexual act in which one or more parties are not voluntarily participating.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 07:01 PM
0

Tell that to the abolitionist who helped fugitive slaves escape. Even when morality doesn’t even factor in people will still break the law without a second thought. Ever jaywalked? Made an illegal U-turn? Made your own parking spot? Exceeded the speed limit? Then you’ve broken the law. In fact, other drivers will often expect you to break the speed limit. And that’s just traffic laws.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 06:57 PM
0

Have you even read the Code of Hammurabi? It establishes trial in court and the concept of innocent until proven guilty. It also establishes punishment fitting the crime. Was it deeply flawed? Absolutely, but considering that it is the very first set of laws ever recorded, it was pretty good for a first attempt. We still use many parts of the Code in modern western law.
/r/PussyPass26/07/19 06:51 PM
2

Sure, it’s illegal to bang people of the same sex in public, but it’s also illegal to bang people of the opposite sex in public.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 06:45 PM
1

Well I’m not Russian so it’s not really a surprise to me that I am not intimately familiar with their laws.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 06:43 PM
2

That is a very big “if”. Just because something is illegal, doesn’t meant it doesn’t happen. Look at the illegal drug trade, or alcohol during prohibition. Laws are flimsy things.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 09:28 AM
3

In Russia it is illegal to be gay, but that doesn’t mean that there are no gay people in Russia.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 09:23 AM
0

What are you talking about? That isn’t even remotely related to my point. Spouting tangential nonsense doesn’t make you right. I said you want to outlaw alcohol. You said you didn’t. I clearly and simply explained to you that holding people accountable for drinking alcohol in the first place (which you had said earlier) would necessitate the outlawing of alcohol. Just because certain laws exist doesn’t make them the best laws. There used to be laws that women couldn’t vote or own property, and l…
/r/PussyPass26/07/19 07:40 AM
0

Please, enlighten me as to the ways in which a government can hold citizens accountable for things without writing it into law. Holding people accountable for decisions that they made while their judgment was impaired is completely nonsensical. Whether or not alcohol impaired your judgment is not up for debate. It is definitively known that alcohol leads to reduced decision making capabilities. So why the hell would you hold people accountable for things they decided to do when they were in a st…
/r/PussyPass26/07/19 06:40 AM
41

At one point slavery was right, by law. Just because the law says something doesn’t make it true.
/r/MensRights26/07/19 06:28 AM
0

Let me walk you back through this. I said that holding people accountable for their decisions when they are drunk is blatantly flawed. In response, you said that they made the decision to drink alcohol in the first place. So you are saying that people should be held accountable for drinking alcohol. How would we hold these people accountable? The only feasible way to do that would be to make it illegal to drink alcohol.
/r/PussyPass26/07/19 01:00 AM
1

This is my problem with modern feminist extremists. They say things like this, things that don’t make any sense whatsoever, and a bunch of people will back them up no matter how batshit crazy they are. I wish that sensible feminists would do more to distance themselves from the crazy ones. Let them know that feminism doesn’t support them or their inane ideas. These lunatics think that everyone who is a feminist believes the same things as them. They feel emboldened by this. They need to be shown…
/r/MensRights23/07/19 11:58 PM
-1

So you are in favor of outlawing alcohol entirely. Considering your total failure to comprehend consequences, you’re probably too stupid to even comprehend the point that I am making. I’m sorry to have wasted your time. You can go back to huffing paint or whatever it is someone so unintelligent normally does.
/r/PussyPass07/07/19 01:20 AM
-1

Except that it isn’t. A person decides to drink a little bit while sober, then a bit more while buzzed, then a bit more while tipsy, then more still while drunk, until they are completely shit faced. Their judgment gets worse at every step. You can be the asshole to say that drinking should be illegal, but I won’t. Besides, prohibition only increased the crime rate. And I’ve already said, nobody died. So there’s no point in sentencing people based on what-ifs that didn’t happen. You seem to have…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 11:50 PM
1

She was studying to be a heart surgeon, and the last time I checked the leg isn’t a part of the heart. But knowledge of the femoral artery is common knowledge, yet she still didn’t try to stab him there (and if she was trying but just missed then she basically failed to pin the tail on the donkey even without the blindfold). And at the end of the day, he lived. There’s no point in sentencing someone based on things that didn’t actually happen.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 01:26 PM
-1

It is a known fact that alcohol impairs judgment. I can’t wrap my head around people who think that someone who is completely wasted should be held just as accountable as someone who is stone cold sober. Alcohol literally makes people more likely to make bad choices, it’s not a secret. So the only two logical options are to ban alcohol entirely, or take into account the known facts about the effects that it has on people’s judgment. We don’t throw drunk drivers in prison for extended periods of …
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 01:21 PM
0

I said that I’m not a judge nor an I cut out to be one. Why would I be able to run a legal system? I certainly know that I’m completely unqualified for the position. These are just my amateur opinions. Don’t like my opinions? Well too bad. My job isn’t to make you happy.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 08:02 AM
1

That alone would not be enough. They would have to be breathalyzed to get evidence of said intoxication. If they couldn’t be breathalyzed immediately after a crime, then they would need to have a pretty long receipt from a bar or a minimum of two witnesses who either say them actually ingesting alcohol, or not ice that they smelled strongly of alcohol to convince me. I offered slightly more leniency to those whose judgment was impaired, but I’m not just going to take the perpetrators at their wo…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 07:59 AM
0

Did you even read my entire post? Having a tracking anklet and community service isn’t Scott free. As for how I would feel, if you conveyed heartfelt guilt like she did, I would honestly probably forgive you for stabbing me. I am a very laid back person and holding grudges is unproductive in my opinion. Besides, the Justice system isn’t there to make victims better, it’s there to weed out dangerous elements of the populace. Because it was a first time offense it is not possible to say whether it…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 07:52 AM
0

While I agree that the matter of consent while intoxicated is often applied as an excuse for women, but not men, I would apply it equally across the board. I personally don’t think that it is advisable to drink alcohol, but I’m not going to be an asshole and penalize people for drinking. I do, however, think that a certain amount of leniency needs to be given whenever someone is on a psychoactive substance. It literally changes the way you think. I think that there should be a way to prohibit th…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 07:33 AM
1

Exactly, which is why I take away the ability to “only use it when it suits them” by always considering it and giving the same allowances to men as are given to women. I would’ve made the same calls if the genders were reversed. The point is to apply the same treatment across the board. That way nobody get preferential treatment.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 07:20 AM
-1

I don’t give a shit that it could’ve killed him, because it didn’t kill him. Sentencing someone based on things that didn’t happen has got to be one of the most completely idiotic things I’ve ever heard of.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 07:16 AM
1

If a person cannot consent to sex while drunk because of impaired judgment, then why is their judgment suddenly not impaired if the commit a crime? At least I’m consistent. Well, she already had an emotional personality disorder, so that was likely exaggerated. Also, any number of drugs can alter a person’s personality, what do you think antidepressants do? Or mood stabilizers? Do you have even a rudimentary understanding of pharmacology? Are you stupid, or just intentionally ignoring the facts?…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 07:06 AM
1

Well, if you conveyed your heartfelt guilt and regret to me like she did, I would honestly probably forgive you. I’m not good at staying angry at people.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 05:13 AM
2

That’s a fine and a night in the drunk tank, not actual prison time. Even if they repeat the offense multiple times the most I would do is revoke their drivers license.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 05:11 AM
1

Except that he wasn’t some would be Olympic star. I said that each case should be decided based on the facts of the case, not the what ifs. She was not actually aware of her mental illness prior to this case. She decided to drink, but if a woman who has been drinking is too intoxicated to consent to sex because of compromised judgment, then she is also too intoxicated to be entirely in control of any of her actions. I think that the same goes for men. Personally, I don’t think that drinking alco…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 05:08 AM
0

For a bread knife, the weapon used in particular case, a month is more than enough time to heal from a simple stab wound. Two months would be close to the time it would take to heal if he had been attacked with something more along the likes of a circular saw. And what did we go through all the trouble of inventing pain killers for if not to kill pain? People get by every day while missing multiple limbs, a bit of scar tissue won’t kill him. Oh, boo hoo, he can no longer be an Olympic gold medal…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 04:02 AM
1

Only if it you get stabbed in the artery, which just so happens to be in a very difficult to stab location. If you get stabbed in 99% of places on your leg, you will be fine after a month or two, depending on the extent of the damage.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 03:15 AM
-3

Is the justice system only there for victims to enjoy the suffering of their attackers? If he can’t accept that he’s not much worse for wear that’s his problem. He got stabbed in the leg. That’s hardly a life threatening injury, and in the end he was ok. I did say that I was inclined to take the actual damage done into account over what rules she broke. If she had stabbed him in the torso, it would’ve been a different story. If she had actually killed him then that would call for much harsher pu…
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 01:41 AM
-1

It would suck to be him no matter what happened to her.
/r/PussyPass06/07/19 01:12 AM
-14

Well, if your judgement is impaired, that means that you are more likely to make bad choices. Choices that you would never make normally. If someone gets drunk, commits a crime, and was too drunk to even remember it, you think that they are just as guilty as someone who commits that same crime while completely sober, with their wits about them? I think that making the decision to drink alcohol is foolish, because it leads to further bad decisions, but that’s my personal belief, I’m not going to …
/r/PussyPass05/07/19 08:52 PM
-12

She was sentenced to ten months in prison, but it was deferred for 18 months. She will basically be committed upon graduating from medical school. So it’s not a total free pass, though it is still a lenient sentence. After reading some of the details of her case I would be inclined to be somewhere lenient as well. This is of course my own opinion and is based on my belief that people should not be punished simply for breaking rules. The punishment should be based on the actual danger, inconvenie…
/r/PussyPass05/07/19 06:43 PM
1

If you are living your entire life in fear of the very existence of half of the population then you are mentally ill and suffering from paranoia.
/r/MensRights24/06/19 05:12 PM
1

Except prostitution, it’s employment, but it still asks for sex.
/r/MensRights16/06/19 05:25 AM
2

The patriarchy is a socially acceptable conspiracy theory.
/r/MensRights13/06/19 11:36 PM
3

Oh, I get it. I though that “this one” referred to him. That made “good” just completely derail the sentence. It could be because I’m American that I couldn’t put it together.
/r/MensRights26/05/19 11:33 PM
2

It’s not that, it’s that the words being used just don’t make sense together. It’s like “up poodle she red swimming mike.” It just doesn’t make sense.
/r/MensRights26/05/19 11:27 PM
6

I’ve read this several time and still have absolutely no idea what the second sentence means.
/r/MensRights26/05/19 11:21 PM
4

She’s acting like there was s some male conspiracy to block women from advancing up the corporate ladder when this is obviously a case of self sabotage.
/r/MensRights18/05/19 05:21 PM
2

It’s a figure of speech.
/r/MensRights17/05/19 04:03 PM
3

The point of the saying is that it perpetuates a cycle of violence and hate.
/r/MensRights17/05/19 04:02 PM
60

The code also punished false accusations with the sentence for the crime they falsely accused another of committing. This included rape. Rape was punishable by death, but so was a false accusation of rape.
/r/MensRights17/05/19 03:53 PM
4

There’s a saying about the Code of Hammurabi: “an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”
/r/MensRights17/05/19 03:50 PM
2

Stiletto heels are named after a kind of short sword/dagger specialized for stabbing.
/r/MensRights14/05/19 02:40 AM
0

So it’s a cat call?
/r/MensRights10/05/19 08:33 PM
1

What’s a wolf-whistle?
/r/MensRights10/05/19 07:32 PM
1

I think that it’s fine for people to wear either one, but if you do wear one then you shouldn’t be surprised when people judge you for you views. I personally wouldn’t be caught dead in either. It’s possible to be liberal and support men’s rights simultaneously.
/r/MensRights08/05/19 07:00 PM
0

The two are already associated, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights07/05/19 12:20 AM
4

ooo
/r/MensRights05/05/19 10:21 PM
8

This is bullying being enforced by society.
/r/MensRights05/05/19 09:59 PM
4

I too would like for this sub to be more directed towards actual men’s rights issues.
/r/MensRights30/04/19 02:13 PM
-2

She didn’t actually say anything of these things. The only person who claims to have been witness to her making these statements is her republican political rival. This is nothing more than a smear campaign.
/r/MensRights30/04/19 01:35 PM
8

These people seem to think of men as subhuman beasts that must be tamed.
/r/MensRights30/04/19 02:19 AM
18

What is this even? The context only makes this worse! It’s like they think that men are just animal that need to be leashed. And don’t even get me started on the incredible arrogance of these people. Sure we didn’t know how psychiatry worked 70 years ago, but we also didn’t know about a lot of other things. There was also a time when people tried to prevent the bubonic plague by huffing spices. Medicine has progressed since then. These arguments are basically saying that because people in the pa…
/r/MensRights30/04/19 02:17 AM
78

And more fun, or at least less boring.
/r/MensRights29/04/19 08:19 PM
7

Toxic masculinity isn’t men being toxic, it’s the societal pressure for men to act tough an hide their emotions that’s toxic. Men are the victims of toxic masculinity, not the perpetrators.
/r/MensRights29/04/19 08:18 PM
1

But instilling fear isn’t a tangible objective. Ideally you would win the favor of the civilians which would only serve to provide benefits to the military. From locally acquiring supplies, to intel gathering, having the civilians on your side is desirable. The more I think about this, the more I think that you didn’t think about this at all. The whole reason that many terrorists attack Western countries is because they are afraid of them. Al Qaida portrayed the US as “the great Satan”. When Wes…
/r/MensRights29/04/19 03:27 PM
1

Dirty bombs are on the same list as nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Using any of them constitutes a war crime. It’s not a weapon of war, at least not one that any sanctioned military would use. As for the danger of the fallout, you are correct that it is highly dependent upon the radioisotope being used, a gas mask and a shower afterwards will prevent almost any long term effects, regardless of the radioisotope. The only elements that could actually pose a significant threat to immedi…
/r/MensRights29/04/19 03:20 PM
3

price I’m willing to pay But you aren’t paying that price, Emily, innocent men are.
/r/MensRights28/04/19 07:18 AM
2

War is scary and people should be afraid of it, but a war with no casualties is a good war by almost any metric. Bin Laden was a terrorist because he organized things like 9/11. As many lives were lost, it was not an effective means of combat, nothing was gained, he got no closer to defeating the US. He could’ve sent those planes to the capital building and the Whitehouse, but instead he destroyed a couple of office buildings. Did it spread fear? Absolutely, airport security before 9/11 was abou…
/r/MensRights28/04/19 07:10 AM
1

Well, terrorist has a very specific definition. A terrorist is someone who tries to cause fear. The US military isn’t just trying to scare people into surrendering, they are actually achieving objectives themselves. The best example if this that I can think of is the difference between an atomic bomb and a dirty bomb. While unnecessary destructive, and admittedly quite scary, an atomic bomb is actually designed to produce very little radioactive fallout. This is because they detonate before they…
/r/MensRights28/04/19 03:33 AM
2

The public mutilation spectacle is just not something that I can understand. Even comic book villains are deserving of that kind of treatment, furthermore, what kind of sick sadistic scum would want to watch that kind of thing.
/r/PussyPass26/04/19 10:07 PM
24

“Serene public transportation” is not an adequate reason to institute serial French Revolution public execution style genital mutations. It’s not just a excessive and bad solution to a minor inconvenience of a problem, she wants to make it into a public spectacle. And they act like men are excessively violent?
/r/PussyPass26/04/19 07:46 PM
62

What the hell is wrong with these people?
/r/PussyPass26/04/19 05:27 PM
2

I thought the same thing.
/r/MensRights25/04/19 10:44 PM
1

This is a good analogy.
/r/MensRights23/04/19 12:42 AM
2

I was unaware of this study and it’s findings. Honestly, I don’t understand the mentality of rapists, so I take my best guess at what they are thinking. I know that when I see my girlfriend in sexy clothes it makes me want to have sex with her. But like I said, most of it is guesswork. Because I don’t think like a rapist in the first place. Also the flyer mentioned clothes.
/r/MensRights23/04/19 12:41 AM
4

You make many very valid points and on the whole, I agree with you. That said, I do take issue with a few things that you have said. 1) war on women vs war on men I would like to point out that wars are not one sided affairs. If someone declares war on you, you have no choice but to be at war with them or surrender immediately. I don’t think that this justifies anti-women behavior, but it’s just something that I felt should be pointed out. 2) the friend zone Based on your description of the frie…
/r/MensRights22/04/19 11:59 PM
4

Rape culture directs women to police their clothing, beverages, behavior, and sexuality at all times. This so blatantly hypocritical that it almost hurts. It’s basically saying that women can’t be bothered to have any situational awareness or think about how their actions effect others, but men must do these things instead. Wearing something that isn’t sexualizing yourself isn’t hard. Wear full length jeans and a t-shirt if you can’t think of something that isn’t sexual. Moderation with alcohol …
/r/MensRights22/04/19 09:58 PM
7

220% of relationships apparently end in murder.
/r/MensRights19/04/19 05:52 AM
21

Their ass
/r/MensRights19/04/19 05:50 AM
59

Unless you’re a woman.
/r/MensRights19/04/19 05:50 AM
3

This is a good article that clearly and objectively shows that social justice/feminist/identity politics are overstepping their mandate and are causing things to become less equal by manufacturing false narratives that fit their ideology.
/r/MensRights18/04/19 10:41 AM
3

Why did that robot voice thing work?
/r/MensRights16/04/19 10:16 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights16/04/19 04:05 PM
1

Yeah, I didn’t pick stupid as a random insult, I picked it because it’s really the best way to describe it.
/r/MensRights15/04/19 10:50 PM
1

Can you give me a source on that sexual assault statistic? I don’t doubt you, I want to use it to improve my own defense and justification of supporting male rights.
/r/MensRights15/04/19 10:20 PM
3

That’s a stupid system and a stupid rule for that matter.
/r/MensRights15/04/19 10:16 PM
2

“You honor, I was lonely.” “So you murdered a child?” “...yes.”
/r/MensRights13/04/19 09:36 PM
1

This was the official protocol in my mechanical engineering lab.
/r/MensRights11/04/19 09:08 PM
3

Who’s names are actually on the published scientific paper and in what order? There’s a weird sort of order to these things. The principal investigator, basically the person who was in charge, always has their name last on the paper. That’s because there are usually not that many principal investors in any one field, so if you were to cite 3 papers it would be hard to tell them apart if they all have the same mane on them. In academia, papers are almost alway referred to by the last name of the …
/r/MensRights11/04/19 07:26 PM
1

I think depression is related to a vestigial hibernation instinct. It make you want to lie in bed all day a sleep a lot. It also gets worse in the winter.
/r/MGTOW08/04/19 10:21 PM
1

Anchor and sword
/r/MGTOW08/04/19 09:43 PM
8

It clearly says no minors on the door.
/r/MGTOW08/04/19 08:33 PM
1

True, but not all correlations are coincidental. There is a correlation between the number of number Nicolas Cage movies and the number of terror attacks. These two statistics are clearly unrelated, but a correlation between oppression and suicide has a much higher chance of being a case of causation. We won’t know for sure until a proper study is conducted, but for such a study to be warranted, we must draw attention to the suspicious correlation.
/r/MensRights05/04/19 04:23 PM
1

I think that China has relatively equal rights for men and women, but women are seen a less desirable children, so many men f them are abandoned at birth. It’s not a matter of rights in this case, rather it’s a matter of how much that society values women. All that said, I do feel like men are less valued than women in many western countries.
/r/MensRights05/04/19 04:19 PM
1

Science is not opinion, but a single study does not a fact make, as can be seen with the singular study that claimed that there was a connection between vaccines and autism. People shouldn’t trust everything that they are told is a scientific fact, that is not to say that they should distrust them. Everyone should always ask for sources and double check the validity of what they have been told. Validation does not come from a buzzfeed article, or a single study that was mentioned on a morning ta…
/r/MensRights02/04/19 06:21 PM
3

The exception that proves the rule.
/r/MensRights02/04/19 06:09 PM
1

I’m pretty sure that’s just alliteration.
/r/MGTOW01/04/19 03:22 PM
2

How does your gender in any way effect your flight accommodations?
/r/MGTOW01/04/19 02:40 PM
1

Ok, but I’ve never needed help to broadside enemy vessels.
/r/MensRights22/03/19 11:46 PM
3

A defensive battle is considerably easier than an offensive one.
/r/MGTOW15/03/19 03:20 PM
2

Jokes on her, Thor is well over a thousand years old.
/r/MGTOW15/03/19 02:17 PM
4

What price did they pay by willingly sacrificing themselves? Uh...their lives?
/r/MensRights11/03/19 08:43 PM
0

We forced the women of America to erect that monument by dying. How dare we burden women with something like that. /s
/r/MensRights11/03/19 08:40 PM
5

According to those statistics, women kill more men than women.
/r/MensRights07/03/19 08:45 PM
1

One of the men would have to live past the age of 220 to serve one of his sentences, but even then, his other sentence is for life. I agree that this is a heinous crime, but that’s just strait overkill.
/r/PussyPass06/03/19 10:34 PM
2

That’s understandable, but ave seen some firehouses that are less Ford trucks and hunting and more video games, or book worms, or knitting. The most common thing I’ve seen in my (admittedly limited) tour of firehouses was dad jokes. They were all telling dad joke all the time. On second thought, I think I see what you mean about not wanting to live and work in an environment like that.
/r/MensRights05/03/19 10:32 PM
3

So these women open stating that they would draft dodge is ok? Men got sent to prison or were forced to risk their lives fighting wildfires or were starved to within an inch of their lives if they wanted to get out of the draft.
/r/PussyPass05/03/19 07:00 AM
-4

White rites aren’t threatened in the same way that men’s rights are, if at all, but I can’t say for certain.
/r/MensRights05/03/19 06:40 AM
7

That’s your prerogative, but hen people’s lives are at stake, diversity hires aren’t going to go over well.
/r/MensRights05/03/19 06:37 AM
3

Lauren Chen gets it. Not all women are hyper-feminists who hate men and all they stand for.
/r/MensRights05/03/19 06:35 AM
9

Why is this downvoted? Maybe people are misunderstanding the quote. This is basically saying that everyone is similar enough to get along no matter how different the might seem, it doesn’t matter what race, religion, gender, etc. you are, everybody’s still got things in common. In this particular case, everyone wears underwater, the smaller, secret pants we wear under our regular pants.
/r/MensRights05/03/19 06:33 AM
1

Because they aren’t working hard enough. Men work longer hours than women on average. If making a woman an exec would help the business, then I can guarantee you it will happen. Profits take precedence over gender. Women think that they should be handed everything on a silver platter because that’s what they think male privilege is. They’ve never experienced it, so how would they know. That’s the thing, most men haven’t experienced male privilege either. Maybe men who were in the work force 60 o…
/r/MensRights04/03/19 03:42 AM
9

I hate when people do this. It’s a misleading abuse of data and statistics. Do men make more than women on average? Yes. Do men work longer hours and take on higher paying jobs than women? Yes. Do men make more per hour than women do if they have the same job? Hell no. The wage gap is a myth perpetuated by feminists. There is a real work gap though. Men work more than women. Feminists claim that women only make $0.77 for every $1 that men make, but the truth is that women only work 77% as hard a…
/r/MensRights04/03/19 03:25 AM
4

Who the hell is saying that males aren’t any stronger than females? That is so obviously false that it’s closer to a delusion than an opinion.
/r/MGTOW01/03/19 10:27 AM
1

Wouldn’t they need to be roughly the same or average for men and women, assuming that homosexual partners have a negligible effect.
/r/MGTOW23/02/19 05:55 AM
4

Damn, those some nice knees tho.
/r/MGTOW22/02/19 05:04 PM
1

So psychology is even less reliable than those, right? Or maybe it is a science, but you need a very large sample size before it comes into focus. You claim I haven’t read enough on the subject, yet you haven’t referenced any of his ideas. What about his assertion that all women secretly want to have a penis more than anything else? That totally checks out, right? What about our self control being born out of a desire to emulate our fathers because they get to fuck our mothers and that’s really …
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 06:10 PM
1

They are still outliers.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:58 PM
1

I have read Freud, but that’s not all I’ve read. I’ve taken psychology at the college level. That doesn’t make me an expert, but it sure as hell has given me more than enough information on just how fucked up Freud was. For starters, all of his diagnoses were based on circular logic, which makes them complete bullshit. P.S. If psychology isn’t a science, then is it the same as aligning your chakras, crystal healing, the four humors, blood letting, and trepanation?
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:54 PM
1

Prove is a stretch. These cases are outliers. If you actually click on that link you will see that there are no post in that sub.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:48 PM
1

I said almost, didn’t I?
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:43 PM
1

You can’t just dismiss scientific facts as opinions. If that was ok, I could just say that it is my opinion that you don’t exist at all. You can’t refute my claim because it is an opinion. Do you see how that kind of breaks things?
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:22 PM
1

r/woooosh
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:19 PM
0

ITS NOT A FUCKING OPINION IT A GODDAMN FACT YOU IGNORANT PIECE OF SHIT!!! A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis was written BY FREUD!!! It is the most biased source you could possibly have!!
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:19 PM
0

What are you? An outdated uptight middle school teacher going through menopause?
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:15 PM
0

What? Did you finally decide to look it up only to find that you were completely wrong? You thought maybe you could at least stop yourself from looking like a total idiot by trying to act like you can’t be bothered.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:11 PM
0

Not according to Freud. And just because they “aren’t hard sciences” doesn’t mean that they can’t be thoroughly disproven. If the odds of it working are less than the odds of it failing, then it doesn’t work. If you treat a patient who doesn’t have trauma, and you give them trauma, then it doesn’t work. You’re just grasping at straws at this point. Nobody follows Freud’s ideas anymore. In intro psych 101 they teach Freud as an example of what not to do.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:03 PM
1

In the same way that we can’t prove or disprove that the universe is a simulation. You clearly have no understanding of science as a field. A scientist will never speak in absolutes. The entire accumulation of all human knowledge is just a big pile of beliefs. The fact is, Freud was a horny lunatic high off his ass on cocaine 80% of the time. Freud’s work is more useful for understanding his psyche than anyone else’s. Or do you honestly think that sexuality is born out of a desire to fuck our pa…
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 04:53 PM
0

Calm down. You just accused me of saying several things that I didn’t. I never said that Freud was somehow at the pinnacle of his field or that he was the only one who discovered anything. I haven’t even talked about Freud the man, I’ve been talking about Freudian psychology, which is a field of study based on a set of beliefs. Freud, the individual, was, quite frankly, a charlatan. It has been said that he set the field back fifty years. Here is a section copied from Wikipedia: Hans Eysenck, wh…
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 04:42 PM
5

But, wait... I’m pretty sure those numbers are complete bullshit.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 04:27 PM
2

Not anymore. Almost all of Freud’s work has been thoroughly disproven. But it did happen, back when Freud was considered the expert on all thins psychological. I’m pretty sure that it was at its height around WWII and for a few decades afterwards.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 04:21 PM
4

No, the therapist convinces the patient that they have repressed the memory of some childhood trauma that is usually sexual in nature and often involves family members. The whole thing is made up, but the therapist convinces the patient that even though they can’t remember it, it did happen. That is where the psychological trauma comes from.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 04:11 PM
2

It still sounds a lot like Freudian therapy-induced trauma. “Repressed” memories: check. Childhood trauma: check. Sex with a family member: check.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 04:06 PM
6

It will, you don’t get a choice in the matter.
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 03:06 PM
6

That bottom one about the aunt sounds pretty Freudian. That’s not a good thing either. Freudian psychiatry had a tendency to “uncover” repressed trauma that wasn’t actually there. Giving the patient real trauma in the process. Think about it, you go to someone who is trusted to help people work out their psychological issues and they tell you that you were traumatized as a child and you buried the memories of it. If you disagree, they will say that your defensiveness shows that they were correct…
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 03:04 PM
1

Too quiet... When suddenly, out of nowhere, ninjas attacked!
/r/MGTOW20/02/19 05:05 AM
4

So make them condemn CPS.
/r/MGTOW19/02/19 09:11 PM
7

That’s why I’m saying not to focus on the abuse. Focus on the shady legal stuff and the damage to his reputation. Once people are on his side for those issues, then you can bring up how his daughter was abused for 8.5 years while he was caught up in red tape.
/r/MGTOW19/02/19 08:24 PM
6

It hurt itself in its confusion.
/r/MGTOW19/02/19 07:43 PM
21

Honestly, if I were you, I would try taking my story to the media. Contact local news, write a book, do something! CPS was clearly in the wrong. There has to be some law about criminal incompetence for lawyers. They made multiple false accusations and failed to properly research the facts. If CPS can’t get the basic facts about you right, what about other children? How can we trust CPS to help children if they are so legally incompetent? If not CPS, go after the lawyer who prosecuted you. They a…
/r/MGTOW19/02/19 07:42 PM
1

🐘🦍🐳🐄
/r/MGTOW19/02/19 04:12 AM
1

There is a book, Gourmet Shaving, that my grandfather wrote about high-quality shaving. He is an absolute nut, but if anyone’s interested, that’s the name of the book.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 07:44 PM
1

I’ve shaved with a knife that I forged myself. It was definitely not the best shave I’ve ever had, but it was satisfying.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 07:42 PM
1

When has something like foresight ever stopped us?
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 07:30 PM
6

Anytime someone says “everyone else is crazy” you should immediately begin questioning their sanity.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 07:54 AM
1

But I didn’t ask a question.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 06:06 AM
1

Those are called transgender women.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 05:58 AM
2

With great power comes great responsibility. But women want all of the power and have men take all the responsibility. I guess that’s their messed up definition of equality.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 05:28 AM
1

Yeah, but that’s not all that this is about. Did you read the last two parts?
/r/MensRights18/02/19 05:25 AM
2

ifs are illogical Except that they play a pretty important part in “if, then” logical reasoning.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 05:19 AM
1

Maybe that’s who’s been giving advice like this.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 04:27 AM
6

Equality means taking your lumps like everyone else.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 04:24 AM
22

Everyone is good until their bad.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 04:22 AM
1

Not everyone works down a coal mine.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 03:43 AM
3

Guy friendships are like muscles, they get stronger when they are damaged.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 03:41 AM
1

But are those feminists you know very vocal on these issues? The problem isn’t feminism, it’s excessively vocal 3rd wave feminism.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 03:23 AM
2

I found it on r/insanepeopleFacebook which probably has a similar effect on my psyche, now that I think about it. Edit: fixed subreddit link
/r/MensRights18/02/19 03:04 AM
2

Being a domestic slave is great, I get food and shelter in exchange for my free will and pride as human being. Is that what you meant to say?
/r/MensRights18/02/19 03:03 AM
2

Because it was totally the women who would go out hunting or go to war. Men are built bigger and stronger specifically so that they can provide and protect.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 02:58 AM
2

I’m not particularly fond of the Don, but I do agree that people act way too fragile these days. I saw someone once say that punching someone once could kill them. Feminism originally was about women being equal to men, but that’s been perverted into the notion that men are no more than animals and women are entitled to be worshipped. I have no problem with women wanting to be treated as equals, but I don’t want to hear any bitching if they are. The fact of the matter is that due to the way that…
/r/MensRights18/02/19 02:30 AM
4

So?
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 01:56 AM
3

You know, I was kind of expecting it to explode, not gonna lie.
/r/MGTOW18/02/19 01:53 AM
16

The whole point of making it an issue is to show how absurd it is. Sometimes the best way to make a point is with irony.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:43 AM
8

Indeed, but we should be concerned if this is actually what 3rd wave feminism wants.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:38 AM
21

The kicker is that women would just complain about having to work to support their lazy good-for-nothing husbands who do nothing but sit around the house naked all day.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:37 AM
6

You said it.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:34 AM
8

Seriously, is this what feminism is nowadays? And people are ok with this?
/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:31 AM
33

That’s the point. “Manspreading” is the most stupid petty non-issue ever. But the crazy “all men are trash and rapists and should die” 3rd wave feminists whipped people up into a frenzy about it. Calling it womanspreading points out the hypocrisy of these feminists and how petty of an issue it actually is.
/r/MensRights18/02/19 01:26 AM
3

I don’t mind women trying to live their best lives, what I mind is the double standard that it’s fine for women to sleep around and their significant other(s) should just be ok with it, but if a man does anything of the sort he is literal trash and should die.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 10:14 PM
2

The younger generation is, on the whole, actually much more understanding of people just trying to do their jobs. The attitude displayed here is more of a baby boomer thing.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 08:52 AM
3

That bitch has no sense of emotional value. A ring from his grandmother is worth far more to him than a store-bought diamond ring.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 06:46 AM
4

I will just say that this is a very “guy” mentality that no woman would ever agree with. That said, I agree with you.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 06:44 AM
35

Frequent riders.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 06:33 AM
-1

Being the embodiment of “No” is a philosophy. It’s not one that I personally subscribe to, but it is still a philosophy.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 06:17 AM
-2

That’s a philosophy.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 06:12 AM
3

The actual code is X X D N A
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 03:58 AM
2

I think it’s interesting that they made their symbols onto a depiction of a demon. It’s a stick figure with horns, at least that’s the first thing I saw.
/r/MGTOW17/02/19 03:57 AM
1

It’s like a psychoanalysis for dummies example.
/r/MensRights16/02/19 11:50 PM
1

What the fuck is this Freudian shit?
/r/MensRights16/02/19 11:49 PM
1

But then women being born also rapes the mother.
/r/MensRights16/02/19 11:44 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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