TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

HardLessontoLearn Archive

View 0 posts and 269 comments by HardLessontoLearn on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

You said I was "absolutely wrong" because I said I "encouraged" others to do something in a thread asking opinions? That makes no damn sense, but I do appreciate the admission and transparency. I could see you thinking I wasn't allowing space for someone to decide for themselves what to do if I'd said something like "alphadestiny' program is absolutely wrong", but I wasn't the one throwing around those absolutes. As I said previously, much of this comes down to goals. Without those aligned, you …
/r/askTRP14/12/17 08:07 PM
2

Your comment is a bit harsh for something that is only partially correct. I'm certain Alphadestiny chose the lifts with a rhyme and reason that make sense to him. I'd hate anyone following a program otherwise. Regardless of advantages to floor press (and I can agree there are some), you can't argue that it's a limited ROM. The floor blocks elbows from going lower, that's limited ROM right there. Now whether or not that limitation and the change in the exercise due to the limitation are positive …
/r/askTRP13/12/17 09:45 PM
2

I think something got twisted in there comments. How are you calling me an apologist? I very clearly said regarding the 14 year old- I don't know of any state where an adult having sex with 14 year old is not statutory rape. It's beyond wrong. Every time I've talked about being accountable for actions, I've been talking about the commenter above me who did not at all imply that he was discussing experiences as a minor when he said: This, is something I'll ponder for a while. How many men, really…
/r/MensRights04/11/17 05:43 AM
2

We can talk about issues of culture, but to even suggest that's on the same playing field as rape, much less to call it rape, is nothing but failure to be accountable for one's actions.
/r/MensRights04/11/17 04:03 AM
2

Are we talking about cultural norms or accusing someone of rape? Can you imagine a feminist arguing these points? "I willingly had sex with him, but it's because he flirted with me so much and told me I was beautiful and he'd love me forever and culture tells me I'm to be valued for my body...." Blah blah blah. Hell no. People need to be accountable for their actions. If he willingly had sex with someone because he felt the need to prove himself, then it was not rape.
/r/MensRights04/11/17 01:41 AM
1

You just can't stop, huh? "43% of highly qualified women with children are leaving careers or off-ramping for a period of time." That is what the OP is referencing obviously. It even says so in his title. And I linked you to the study explaining where that number came from and telling you 24% of men answered yes to that same question. The question was NOT about all men and women, only "highly qualified" individuals. It wasn't just about children. Read the fucking study. He is saying why are we w…
/r/MensRights04/11/17 12:38 AM
1

You know anyone can write a title to a Reddit post, right? Titles aren't necessarily fact. I've linked you to the data and explained the article to you multiple times and you seem completely incapable of understanding that NOTHING here says 43% of women don't go back to their careers. Just as NOTHING here says or encourages hiring females over males, especially not inexperienced over experienced. Look through my comments, I'm open about the fact that I'm a woman. But hey! I'm a woman with a brai…
/r/MensRights04/11/17 12:10 AM
1

If I heard a woman say "I'm 5 credits short of a degree, but it's impossible when no man at this college will let me take my classes in peace. They walk into me when I'm walking", I'd say, "suck it the fuck up, buttercup". Same applies here.
/r/MensRights04/11/17 12:02 AM
7

As someone whose tax bracket went up and who owed more tax post-divorce than married, this is 100 levels of bullshit. Currently, at least a person paying alimony could potentially lower his/her taxable income to end up back in a more reasonable bracket. And at least the fucker receiving alimony has to claim it and pay on it. These proposed changes would mean taxing the payer at a potentially higher bracket and for the money he/she will never see. Then the receiver doesn't pay a dime? Fuck no. In…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 10:12 PM
1

I really believe that the monolith of feminism is made to appear much larger by media and show, and that there are a number of people who believe feminists are full of shit but who are currently remaining silent. Your comment reminded me of a really good article I read earlier this year here. Towards the end the author talks about how causes that are advanced not by reason, but by accusing all who question with being guilty of an -ism or -phobia (sexism, racism, islamaphobia, etc.) normally poll…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 09:50 PM
1

That's literally what the author is claiming, adding in other supposed cultural norms as well. As I said before, it's bullshit.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 09:01 PM
1

The article claims this is the case in Sri Lanka. I know very little about Sri Lanka, so I tried to give benefit of the doubt. The entire thing sounds insane.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 08:36 PM
1

Regarding the author- I don't know of any state where an adult having sex with 14 year old is not statutory rape. It's beyond wrong. Regarding your argument (unrelated to the situation of the minor) of a female being coy and a man "not really given the option of choosing", but instead feeling the "need to prove themseleves" being rape? I don't buy that at all. More than disagreeing, I think it's an incredibly slippery slope that dismisses your own accountability. I also think it's completely ign…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 08:31 PM
18

“It’s anathema to me. I hear a lot of people out there espousing things about being good Christians, being patriots and what not. We just read different history books. Different Bible, everything.” Note to self- check and make sure my Bible isn't the version that endorses joking about suicide Fuck him.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 08:02 PM
1

I know that harassment goes both ways, but man or woman, I don't buy any of this.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 07:52 PM
2

This kind of shit makes my blood boil. Climate change is sexist? The fuck? There are multiple reasons for this inequity ranging from cultural norms that prohibit women and girls from learning to swim Okay, so it's not these norms that are sexist? It's climate change? For all of these reasons (and a shit load of others) it is more important than ever that we understand and recognize combatting climate change is feminist activism. I genuinely don't know if the author is: * trying to pull something…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 07:44 PM
2

I think they ran out of things to fight for from a legal standpoint. While there may still be perceived issues, most of them are cultural or are due to personal choice (the wage gap). They still want to fight for something, so they choose petty, #triggered bullshit to complain about. Want to do something about the "wage gap"? Give up your #girlboss pyramid scheme, go get a real job, work your ass off, make no excuses for your gender, climb to the top. Raise daughters that do the same. Old school…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 07:23 PM
1

The example you provided is from the DOD, which doesn't follow FMLA and plays by its own rules due to the given nature of the job. In addition, this statement: (recovery from child birth which is the only health issue not counted against an employees sick leave / disability) Is not accurate. If an employer decides to allow benefits on top of minimum FMLA standards, employees may not need to use sick time or disability after having a child. However, it's at the employer's discretion if they offer…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 07:06 PM
1

If you took my post as saying I in any way advocate for companies to classify workers differently or for FLSA guidelines to change, I assure you that wasn't my point and is not how I feel. I'd initially written even more about why a company couldn't use contractors for some of these roles and wouldn't want to use a part-time employee. I broke it down into what that role would look like and how it would impact pay and the bottom line, but then decided I was nerding out too much and deleted it. I'…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 04:34 PM
4

This is critical to understand, and to fight. It's why a parent who just watched the news going on about Weinstein is going to be even more skeptical of the father at the park with his kids, while likely not thinking twice if there's a woman there, even if she's not with children. Edit- not the data I was looking for, but an interesting article on the subject
/r/MensRights03/11/17 02:27 PM
5

I think this article does a very poor job of discussing feminism and the negative impacts on men's rights. Hell, it literally says the movement is "not harmful to men". It might be important to keep in mind that this "article" is actually a foreword to a book What Women Want, so it's more a call to a specific group (the readers) than anything pretending to be objective communication. I'm not excusing the grossly incorrect statement that new wave feminism isn't harmful to men, but context should …
/r/MensRights03/11/17 02:21 PM
1

OP never quoted 50%; you did. His post is confusing and you're the one interpreting what he might have meant. I'm just discussing the article he posted. I'll leave this right here. You talk a lot of shit for someone who can't back any of it up. All bark and no bite.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 01:03 PM
1

43% of You miss the point I believe. The op is not indicating the article. He seems to be indicating only the title. That's what I figured too, that OP didn't even bother to read the article. Pretty lazy if you ask me. It looks like the 43% comes from a 2004 study discussed here where they asked "highly qualified women" (those with a graduate degree, professional degree, or high-honors undergraduate degree), "Since you first began working, has there ever been a period where you took time out fro…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 11:57 AM
1

I feel like you have a point, but also like you turned her words around a bit. "I decided the only way for me to lean in was to make it happen on my own terms: to start a business." She says this after years of staying home with kids. It seems that they did try to keep her and offered her accomodations, but they both felt it didn't work. That was when she had one kid. Not after four kids and years of staying at home. She acknowledged, "By leaving the workforce, I lost all of my accumulated exper…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 03:52 AM
2

Sorry, I meant at the federal level. I clarified in another comment, but failed to in that one. I'm interested in this sick vs parental idea, though I don't fully understand it. Currently, federally, they're grouped together, general FMLA. I could see companies who offer benefits on top of that needing to provide them equally for men and women. I know some employers offer women short term disability to supplement income during FMLA and while the same benefit must be offered to men, due to the de…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 02:45 AM
1

We do. Parental leave in the US is currently the same regardless of gender. Whichever parent wants to stay home for parental leave can. Or both can. The only caveat is if both parents work for the same employer, in which case they have to share the 12 weeks instead of each getting 12 weeks.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 02:03 AM
3

I think the OP means that with a gender quota of 50% Where is this discussed at all? A 50% quota doesn't exist and isn't mentioned anywhere. It is senseless to pass over highly experiences men in any field. The best jobs should go to the people with the most experience, not the most under represented gender. Yep, jobs should go to the most qualified candidate, no matter gender. The author of this article never argued any differently. As for society getting women back into thier careers, we don't…
/r/MensRights03/11/17 01:24 AM
2

Gotcha
/r/MensRights02/11/17 11:55 PM
4

But the title of this post does lead me to believe it might have been posted by a dog looking for a treat for a job well done, so maybe "male" was correct? The whole thing is a bit confusing to me.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 11:47 PM
2

It is not clear where the woman worked That part was weird to me. Having lived in a town where there are "massage parlors" open 24/7, I know there's a difference between a normal spa massage and a place with a neon light on at 3am. I'm IN NO WAY saying this is a not valid sexual assault claim. It is. But my experience made that line stick out to me and I wonder if it stuck out for others as well. Edit- Per this article The barista booked an appointment at a massage parlour in Kent, which we cann…
/r/MensRights02/11/17 11:38 PM
19

I'm not sure what your title has to do with the article. The 43% is discussed, but nothing about the government or passing over anyone. I actually thought this was a rather fair article. The woman who wrote it has good credentials and a really respectable resume. Further, her main argument is: To be clear, I feel no entitlement to have a business accommodate me just because I am a "high achieving" mom. After all, this is business. The role of business is to generate value for their shareholders.…
/r/MensRights02/11/17 11:23 PM
1

Let me get this straight- you're advocating that the government be able to call up pregnant women for service and send them into harm's way in engagements where they likely will not have access to modern medicine and will be expected to perform on par with someone not carrying a child? You think that's what's best for society, for the men and women who would be fighting beside them, and for battle effectiveness? Or you care more about "fair" than you do the safety and well-being of those serving…
/r/MensRights02/11/17 07:43 PM
1

I don't necessarily agree with the entirety of your post, but I will say it was refreshing to read something from a perspective of experience. My guess reading many of the comments here is that most of these posters understand military service solely through video games and movies.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 07:02 PM
1

My guess is he has actually served or closely knows someone who has and understands what calling up a combined male and female non-volunteer force would entail in terms of resources and logistics.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 06:58 PM
1

Now you're twisting it further. I've never argued that I said "man up" (I did). My saying "man up" was in response to your twisting words and accusation, which you did here. My response where I compared what you accused me of saying to what I'd actually said and said "man up" is here. My apology for saying "man up" is here. You've never acknowledged that you twisted words, or that you're the one who set the standard of "legal" and then blamed me when I explained things according to your standard…
/r/MensRights02/11/17 06:17 PM
1

It's just a line from the song playing on Spotify when I made this account. Easiest way to find a name not already taken. I didn't really consider how much it'd be read into.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 02:51 PM
1

Sorry if I made it sound like I was asking you for data; I wasn't. I was just trying to provide another potential perspective. Neither one is wrong at all.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 10:23 AM
5

I'll quickly agree that his comments don't make a ton of sense to me, but I do know there's a well-known issue with rape and young boys in Afghanistan. I'm not sure if you know anyone who has served in the Middle East in a role where they'd interact much with local nationals, but everyone I know has said its well-known and acknowledged. In addition, you can find a ton of articles supporting this claim. [1], [2], [3], [4]
/r/MensRights02/11/17 05:03 AM
2

I don't know that it's that they feel like they're the victims or if it's that they feel like their bodies are their only/best assets. When I think of women who would do this kind of thing, I don't think of women who would describe themselves as victims. I think of women who are of lower socio-economic status and see this kind of behavior as a means to an end they feel they have few other ways of acquiring due to lack of education and resources. I see how this is in part victim status, but I thi…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 11:02 PM
3

/s? If so, I agree the claim is bullshit. I do not think that all men use women for sex, just as I do not agree that all women use men for money/security. You can see in my comment history where I've argued against this numerous times. I'm saying that there are men, on this sub and others (specifically theredpill), who argue this claim very transparently and who pride themselves on using women solely for sex. It's not something I'm inferring; it's very much flat-out said.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 10:38 PM
1

As you previously noted, "man up" would have to be part of a larger claim where I question your masculinity to the point of creating a hostile environment. I haven't done that. Right now, I question your logic and your ability to concede when you realize you weren't clear in the beginning. Know what I think is fucked up? Taking a non-accusatory, open-questioning comment where I asked for clarification- I'd hate to work in a place where such innocent words (from a male or female) are alone consid…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 10:29 PM
1

After a long drawn out exchange where I started by asking an open-ended question, have been polite, explained the law, noted where we're saying the same damn thing despite your accusations that I'm spreading misinformation and cherry picking, have never accused you of anything but changing your claim (which you did), and clearly explained why it's important to be specific in a way that shows you and I are on the same side, you still can't just leave it alone and instead accuse me of a rather dra…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 05:58 PM
0

If you see my comment: I'd hate to work in a place where such innocent words (from a male or female) are alone considered sexual harassment. How is "man up" a hostile work environment? And get from it- "NO, you're WRONG. Your employer is stupid and you should QUIT" Then you should man up.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 05:43 PM
1

Consider your original post with a minor word change- Just had training at work and I was pleased to find out that ~~telling another coworker to "man up" ~~asking a coworker out is taken very seriously as sexual harassment. That would be downvoted repeatedly. Because it's wrong. It's not clear that the action is part of a larger picture. I think you and I can both agree that it's not clear what you meant. I argue regularly on feminist subs that "unwanted advances" and requests for dates aren't, …
/r/MensRights01/11/17 05:19 PM
1

My info is spot on, trust me. Your claim is changing. Your original post- telling another coworker to "man up" is taken very seriously as sexual harassment My rebuttal- I'd hate to work in a place where such innocent words (from a male or female) are alone considered sexual harassment. Your latest comment- They gave firm examples of other companies where this type of language contributed to a hostile work environment and therefore is considered sexual harassment. Simply saying it is not enough, …
/r/MensRights01/11/17 04:54 PM
8

Some, I'm sure, but I wouldn't argue a "large percentage". While I'm not sure what data could be used to determine what the percentage is, I would argue that there are a number of men who use women just as well. A number of men here and in other subs will argue relationships, no matter how short or long, are just an exchange of resources- women want money and security, and men want sex. Any time a relationship comes down to a resource exchange not grounded in mutual respect and shared goals, the…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 04:32 PM
1

I started a list yesterday and quickly decided it wasn't worth it. Here are the couple I had before quitting Women would get more attention if they didn't fail to replicate with their husbands (same guy also said women suicides should be increased) Women should be treated like children, not rented to or loaned to There are regularly posts stating or implying women aren't intelligent and/or don't belong in the workplace. I know those thoughts may be general venting or even culturally-influenced. …
/r/MensRights01/11/17 04:17 PM
2

No, this is your company's interpretation. If you're in the US, implying someone is somehow less of a man or saying "man up" is not workplace sexual harassment. Sexual harassment as defined by the EEOC is quid pro quo (this for that) or hostile work environment. From the EEOC site, "Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work …
/r/MensRights01/11/17 04:04 PM
1

I know that grit is far from the original intent of the discussion here, but it's something that fascinates me, so I'm happy to continue replying. I'm also happy to discuss this through direct messages if you'd prefer. While grit + natural ability is the basic equation for high levels of success, studies show the two factors aren't necessarily interlinked in the way you describe. I tried to link you to the actual research paper, but everything I'm finding requires payment or login. This article …
/r/MensRights01/11/17 03:42 PM
1

Look dude, I made one claim: It's so ignorant to me that so many debates and rebuttals here come down to the assumption that all women stay at home, all women want to stay at home, women should stay at home, etc. It's not 1950. There are a large number of women who work full-time jobs, not acting as primary caregiver for the home. To prove that argument, I needed to show: (A) that not all (or even most) women stay at home, (B) that not all women want to stay at home, and (C) that not all women s…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 02:25 PM
3

I personally feel like you were being rational in every aspect other than thinking you could change the minds of people on the internet who are already at such odds with your thinking. Please don't hear me thinking you did something wrong. I would've been equally frustrated had I been you. I just think if they're beginning with the idea that random approaches are sexual harassment, you have more work cut out for you than can be tackled in Reddit comments I started a reply detailing a few friends…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 04:34 AM
2

With your reply, I see what you're saying. I think the empathy is good and you're right, important to listening to the other side and expecting them to be open to listening. I think the problem that led to your original post being downvoted was that it read like you supported treating it as something akin to a right or were giving credence to the idea that more than empathy was required.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 02:24 AM
1

Sneaky Reddit! To be fair, I was thinking, "man, if that's what he was trying to say that whole time, he didn't do the best job, but damn if he didn't come through well in the end". I very much agree with your assessment of grit in men vs women and think we can do better to raise girls with grit. This is a bit of an old article (2011), but I remember reading it 6 years ago and it's stuck with me ever since. It's a known issue with boys and girls, but over and over studies show it impacts girls t…
/r/MensRights01/11/17 01:31 AM
1

Solid explanation. Thanks for sticking through to clarify.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 01:10 AM
1

Here you go
/r/MensRights01/11/17 12:49 AM
1

I am an MRA It's as if you're too prideful to comprehend what I'm saying. It's so ignorant to me that so many debates and rebuttals here come down to the assumption that all women stay at home, all women want to stay at home, women should stay at home, etc. However, it's not 1950. There are a large number of women who work full-time jobs, not acting as primary caregiver for the home. There's my argument, as it has been this whole time- It's ignorant to assume all or most women stay at home. Thin…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 11:14 PM
2

I'd hate to work in a place where such innocent words (from a male or female) are alone considered sexual harassment. How is "man up" a hostile work environment?
/r/MensRights31/10/17 10:30 PM
1

This is gross generalization to the point of ignorance. I know men who are not disabled and who stay home. Not as many as women, but they certainly exist. I also know women who are only home because of expectations from their husband. What I've primarily argued from the beginning is that posts that assume or infer the majority of women stay home are incorrect. I've provided data for that. Next, I've stated that in the current economy, unless the sole working partner is making significantly good …
/r/MensRights31/10/17 10:01 PM
5

I've never had a situation where I agree with 90% of someone's post, and yet disagreed with their premise, but I guess there's a first time for everything. I firmly believe that grit is one of the most beneficial traits a person can develop. It's a personal belief backed by experience and studies. There is a difference between natural talent and grit. There's a difference between early success and what can be achieved through continuous effort and grit. Study after study confirms that dedication…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 09:40 PM
3

I'd also argue that "man up" is typically used to motivate someone to do something the person motivating considers brave or strong (positive traits). It leaves room for men to be a lot of things, so long as they fit within the speaker's idea of masculinity. "Man up" is like saying "your current actions are not masculine enough. in order to be a man, you need to do this brave, strong, bold thing that I believe you're capable of doing". A man can be told to "man up" to ask someone out, conquer a f…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 08:10 PM
5

I don't understand your argument in entirety. It's just the sheerest, laziest, most effective manipulation at anyone's disposal. It needs to not work. That way, a man might be able to decide what it means to be one. There is a possibility their intentions might be good, but probably not by the time it switches over to some gendered statement. Agreed, wholeheartedly I could easily go on a rant on why women should suck it up, they just ought to figure it out themselves. What does this part have to…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 07:16 PM
17

I think "suck it up" is a pretty generic term used for both men and women. The point being argued here is that telling a man to "man up" implies he's not a man if he doesn't suck it up.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 06:51 PM
11

Exactly. Misogyny is sexism, but sexism isn't misogyny. Feminists may claim otherwise, but by definition, you've hit the nail on the head.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 06:15 PM
16

/s? Sexism is discrimination based on sex and "behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex" Misogyny is the hatred of women A person can be sexist and not misogynist. Your comment in and of itself wasn't misogynistic, but it was very sexist.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 06:05 PM
18

I'm not sure you've correctly labeled misogyny, but you've sure as hell provided an example of extreme sexism. I hope your example is made to show the stupidity of this phrase when turned on the opposite gender and isn't actually evidence of what you believe.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 05:59 PM
2

I think you're trying to differentiate your thread and the conversation you expect from the current thread you've linked, but I don't understand how. Can you explain a bit more?
/r/MensRights31/10/17 05:46 PM
1

I've never heard this, but I'm enjoying learning what others have heard said local to them. Skirts seem inappropriate for dealing many basic tasks, but this line did make me laugh.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 05:37 PM
1

You'll note I never said it did. My question was merely over whether or not using this for both genders was regional.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 05:35 PM
3

Good call. Such a cringy phrase. Who said this for the first time and why the hell was it ever repeated for a second?
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:54 PM
10

I hate to see places with hiring quotas, especially so blatantly displayed. This is a bit old (2014) but it's interesting and explains that gender quotas in hiring drive away both male and female applicants.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:53 PM
8

I absolutely agree. Telling a women to "man up" is akin to saying "be these traits you're capable of being"; telling a man to "man up" is akin to saying "you're failing at something that should be innate; you aren't a man". I just realized in thinking about that post that there really was no female similarity. "Grow a backbone" might be the gender-neutral phrase, but I don't hear it as frequently as the others.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:28 PM
8

I think a similar phrase in reverse might be "don't be a bitch" or "you don't have to be a little bitch about it" which I've heard used towards both men and women. It implies a feminine angle, but instead of saying "do this masculine thing (be bold, corageous, risk-taking)" like "man up", it's "don't do this feminine thing (be whiny, nagging, or cutting)".
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:24 PM
3

Here is the NY Times article they're talking about if anyone is interested. As a headsup, it's trash. Here's a taste- More important, I must follow the advice on sexism that I proffer on racism: If you are not actively working to dismantle it, you are supporting it. It is not sufficient to simply not be a sexist yourself if you are a man. So apparently by not being a sexist and/or rapist, you are still supporting sexism and rape. Sounds fair. /s
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:14 PM
2

Gotcha. I'll admit I'd avoided clicking on the link to the HuffPo article in the OP because i didn't want to give it views. However, just checked and while "tampons" is in the title, the article centers on "menstrual hygiene products" in general. My guess is that "tampons" leads to more clicks than the other. If you're asking about why women would personally choose tampons over other options, I suppose I'm happy to answer that as well.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 03:52 PM
6

This is great. I believe you're grassroots and still in the earlier phases, but it would be really great if you or someone else could make visualizations for this data. There's SO MUCH here and it's critically important that information like this be compiled and communicated, especially right now. I think visualizations are key to marketing data, making it digestible to your average user (and more readily likeable, clickable, shareable), helping show conclusions, etc. I used to have a veterans c…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 03:23 PM
28

I agree that there may be truth here, but I'm also curious about how this is used regionally (because again, I agree with the overall sentiment). "Man up" is something I've heard said to both men and women, in the same way saying "you guys" is used to describe groups of men and women. I know "you guys" can be a regional thing. Where you live, is "man up" something that would be told to both men and women? Edit- thinking more about it, what about other masculine-inferred phrases like "grow a pair…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 03:10 PM
1

Higher risk than not using them? Sure. I'm not sure the argument you're trying to make. The risk of tss is still extremely low. I can provide more info if you help me understand what you're getting at.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 03:04 PM
1

The unreported false rape accusation rate? Who the fuck knows. What does this even mean? The number of people who don't report false rape? I'd like 100% of people to not report false rape. This is the reality that women perceive. Nah. Not all women think men are, as you say "legally allowed to rape women any woman they wanted, any time they wanted". That's insane. It's insane when it's implied by feminists and it's insane you're implying all women think that way, and thinking of false accusation…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 02:57 PM
3

I agree. A lot comes down to the definition of "normal", but I think it's fair to say on average, more US male babies are circumcised than not. The OP link was down, but I found this data that discusses if by region. It's 11 years old now and showing a decline, but the numbers are still high.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 02:12 PM
1

I'm saying your comment If "men don't get it" and women want some product to magically fix their pain, at whatever level it may be... why don't women put their time and effort into that research? Typical "do it for me" syndrome... Is the same as someone saying: "If women don't get it and men want some product to magically fix their prostate cancer, why don't men put their time and effort into that research? Typical 'do it for me' syndrome..." I'd say that comment is equally stupid. I don't find …
/r/MensRights31/10/17 12:22 PM
1

Someone ought to tell women that it's not the 1950s and that it's okay for fathers to be the stay at home caregiver. If you read, my original point was not that fathers stay home instead of mothers, but that most of the time (according to that data) both parents work full-time jobs. No one needs to stay home. I think in today's economy, it's a risky choice to have a partner drop out of the labor force for an extend period of time.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 12:12 PM
6

I like seeing feminist-crazed media really reaching for straws with this one, but I'm terribly afraid of most of society's definition of "right".
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:43 AM
17

A woman is also banished from society if she doesn't have on pants. So is a man. But pants aren't a right; they're a thing you buy as a civilized human living in society. Feminine hygiene products are just that, hygiene products. A grouping of products which men use as well in forms of razors, deodorant, toothbrushes, anti-chafing powder, etc. None of these are rights. None of them should be.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:40 AM
0

Please note the following- I never argued that men are not the primary wage earners. I did cite data that showed that in the US in 2016, only 19.5% of married families had only the husband working, and in the families where the wife worked at all, 76.3% of the wives worked full-time. Therefore disputing the idea that most wives, or even a large majority of wives, are staying at and caring for the home. I cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the US (a .gov site), and you cited judgybitch.com,…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:28 AM
-1

Please note the following- I never argued that men are not the primary wage earners. I did cite data that showed that in the US in 2016, only 19.5% of married families had only the husband working, and in the families where the wife worked at all, 76.3% of the wives worked full-time. Therefore disputing the idea that most wives, or even a large majority of wives, are staying at and caring for the home. I cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the US (a .gov site), and you cited judgybitch.com,…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:25 AM
2

No one was demanding any chaperones. Thus my statement that this article has nothing to do with male chaperones, as you claimed in the title. I don't give a fuck if you reply or don't. My complete sentences stand on their own without your reply.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 04:14 AM
1

I keep seeing ignorant comments and almost all of them in this thread have your name next to them. At this point, I no longer think the source is ignorance. Something specific happened to you and you're taking your anger out on women as a whole.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 03:46 AM
1

This comment makes me think you've never been near "front line units", nor do you closely know anyone who has. You talk about it like a dumb video game.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 03:17 AM
5

This is great and well-written, definitely something I'll bookmark.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 01:47 AM
-1

It's so ignorant to me that so many debates and rebuttals here come down to the assumption that all women stay at home, all women want to stay at home, women should stay at home, etc. According to this 2016 data, in married families, 48% had both partners in the labor force, 19.5% had only the husband working, and 7.1% had only the wife working. Of those in the labor force, 85.6% of husbands and 76.3% of wives worked full-time. I know that there is an issue with women taking lower-paid and fewer…
/r/MensRights31/10/17 12:49 AM
1

I'm not doubting this has happened, but do you have a source?
/r/MensRights31/10/17 12:12 AM
1

Yeah, I don't think you understand how funding and research work. To be very clear, again, I agree that funding and researching for this cause is stupid. However, your argument is as stupid as saying "if men think prostate cancer is a problem, they can find the research" or "if we need more men's shelters, men can fund them".
/r/MensRights30/10/17 09:00 PM
1

Oh, I'll agree in part. I think the article is garbage, but I didn't like what your comment insinuated either. "able" =/= "funded" in terms of medicine. The article seems to claim that "men don't get it" leads to the lack of funded research, similar to claims that birth control and abortion would be federally funded if men could have children. Both are dumb arguments, but your argument in not understanding research and funding is pretty stupid as well.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 07:47 PM
1

Be prepared to be a new level of angry.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 07:42 PM
1

*their Psh, typical man expecting women to fix his problems. /s See? It's ignorant both ways.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 07:19 PM
1

This is a dumb fucking article, but your comment is pretty stupid too. By and large, research is funded. The woman in this dumb piece isn't saying women aren't capable of research, but that funding hasn't been given to researching this cause (my opinion- for good reason, it's an idiotic cause). It's similar to when men cite prostate cancer statistics that show we should be putting more funding and research towards prostate cancer than we do breast cancer. It's not that men aren't capable of this…
/r/MensRights30/10/17 07:17 PM
2

Your "helping men by never renting to women" is akin to a feminist's "helping women by never renting to a man". Congratulations on being just as bad as your enemy.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 06:54 PM
2

This post is sensationalist crap. The article linked mentions David Schwimmer offering a third person to accompany him and a female critic, when he proposed an interview move from a too-noisy restaurant to his hotel room. The third person wasn't mentioned as female or male. This has nothing to do with "demanding male chaperones". To take it to an extreme and suggest an individual offering the the company of a third person in a hotel room is the same or on the path to laws that demand a woman be …
/r/MensRights30/10/17 05:54 PM
9

I have to agree. My understanding is that this is a community advocating for men's rights, discussing violations of men's rights, and discussing actions that can be taken or pursued to further men's rights. However, what I've seen in action makes this subreddit seem more a place against feminism, even against women as a whole, and a place supportive of illogical conclusions (click bait titles) with poorly discussed data so long as it supports a pro-male bias. I understand that feminism is leadin…
/r/MensRights30/10/17 04:52 PM
1

You've made two past comments that you don't work or believe in women working. So I'm going to just go ahead and keep on with my actual career experience.
/r/askTRP28/10/17 05:39 AM
1

Maybe // is a Reddit sign I don't know? I also don't really understand what the rest of your comment means. I responded in length below about women in the workplace and then women outside of work when he clarified. This comment about getting rid of inept employees is strictly in response to the idea that SJW or any inept employee should be coddled.
/r/askTRP28/10/17 02:34 AM
2

If an employee, man or woman, cannot do their job, they need to be fired, not coddled. Even a SJW isn't immune to good documentation.
/r/askTRP28/10/17 02:00 AM
3

I don't really deal with whiny well, which is how that comment sounds to me. I'd probably go with "It is hard, but i assure you it's more fun when you're good at it. If you give up now, you'll never know". Then start the next round? Game? Mission? Without her. Don't spend time giving into her pouting. If she wants to play, she can come back and play, but you shouldn't wait for her or coerce her. If she does come back, say "glad you decided to join me. Last time you (explain where she messed up, …
/r/askTRP28/10/17 01:32 AM
1

First, you'll note I said words like "if he" and "based on her account" and "harassment claim", so you might want to back off that high horse. Second, I feel like I've already explained why this is different than prostitution.
/r/MensRights28/10/17 01:10 AM
1

Does this girl like you? Or is she at all self-motivated and actually like the game?
/r/askTRP28/10/17 01:05 AM
1

I can manage the fuck out of a team or project, but I know jack and shit about video games. It appears you're pretty passionate and I don't even know how communication channels on video games work. So I'm going to leave this to someone else who is better equipped. Good luck!
/r/askTRP28/10/17 12:51 AM
1

I honestly think the "someones" and "somethings" of this vague example have lost some of what both of us are trying to say, because I definitely do not think mistakenly thinking something is on the table is harassment. In addition, I'd agree that it's not clear if we're talking about what we think is right vs what the US law says. It's a tricky topic to talk about online because there's what makes sense to rational people, what the federal law says, what company policy might be, what things migh…
/r/MensRights28/10/17 12:43 AM
1

I'm assuming you're talking about training and motivating a woman who you lead in a workplace environment. That's what 90% of the post sounds like, though the "your women" at the end is confusing. If it is work and you're the leader, treat her like you would anyone else who works under you. If you really struggle with that, here are some basics- Be clear about performance expectations. Before giving a new project or task, explain what needs to be done, the parameters for measuring success, and w…
/r/askTRP28/10/17 12:18 AM
4

In an earlier post you say your wife is gorgeous, hot, comes from a rich family, will inherit millions, and is smart. According to this account and your alternates (/u/Grahambell35, /u/Jimbocaan2) all you do is whine about this coworker. At this point, I'm looking forward to your ass getting left. Especially when it's from fucking around with a woman in an LTR who you readily admit isn't as smart or valuable. Throw away your marriage and family for a woman who, if this goes like you want it to, …
/r/askTRP27/10/17 11:33 PM
5

If that's not the best word I've learned in a long while, I don't know what is. kafka's The Trial for anyone who didn't have it as required reading or cheated their way through literature
/r/MensRights27/10/17 10:35 PM
3

He's just trying to sound authoritative and make sure you and everyone else here knows he lifts.
/r/askTRP27/10/17 10:06 PM
1

I see what you're saying there, but it's not a very valid argument. First, I agree with decriminalizing prositution. If a woman or man wants to sell sexual favors in exchange for money, I say go for it. However, in your example, a job mining coal will list coal mining as one of the duties. OSHA and MSHA have laws and standards to hold employers and leaders accountable for creating a "safe" environment given the inherent dangers and risks. The job description will detail the work environment and …
/r/MensRights27/10/17 08:29 PM
2

You realize this is a dumb fucking idea right? Feminists are incorrectly saying "You're paying females less!" And your rebuttal is "Yep! It's cause some of y'all might have babies"? You're fucking agreeing with them? Accounting for equal jobs, the pay gap is nil. On average (which is a dumb way to look at something like this), women make less than men. That has nothing to do with pregnancy benefits. It has to do with the fact that women take lower-paying jobs and/or jobs with fewer hours.
/r/MensRights27/10/17 07:52 PM
1

I guess I didn't see OP saying anything about mobility issues. Was it in an older post?
/r/askTRP27/10/17 07:42 PM
1

I don't believe this is what's happening as none of the females have reported this. They say that these men propositions them while auditioning. I have heard very few reports that you say. We weren't talking about a specific case. You have an example of something you said a man should be able to do ("why not") and I gave you exactly how your example man could and could not act within the US definition of sexual harassment. It's up to the flame to prove that she was not given the part because of …
/r/MensRights27/10/17 07:37 PM
1

Ha! Didn't see that one coming. That's golden!
/r/MensRights27/10/17 07:12 PM
1

That's HR covering the company's ass. I'm afraid the less people understand what is and what is not harassment, the more companies are going to spend time and money on these bullshit claims and the check-the-box "resolutions" they use to CYA
/r/MensRights27/10/17 07:07 PM
1

First, a man can do whatever he wants. However, all actions have consequences and some of them legal consequences. I'm not sure where you're from, but US law regarding workplace sexual harassment would deem that a man who is in a position of power and hits on a woman didn't do anything illegal (unless it was so frequent and/or severe that a reasonable person would call it hostile). HOWEVER if that same man implicitly or explicitly made an offer to the woman reading the part (saying or implying, …
/r/MensRights27/10/17 06:59 PM
3

Exceedingly true. Someone asked you out? Said your new workout regimen is paying off? Called you "sweetheart"? Looked at your ass as you left the building? Put his arm around you? None of these are close to illegal on their own and for every single one of them, the response if they're unwanted is to be an adult and tell the person to stop. Unfortunately, feminism likes to claim that women are stronger than men give them credit for, but they themselves claim they're too weak or uncomfortable to h…
/r/MensRights27/10/17 06:34 PM
2

This is true to an extent. However, if the person in a position of power (man or woman) provides an explicit or implicit "this for that", even if it's "I'll give you a job if you give me this sexual thing" (in the case of a man owning his own company as you stated), it's a very good claim for workplace sexual harassment.
/r/MensRights27/10/17 06:28 PM
7

I'm very much against the guilty until proven innocent, all men are harassers, lets crucify someone for something someone said he did 30 years ago, "unwanted advances" are harassment mess that's going on right now. That being said, it's ignorant to pretend like the problem here is who took the top off. If he, someone in power, held power in her career as an exchange for nudity, and then said: "There is a girl who went against me. She was going to talk about something I did." He then allegedly to…
/r/MensRights27/10/17 06:14 PM
6

It's a decent progression. Really just looks like he took strong lifts and edited it a bit. I like the addition of weighted planks. I find them a be a good burn out at the end of a workout. If you go with alphadestiny, I'd encourage you to do traditional bench over floor press and traditional squats over box squats. Floor press limits the range of movement. While box squats can be a great tool to focus on specific aspects of your squat, I would never recommend foregoing traditional squat altoget…
/r/askTRP27/10/17 05:02 PM
0

Farmers walks Towel pull-ups (these are incredible for forearm strength, especially with a slow negative) High-rep, lower-weight deadlifts (deadlifts in general are great for forearm and grip, but if you want to focus on forearms, you can lower weight a bit, keep a double overhand grip, and do sets of 15-20. This will keep your legs good while taxing the hands and forearms.) Don't use straps
/r/askTRP27/10/17 04:29 PM
1

There are so many things wrong with this article. The author talks about non-martial birth rates and claims they're high. The chart he (I assumed initially this was a female, but nope, a man did this) provides cites the MN dept. of health and has the rates for US born African Americans highlighted. He notes that the out-of-wedlock birthrates among African Americans between 1940-1963 increased. Confused yet? For real, this is how he lays out his argument (start at the chart and read that next par…
/r/MensRights27/10/17 03:02 PM
1

I have nothing to prove to you dude. You're proving yourself a rather ignorant ass who doesn't know when to stop all on your own.
/r/MensRights27/10/17 02:10 PM
2

*they must produce as expected for the job Let's be real, this is not a man vs. woman issue except for the fact that feminists are claiming it as such. Jobs have schedules and expectations. Different jobs have different pay. Within the same job, different industries have different pay. Within same job, same industry, same company, a man can negotiate for more, talk to his manager more about raises, etc. It's not men's fault if on average, they're working higher-paying jobs and women, on average,…
/r/MensRights27/10/17 01:47 PM
4

less than a man *because you are a woman An employer can pay a man more if he's more qualified or if he has more tenure or if he negotiates for more... A man and woman can be given the exact same initial offer by a company. The man could ask for more while the woman accepts as is. Pay gap! That is somehow the company or man's fault.
/r/MensRights27/10/17 01:13 PM
1

If that's how you treat supporters who haven't posted a link, you're a rather shitty advocate.
/r/MensRights27/10/17 12:59 PM
2

Butt wink can definitely be a motor control issue
/r/askTRP27/10/17 03:38 AM
3

You ignore it. You're not paying them tuition to die on a dumb hill in some tenured bitch's classroom. You're paying them for a piece of paper that says you can jump through hoops and meet expectations by given deadlines and maybe read some stuff about economics while doing so.
/r/askTRP27/10/17 02:07 AM
3

This was like listening to a 12 year old girl talk, but with little rainbow sprinkles of "pump and dump" and "beef curtains" throughout. I read the whole thing, but have no clue what it actually says. I think you were trying to get with Q, but then L stole her phone, and you said you had to go. Maybe carry her books for her, walk her to her locker, and ask her to homecoming?
/r/askTRP27/10/17 01:53 AM
1

We're talking sides here, or directions to screw?
/r/askTRP27/10/17 01:05 AM
1

Left side, best side.
/r/askTRP27/10/17 12:11 AM
3

Thanks for that Thursday afternoon laugh. This is golden.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 11:47 PM
3

The title very much implies that "as a group, only men pay taxes". In fact, it says that. A more accurate title would be "New Zealand study finds as a group, only men have a cumulative net fiscal impact". The article linked is tricky because it cites a New Zealand study, but then when pulling data not in the study, uses US data. In addition, the article was clearly written in extremes. Not only is the title BS, but this- the research suggests that male taxpayers are the only ones to ever have a …
/r/MensRights26/10/17 11:23 PM
2

Yeah, I'll stand by not contributing any links over contributing links where research is talked about inappropriately.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 10:33 PM
3

This is incredibly poor data analysis and writing that leads to little other than a really clickable title. We're better than this.
/r/MensRights26/10/17 09:09 PM
1

Yes, OP, please go ahead and retain a lawyer and start suing now. Use your text exchange where she hasn't responded to prove you have a case for libel, slander, and defamation. /s
/r/askTRP26/10/17 08:48 PM
2

This is a solid reply. A couple notes- while we previously thought fat (fried chicken) was what cause heart disease, (leading to the awesome 90's diets of everything being low fat, but packed with sugar to make it taste better), studies are now showing sugar was the problem all along. That's just the first link I found on Google; others are likely better. Paleo is much more about just eating whole foods than necessarily eating like cave men. Grains have been cultivated for 100,000 years and yet,…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 07:31 PM
3

Yeah, "next time" go ahead and pause for a second to think about how good that pretty little bullet is, just waiting to blow your brains out, and the shame if you'd lose it. It's as if your brain doesn't fucking work.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 06:58 PM
5

I'll take "She's saying it's mine, but I know she was fucking other people. Wut do I do?" and the legal aspects
/r/askTRP26/10/17 06:47 PM
1

First, that's the low end which studies say is due to men not pulling out in time. The average is closer to using a condom. Second, it doesn't matter much because no, it doesn't sound like a good idea to me, which is why it's not my method of birth control. But that's not what we were talking about. Third, you're the one relying on women being on bc and not pulling out. Here's a mind-bender- you don't have a fucking clue if she's taken the pills on time or at all. If I were a man, I'd watch out …
/r/askTRP26/10/17 06:33 PM
1

You dont give a shit about people other than what they give to you. You don't want bonds, but you just want to be asked out (something people can "give" you, an invitation and company). You even state that you don't give anything in return. Yet you want to know how to make people enjoy your company (which is just you using them)? Step one of making people enjoy your company- be enjoyable company. Your head is shoved so far up your selfish ass that you can't even phrase the question in a way that…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 06:19 PM
1

It depends on your goals and how you define health. You'll likely find more info on a subreddit like /r/fitness (if that's your goal). Canned and fast-food tends to be really high in sodium, which will make you bloat and hold water. Getting plenty of water can help combat the bloat. Frozen vegetables are actually better than fresh most of the time and they're lower in sodium. I don't see much protein in your list, though I may be missing something you generalized. Protein plays a critical role i…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 05:46 PM
3

She doesn't know your feelings because you led her on a wild goose chase over "being busy". You don't have to talk feelings to stand up for yourself and be honest here. Watch this (based on the vague info you've provided)- Her- You've been quiet You- yep Her- why? You- I didn't like the way you were acting earlier Her- how did it make you feel? You- embarrassed for you and the way you were acting Her- but how did it make you feeeeeeeeeeeel? You- now you're being ridiculous. This isn't about feel…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 04:02 PM
5

Picture this- man notices the woman he's with is acting funny. He asks what's wrong and she says "nothing". Clear that something is up, he asks again and she says "I'm fine". We both know she's not fine. We both know something is up. We both know she shouldn't play mind games trying to make him guess. If he doesn't want to play that game, he ignores the behavior. She had two opportunities to talk like an adult and shit on both of them. You just did that same girly bullshit to your girlfriend. If…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:55 PM
1

Yep, if that's what that sane man wants, then that's exactly what he should say. And if she's a self-respecting woman and walks away, then he should move on and keep spinning plates until he finds one who is willing to make that agreement. The only woman who would agree to this is 100% using him for security. This also means she'll likely move to the next guy who she thinks offers her better security in exchange for a shitty agreement.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:42 PM
0

That's not how this works. Even if the facts you've posted are true, you cannot logically jump from those facts to "what you're promising". What OP promised is whatever the fuck he promised. Promises and agreements aren't based on facts, they're based on two people promising and agreeing. If OP entered into a relationship where he agreed to not sleep with other people in exchange for consistent, easy sex (as he says), then that's what he agreed to. If OP agreed to enter into an open relationship…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:17 PM
1

I don't pretend to not be female. Pretty open about it, actually. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the red pill about being a strong man of value, not caving to needy women, and using what you now understand about hypergamy to live the life you want? Why would a strong man who wants sex with multiple women and who stands up for what he wants, be in a relationship? He wouldn't. Plain and simple. If he ended up in this relationship where he's agreed to not sleep with other people even though he …
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:02 PM
3

I cited planned parenthood, but even looking at your site, they have withdraw as 73-96% effective, condoms as 85-98% effective, and the pill as a page they haven't finished. 73-96% isn't something to scoff at, especially knowing that it's more effective when used properly.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:43 PM
1

Your ellipses and the fact that you had to tell her are still not doing you any favors.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:13 PM
3

Used perfectly, pull out method is 96% effective. Used perfectly, condoms are 98% effective. This was kind of as if they'd agreed to use condoms and then he didn't. Her reaction here is just as merited as his concern that she might be pregnant. She flipped out because they'd agreed to use a birth control method and then when she was drunk, he didn't.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:10 PM
23

You're a fucking idiot. First, you need to protect yourself. As another person here noted, she could go get Plan B. She could also not do that. She could be pregnant. If that's the case, your biggest problem isn't likely a rape claim, but being on the hook for 18 years of $$$. Hope it felt good. Second, and probably more important going forward because this is key whether or not she's pregnant, don't abuse your partner's boundaries like that. You're calling this girl crazy for losing her fucking…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 01:59 PM
0

Nah. If you want to spin plates, spin plates. If you want to be in a relationship, be in a relationship. Neither one requires lying to your partner(s)
/r/askTRP26/10/17 08:36 AM
0

You're a piece of shit for cheating on her and a dumb one for thinking it wouldn't therefore be done to you. If you're going to sleep around, be honest about it. If you're going to be in a relationship, commit to it. If at some point you realize you don't want to be in a relationship or you'd rather have sex with someone else, be a fucking man enough to end things. It's really not that hard.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 06:01 AM
3

Nah, fuck all of this. You only live once. You can't spend it hiding behind a skinny frame and shitty clothes just because it feels safe. Let's work through this worst case scenario- you put on some weight and muscle. Wear decent clothes. Approach a woman and she rejects you. What's the worst thing that can happen? A girl doesn't like you? That's happening now. Let's say you look your best and multiple women reject you. Sounds like that's happening now, so nothing different except like you said,…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 05:12 AM
1

Dude, I'm not going to break down Barney-style how to have good sex and please a woman in bed. There are other subreddits for that. At least care enough about yourself and your partner(s) to do that research yourself.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 04:24 AM
2

Just a note for when you do go on a date with her- I got to I figured she'd come find me and try to prove her strength where id end up proving mine instead, 2 years serious lifting And seriously laughed out loud. The real kind, not the lol kind. Girls are not bros. if you question their strength in a text, they're not likely to challenge you on it later. Too, what was she supposed to prove? The thing you said she wasn't strong enough for, that she could step on your face? A girl stepping on your…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 04:14 AM
1

This may be easier, but it's bullshit.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 04:02 AM
2

Yeah, not going to do that. The world is pretty small when it comes down to it. Trump is the president, so he's held to a higher standard than an Internet stranger. You or OP can not believe me, and it really impacts no one but OP and how he chooses to proceed. I'll sleep just fine tonight without your trust.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:48 AM
20

You use your fucking brain and put your career ahead of a quick blow job
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:30 AM
1

I'm in no way saying he has to endure harassment. He shouldn't put up with it for another second. I want to make that clear. Where you and I differ are our ideas of: * The ease to which he's going to be able to refute her insanity should she pull some shit out of her ass in front of HR * The critical reasoning and impartiality of the people from HR doing the investigation * The degree to which his HR team is there to support him vs. there to cover the business' ass * The degree to which he has n…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:28 AM
3

I hear what you're saying. What I'm saying is that the gossip and heresay that the HR investigation could stir up (especially with her help), could still be limiting to his career, even if he's found innocent. I don't AT ALL think he should put up with this and am in no way advocating he continue. I'm saying he needs to protect himself and his account (through evidence like you said, which was a good call), tell her to stop and then, if she involves HR or if she doesn't stop and he has to involv…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 03:02 AM
1

The proof of refusal for a while is he tricky part, unless he has evidence from past refusals. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you're saying here. I just feel like I've seen situations that should have been cut and dry and instead became shit shows. As a man, I think he needs to be doubly careful in protecting himself here. It's bullshit that it has to be the case, but in today's society, men aren't faring well in he said/she said situations, which some of this could turn into depending o…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:57 AM
1

This. To add on, while it's true that just because you're a man doesn't mean it's okay for you to be harassed, it's also unfortunately true that you're less likely to be believed without evidence, especially if you've been letting her sit in your lap.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:46 AM
1

Yeah, I think the hope is that this can be solved without involving HR, which I'd recommend. Maybe record evidence and talk to her/email her, but keep the evidence only if needed? I only say not to immediately involve HR as they'll quickly open an investigation, interview anyone who may remotely be connected, and make a big stink of it. Trust me, even if there's evidence, this is highly likely their protocol. The investigation, even if it proves he wasn't guilty, can be a hinderance to a career.…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:44 AM
1

I suppose you're thinking I should've said "women", but I'm a one man kind of woman, myself. Your comment history is 99% you saying this same thing over and over, literal copy and paste like you did here with most of it telling everyone they're being cheated on, showing them the twats you find on snap, and bragging about how redpilled you are. You know bragging about booty pics online doesn't mean much right? Literally, my dog could beat you in numbers. Do you know how many bitches would send th…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:40 AM
1

It's Reddit, not a courtroom, so it's a pretty take it or leave it environment. Feel free to disregard.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:29 AM
5

Don't do this. When she cries, "harassment" and tells a story of how you asked her to sit in your lap and teased her, flirted with her to the point making the workplace uncomfortable, your rebuttal of "she told me her marriage was sexless, she'd suck my dick (even though I didn't want it or take her up on it), walked close to me in the hall, and cooked me stuff" is going to sound really flimsy.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:15 AM
4

In most situations I'd say to act like water off a duck's ass, but crazy bitches in the workplace can be detrimental to your career. Honestly, I'd say, "I've tried to ignore or downplay your comments so as not to make this any more awkward and unprofessional for either one of us, but you need to stop. Your actions and words are bordering on harassment". Fuck, I'd type it in an email and send it to her so you have it on record. And never fucking let her sit in your lap again. Someone this reckles…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 02:12 AM
2

I think there's a difference between "acting normal" in a way that is betraying yourself, as you say, and "acting normal" in a way that doesn't give a fuck. First, that boyfriend is being a little bitch. She's obviously nagging and manipulative. You had to put up with it once; he goes home to it constantly. He chose to tell you that you were disrespectful in order to avoid the onslaught of shit he'd have to hear on the way home if he hadn't said anything or stood up to her. This is why you shoul…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 01:43 AM
2

Understanding this is immensely critical to so many facets of life.
/r/askTRP26/10/17 01:24 AM
4

Or maybe OP is legitimately asking what resonated most with different individuals. Example- a new album came out last week and my friend just asked my favorite songs. I responded and shared my reasoning and she responded and shared hers. Turns out, though I'd listened to the album multiple times, there's a slick guitar solo in one song that I really hadn't given enough credit to and a throwback to writing from a former album that I hadn't noticed. On her recommendation, I gave those songs anothe…
/r/askTRP26/10/17 01:00 AM
5

I assure you we're not. For starters, I do believe in love and commitment. Not popular here, but fuck it. Second, I'm not saying to be mean to anyone, much less someone you care about. I'm saying to bring a valuable package to the table. Be fit and healthy, have a good career, have hobbies, be interesting, be someone who woman can throw in almost any situation and you'll handle it with confidence and charisma, have self-respect enough that you have standards and don't put up with shit and manipu…
/r/askTRP25/10/17 11:17 PM
6

You edited your comment, so mine doesn’t really address everything anymore. Regarding the edits, I don’t think you understand how this works. Hoe ass low value women chase low value men because they think those men are the best they can get. A woman is going to try and be with the best man possible. If thugs and addicts are what those women think they can get, then that’s what they’ll go for. Now sometimes, addicts are still considered high-value. Maybe he’s a Wall Street broker with confidence …
/r/askTRP25/10/17 10:56 PM
8

This isn't an answer to your question just yet, but I think it's important to point out. Your comment history says you're a diagnosed narcissist and have called yourself "numb", "detached", "entirely self-serving", "incapable of loving someone", and "much like a cold-hearted sociopath". So I'm confused, did you truly care about and love these people (as you claim), or are you incapable of love (as you also claim)? My rando internet stranger guess based on the wording of your post in this thread …
/r/askTRP25/10/17 10:34 PM
5

You just want to believe this because it makes you feel better about the times you cared about women and they left you. They left you because you lost value to them, not because you didn't treat them mean enough. /u/TrenGod37 is correct. Being an emotionless asshole will get you more women than you likely had previously. You can spin plates for the rest of your life and never really care about any of them. But you could also find the balance here and have women you actually care about (and they …
/r/askTRP25/10/17 10:13 PM
1

I agree that my revised version of your comment is common knowledge. Your original comment, i haven't seen data on, but am open to learning and using it to support my own arguments in the future should you or someone else source it. Typically, I agree with your language police comment. You'll note I haven't corrected any of your typos or grammar. The fact is, in a forum that is language-based, language is the only way we have to form our arguments. Therefore, language needs to be clear enough to…
/r/MensRights25/10/17 09:00 PM
1

I agree that my revised version of your comment is common knowledge. Your original comment, i haven't seen data on, but am open to learning and using it to support my own arguments in the future should you or someone else source it. Typically, I agree with your language police comment. You'll note I haven't corrected any of your typos or grammar. The fact is, in a forum that is language-based, language is the only way we have to form our arguments. Therefore, language needs to be clear enough to…
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:58 PM
1

I found the problem; that's not at all what we were arguing about. Edit- Let me help you. If that's what you were claiming, your original post should've read, "the reason current statistics show that man commit a majority of violent crimes is because data shows that female violence against men is under-reported. If all violent crime were reported, statistics would look different". In that case you're right, it's been discussed over and over. If I got it wrong and your original post is still what…
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:33 PM
1

Listen, I'm all about supporting men's rights. I know that female violence against men is under-reported and that legal actions against men are wildly unfair. However, Rhianna and stilletos have little to do with the fact that you have repeatedly supported violence up to and including murder against women. You make no damn sense and the sense you do make does more harm to men's rights than it does good. I'm done engaging with idiotic and violence-justifying. Thank god you're just a shitty man an…
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:32 PM
3

I'm not the one making the claim, so it's not really on me to provide the data. That being said, the wiki article you've provided does very little to substantiate the entirety of your original claim. If we're going to be condescending, can you please learn how to form a logical, data-supported conclusion and introduce it to the discussion in such a way that others can learn from it?
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:27 PM
1

As for my getting out of here until I can do more harm than good Clearly this is the issue. I said to get out until you could do more good than harm. The quotes below show you still haven't figured it out. Females [...] quite frankly get what they ask for she need to be taught If more females die in domestic disputes than men, it's a clear example that the females didn't think to stop First, you realize these stats are not domestic assault stats, right? Second, are you truly claiming that "much …
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:21 PM
2

Source?
/r/MensRights25/10/17 08:11 PM
2

You're right, I incorrectly assumed you were the OP. Turns out there are two people out there dumb enough to think this belongs here. Sorry for the assumption on religion or location.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:59 PM
1

I'm commenting first to keep an eye on this thread. However, I wanted to add that you should likely open up the stats to include abuse outside of just murder. Keep in mind too that men are probably* less likely to report verbal or minor physical abuse. *i say probably because I'm sure it's true, but am not in a place where I can provide stats. I assume, like rape, men are less likely to come forward or be counted for spousal abuse for fear of appearing weak
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:55 PM
3

You're implying that women talking is grounds for homicide. You know that implication doesn't do a damn thing for men's rights, right? Get out of here until you can do more good for the cause than harm. Or at least be clear that you're actively working against men's rights when you say shit like that.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:45 PM
1

If she wanted you, she would've gone to dinner. If she was busy and wanted you, she would've rescheduled. I hate to break it to you twice, but she doesn't want you.
/r/askTRP25/10/17 07:41 PM
1

But you don't interact with women at work. Nor do you accept their LinkedIn invites. Nor do you use them as doctors, etc. You can't expect women at work to talk to you about political matters like anti-feminism if you don't talk to them. That's common sense. It's clear you want to believe what you want and aren't open to even considering anything that might refute what you want to believe.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:39 PM
4

Women are oppressed by the class system. Women are oppressed on the basis of race. Religious rules and traditions oppress women. See? Because these are not men's rights issues; they're class, race, or religion issues. I tried. I hand-fed you a very stretched rationale, like a baby bird. This shit doesn't belong here. While I'm at it, as a woman, I'll take my chances in the US over any of your muslim countries anyday. Edit: my B
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:36 PM
6

First- class, race, and religion are not oppressors; they're ways of grouping people. They don't have power until power is given to them and laws or norms are used to oppress according to class, race, or culture. Second- Class doesn't oppress men; oppression against class oppresses classes. Race doesn't oppress men; oppression against race oppresses races. Religion doesn't oppress men; oppression against religion oppresses religions. Finally- there can be overlap where men are oppressesd because…
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:27 PM
4

Yeah, that makes no sense. It's a weak argument to begin with, but it really doesn't hold up here. How does the alt-right demonize men in such a way that worldwide female homicide stats show anything? It sounds like you're agreeing this is a race, religion, or maybe class issue and not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 07:12 PM
4

I'm trying to stretch what you're saying to make sense of it in context of this sub and I'm struggling. I think you're trying to say the alt-right is hostile towards Muslims, occasionally specifically speaking out against how they believe Muslim women are treated : Some Muslim countries are safer for women (in terms of homicide rate) than the US : All men are men, including Muslim men : the alt-right being hostile towards Muslim men and their perceived treatment of females is wrong :: this is a …
/r/MensRights25/10/17 06:48 PM
4

What does this have to do with men's rights?
/r/MensRights25/10/17 06:30 PM
1

Are you truly saying youve never met a female who denounces feminism? Women Against Feminism That's just one site, but hashtags, blogposts, reddit threads, and hell, my comment history will show you there are a number of women who think feminism is bullshit. Are you claiming that you've never met a woman who you've openly talked with in real life, or are you just making an exaggerated claim? I'm honestly interested. If it's the former, I'm guessing it may have to do with the fact that you avoid …
/r/MensRights25/10/17 06:19 PM
1

She's trying to let you down nicely. She's not interested. Move on.
/r/askTRP25/10/17 05:57 PM
3

First, you're lucky you didn't get super fucked in your divorce. If you don't currently know others in the army who were mega-fucked, you will shortly. Dependas have that name for a reason. Second, it sounds like you have four years before you're out of active duty. That's a good amount of time- not so much that you shouldn't start thinking about what you want to do and positioning yourself to do that, but also not so little that you have to know right away. If you have the points, turning down …
/r/askTRP25/10/17 04:18 AM
1

Touché. I didn't remember that. Edit- I was out when I responded and just now looked and realized you're the one who started this entire thread. I guess I assumed because you said you weren't from the US in your last comment that you weren't the one who started the thread discussing a gun case in the US. I think, especially given your last comment about the "psychotic gun culture in the US" that's it's safe to say this whole thread is, for you, much more about the guns than about the legal diffe…
/r/MensRights25/10/17 02:30 AM
0

Yep, you really showed me there.
/r/askTRP25/10/17 01:57 AM
1

This makes no sense. His mom was alive. He didn't kill his mom. I understand non-Americans may have questions about American gun rights, but you should at least be knowledgeable about the situation and laws you're speaking on.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 01:56 AM
2

No time because she purchased the guns legally and her son used her guns. You do understand that people get time for illegal actions, and owning legally-acquired firearms is not illegal, right? You don't legally punish the buyer unless he/she bought the weapon illegally.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 10:30 PM
2

Squatting a girl feels like you're trying way too hard. The confidence trp advocates should be a seemingly innate, don't-care-what-others-think, don't-have-anything-to-prove type of confidence. Telling a girl you think you can squat her or that you like to squat girls in your free time is akin to "I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany". Stop trying so hard.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 09:48 PM
2

It's like you're trying to sound smart, but failing to actually articulate anything worthwhile. If we're playing a game on words, "ignorant" according to Merriam-Webster is to lack knowledge or comprehension. I'm saying you choosing not to accept any connections from women solely on account of their gender is a career move that shows lack of knowledge or comprehension as to the benefit a large, diversified network could provide. Hell, I know men in careers that women aren't allowed in who have s…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 09:06 PM
2

She settled, but her sum was fractions of what Duran and Manes settled for. I'm not saying it's not interesting, but I think it's more of a discussion on gun sales and laws than men's rights. Again, I think you're right and that, had the genders been different, you'd see obvious discrimination. However, I think it's a poor case to use in an argument for men's rights because whoever you're arguing can easily point out the flaw that the men did an illegal act and the woman a legal act. In addition…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 08:25 PM
3

Yes.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 08:15 PM
1

The middle man (Phil Duran) introduced them to Mark with the known intention of getting underage kids handguns. As noted previously, this is illegal. That's why he faced charges. The woman here gave them guns that were legal to transfer (shotguns and a rifle). In this case, the men did something illegal and the woman did something legal. You can say "if you switched the sexes", but it's conjecture. A better claim would be to find an instance or case where a woman and man both did something illeg…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 08:14 PM
2

This. In addition to worrying about potential harassment claims, many organizations are accountable at the state and federal levels. Any organization doing business with state and federal governments is subject to audits that look at their recruiting and hiring ratios of protected classes, including women. If the ratios are disproportionate to the local community, they'll need to provide evidence as to why that's happening in addition to evidence that they're doing due diligence to recruit and h…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 07:44 PM
1

This is a rather bullshit post. If you have the article, post it and let's discuss it. If you're just suggesting all men refuse sex and relationships based on an article you once read, I think you're going to run into difficulty drumming up followers. If the true thesis of this post is "don't have sex or get into relationships with radicals", then you're preaching to the choir on this sub. Provide something worth value of discussion.
/r/MensRights24/10/17 07:27 PM
3

You could be missing great career opportunities as many recruiters are female. Even if you want to work for a man, the recruiter and hiring manager are different people (unless you, yourself are a recruiter). A recruiter's job is to find the best candidate for the role and they're given a job profile for that role. Female, male, it doesn't matter. They'll gather together candidates and present them to the hiring manager for consideration. You can choose to progress your career in any way you see…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 07:21 PM
1

If you have free time to spare, read up and learn about investing. Even better if you have some money (even a small amount) to begin investing to learn about the market and opportunities in real time. If the question is about making money, you could get a job. Waiting tables or bartending are great ways to flexibly make money in college. They also give you opportunities to meet people. You could drive for uber or tutor. Depending on your major and skill set you could take contract jobs. Especial…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 07:12 PM
1

In addition to all of the above which is spot on, OP is creating, enabling, and encouraging a woman who is likely insecure and whose insecurity will only grow as her self-worth decreases. From my understanding, you don't want to be with a woman because she feels fat, ill-dressed, and like she can't get anyone else. You want to be with a woman who you're proud to be with and who feels like she's with a leading high-value man. If OP wants to be in a relationship with a crying, overweight, insecure…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 06:17 PM
1

Agree and amplify is typically used in shit tests. This isn't a shit test; it's a genuine compliment. All he has to do is agree with it, avoid downplaying the complement, convey confidence, and he's essentially saying "I know I have good (whatever the asset is)". Further, by not directly complimenting her in return (which women may expect), he'll catch them a bit off-guard and further convey confidence. Responding as if this is a shit test or making a joke of it may make him seem insecure.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 05:39 PM
1

It sounds like the problem has more to do with you than her. You admit your business venture is currently lacking success (but this should change around Feb), that you've stopped lifting, and that you're letting things bother you. First, lifting is an investment in yourself, just as your business is an investment in yourself. Don't prioritize your business at the expense of your health and fitness. You need to be healthy mentally to get your business where you believe it can be. This means stepp…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 05:26 PM
5

Drop her or don't, but do be cognizant that if you're sleeping with someone who's been drinking, she could pull a rape claim on you. If the sex is good and you want to keep sleeping with her, go for it, but do protect yourself from false allegations.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 04:40 PM
12

I'm not disputing the idea that women are given lighter sentences or aren't sentenced at all, but this is a bad example. Colorado law follows federal age restrictions on possession and purchase of weapons. According to federal law, "unlicensed persons may sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer a long gun or long gun ammunition to a person of any age". Robyn Anderson (the woman here), wasn't charged in giving them the guns because the guns she provided were shotguns and a rifle. Mark Manes and Phil…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 04:35 PM
1

I recognize your user name from my previous throwaway accounts used here. I've actually given you advice before and you agreed in your reply. (I know proof or it didn't happen, so I'm not expecting to be believed here). Totally unphased by your name calling. You fucking cunts doesn't make me a cunt. This is a subreddit for men trying to learn to be better men. As a women who believes men could step up their game, I'm happy to spend time here telling y'all when the woman you're pining over just i…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 04:28 PM
5

I know the OP argument is against the current validity of the data, and I agree it's very outdated. I also think a few more arguments can and should be made against this article. The chart shows that there is a disparity, but does not at all conclude that it's because of unfair treatment in promotions. Because the chart is specifically about education- are women seeking to be principals and superintendents to the same degree as men? Are women seeking the formal education aligned with these posit…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 03:19 PM
2

I'd also add that when I say I believe both spouses should work in order to be more adaptable and prepared against the ever changing economy, I also believe that means both spouses should carry their weight at home. I won't say equal weight as there are times when it can't be 50/50 (maybe all the time), but I don't think the home is the woman's territory any more than the man's. I'm cool if the husband enjoys mowing more and the woman enjoys shit inside or is better at it. I can fold clothes a l…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 02:09 PM
1

I'm a straight woman, so you have me wrong from the get go. Further, I never said there's anything wrong with the preference, only with the idea of a dating site in 2017 that asks that question and the way the post was worded, both of which I called creepy and fucked up.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 01:39 PM
1

I'd prefer you not as I'm not trying to stir shit, which is why I posted it to a sub where my viewpoints align more than one where they don't. I'm definitely not a feminist. I'd say exactly what I stated here to a feminist, though I wouldn't expect rational discussion. Feminism, from what I've been told (though it seems to change each time I ask), is the idea that women should be able to do what they want and have equal opportunity. I believe that's already the case in most instances. Adjusted f…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 01:34 PM
6

The fact that you've made three posts in 6 hours asking about this "stud" "hotass" "elite athlete" who is crushing on you, but can't figure out what to say to her in class or in your restaurant tells me you have a much bigger crush than she does. First, calm down. Second, limit your shit to one post. Third, go with the advice here
/r/askTRP24/10/17 04:30 AM
3

You don't have to live with someone to cook for them, or them for you. You don't have to live with someone to see if they do their laundry, fold it, iron their clothes, etc. You don't have to live with someone to see if they keep their place clean. My guess is you saw the warning signs but ignored them and thought she'd change once you were married. Edit- it also sounds like you're a dick. She's working 50-55hrs a week (more than your 50). Instead of helping with the cleaning, you leave? The fig…
/r/TheRedPill24/10/17 04:22 AM
1

See my two comments above where I state the exact same thing you're saying regarding the video. If roles were reversed, there would be an outcry. As it is, there isn't. That's unfair. I've said it numerous times. I haven't argued for the video, for the portrayals in the video, or for the idea that the video isn't garbage. I agree, over and over, with you and the previous poster in that regard. I'm not sure how to state that more clearly. Now if the previous commenter is saying that movies like t…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 04:20 AM
5

Sounds like you married poorly. Imagine the time you married you were both earning what you made, both saving for your future. Imagine if you were still married with two incomes, saving using that compounding interest. You'd be a multi-millionaire right now if you'd married better.
/r/TheRedPill24/10/17 03:46 AM
2

Sounds like you married poorly.
/r/TheRedPill24/10/17 03:22 AM
1

Maybe don't seek advice from someone who "struggles with the simplest of roadblocks". Man or woman, why would you think this individual would be aligned enough with your aspirations and knowledgable about risk and reward to give advice? If you take the route of high risk and high reward, it'll be in your best interest to have mentors and/or network contacts that you can go to for advice. I'd encourage you to seek out anyone qualified, not risk-averse, and ideally others who have been in similar …
/r/TheRedPill24/10/17 03:13 AM
1

This post makes me hate whatever women you're spending your time with. From what I can put together, they don't truly work out, are unoriginal, emotional, gossipy, miss work, can't do pull ups, and giggle at reality tv. That's a list of every awful female cliche. Fuck, I'm a woman and I wouldn't even waste time with the bitches you describe. I'd like to propose an Option 4: find a woman who gives a shit, has hobbies, takes care of herself, isn't a gossipy sack of emotions, and works her ass off …
/r/TheRedPill24/10/17 02:57 AM
5

The fuck creepy ass conservative dating sites are you using? Rhetorical question. I don't want to know the answer. Just know your post sounds really creepy and dating sites that ask that question sound conservatively fucked up.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 02:42 AM
4

It's weird because if you actually cared about music, you'd probably already have bands you follow and shows you go to. However, the question kind of reads like you don't care about it except to get women. That's more of a challenge. My advice- either care or don't, but be confident in what you do. I've known guys who couldn't care less about music and listen to podcasts/books on tape. The confidence they exuded in talking about it made it hot and attractive. I've also known guys who are into di…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 02:34 AM
1

You say he's really good looking, has a good body and "swagger", has a "strong presence socially", and doesn't seem to care that women are into him. You also say he "lacks confidence" and is "insecure", but your only evidence of that is that he's bad at eye contact. You know there's more to confidence than eye contact right? Like having swagger and a strong presence and not caring what women think, for instance. Eye contact is one way to show confidence. It's an easy, objective skill that men on…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 02:23 AM
1

I disagree. IF isn't any harder than counting calories or macros and in some ways is easier because you could be counting for fewer meals. It's typically a lot easier to eat at a deficit and remain satisfied doing IF (during your fasting window your blood sugar levels and you don't have similar cravings to someone who eats regularly and during eating Windows it's hard to eat a surge number of calories in a short time). Do IF and count calories if it works for you. Don't do IF and still count cal…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 02:11 AM
1

He could be cutting. IF with rice, beans, and spinach sounds like a potential cut severely lacking in protein. He could still be making strength gains as he's new to lifting. If he's cutting, he might still have that flabby look if he has a lot to cut or if there's just no muscle under there to uncover.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 02:08 AM
1

This hurts to read. I don't think any EC thinks himself perfect. You should always continue to have goals and areas to improve. Of course you can begin to approach women before your perfect. Start now. Approach women. Learn how to fake it till you make it. Learn that rejection isn't the end of the world. I'd encourage you to start by working on your confidence so that you're confident enough that you're not asking internet strangers permission to talk to women.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 01:47 AM
3

I think your approach is just missing one word that you should be pretty decent at saying. Here goes- Her- "you have really great eyes" You- "thank you. Ryan (or whatever your name is)" (hold out your hand to shake hers) Done. Get her name and go from there.
/r/askTRP24/10/17 01:33 AM
2

I think in today's economy, it's an awful gamble for both the man and woman for only the man to work a job capable of sustaining a family. For the man- it limits his ability to change jobs should his not be fulfilling or should a potential exciting, but momentarily risky venture present itself. It means the weight of all finances and retirement savings are on his shoulders. It means if his job relocates, the whole family likely HAS to move or face a lapse in employment. It means the family is in…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 12:58 AM
3

You posted something yesterday about your "top 20 school" (quotes for saying you noted it as such yesterday, not to say that WashU isn't top 20). It reads as if you're REALLY into the status of your school, and I'm going out on a limb to say you might approach other parts of your self-perceived value this way as well (mentioning quickly and smugly that you're an engineering student, etc.). First, women at your school are going to be similar to women everywhere else. Second, this means that if yo…
/r/askTRP24/10/17 12:36 AM
3

The way you're talking here sounds like two boys had a sleepover and shared romantic tales of all the girls they're going to lay and exactly what incredibly alpha gestures they'll use to get there. Get out there and get some real experience talking to women. Maybe you'll meet them at a club, maybe you'll meet them at the post office, maybe you'll meet them in social leagues. Maybe your plans will work. Maybe they won't. The important thing is that having respect isn't "beta", and being dishonest…
/r/askTRP23/10/17 11:57 PM
1

I didn't necessarily advocate hard nexting her. If you're just wanting sex, I'd make sure to be open and honest about that. You don't have to say it so point blank, but don't trick her into thinking you're exclusively sleeping with her. As long as your honest about things being casual, if she's down for that too, carry on. You might just check this sub for problems others have had with really religious women. Religious crazy is a heightened level of crazy.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 11:51 PM
1

I had no issue with the first part of his post. However, when it came to belittling the OP because he hadn't slept with the girl in 4 dates, that's where I take issue. Get laid after 5 years? Awesome. It entitles you to posting, bragging, talking about trp moves that got you laid, etc. It doesn't entitle you to belittling others for not getting laid yet. Edit- delete or not was his choice. I didn't add wording that wasn't already there. "Loser" and mention of staying at home, calling the girl a …
/r/askTRP23/10/17 11:19 PM
11

I found listening to her voice, cadence, and arguments quite difficult. It was as if from every angle she was dismissing MRAs. When she brought up the MRA issues of her own (suicide, etc.), I was really confused. Clearly she's done some research, but it appears she's done just enough to dismiss ideas without actually listening to them, giving them consideration, or exploring statistics. It blew my mind that she was able to twist alimony and parental rights issues as feminist issues and discrimin…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 11:12 PM
2

I'm confused about how this is applicable. How would trp's potential influence on music impact your behaviors? Are you asking about what kinda of music you should be interested in? What kinds of music you should see live in order to meet women? What music you might play when having a woman over?
/r/askTRP23/10/17 09:16 PM
1

here (First time linking on mobile, so I'm not sure if it's right)
/r/askTRP23/10/17 09:10 PM
3

I think you and I disagree on the degree to which these factors influence modern men and women, but I think over a beer, we'd get along and be 90% on the same page. Either way, I have to say thanks for the respectful back and forth. As a woman with a brother, a father, and a functioning brain, I'm a big advocate for men's rights. Unfortunately, this subreddit at times tends to lean not just pro-men, but anti-woman. More unfortunately, there tends to be some disrespectful and just plain fucking s…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 09:08 PM
1

Fuck that. Be your own man, watch what you want and find other friends who have your interests. Bending your interests to get men to be your friend is just as dumb and weak as bending your interests to get a woman to like you. Be you, have hobbies, better yourself, you'll eventually find ways to make friendships with men who have similar interests.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 08:54 PM
1

I don't believe in playing stupid games unless you're okay with having them played to you. Don't be a puppy, but don't feel like you have to sit at home faking "busy" and lying to her. You hang out with friends, you go to the gym, it sounds like you have a lot going on and if it fits that she's willing to work around that schedule to see you, good on you. Religious women are tricky. If you're wanting a LTR, then keep on keeping on as you are. Eventually, she'll likely put out, and it doesn't sou…
/r/askTRP23/10/17 08:46 PM
1

When I think of a man who doesn't leave the house and is a self-described loser, then think of what kind of woman has never been kissed and wants someone to want her so badly that she sleeps with self-described loser, I'm definitely not picturing anyone worth bragging about. Anyone can get laid if he sets his bar low enough. OP, don't take advice from this guy or make you feel like you're doing things wrong. It took him five years to get out of the house and lay a girl no one has ever even tried…
/r/askTRP23/10/17 08:42 PM
3

The way you use "resources" sounds purely economic. Sure, over history on average, women have married up financially in sight of financial resources. Men, as you mentioned, have married for biological resources (sex, the ability to have children) and resources in the home (someone to care for those children if the man is the sole financial provider, someone to care for the home in his absence). These are generalizations, but I'll agree that on gross average, they're accurate. They are also both …
/r/MensRights23/10/17 08:17 PM
-1

Using poor English and adding periods as if you're needing to break it down slowly doesn't help your argument. Treat me like I'm slow all you want, but your original post wasn't correct grammar in any fashion and was confusing. My earlier comment said exactly what you're saying in stating that outcry from this video won't happen and that if genders were reversed, that certainly wouldn't be the case. It's unfair. This video is unfair. I've never deviated from that or implied otherwise. What I've …
/r/MensRights23/10/17 07:19 PM
5

It's rather short sighted to talk about history as a statistic without considering or mentioning what that history looked like. Women haven't always had access to higher education or to high paying work positions. This meant first and foremost that marrying up wasn't difficult. Second, it meant that if a woman wanted a good life for her family, marrying up was the best way to do that. Further, there has been and continues to be a stigma (pushed by men and women both) that working moms or higher …
/r/MensRights23/10/17 07:03 PM
1

I don't see how women wanting an alpha and women encouraging their partners have to be mutually exclusive. Women want a high caliber man, sure. But women can also encourage those men to pursue things- promotions, entrepreneurship, hobbies, etc. They may do this to be controlling, or to further increase his value, but they may also do it because they love and care about their partner and want to see him succeed in areas they know he's interested in.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 06:32 PM
1

If I were to guess, it's not the feeling of squandered potential but instead the frustration that the rest of you must be lacking sorely if you have this important thing (looks) going for you and it's not enough. There are ugly men and short men who get great women, so you not doing the same with your perceived looks must mean that the rest of the package is negative to the point where your looks aren't enough to compensate. Please know I don't say that to put salt in a wound, but to maybe provi…
/r/askTRP23/10/17 06:07 PM
1

I don't even know what the word "sperg" means. Normally I advocate for the typical getting in shape, finding and pursuing hobbies, things that I think build confidence. In your case, and I say this as respectfully as possible, I think you may be good to seek counseling. The way that you talk about yourself goes beyond lack of confidence and even to an Internet stranger is concerning.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 05:58 PM
1

What I get from your post thus far- You're unsure of how to ask out women You're so good looking, always told you're good looking, and it's such a burden You hate yourself Do you see how the bullets above aren't attractive at all? Women want a man with confidence and certainty. They want someone good looking, but they don't want someone who thinks he's just so good looking and brags about people telling him so. It's about the whole package. Wishing you weren't so good looking isn't going to incr…
/r/askTRP23/10/17 05:43 PM
1

Shit tests are bullshit whether they come from a man or a woman. Don't put up with them from a woman, but don't expect a smart decent woman to put up with them from you.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 05:36 PM
-2

I'm not trying to be rude, but I don't understand what you're saying. You might try and reword your post. In the meantime, note I never said this behavior has never happened. I'm saying to call it "typical" of women is incorrect and does not help your cause. There are men who have in fact harassed women, but to call that typical behavior is incorrect. See the similarity? In this case, sure, speak against the supposed stereotype that women are able to burn and vandalize a man's house without lega…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 05:19 PM
5

You say this as if there's something in women that can't help but marry a man who makes more, as if it's not even a cognizant choice, but compulsion. It's ridiculous. I don't think there's anything wrong with a woman wanting to marry an equal partner. A women who is a high earner has likely worked hard to get where she is. Wanting a partner who has worked hard as well, can match her intellectually, understands the corporate workplace and can give advice as she moves further in her career is not …
/r/MensRights23/10/17 05:14 PM
1

I think it's important and healthy to note how you feel now is impacted by what you've experienced. That being said, it may very well change as time progresses, you're further from your divorce, and you learn to trust someone else. There are a number of benefits to having a partner who earns close to what you do. In addition to protection in divorce like you've mentioned, it also gives more safety to both partners should they want to change jobs or careers, especially in the US where insurance i…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 05:08 PM
1

An equal partner with intelligence and goals who wants someone similar.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 04:59 PM
-2

Saying this is typical behavior because it's a stereotype is like saying that males being sexually aggressive and harassing is typical behavior. Both are incorrect statements. Further, hating women or speaking against women does not further the men's rights cause. Speak against the portrayal of men and women. Speak against unfair laws. Speak against unseen statistics. Speak against practices that are discriminatory. But don't demonize women as a whole. When you do that, you're just as bad as you…
/r/MensRights23/10/17 04:57 PM
2

I'd caution that style is relative and regional. If a man where I live wore white shoes and bracelets, I'd assume he liked other men.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 10:52 AM
1

Treat women like children and the ones who put up with it will be the ones who are okay being treated like children. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The respectable women leave your asses because they're not okay with being treated like children. You say it's because of chad or because she was a whore and it's no longer your ride or whatever. The needy bitchy children stick around and put up with your shit and you somehow think it's indicative of all women.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 03:53 AM
1

There's a chance you're 52 and have been left by all women who gave you a turn because you're immature and can't form a rational argument.
/r/askTRP23/10/17 03:37 AM
0

Yep, I'm accusing you of making inaccurate exaggerated claims against an entire group of people. I'm also saying that's not how you elicit change. HOWEVER, I'm didn't begin by calling you a shithole. I'm saying people who regularly do what you're doing are shitholes and if you decide to continue your poor arguments (that are made no stronger by adding an immature "lol" before and after), then you are a shithole. I've given you the option and space to have some common sense and make a better argu…
/r/MensRights22/10/17 10:56 PM
0

I never called you a shithole. I said that people who are make inaccurate exaggerations and claims against entire groups instead of speaking rationally and objectively are shitholes. IF you wanted to discuss things that way, then get in line. If instead, you want real discussion and change, then act as if that's what you want, and do it by speaking rationally and not emotionally. Currently, you seem to be getting offended and trying to flip things around, the exact thing you blame others for doi…
/r/MensRights22/10/17 11:10 AM
0

When you make irrational, emotional accusations like this regarding a whole group of people, you're just as bad as the others doing the same thing. If you truly want change, be rational and objective, if you just want to whine and throw around inaccuracies, get in line behind all the other shit holes.
/r/MensRights22/10/17 10:19 AM
1

I feel like everything you're saying belongs far more on the red pill than here. Your original argument was that women lack rationale. Then, that women may have rationale, but won't stand up against things that benefit them. Now, you're saying in a blanket statement that women are shaming men. Again, if those are the women you're around, then you're hanging around the wrong women. The women you speak of exist- just as sexist, overly- aggressive, womanizing men exist- but they're not all women, j…
/r/MensRights21/10/17 06:14 AM
1

First, two months isn't that long. Second, you're right, confidence and assertiveness can get a man far. Third, I think you need to think about what you're asking here. Say there's a woman you're frequently texting about your day, hanging out with, cuddling and having sex with, respecting enough that you you go to her for advice on life goals. Are you going to be okay with her getting nailed by some other man? If both of you are open and honest and okay with that, go for it. However, you'd be st…
/r/askTRP21/10/17 12:45 AM
3

To say that women wouldn't believe these actions to be wrong because they benefit them is like saying a Protestant man wouldn't think ww2 Germany wrong because it benefited him. Unfair, discriminatory, racist, and sexist practices are unfair, discriminatory, racist, and sexist no matter who you are, whether you're benefiting or not. Women and men are both perfectly capable of calling a spade a spade. Let's be honest, there aren't many people calling SJWs out outside of some subreddits. If you me…
/r/MensRights21/10/17 12:26 AM
8

You do see the error in attributing all women's reasoning with this one woman's reasoning, right? There are a large number of women who will readily agree that this lady is in the wrong.
/r/MensRights21/10/17 12:09 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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