TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Hot-Influence320 Archive

View 0 posts and 132 comments by Hot-Influence320 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

Sources please?
/r/MensRights12/07/26 04:50 PM
-1

Please. This is not r/conservative
/r/MensRights23/06/26 12:56 AM
4

Welcome to the world of virtually all mainstream taxpayer-funded media, lol.
/r/MensRights23/06/26 12:55 AM
4

> harming non-combatants is wrong Guess what, the vast majority of men are non-combatants too, just like women. They do tend to get forcefully drafted against their will more than women, like in Ukraine, or to be massacred on the basis of their gender (like in Srebrenica and virtually every massacre in history) based on the presumption that they could be potential combatants, but that doesn't make them actual combatants. > or that we should protect the most vunerable Do you know which gender is …
/r/MensRights16/06/26 06:45 PM
1

It's not as black and white as that. If I recall correctly, women commit the majority of infanticides, but men commit the majority of grave physical violence against children.
/r/MensRights16/06/26 06:31 PM
2

Lumping together "women and children" is also completely absurd because they don't have the same patterns of vulnerabilities at all. In wartime massacres, male children are usually at much greater risk of dying than adult women. Grouping them with women, as if they somehow shared the same vulnerability, makes zero sense. Like in Srebrenica, where young boys were selectively targeted massacred together with adult men, but women were spared. This happens almost systematically in wartime. Young boy…
/r/MensRights16/06/26 06:30 PM
1

A workaround to this is to leave Austria (eg to another EU country) when you turn 18, right before you get mailed conscription papers, and to study or work abroad and never come back to Austria until you are 33. This has been discussed in German-speaking subreddits. It might not feel easy but it's the least bad legal solution for Austrian men to avoid the sexist conscription.
/r/MensRights16/06/26 06:08 PM
1

Then why does Israel, one of the world's most successful militaries (leaving aside any questions of morality), draft women?
/r/MensRights16/06/26 05:50 PM
1

The Ukraine (sexist) draft is clearly unjust, as this is clearly a proxy war for foreign interests, not a war of survival. You can tell why Ukrainian boys are not particularly enthusiastic about being shot by drones in the mud to defend BlackRock's interests, and are going to extreme lengths to try to escape the country and avoid getting busified. I do think the Ukrainian draft should obviously be abolished. My point is that while many drafts are indeed unjust (Ukraine and Vietnam being examples…
/r/MensRights16/06/26 05:40 PM
1

This. We have a gender empathy gap where many people apparently don't care when only men die in war. Making women share the burden equally might be the only viable way to make the draft unpopular. Especially as long as women form the largest voting demographic and are able to vote for men to die in wars where they are not affected themselves.
/r/MensRights16/06/26 05:30 PM
1

I don't think it's ideal, but I can see how a draft makes sense in some cases. It's not always just (I think the draft for the Vietnam war was unjust, for instance) but there have been occasions in history where the draft was arguably really a matter of self-defence, for instance the draft in the USSR when it was invaded by Nazi Germany which was bent on genociding everyone there to make room for their racist Lebensraum policies. And as long as one is able to vote, they should share that burden,…
/r/MensRights16/06/26 05:25 PM
1

Because freedom isn't free.
/r/MensRights16/06/26 05:18 PM
1

The same Hillary Clinton who said that women are the primary victims of war because they lose their husbands? And who, as secretary of state, was a staunch supporter of the interventions in Libya, Syria and Afghanistan (which killed many more men than women), and constantly pushed for war with Russia and China? Somehow I'm not really convinced she cares about peace, much less about men's rights.
/r/MensRights22/04/26 11:09 PM
1

The "patriarchy" in the form of Phyllis Schlafly who successfully sabotaged the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s because she feared that it could lead women to be drafted to die in Vietnam (like men and boys were)? Or in the form of the White Feather movement in WW1? Or in the form of Elisabeth Schwarzhaupt, a German feminist politician who, at the time when the German constitution was created in the 1950s, made sure that it included an article that said that women cannot be made to serve in …
/r/MensRights22/04/26 11:00 PM
1

If we assume that a draft or a military service is a necessary evil (and we might disagree about this, depending on the situation), then making it gender-neutral would be a net positive for men's rights. If women contributed equally to state-imposed services, there would be less burden on conscripted men. It's not about "putting other people down", but about sharing the burden equally.
/r/MensRights22/04/26 10:26 PM
1

Maybe donate to the NCFM. They are the ones who have a chance to pull that off. And no, drafting women won't lead to "extinction" of society any more than drafting men already does. In fact, if the goal is to minimize the demographic impact of wartime deaths, we should seek to draft equal numbers of men and women to dangerous positions so that the postwar gender balance remains balanced instead of having a huge loss of men and surplus of women. When only men die in wars, it impacts demographics …
/r/MensRights19/04/26 05:11 PM
3

Recently, in Switzerland, there was a referendum to make the (male-only) compulsory military service gender-neutral. It was unfortunately rejected. Guess which gender voted most often against it. (Though most men also voted against it tbh. But women voted against it in even bigger numbers than men, and feminist groups spammed the media with campaigns about how drafting women was unjust because women were already doing care work with their families, or other nonsense.)
/r/MensRights19/04/26 05:04 PM
1

also there’s not a single politician thats a real feminist. The "no true Scotsman" fallacy. I'm sorry but you don't get to redefine what a "real feminist" is. Just as we cannot redefine Al-Qaeda terrorists to be "not real Muslims" or defenders of Israel's crimes as "not real Jews". the issues pertaining to the legal system has nothing to do with gender based discrimination. You seem to confuse gender discrimination with misandry/misogyny. Gender discrimination, by definition, doesn't necessarily…
/r/MensRights18/04/26 07:21 PM
1

definition never changed. feminist theory already has an established framework that’s academically supported. feminism isn’t about equality because there’s no actual consensus on what equality actually is. Yes, equality is a delicate and multifaceted concept, and we could argue for hours about what different notions of "equality" mean (for instance, there are notions such as equality in essence and equality of treatment/equality before the law). But according to all established sources, feminism…
/r/MensRights18/04/26 07:19 PM
2

The difference between voluntary service and forced (male) conscription is apparently a hard concept for you to comprehend. The problem of powerful female politicians starting or fueling wars while only men have to fight them is still very relevant today, and we've had (and still have) plenty of warmongering female politicians throughout the 20th century. Thatcher, Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Biljana Plavsic, and others. Today, we have Kaja Kallas and Ursula von der Leyen (among many others) who …
/r/MensRights18/04/26 04:50 PM
1

In a free market economy, we don't force people to work in jobs that they don't want. The only exception to this is military service (which should indeed be gender-neutral) and compensatory civilian service. But I don't see how forcing anyone to work in a dangerous job against their will could be legally or reasonably feasible. Men are the majority in dangerous jobs because society forces them into a provider role and they have financial responsibilities that they can only fulfill by accepting h…
/r/MensRights18/04/26 04:45 AM
0

The pressure on everyone - and the risk to everyone's life - is still lower when there are more people contributing overall. Even if we assume all women are drafted to support roles while all men are drafted to the front (which is still ethically suboptimal for gender equality), it's still a much better and safer situation for men than if we only draft all men and let women enjoy their lives abroad with no obligations (as it currently happens in Ukraine). If everyone contributes, even in non-gen…
/r/MensRights18/04/26 04:37 AM
1

Drafting women - even if putting them in safe support roles in practice - is still much better and more egalitarian than not drafting them at all.
/r/MensRights17/04/26 11:45 PM
4

Except that, at least in some countries, the draft is not just a sadistic plot by the government, but a necessary evil that serves a purpose. If abolishing the draft was feasible, governments would have done it already. As long as the draft is necessary, it should include women - and, more generally, it should include anyone who has the right to vote. It's not only a question of equality, but also of logic, fairness, "skin in the game", and preventing a very dangerous situation where women have …
/r/MensRights17/04/26 11:42 PM
3

Throughout history, and still today, proportionally, compared to men, women were much, much more likely to start a war from a position of power than to die in one. Studies have shown that from the Middle Ages onward, throughout Europe, queens were significantly more likely to start wars than kings. Among many other examples, you can look up how Catherine the Great ordered her (male) army to dangerously storm Ochakov in the Russian-Ottoman wars, resulting in men dying for the benefit of a power-h…
/r/MensRights17/04/26 09:41 PM
2

> feminism isnt about being equal to men. Wow, suddenly changing your beloved "definition of feminism" as soon as it stops being convenient. Look up the motte-and-bailey fallacy. > the violence men face is very real but its not gender based. Yes, it is gender-based. In fact, it is one of the most obviously and openly gender-based discriminations in existence. Look up how many legal systems explicitly hard-code that "men" are to be drafted or to perform military service while "women" are to be pr…
/r/MensRights17/04/26 09:29 PM
2

For decades now, almost all of the world's armies (both Western and non-Western) have allowed female volunteers, but still keep conscription only for men. And many feminists have fought to give women that possibility if they volunteer, but not to give women equal obligations. A good example is Germany, where, in the 1900s, Tanja Kreil started a lawsuit to make all of the German army's positions open to women. She succeeded (but, ironically, finally choose to not join the army anyway), and as a r…
/r/MensRights17/04/26 08:55 PM
2

No. It's an analogy 1900s politicians and some of today's feminists (not realizing the irony) love to make, but it's horribly wrong. The equivalent to forcing young men to go to war is forcing young women to go to war.
/r/MensRights17/04/26 08:43 PM
3

😢 Ironically (or not), in Ukraine, there was a case where a 14-year old boy was beaten up by conscription officers. Also, the vast majority of child soldiers are male (not really a surprise; most soldiers overall are male).
/r/MensRights17/04/26 08:40 PM
1

Tell me you're German without telling me you're German.
/r/MensRights17/04/26 08:38 PM
1

Patriarchal societies throwing mud at each other (sometimes under female rulers that were often happy to send their subjects of the opposite sex to die on battlefields to expand their personal power, e.g. Catherine the Great who ordered the Russian conquest of Ottoman territories. I believe there was a study that showed British queens were more likely than kings to wage war (with men's lives) - but I digress) didn't necessarily slow down technological progress - to the contrary, science often pr…
/r/MensRights15/06/25 03:26 PM
2

Which six women ?
/r/MensRights15/06/25 03:09 PM
1

According to your own source (page 5): Therefore, the public, the government, and the criminals themselves have each contributed to the chemical castration sentencing regime's single greatest flaw: the punishment of chemical castration is, in effect, reserved exclusively for use against male offenders.
/r/MensRights02/06/25 10:50 PM
1

Depo Provera doesn't seem to be used for mandatory castration of women. I haven't found any sources that would say this. According to the Wikipedia article, Depo Provera specifically reduces sex drive in men (not women) and seems to be used for chemical castration of men and for some voluntary medical treatments (especially for transgender women). It does not appear to be used to chemically castrate women. Sorry if I missed something.
/r/MensRights02/06/25 10:47 PM
1

But there is ample evidence that the long term effects of these drugs may be irreversible and not fully known. It's also known that chemical castration often leads to depression and heart issues in the short term. The fact that they might have been used on consenting patients doesn't mean they are harmless.
/r/MensRights02/06/25 10:31 PM
1

It's obviously interesting from a men's rights perspective, but what I mean is that the title sounds like it's from a women's rights perspective ("How Women Have Betrayed Women"). I know Sommers is a well known critic of feminism but I think that doesn't necessarily overlap with men's rights. Sorry if I sounded condescending.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 04:34 PM
1

Sorry but what's the Christina Hoff Sommers about ? Judging from the title, it doesn't seem directly related to men's rights.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 03:33 PM
1

Democrats are bad for men's rights, yes (they tend to push anti-male rhetoric, anti-male DEI, sexist laws, etc.) but Republicans are usually worse when it comes to military conscription. Republican senators were the most vocal opponents to bills that would have made the draft gender neutral (eg in 2016).
/r/MensRights28/05/25 03:29 PM
2

Republicans are not our friends either. They might be slightly less bad than Democrats in most cases but they don't give a damn about men's rights.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:23 AM
3

Much like "incel". It used to have a precise definition, now it's a vague catch-all term to disparage any non-feminist point of view.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:21 AM
1

The legal and support systems don't even need to encourage female bad behavior against men - they can still completely screw over, enslave, mutilate, and degrade men even without female interaction. Military enslavement, circumcision, sexist laws, sexist hiring practices, etc. Violence and sexism against men doesn't always come from women - it can also come from other men or from state actors, sadly.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:16 AM
3

It's already mandatory for certain categories of offenders in lots of countries, sadly. And it's only ever applied on men - female chemical castration is under-studied and not standardized, and there is no incentive to develop it (it probably still wouldn't be applied in practice, even if there was more research into it).
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:12 AM
3

Even when gender-neutral in theory, chemical castration is always applied exclusively on men and never on women - there isn't even a known procedure to chemically castrate women, and there isn't much research into the subject. So it's massively sexist in practice, even though not in theory.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:09 AM
5

What's weird is that even when laws regarding chemical castration are gender-neutral (they are in most countries where chemical castration is legal), it's still applied completely exclusively on men only. There isn't even a standard procedure to chemically castrate female offenders.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:08 AM
5

This. Also, it's weird how the "barbarism" argument is sometimes invoked to justify why we don't do any research on female chemical castration (which currently doesn't exist and the subject is barely studied): some people say it's to avoid repeating historical barbarism like sterilization or medical abuses against women (nevermind men have also often been suject to substantial medical abuse) - yet people have no problem allowing it for men, even though it massively and irreversibly impacts men's…
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:06 AM
3

Maybe. But one thing is sure it, it will be only done on men, not women. Chemical castration for women doesn't even exist.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:02 AM
4

I think chemical castration should be outlawed regardless, even for major sex offenders. Offenders too have rights to bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:01 AM
3

It's chemical, they don't remove any body parts, but they do inject chemicals which irreversibly change body functions.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 08:00 AM
3

Physical castration is a step too far, it's never applied (to my knowledge) in any Western country, not even against men. But yes, chemical castration (which currently exists for men only) can have irreversible long term effects, so it's almost comparable to a physical mutilation. And it exists only for men. Personally I think chemical castration is a crime and should be outlawed completely rather than extended to female rapists though.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 07:59 AM
7

Yes. Seemingly there is not a single standard procedure for chemical castration of females worldwide (nor is there any research on it), and it seems to have never been considered against any female sex offender - even though laws regarding chemical castration are often gender-neutral in theory. It's a massive double standard: chemical castration is gender-neutral in theory but in practice 100% performed on males only.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 07:55 AM
4

You're completely right that there is no proof that (male, since it only exists for males) chemical castration even works. There is however ample proof that it leads to depression and possible long-term irreversible damage. It's a violation of men's bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights28/05/25 07:53 AM
5

Sorry if I missed something, but it seems the article doesn't mention gender at all. In theory, if it passes, the law will probably be gender-neutral, even though men will probably be de facto disproportionately affected by it as we all know (female rapists are massively underpunished anyway), but at least I don't see any de jure discrimination here. Anyway, after reading the Wikipedia article on chemical castration and its side effects, I'm strongly opposed to it (for both genders). Edit: I was…
/r/MensRights28/05/25 06:42 AM
1

Frankly I dont see how its relevant. Personally if I found out women made 99% of inventions if wouldnt change my views or political beliefs at all. (Women probably made more than 10% of inventions anyway through thats hard to measure objectively) I dont really care what percentage of inventions was made by men or women. Its pretty much completely irrelevant to mens rights or gender issues. And I cant stand OP for this dumb post which seems more like he's trying to trigger women or boost his own …
/r/MensRights07/04/25 07:44 AM
1

You have sources for this ?
/r/MensRights06/04/25 07:27 AM
1

It's obviously stuffed with pictures of anti-Trump demos, anti-Trump meme material, and other anti-Trump content. They even posted a picture of an anti-Trump demo with a huge banner that reads "Burn a Tesla, save democracy". People have the right to protest, but advocating for the destruction of other people's property shouldn't be allowed or glorified.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 10:52 PM
1

It's more of a soapbox for political propaganda than a place to actually share pictures.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 08:49 PM
2

I didn't find any references in "actual history" to the slavery stuff you mentioned so I'm going to assume you're just talking out of your ass. (I on the other hand provided actual historical references for everything I said. You can look up the notion of "coverture" in 19th century England.) The practice of selling one's own kids (not just daughters) as slaves existed in ancient Rome, a brutal society where life sucked for everyone (including men who had to do 20 fking years of deadly military …
/r/MensRights05/04/25 08:38 PM
2

Most of the stuff you mentioned is just oversimplifications or borderline revisionism of history. It is debatable whether Note G by Lovelace was really a computer program because it was in a "pseudocode" table form that wasn't directly readable by a machine, and it was also never actually tested (afaik) because the "analytical engine" it was written for never worked. You are right about the first compiler (A-0 by Grace Hopper) but even then, again this is debatable since (according to Wikipedia)…
/r/MensRights05/04/25 04:45 PM
1

Heard lied maliciously and cold-bloodedly, but not because she read mean tweets on social media, she did it because she wanted to deliberately destroy Depp's career for money and fame.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:41 PM
3

Computer programming was not exactly "invented by women" though.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:09 PM
2

I agree that OP trying to somehow feel proud of other men's achievements is completely ridiculous. However your statements about how women were "property" in the past are completely out of line and disrespectful to people who were (and still are) treated like ACTUAL property ie SLAVES. In 19th century England (under the common law doctrine of "coverture"), France, and most Western countries, women had a special legal status when married (not when single), where they lost their financial and lega…
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:08 PM
1

Do you have actual examples of this happening ?
/r/MensRights05/04/25 01:30 PM
2

Yes, this did happen... but pretending that Ada Lovelace "invented computer programming", or that Hedy Lamarr literally invented Wi-Fi all by herself, or that Watson & Crick just stole all their ideas from Franklin, or that Otto Hahn stole his Nobel Prize from Meitner (like I’ve seen some feminists claim) is just a distortion of history. Not everything was invented by lone female geniuses and then stolen by evil men. Reality is more nuanced than that.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 01:02 PM
1

Where a community is labeled one thing, but has nothing to do with it. Wait until you find out abour r/pics ...
/r/MensRights05/04/25 04:54 AM
1

Which woman exactly
/r/MensRights05/04/25 04:50 AM
1

So male incels should be called malcels then ?
/r/MensRights05/04/25 04:50 AM
1

Would you mind debunking it one last time for me ?
/r/MensRights05/04/25 03:13 AM
1

It was clearly true before the 1900s. It was only around that time that women in the West started gaining access to higher education. Supporting men's rights doesn't mean we should engage in denial of history.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 03:11 AM
1

I don't give two flying fucks what percentage of inventions were invented by men. I'm more concerned about real men's rights issues, including forced military service and deadly conscription, discrimination against men in the legal system, the lack of public services for men, and so on.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 03:05 AM
1

I hate this post! ☹
/r/MensRights05/04/25 03:03 AM
1

What do you mean ?
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:57 AM
1

Well thats partly true (women did in fact not have access to higher education until 20th century) but that doesnt mean women were literally "stopped" from inventing or publishing things. If that was the case there wouldn't have been any female inventors before 1900, yet there were. Also women being barred from higher education until the late 19th century wasn't about "guys being insecure", it had more to do with well established gender roles - which by the way werent exactly fun for men either (…
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:55 AM
1

This. op should focus on real men's rights issues instead of just bashing women like they haven’t mattered in history.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:21 AM
2

It's true women invented tons of stuff, but some of your examples are wrong. Hedy Lamarr didnt exacly invent wifi. The medical syringe also wasnt invented by a women, or at least i cant find sources for it. You are correct about the dishwasher, diapers and wipers.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 02:02 AM
2

Even though burning of witches was a thing (mainly during the middle ages) historically the majority of victims of torturous execution were men, not women. While women accused of crimes in medieval England were typically burned at the stake, men were typically hanged, drawn and quartered. The majority of prisoners were also men, and this remains true today. I don't think most men fear smart women. However, I do fear the "smart" women (and men) who use their power, influence, and intelligence to …
/r/MensRights05/04/25 01:58 AM
2

Wow, still pulling the incel card in 2025.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 01:30 AM
2

Not exactly, they did theoretical work on their own, even though Franklins photo definitely contributed to their discovery (they credited her in their paper)
/r/MensRights05/04/25 01:19 AM
1

What is that "wif"
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:53 AM
1

Go MGTOW lmfao
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:51 AM
1

Wow. "Women scream rape when they feel like they are going to be raped even if nobody is noticing them" ? What makes you think that ?
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:51 AM
2

This. There were strong gender expectations in the past, especially before the end of the 19th century, some of which harmed women in a few areas eg higher education (since women were seen primarily as mothers who didn't need higher education.... though there were a few women's colleges before 1900), while others caused significant harm to men, such as men-only mandatory military service (which existed in almost every Western country until the end of the 20th century; many Western countries stil…
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:47 AM
1

The story about Watson and Crick "stealing" Franklins work is only partly true. It was Wilkins who showed Watson the photo without Franklin's consent, and he did so in a casual setting without Watson or Crick even asking for it. It probably wasnt deliberate plagiarism, Wilkins might have just thought it was normal to share results from fellow researchers at his lab (both were at King’s College). Watson and Crick did acknowledge Franklin's role in their paper so it's hardly plagiarism.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:38 AM
2

Maybe, but fantasizing about alternate histories isn't really helpful or relevant.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:28 AM
2

That thing did happen, but probably not as often as feminists claim.
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:27 AM
1

What effect ?
/r/MensRights05/04/25 12:25 AM
2

There has undoubtedly been historical sexism against women in higher education, but yes, fantasizing about how women would have done much better in an alternate history is just dumb. If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
/r/MensRights04/04/25 04:14 PM
1

It's not as simple as that. Wilkins showed Watson & Crick Photo 51, which Franklins team took, without her permission, but that doesn't mean Watson & Crick stole all of their work from Franklin. Watson & Crick also did their own theoretical work on the structure of DNA, they didn't just steal everything from Franklin. They also gave Franklin credit in their paper.
/r/MensRights04/04/25 04:09 PM
1

You could argue there has been sexism historically against both men and women. Women were indeed excluded from most universities (with a few exception eg Girton college in Cambridge and some women's colleges in the US) before the end of the 19th century, but you could say it was more about gender roles than just one sided sexism against women. Women faced discrimination in education and other areas, but there were also laws that protected women and put men at a disadvantage in other ways. Mandat…
/r/MensRights04/04/25 04:00 PM
5

It is true that women historically often did get their ideas stolen or plagiarized by men. However some of your examples are not really on point. About Rosalnd Franklin, it is true that she was about to discover the DNA structure through experimental means, and Watson&Crick did get access to Photo 51 by somewhat "unethical" means (Wilkins showed them the photo without Franklin's explicit consent... however it wasnt because of Watson&Crick's initiative, Wilkins showed them the photo in an informa…
/r/MensRights04/04/25 03:33 PM
1

Well it's not as clear cut as that. Women were indeed excluded from most Western universities (with a few exceptions ie Bologna, or some women's universities in the UK and US) until the late 19th century. Gender roles were strong back then and it was seen as weird for women to attend higher education since they were seen as mothers and wives, just as it would have been considered as weird for men to dodge military service or conscription since it was seen as men's role. Some upper class women di…
/r/MensRights04/04/25 02:51 PM
1

Being sexually single doesn't mean you're alone. You can have good friends who will give you all of the benefits of true friendship without any of the legal risks of marriage. and it's never too late.
/r/MensRights28/10/24 11:54 AM
1

First of all, as others have pointed, sadly there is not a single party that cares - or even pretends to care - about men's rights. (Neither in the US nor in most other countries.) So it comes down not to who is best for men's rights but rather to which party is less bad for men. I think Harris is worse for the following reasons : The Democratic party's program caters to women but almost completely ignores men. In a 2018 Twitter post, she suggested that no law supposedly gave the government powe…
/r/MensRights28/10/24 03:59 AM
1

What actual policies ? I don't trust the Dems on men's issues. Their party platform statement more or less completely ignores men while focusing on women. Also, I strongly disliked how harsh "Copmala" Harris was against nonviolent marijuana offenders in California, most of whom were male.
/r/MensRights24/10/24 12:46 AM
1

Republicans are not pro-male. I still vote for them because (among other reasons) at least they are not anti-male.
/r/MensRights24/10/24 12:36 AM
2

The same DeSantis who thinks only men should be drafted against their will.
/r/MensRights23/10/24 08:30 PM
-2

Title IX is already gender-neutral. Edit: why are you fukers downvoting facts ? Title IX is formulated in a gender-neutral way and is supposed to be gender-neutral. Women-only programs in colleges are already illegal in theory under Title IX. Mark Perry has filed complaints against medical schools on these grunds.
/r/MensRights23/10/24 01:50 PM
1

Please. Can we stop with these AI posts.
/r/MensRights21/10/24 01:59 AM
1

You're right but I don't think the "future is female" gynolaters view this as a dogwhistle reference to Sally Miller Gearhart. They probably don't even know her. Thinking that this slogan is implicitly advocating for genocide of men is dumb.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 11:10 PM
1

Vote Trump. He has promised to end the war. I don't care how bad Trump supposedly is, if he can end the Ukraine and Middle East conflicts he's better than Harris in my view.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 07:54 PM
1

They still are. The past and the present aren't male.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 07:34 PM
1

This. While I don't think "the future is female" is a sexist slogan per se, feminists need to stop ignoring the fact that ~99.9% of war deaths are male, and most of the time men are drafted against their will.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 07:34 PM
1

You gotta stop with this. There is no worldwide plot to genocide men (even though men do make up the majority of combat deaths). These ideas just make us look dumb.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 07:28 PM
2

Obama and Kissinger come to mind. Even though, they actually did things, just bad ones.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 07:26 PM
1

I'm going to go against the grain but no, I don't think that the "future being female" (or male) is a sexist slogan, not anymore than saying eg "the future is Chinese" is anti-white. It simply means you think or hope women will play a more a more important role in the future, which is not a sexist idea per se. And no, boys seeing this slogan is not child abuse. These far-fetched slogans do nothing but make us look like fools and take attention away from the real men's rights issues.
/r/MensRights17/10/24 07:24 PM
1

Agreed, I didn't like OP's generalizing tone about "females" being "brats".
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:36 PM
1

Sex slavery is arguably better than death
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:34 PM
1

I already exists on November 19th
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:33 PM
1

Sorry but your text doesn't make logical sense. What is your point ? Do you object to women having a choice in mate selection ?
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:31 PM
1

What exactly happened to women a millenium ago ?
/r/MensRights10/10/24 01:22 PM
7

Like many of us, I was still hesitating who to vote for in the last months, but things like that did it. When it comes to men's rights, I think at this point it's increasingly clear that one of the two parties hates and disdains men much more than the other. The Democrats' complete ignorance of men's issues while they bend over backwards to pander to female voters (see this post about the Democrat party platform), Walz's recent comments about "men who are not testosterone laden", Kamala Harris' …
/r/MensRights09/10/24 10:53 PM
1

I don't condone unwanted touching but self-defense has to be proportional. Knocking out is a bit extreme.
/r/MensRights08/07/24 03:34 PM
-2

Actually Girls Who Code seem to accept any gender according to their wsebsite
/r/MensRights30/06/24 06:16 AM
1

I'm pretty sure Russia forcibly drafts men against their will.
/r/MensRights06/04/22 05:36 PM
-2

Go away tradcuck troll. Or maybe you are a more of a feminist/TERF concern troll? In any case you have nothing to do on this sub.
/r/MensRights29/03/22 08:07 PM
5

The peoples they respected least suffered the greatest deportation o f their female populations Interesting, so the nazis saw only men from peoples deemed superior as expendable, but among the races they deemed "inferior" they treated all genders equally ?
/r/MensRights17/03/22 07:12 PM
-19

Russians are not a race
/r/MensRights11/03/22 08:26 PM
2

I guess I don’t actually want equal rights between men and women. Then you're in the wrong sub. Didn't you read the caption ?
/r/MensRights09/03/22 10:50 PM
1

FEMINIST CONCERN TROLL identified. Go away.
/r/MensRights09/03/22 10:48 PM
3

We've already seen more subtle feminist concern trolls on this sub. Could the mods please mute and ban the feminist concern troll u/MishmaTcp ?
/r/MensRights09/03/22 10:47 PM
3

I totally agree that it should be a war crime. I also agree with your view that conscripting adults against their will is not much more despicable than mobilizing children. However sadly it isn't recognized as a war crime by the UN yet. We can't meddle with definitions. But then also, the concept of war crime is itself very hypocritical. As if there could be clean wars.
/r/MensRights09/03/22 10:39 PM
6

Female Genital Mutilation
/r/MensRights08/03/22 10:18 PM
8

Feminists have also protested against equality in Switzerland https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/s6vqn5/feminists\_protest\_against\_equal\_retirement\_age\_in/
/r/MensRights08/03/22 10:15 PM
1

This kind of generalizing and borderline misogynistic comments are the reason why the arseholes at AgainstHateSubreddits and AgainstMensRights manage to portray us as hateful incels.
/r/MensRights08/03/22 08:21 PM
16

This also applies to the hundreds of thousands of women who have fled then.
/r/MensRights08/03/22 08:12 PM
-1

Not sure whether it's a war crime. Words have meanings.
/r/MensRights08/03/22 08:10 PM
0

what's your point ?
/r/MensRights08/03/22 08:08 PM
6

Ukraine is bad but Russia is worse in all aspects. It's run by oligarchs. Not much media freedom. And male-only conscription and military service.
/r/MensRights08/03/22 08:07 PM
16

The emphasis is on gender discrimination. Women are allowed to flee. Men are not, and are being sent to prison or forcefully conscripted for trying. If half of the population is allowed to flee then so should the other half.
/r/MensRights08/03/22 08:05 PM
1

not meant to trash men
/r/MensRights08/03/22 07:57 PM
9

I partly agree, but all sexism needs to be called out. Even in extreme times.
/r/MensRights08/03/22 11:37 AM
4

Happy Women's Day !!! ♀
/r/MensRights08/03/22 11:28 AM
1

No, just about women More precisely, he's mad that women get a choice while men don't. It would be best if everyone could escape of course.
/r/MensRights03/03/22 08:11 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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