TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

IOIOOIIOIO Archive

View 1 post and 76 comments by IOIOOIIOIO 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)
0

FeminismIOIOOIIOIO/r/MensRights02/02/18 11:54 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

The Bureau of Labor Statistics produces a Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries which is where this slide originates.
/r/MensRights29/08/15 06:09 AM
1

Probably because in the majority of cases where judges do not find deviation from a policy of joint visitation/custody/support is warranted it would encourage reaching a fair outcome. And in the edge cases, as you've noted, solutions already exist.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 09:08 AM
1

Merely two links: One to the Daily Mail and one self-referencing. No additional content added. Blogspam.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 07:18 PM
–

Put it into an account in the child's name with limited approved uses. Require both parents to pay into it each month. Allow both parents to use and monitor the account.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 04:29 PM
5

I'd support a child support order applying to both parents and going into a specific account set-aside for the child with limited pre-approved uses by either parent.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 04:27 PM
2

Require that all encounters be videotaped and posted to /r/gonewild so there's a public record.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 05:33 PM
1

Why does she still have a job?
/r/MensRights19/10/11 11:51 AM
1

I could have used the words satisfying, workable, functional, and many more. You could have, but you didn't. So I responded to the comment you wrote, rather than the comment you could have written. I won't quibble over words. You should. They have different meanings and effects. You sound like someone who has never been married. Thank you! Why would you offer a comment? Why not? End of comment. Okay, MCP.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 03:11 PM
1

Eh... not really. Women of other ethnicities seem much more willing to treat relationships as an equal partnership. They want to be in it, too. White women (from the US, at least) have a tendency to think of themselves as prizes or princesses.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 03:02 PM
1

"Doesn't make you happy." is a rather shittily low bar, don't you think? If you are actively unhappy in your marriage, yes, by all means get away from that toxic relationship. If you just don't have the live of luxury and leisure you expected? Suck it up, that's life. Ending your marriage isn't going to fix anything.
/r/MensRights18/10/11 02:01 PM
2

You wouldn't want people to actually use social services, would you?
/r/MensRights27/06/11 03:36 PM
7

They also want you to pay to ride... which does wonders for paying the rent and staying off the street.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 01:59 AM
25

Male prostitution doesn't pay as well.
/r/MensRights27/06/11 01:51 AM
1

Glad we've cleared that up, then.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 05:51 PM
1

The assumption that the person is cisgendered is not correct.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 05:31 PM
1

she gained my consent Key words right here.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 03:54 AM
0

The discussion about trans folks living their lives as their assumed gender is a red herring within the context of a casual-sex hook-up. Without the "trick" of passing as someone's preferred gender, they wouldn't get laid. Sure, sure, transphobes (or transphiles) are irrational. But it's precisely because they are irrational that reasoned arguments aren't going to change the way they feel.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 03:49 AM
1

I never said "Have you lusted over someone with AIDS?". You asked "Do you want to have sex with someone with AIDS?" and I replied that, yes, I probably have wanted to have sex with someone with HIV. And so have you. I asked if you would have sex with someone with AIDS? I'm guessing you wouldn't. Any active STD would be a count against them, but, no, it wouldn't be an automatic deal breaker. I'm also guessing that if someone you had sex with told you they had AIDS (or anything else that would mak…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 02:55 AM
1

I wouldn't be surprised if I have lusted over some hot chick that was HIV+ (or had a Y chromosome... or both). You probably have, too.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 02:17 AM
1

I don't want to have sex with a transperson. Point of fact, in this scenario you do want to have sex with a transperson, you've just mistakenly assumed she's cis.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:45 AM
3

We all keep our pasts secret when dating It's not "past" that you're transgendered, though. It's the present.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:43 AM
4

Trans women will tell you that there are huge numbers of men who have a specific sexual interest in trans women. They may also tell you they do not wish to be someone's fetish.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:33 AM
2

should not matter Agreed. It does matter to a lot of people, though, and transgendered people know this. In fact, transgendered people rely on the mistaken assumption that their presented gender is their, for lack of a better term, natural gender for their own safety.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:29 AM
1

Because all trans people are just "pretending?" Do I even have to point out why that's offensive? Pick a less offensive term for a trans-woman passing as a cis-woman, then. Whatever you call it, things are not as they appear. Yes, you have a right to be a homophobe and/or a transphobe; but don't act like you're sitting on some moral high horse. It's difficult to exercise one's right (your word) to be a transphobe when that transgendered girl is relying on the mistaken assumption that she's a cis…
/r/MensRights09/05/11 01:19 AM
2

This new data or another redefinition of sexual abuse?
/r/MensRights25/04/11 06:00 AM
4

Yeah, I saw that before and thought it's superficially humorous, but it's valid to complain about deprecating terminology based around gender if you're paying attention to that sort of thing. Not much different from the use of "gay" as an insult. He could just as easily have teased her about being a weakling, which is purely descriptive and a directly undesirable trait for the task at hand. Instead he implied that it's bad to be feminine or womanly. Yes, there's a batshit-crazy over-reaction at …
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:17 AM
3

Poe's Law
/r/MensRights06/04/11 01:05 PM
3

The devaluation of parenting as a worthwhile or rewarding occupation probably has more to do with it.
/r/MensRights28/02/11 06:24 PM
2

Not generally a member of this community, but I'd say do exactly what you said you'd do. Don't buy that you have to wait n days. Call her when you have a couple of concrete ideas for things to do, just so you can direct the conversation.
/r/seduction28/02/11 10:43 AM
3

Since you've brought up that this sort of behaviour is common amongst the employees at this store, if the supervisor/manager truly feels that it is a problem, they should hold training to instruct all employees to cut that shit out. But this isn't an example of workplace misbehaviour, so no corrective action was warranted. Period.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 11:19 PM
3

Sounds like that was her chance to engage in some recreational outrage.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 11:13 PM
8

Maybe he made a comment about the fact that they had a special on asparagus that week and she was molested as a child by an uncle who had a kidney problem that made him smell like asparagus pee and that's what made her uncomfortable. She might have really been uncomfortable. Doesn't make the complaint valid.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 11:13 PM
2

That's where it should've ended, sure. Instead he got formally reprimanded.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 11:10 PM
4

Not all customer complaints are legitimate. In which case you mollify the customer and make them feel like their unreasonable concern will be addressed. In this instance, I'd probably talk to the employee to let them know some paranoid whack-job complained that they said "hello", but documenting it their file as a formal complaint is a bit too far.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 11:08 PM
–

He would sue the store for taking disciplinary action against him because of his sex. Part of the job of a supervisor is to shield their workers from stupidity from customers and management so they can do their jobs.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 10:04 PM
13

.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 08:00 PM
–

Sounds like you've got a sex discrimination lawsuit on your hands if you want one.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 07:13 PM
1

Completely agreed.
/r/MensRights15/01/11 07:09 PM
1

I know! Sometimes they follow through. Oooh la la!
/r/MensRights15/01/11 07:09 PM
1

No, that's a pretty common sentiment. Provided you did good work, though, I personally didn't care if you had time to screw around between tasks.
/r/MensRights15/01/11 07:08 PM
0

There are none. Ask a feminist of the type under discussion.
/r/MensRights15/01/11 07:02 PM
2

Only 16 men chose to get up off their asses and run for office. In a state with a population of several million, these aren't significantly different levels of participation. But if you don't have a 50:50 split in candidates, it's somewhat difficult to justify the expectation that there should be a 50:50 split in elected officials. As other posters have pointed out, female candidates seem to get elected at about the same frequency that they run... which indicates parity.
/r/MensRights15/01/11 12:20 AM
1

Last election there were 19 candidates for governor listed in the election results. 3 candidates were women. Much less than 50.7%.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 10:39 PM
6

Wouldn't you prefer I equate unprofessional behavior with just that - being unprofessional - rather than being a man? Why was it ever redefined as outside the bounds of "professional"? Oh, right, because it upsets the women. And, in the interests of equality, we all have to do it the way the women want.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 05:00 PM
6

Think very carefully about what you've just done. Being unprofessional doesn't equal being a man in the work place. I've described to you an experience in an all-male work environment. An interaction that had absolutely no impact on the quality of work performed or on the nature of the working relationship. It was, as noted, completely professional. Yet here you are telling me it's unprofessional and/or not "being a man in the work place". Interesting. How would you know? I accept that I can say…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 04:41 PM
3

I'd probably get burned at the stake in the 1950s if I said something like that.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 04:18 PM
4

No. Meaning there is no way you can stay home and be happy with that, because the only way to have a worthwhile and fulfilling life is to go get a man's job. Nevermind if your spouse makes enough to support the entire family comfortably and you really would like to raise your own children. Parenting is something self-respecting people pay strangers to do for them.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 04:06 PM
4

Who said anything about "unwarranted"? "Nice glasses." "Thanks." "Very fagalicious." "Yeah. I'm busy, though, so I can't suck your dick right now." "Bring that sweet ass to my office when you're done." Then I'd go to his office after I'd finished with whatever task I was doing, he'd give me the next maintenance assignment from the daily worklist, and tell me to take New Guy so-and-so and train him on how not to dog fuck it. It was all completely professional. And then we'd have planned female vi…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:59 PM
5

Nothing in theory. In practice, "empowering women" has mostly consisted of denigrating the roles women have historically filled so they believe they can only be successful as men (who happen to be female).
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:35 PM
7

What are you talking about being freaked out by how men treat each other? Woman gets treated as equal. Woman files sexual harassment complaint. Men get annoyed at having to treat each other like women.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 03:31 PM
5

There are those that have more extreme views, and they may be the loudest, but they're not the majority. They're the only ones doing anything about it. And I've had to sit through way too much sexual harassment and sensitivity training to buy that "I don't want to be treated in a special manner for being a woman." idea. Women wanted to be "empowered" by breaking into a male dominated workforce... and then freaked out about how working men treat each other.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:57 PM
–

Pity you're down here at the bottom, because I think you've put it beautifully. Feminists may talk about equality, but they work to empower women.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:46 PM
5

They'll get protections for maternity leave and anti-discrimination policies against giving neutral performance reviews for the time they weren't doing any work because they were on leave. And fathers can go suck a dick.
/r/MensRights14/01/11 02:40 PM
2

What would you have considered appropriate?
/r/MensRights31/12/10 07:31 PM
1

he could have seriously injured this woman. He could have. He didn't. He did what he needed to do to stop the assault.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 06:45 PM
1

And if you go back far enough rape was the divine right of nobles. So what?
/r/MensRights31/12/10 06:43 PM
3

Are women similarly expect to think clearly and rationally while being sexually assaulted and use exactly the measure of force required to stop the exact limits of the assault to that point or is it understandable that people might react a bit to being violated and want to ensure their future safety?
/r/MensRights31/12/10 06:17 PM
2

I'd prefer to think she was fired and he got a nice settlement from the company. That would be a more significant "Achievement Unlocked" than "Woo! The look on her face!"
/r/MensRights31/12/10 06:01 PM
1

I think you're both making the same point.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 05:42 PM
9

Self-defense isn't a wrong. It's a Right.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 02:05 AM
9

Reverse the roles so it's a guy trying to put some girl's hand on his junk and, having already been rebuffed once, waiting until they're alone in the dark to hold her against the wall and stick his tongue down her throat. It's sexual assault. Don't try to minimize what she did.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 02:03 AM
7

I don't think his sexual orientation is relevant.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 01:59 AM
0

This type of assault is probably a lot more common than the "horror stories" in the other comments.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 01:39 AM
–

an X-year old man from Y was brutally beaten by girlfriend with a frying pan after he suggested she needed to lose weight See? See guys! It's FUNNY because it's a woman assaulting a man! Ho! ho! ho! Point and laugh fellas! What the fuck is wrong with you?
/r/MensRights31/12/10 01:04 AM
2

Throw in girlfriends taking advantage of the morning wood in the nicest way possible to wake you up. It's rape and/or sexual assault.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 12:59 AM
3

What is the nature of your objection? Yes, I think an innocent person should be able to limit the amount of damage to their reputation caused by baseless accusations that must be defended against at trial. I recognize this also means some guilty folks will benefit. Oh well.
/r/MensRights30/09/10 02:35 AM
2

You could have a "who was arrested" list and a "arrests for these crimes" list without any public link between the two. Becomes problematic when the list is very short, but if that's the sort of situation you're in, everybody in town probably knows your business anyway.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 08:13 PM
3

In the USA you are innocent before proven guilty. People should and mostly do understand this is a critical aspect of our justice system. Depends on how badly people want someone to burn for the crime. For sufficiently vile and publicized acts, simply have a finger vaguely gestured in your direction can be sufficient.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 08:09 PM
3

Remove this power from the judges and place it in the hands of the Defendant.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 08:04 PM
6

Divorce courts have been known to decide on the basis of "fairness" to set aside the amicable agreement between the people seeking to finalize a divorce and substitute their own judgment. Interestingly, the only cases I know of personally all happened in states where the local government collected the support payments and then disbursed them to the awarded parties. No conflict of interest there, nosiree.
/r/MensRights09/07/10 01:17 AM
5

Varies by state, but you can work out everything amicably with your spouse and take it to be rubber stamped by the court and they'll return it telling you to come back with something "fairer" by whatever lights the court judges these things. But, yeah, child support will be completely unaffected.
/r/MensRights09/07/10 01:06 AM
1

You may not know why someone is attacking you, their intentions, or how far they're willing to go. "Often not necessary" does not mean you have to accept the risk of being headbutted, kneed in the groin, and/or having someone stomp down your shin onto your instep when defending yourself from attack.
/r/MensRights05/05/10 03:10 PM
-6

I grew up in a household where hitting my sister meant I got the shit beat out of me. She for some reason could hit me and torment me all she wanted. I grew up in a messed up overly feminist home No, you didn't.
/r/MensRights05/05/10 02:48 PM
1

Obviously motivated by stamen envy.
/r/MensRights10/01/10 03:44 AM
1

Child support payments have nothing to do with supporting children. And this is a problem that needs to be fixed. The system does a pretty shitty job in securing the rights of fathers (or noncustodial parents, generally speaking). The answer isn't to make the system do a shitty job of securing the rights of children (or women, in the case of the right to choose).
/r/MensRights27/07/09 04:10 AM
1

If only one parent was required to provide support for the child that would be far worse. Both parents should be equally obligated to support their children. Neither should be given an "opt out" that leaves the other on the hook.
/r/MensRights27/07/09 01:26 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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