TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Imacleverjam Archive

View 0 posts and 21 comments by Imacleverjam 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 don't need to link to the definition of sociology lol Also that's not the sociological explanation. That's a sociological explanation.
/r/MensRights28/03/22 11:59 AM
1

that doesn't change the fact that it's not ad hominem lmao just admit you don't understand the ad hominem fallacy and move on.
/r/MensRights28/03/22 11:46 AM
1

I called you stupid, that's not ad hominem because I wasn't claiming you're wrong because of it.
/r/MensRights28/03/22 06:04 AM
1

ad hominem only applies if you're using it as a point. "you're stupid therefore you're wrong", etc. I just said you're stupid.
/r/MensRights26/03/22 07:00 PM
1

not everything is a debate, dipshit. It was a joke about how you're a dumbass
/r/MensRights26/03/22 01:12 PM
1

I'm not convinced you've read a single book in your life tbh
/r/MensRights25/03/22 07:33 PM
1

"Any website that feminists have edited at any point in its editorial history is not going to give unbiased view of feminism" that's such a ridiculous sentence I don't even know where to begin. do you hold other political positions to this standard? Is the article on liberalism biased because liberals have contributed? Is the article on monarchism biased because at some point a monarchist has contributed?
/r/MensRights25/03/22 01:38 PM
1

Books, encyclopedias and peer reviewed articles are all valid sources. Not sure what you're laughing about...
/r/MensRights25/03/22 12:52 PM
1

buddy you're allowed to swear, you're not gonna be grounded
/r/MensRights25/03/22 12:50 PM
1

4 dictionaries. The other eight are encyclopedias, books and articles. All valid sources
/r/MensRights25/03/22 12:48 PM
1

wow almost as though they cited a plethora of other sources 🤔
/r/MensRights25/03/22 12:42 PM
1

that doesn't make the sources invalid. Dictionaries are generally considered secondary sources by Wikipedia, which is acceptable, and dismissing a book or study because it contains the word feminism in itself would be biased.
/r/MensRights25/03/22 12:36 PM
1

That's an unfounded conspiracy theory. if you actually look at the page statistics for the feminism article, there's a very minor increase from 7 to 22 edits in the month the project was announced, which goes back down by march. Most of them are adding citations or very minor corrections. Not exactly a feminist takeover.
/r/MensRights25/03/22 11:49 AM
1

https://www.amnesty.ca/blog/get-involved-in-amnestys-feminist-wikipedia-takeover/ if you actually read about it, it was about writing about notable women & nby ppl on Wikipedia. it wasn't about promoting feminism, but recognising women's achievements.
/r/MensRights25/03/22 10:58 AM
1

they cited like 12 sources dude, it's absolutely true that sexism primarily affects women the citation: "There is a clear and broad consensus among academic scholars in multiple fields that sexism refers primarily to discrimination against women, and primarily affects women. See, for example: "Sexism". New Oxford American Dictionary (3 ed.). Oxford University Press. 2010. ISBN 9780199891535. Defines sexism as "prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of s…
/r/MensRights25/03/22 09:33 AM
1

by the way referring to the problem op had with the article on sexism, this is the reference... "There is a clear and broad consensus among academic scholars in multiple fields that sexism refers primarily to discrimination against women, and primarily affects women. See, for example: "Sexism". New Oxford American Dictionary (3 ed.). Oxford University Press. 2010. ISBN 9780199891535. Defines sexism as "prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex". "Se…
/r/MensRights25/03/22 09:31 AM
1

Wikipedia doesn't employ editors, it's unpaid voluntary work anyone can do. If you have adequate sources and think you can write impartially, write about the "dark side".
/r/MensRights25/03/22 07:03 AM
1

Wikipedia doesn't call any ideology sexist. If you actually looked at the article, you'd see that it just describes the ideology, its history etc. It has a section covering both arguments for and against feminism, but it's just describing the arguments (including the argument that feminism is sexist/places women above men). Not actually expressing a view, just listing some major arguments and linking to the pages for pro-feminism and antifeminism.
/r/MensRights23/03/22 03:10 PM
1

literally brought me to tears :')
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/18 11:07 PM
1

the 'social experiment'. Youtubers' get out of jail free card for acting like twats
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/18 11:02 PM
2

bleh, I has been deaded by the mean police person
/r/PussyPassDenied12/08/18 11:00 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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