TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

InflatableTomato Archive

View 0 posts and 133 comments by InflatableTomato 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)
26

Film or audio record that shit and upload it on youtube. First, if they're subjected to ridicule they could be more likely to consider a policy change. Second, even if nothing changes, it's good to have this stuff documented lest anyone say it doesn't happen, it still helps in the long term bigger picture.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 07:02 AM
2

Regardless of whether you agree with him or not, you've either missed the point of his choice of the word dickhead by a long shot or you're ignoring it.
/r/MensRights31/01/14 11:16 PM
4

Out of curiosity, could you expand or have a link about the matriarchal tribes?
/r/MensRights27/01/14 05:04 AM
5

I can't recall the name of the group but it's one of those bat shit insane nordic feminist groups who made some video where they sneak up on some old bald white guy shoot him in the head then dance around the body to some cheery tune licking the blood off him. Here
/r/MensRights22/12/13 02:38 AM
3

Fuck, it's BACK?!? I thought I'd survived the epidemic somewhen in middle school!
/r/MensRights17/12/13 11:44 AM
2

Legally, yes, it could be trouble -- but that's because it would be impractical and dangerous to write otherwise into a law, and allow people to take their own revenge without passing through official institutions such as the police or a tribunal. Morally, you can't expect to punch someone in the face and suffer no consequences so long as you walk away afterwards, just because you know very well that in 99% of the cases small scuffles won't get taken to court because it's a pain in the ass. Dude…
/r/MensRights23/11/13 09:03 PM
1

Well, I for one am ok with the most upvoted comments in this post for example. This is not something that would happen in SRS.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 02:59 PM
0

At least the comment section isn't as retarded.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 12:30 PM
18

The point is that there's plenty of ways for a girl to "take a step toward her liberation" that don't "help a boy find the way to freedom easier", it's not automatic.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 04:40 AM
31

It could be worse, but I don't like it very much. It implies that making things better for women would automatically make it better for men too. It gives the idea that advancing women's rights is the lever to pull to have men's rights automatically adjust in the new equilibrium. And that is not true, as in the past by pulling that lever over and over again many things have improved for women, but for men the correspondent things never really got automatically adjusted as they seem to suggest.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 02:43 AM
1

But when it comes to men being expected to make the first move, take all of the initiative, Eh, I don't think in that case it's a matter of sexism, it's more a matter of there always being enough people of the opposite sex willing to make that first move for them. Heck, if I didn't have to and there were enough women making the first move around, there's no way I would take the chance of a humiliating rejection myself. Who'd want to deal with that shit if given a good enough alternative like tha…
/r/MensRights23/10/13 04:24 AM
5

That's just semantics. Also I'm not arguing the legality of it, if it wasn't clear.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 07:23 PM
8

An argument could be made that one-sided censorship is potentially much more harmful, though. Censor every 'strong' opinion indiscriminately, and you're enforcing moderation, which is bad. But censor every strong opinion except those subscribing to a certain set of values, and you end up encouraging radicalism in one single direction, which is another whole kind of bad. Of course censoring neither would be ideal, but if it's a choice...
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:00 PM
94

I'm strongly against this kind of censorship and my first gut reaction was disappointment in OP, as freedom of expression ranks very very high in my scale of values worth protecting; with that said, if it has to be there, guess it's at least nice to see they don't (or didn't) apply double standards in enforcing it.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 03:14 PM
10

Or just that fathers get awarded custody only if found to be the significantly better parent.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 03:28 PM
14

Let that number go up, I don't care. The more they raise it the more it becomes obvious even to the average joe that maybe, just maybe, something doesn't add up and someone's been playing with statistics for a while.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 02:18 PM
30

The whole concept behind "victim blaming" is bullshit anyway, imo. It assumes that every situation is of the stark black and white kind and never accounts for the possible existance of various degrees of responsibility.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 12:39 PM
2

I don't know how it works in America, but even over here in Italy, which is one of the oldest countries in Europe (if not the most, but not 100% sure about that), old people don't just "die". They remain a financial burden, both in the form of pensions and health care. Further, the damage to society can also come in different forms. Since obviously voting rights don't die until they do, they can - and usually do - also vote for godawful politicians the likes of Berlusconi if only they promise no…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 12:17 AM
1

In the end whether it falls into the "privilege" term or not is just semantics -- although I believe that watering its meaning down until it's completely interchangeable with "advantage" makes the use of the word dull when discussing social issues, but let's set that aside. The point is that it's their right to have free choice regarding who they want to be with, whether their expectations for a partner are too stupidly high or not. You can't force someone to go against their preference just bec…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 12:47 AM
6

Yes, I was writing in a hurry and worded that poorly. The point I meant to convey was twofold. First, that the kind of privileges he was discussing were those of that particular kind: Women are granted special privileges [list] Hypergamy is not the kind of privilege that is granted. Second, that I do not deem justifiable to either advocate stripping people of or otherwise protest the kind of privilege that can be categorized as a direct consequence of a natural advantage, unless the exploitation…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 06:02 AM
6

Agree with the first part, but why should hypergamy be considered a privilege? As I see it - if I understand hypergamy well - it is as much a privilege for women as having superior muscular strength is for men. It's a natural advantage, there's more demand for dating partners on the male part than there is on the female side, so they get to be picky. It sure sucks for us but I don't see anything inherently wrong with it, and I definitely wouldn't classify it as privilege, if privilege is defined…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 01:37 AM
39

By the same logic, is white people being scared when approached by black people a demonstration of the lack of privilege whites have?
/r/MensRights05/07/13 01:21 PM
2

Well, being the top dogs of their league does mean they draw in more spectators and money than the other dude who's ranked 300th, so it's not just about gender (plus I'm pretty sure a large part of their income comes from merchandise etc. from being able to profit off their fame), and if it was just that I'd say fair enough. What is arguably not fair is that if money drawn is the criterion, then they shouldn't be able to demand as much as the leading players of the men's league.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:26 PM
3

It also depends on what you consider size. Males on average have a higher muscle mass per body mass unit, whereas women are higher in fat mass.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 02:35 PM
1

Well, upper classes are the only ones to codify gentle behavior in rituals. Greetings, honour, everything. It doesn't mean that the lower classes received those principles only as they trickled down. The article also doesn't just address courteous etiquette such as holding the door for a woman, taking her coat and yada yada, but preferential behavior that men should hold towards women in general. It addresses all that, in the author's words, feminists call "benevolent sexism". So I think it's sa…
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:41 PM
2

Well, the european upper class may have codified it and called it "chivarly", but the principles were most likely there already. In fact, as far as I know chivalry can and could be found in pretty much every culture around the world in one form or another, not just in Europe.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 03:01 PM
0

Probably a mix of competition for sex, and natural selection in that those tribes/populations that weren't either culturally influenced or hard wired to care for women's well being more than their males' would go extinct or otherwise be out-reproduced by other tribes who were.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:49 PM
22

Rich women got together and made up lots of social and dating rules and protocols. Hope you're kidding and it went over my head, cause that reeks just as much of bullshit as the patriarchy theorists who believe menzkind at one point got together to create a system to oppress women.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 02:41 PM
14

They work for them, because women don't have to fight the stigma of being aggressive, and their aggressivity is not seen as threatening. For us, it's really not a good idea.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 05:43 AM
7

Well, you see, since the actually relevant parties are very few and proposals come in indivisible bundles, succeeding in politics is not just a matter of who agrees with you and who doesn't, you just have to be careful not to propose anything that could be a dealbreaker for your target electorate. In other words: people don't see themselves ever being in a situation where they'd be under trial for murder, so it's not a dealbreaker and it won't cause them to break up with that party even if they …
/r/MensRights29/05/13 02:31 PM
2

Dude's a troll, mind the username
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:11 PM
4

I think that, given his username, the chance is high that he's making that shit up
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:09 PM
1

I don't see the purpose of two entrances, but I for one wouldn't give a damn about a white-only room and a black-only room, provided both rooms held to the same quality standards so as to not come off as one being better than the other. If a business wanted to try and capitalize on a hypothesized preference of people for gathering/socializing with their own ethnicity, what would be wrong with it, other than not being seen as a PC move in our society?
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:03 PM
5

I appreciate the sentiment but honestly I feel there's little to work together on, if by feminism you mean the ideology that has its roots in patriarchy theory. A lot of the things that the MRM stands for are in direct conflict with patriarchy theory, and with much of what has been done by the movement you claim to be part of in the name of "smashing" or defending yourselves from it. Duluth model, affirmative action, women-only shelters, etc etc... the list goes on, same old stuff that gets post…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 06:50 AM
6

As an Italian, I can assure you that you probably couldn't pick a worse example if you tried. Berlusconi is constantly mocked over here for his short stature. He's actually been referred to by his detractors as "psiconano" (psychodwarf) or "nano malefico" (evil dwarf) and many other nano-derivatives since I can remember, even by the opposing press sometimes. If you google "Berlusconi nano" you get 1,610,000 results, even though the search terms are in Italian. And people also mock him for his fa…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:17 AM
5

Yea, no. The unfortunate truth is we benefit from Reddit more than they benefit from us. This sub keeps growing everyday largely because Reddit itself is growing. Moving to another platform would also mean losing a significant part of our growth rate and of the possibility to make new contacts to expose new people to MR's ideas.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:19 AM
16

Really? What is the purpose of school? To educate and do what's possible to draw out every student's potential, or to take revenge on the student and punish him/her for attitudes that irritate the teacher?
/r/MensRights17/04/13 02:35 AM
10

It seems to me that you're not acquainted with the concept of variance. That or you haven't read either of the posts you've replied to.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 02:29 AM
1

I would, but I'm not a judge and I'm not required to be professional. A person in her position of authority shouldn't abuse it, she knows full well that they're not allowed to talk back.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 06:58 PM
8

Hahahah this is fantastic
/r/MensRights10/04/13 08:09 PM
37

Intersectionality is what happened the moment feminists discovered the mathematical operator "plus". So basically the most groundbreaking innovation in feminism since whoop dee fucking doo. It's just a word to say that you can have more than one tick in your feminist approved "privilege card". Basically you add one point for each tick that you're able to put in the female/black/poor/straight/trans column and subtract one for each in male/white/rich/straight/cis. The higher the score you end up w…
/r/MensRights06/04/13 07:07 PM
11

Keep in mind we're talking about accusations that are PROVEN false (e.g. video footage, recordings, etc), not ones that are dismissed due to insufficient proof. So, if you're being sincere you have literally nothing to fear. but that is already illegal because they are lying under oath. Yet oftentimes they're let go with not even a slap on the wrist, if you've been browsing this sub you should have already read plenty of examples.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 04:45 AM
0

Same. Too bad in Italy where I live giving my vote to the right would mean voting for the likes of Berlusconi. Instead I'm forced to vote for opposing parties that include in their programs points such as gender quotas and "stopping the femicide". I kid you not. The "femicide", it's become a buzzword. Every year in Italy there are around 500-600 homicides depending on the year, and our newspapers and tv news report titles like: "massacre of women, 100 killed in 2012". I don't even
/r/MensRights30/03/13 05:28 PM
3

Not quite what you were asking for, but the closest thing I could find: She later said, on Good Morning America, "I almost wish I hadn't even written about it, because it's been sensationalized out of context. My husband was not a wife-beater, and I was no passive victim of a wife-beater. We fought a lot, and he was bigger than me."
/r/MensRights27/02/13 07:57 PM
3

In all honesty I was more scared to learn the infamous hippocracy has made a move leaving its rivers in africa to come back up the feminists. But yea, otherwise, very good replies.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 09:07 PM
9

And I totally agree with the points you and your girlfriend are making. See my response to HULK-SMAAASH below.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 06:42 PM
9

I think it'd be pretty awful if they didn't, considering the much milder stuff they don't allow. Yep, I do agree with you on this point. What I mean is: on the one hand I'm sort of glad it was removed because of what it indicates, which is that a growing number of people are starting to consider female-on-male violence just as offensive and unacceptable as its gender reversed counterpart. But on the other I really don't like how interest/activist groups put pressure on companies to have things t…
/r/MensRights03/02/13 05:49 PM
96

Actively promoted? As in, there was flashing text suggesting people should get up from their chairs and go beat their boyfriends? Or do you mean "actively promoting" in the same way as, say, GTA actively promotes joining a gang and start a criminal life? I mean, sure, I didn't like the game because it was yet another indicator of how acceptable female-on-male violence is, but that's no reason to take it down in my opinion.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 05:27 PM
176

Not a big fan of this having "offensive" stuff taken down. Don't like it when feminists do it, and I'm not going to start to like it when MRAs or whoever else does it. Don't like it? Don't play it.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 05:12 PM
3

It can, but in my personal experience it isn't. "Most" women I know wouldn't cry rape even if they were to regret drunk sex the morning after - unless their drink was spiked of course, but that's different.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 11:19 PM
0

Let's not conflate "irresponsible" with "are not held responsible".
/r/MensRights21/01/13 10:27 PM
2

Assuming you're from the US, you have a much higher chance of meeting those where you live than in Italy...
/r/seduction13/12/12 08:06 PM
5

^ Manhood 101, downvote and move on
/r/MensRights09/12/12 06:00 AM
9

Goddamn it, just talking about people who are homosexual is getting harder by the day. It'd almost be easier to learn another language altogether than memorizing the ever growing list of things someone could possibly interpret as malicious. EDIT: oh, I see from your comment below that it was a reference I didn't get. Nevermind :p
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:44 PM
2

Facepalming? If anything I find the overwhelming majority of the responses to be very encouraging and way beyond my expectations, instead.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 04:30 AM
6

Well. To be fair, it's not fireproof, but it does reduce the chance of having someone interested in flirting in the group by a very good chunk since gay population only makes up for a small percentage (and there's no telling about people's sexual orientation by just looking at them anyway so that's not an easy criterion to apply)... I don't really think there's any androphobia to be found there. And even if all they wanted was just female company cause they think they'd relate better or whatever…
/r/MensRights16/10/12 01:59 AM
1

Driving traffic away from reddit sounds like a bad idea to me. One of the main reasons we keep getting more subscribers is that this sub is growing with reddit. It's really much more visible and easily accessible here than on an obscure site, and if there's one thing the mrm is in dire need of, it's numbers and awareness of its existence. The site might be a good idea as support or alternative forum, but imho you want to keep the "HQ", so to speak, here. Except in the unlikely case it gets banne…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:57 PM
3

Yea well, I think he was rather obviously referring to what makes religion bad, which is not the conclusion that there's a god per se, but how they reach that and all other conclusions. The rotten part of religion is its method based on rejecting evidence and confrontation in favor of dogmatism, circular thinking and demonization.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 09:09 PM
2

Oh, don't get me wrong, user-me totally agrees with you. Just saying that profit concerned admin-me probably wouldn't.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 11:37 PM
3

Well to be fair, if I were in charge of reddit the last subreddit I'd want to ban out of them all would be SRS, considering all the effort they put into advertising the site for free.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:21 PM
25

No it wouldnt, reddit rules explicitly state doxing people will get you banned. A hateful subreddit with precedents threatening to do it again is more reason than you need to look into it. Plus, if we want to get pedantic, reddit only has to answer reddit as to who they decide to ban or what they decide to look into, so there wouldn't be any abuse of power to be committed here regardless.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:17 PM
75

Who the fuck cares whose "side" he is on? Opinions don't come pre-packaged in "sides". Picking sides is one of the worst things that can happen to your critical thinking.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 01:41 PM
37

Social stigma? What are you talking about, we live in a rape culture, dontcha know?
/r/MensRights16/09/12 05:27 PM
1

Oh, oops, seems I misunderstood what you were implying, sorry.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 06:53 PM
1

Well uh, as I see it that statement is actually kinda misogynist if anything at all. The only malicious thing I can possibly take out of that sentence is him saying wives are baby-craving whores, since he's not taking a stance on whether they're rightfully entitled to that behavior or not.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 06:30 PM
5

But... cucumber IS a fruit. An undeserving one, but a fruit nevertheless :(
/r/MensRights13/09/12 09:22 AM
10

539. INFLATABLE_CUCUMBER(1) Wtf my archenemy has arrived here?! So... it has come to this, huh. Guess it was only a matter of time. I KNOW YOU'RE READING! WE BOTH KNOW THERE'S NO SPACE FOR TWO INFLATABLE FRUITS ON THIS EARTH, SO SHOW YOURSELF AND LET'S SETTLE THIS ONCE AND FOR ALL YOU DILDO SHAPED COWARD!
/r/MensRights13/09/12 08:53 AM
3

If it's the same as Italian (and I'm pretty sure it is), pagina = page. And sorry for turning such an intriguing word into something that boring, I guess...
/r/MensRights13/09/12 08:23 AM
7

Also, it should never be included by default in marriage. If the parents make a joint decision to have one of them become stay-at-home, they can always customize their own contract to suit their situation. By including it by default the decision becomes unilateral and the system too easily abusable.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 06:11 AM
4

Ugh. There should be a law to ban feminists' attempts at humor. I don't even
/r/MensRights28/08/12 07:31 PM
1

I'm perfectly fine with women discussing women problems. Except when they frame as specific to women problems that are not, just so they can claim that meanie society is out to oppress them. I can't stand that, and calling it out is perfectly fair game and has nothing to do with the "what about the menz" bullshit.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 09:24 PM
25

Hi, I'm a Mike, and to the defense of Mikes around the world, you haven't really had any fun playing Risk unless you cheated as if your life depended on it. Hospital is a more than reasonable price to pay for the thrill. It's not Risk unless you risk!
/r/MensRights17/08/12 07:45 PM
12

I love when we chug an assload of beer and he ends up puking, but I can keep drinking for the rest of the night. Meh, I hate them instead. They pay half as much to get just as drunk. Fuckin' privilege right there if I ever saw it
/r/MensRights17/08/12 02:59 PM
7

Yea but you don't get that without it being linked or made visible. It's been there for 9 months and it doesn't look like it's going to boom in subscribers anytime soon without some help.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 05:55 PM
3

This guy needs to be upvoted higher. As an MR supporter the last thing I want is giving people easy ways to discredit our credibility. Let's not become feminism, truthful information needs to be highest priority here. There's other ways and good quality data available to argue this measure is bullshit without recurring to made up "facts".
/r/MensRights14/08/12 10:43 PM
0

Does anyone have a link to the actual study anyway?
/r/MensRights29/07/12 03:08 PM
2

My only small objection is I wouldn't have worded it as "educational service" cause it sounds like an euphemism for countering indoctrination with indoctrination, but otherwise totally agree. If there's one thing that really "doesn't do shit for the movement" is impeding dialogue and discussion to those who are seeking it to challenge their ideas. Also, let's not turn this subreddit into SRS for fuck's sake.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 11:06 PM
4

I prefer asshole. Everyone has one, and they all stink. In the US maybe... we have bidets over here, so watch who you're calling stinky asshole, asshole!
/r/MensRights29/06/12 01:01 PM
3

Whoa, er, don't get me wrong but, could you define safe-space first? Is it going to be as ban-happy as SRS or lgbt? RES is telling me you've gotten quite a few upvotes from me so I'd be inclined to lean towards no, but just checking.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 12:45 AM
10

fuck off troll
/r/MensRights17/06/12 03:11 AM
1

Dude, I for one don't think it's reliable information either, but how about you chill out a bit?
/r/MensRights01/06/12 02:06 AM
3

This is just as petty as a woman destroying things in response to a relationship ending, something I've seen this subreddit call out more than once. Blindly supporting destructive behaviour just because the destructive party is male is hypocritical. The key here is that the stuff he was damaging was allegedly his property. The reason people complain about destructive behavior is because it damages someone else's property. I don't necessarily disagree with the decision of arresting him (for reaso…
/r/MensRights31/05/12 05:43 PM
0

If it wasn't merely a symbolic statement, that justification would be fucking retarded though. The whole point and goal of politics is to make decisions for the benefit of the nation you're representing, whether or not you're the one carrying them out first hand or not. And laws and decisions that don't directly influence the politician supporting them are made all the time, and so it should be.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 05:43 PM
1

You're reading into it too much. When he said perceived as mutilation he obviously didn't mean the dictionary definition of mutilation, just that - as he specified when he said he was trying to keep it neutral - he was not attaching neither good nor bad connotations to circumcision in his question. "Mutilation" generally implies bad, which is not good grounds to encourage responses or building civil discussions. Give the guy a break for god's sake...
/r/MensRights08/05/12 03:11 PM
2

I think that wouldn't even necessarily be a bad thing. Women invading OneY and men invading 2XC has the upside of making gender-topics discussions more interesting and varied, as opposed to circlejerk-y. But if the moderation is biased, that's another story...
/r/MensRights04/05/12 05:05 AM
6

The factors that cause it to happen are in no way privilege, per se. The factor that causes a man to earn more money on average can for example be that he's supposed to be the provider, or he's not just off the sexual market, but in many instances also shunned. Is that a privilege? If the factors leading to it were that men get awarded unfairly higher pay based on sex discrimination, now that would be a privilege. It all depends on what those factors are.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 12:45 AM
5

You are statistically more likely to make a larger amount of money. That's not how privilege works. Privilege is an advantage you're provided by society, a head start. It would be privilege if it were easier for men to make a larger amount of money. That's not the case.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 12:08 AM
8

Nice idea, now add it to the reddit shout-outs section in the sidebar to get em some userbase!
/r/MensRights27/04/12 10:41 PM
2

I agree both with your first post and with themountaingoat's. Honestly, I get real annoyed the times MR starts behaving like nutsy feminists. But staying silent about it, and letting feminist MR opposers go on with their idiotic narrative about how the media and society in general is all bent on offending women while sparing the oh so privileged males, would have just as undesirable consequences. So it's ok (and much needed!) to point out the double standard in the "right to be offended" wheneve…
/r/MensRights27/04/12 04:39 AM
7

Regardless of whether she's guilty of some crime or not, 1) it's still an excellent example of the amount of proof that is needed to incarcerate a man for rape; 2) it helps people perceive that false rape accusations are indeed a problem - as it should be; 3) society showing empathy for men for once? Yes please
/r/MensRights04/04/12 12:26 PM
1

Hey, at least you didn't have to see girls crying their way out of a bad mark. Or... did you. Yea, I bet you did.
/r/MensRights03/04/12 07:48 AM
1

To be fair, it's another matter altogether... these guys weren't advocating for men's rights.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 05:15 AM
0

Heh, the businessman one happened in my city not too far from where I live, apparently. Fuck the crisis.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 01:45 AM
1

Yup, I did understand that, man. xD But I just wanted to point out how it could be misinterpreted, even by people in good faith. That's all.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 06:49 AM
1

Well, it's not so far-fetched to interpret that as an argument about how "support" necessarily implies activism...
/r/MensRights29/03/12 06:21 AM
5

"Discussion" in SRSd means "Discuss why I am right, and anyone against SRS is wrong." Basically, "SRS - now with more words!"
/r/MensRights29/03/12 06:12 AM
11

Let's even shut a big bunch of neurons down for a moment and assume this was true. Also, let's try and change "men" into "blacks" and "women" into "whites" and see what happens? Without commenting on that story - seriously, I am not commenting on that story - I want to confirm that often, yes, there's a policy to arrest the black person. It's a harm reduction policy and saves a lot of whites. It's because: It's often difficult for police to tell who has attacked who, as attackers often claim to …
/r/MensRights29/03/12 05:58 AM
1

Ask a feminist when ever in any circumstances EVER they've been willing to lose some privilege/advantage for women so that men might gain - in the interests of overall equality. There just isn't such a thing. No matter how many times I ask the question, the best they can ever come up with is "well, when it helped women too...." Yep I understand, but "what do you actually do" can be ambiguous and misleading if what you meant to get across was if "supporting men's rights" was a genuine interest or…
/r/MensRights29/03/12 05:08 AM
1

As much as I can perfectly see why anyone in his sane mind would avoid discussion with SRS peeps, I also have to agree with the SRS idiot up there that "what do you actually do" was at least rather poorly worded, for the reasons s/he pointed out. I think a better question would have been what exactly being for men's rights means in a feminist context, and if she supports the many things against men's rights that feminism has pushed over the years. As in, "where do you actually stand", rather tha…
/r/MensRights29/03/12 04:27 AM
2

I don't know... after a bit of googling, even in the UK where circumcision isn't exactly popular, today's suicide rates by gender don't look like they're significantly off from US' 1:4.
/r/MensRights29/03/12 03:18 AM
6

Yea, as an Italian the first time I read it was on some askreddit thread... left me pretty confused I must say. Here it's being cut that makes you, uh... not sure weird is the right word since it's not such a huge deal, but out of the ordinary. Some people are not comfortable with it being known.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 04:31 AM
78

Maybe somebody can recommend a site that's like reddit but with an adult audience. You mean an audience from the previous generation. The current average age for a gamer is 37 and increasing.
/r/MensRights28/03/12 12:20 AM
3

No, sorry but feminism as an equality movement is rotten from the roots to the top, and always has been. The fact that it just happened to bring fair equality in certain fields on its way to female supremacy doesn't deny the fact that its aim has always been about that, female supremacy. And that's all the way from feminist literature or philosophers to the lawyers and politicians you mention. Then, it's true that there are also some people who wrongly call themselves feminist who are really abo…
/r/MensRights23/03/12 07:19 PM
6

I just want a little reading comprehension and critical thinking, is that so much to ask!?!?(silly question this is the internet) Nah, I believe you'll find plenty of critical thinking on the internet, much more so at least than in the daily "outdoors" society dominated by rhetorics (which are much less influential in a written exchange, since you can easily deconstruct an incoherent argument point by point) and where having an unpopular opinion has far worse consequences. Just, if it's critical…
/r/MensRights19/03/12 10:48 PM
1

Honestly, I think this subreddit and MRM in general needs some good advertisement. I wouldn't even know the MRM existed if it wasn't that a few months ago just out of curiosity I clicked one of those retarded links to manhood 101 that they never miss a chance to spam all over the place on youtube vids... and I'm sure there's plenty like me out there, who'd gladly join here if only they knew...
/r/MensRights15/03/12 02:39 AM
3

Did that thread just get us nearly 200 new subscribers? Not 100% sure, but I think before it popped up the count was in the early 31,400s... 31,589 as I write
/r/MensRights14/03/12 11:58 PM
3

Ok. Would you please define what it means to be racist?
/r/MensRights11/03/12 07:06 PM
8

Any good soul willing to explain to an ignorant European how much influence and visibility this SPLC thingy has in the US, exactly? I'd never heard the name before yesterday... I've just gotten a rough idea of what it is about, but that's it.
/r/MensRights10/03/12 04:11 AM
7

Is it just a matter of having two loving parents of either gender, or are there special benefits imparted by each gender and not by the other? Heh, it's hard to draw significant statistics I think, considering how things go with the current court system. Single fathers are pretty much only awarded child custody if they're significantly more suited to be parents than the mother, whereas most of the times all the mother has to do to obtain custody is to have a vagina between her legs. The only way…
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:19 PM
8

Can't tell if sarcasm or...
/r/MensRights08/03/12 05:04 AM
1

Well yea, letting them know the message offends you either directly or by boycotting is the right way to make them understand that it's not only mothers they cater to and to be careful next time. But I for one just wouldn't hold any resentment towards em, they're just doing their job. EDIT: grammar
/r/MensRights08/03/12 04:56 AM
3

I don't feel like blaming Huggies, though. It is true that as things are now moms are on average more often in charge of buying baby products, so it's obvious that they'd aim to send messages that are appealing to that demographic. Companies are in for the money. And that's how it should be... their employees and investors depend on their ability to make profit
/r/MensRights07/03/12 11:29 PM
7

Except you totally ignored my statement that women tend to have smaller hands then men. A finger is not going to do the same job a vibrator does. Dood, if your hands really do feel like a vagina... fuck, I don't even know what to say. Somebody contact the media, we just might've found the first human specimen to ever exceed homo sapiens, the last step in human male evolution. The ultimate being. All hail!
/r/MensRights06/03/12 04:39 AM
3

is a case in which a stripper was seen as the provider of the service she was selling, no differently than what would happen with any other job like say, a plumber FTFY
/r/MensRights05/03/12 12:54 AM
2

Well, it's past 3 am here so I don't really have time for an exchange, but I'm just gonna drop the question here. Shouldn't you rather be looking at economics (and arguably sociology) majors than engineering for the more educated political views? I understand your point on the overall orientation and core values of engineers, but knowing your physics doesn't automatically make you knowledgeable about what's good for your country.
/r/MensRights01/03/12 02:18 AM
5

Well, from my understanding the subject here are not the parents, but the thing being killed, so technically it'd still apply. Then again, I wouldn't get all upset over such trivial and unimportant matters either way. Also - just saying - there's a chance the original paper was written in Italian... even if the paper is from an Australian univeristy, Alberto Giubilini, Francesca Minerva and Sergio Bartolommei are all Italian names. "Person" is a feminine noun in Italian, so there might have been…
/r/MensRights29/02/12 11:19 PM
2

But knowingly having sex with anti-abortion women, well, yeah, it's consenting to the possibility of having children. Well, should also be said that in that case being anti-abortion is the woman's choice and opinion, she should be the one to take responsibility to preserve her own personal set of ethic values. You can't expect to have someone else than yourself sacrifice decades of their lives to protect your principles. And you can easily flip it around. If knowingly having sex with a pro-life …
/r/MensRights27/02/12 11:43 AM
0

What I'm trying to say is that the same word can have a very different meaning or change completely depending on the context. The word "fuck" has a different meaning if used in "to fuck" or used as in "that dude's fucking nuts" - where the original, etymological sense is totally lost. Similarly with bitch. As you'll often hear all women referred to as "bitches", but you dont see all men being called "dicks". You dont hear "fuck dicks, get money" because it doesnt make any sense. "bitches" are sy…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 12:16 PM
0

Thats a terrible example, that is the most vercitle word, it can mean almost anything. How is that a terrible example? In both cases the original, literal meaning is completely lost. That's the analogy. Can you explain what versatility has to do with it losing its original meaning? Anyway, not that it matters, but versatile* (not trying to hold this one against you, but as a non-native speaker I always appreciate when people correct me) You dont think it is? No I don't. Are you saying that the p…
/r/MensRights24/02/12 10:51 AM
-1

Aye ma'am(/sir). Cause being an SRS poster is highly correlated to intellectual dishonesty interest in shaming and highlighting taboo words rather than constructing a reasoned argument crying to be listened to but not being willing to take into consideration other people's arguments and points of view in return (as shown by the mass bans among other things) walls of text with no substance bitching about semantics Chances of wasting your time by replying to an SRS aficionado seriously: over 99%. …
/r/MensRights24/02/12 09:18 AM
-5

That's like saying you can't take sexual intercourse out of fuck. Or that the expression "being a dick" is degrading to men. I don't think you have a clue on how slang works.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 08:59 AM
3

I can speak for Italy here. A part of it is surely because of the economy being what you all know it is; another part, though, is that the workforce here is entitled to many more rights than, for example, in the US. It's much harder than it is there to dismiss workers, or at least it's been until recently... the flip side is that, as the older people get to keep their stable jobs, there's much less mobility and the young have a hell of a time moving in.
/r/MensRights20/02/12 05:54 AM
5

It's sad to see a movement that pretty much garnered lots of its consent as a reaction to irrational angry feminists start walking down the same path. Oh well, let me share some of your much undeserved downvotes.
/r/MensRights19/02/12 08:16 PM
6

Orly? Maybe that's why I clearly listed rape as a crime? But by now it's clear I'm wasting my time arguing with either a troll, or someone who just won't read what I write. In either case, there's no point in continuing this discussion. Have a good day.
/r/MensRights18/02/12 07:50 AM
7

Are you aware you are calling it unwanted sex? Unwanted sex is not rape? How does this make sense, in any reality? Yes, I'm aware, and I even broke it down into points for it to be easy for you to comprehend; if you got any more questions, please do point at the specific part you're having difficulty to understand. So, when a person is robbed at gun point, and they give up their stuff, it isn't a robbery because they gave in? Being robbed is ALWAYS unwanted. The robber knows full well that there…
/r/MensRights18/02/12 07:38 AM
2

Dood, it's not that hard, really. Either you're trolling or I'm afraid you lack basic reading comprehension skills. Unwanted sex (occurrance): includes two cases one of the people engaging in sex was unwilling, but didn't make any reasonable effort to communicate it to make the other party aware of it -- it's not a crime because you had no reasonable way to prevent it; one of the people engaging in sex was unwilling, communicated it explicitly to the other party who still refused to stop -- it's…
/r/MensRights18/02/12 07:27 AM
3

About the only sorts of commercials that make me feel bad for women are the cleaning supply ones. I seriously doubt women are as happy about cleaning as they are always portrayed.. Well, that's what you call marketing and knowing your customer. Companies do make sure to do their demographics research to understand who their commercial should be aimed at for it to be as effective as possible, before they spend money and put it in the making. As a matter of facts, in a family it is statistically m…
/r/MensRights17/02/12 10:25 AM
1

Not to be a dick but, uh, honestly, some punctuation would have helped there ^ ' Anyway dude, I'm the most peaceful guy around, and I understand there's an issue with that... but people need to learn to be able to tell jokes apart from reality. Y'all - men and women alike - should just have a healthy laugh every once in a while without having to scream at stuff like this for "encouraging violence", the same way you wouldn't see violation of animal rights in an episode of Wile E. Coyote everytime…
/r/MensRights10/02/12 03:05 AM
0

Aww, poor pierce, got his fee-fees hurt b/c I called him on being a ridiculous bigot. :( A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. Again, I'd suggest you check your words choice. If anything, you could accuse me of being an indecent human being for tolerating the removal of too many ethical axioms that should better be left untouched. But, a bigot? Real…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 09:50 PM
1

Why thank you :) Anyway, no. I wouldn't normally laugh at an actual guy getting beaten, but sure as heck I would at a picture portraying a guy getting beaten, given the setting was hilarious enough. Also, I'm very sorry for not meeting your standards for a decent human being, but what can I say... you can't be loved by everyone, c'est la vie
/r/MensRights09/02/12 09:08 PM
1

Poor words choice on your part then. It's not a matter of it being funny or not, it's a matter of your own ethical values finding it to be unacceptable to make humor on anything involving violence. I for one think it's stupid to hold back a smile - if you feel like, that is - because of political correctness. But hey, you're entitled to your choices, you got every right if you want to. Instead, what I really find horribly wrong, is taking that choice away from everyone else by banning the depict…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 08:58 PM
-1

Where exactly in my comment did I say it was? You hallucinating mate? Anyway, if you really want my opinion it sure wasn't made-my-day kind of funny. But didnt find it to be bad either, especially for an ad. With that said, I was only commenting on the reason why some people here apparently found the joke to be unacceptable, since I doubt anyone was issuing a complaint over the joke not being funny.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 08:02 PM
-4

Nah don't go that low, this isn't supposed to be batshit crazy feminism male edition. There's nothing wrong with violence in a joke. No one gets hurt, it's just for humor. I for one didn't find my "maleness" to be offended. The real problem is the double standards. It's only considered politically correct and fun when violence is portrayed against men, but unfunny, of bad taste, and sexist against women. The world one should aspire to is in my opinion one where a person can make humor without pe…
/r/MensRights09/02/12 07:38 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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