TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Insanitarium Archive

View 0 posts and 58 comments by Insanitarium 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)
4

Just for the record, domestic violence is a huge fucking problem in the Ukraine, and this isn't just a feminist issue: while women are victimized at a much higher rate in adulthood, men are routinely abused as children. And it is in no way a functional ecosystem, unless you're actually just okay with routine, grievous abuse. There aren't a look of good statistics available, as is common in places where domestic violence is normalized, but about a fifth of all Ukrainians are victims of physical d…
/r/TheRedPill11/09/13 09:04 PM
0

I'm not sure about "destined to be interpreted," but replace that with "has a definite possibility of being interpreted" and I share your concern. That's why I see the wording as unfortunate. But it's not inherently wrong in any of the ways the CotWA writeup suggests. Most importantly, justice can be served by having a preferred outcome, at least on the macro level. Unless we assume that false rapes are reported at a level exponentially higher among the armed forces than among civilian populatio…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 04:04 PM
-1

Fully agreed. It is reasonable to say "we need more convictions in rape cases" when there is a known epidemic of unprosecuted rape in the U.S. military. I understand why the wording of Palmer's statement would rub /r/MensRights the wrong way, but CotWA's response is at least somewhat disingenuous. Palmer wasn't discussing quotas, and he wasn't discussing specific cases; he was discussing a situation in which we know of systematic failures within the military's prosecutorial system, the result of…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 02:34 PM
5

You've got to keep in mind that Mystery/Style and TylerDurden had a ridiculously and mutually childish falling out, that The Game was written by the former camp, and that (on a narrative level) the book uses TylerDurden as an easy antagonist to explain the decline of Project Hollywood, despite the fact that the project was clearly unsustainable from the start. Add to that the facts that TylerDurden has (for the most part, at least) avoided talking shit about his former friends over the years, an…
/r/seduction30/01/13 06:33 PM
7

No, that is entirely incorrect. First, the ACLU is quoted as having made the statement you're referencing about gender normativity. I happen to agree with them (some boys would prefer dances, and some girls would prefer baseball), but they neither made the decision nor brought any legal action; they just wrote a letter to the school department about the legal issues at work, and then answered some press queries on the subject. Second, the policy change wasn't even made in response to any issue r…
/r/MensRights19/09/12 02:37 PM
11

Actually, the issue here was that half of the population cannot enjoy it (female adults and male children), so the other half can't. At least not until they change their policy to allow the former half to participate. If the school district wants to take their marbles and go home, that's their choice. They could just as well say, "okay, mothers can be part of this, too, if they want." Which would be the basically decent response.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 12:23 PM
3

I'm honestly not sure how this point is even open for dispute, so I apologize if this response doesn't address your objection, but the analogy he used was: It would be unfair for me to assume that all women are unattractive just because you are. not It would be unfair for me to assume that all women are unattractive just because you were. He uses weasel words, because he can then claim a layer of deniability for his message, but don't pretend you fall for it. If I were to walk up to you in a bar…
/r/MensRights24/04/12 03:09 PM
16

He was drawing an analogy, and the analogy was misogynistic. I realize that defending claims of misogyny in r/MR is just a recipe for downboats, but I'm going to unpack this in case it helps anyone else. First off, he uses Ghitis's unattractiveness as a premise in his analogy, not as a conclusion. The premises in an analogy are, according to the most basic rules of logic, assertions. To unpack this assertion from the language of the analogy, we could say something like "Frida Ghitis is unattract…
/r/MensRights24/04/12 12:46 PM
-9

I wish you would repost this comment a few more times in response to comments which it does not in any substantive way address. Maybe the problem with this discussion is that you're not copypastaing your unnecessary misuse of the reddit Header markup quite often enough. That being said, a resigning member of the school board filed a complaint, and the quote you offer about Leko's conduct comes from a high school sophomore who happens to be the daughter of the only parent who supported that compl…
/r/MensRights22/11/11 12:22 PM
-3

Harken to me, r/MensRights! If we allow the feminists to stop us from murdering women and stuffing their dismembered bodies into suitcases, then where will we draw the line?!
/r/MensRights19/11/11 09:49 AM
-6

I can't speak for CedarWolf, but I got my first hint of your rampant, cringe-worthy misogyny from the following internet post: "your so right, that is definitely how a bitch ends up inside a suitcase on the side of the road." -- Offensive_Brute (source) I hope this answers your question! Also, "you're" not "your," and "woman," not "bitch." Cleaning up these sorts of errors will dramatically improve the readability of your future output. I was impressed that you didn't go with "definately"; keep …
/r/MensRights18/11/11 11:23 PM
4

The letter to the editor is in reference to this case. Not only is the quote John the Other rails against not reflective of any University position, it has absolutely nothing to do with any standing University policies. It's just a letter written by some asshole who believes that Brown University should eliminate due process for men accused of rape, in reference to a case in which the University is accused of handling a rape allegation poorly. (From everything I've read about the case, which got…
/r/MensRights16/11/11 03:51 PM
1

I am not an MRA, any more than I am a feminist. I agree strongly with the last sentence in your post; I don't feel as though I can identify with any group which routinely tolerates behavior which I find unacceptable, and so the widespread misogyny in the MRM and the widespread misandry in feminism preclude either. However I do argue MR issues with my feminist friends; I've successfully convinced several of them on issues of child custody, alimony, and domestic violence. Of those, the MR perspect…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:44 AM
1

You know, I think I've been exposed to both of them but I've merged them into one identity in my mind. I know one's a middle-aged dude and the other one's a younger travelling dude, but I couldn't for the life of me remember which is which.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 01:40 PM
2

I always cringe a bit when people try to develop a common ideology everyone should rally around. I honestly sorry if that's how I'm coming across; that's not my intention. I just find it infuriating that I see so much scorn from my smart feminist friends about MRAs, and so much generally-accepted demonification of feminism among MRAs who I would otherwise agree with. Whereas the goals of increasing justice for women and increasing justice for men should never be in conflict; I feel as though, an…
/r/MensRights08/09/11 01:34 PM
2

Fair enough; I don't know much about Roissy, and he only popped into my mind because of the times I've seen his philosophy invoked in reddiscussions or in the comments sections of MRA blogs. I'd assumed, based on some of the quotes shared, that he'd identified himself as an MRA, but I never actually read his blog (and I guess it's gone now). So he may very well be a bad example. I disagree with the assessment of incompatibility, but that's mainly because I think that neither the contemporary MRA…
/r/MensRights08/09/11 11:53 AM
1

I don't think Andrea Dworkin was a feminist, either; I think she was an insane narcissistic demagogue. But, as Dworkin is relevant to the history and development of feminism, Roissy is relevent to the history and development of the online MRA movement, if the frequency with which I've seen his rambling defenses of patriarchy within online MRA conversations is a guide. But in either case, we're in danger of entering No True Scotsman territory here. My point was more that in these kinds of convers…
/r/MensRights08/09/11 10:57 AM
5

The Andrea Dworkin school of feminisim and the Roissy school of MRA are mutually exclusive (to use the first examples that popped into my mind; there are dozens of good case studies on each side). The former is founded on irrational, inflexible condemnation of men who assert themselves, while the latter is founded on irrational, inflexible condemnation of women who assert themselves. That being said, these are examples of extremists influencing movements. Whereas the feminist movement, in princi…
/r/MensRights08/09/11 08:32 AM
1

I just gave you the federal code of the crime involved, and you say "the threat itself is not illegal"? Since this seems to be your point of confusion here, though, it's the threat that defines it as rape, not the thing that's being threatened. By that logic, if I threatened to shoot you if you didn't have sex with me, and then when you complied I didn't shoot you, it wouldn't be rape. You're inventing an entire idiosyncratic legal system of your own, where the rules are entirely different, and …
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:58 AM
1

You're not making any coherent points for me to respond to. Rape is (to use a simplified definition) sex without the valid consent of both parties. "Valid consent," as legally established, means (again, to use simplified definitions) that there has been no forcible compulsion, that both parties had a capacity to consent (i.e., no unconsciousness), and that there was no duress. Blackmail is a form of duress. Therefore, if you blackmail someone for sex, the act meets the legal definition of rape. …
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:29 AM
3

I made no (zero, none) claims about rape there. Your reading comprehension is at an unsatisfactory level. Please have your parents see me after school.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 11:10 PM
6

Threatening to report to the cops is not illegal, thus it's not rape. Okay, so: TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 41 > § 873. Blackmail Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or receives any money or other valuable thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. So, now that we've established that threatening to report to the cops is, under these circumstances, i…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 09:12 PM
5

I've been posting a lot in this thread just because it blows my mind that anyone could seriously believe half of the shit that's being said. What you have to keep in mind, though, is that a lot of the stupidity that gets unleashed in cases like this is basically just an untempered overreaction to real problems related to MR. It is insane that, in cases of statutory rape, adult men are typically treated much worse by the courts and public opinion than adult women. It is insane that, in cases of u…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 09:00 PM
4

Yeah: trust me, you won't find me disagreeing with any statements about the sheer insanity of the family court system. It's all fucked. That's how I found my way to the MR movement, and why I keep up-to-date no matter how embarrassing I find the widespread misogyny.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 08:19 PM
5

You said "in both cases, it is consensual prostitution." I can't see how to read that, in context, as not referring to both the scrapyard scenario and the speeding ticket scenario. If you intended otherwise, I apologize for an overstated condemnation, but the question you were answering ("Why doesn't it matter?") referred specifically to the scrapyard case and the speeding ticket scenario. Anyway, prostitution is definitionally a crime involving the exchange of a positive good (specifically mone…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 07:46 PM
2

Telling someone you'll do something to hurt them if they don't have sex with you is not "consensual prostitution." If you actually believe what you wrote, you're a severely sick fuck. Otherwise, you're an obnoxious troll. Anyway, have a great day.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 06:57 PM
0

It doesn't matter who proposes the idea, Why doesn't it matter? I mean, factually, according to the law, it matters very much. Most people agree with the law on this one, which is why there are separate words for extortion and bribery.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 06:36 PM
5

If she offered him a blowjob if he'd let her go, she'd be bribing him. If he told her she'd need to give him a blowjob or he wouldn't let her go, he's blackmailing her. The news story may be wrong (it's entirely possible that she got caught, offered him a BJ, and then made a false police report), but according to the facts as presented in the article, this is blackmail, not bribery. And while accepting a bribe is often a criminal act, being successfully blackmailed isn't, unless the act the blac…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 06:32 PM
6

There are two questions here, though. The first has to do with her culpability: she probably committed a crime, and (if she did) should be punished. It would be a miscarriage of justice if she wasn't held accountable for her crime as a result of his crime. But the second question has to do with his culpability. And, although it sometimes seems counterintuitive, it is always a crime to use the threat of criminal charges to coerce or manipulate someone. If you believe someone has committed a crimi…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 05:10 PM
9

Legally, however, blackmailing someone constitutes unlawful duress, which makes the sex act rape. It's not either/or; it's unambiguous that he blackmailed her, and the thing he blackmailed her for was sex, and therefore he committed rape. If I point a gun at you and tell you I'll shoot if you don't give me a blowjob, it's not a case of criminal assault followed by consensual sex; the blowjob is rape, because it occurred due to the threat of violence in my assault.
/r/MensRights04/09/11 03:00 PM
4

I think you're misreading the law. The fact that she was trying to steal something has nothing to do with the fact that he threatened her to pressure her into a sex act. She became involved in the situation-- that is, the dude demanding that she blow him-- through no fault of her own. The distinction about "no fault of her own" would come into play if, for example, she had suggested the blowjob as a way of getting out of trouble. That being said, I think it makes more sense to consider this a ca…
/r/MensRights04/09/11 02:53 PM
1

It's obviously the fault of the rapist Girls that pass out drunk often will get raped and it's their own fault. You are very thick in the skull.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 08:58 AM
1

Thank you for providing a clear and unambigious case of victim-blaming. As much of a colossal douche as you are, it's probably a useful thing to have around in this kind of discussion.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 08:57 AM
3

[citation needed] You're responding to a complete strawman argument with the use of misleading statistics. Or, in other words, you're arguing against a position that no one takes, and you're still not making a coherent case.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 05:10 PM
1

Weird that you deleted your account so quickly, but anyways: Evolutionary psychology does have falsifiable hypotheses. The discipline is based around developing theories about human capability and behavior from an evolutionary standpoint, and then testing them by comparing them to actual human behavior and capability. One very good sign of bad ev. psych (of which Kanazawa is an excellent example) is what amounts to just-so stories which don't attempt to self-falsify: "hey, I gave this survey to …
/r/MensRights26/05/11 07:38 AM
0

Oh, please, don't go down that road.
/r/MensRights25/05/11 06:03 PM
11

I'd have to log into LiveJournal to read this link, apparently, but I can only assume it's about Satoshi Kanazawa. If so, then I recommend that anyone getting all upset about this read the article he published, with the help of a smart friend if you're not familiar with the scientific method. Satoshi Kanazawa's work is not science, by any meaning of the term, and his column in Psychology Today is not a personal blog. The article in question was offensive not only because of its cultural ramifica…
/r/MensRights25/05/11 03:58 PM
2

Just wanted to thank you for your responses in this thread. I'm strongly anti-circumcision, but from reading your input and doing some Google crosschecking I've realized I was misinformed about several points on both sides of the debate. Basically, upboats just didn't seem enough in this case.
/r/MensRights19/05/11 01:37 PM
7

Hey, can I get that guarantee in writing? And then can I take that written guarantee to the developing world, where these incentives don't exist, and where the result is not a reduced birthrate, but rather a massively higher rate of children and mothers growing up in poverty? And then can I have your home address, so that these destitute children and mothers can make claims against the guarantee you have so generously made?
/r/MensRights13/05/11 08:00 AM
2

The tyranny of small decisions. You're right, it would be impossible to fund an aggressive war without taxation. It would also be impossible to fund a defensive war against any country that wasn't operating under your bizarre "everyone acting in enlightened self-interest" libertarian fantasy. It would also be impossible to adequately help people in need, or to make legitimate steps toward social justice, or to keep order in the streets. And I'm pretty sure even libertarians know this, perfectly …
/r/MensRights13/05/11 07:56 AM
10

Sources for you: Health Care Costs Hit Women Harder Than Men, Study Finds Women Pay More Than Men for Health Insurance I'm not sure what you guys are even disagreeing about, but I assume I'm on your side, since I agree heartily with partyhat's post above and think surfnsound comes off as an asshole in his posts. But it's the very fact that women typically require and access more healthcare than men that convinces me, from a social justice standpoint, that we should, as a society, be finding a wa…
/r/MensRights13/05/11 07:42 AM
8

Dude, the article you started out by objecting to is celebrating women having "lots of autonomy and authority." You objected to that. I think I'm all for Men's Rights-- I want equity and justice when it comes to childrearing, I'm opposed to the promulgation of cultural stereotypes which classify men as "potential rapists" and women as "the fairer sex," I believe in open discourse about the biological basis of gender and its consequences for society-- but I don't want to see women subjugated and …
/r/MensRights26/02/11 07:36 PM
5

Your first link offers findings which show no statistically-significant difference between men and women on this issue (a 2% difference, with a reported 3% margin of error), which is similar to other polls on the subject. Generally speaking, in America, men and women favor the legal status of abortion in roughly the same proportions (different polls I've seen show men or women being up by 2-4%, but rarely more than that). Your second link is a totally different question: whether abortion is "mor…
/r/MensRights11/02/11 11:01 AM
0

Yeah, that's a good point, and something I meant to accent a bit more in my earlier comment: it's definitely premature for any of us to leap to conclusions about the facts of the shooting. My response is to the idea that, if Gunwitch was involved in the intentional shooting of a woman, then even that wouldn't be relevant in an evaluation of his work. If this was an accident, or if he's been falsely implicated, then the conversation is moot. But, for me, based on reading his works (and seeing som…
/r/seduction06/01/11 06:48 PM
40

I don't know, I haven't read Gunwitch in years, but given that his method was always defined by sexual aggression (getting "laid not liked," avoiding any emotional connection, acting in ways that constitute sexual harassment) and desperation (finding unhappy women who will "settle" for you and using them for sex, being pushy and vulgar, his "looks + effort / 2" formula), I think his being a fuckup who is literally and grossly violent towards women would be relevant. Gunwitch was always the oppos…
/r/seduction06/01/11 11:23 AM
2

That is the loophole. However, if a convincing case can be made that you refused service to someone for a discriminatory reason, you're still in trouble. If a group walks in, and you serve everyone except for the visibly pregnant woman, and you can't offer a good, nondiscriminatory reason for singling her out (you're not at capacity; she wasn't already drunk; she wasn't rowdy, or rude to the staff; she was following any posted notices about establishment policy; you hadn't previously banned her …
/r/MensRights03/01/11 05:16 PM
13

I posted this in that thread, but that's an entirely misleading statement. Bartenders are within their legal right to refuse service to anyone, including pregnant women. They are not within their legal right to refuse service to women on the grounds that they are pregnant, though, just as they are not within their legal right to refuse service to men because they are black. Antidiscrimination laws don't actually give protected categories some sort of carte blanche; they just make certain criteri…
/r/MensRights03/01/11 02:44 PM
2

You are a true font of wisdom. I'm neither offended, nor "standing up for" the poster. You posted a bizarre non sequitur of a comment in a public forum, I posted questions in response, and you answered each time with a response less coherent and defensible than the last. At this point, I'm just amused by the incongruity between the sagacious air you've assumed and your basic deficiencies in reading comprehension and logic. I understand now that you meant to send a PM in the first place. Better l…
/r/seduction03/12/10 02:52 AM
3

He doesn't "[go] on about how the wife [...] puts the guy in the doghouse." That's entirely in your head. He describes, within a single sentence, a behavior and attitude which he claims are resilient to what you describe as "being put in the doghouse." This is where it's easiest to observe the extent of your unfounded inference. But beyond that: what he's advocating is not playing the manipulator's game, which is actually an opposite of "competition." In fact, what he's saying reflects a near-to…
/r/seduction03/12/10 02:05 AM
2

That's not even remotely a good example. I notice you switch "quality" for "trick," there, but even so that doesn't make sense in the context of your complaint. You're the one who's labeling it "the oldest fashioned wife trick in the book"; pickup_startist referred to that "trick" explicitly as an example, in the context of explaining what he meant about establishing "acceptable boundaries of behavior." But beyond that, what you're calling a "wife trick" is not a "wife quality," and in any case …
/r/seduction03/12/10 12:18 AM
3

Are you describing this post as the "sermon about objectifying women"? Because I literally cannot see a single line here that "describes the old-fashioned qualities of a wife." If you're referring to some other conversation you've had with the OP, a'ight, but otherwise I'm completely confused by the objection.
/r/seduction02/12/10 11:10 PM
3

It has nothing to do with acting like a 12 year old girl; it has to do with utilizing an established vocabulary developed to maintain a distinction between the conventional language used in discussing sexual dynamics and the more specific terms which have grown out of the ASF/seduction scene. And it would actually introduce ambiguity to type these phrases out. Some acronyms (like FTOW and SOI) have multiple possible "voicings," in the same way that there is no single definitive meaning of DVD. O…
/r/seduction02/12/10 11:07 PM
3

I had to upvote this, even though it ruined the quod erat demonstratum effect of your perfectly reasonable comment about childish downvoting being at 0 points.
/r/MensRights13/11/10 06:10 PM
-1

Well, a man can do all of that, but fortunately the legal and cultural stigma against gays would be on my side there, especially if it happened in prison (are you assuming I'm a woman? it comes across that way in your comment). Anyway, just to clarify: I don't think that false rape reporting isn't a problem, and I'm not sure what part of my comment came across that way (I mention "a failure to achieve justice for men in a number of important contexts," which was meant to touch on that). What's o…
/r/MensRights13/11/10 05:04 PM
-2

Is a false rape report really newsworthy in the context of Men's Rights? I certainly believe that studies about false rape reports are relevant and newsworthy, as are (in some cases) cultural responses and news treatments of false rape reports. But we all presumably know that women have falsely accused men of rape, and the amount of attention this reddit gives to individual cases is certainly disproportionate to the importance that each has. I don't think the focus that r/MensRights gives to spe…
/r/MensRights13/11/10 01:23 PM
7

I actually read the entire article, thinking that maybe it would have some sort of quirky, interesting take on shifts in cultural norms, but: no, it's just some dude who thinks women should be happy to be ruled by men. The incoherent Red Scare fearmongering he keeps touching on is just the icing on the insane misogynist cake. Just for your reference, and I realize you might be confused by some of the submissions to this subreddit: men's rights ≠ misogyny.
/r/MensRights16/09/10 09:14 AM
60

If what you mean is actually "I do not automatically assume that a woman who tells me she was raped is telling the truth," which is what you seem to be describing in most of the text of your submission, then good for you. You are, indeed, taking a level-headed approach to the situation, by reserving judgment in a case where you do not have enough information to come to an educated conclusion. If what you mean is literally "when a woman says she was raped, I don't believe her" then you're a prime…
/r/MensRights13/05/10 07:00 PM
2

By your reasoning, a man who tells a woman he loves her when he really doesn't is committing rape, as long as the woman sees love as a necessary precondition for sex. Does this seem like a meaningful definition of rape to you? (And, for the record, yes, in the reversed situation, the man is responsible for the pregnancy, from both a legal standpoint and from a current societal consensus standpoint. But this is beside the issue, as your comparison is unequal-- the correct way to "turn this around…
/r/MensRights07/04/10 07:38 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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