TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

JackobusPhantom Archive

View 2 posts and 33 comments by JackobusPhantom on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
4

This is key. OP is over-reaching by saying they lied, and the conversation is easily waylayed as a result We can't know they lied, and they genuinely have a great deal of my sympathy if this awful thing happened and the police couldn't land a conviction But regardless, the guy wasn't convicted, so in the eyes of the law (and one would hope society) he is innocent. Of course people can't go around applying hugely stigmatising criminal labels that aren't upheld in a court
/r/MensRights24/02/21 08:58 PM
4

This isn't exactly true. Some men receiving some hormone based therapies lose the ability to orgasm After a prostatectomy, you can't ejaculate anymore anymore as you don't produce seminal fluid, but most can still orgasm. That isn't to say prostatectomy can't cause a whole range of problems (impotence, diminished enjoyment, loss of male identity from loss of ejaculations etc) but it's incorrect to say as a blanket statement that men with prostate cancer can't ever orgasm
/r/MensRights09/01/21 10:57 PM
8

The implication is she targeted him because he was black, relying on prejudice to get her accusation to stick
/r/PussyPassDenied08/01/21 07:27 PM
-36

More than 8 million black and ethnic minority people in the UK, living, working and contributing without fanfare, but the dickheads come out for one crazy woman
/r/PussyPassDenied12/06/19 09:25 PM
19

I know - I had to google it as well, but it's legit. Dumbfounded
/r/MensRights26/03/18 11:08 AM
2

Sorry I wasn't clear - I couldn't see any statement from her, but inferred from the comments that she had claimed depression, stress and anxiety
/r/MensRights07/07/16 03:55 PM
34

Holy tits- and since she's claimed depression all the commenters won't even call her out for it. I'm all for patience and sympathy, depression is a bitch, but it doesn't mean you just get to disappear with $31,000
/r/MensRights07/07/16 10:54 AM
1

I agree that this is a murky case best left alone, and that unconscious penetrating-with-fingers is morally indistinguishable from penetrating-with-penis, but the law doesn't always make sense and I feel the point of this post is to show that maybe factors other than 'rape culture' were to blame for the shockingly low sentence
/r/MensRights21/06/16 07:14 AM
0

You're speaking a lot of sense. Being an obnoxious twat isn't nice, but fortunately isn't against the law, and we shouldn't strip this guy of his own agency- he chose to throw the punch, when he could've just nodded right back and stayed out.
/r/MensRights18/01/16 05:51 PM
0

This seems altogether unfair, especially as u/Flying_Burrito_Bro said explicitly that they support the original premise of encouraging rape victims to handle accusations formally, through the police. All they were advocating with the word "sympathetic" was kindness, not uncritical belief. When an accusation is made, without any evidence, the correct position is neutral - investigate the claim and take it seriously, while maintaining presumption of innocence for the accused. There is room for kin…
/r/MensRights10/12/15 11:13 AM
4

Yeah that's the real kicker at the moment- we need to know what the undisclosed charities actually are. If it turns out that £15,000,000 is being funneled into breast cancer research, then I certainly will have no complaints. Yes it's a cancer that predominantly affects women, but woman are overwhelmingly the people that buy sanitary products so fair's fair, but it's not a divisive "them and us" issue, as cancer research will inevitably overlap with other medical advances, and hopefully it would…
/r/MensRights26/11/15 07:58 PM
3

Well hotdiggedy damn- 1,270,000 women raped: 1,267,000 men "made to penetrate" (that is to say, raped) Thank you, that is fascinating. Why on earth would the crime of "made to penetrate" not be listed as rape? What is the distinction?
/r/MensRights20/11/15 05:55 PM
15

Its not an "issue" in the statistical sense, but for what it's worth the thing that really turned my head was just the lies and the zealotry from people calling themselves feminists. In particular, the misrepresentation of the gender wage gap seemed to be more than an honest mistake, and instead a willful attempt to deceive the public. It's intellectual dishonesty of the highest order. This coupled with numerous examples of hostility, even to people just asking questions, on tumblr/twitter/faceb…
/r/MensRights19/11/15 04:47 PM
3

I've certainly never seen anything to suggest more men are the victims of sexual crime than women. I think the "much" is inappropriate, as it makes it sound as if the male prevalence is small enough to be negligible- This 2014 US survey reports a 38% male victim rate. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv14.pdf NB: I haven't critically appraised this study so be aware for bias/flawed methodology
/r/MensRights19/11/15 03:09 PM
1

You're being entirely reasonable, and yes all the cabinet do seem to be more than adequately qualified for their roles. I don't know all the candidates, but those appointed do seem at least good enough. My objection, and what skepticalbipartisan's appears to be, is that gender had to factor in at all. It should've been completely gender-blind. Given that the women (and men) have such considerable merit, they all may have been appointed anyway, in which case nothing is gained by framing it as mee…
/r/MensRights12/11/15 09:43 AM
1

I respect your reasonable opinion. We're solidly on the same team here: I am well aware that vicious bullshit like this exists ( http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-articles.asp?section=00010001002200410001&itemid=1275 ) and that there are idiots in the world who blame 'lad culture', 'toxic masculinity' and its many derivatives. However, I can't accept that those opinions are anything more than a vocal minority. Sensible research into factors leading to violence does occur for both gen…
/r/MensRights11/11/15 03:43 PM
1

Lmao sure, lump me in with the 'safe space' imbeciles. They're stupid and we all know it- not sure what that has to do with this though. Nor am I sure how I am faking naivety or defending women- there is nothing being imagined here, people actually do study contributing factors for crime, for both genders. I'm well aware of feminist resistance to male-victim focused studies of IPV which may colour people's interpretation of programmes like the OP, but I'm not convinced any actual discrimination …
/r/MensRights10/11/15 11:21 PM
2

...what? I said "just an example" because I don't have the statistics to support the statement, not out of fear of backlash. I wasn't looking to be drawn into a statistical analysis of why men become violent- the point of the previous post was to generally state that analysing motives of crime isn't ridiculed, doesn't detract from the responsibility of the perpetrator, and can be useful for preventing further crime.
/r/MensRights10/11/15 08:58 PM
-3

I think this is being framed incorrectly here, and there is too much focus on the BBCs perceived 'gynocentric bias'. There is a huge difference between 'making excuses' and trying to explain a phenomenon such as violence, for either gender. If I was to suggest (and this is just an example pulled out my ass, not saying it is truth) that male violence was largely as a result of alcoholism, depression and workplace stress, I wouldn't be making excuses- the perpetrators are still at fault, they stil…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 02:56 PM
1

Yeah I thought this article was pretty admirable and showed a wide range of views. This in particular stood out- "If we could say that Tom could be charged with a sex offence rather than rape, we would prefer that." (A woman's opinion) - and the following Lawyer's view. I think the generally people would agree that while this man's actions were clearly wrong in the scenario as-told, it would be wrong to judge the offense as severely as violent rape, or date-rape poisoning.
/r/MensRights04/11/15 12:12 AM
2

I must say I was very impressed at the comments- especially as r/relationships gets a lot of slack. Totally agree with OP- clearly this woman wasn't the person the guy thought she was when he married her. All of her responses seem flat wrong, but to my eyes the most alarming thing is the continued day care- surely childcare is half of the whole point of a housewife/husband?!
/r/MensRights03/11/15 11:22 PM
1

We're on the same side here (and fair enough if you need to vent this sub is a pretty good place for it), but you're in danger of losing the weight of your sensible argument if it seems smothered by anger. We don't want to facilitate our misrepresentation as "angry privileged neck beards" (cause we ain't, so don't let 'em :P )
/r/MensRights03/11/15 09:27 PM
7

It seems you are trying to be reasonable, I agree GoHoMo's tone is a bit off. We are in total agreement- neither of these people should have had any police involvement. This is the ideal. However, once we accept this is not happening as evidenced by the Toronto case, all we now want is equal application of the law. Yes, that might boil down to "it happened to me, so it should happen to you", but I think it is dishonest to call this 'retribution', it could just as easily be framed as 'equality'. …
/r/MensRights03/11/15 08:46 PM
2

In theory, alimony payments are to compensate a spouse (historically wives) for the loss of potential earnings incurred when they leave employment as part of a mutual marital agreement to care for children. Implicit in this agreement is the non-working spouse does the cooking, cleaning and the majority of the childcare- no one should demand 50/50 housework where only one spouse works. Obviously there are abuses of the system, but it's not intended to be legal theft of a man's earnings. In the UK…
/r/MensRights08/10/15 06:13 PM
4

Whenever I see articles like this my thoughts are always the same: marriage is not problem, it's marrying the wrong person! This author makes some entirely reasonable points about the societal pressures on men, for example the double-standards related to cheating spouses and the expectation the man be the main breadwinner, and they are right to use statistics to deter people who may seek marriage solely for regular sex or deathbed companionship. However, all else can be overcome just with common…
/r/MensRights08/10/15 01:43 PM
3

Oh I see, sorry, I didn't realize she was known to the subreddit
/r/MensRights07/11/13 09:06 PM
4

Its ironic that in a subreddit all about an alternative, rational opinion you've been downvoted for presenting an alternative rational opinion. Obviously this article is just a taunt/satire, but I agree with your point that people of both genders shouldn't be judged by their sexual preferences. If an Asian woman says she doesn't find Caucasian men attractive that doesn't make her a racist, if a man says he doesn't find other men attractive that doesn't make him a homophobe and if either gender d…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 07:04 PM
1

I think you may have meant to send this to r/theRedPill.... most people who comment on r/MensRights seem intelligent, level-headed and pretty happy. We don't hate women, and we don't want men treated preferentially either. We want gender-blind fairness, and this is a place to highlight the issues men face and promote discussion. I doubt you've given our position much thought, so it may help to consider how you feel about the following questions: Is it right that those accused of rape are denied …
/r/MensRights01/09/13 11:09 AM
1

A false accuser should face two thirds of the jail time you would get if convicted of rape. This may seem high, but I feel justified so long as those accused are denied anonymity and the social stigma (not to mention police and jury bias) still leans towards "guilty until proven innocent". Obviously this sentence would only apply when it can be unequivocally proved that it was a malicious false allegation (as opposed to just an allegation that does not lead to conviction) and therefore will not …
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:48 PM
2

I don't think the sarcasm is helping the conversation here. It is reductio ad absurdum but falsely applied- this isn't about direct control over ever action during sex, but rather about going against what had been previously agreed concerning one of the most important dangers of sex- that of pregnancy. I agree wholeheartedly that rape is the wrong description, and no-way-no-how should this man be charged with rape or called a rapist. However, I think their should be some legal repercussions for …
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:12 PM
14

The guy was definitely in the wrong here, and the law should reflect that, but rape is far too severe a term, and just plain wrongly applied. The actual penetration was consensual, so maybe they could bring in a lesser charge of "attempting to cause unwanted pregnancy" (or whatever they want to call it) which could apply to men who fail to withdraw as agreed and to women who lie about their birth control or stop men withdrawing as agreed.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:29 AM
1

Ill admit the article doesn't give much away, so maybe there is some confouding factor, but this seems as blatant as it gets.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:34 PM
1

Woah ok man, no need for that- we're all friends here. He was making a fair point- I appreciate your comments, but in conversations and arguments it obviously helps to have some numbers to point to as well as opinions.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 11:17 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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