TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Jake_Alt93 Archive

View 0 posts and 34 comments by Jake_Alt93 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

It seems that we still want men to be disposable, though. I wonder if humans will move past that in my lifetime.
/r/MensRights21/07/14 04:33 PM
3

This looks like it was written by my mom. She is legitimately mentally ill, though, so I suppose she has an excuse.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 09:21 PM
2

How is that not discrimination?
/r/MensRights04/07/14 12:48 PM
15

That sounds like child abuse
/r/MensRights30/06/14 05:25 PM
0

Native Texan here. It is an odds place. I'd move if it weren't for family. How'd you end up here?
/r/MensRights27/06/14 02:38 AM
1

Have you heard of Harding?
/r/MensRights24/06/14 08:09 PM
2

I'm in a physics lab right now, so I want to take a stab at this. The phenomenon is that some feminists see men and subsequently become filled with hate. The hypothesis is that instead of hating the men, they hate the "patriarchy field" that mediates an oppressive force from the man to the woman. By Newtons second mansplanation, the "patriarchy field" mediates an equal and opposite oppression (privilege) to the male. You could then test this hypothesis by killing all men and measuring whether or…
/r/MensRights19/06/14 05:30 PM
2

I agree wholeheartedly. I especially like that on the topic of "privilege" you specified "some people" not "all of some groups of people".
/r/MensRights17/06/14 05:58 PM
1

My guess is that pugs didn't mean to be uninclusive Edit: never mind
/r/MensRights17/06/14 05:32 PM
1

Can you taze someone in defense of property?
/r/MensRights11/06/14 05:22 PM
14

No thank you
/r/MensRights05/06/14 01:19 PM
1

It is possible to do good while also murdering people in your spare time. blueoak9, I think, is talking about the murdering part.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 05:56 PM
16

grandmothers
/r/MensRights31/05/14 08:59 PM
4

These tweets read like made up religious affirmations and testimonies. Maybe they will speak in tongues next...
/r/MensRights26/05/14 03:09 PM
1

30th of July?
/r/MensRights23/05/14 05:53 PM
12

No. Wildfire2k5 might be, though.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 12:07 PM
-3

Just a question. Could the preponderance of evidence standard lead to this being abused by rapists using the courts to take money from their victims?
/r/MensRights20/05/14 01:18 AM
4

Using such phrases is a hard habit to break, but I'm right there trying with you.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 12:06 AM
22

I may have misinterpreted, but I think I got quite a few downvotes in 2X for pointing out that a comic was seeking to shame men out of defending themselves. It seems they would rather men "learn their place" and take the abuse.
/r/MensRights18/05/14 11:59 PM
1

I'm sorry if this is only tangentially related, but how does it become common knowledge that someone is ace? It may be that my colleagues don't talk about sexually much, but I can't see it coming up in conversation.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 10:41 PM
7

Am I missing something or is this "women being bad" post about a male teacher?
/r/MensRights09/05/14 10:11 PM
1

You are trying to frame it that way, but it's not. The discussion is about whether the victim has blame, not whether it is okay to tell them they have blame. I'm sure nearly everyone agrees that saying "it's partially your fault this happened" is a terrible thing to do, even if it is true. Edit: I'm still not taking a stance on whether there is blame.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 06:34 PM
3

I'm not saying we should annoy anyone with anything. I am just saying that the discussion here is about the small number of instances where someone chooses an unsafe environment and is then victimized. It's not reasonable to say it never happens that way.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 06:21 PM
3

I don't think people work that way. People tend to estimate the odds of something happening. Sometimes people willingly enter a situation where there is a high probability they will be victimized. That is the decision here.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 06:06 PM
5

This sub is bad at sarcasm. The downvotes are because people think you are serious.
/r/MensRights06/05/14 05:18 PM
1

I suppose I meant to say that a woman can drop a child off at a safe haven after having it without the fathers knowledge, while a father would find it difficult to do the same (as the mother could easily walk from the hospital to the courthouse to get child support payments established [an over simplification, I know]). I'm sorry if the mistake offended you in some way...
/r/MensRights06/05/14 02:44 AM
4

You are comparing dissimilar things. A father surrendering all parental rights and responsibilities is not the same as a mother not liking the father and removing him. A more similar situation to "financial abortion" for the mother would be safe havens (this already exists for women, but not for men). A more similar situation to a mother removing the father would be the father removing the mother (good luck doing this and keeping the children).
/r/MensRights05/05/14 09:28 PM
0

It means that humans aren't perfect and tend to group things and see systems even when there are none. One way we do this is by ranking things by power. Pears aren't more masculine than apples, but the picture in the article makes the pear seem male and makes the apple seem female. Clarity edit: This may be because we tend to see larger, more powerful things as masculine.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 02:00 AM
1

Humans reproduce sexually. We also like to categorize things. One way we like to categorize things is by power. Seems like a simple, agreeable concept.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 01:10 AM
10

It seems like society activity denies men's reproductive rights in cases women don't want men to have them.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 11:46 PM
7

That's an interesting idea. If everyone ignores them two things happen. They are happy because they are right and we are happy because everyone is ignoring their hate speech. Win-win
/r/MensRights01/05/14 04:17 PM
6

Maybe this is a good sign. Could it be that what she sees as a rise in "not all men" is really a rise in people calling out anti-male discussions? I can imagine that a sexist who has never been told that her bias against men is wrong would find people defending men rather strange.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 04:11 PM
5

Exactly. Everyone knows women never abuse their children like those filthy men do. /s
/r/MensRights29/04/14 09:17 PM
4

I don't think tratsky is assuming. Also, "I have biases that make that statement seem wrong to me" is not a good refutation for a statement with a source.
/r/MensRights24/04/14 07:31 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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