TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

JasgerP Archive

View 0 posts and 89 comments by JasgerP on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Maybe you should read the entire paragraph. They weren't just blaming evil men. They also mention evil women. "But even through all of that, I never see women as the enemy. The enemy is the evil men. The men that give them the reason to fear. The enemy is the evil women who gave us reasons to fear as well." Meaning its the bad men and WOMEN who are causing the fear and problems.
/r/MensRights21/09/22 09:39 PM
-2

Then you look into the top post about mental health and read the lines... "I'm in the fucking dark here and being chastised as a lunatic for things that were done to me by... oh yeah here's the kicker... WOMEN that have fucked me up for life and mental illnesses left untreated by healthcare "professionals" that are completely out of my control." Yes the post is about mental health but the WOMEN have ducked up his life etc. Thats just the first one I read so far.
/r/MensRights21/09/22 05:10 PM
-24

Calling women out for their BS? That post is generalizing women at best. People on this sub get upset when they see posts generalizing men.
/r/MensRights05/09/22 09:13 PM
1

Are you sure those are the only reasons why women leave their husband's? I dont know. From going on the parenting boards, I can tell you there are other reasons why some women leave. Do you have stats on the top reasons women leave their husband's?
/r/MensRights04/09/22 12:50 PM
-5

Better hateful content? Its odd to me that you complain about their posts then support or ignore the generalized comments on this site. Seems a bit hypocritical no matter how much you try to rationalize it. Both groups are guilty of generalizing the other.
/r/MensRights03/09/22 08:09 PM
-7

People on here do complain about those sites generalizing men though.
/r/MensRights03/09/22 07:56 PM
0

Lol I'm just wondering how you see sexist hypocracy in what they said and not with wanting women to video record their consent. But good on you for your reply. It added so much to the discussion.
/r/MensRights26/08/22 05:11 PM
-1

No, its because consent for sex is ongoing. You can withdraw your consent in the middle of sex if you want. If someone is performing rough sex and the other participant isn't into it, they can ask them to stop. A video consent beforehand might make someone feel as if they have no control in the sex because they already "consented". Also, does this consent video need to be done everytime before sex? Or just once?
/r/MensRights26/08/22 02:06 AM
-3

So its ok for him to take precautions on whether or not she's an asshole who wants to falsely accuse him of sexual assault and ruin his life, but she should just lay all her trust with him?? Seems a little hypocritical to me.
/r/MensRights26/08/22 01:54 AM
2

I dont understand. Why would the women who are going their own way care if some men go their own way? They wouldn't be looking for a date anyway. The fact of the matter is, anyone should do what is best for them and their lives. If they're not happy in a relationship... more power to them. Some people enjoy being single.
/r/MensRights22/08/22 10:00 PM
1

Another reason I find it odd. I work in daycare in the same province where this happened. We legally cannot prevent a mother or father from picking up their child without a court order. Which means that if a women comes in and says to us the father can no longer pick up their child, we tell them we can't legally prevent him from picking up the child without a court order. I can't imagine the school system would be much different. Thats why its so odd that it went that far. I mean I could maybe s…
/r/MensRights20/08/22 08:48 PM
1

Wow. You're so quick to jump to conclusions. I wasn't blaming him. I simply thought it was odd that the school all of a sudden reported him for picking up his daughter (when he had countless times before). The article never mentions why they all of a sudden did. Also the article doesn't exactly say he picks her up every Tuesday. "But Solomon, who is no longer with his daughter’s mother, claims he routinely picks her up from school and Tuesday was no different." It says Tuesday was no different b…
/r/MensRights20/08/22 08:25 PM
1

The article doesn't say anything about why they believed he wasn't suppose to have his daughter. Most parents that aren't together have specified days which they have their children. It says in the article he had picked his daughter up many times from the school so why was this day so different? It certainly is odd.
/r/MensRights20/08/22 06:26 PM
1

I don't think as many men are opting out of 'impregnating women' as you think. Definitely not enough to get the governments attention.
/r/MensRights15/08/22 04:51 PM
2

Considering the financial abortion would only cover child support from those fathers that opt out before the child is born, the IV-D money would still be needed for IV-D. With so many babies being born, would it be enough money to cover them all even when you don't take that into account?
/r/MensRights14/08/22 11:35 PM
1

The problem is, these DNA tests need to be funded. Where is the money coming from? If you're serious about any of this, you're going to have to start raising money in an attempt for this to come to fruitation. The state is fine making men pay for these children because they won't fork over the money for it.
/r/MensRights14/08/22 09:20 PM
-1

I dont think the number of women working part time or not at all is as huge as you think it is. With rapidly rising inflation, families need two working individuals just to make ends meet. I think its becoming less and less feasible with most families. Most women don't have the choice to stay home. Though the lucky ones do. Of course none of them would have the choice if someone else wasn't willing to finance their lifestyle. Their "choice" is actually dependent on someone else's choice and abil…
/r/MensRights06/08/22 11:53 PM
1

So you don't know anyone who has become pregnant using contraception? I find that hard to beleive. And, yes sometimes there are human errors like forgetting to take 1 pill at the same time everyday.
/r/MensRights15/07/22 10:13 AM
1

I've known multiple women get pregnant on contraceptives. It definitely happens a lot more than you think. Yeah it might take 10 times to get pregnant. It might take 20, but why take the risk? And women are being selfish for not wanting sex? If they don't want sex, then they don't want sex. For whatever reason, it shouldn't matter. Sex isn't life or death.
/r/MensRights15/07/22 01:33 AM
3

In that situation, I think you guys are safe. Sometimes people are denied sterilization or they're just not ready for kids yet.
/r/MensRights13/07/22 09:17 PM
4

Contraception sometimes fails and isn't a guarantee you won't have to go through a pregnancy. I know several people who have children because their contraceptives failed and they made a choice to continue the pregnancy. And I do realize the ability to get an abortion differs by state. Thats why I mentioned if I lived in a state that banned abortions.
/r/MensRights13/07/22 09:07 PM
5

Eh. If I lived in the US in a state that banned abortions and I didn't want a child, I'd think twice before having sex. Not to punish any men because obviously they personally didn't make the decisions. But to protect myself. I've read some posts from women that have health issues that would make for a difficult or dangerous pregnancy. I can't blame them for not wanting sex. I do think that more people are opting for sterilization now more than ever in these specific states. And for good reason.
/r/MensRights13/07/22 05:09 PM
1

I did say it was a failure of the system in general. More staff or teaching assistants could help. More funding would be required.
/r/MensRights11/07/22 10:03 AM
1

So we should just allow every other child in the classroom to fall back in their education so the teachers can spend the day dealing with behaviours? This isn't just about my child, but all of them. I'm not saying all the boys need to be drugged up. I'm saying something should be done to allow everyone to get the opportunity to be successful in the classroom. There could very well be better solutions but they might be more costly like hiring more staff to deal with the behaviours so the teachers…
/r/MensRights11/07/22 01:37 AM
3

I think most fields that try to get more women into it are the more coveted and high paying jobs. Those types of jobs are more "desired" by society. They're simply better. Why would you want to push for a lower paying not so coveted job? I mean, there's a reason daycare workers have a high turnover rate in staff.
/r/MensRights11/07/22 01:24 AM
1

Devils advocate: Teachers have 30 or so children to teach and get through the curriculum for the year. If one or more of the students are disruptive to the class, that can set the entire class back if the teachers constantly have to address the behaviour. Quite often there isn't enough time to give these children the one on one attention that might be required without it taking away from the rest of the class. I know as a parent, I would be upset if my child didn't receive the proper curriculum …
/r/MensRights11/07/22 01:15 AM
1

I don't think I've ever heard the words "relationship" being referred to when a woman abuses a 5 year old either.
/r/MensRights15/05/21 01:28 AM
1

He could take his children to the park or for a walk or just spend time with them. If he has such a problem with his wife, he doesn't have to be with them around her. And again. You're assuming. You dont know.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 08:53 PM
0

But he also leaves 90 percent of the childcare up to his wife when he should be perfectly capable to raise his children as well.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 08:34 PM
2

According to one of her other posts, her husband works in a lab.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 08:32 PM
1

In this case, the husband works in a lab though.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 08:31 PM
1

Her husband isnt in construction. In one of her other posts she mentions that he works in a lab. She works in special education.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 08:29 PM
2

I dont see how that has anything to do with her post. She never said she had the children when her husband didnt want them.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 07:58 PM
1

Honestly though, if you're going by this logic, you cant be upset when women get custody of the children in a divorce where the man works a hard labour job. If the men are too tired to look after them, then what else is suppose to happen with them?
/r/MensRights30/06/20 07:13 PM
1

So it isnt important for a father to take care of their child? Of course certain jobs are more exhausting than others but what is the point in having them if you're not going to look after them and spend time with them?
/r/MensRights30/06/20 06:58 PM
1

He has a resposibilty as a father to look after his children regardless of what type of job he works. This is like saying that the parent with easier job should have custody of the kids because it would be too exhausting for the other parent which would be ridiculous. There are many fathers who work hard jobs and come home and spend time with their children. And mostly because they want to.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 06:26 PM
2

I don't know. If I were doing 90 percent of the chores and childcare plus a fulltime job, I would expect my SO to step up a bit. The fact that he is ok with leaving his wife to take care of the children 90 percent of the time shows me hes not too fussed about an equal share of responsibilities regardless of the high expectations of cleanliness expected from his wife.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 06:10 PM
1

You're bringing up issues that arent in the post to try and invalidate the situation on her end yet you're ignoring the fact that the parenting doesn't appear to be equal in this situation. If MRAs wants to stress the importance of fathers in a childs life, I dont think plucking posts regarding a lack of effort from a father and criticizing the poster for it all the while excusing the man for not putting enough time in for his children is helping their cause.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 03:31 PM
3

Her post had to do with her own situation and we dont even know what job her husband works. It might not even apply to her situation.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 03:18 PM
0

You're assuming things when it comes down to their jobs. And the 90 percent thing still doesnt explain the lack of time for his children. Regardless of his job, he should at least be an equal parent.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 03:13 PM
-1

What are the double standards in her post?
/r/MensRights30/06/20 02:57 PM
2

She says in her post that she works a full time job and does 90 percent of the childcare and household chores. If it were equal he should be doing more especially with his children. Fathers are important for a childs upbringing as well.
/r/MensRights30/06/20 02:54 PM
1

Hostile doesn't simply mean hatred. It could mean unkind to, unfriendly, disapproving etc. What would you consider saying women in general are greedy as? It's not a kind or approving comment about one half of the population for one thing... especially with the sarcastic tone of the post. And the post for that comment is in this very thread and on top of that it's upvoted 43 times. If someone said that about men somewhere on the internet, it would be posted here in a big uproar.
/r/MensRights15/10/17 03:44 AM
-3

I think some people here are really reaching. They didn't mention the word 'boy' in the title. They make reference to his gender in the article and refer to him as a son. Girls aren't sons.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 10:00 PM
-4

That article also didn't say the sex of who did the shooting. Not even in the article itself.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 09:54 PM
1

I am not claiming to know what happened either.... that's why I am not bashing on these people.
/r/MensRights29/05/16 12:18 PM
2

You have no idea what happened with her and Johnny, so I don't get why you think you do and why you're resorting to calling her a bitch. I thought people on this forum didn't want people to get crucified without any proof? Yet, you have no proof that he didn't hit her... you and other people on here, yet you're name calling her and shaming her. There are a lot of hypocrites on this board.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 09:31 PM
2

The poster didn't specify which kind of white women. There are white women off all different classes. I guess you could say that people are talking about specific men when they generalize men as well. That should be ok?
/r/MensRights23/05/16 03:09 PM
1

He said white women. I don't see the word rich anywhere in his sentence. Maybe you need to learn some reading comprehension before calling other people dumb.
/r/MensRights23/05/16 01:09 PM
431

She's not trying to criminalize men. She's trying to 'criminalize' people who call people fat. Though I think she was just exaggerating, women do that too (maybe more). There is no way she doesn't know this. But yes, she was being hypocritical when she made the remark about fatman.
/r/MensRights22/05/16 12:19 PM
1

So you're saying the female units could overtake the enemy all male units if they're larger? So we should draft more women than men?
/r/MensRights18/05/16 02:18 AM
1

No there wouldn't. If the military they send to war aren't able to put an end to the war (ex// they can't perform the tasks adequately), they will start to get more people to fill those positions when they're dead/injured. There for, those males and more females would come to call eventually. I notice that you didn't deny that enemies with all male soldiers would defeat the female units. So if the female units are just going to be defeated by all male units, how is that going to stop those other…
/r/MensRights18/05/16 12:43 AM
1

I don't care about equal responsibility in war. I care about getting the best out there and preventing as many deaths as possible. What extra privilege would those veterans gain from making women register for combat?
/r/MensRights17/05/16 10:17 PM
1

I would want the war to be fought so less people would die in general. You're too concerned with the us vs them logic. You know damn well that an all female unit wouldn't fare well when fighting in combat against the enemy which will most likely have all male units. It's not going to save any men's lives in the long run and the war would end up costing more money and running longer than it should.
/r/MensRights17/05/16 10:00 PM
1

So you want to put women there to take some bullets? To me, it seems like you're much more concerned about making sure as many women get killed in war as men even if it means more people are going to die on a whole. You're not concerned about the over all outcome. Yes, women can shoot guns, but they are also required to carry their heavy gear as well as other duties that some of them just won't be able to handle.... which will hold back the entire group. If they are going to be drafted, they nee…
/r/MensRights17/05/16 09:23 PM
0

Anyone who is unfit to be in combat shouldn't be there. Men or women. I thought I made that clear when I said putting random bodies on the field isn't going to accomplish anything. It doesn't matter how many bodies you have on the field if they aren't able to perform the tasks necessary and carry their heavy gear and what not. The individuals who can't perform these tasks will hold back the others. If a man goes down with all his gear, and there is only a woman around, the chances are that woman…
/r/MensRights16/05/16 08:59 PM
1

Throwing random bodies on the field isn't going to accomplish anything though. It's only going to result in more deaths in the end.
/r/MensRights16/05/16 02:36 AM
1

That study doesn't really say anything about how people are treated and it was conducted 12 years ago. It says that women like women more than men like men. It also doesn't say that women like women more than men. It says men who are highly experienced in sex preferred women... which could account for a lot in their study. Which goes back to what I was saying before. Men are going to treat women they are sexually interested in better than other men who are strangers. That's a no brainer. Some wo…
/r/MensRights16/05/16 02:25 AM
1

While drafting people into combat positions and in training, should they force people into combat roles regardless of skill or should they force the soldiers that are more competent. I ask this because there are typically tests that soldiers have to pass in order to go into combat. Do they lower it for women so they can pass or do they test everyone on the same levels? Because if they don't lower those tests for women, you won't see many women being forced into combat as they won't pass. You wou…
/r/MensRights15/05/16 02:24 PM
1

How and who treat women better? I often hear this argument in these forums. Men who are attracted to certain women will treat them better. That is true. Will other women treat them better? Unlikely. Women will treat attractive men better than attractive women. The fact of the matter is that attractive people are treated better in society than unattractive people. I highly doubt a bunch of men are treating unattractive women better than their friends just because they happen to be women. In fact,…
/r/MensRights15/05/16 02:11 PM
1

Actually, the article doesn't say anything about statutory rape. It says he raped a 13 year old. It also says he raped a 7 year old when he was 13. I don't think this case is comparable to statutory rape at this point.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 01:06 AM
1

I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything. I think there happens to be more male writers and I think males tend to be more interested in things that are more male oriented, therefor, you have them writing more characters for men. I don't have a problem with this actually. I just don't think it's because society has to always have women be portrayed as wonderful.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 11:19 PM
-2

I admitted I missed that part of your post. What else do you want me to say? lol You are trying to derail the conversation away from my examples. Of which I have provided 13 examples in this thread for you. I have asked you before.... where are the complaints about these women villains for portraying women as less than wonderful? You ignore that. As for your argument about feminists flooding the market with mary Sues or perfect female characters.... it all goes back to my original argument in th…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 11:08 PM
0

I think it would be an issue in this forum if women were the ones who had 60% of the speaking roles in films. For me, I'm not that concerned about who has more speaking lines. And for a select few articles? I don't know why anyone would be afraid of that. The Star Wars films aren't afraid to put more female characters in their films even though some people are complaining about it. Harry Potter got criticized for witch craft, but WB still hammered on with those films.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 10:09 PM
-2

I missed that part I will admit, but in the end, our topic of conversation is whether or not women are allowed to be portrayed as villains or evil. I just think your reasoning is weak when there are so many examples of female characters being evil and not being criticized.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 09:59 PM
0

Of course you're going to have a select few people criticize things for ridiculous reasons. I've seen people complain simply because a woman is a lead in a film..... period. However, the examples you have given aren't criticizing the films for portraying a woman character in a negative light... which is what i was talking about.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 09:48 PM
-2

You didn't say anything about dialogue in your original post. You said that women can't have the same flaws as men. You said they can't be a random villainess asshole or they need to empathetic.... or have a lot of backstory. I'm giving you several examples of female villains that don't follow that narrative and haven't been criticized for portraying a female character as bad. What other points in your original post have I not addressed? You pretty much only talked about how female characters ar…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 09:38 PM
1

I gave more examples in my other post as well. (Little Mermaid, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty) And I have more. Twilight's character Jane. Snow Whites The Queen. Alice in Wonderland's The Queen of Hearts. Mean Girls. Mrs Trunchbull from Matilda. If what you say is true, where are all the complaints about these female characters? It's true that most of my examples are from children's stories, but tbh, children are more impressionable than adults. If anything, people would want to try and sensor chi…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 09:11 PM
-2

My position is that these characters exist and there are no complaints about these female characters being full of flaws, so I can't see how exactly this is a reason as to why there aren't as many female villains. I mean even in Disney movies, there are female villains who don't have any redeemable qualities. Ursala the sea witch in the Little Mermaid, Millificent in Sleeping Beauty, the Step sisters in Cinderella. What redeeming qualities do these villains or highly dislikable characters have? …
/r/MensRights10/04/16 08:01 PM
-1

Someone needs to inform WB that there's a rule that female characters can't just be villainous and that they need to be empathetic in some way. The Harry Potter series features two villain like characters who are female and have no redeeming qualities. One of them is Bellatrix Lestrange. She is Voldemort's evil sadistic right hand woman. The other is Dolores Umbridge who is 9 times out of 10 named as the most hated character in the Harry Potter series even out ranking the main villain Voldemort.…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 07:09 PM
1

I actually think reforming child support and making sure the money is going towards the child would be more likely to prevent mothers from seeing their child as a meal ticket and also keeping children out of poverty. For example, putting a limit on child support payments no matter how much the father makes. Perhaps even handing out the support payments in the way of food stamps etc. If it were true that women wouldn't have babies if they couldn't afford them, you wouldn't see so many children in…
/r/MensRights05/04/16 10:47 PM
3

But it is the issue and it's why child support is in place to begin with. That's why welfare exists as well. To pull people out of poverty line. The government unfortunately can only do so much with the tax dollars without raising them. If we pull child support away from these children, the future of our society... without having a back up plan, we are setting these children up for failure. How are they suppose to learn in school if they're hungry? How are they suppose to feel secure if they are…
/r/MensRights03/04/16 10:49 PM
3

The issue with having dads be able to opt out of parenting is that some of these children would be living in poverty if the single parent can't afford the child on their own. You would have to come up with a way to make sure those children are financially supported, otherwise I don't see these laws changing. If a successful way to do so can be found, then it's possible for change.
/r/MensRights03/04/16 12:34 PM
0

The thing is, there are some women who work and do most of the domestic chores at home. Of course this could be true for some men as well. When you're cleaning up after a family, the work at home is a bit more than when you live by yourself. More cooking which leads to more dishes, more laundry, more rooms to vacuum, more messes to clean up around the house. (Toys on the floor, spills, accidents etc) I don't think this sub really takes into account that some of these women do in fact work as wel…
/r/MensRights19/03/16 04:21 PM
1

How exactly would you fill the quotas in those fields though? Force women into trash collection and force the men that are in those fields already out? How would that work exactly?
/r/MensRights19/03/16 12:56 AM
0

There are reasons why everything happens though. Why don't they spend threads upon threads discussing why Men's Rights issues happen instead of complaining about them? I already know why female infanticide happens, but people in here are desperately trying to turn it around into a discussion about privilege for females. It's ridiculous. If this were a conversation about male infants, people here would not be focussing on the why, but how disgusting it is. Some MRA's are as bad as feminists with …
/r/MensRights17/03/16 10:21 AM
-1

Working is not necessarily a lifestyle choice, especially when you're part of a society that doesn't offer much in ways of work for women. Do you know what kind of work or education has been offered to women in these countries? In places like India, some women aren't even offered education. If women aren't educated in certain countries, you can all but guaranty they aren't being set up for working life. The women are seen as being apart of their husband's family once married. Not their own. The …
/r/MensRights17/03/16 10:11 AM
6

She pleaded guilty and the two of them also had a son together that needs to be taken care of as well. Besides that point, one situation isn't representative of the entire female population or male population. I know people on this site don't like men being lumped together when it comes to other violent men.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 02:13 AM
-2

Some people hate men. Some people hate women. Those things I stated have nothing to do with hating men. There are other reasons already stated as to why those discriminations exist. People here are trying to justify female infanticide/abortion with reasons, so I am giving reasons right back as to why some discrimination is held against men in certain situations. There are always reasons. Doesn't really justify it.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 01:52 AM
7

How is this an example of women thinking family is replaceable? Because she didn't commit suicide?
/r/MensRights17/03/16 01:44 AM
-5

There are practical reasons pertaining to the domestic violence argument as well, not because anyone hates men. There are practical reasons why the men were sent to war instead of women as well. They're stronger and more suited physically for warfare. It doesn't have anything to do with hating men.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 12:41 AM
1

Although I don't get the comparison to the military per say, this article has an estimate of 163 million of missing women by adding them from a few different countries. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3830941/ So while the numbers are comparable, the situations are not.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 12:29 AM
-3

You can try to justify it all you want, but it's still gender discrimination. There are reasons for everything MRA's speak out against, but it still doesn't make it right. For example, domestic violence against women is taken more seriously than domestic violence against men because women aren't as physically strong as a man and many men could murder a woman with his bare hands. There is a reason right there, but MRA's still fight against this form of discrimination. Not to mention, this isn't j…
/r/MensRights17/03/16 12:08 AM
-4

So you would be willing to give up your parents and your lifestyle choices just so you don't have to work anymore?
/r/MensRights16/03/16 11:58 PM
1

So someone would be better off dead than working? I see people on here get upset when Men and boys in third world countries get murdered. In those cases, they would no longer have to go through suffering and obligation as well. But when it is an infant female, it's "well at least she doesn't have to go through suffering and obligation". Yeah, that's right. She doesn't get to live simply because she was born female. And like I said in my previous post.... women in third world countries go through…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 11:53 PM
0

The article never specified where the majority of the missing come from. Some of these people in the poorer areas of India don't have access to technology we do and may not know the sex of their baby until they're born. Many of those girls were killed right after being born. The women in those countries have suffering and obligations as well. It's a third world country. They don't have the technology we do. There is MORE work for everyone and less pay. Children even work sometimes.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 09:34 PM
2

Women weren't required to be in the workforce back in the 1900's over here in the west either. Women themselves fought to get into the workforce. It would be interesting to find out what kinds of jobs are available to women in China. Yes, they may not be required to work out of the home, but that doesn't automatically mean privilege, especially considering they are expected to leave their families they grew up with and help take care of their husbands families. Sometimes it's better to have more…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 09:24 PM
0

In India alone, it is estimated at 60 million missing women. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/07/201372814110570679.html
/r/MensRights16/03/16 09:14 PM
-7

So it's a female privilege to be expected to stay in her husbands family and help take care of her husbands family and have to leave her own?
/r/MensRights16/03/16 09:02 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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