TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Lallo-the-Long Archive

View 1 posts and 205 comments by Lallo-the-Long 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)
18

DiscriminationLallo-the-Long/r/MensRights04/10/17 11:09 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yes. All the time. Like, more often than not, that's what's happening.
/r/askTRP26/10/19 07:52 PM
1

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
/r/MensRights04/09/18 03:28 PM
1

So what? Is that what Christianity teaches? People you find objectionable are fair game? You know what. We're done here. Have a nice life.
/r/MensRights04/09/18 03:10 PM
1

Good for you. You seem like a fine person, and one of a very very small subset of people on here. Congrats! Are you going to continue to just insult me at the end of every message or is that part of your Christian raising as well?
/r/MensRights04/09/18 02:42 PM
1

I was using you to refer to the group, not you specifically. If you're a special case then tell me, what do you do?
/r/MensRights04/09/18 02:28 PM
1

That's hardly an argument to throw the book at her. Compared to the usual extortion scheme, this was pretty harmless. Had the scheme been successful, money would change hands and no one would be hurt. We have different severity of crime for a reason. I'm through talking about the alimony. It's not even the same judge awarding alimony. It's not a part of her criminal proceedings, which concluded in a logical and sane manner. The judge determined that the exterior was not as dangerous as it otherw…
/r/MensRights04/09/18 01:50 PM
0

You're such a good conversationalist.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 05:37 PM
2

Wow. Complaining about insults when the first thing you said to me was an insult. Quality
/r/MensRights03/09/18 05:32 PM
0

Your inability to understand English is neither my problem nor is it important. Have a nice life.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 05:28 PM
0

I'm not your English teacher, here to teach you reading comprehension.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 04:59 PM
0

I'm quoting the standard terms of probation in Florida, you idiot.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 04:10 PM
0

I am not confusing parole with probation.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 03:41 PM
-2

First, your objection to the probation is based on some imaginary world where they looked at the evidence of the "kidnapping", ignored it, and locked up the husband instead. Real winning idea there. Near as I can tell he was never in danger of being convicted of this... You're welcome to show me otherwise. Second, do you even understand what alimony is intended to be? It would be idiotic for him to be awarded alimony. What is the point of having different degrees of severity in criminal law if y…
/r/MensRights03/09/18 02:46 PM
-4

It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote. Like, right on the line between having read it and having skimmed it.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 02:26 PM
-13

Have you ever been on probation? It's not a walk in the park. You're subjected to random UAs that you have to pay for, which is probably not a huge deal here. You also pay a fee each month for the required monthly meeting with your probation officer. In addition, the police have the authority to rule your life, essentially, because being arrested is a violation of probation, regardless of reason, and violating probation can easily see that probation revoked. You also have to consent to searches …
/r/MensRights03/09/18 08:43 AM
-26

You make it sound like she was unpunished for the extortion, but she did receive a pretty significant sentence for it, as did the other guy. Seven years of probation is nothing to sneeze at. That said, the alimony number is pretty ridiculous. One payment of alimony pays for the fine of her extortion, which is pretty infuriating.
/r/MensRights03/09/18 06:23 AM
1

You forgot about Puerto Rico and the Virgin islands. Which are actually a part of this country.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 01:49 PM
-22

There's a whole fucking article and you decided to just take a screenshot of a tiny piece of it? Why do you have to try to get meme points?
/r/MensRights21/08/18 02:56 PM
1

I don't think that's how those are supposed to work, but sure. Why are you representing these gaps as vastly greater than they are?
/r/MensRights20/08/18 09:02 PM
1

Okay... There are three values given for IQ. Which did you compare?
/r/MensRights20/08/18 01:38 AM
0

Maybe I'm just a simple idiot, but the information represented on this graph you've provided is not defined in the paper you've linked. Could you tell me a little bit about where in the paper you got this information and how you converted it into the image we see before us?
/r/MensRights19/08/18 11:43 PM
-5

Your link doesn't work. The FOX attribution is merely a note on the quality of the graph, because they are well known for putting out shit graphs, similar to this one... Not to mention that if there's an entire paper that you're stealing the memes from, you might as well just link the actual paper.
/r/MensRights19/08/18 07:06 PM
-19

Oh I see we're using FOX news graphs now. They're always so quality and distorting and frequently wrong.
/r/MensRights19/08/18 06:36 PM
-2

Wow. I'm not going to engage with someone who deletes his insulting comment then engages in willful deceit about it. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 02:18 PM
-5

The first words out of you was "are you stupid?" and you have the audacity to get pissy about an insult?
/r/MensRights13/08/18 02:09 PM
-4

This is the comment we're all responding to. The topic, if you will: "Judge Judy is a perfect Example of a woman who still holds old age values that Most People had in the 1950s,where everything is fair and not biased towards a gender." Pretty sure that from the context, the person i replied to is supporting the idea that old age values are good. But they weren't good for anyone. Men and women got the shaft in different ways.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 02:07 PM
0

The very first sentence of the post i replied to says "Not to mention working their asses off to provide for their family on one salary." They're also presenting an argument as to why men should be the exclusive bread winners in a family at the end there...
/r/MensRights13/08/18 01:47 PM
-7

You need to take some reading comprehension courses, my friend.
/r/MensRights13/08/18 01:41 PM
2

What? No... No they weren't. What was being discussed was this comment: "Judge Judy is a perfect Example of a woman who still holds old age values that Most People had in the 1950s,where everything is fair and not biased towards a gender." That was responded to by pointing out that women, lgbt, and black people all faced significantly more discrimination at the time. The argument for 1950s values that followed, ridiculously, was that women weren't being discriminated against because men served i…
/r/MensRights13/08/18 01:39 PM
-15

So 1950s values are great because men have to do all the work? Yeah! Sounds great! Where do I sign up for that!?
/r/MensRights13/08/18 12:37 PM
-6

So.... In the 1950s women were allowed into a variety of positions in the military, though they were still refused combat roles. Is that your argument, though? That 1950s values were so great that men were the ones exclusively sent into combat situations while women were frowned upon for even thinking about it?
/r/MensRights13/08/18 12:35 PM
1

This is relatively true for the US federal government, too. Though not as strongly since our Justice system is weird. They do define rape as something that can only really be done by a guy. Edit: Here's the source of you want to see what it says: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape This doesn't really affect state courts that much, it primarily affects how other federal agencies (such as the CDC) build statistics on rape.
/r/MensRights12/08/18 06:08 PM
18

The young man was "acutely embarrassed" by what had happened. Um... I think she means traumatized?
/r/MensRights09/08/18 04:00 PM
1

Oh. That would make sense if you're not American, but to be clear, the states are broken up into smaller areas for local governments called counties
/r/MensRights28/07/18 10:09 PM
1

It's the name of a place...
/r/MensRights28/07/18 09:00 PM
3

What does this have to do with men's rights...?
/r/MensRights28/07/18 06:45 PM
7

Well... By shear numbers that makes some sense. There are only like 34 women in the Australian Parliament. So it makes sense that she would almost exclusively insult men, because there are almost exclusively men in the Australian Parliament. Not that it excuses any of her comments, particularly the sexist one that started all this.
/r/MensRights19/07/18 03:53 PM
1

I don't disagree with either the outrage or the fact, but could you provide a link to actual information rather than a screenshot? If this is an article you read it should be a sinple thing to provide us with a link to talk about.
/r/MensRights18/07/18 03:42 PM
1

It was a dick joke.
/r/MensRights17/07/18 04:06 PM
0

Like i said, the reason given is here immunity, which is a real thing that you can look up if you want. I don't know there vaccination rate required to obtain herd immunity, but assuming that's adequate, only men who have sex with men do not benefit from the hpv vaccination policy in place. I would be interested in reading more about herd immunity so if you find anything feel free to send me a link. I'm at work right now so i can't really look.
/r/MensRights17/07/18 02:37 AM
1

I'm the one being obtuse? You brought up the subject!
/r/MensRights17/07/18 02:23 AM
0

They're actually different vaccines, the one for women developed in 2006, the one for men in 2009. The argument for not giving it to everyone is called herd immunity, though personally i think a true herd immunity would come from a vaccination rate significantly higher, i don't know the statistics behind herd immunity.
/r/MensRights17/07/18 02:21 AM
1

Yes, it also causes cancer in the penile region, in the "head and neck" if you will. Haha, i made a dick joke, everybody laugh... What's curious to me is that article actually downplays the role of hpv in those cancers.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 09:30 PM
1

Shhhh, calm down. I was questioning the language because it sounded funny.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 09:13 PM
0

"head and neck cancer"...?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 08:45 PM
0

Clearly you did not comprehend the post you responded to.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:15 PM
2

Did you just read the first half of the first sentence of my post and then respond?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:13 PM
1

That's not my understanding of what happened, but it wouldn't be the first time the government ignored sti knowledge because reasons.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 06:25 PM
-10

Okay, in men HPV was thought to only occasionally cause some warts that would eventually just go away on their own. In women it occasionally cause genital wars and even now occasionally cervical cancer. Does that clear it up?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 05:29 PM
-14

It's expensive. The vaccine is like $50 a head to put together. I don't know about the UK, but in the US that means the vaccine is $200 a person. So if we can cut down on the cost by vaccinating only the people who are affected by the virus, we save money with the same effect.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 04:20 PM
-13

The HPV vaccine hasn't really been around all that long either... If any doctor told you this was a vaccine for cervical cancer, they were either stupid or lying. When the vaccine was first developed, however, it was thought that HPV caused cervical cancer in some women and in men it was harmless, so I can see how there might be some confusion in the general public over what the vaccine was actually for.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 04:04 PM
144

HPV is primarily linked to cancer in women, and it's only recently that we have seen evidence that it does anything at all to men. That said, it's a vote because that's how democracies work.
/r/MensRights16/07/18 03:40 PM
1

The subject was the video game, not some abstract concept you won't even demonstrate. Further, archaeologists and historians don't have a terrible amount of difficulty telling the difference between fiction and non-fiction from 2000 years ago. Why would that change?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 03:25 PM
1

You're just changing the subject but fine, do you have an example?
/r/MensRights16/07/18 07:22 AM
1

Here's another source: https://reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/8qtgwe/_/e0mw7id/?context=1&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=MensRights&utm_content=t1_e2fqdbn
/r/MensRights15/07/18 06:38 PM
1

It is hard to quantify, but not 25% difference hard to quantify.
/r/MensRights15/07/18 06:36 PM
3

"61 percent or 335,038 were men; 39 percent were women."
/r/MensRights15/07/18 06:35 PM
1

https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/who-experiences-homelessness/singleadults/
/r/MensRights15/07/18 06:27 PM
2

The first one is just flat out wrong...
/r/MensRights15/07/18 06:16 PM
0

Where did you get these statistics? The first one, at least, is way off. 61% of the homeless in the US are men. And 66% of suicides are committed by men. I'm too lazy to check all of those numbers, but the first two make the rest pretty suspect.
/r/MensRights15/07/18 06:15 PM
1

A few tribes, particularly the Iroquois, were heavily involved in both world wars... Why would you even make such a dumb comment?
/r/MensRights14/07/18 06:38 PM
-5

No one has ever claimed the Battlefield series has ever been historically accurate. It's always been a fictional representation. It has never been advertised as anything else. You're standing up a straw man.
/r/MensRights14/07/18 02:49 AM
0

You keep insisting that it's a historically accurate series. Do you have a statement from the developers of ANY Battlefield game claiming historical accuracy?
/r/MensRights14/07/18 01:03 AM
-5

Do you think people in 100 or 1000 years will not have fiction anymore? What a sad thought.
/r/MensRights14/07/18 12:49 AM
8

Another doozy! Your logic is certainly astounding.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 08:55 PM
9

Wow, what an argument you got there.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 08:30 PM
10

Did Saving Private Ryan need to tell you it was fiction? Do you need to be told that Barry is not a documentary series, or that Westworld is not a true prediction of the future? Did we need to be told that Dunkirk was not a true rendering of events? What about Godfather? Wolfenstein? Do you need to be told that Call of Duty is not real? The point is, a setting does not say or imply any historical accuracy.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 07:28 PM
4

The video you included in your original post actually repeatedly shows the developers talking about the game as not being historically accurate. Where are you getting the idea that it's intended to be?
/r/MensRights13/07/18 07:09 PM
35

They, in fact, seem to happily talk about how this is not supposed to be a historically accurate video game.
/r/MensRights13/07/18 06:41 PM
53

Where's the claim that this is historically accurate?
/r/MensRights13/07/18 04:36 PM
1

That's interesting. Apparently pepper spray is also illegal in Canada, but Canada is also like... Grizzly territory, so bear spray is legal.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 11:47 PM
3

What about things like bear spray? Maybe in Europe there aren't any large predators, but surely there are predators in Australia where bear spray would be effective?
/r/MensRights28/06/18 06:47 PM
6

Pepper spray is illegal in Australia? That's pretty fucked up.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 04:10 PM
1

It's how any federally generated statistics will define rape as well. An example would be the CDC sexual and intimate violence reports.
/r/MensRights27/06/18 08:13 AM
2

According to the department of justice, it would be surprisingly hard for a woman to commit rape: "The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim." It used to be worse, but was changed in 2012.
/r/MensRights26/06/18 05:48 PM
1

I have answered your questions, you just don't like my answers so you keep raising the bar on how i should answer your questions. I've even already answered the first question you just asked in my previous post. As far as what I disagree with, there's a good amount of vehemence directed at feminism and women as groups that comes into this subreddit. The vast majority of people have not written for academia or government on any subject,; most people are not masters/phds or lawmakers, and i don't …
/r/MensRights25/06/18 02:49 AM
1

Let me ask you this: I haven't written for men's rights in academia or in government, and i strongly disagree with some things that some MRA members advocate. However i do advocate for men's rights where and when i can. My guess is that the same could be said of a lot of people on this subreddit. Am i not a real mra?
/r/MensRights25/06/18 02:03 AM
1

So you're using the argument that the vast number of people who call themselves feminists are not real feminists, then?
/r/MensRights25/06/18 12:49 AM
1

Woo. You got me. I used common sense. Caught me red handed. I used the basic idea that the vast majority of the people I've interacted with in my life are basically good people. Then i extrapolated that probably most people are good people. Final conclusion, most feminists are good people. Do you need me to define my terms, or are you done being a thesis advisor for today?
/r/MensRights25/06/18 12:31 AM
1

Why do i think there are shitty people in a movement with vast numbers? Logic? There are shitty people all over the place.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 10:38 PM
1

I'm thinking that it's a movement with several hundred thousand people in it. Edit: Scratch that. Several hundred thousand is probably way under. Several million, possibly even several hundred million.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 09:39 PM
0

I'm thinking that it's a movement with several hundred thousand people in it. Do you think all those people have it in for us?
/r/MensRights24/06/18 09:11 PM
-8

I guess if you choose to listen to all the shitty people and take their opinions as the whole then I can see how you get to where your mind is.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 04:40 PM
-7

Why would we hear about them not stop?
/r/MensRights24/06/18 03:36 PM
-10

Are these the only five things important in life?
/r/MensRights24/06/18 03:29 PM
28

The article says nothing about the court declaring that his rights were violated, merely that they have been presented with enough evidence supporting that claim to convince them to proceed to trial. It's a blow, certainly, but the school could still be exonerated of any wrongdoing in the eyes of the law. Unless you have additional information to share on the case?
/r/MensRights02/06/18 05:42 PM
215

It's probably not being reported because it's not a major victory. The court basically said "alright, your paperwork seems to be in order, we'll hear you out."
/r/MensRights02/06/18 02:58 PM
7

From the bottom: "less comfortable working conditions" "more workplace injuries" "fewer days off" "more workplace deaths" "more overtime" "different career choices"
/r/MensRights18/05/18 04:45 PM
1

You're welcome. The better action to take would be to, you know, actually make arguments rather than memes.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 09:09 PM
1

It's the worst kind of political activism without violence, and serves no purpose. If you are angry about something that someone has written, link the damned writing. This is out of context. The text in the article could say literally anything, even be against the idea of a pay gap and encouraging men to ignore it.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 05:35 PM
2

Why did you not just fucking link to the article? What is wrong with this sub? Why does every post have to be a memed up screenshot of a news article?
/r/MensRights13/05/18 03:33 PM
3

Yeah... Pretty much everything you suggest would be an awful legal precedent to set.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 01:01 PM
14

That is also a perfectly fair conclusion.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 05:31 AM
34

The Justice system can't do that because of laws surrounding the statute of limitations. They should have caught the woman's lie years ago, when they could actually legally charge her with something.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 01:34 AM
3

The middle ground fallacy has to do with compromise, but the middle in politics doesn't necessarily mean compromise. Most people are moderates, even among politicians, but politics is often presented to us in terms of extremes.
/r/MensRights02/05/18 07:33 PM
2

Fair politics comes from the middle, not the extremes.
/r/MensRights01/05/18 11:30 PM
1

What's the delusion?
/r/MensRights20/04/18 11:23 PM
0

Socialism is, essentially, what taxes are. The United States already has hundreds if not thousands of social programs active today, and there are not many people who have not taken advantage of one or the other of them at some point. Stupid people not understanding what socialism is and coopting the term for their use does not make them socialists.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 01:07 AM
1

Your degree program might have a club worth getting into, mine does, at least.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 12:42 AM
3

Haha. I didn't even realize you were op. Yes! The context is important, thank you! At my school there are all kinds of clubs, and yeah, there are tons of women only clubs, but only like two men only clubs other than sportsball teams, which is pretty sad.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 12:06 AM
0

I'm not. I did not bring up a college connection, the other person did, so i responded to that. I also clarified why i think the op is more upset about the anti capitalism message that the patriarchy message.
/r/MensRights18/04/18 11:47 PM
1

And this pamphlet has to do with that because...?
/r/MensRights18/04/18 11:46 PM
1

First, if the message about patriarchy is the highlight, why is the last page the cover of the imgur album? Second, at my college campus there is almost always one person or another screaming about one thing or another in the campus public space. Nothing in this pamphlet associates with any University i can see.
/r/MensRights18/04/18 11:42 PM
1

Read what post? To me it links to an imgur album.
/r/MensRights18/04/18 11:28 PM
-2

I thought this was a men's rights subreddit not a "push my economic policy of choice" subreddit
/r/MensRights18/04/18 11:04 PM
-5

Oo, I found a Superior Moron, how fascinating!
/r/MensRights14/04/18 03:48 AM
-6

Yar, you shouldn't be using elitest bullshit like economic status to judge someone's success or failure in life. Both these characters are successful people.
/r/MensRights14/04/18 01:46 AM
1

When you tell people they're "clearly pushing their insecurities onto society." how is that not supposed to be insulting?
/r/MensRights13/04/18 07:00 PM
-3

Alright. You're unwilling to actually look at information so i think we're done here.
/r/MensRights13/04/18 03:33 PM
-2

http://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&iie=1&q=Medical+conditions+causing+obesity
/r/MensRights13/04/18 03:22 PM
-5

Do you have your medical degree handy? I would love to see it.
/r/MensRights13/04/18 03:14 PM
-6

Dude... There are legitimate reasons for some people to be overweight. They're called "medical conditions". Have a sense of empathy.
/r/MensRights13/04/18 02:56 PM
2

Wow you put a lot of words in my mouth.
/r/MensRights05/04/18 02:38 AM
0

That is neither what I said nor what I implied. But thanks for making that point. Maybe stop assuming that every message you don't understand is an argument.
/r/MensRights05/04/18 01:57 AM
3

Er, I was curious what you thought happened two or three generations ago. Slavery ended like five generations ago in America. At least the racial kind of slavery.
/r/MensRights05/04/18 01:02 AM
1

Curiously, this is a shift that's occurred almost entirely over the last fifty years. Also curiously, white people have experienced an increase in children raised in single parent homes over the same time period. It caused some concern in the sixties when 20% of black kids were being raised in single parent homes, where the statistic for white kids is now at 28%. Point is, I'm not sure that's the sole cause of poverty amongst any group.
/r/MensRights05/04/18 01:00 AM
-9

And why is that, my friend?
/r/MensRights04/04/18 11:46 PM
-9

Why do they have less money on average?
/r/MensRights04/04/18 10:30 PM
-3

You say that and like 80% of the replies you got are us vs. them reactions. As deeply as I believe that men need help in society, this sub drives me nuts sometimes.
/r/MensRights04/04/18 03:48 AM
18

It's like the third post on the front page for me.
/r/MensRights04/04/18 03:43 AM
1

I think you might be putting too much stock in acceptance requirements, honestly. For instance, at my school, the engineering degrees all require a 3.0 to get into, but the other science degrees do not have that requirement. It's not because the curriculum is harder for the engineering students, it's because space is limited. Edit: point is, acceptance requirements aren't particularly indicative of the degree. It's just getting through the door.
/r/MensRights02/04/18 03:02 PM
0

There are certainly problems in the way custody is handled, and the way child support is put on men in an often one sided fashion, but you're just being dramatic now. Did you read a different article, though? This one offered nothing to show the woman's claim as "transparent, greedy and disrespectful"
/r/MensRights01/04/18 05:06 PM
-45

What would you rather have been done in this case?
/r/MensRights31/03/18 07:37 PM
-78

Who... Cares? People have been getting exhumed for various reasons for literal centuries.
/r/MensRights31/03/18 05:43 PM
1

That is a word, sure.
/r/MensRights29/03/18 10:31 PM
2

Nope. Trials should be as public as possible no matter the crime. The only time the public should be cut out is when there is a provable threat.
/r/MensRights29/03/18 05:02 PM
5

Too many dropouts is bad, too.
/r/MensRights29/03/18 02:55 PM
6

Curving grades has been prevalent for a very long time... It only works like you suggest if everyone gets low grades. When part of the class does really well and part does really poorly, the normal grading doesn't change much by curving it. The only time curving grades significantly raises grades is when everyone in class does mediocre, which is usually the teacher's fault.
/r/MensRights29/03/18 02:47 PM
8

And the school pockets their tuition and fees...
/r/MensRights29/03/18 02:41 PM
2

My story is more recent, by maybe 5-6 years. It seems like the general mindset of the legal system has shifted, at least in my state. They've even moved away from language like custody. Hopefully most people act like you and my friend did, seeking to do what's best for the kids and not their ego.
/r/MensRights27/03/18 03:14 PM
2

It's interesting... One of my best friends had to fight for parenting rights for his kid. It was a long and arduous thing, but the court seemed entirely on his side. The girl tried to make up things, got him put on drug tests, but the court told her she had to pay for them and they could only happen once a month. She never gave him a single one. As far as i know he never tried for "primary custody" but pushed really hard for equalized time. There was never a time where the judge did not rule in …
/r/MensRights27/03/18 02:49 PM
5

Some of them do and some of them don't. Unfortunately on this sub we have many people more interested in screaming "no me" than recognizing that, in fact, everyone can have problems that society and culture places on them and they don't have to be mutually exclusive. Edit: I know there are at least as many of the people on this sub who do recognize. I don't mean to put down the sub in general.
/r/MensRights26/03/18 03:50 AM
15

Found it! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Elementary_School_shooting_(San_Diego)
/r/MensRights23/03/18 04:36 PM
6

What makes a school shooter "modern"?
/r/MensRights23/03/18 04:08 PM
3

Wow! Two different, equally terrible news organizations print the opposite headline because they're on the opposite sides of the political spectrum!? I'm so shocked and appalled! Have you called The Times yet? You could be rich selling this story!
/r/MensRights22/03/18 05:13 PM
2

Maybe the OP is just misinterpreting satire, or even flat out misrepresenting what the book is about. The author has a blog too, and my cursory glance at that didn't make it seem so dastardly, but I didn't dig deeply. Honestly though, I'm only encouraging you because I think it's important for us to read things that challenge our ideals so starkly it makes us sick every so often. That said, I usually like it to be well written, and this author writes more like a Sexy Detective © series.
/r/MensRights19/03/18 09:53 PM
3

So read the book and leave a scathing review, rather than just yelling and complaining in this mostly echo chamber.
/r/MensRights19/03/18 08:45 PM
4

There was this one guy who wrote a pretty awful book once and shortly afterwards became head of state. I think it was in Germany or something.
/r/MensRights19/03/18 06:35 PM
0

That sounds suspiciously like abandoning everyone to their fate until some mysterious solution simply presents itself.
/r/MensRights17/03/18 02:02 AM
1

Well, for the most part, yes. However, making laws that are unenforceable is pointless to the extreme. Since we agree that enforcement of current anti-discrimination laws is pretty negligible, what is your solution to that?
/r/MensRights16/03/18 10:35 PM
0

I'm under the impression that there is very little enforcement of these laws, that at-will employment states exist in the US that create an environment where discrimination is easy. I know that it's basically impossible to prove that an employer or landlord is kicking you out because of any particular trait they care to take offense at.
/r/MensRights16/03/18 05:02 PM
0

So like... No enforcement, then?
/r/MensRights16/03/18 11:07 AM
0

That's not an answer to my question, just a restatement of your opinion
/r/MensRights16/03/18 10:37 AM
0

I dunno, that sounds a lot like leaving minorities who are genuinely discriminated against to fend for themselves until some abstract time where things magically get better.
/r/MensRights16/03/18 04:00 AM
-1

So how would you enforce anti-discrimination laws? Hypothetically, you're the government and I'm an employer. How do you know if my hiring practices are discriminatory?
/r/MensRights16/03/18 03:48 AM
-6

I would disagree with that in some instances, but agree with it in others, I suppose. And really, how do you enforce anti discrimination laws without requiring some percentage of the sample population be diverse?
/r/MensRights15/03/18 09:12 PM
-17

If your sexuality is used to discriminate against you I feel it's equally egregious it's used to validate you. I interpret this sentence as "if you're being discriminated against, you can't also have people help you." Could you maybe clarify your statement? It reads a little... Insane.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 07:32 PM
1

Let's be honest here, they're all hot as fuck.
/r/MensRights12/02/18 01:06 PM
2

Why does it have to be feminists? Why can't we just all be people who hate BuzzFeed?
/r/MensRights12/02/18 12:59 PM
166

The vast, vast majority of the comments are pretty negative about the article and the two or three people being idiots, though.
/r/MensRights11/02/18 08:56 PM
-1

I don't think this poster means a group of occupations. I think they mean the hard labor part of construction site jobs that are heavily dominated by men, This is part of the problem. The poster is completely open to interpretation. It could mean bunches of things, and all of them are still false. Presenting an accurate message is as important as casting a wide net.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 10:48 PM
-1

I think it's disingenuous to compare the birth of a child, which is something that cannot happen without a man and a woman, despite the brunt part of pregnancy being on women to a claim that a group of occupations that includes everything from architecture and manufacturing is all male. And yes, I get annoyed at feminists when they try to pull the same shit. Memes are not useful political tools. They cannot actually express points that will change minds. All they do is put people more firmly in …
/r/MensRights10/02/18 10:11 PM
-3

That's not what the poster says though, is it?
/r/MensRights10/02/18 09:25 PM
-7

That was an inflammatory street poster, not a positive one.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 06:35 PM
1

Don't get pissy with me for sticking up for myself when that's what you wrote about me. And no I'm not taking anything personally, You keep attacking me like I'm not a part of this community.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 05:57 PM
1

Sigh. You're taking this mighty personally. I was pointing out a flaw on your position, not your character.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 05:46 PM
1

Oh okay. So i guess my opinions can't be different from yours without me being an awful human being. My bad. Apparently I've called people in this sub "losers" and I "keep spamming". You're not arguing, you're not defending anything, you're just attacking people.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 05:39 PM
0

Check usernames before you get all pissy with me, my friend.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 05:24 PM
-4

Is it really saying anything positive about men when the picture this post is about is a lie, in and of itself. You don't like people who lie, yet you're defending a meme that is a lie at its core.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 02:38 AM
3

Yeah, that's not really relevant to this discussion. Though I do appreciate the effort you went to write it.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 11:12 PM
4

Really? That's where we're going with this? A discussion of semantics? Great. You described yourself as a feminist. You cannot simply call yourself that and divorce yourself from what the word means and who you are associating yourself with. Just like conservatives will never be able to escape the association with neonazis.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 08:29 PM
4

Because the general public is and always has been and always will be blind to the things that matter in the world because they can't or won't or just don't want to acknowledge it.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 08:03 PM
1

You mean the crazy neonazis? They're crazy neonazis, a fringe element in political group. Are you really comparing them to feminists that have influenced government policy and police training across the country?
/r/MensRights28/01/18 07:18 PM
4

Perhaps you're simply uninformed about all the aspects of your own movement.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 06:50 PM
7

I dunno about Mina Loy, but the Duluth model is a pretty shitty thing that feminists came up with that still used today.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 06:44 PM
4

Why misguided?
/r/MensRights28/01/18 06:02 PM
36

This is actually not true. There's a lot of human trafficking in the United States.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 06:00 PM
1

#notallhrdepts ?
/r/MensRights20/01/18 08:20 AM
-7

Sigh. That's nonsense.
/r/MensRights05/12/17 08:56 PM
4

Yep, pretty much everyone has to develop empathy in their own ways. It's never an inherent part of anyone.
/r/MensRights05/12/17 06:50 PM
2

I can't tell if you're making a joke or not.
/r/MensRights05/12/17 06:44 PM
2

I, however, would appreciate debates a lot more of the debaters were in a snowboard park while they were debating. Just saying, these events could be interesting but every year political debates fail to deliver.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 07:56 PM
3

It is! Some of it can even be a decently complete meal. Also crock pots are awesome.
/r/MensRights21/11/17 01:39 AM
2

The women who work with Sheldon are basically the same way, though.
/r/MensRights20/11/17 07:49 PM
3

I would encourage all of you to use the "send feedback" button to express this to Google. Who knows, maybe we'll find a champion.
/r/MensRights20/11/17 06:48 PM
1

The big bang theory? If anything isn't that just making fun of hyper smart people for not being normal?
/r/MensRights20/11/17 06:43 PM
21

It blows my mind that all these mid twenties/thirties people think they've figured out the whole life thing and now they know it all. I wish i had their confidence.
/r/MensRights20/11/17 06:41 PM
17

I suspect you're going to face some backlash at some point. Be prepared for that, and remember to stay calm in the face of criticism.
/r/MensRights20/11/17 06:35 PM
3

I'm not sure this is specifically related to men's rights, but it is pretty upsetting. Thanks for sharing.
/r/MensRights19/11/17 10:50 PM
4

I remember watching a short video following a commander around Afghanistan to see what problems remain. This was a big one, and one the guy didn't see getting solved.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 07:28 PM
1

To what end? Won't the post only appear to people who have subscribed to the sub on the front page? (I actually have no idea how that system works.)
/r/MensRights16/11/17 10:41 PM
2

It's okay to not get all the upvotes. It's all really quite meaningless.
/r/MensRights16/11/17 08:01 PM
8

I really enjoy seeing true love bud on Reddit. hinthint
/r/MensRights15/11/17 05:04 AM
2

Legally speaking, men are almost always going to be the top perpetrators of rape because of how rape is defined by the federal government. Maybe that's what the speaker was referring to, but i doubt it.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 04:55 AM
10

The CDC released a report from a group called... NISVS if i remember correctly that does have some numbers for the sex of the perpetrator. It's not exactly domestic violence statistics, iirc. I also don't really remember what the statistics came out to for perpetrator and i don't really care to dredge through it, but that information is out there. Here: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/index.html There's a similar organisation in Australia with a slightly different name, but i don't …
/r/MensRights15/11/17 04:51 AM
2

I would also like to point out that at least in the United States, rape is defined as something that women are just not that likely to perform in the legal system. Rape is the unwanted penetration of the victim, but that's... Not how women have sex, so by definition, most rapists will be male.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 09:08 PM
0

Well that's useless, i don't even know why you wasted your time.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 05:14 PM
1

Why raise new kids in a world where so many kids go unwanted? I'm not criticizing I'm just curious how you made the decision. Edit: Also i was more referring to giving me flak for not really liking people because it doesn't help perpetuate our civilization like I owe society something in return for my existence.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 01:05 AM
1

Can you explain like I'm five, please? Why does his assertion not fit the definition of an outlier?
/r/MensRights11/11/17 12:38 AM
1

So you're knocking me for not contributing to procreation and the stability of the population of a subset of the human species while you also don't contribute and have no intention of contributing either? That takes some guts, dude. Also I'm getting this from your use of "us".
/r/MensRights11/11/17 12:27 AM
1

I'm also homosexual, would you like to blame the low birth rate on that as well?
/r/MensRights10/11/17 10:53 PM
1

Oh man you used a lot of big words string together there. What exactly is "demographic collapse"? It sounds like a buzzword. I mean, "demographic" just relates to populations, but the world keeps getting filled with more humans, so it can't possibly mean that the population is collapsing.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 08:10 PM
1

I will do this thing.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:53 PM
1

Yay! I'm killing society!
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:49 PM
1

I kinda like the acronym, too.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:46 PM
1

Out of curiosity what will you chalk it up to?
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:34 PM
1

I mean, you can take "Judgy McJudgerson" however you will, but I'll let you know now that it's not something angry/upset people usually throw out there. Maybe I'm just fucking with you?
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:25 PM
1

Welcome to life,where we all have different interests and priorities. Mine mostly don't involve people and I like it that way. How about you, Judgy McJudgerson the Second?
/r/MensRights10/11/17 06:34 PM
1

I don't think it's a problem. Welcome to life though, where we all have different interests and priorities. Mine mostly don't involve people and I like it that way. How about you, Judgy McJudgerson?
/r/MensRights10/11/17 06:32 PM
26

You know, I come here because I care about men, but this still made me more upset than the article.
/r/MensRights09/11/17 08:51 PM
1

There doesn't seem to be. This is all i could find to support that: "Licensing agents are required to advise an applicant's spouse or next-of-kin prior to granting a license, and licenses are denied to applicants with any past history of domestic violence. Buyers in private sales of weapons must pass official background checks." http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-australia-japan-britain-gun-control-2013-1
/r/MensRights06/10/17 04:32 PM
2

I didn't even think about that. If you're just a single dude then you're just not trustworthy enough to own a gun.
/r/MensRights05/10/17 05:16 PM
-2

So do that, then, which has nothing to do with the greater debate of "should guns have more regulations" i mean, honestly, this is reddit, so i couldn't stop you from posting whatever you want to my post, so do whatever you want and I'll just live with it.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 11:34 PM
-2

Sorry, it's not about whether or not to regulate guns, it's about how specifically this suggestion is discriminatory. The justification for that suggestion is up for debate i suppose, but i really don't want to see this post turn into just another "should we regulate?" debate.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 11:17 PM
1

This came from his Facebook page. The interesting part is the first bullet point. Also please don't comment on the gun debate. This is not about that.
/r/MensRights04/10/17 11:11 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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