TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Loweeel Archive

View 2 posts and 16 comments by Loweeel 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)
23

Loweeel/r/MensRights24/04/13 02:49 PM
8

Loweeel/r/MensRights24/09/11 03:42 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Testicles
/r/MensRights10/06/26 11:56 PM
2

But the Top Chef winners are usually men
/r/MensRights31/03/26 01:05 PM
7

Dworkin is arguably the ugliest. Thank God she didn't pass on those genes.
/r/MensRights18/09/25 01:46 PM
9

All of them.
/r/MensRights18/09/25 01:21 PM
1

Why not let your infant choose for herself whether to have her cleft palate fixed? The answer is obvious -- for certain types of procedures, the longer you wait, the more difficult and traumatic correcting the issue becomes.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:40 PM
1

There are more Chromosomes than X and Y -- 22 more pairs of autosomes, to be precise. What do you think causes things like AIS -- magic? No, it's likely something buried in other chromosomes.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 10:46 PM
1

Gender is for linguistics and grammar, not people.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 02:58 PM
2

If you don't think that chromosomes are, by far, the most important determiners of Sex (which is what people have; gender is for linguistics and people who did nothing but intellectually masturbate in college), for 99.9% of humanity, you're delusional. I can believe that some XY individuals (not women), have given birth, but at best, they're only half as fertile as women; Y ova don't develop normally even with an X sperm.
/r/MensRights18/09/11 05:30 PM
2

Your statement (and if it's accurate, the olympic policy), assumes the argument that it needs to win. It's not undisputed, nor is it clear, that XY individuals are properly classified as women. Again, genetically speaking, they're male. You may want to state that they classify XY AIS individuals as women, and that you consider such individuals to be women, but it's not correct to state, as a fact around which we can argue, that there is even such a thing as an "XY woman".
/r/MensRights16/09/11 04:57 PM
1

I don't practice in this area, but even in law school (and just by reading), there's a hell of a lot. Reed v. Reed is about sex discrimination (i.e., inherently unequal, a preference for men over women), not the situation you raised about separate-but-equal. I agree that government discrimination based on sex is usually (but not always) unconstitutional -- but we still havee different requirements in the armed services, police, and firemen, for male vs. female physical fitness standards; we stil…
/r/MensRights16/09/11 03:12 PM
1

This would actually be my solution if I ran a college, to get around all the Title IX bullshit. It would certainly suck for women, to only have singular teams for sports, but that's not my problem.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 02:47 AM
0

I'm a lawyer. "Separate but equal" is only a problem where there's strict scrutiny (i.e., race, religion, and national origin) -- essentially, where there's an explicit Constitutional Amendment protecting a particular category or way of slicing things. "Separate but equal" is not a problem in any other category, such as sex (which, under the Constitution, gay rights have the best hope for trying to be seen as a species of gender, and therefore under penumbras of sex discrimination, but it's incr…
/r/MensRights16/09/11 02:46 AM
1

1) It's not clear that they're "women", despite their phenotype. Genotypically, they're 100% male. And I can see them having some advantages against phenotypical men in things such as certain gymnastic events, diving, and shooting (women are, generally speaking, better shots than men). 2) I never said that my bright line was perfect, or perfectly fair. You have to draw a line somewhere, and if yours differs, please let me know how the incremental fairness of putting AIS XY with women is worth tu…
/r/MensRights15/09/11 09:57 PM
1

But that doesn't account for the developmental differences that happened during youth/adolescence (e.g., knee/hip/ankle angles that make men run faster, and women more prone to tearing ACLs), or the fact that you can put on muscle with testosterone and a Y, and then lower your rates if you want to compete against women.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 09:54 PM
2

The really interesting area for applying this issue is in athletic competition. I have my own personal opinions as to where to draw the line (If you have a Y chromosome, you don't compete against anybody without one, just for ease of testing and administrability, coupled with disqualification for androgen supplementation), but the need to draw a line and enforce this rules is perhaps clearest in athletic endeavors.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 08:56 PM
1

"But no oppressed group ever insisted its emotional distress was the sole basis for the establishment of a right." Actually, that's the a substantial portion of the legal (not political, not logical, not moral) argument for Gay Marriage, in jurisdictions that already have Civil Unions with all the rights, privileges, etc., of marriage. Essentially the argument claims that not having the state use the term "marriage" is disparaging.
/r/MensRights15/09/11 08:52 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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