TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Magrias Archive

View 1 post and 98 comments by Magrias 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)
3

Magrias/r/MensRights25/10/12 11:24 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
13

Sure, someone might like it, but when they're passed out, how can you tell? Are they giving you a yes? Taking it a step further, is it fine to have sex with someone who's unconscious because they might like it? Obviously not, and this is a similar situation, just less extreme.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 07:15 AM
1

Also, I do partially agree with the submission itself. I think we should poke fun at whatever we wish, though we should also do it in a tasteful manner, not repost some old rubbish from 4chan. As people, sure, have a laugh and make fun of "the other side", knowing you don't really mean it. But as a sub dedicated to specifically men's rights issues, I don't think joke posts and feminism satire are really appropriate, much like a comic about apple's business practises wouldn't be welcome in /r/tec…
/r/MensRights31/12/12 03:11 PM
1

That was expertly presented, thank you.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 01:38 AM
5

Let's not get hasty. If she put a full-on beatdown on him then yes, tell her she's being needlessly violent and you will call the police if she doesn't leave. If she playfully slaps her boyfriend, don't run to the phone and say "I HAVE WITNESSED DOMESTIC ABUSE, PLEASE HELP". And yes, this counts for if he hit her. Since when would you call the police over a playful hit? Yes, if either of them is uncomfortable with it, they should tell the other that and deal with it, but police? really?
/r/MensRights27/12/12 07:32 AM
-1

I see...
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:09 AM
-7

I'm not upvoting you. Link to the effing article.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 01:10 AM
58

It's justice for the judge, meanwhile the woman is sitting on practically a lifetime guarantee of easy sailing.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 01:08 AM
13

It's not about what they know, it's about the message they're sending. It's not an issue of "These people are so stupid they don't even know men can be raped by women", it's an issue of "They're pushing the blame for rape solely onto men, even though they know better"
/r/MensRights05/12/12 03:32 AM
1

Your response is a little confusing... In any case, all I'm saying is that there's a difference between "This is within my rights" and "I have a right to film this, there's nothing you can do about it, you ruffian". You can in fact say the exact same sentence with a different tone of voice and it will come off completely differently. I'm just saying not to be that guy who was recording in a court session because "I'm not a person I'm a human being"
/r/MensRights19/11/12 04:05 AM
15

Just please, don't be "that guy" with the snarky attitude. I don't know you at all so this isn't any kind of comment on you, but I'm sure you've seen the videos of someone recording and acting like they're superior to every human being. Even if they turn out to be laughably stupid, don't get arrogant, nobody will listen to you. Good luck, and good man.
/r/MensRights19/11/12 01:53 AM
14

Complete with the trademark "This was posted 109 milliseconds ago"
/r/MensRights11/11/12 12:08 AM
11

Yeah, I gave a friendly downvote. Funny, but not really what we want to see in this sub.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 04:10 PM
1

This is interesting. This "core gaming experience" or having to trash-talk and show dominance is rubbish. You know where that happens? Halo, Call of Duty... mostly just FPSs available on the 360, and sometimes PS3. Why? Because consoles, 360 especially, are easily accessible to young teenagers. The parents don't want to spend $1000 on a PC for the sole purpose of letting their kid play games, so they get a console, which covers all their kids. Then you have 14-year-old boys going through puberty…
/r/MensRights07/11/12 03:29 AM
6

"WOMEN ONLY GET PAID 77 CENTS FOR EVERY DOLLAR MEN DO!" Not really. That doesn't account for things like their occupation, lea-- "STOP TRYING TO OPPRESS US. WOMEN GET PAID LESS" I'm not trying to oppress you I'm tel-- "OMG DID YOU HEAR THAT WOMEN ARE FINALLY GETTING PAID THE SAME AS MEN! A VICTORY FOR WOMEN! PUT IT ON THE FRONT PAGE!" twitch I can see something like that going down.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:03 PM
7

Your response as well as some others in the thread have helped me make up my mind on this. The ad's not objectifying women. You don't look at the ad and go "Hah, women are just like PS Vitas!". You look at the ad and think "Man, are they telling me a Vita is as enjoyable as a woman? That's silly, but witty." It's not objectifying women, it's using women as the commonly accepted high point of enjoyment. Sounds bad, but tell me, do you be around anyone for any reason other than you enjoy them? If …
/r/MensRights02/11/12 01:46 PM
3

On a side note, the giant background ad on the page, featuring two womens' faces, links to here, an apparent "Cancer Center"... with images women, and only women, covering the site. That's why we need to raise awareness for things like testicular cancer - men are, in fact, affected by cancer.
/r/MensRights01/11/12 03:04 PM
1

They need to hear the truth, yes, but not from him. They need to hear it from an uninvolved, professional party. If he brings it up, it's immediately viewed as a threatening statement, because he's on "the other side".
/r/MensRights01/11/12 12:50 AM
-1

I'm not saying that, I'm saying that because she isn't a man, it's not her responsibility to be involved with male rights. It makes sense, and it's a sign of decency, but it's not her responsibility, when it comes down to it.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 08:04 PM
0

You're putting words into my mouth. I specifically said that it wasn't something that affects her, but it'd be nice if she cared about it. Because she is not a man, it is not specifically her issue. It makes sense for her to care and be involved, but being a woman, it's not her responsibility.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 08:03 PM
2

Alright then. Just making sure we're all still on the same page, as you indeed are. Carry on.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 02:14 PM
82

I can respect her idea not to get involved with men's rights, being a woman. It's not something that directly affects her. It'd be nice if she cared, but she doesn't have any kind of requirement to. Now, if she actually works against men's rights or plays down the idea that men do in fact face issues (as her tone would seem to indicate), then yeah, that's not acceptable.
/r/MensRights28/10/12 02:09 PM
3

Would we even have this "priceless piece of flawless insight" if it was a woman sitting in the spot? Would she have cared if it was someone other than her friend? Would she have cared if it was a guy? Is it really that big of a deal that her poor friend didn't get to sit in effing first class? I think the answer to every question there is no.
/r/MensRights27/10/12 10:28 PM
2

Even just tone of voice can change the implied intent behind a phrase or sentence. For example. Picture the different stances/actions associated with these two tones, and how one could easily appear threatening.
/r/MensRights27/10/12 12:56 AM
1

Started off with her tying up his wife, then trying to stab (see: kill) him, and as the struggle continued it ended up there. It's not like she tried to stab him so he drowned her, they fought.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 01:20 AM
1

Yes, it's a music video. No, the music isn't necessarily important.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 11:25 PM
3

I'm thinking back to just last year in my private Christian school, and they had these rules too. Guys can't have long hair or pierced ears, etc. I'm only now realising how absurd it was. I liked the school and all, but they had some really stupid policies (and a widely-recognised demonic force in the form of the teacher in charge of uniform-related things)
/r/MensRights25/10/12 01:18 AM
1

It's all good to get mad, just read some of the other comments in other threads, it has a strangely calming effect. I wasn't insinuating that it doesn't work the other way, I should probably have said that. I was specifically saying that they're just looking at what it's like for women taking on traditional men's roles, ignoring men taking on traditional women's roles. I'm glad you responded though, you're good at explaining things, and I am not, so now I have a clearer explanation than I would …
/r/MensRights24/10/12 09:15 AM
3

It looks at all the issues women would face if they did what was normal for a man, and tries to say men are privileged because they can do what's normal for a man without facing those particular difficulties.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 06:04 AM
3

High school is both what's confusing and what makes sense about that.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 06:02 AM
3

Tell me, what on earth kind of good is it going to do to release an entire gender-specific prison, as opposed to some from various prisons? You'll get the same amount of space freed up, just without it having any impact on most prisons. You could move prisoners from other prisons into the now-vacant prisons, to achieve what? The exact same level of crowding as if you'd taken prisoners from various places. Or maybe you mean you'd only take a certain less-violent group out of female prisons? So th…
/r/MensRights23/10/12 02:16 PM
2

yeah sure, just drop his damn son because the legal system won't let him have him. It's as simple as that, who needs any kind of emotions anyway?
/r/MensRights22/10/12 02:05 AM
2

(couldn't find a better quality video)
/r/MensRights21/10/12 11:37 PM
0

The sheer sense and logic from both your reply and, more specifically, the paragraph, is truly calming and settling. Best of luck with the book.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:39 PM
1

I've heard we are one of the biggest online gatherings, at least. Of course, there are plenty of potential people who haven't heard of this subreddit, or haven't heard of reddit, or don't even use the internet much.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:37 PM
5

I just hope that everyone involved in any Men's Rights movement is very careful not to go overboard, lest we turn into the beast we fight. I hope we can set clear goals and definitive limits on what would bring men back onto equal terms with women, and not undo the legitimate equalising achieved by early feminism.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:34 PM
6

She made some valid points, but used them in invalid circumstances. It's not the most outrageous thing I've read, but that's kind of what's worrying - It's not clearly outlandish, which means these views are becoming more "normal".
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:29 PM
1

That is slightly unsettling if true.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 06:52 AM
0

Hey hey, so far Australian news has been mostly reliable, if biased. Can you say the same for things like Fox in the US?
/r/MensRights21/10/12 06:01 AM
2

In the long term, yeah. I mean, it takes a while for that to happen, but if unchecked yeah, it certainly does.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:15 PM
14

It's all good and well to say it's their own fault, as it is. The problem is that while the men are too stupid to realise they're losing so hardcore, the women get to reap the rewards without issue.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 01:29 PM
9

go to the media they'll really want to hear a story about a guy not being able to get into a rape seminar. They're more likely to twist the story around to show "how predatory men can be"
/r/MensRights18/10/12 11:03 PM
6

"Now you're making no sense. I can explain it, but you just don't get it. Maybe some day you'll grow up and learn how the world really works, and you'll thank me because of the changes people like me worked for, while people like you tried to say we were the wrong ones. How sad." These people like to be condescending, it feeds their superiority complexes.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:46 PM
6

"I already did, you just didn't understand" side note, I was hoping you'd ask "what truth" and I'd say... "That there is no spoon"
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:27 PM
5

"If you really wanted to understand you'd accept the truth"
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:18 PM
3

"Explain that to me?" "You're just being irrational. I'm not going to bother answering someone who doesn't understand."
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:04 PM
10

I don't even have words for this. I can only pray this judge gets found guilty of corruption, asks for an extension and approval for his lawyer, and is denied at the last second.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:57 PM
1

I didn't know what elevatorgate was until just now. I don't see how there's even an argument here, but I guess simpler people will go to any length to try and validate their views and keep their benefits. Maybe that's the biggest issue with the world - the mature and level-headed are willing to see both sides, but the immature and hard-headed will not, so we get a compromise in the less thought-out direction.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:49 PM
7

I don't know, usually when I'm dealing with irrational people, they start saying things that are not only wrong, but they somehow say them in a way that is syntactically correct (follows all the rules of being a sentence), but makes no logical sense (uses the wrong words in the right places). Unrelated example sentence: "You don't understand coffee because walking through doors causes pregnancy" It really stops me dead in my tracks, because there is no way to respond to it other than flat-out te…
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:41 PM
1

I see.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 09:52 PM
1

Assuming he's agreeing that the gap exists, then saying that women are now the "primary breadwinners" contradicts that.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:45 PM
1

That's not cognitive dissonance, that's self-contradiction.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:08 PM
11

well damn, frankly I'm impressed.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 12:25 PM
11

I suspected there were users just going around downvoting all our stuff, since half of my reasonable responses become negative.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:39 AM
8

If I remember correctly she was saying some really opposite stuff not long ago, though my memory is foggy. If that's the case, I'm very pleased to see such a change. Even so, I'm pretty happy with what she's doing.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:17 AM
5

I guess it's about proportionality because it's the continuation of what you were doing when you were defending yourself, as opposed to attacking someone without their initiation.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:15 AM
0

If we ever had a "List of Saints", she'd be on it in a heartbeat. The amount of reason and truth I just read has seriously improved my mood and mental state. Thank you for sharing this.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 03:11 PM
0

And a way of tracking things as easily as on Reddit. Here, when garbage is posted it soon enough gets downvoted out of my sight, and the important things show up alongside everything else during my daily browsing. If we have a separate site, it's got to be easy enough for me to view the decent content in a casual browse.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:10 AM
1

publicly/easily available, to be more specific then.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 03:13 AM
2

If the information was not available anywhere else, then they are partially responsible. Informing the people who are in any kind of danger from them is a different matter, by the way.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 03:08 AM
9

You're assuming only one person is responsible for anything. In the case of doxxing, anyone who commits an assault or what have you is primarily responsible, but the person who provided their private information is responsible to the second degree. You don't put someone's personal information out if you're not intending for it to cause problems for them.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 04:28 PM
1

Jurassic Park car?
/r/MensRights14/10/12 04:25 PM
0

I haven't finished the article yet, but I can't let this fall out of my mind. This guy uses statistics to argue that women are more abused and with more severity than men. That's a good start, but when the argument is that society severely downplays the severity of physical and sexual abuse towards men from anyone other than men, using data from police reports is straight stupid. The whole point is that men won't report or won't be able to report a majority of abuse cases, especially rape cases.…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 04:18 PM
1

I'm... I'm not even mad. That's just laughably backwards and childish thinking. The community as a whole seems to have the attention span of a child in a ball pit, defaulting to arguing semantics.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 04:02 PM
3

Do companies need to take into consideration women who have stayed at home to raise their kids? Yes. (Do they need to consider men who do that? Yes). Are soldiers even comparable to mothers? No. Do all men want to risk their lives to fight in a war their country's governing power thought was beneficial to the country, killing people they are told are the bad guys (or sometimes they just might be), without knowing why? Do we want to spend months separated from everybody but a relatively small gro…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 02:18 AM
-6

Come on, that's a bit of a stretch. Videos show that she pushed him and assaulted him first, yes. He then retaliated with excessive force, and not in self defence. He slammed her straight in the jaw while she was just standing there, no longer doing anything. Aside from that, these guys clearly say that they were both in the wrong, and she's only barely "the victim". I think the only thing these two have done wrong is to assume that there has to be one person who's the victim. Neither of these t…
/r/MensRights13/10/12 02:55 PM
41

since most men will never know the agony of wearing stiletto heels or trying to pry glitter nail polish off their toenails, I think I’m entitled Protip: If you're going to choose fashion over your health and comfort, shut up and take the pain. Nobody's making you do it. Honestly, as far as I can tell most of us guys hate heels anyway. Shoes are not an important thing. The biggest "pressure" to have good shoes comes from other women.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 01:21 PM
5

I understand where you're coming from and everything, but this really isn't a men's rights issue. This is your personal trial that involves a woman, and your perception of other women now. It's an entirely personal thing that happens to involve gender, but it's not a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights08/10/12 05:05 AM
22

While your sentiment is valid... You forgot to close the bracket you opened here: *edit: If one wishes to be taken seriously (as opposed to being dismissed... I suppose you intended to enclose: (as opposed to being dismissed as undereducated, potentially illiterate, and/or a troll/random yahoo)
/r/MensRights07/10/12 11:31 AM
1

The tone of the article suggested the whole investigation was pretty early, so they probably wouldn't say anything as to whether it was consensual, since there's been no investigation into that. As for explaining why it matters she had power over him, I already did. He could have felt a duty or obligation to have sex with her, felt he'd get in trouble if he didn't, or worse, thought that since she was a trusted authority, that having sex with her was the right thing to do. Being 17, it's unlikel…
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:40 AM
2

I'm 19. Besides which, I simply haven't looked into the incidents becaus I'm Australian. What I know about them is something something cheating rape, because as I said, it happened when I was young, and I'm not in your country.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:58 AM
3

Now you're just spurting nonsense at me. Did you even read the whole thing? Or any of it? The only person I said didn't care was me. I'm in Australia, and 8 years old after he'd been in for 8 years. Why would I give a damn what happened with him? I specifically listed various reasons why they may not have lit the torches and raised the pitchforks against those who you say supported the guy, and you seem to have read none of it.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:59 PM
3

Thanks for the explanation of the theory of evolution, I had only what my highschool science teacher had told me and while she did her best to be accurate (and was good most of the time), she was teaching high school science. And I said superior for simplicity. Different genes will be more useful in some situations than others, and the ones that are useful in current situations are superior at the moment. Moving on, I think that the problem is the feminist movement started with the same mindset …
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:49 PM
6

I'm not sure this is really appropriate as an article. The point is still kind of valid, albeit a bit redundant - we know that there's an imbalance of men and women in all different kinds of industries, and there always will be because of natural characteristics in each gender. We shouldn't be conscripting people into this job or that job to maintain an even number of men:women, black:white:asian:hispanic, young:old, etc.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:34 PM
1

I weep for humanity on a daily basis nowadays. Some day soon it'll become a morning ritual.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:29 PM
5

I think I'm glad I could bring these memories back. They seem good. He sounds like a responsible man, and a very classy man, not drinking to get drunk.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:28 PM
3

That's actually pretty good, in casual terms. I wouldn't want to use it in anything professional, since the term Nazi is used far too generically enough already, but it's pretty good for describing feminist extremists.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:21 PM
6

That's a bit of a bold statement. You're assuming that they knew what was going on, had any kind of say in it, had any kind of connection with the people involved other than sharing a general view with wide-ranging severity, have any kind of audible voice (socially speaking), and care enough about these individual cases to research them and related situations in order to make a well-informed opinion on the matter, being very sure that you are making the right decision, and that all this can be d…
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:20 PM
4

I think the whole article is a bit telling of her level of maturity, everything from how it's written to the content.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:10 PM
16

Not to mention that it seems like fathers play a wild game of roulette each time they drink, risking the chance that someone around will decide they're a drunkard and are abusing their children.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:02 PM
7

The article here gave nothing saying it was consensual. Going to her house means bugger all. I mean, what if that was the first time, and he was locked in the house, or she used the fact that she was both his teacher and the owner of the house (and probably the person giving him some extra-curricular assistance) to get him to have sex with her, and then guilt tripped him into having sex with her from then, threatening to tell everyone he had sex with her, or worse, raped her? Even if it was "con…
/r/MensRights04/10/12 03:57 PM
2

"professional" feminists. Let's not generalise everything.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 03:46 PM
4

I think the problem is naming. There's a difference between Feminism and Women's Rights. Women's rights looks to stand up for women and give them what they deserve. It's not about supporting women because they're better, its about supporting women because if you can narrow your group, you can represent them better. Feminism is about female supremacy. It's the female equivalent of what went on for thousands of year with men being the "upper gender" (though the whole issue is probably up-played a …
/r/MensRights04/10/12 12:52 PM
1

It's perfectly within their rights, but it's not necessarily right
/r/MensRights04/10/12 02:56 AM
2

I'm in an ICT class, there's one or two females. My friend is in an arts class, I think he's the only guy.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 02:47 PM
6

Ok, care to maybe post some kind of link or discussion? Instead of just informing us all you're annoyed?
/r/MensRights03/10/12 02:21 PM
2

They'd be right to remove the post, they wouldn't be right to ban him. Also pyongyang
/r/MensRights03/10/12 02:06 PM
10

I've never been good at absorbing information from articles, but I could feel such seething condescension and one of the most blissfully unaware over-inflated collective egos leaping out of each sentence more than the last. The writer seems like she means well and consciously wants equal rights, and is trying not to sound bigoted in her opinion of men, but she just doesn't realise how wrong what she's saying is. It's like an old-time white man trying to be polite in front of a group of black peo…
/r/MensRights03/10/12 01:29 PM
3

How exactly did you submit this? By the looks of it you tried to submit the link but thought you could also add the text?
/r/MensRights03/10/12 12:47 PM
1

Keep in mind, this is just the UK. It's still pretty telling, but only for the UK. I'd like to see if the trend is similar in other countries, and I'd be particularly interested in Norway's figures. Norway seems to have everything else pretty much perfect.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 12:46 PM
3

Gender simply shouldn't come into it. Decide if someone is suitable for the role based on themselves. If a woman is incapable of working in infantry, then put her someone else. If a man is incapable of working in infantry, then put him somewhere else.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 08:13 AM
16

You have to keep in mind, though, that that kind of person is just prevalent all through society. "Everybody" wants to be better off than the rest.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 12:22 PM
2

I think you make some valid points, and I feel a lot more comfortable about it. Disease is an unfortunate thing.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 12:15 PM
4

I see. I can understand the thought process behind that, but I'd feel a lot safer knowing that if I got prostate cancer, the treatment wouldn't be to hope I die some different way first so it doesn't have to be treated.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 12:07 PM
2

We can start by not paying them less to do the same jobs men do, educating the men who would call sexual harassment "harmless joking", and ensuring the replacements for high-level management understand that women are not inferior to men, and should be promoted based on ability rather than gender. These issues are most prevalent in white-collar jobs, if I remember correctly.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 12:02 PM
3

I'm relatively new here, and reading the comments in these threads is an odd sensation. There's usually much more sense and satisfaction reading the comments than viewing the original content. It's liberating. I think I might subscribe, we'll see.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 11:47 AM
1

I think you maybe responded in the wrong place. All your points are valid, but hers is too. Just because one group may be worse off than another doesn't mean the "better off" group shouldn't still receive improvements.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 11:43 AM
2

In your case, you feel bad (with an arguable amount of validity) because you were actually interested and presumably able to fill the roll. Meanwhile, the men who wish there were more men in child care might be wishing so without having the ability or specific interest to enter the industry. I shouldn't have to give up my dream of being a game designer because I wish there were more male teachers, and the same applies to women in politics. It could be that the type of women who have the ability …
/r/MensRights02/10/12 11:41 AM
5

Please explain, I don't quite understand.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 11:35 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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