TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MattBD Archive

View 0 posts and 57 comments by MattBD 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

Relevant Guardian article.
/r/MensRights29/04/16 09:25 AM
2

Relevant article from the Guardian on rape conviction rates in the UK. Of particular note is the fact that misrepresenting the attrition rate as the conviction rate, dissuades victims from reporting the crimes against them
/r/MensRights16/02/16 05:00 PM
2

IIRC Scottish law has three verdicts - proven, not proven, and not guilty. Not proven is for cases where it's possible the defendant did it, but there is insufficient evidence, while not guilty is for when the court believes the defendant did not do it.
/r/MensRights24/01/16 09:19 PM
2

Contrary to what some people seem to believe, we aren't British subjects, we're British citizens, and that has been the case since 1981. The category of British subjects now includes only those people formerly known as British subjects without citizenship and people born in Ireland before 1949. There will never be any more people added to this category and once the current people in this category die out the term will be redundant.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 12:04 PM
1

UK subjects Wrong.
/r/MensRights07/10/15 12:01 PM
8

There's a similar case concerning a 14 year old boy here in the UK right now on the BBC News site. That kid isn't being prosecuted, but it is being kept on record, so if he applies for a job which requires a background check in future, it will show up there. There are some really stupid comments there.
/r/MensRights03/09/15 12:16 PM
3

They aren't the only ones - in the UK there have been spikes and sloping benches used to deter the homeless, as well as talk of fining rough sleepers £1,000.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 01:45 PM
1

They didn't - the case went to the ECHR and they found against her at each stage. The contract essentially stated that either of them could withdraw their consent for the embryos to be stored at any point, which the man did.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 03:52 PM
2

As I understand it, freezing embryos is much more reliable than freezing unfertilized ova, but techniques are beginning to appear that make it more viable to freeze ova. So hopefully this kind of sad situation will be less likely to arise in future.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 03:47 PM
3

It's a terribly sad case, but the courts made the right decision. The guy agreed to the process on the basis that he could withdraw his consent to keep the embryos on ice at any time. Overturning that is a really bad idea in principle. As an aside, I'm convinced that the whole elevation of parenthood to some kind of holy calling is a much bigger cause of distress to the woman than the man's actions. She could consider adoption, yet many people see that as a poor substitute for a biological child…
/r/MensRights13/06/15 11:06 AM
2

There was definitely a similar case here in the UK where the man asked for the frozen embryos to be destroyed after the breakup of their relationship (which the contract specifically allowed him to do) and the woman went to court to prevent this. Source - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evans_v_United_Kingdom
/r/MensRights13/06/15 10:13 AM
5

I think it's also worth noting that the vast majority of the inequality in the world is along class lines and not gender lines.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 06:52 PM
3

Good point. I suppose the best way to go would be to have an IVR system so you can request to speak to someone of the same gender.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 05:28 PM
73

I don't see any reason why they have to be gender-specific. Why can't there just be a victim's helpline and an abuser's helpline?
/r/MensRights25/03/15 01:13 PM
1

I agree. There are plenty of issues women have every reason to be pissed off about, and I would say I probably agree with 90% of what most feminists say. Just like virtually any other group, there are a vocal minority of feminists who are odious bigots, but most are reasonable people.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 08:02 AM
1

It's also worth noting that the shirt in question was made by a female friend, who was overjoyed that he wore it to such a big public event. Source
/r/MensRights17/11/14 10:01 PM
1

I don't think the Guardian does constantly have a go at men. There are some columnists that do, and there are also some very good ones. Today there's an article by Lauren Laverne about making "coercive control" within relationships a crime in the UK, and she mentions that seven women and two men per month are killed by a current or ex-partner in England and Wales. Ally Fogg is also quite strong on men's issues.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 05:25 PM
1

By that logic, people who self-harm should be charged with assault Thank you. That is a wonderful analogy.
/r/MensRights10/07/14 10:47 AM
3

Too many people don't seem to grasp the fact that while, on average, men are stronger than women, there are outliers. It's perfectly possible for a man to be physically weaker than a particular woman.
/r/MensRights19/05/14 11:10 AM
2

The thing that gets me is the "of colour" section. Just because someone is white, doesn't mean they aren't a member of an ethnic group that is discriminated against. The Irish have experienced some pretty awful discrimination in the past.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 02:00 PM
1

I hate this kind of fawning over parents at the best of times. Anyone with a functioning set of genitals can become a parent. It takes a damn sight more than that to do a decent job of it, though - there are some pretty shitty parents of both sexes,, but there are also some awesome ones.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 01:05 PM
1

Historically most monarchs of England have been male, and until very recently indeed, the rules of succession quite overtly favoured males over females, so that is a really bad example. Female monarchs of England are the exception, not the rule, but we happen to live in exceptional times.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 07:01 PM
7

there's a difference between "men have the power" and "the people who have the power are men." Exactly. The increasing number of women in politics, while not a bad thing, hasn't done squat about the gross disparity in wealth in the Western world, nor is their any reasonable likelihood of it doing so. There are undoubtedly issues of inequality for both sexes, but they're nothing compared to the huge economic inequalities between the ruling class and the rest of us.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 03:18 PM
9

I think the idea of "The Patriarchy" is fundamentally flawed. Our ruling class may be predominantly male, but it's still entirely dominated by the wealthy, and having more women among them wouldn't change shit. As George Orwell said in 1984, "Whoever wields power is not important as long as the hierarchical structure remains always the same". IMHO a better term would be "The Oligarchy" - maybe I should start correcting people over that.
/r/MensRights30/01/14 08:32 AM
1

I agree. This is why the concept of gender being a genuine occupational qualification exists.
/r/MensRights10/01/14 07:19 AM
1

Only curious if there are is one egregious area where they are still being segregated I think to some extent it depends on how wide you cast your net. There are other cultures today where women are treated in the most horrific manner imaginable. In Western cultures, not so much - I think a lot of what women have to put up with nowadays is less institutional discrimination and more a case of some people who happen to be male being twats. People being twats can certainly make your life a misery, b…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 11:40 PM
4

I don't agree that us chaps have it worse than women on balance, but I think to boil it down to bickering about who has it worse is counterproductive.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 10:13 PM
8

I call myself an egalitarian, partly because I can see that both genders are disadvantaged in different ways, and partly because no-one can reasonably dismiss being pro-equality. Of course, people may disagree about whether equality means equality of opportunity or equality of outcome, but it's very difficult to say "You being pro-equality means you're anti-equality" and sound like anything other than a nutter. Also, that poster is a classic example of a false dichotomy.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 06:43 PM
5

Sorry if I was unclear, but I think you might not have quite gotten what I was saying. What I meant is that you can enforce equality of opportunity (for instance, by prosecuting employers who discriminate against employees or potential employees based on their gender). What is not reasonable is to attempt to enforce equality of outcome (such as by requiring a 50/50 split in gender), "enforce" being the operative word. To use the example of "Men die younger", it's perfectly appropriate to researc…
/r/MensRights04/12/13 03:22 PM
3

I agree. As I often say, there's a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. We can and should enforce equality of opportunity, but there is no way you can enforce equality of outcome without making the playing field less level.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 11:10 AM
2

In many cases people campaigning for improving the rights of a group they or a loved one belong to are motivated solely by enlightened self-interest, not the desire for a more just society. There's nothing wrong with this - we all want a better lot in life for ourselves and our loved ones. However, people like that may not necessarily care if that creates injustice elsewhere. It's a rare person who wants to better the lot of a group where they or a loved one don't benefit from that group getting…
/r/MensRights02/09/13 10:56 AM
1

I think I've looked at /srs once, and it seemed to do nothing but take things other redditors have said out of context in order to portray them as offensive.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:02 PM
1

I'm actually not only English, but a somewhat old-school Labourite. By US standards I'm probably a raving communist. Doesn't mean I don't think Harriet Harman's idea that the shadow cabinet should always have a 50-50 split along gender lines isn't counter-productive though.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 08:09 AM
2

An employer isn't forced to advertise vacancies they don't have. They advertise for more staff when they need more staff and not before, so they're under no external compulsion from society to create jobs unless they have enough work to require them. You can decline to hire someone if you think they're a lazy feckless git or they won't be able to do the job, which is not unreasonable. It is unreasonable to decline to hire someone based on something that won't affect their ability to do the job, …
/r/MensRights14/05/13 10:15 PM
9

I've observed that when people are referring to equality between groups, they can be either referring to equality of opportunity or equality of outcome. An example of enforcing equality of opportunity might be preventing an employer from refusing to hire someone for a role based on their gender. An example of enforcing equality of outcome might be requiring 50% of all employees in a certain role be male and 50% be female. In essence, equality of opportunity is about creating a level playing fiel…
/r/MensRights14/05/13 06:31 PM
12

In Charlie Stross's book Accelerando, the protagonist, Manfred Macx, patents his own genome, and threatens to sue his ex-wife for breach of patent after she impregnates herself with his semen against his will.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 04:15 PM
16

That's a deeply scary thought. Someone could go through your rubbish looking for hair, used tissues or things like that, and use them. Or someone need only scratch you with their nails and use the skin under their nails to create a child. It does sound a little paranoid, but there really ought to be legislation about using someone's genetic material without their explicit permission.
/r/MensRights25/11/12 11:02 AM
14

One of my favourite quotes by H L Mencken: "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." If more people understood this, we wouldn't have half so many ill-considered laws.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:31 PM
38

I think a lot of people don't realise that equality is not about equality of outcome, it's about equality of opportunity (and creating an environment that isn't hostile to one group or other). The fact that one gender or other may be under-represented in a specific field, by itself, is not necessarily significant.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:06 PM
4

I'd reply with "Get stuffed, and mind your own business." Bonus points for calling her a silly old trout.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 01:21 PM
1

That's kind of an unspoken corollary to it, though (although IMHO it should be spoken more often). Being a parent merely requires reproduction (at least, from a genetic point of view), while actually being a decent parent is a whole other ball game.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:56 PM
8

I will tell you one thing I've seen done that I believe is significantly harder than being a parent, and that's being a carer for an elderly relative with dementia. It's by far the most crushingly painful and depressing situation I've ever known. My mother concurs with this assessment, and she's had three kids. The best way I can put it from my personal experience is that it's like seeing a parent or grandparent slowly turning into a toddler. My paternal grandmother had vascular dementia, and th…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 05:40 PM
1

Even excluding those female world leaders who did start wars, I certainly don't think you can say women are blameless in terms of starting wars. During the First World War, in Britain it was common for women to give white feathers to men if they were not in military uniform, as a symbol of cowardice, in order to encourage them to join the military. While it may not have been starting a war, it certainly glamourised it, and demeaned those who for various reasons didn't want to participate - and, …
/r/MensRights04/10/11 05:20 PM
2

Yeah, I know it's not going to be enforceable, but it might make people think twice, and not everyone is going to know it's unenforceable.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 08:01 PM
10

I am not a lawyer, but I'd be tempted to get a t-shirt printed with some kind of EULA on it - something like "By photographing the individual wearing this t-shirt you are agreeing not to share the resulting image electronically or physically, or distribute it in any way, shape or form without payment of a license fee of at least £1,000."
/r/MensRights25/08/11 05:57 PM
3

May I add another point? Everyone deserves equal opportunities, but that doesn't mean that they're going to end up in the same place with the same opportunities. The fact that one gender or other is under-represented in a particular field or at a particular level doesn't necessarily mean that gender is being discriminated against. Of course it doesn't mean they aren't either.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 08:10 PM
1

Ah, sorry. I only skimmed the article and skipped over that part.
/r/MensRights08/06/11 05:45 PM
2

I don't see how this can possibly be justified for EVERY female criminal. Does this include people like Rose West? Arguably some relatively minor crimes might well be better punished through community service or other alternatives to jail time, but these should not be specific to one gender.
/r/MensRights07/06/11 05:47 PM
5

Wow, just... wow. In particular: statistics indicate there is an almost 100% certainty that you have either committed a rape, or wanted to commit a rape, or knowingly assisted or defended someone who committed a rape, or mocked a woman who was raped. Sounds like it could have been lifted straight from Chris Morris's Brass Eye.
/r/MensRights16/05/11 09:49 AM
2

This is absolutely horrifying. The people who did this are the worst kind of scum imaginable.
/r/MensRights04/05/11 05:57 PM
1

Several countries do that, including Japan, Germany, Portugal, Argentina and Spain. Most countries have at least some restrictions on what people can call their child. The UK has some of the most liberal restrictions, banning only those deemed offensive. New Zealand is slightly stricter, banning names that begin with numbers, but otherwise the same. At the other end of the scale, I heard of a French couple who named their child Zebulon and were told they could face prosecution if this singled th…
/r/MensRights02/05/11 02:35 PM
2

And yet if you urinate in a public convenience, where it's probably MORE likely, as you're more likely to be using it in daylight hours when minors are more likely to be around. and the lighting level is better, that's presumably OK!
/r/MensRights02/04/11 04:25 PM
3

From the article it linked to: "One answer could simply be that parents are deluded, in the grip of some false consciousness that’s good for mankind but not for men and women in particular. Gilbert, a proud father and grandfather, would argue as much. He’s made a name for himself showing that we humans are pretty sorry predictors of what will make us happy, and to his mind, the yearning for children, the literal mother of all aspirations for so many, is a very good case in point—what children re…
/r/MensRights27/03/11 10:47 PM
1

Here it is: http://boingboing.net/2010/07/06/parenting-makes-you.html
/r/MensRights27/03/11 08:36 PM
2

Read it yourself, it's at http://boingboing.net/2010/07/06/parenting-makes-you.html
/r/MensRights27/03/11 08:30 PM
8

Recently on BoingBoing I actually saw a link to an article saying that having kids doesn't actually make you happier, it just makes you think you're happier because you tend to ignore the bits where they're behaving like little shits and emphasise the "Ooh, they're so cute when they do that!" part. Basically, a lot of people are living in a state of denial about it.
/r/MensRights27/03/11 07:53 PM
7

That happened to me today - a scaffolder shouted an abusive term at me when I was on my way to work. And I'm a white, heterosexual male so it's not as if I'm a member of a minority - at the most you could say I'm a geek. However, he then got told off by his boss so wasn't all bad. Some people are wankers, pure and simple, and like to try to make others feel bad.
/r/MensRights25/03/11 06:21 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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