TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MikeHolmesIV Archive

View 0 posts and 62 comments by MikeHolmesIV 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)
6

Meanwhile, at NOW
/r/MensRights31/01/16 04:42 AM
10

GOD FUCKING DAMNIT This shit is getting way too common in here. Why don't you go set up /r/complainingaboutwomen so people like you can do all your venting, and keep the sexism the hell out of a subreddit that's supposed to be about equality?
/r/MensRights03/09/13 05:47 AM
1

And that's why women who put up children for adoption are forced to pay child support for 18 years. Except they aren't, so . . . what makes you think the justice system is "in the best interests of the child"? 3 posts up from mine. Was that so hard? Even ignoring that, we're talking about issues where there's a clear gender disparity.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 11:46 PM
6

Yeah but not if that parent is a woman, because expecting the same responsibilities from men and women is anti-feminist
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:01 AM
5

Let's work from that frame of view, and start with the assumption that we should look out for the best interests of the child, and order child support if necessary. If this is about making sure the child is provided for (and not about giving money to the mother), then would you agree that the amount of child support should be dependent upon need? IE, the mother's income should be taken into account, and there should be a cap on child support? For example, if the mother makes 100k, then she's ple…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 04:02 AM
20

Jesus Christ, let's not let this sub turn into /r/complainingaboutwomen. This is low quality content, and it's embarrassing to see it getting upvoted.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 04:12 AM
1

Gay marriage means no homophobia I never said that. But it would certainly reduce homophobia. I don't know if 2% constitutes a significant chunk, frankly. Depends on your perspective. 2% is pretty significant in my opinion With reasoning like yours, anything could be good for everyone. No.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 11:27 PM
1

I suspect that if gay marriage becomes more prevalent, then it could lead to a more balanced treatment between the genders in family courts - this would be a major win. Also, a significant chunk of men are gay, so any boost in gay rights helps men out. Additionally, homophobia tends to lead towards social pressure for men to adhere rigidly to gender roles. If gay marriage becomes commonplace, then it will help ALL men. And it will help women too, of course - this is an all-around win situation, …
/r/MensRights23/06/13 10:00 PM
5

That uses a pretty lax definition of "child"
/r/MensRights23/06/13 06:21 AM
6

I doubt it. But this isn't an insignificant minority.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 12:02 AM
2

You don't seem to get it: I agree that he should have worn the condom. That is not the reason I think you're all kinds of fucked up.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:01 AM
2

You're all kinds of fucked up.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:20 AM
6

You have as much control over becoming a father as she does over becoming a mother. Birth control is almost exactly as effective as condom use. So if a man lied and told a woman that he had gotten a vasectomy, and got her pregnant as a result, would you tell her she shouldn't get an abortion, and refer to a baby as "consequences"?
/r/MensRights17/02/13 06:59 PM
7

Interestingly enough, if you genderflip it, your comment becomes an anti-choice argument!
/r/MensRights17/02/13 06:56 PM
3

YFW
/r/MensRights17/02/13 06:46 PM
19

storytime
/r/MensRights17/02/13 07:08 AM
3

There's nothing ethically wrong with using deception against someone to counter their own deception, in a similar way to how isn't ethically wrong for the government to take stolen property and give it back to the rightful owner.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 07:04 AM
5

Rings can be considered "conditional gifts", and can legally be reclaimed, as long as they aren't given on birthdays, christmas, etc. That's part of the reason why some people say not to propose on such days.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 07:02 AM
117

Legitimately do this. Let it slip to one of her friends that you're shopping for rings, start talking about planning the wedding, all of that. Then, when she's feeling comfortable, talk about how you're looking forward to being a family man, you want three kids... but, you aren't at a point to be doing that yet. You really need to get some things figured out in your career, you need to get a house, you need to start setting money aside, maybe a few more years. She's feeling all good, things are …
/r/MensRights17/02/13 06:59 AM
106

We meet in large phallic structures like the Sears and Eiffel towers
/r/MensRights16/01/13 12:04 AM
9

Male Privilege
/r/MensRights28/12/12 12:25 AM
49

is the "LOL FEMALES" really necessary?
/r/MensRights10/12/12 05:28 AM
3

You can agree, perhaps, that at one point minorities or women were disenfranchised, even if they aren't now, right? Minorities still are, though to a much lesser degree than in the past (there's still progress to be made.) Women certainly had it worse in the past, but it is easy to overlook the fact that in the way in the past things were shitty for everyone, and being a man was shitty for some of its own reasons. I'd argue that today both being a man and being a woman have their downsides, and …
/r/MensRights06/12/12 11:55 PM
2

I don't consider myself to be a Mens Rights Activist, just as I don't consider myself to be a Feminist (I consider myself an egalitarian, I read this and a couple of feminist subreddits for perspective), but I hope I can answer this. First off, I'd like to point out that your title is flawed, it implies that men are already far far elevated over women. I think a better description would be something like: How is the advocacy of "men's rights" any more necessary or different from the advocacy of …
/r/MensRights06/12/12 11:07 PM
2

Excellent, you have found a way to blame men! Even if it does infantilize women, and completely ignore the fact that the legal profession has a significant number of women in it! Even if it does ignore the fact that the laws are written and the courts are prejudiced in such a way to allow it! You've managed to take an issue of equality and justice, and turn it into one of "men vs. women: the showdown"! edit: go fuck yourself.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 04:35 PM
3

shaming language Poor you. And yes. If you're going to drag the whole movement down just because you "want a freakin' break", I will call you out on it. Imagine the reverse of this: if an outsider went to a feminist subreddit and saw a comment like yours, but from a female perspective, it would strengthen any negative views of feminism they had. I don't care that you didn't attack me personally, YOU are holding back gender equality by being sexist, and you are misrepresenting this subreddit. I c…
/r/MensRights08/11/12 02:09 AM
6

So, you want to talk in a sexist way on a subreddit about gender equality? Particularly in a subreddit that is unfortunately very controversial and is often claimed to be sexist/misogynistic?
/r/MensRights08/11/12 12:35 AM
1

how very female (vast majority of females anyway) to be ... Let's not have that kind of talk around here, it does nothing to help gender equality.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 04:54 PM
1

It's disproportionate, twice as much food isn't going to cost twice as much. Yes, and I covered this several comments ago: "BTW, men on average need about 25% more calories per day than women, so 1.25x more. If it's all-you-can-eat BBQ, then the extra $3 is probably less than 25% of what women are paying. Figuring in the fact that there are fixed per-customer costs in any restaurant, men may still be coming out on top." As someone else suggested, why not charge fat people more? that would make a…
/r/MensRights06/11/12 04:31 AM
2

Yeah, that was my point. I was just showing how ridiculous it would be to try to make things "perfectly fair".
/r/MensRights05/11/12 08:55 PM
1

Women are charged more at some private health insurance firms because it's proven that they will cost allot more, Also, I don't dispute that either. Unfortunately, facts don't stop some people from trying to force me to subsidize them. Which is annoying, because I gladly subsidize women's healthcare by donating to planned parenthood, but it sickens me that people feel entitled enough to use government force me to make me do even more against my will.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 08:48 PM
1

but the main cost for things like this is insurance and paying cooks Yes, and the more food the cooks have to make, the more hours you need them to work. And as I said in an earlier comment, it's basically impossible to make this "fair". Obviously, some people are going to pay as much as other people to eat less food. There may be some women who pay more than some men, but still eat more. The only way to get things "fair" is to charge by what people eat, in which case it's now a normal restauran…
/r/MensRights05/11/12 08:37 PM
1

Unless men eat 16x more than a woman then charging them more is uncalled for. Most buffets charge adults more than they charge children, and I doubt that an adult eats 16x more than a child. Would you say this is uncalled for? At what ratio (I imagine that 16x is a hyperbole) would you say that a price differential would be called for? BTW, men on average need about 25% more calories per day than women, so 1.25x more. If it's all-you-can-eat BBQ, then the extra $3 is probably less than 25% of wh…
/r/MensRights04/11/12 11:45 PM
0

I keep getting shocked by this electric fence that I touch. Please advise.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 10:55 PM
0

I bet I’ll get downvoted into oblivion after a quick half-assed glance without understanding what I said. :( happened to me too.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 10:53 PM
1

I don't dispute that. Health insurance, for example.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 10:41 PM
-5

Yeah or they could simply run a basal metabolic rate estimation (based off of height, weight, and gender), have the customers fill out a survey on how physically active they are, and run an electrocardiogram to look for the characteristic abnormalities that are present after a meal to determine how full they are, and run all that data through a program with a reinforcement learning algorithm (they would of course track how much customers ate in order to tune this in) in order to determine exactl…
/r/MensRights04/11/12 08:22 PM
-2

Is it all-you-can-eat? Because if so, then I understand it. I eat a hell of a lot more than most women.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 07:40 PM
4

No. Just, no, keep this shit out of here.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 05:38 PM
28

Can we please not have this sub devolve into r/complainingaboutwomen?
/r/MensRights16/09/12 05:35 PM
13

You get the fuck out of here with your sexism.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 04:24 AM
14

SnarkyLibertarian: 3 hours of rustled jimmies
/r/MensRights02/07/12 12:58 AM
8

Um, yes you did. This post originally said something to the effect of "Screw you pricks. I'm done posting here" Then you removed the "Screw you pricks" part. http://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/vw2sx/mensrights_believes_that_male_circumcision_is_a/c585y0r Reported for instigation. Lol, talk about the kettle calling the pot black. I'm sure DAT_ALT is just quaking in his boots.
/r/MensRights02/07/12 12:50 AM
3

TwoXIrrationalChromosomes. Downvoted for sexism
/r/MensRights04/04/12 06:14 PM
1

You used statistics from the U.S., and you used the U.S. legal system as an example, and you discussed circumcision, which is primarily done in the U.S. and the middle east.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 07:46 AM
1

still sure the government shouldn't use force and would never use force against the church. doesn't mean it can't fine them. take them to court. And how do they make the church pay the fine? Follow this train of thought back to it's roots, completely back to it's roots. The entire basis of the government's authority to do anything is that their orders are backed with the threat of violence, this is fundamental to political philosophy. That is the very definition of government, and that is why it…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 07:43 AM
1

Read through my comments. I clearly stated it was essentially impossible to quantify who had it worse. I was attacking your claim that women had it significantly worse.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 07:31 AM
1

I'd like to include some speculation here: Active legal based sexism does by far more harm to men. Examples: the way VAWA ignores violence against men; how the family court system operates to the detriment of men in general; the draft only applies to men; the significantly higher prosecution rates / stiffer criminal penalties that men face for the same crimes, the way rape against men is rarely prosecuted I can not, off the top of my head, think manner in which women in general suffer more from …
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:43 AM
2

another thing i would add is that unequal expectations of men and women hurt both men and women. it makes men feel as though they must attain certain things and women as well. but usually this also reflects less career expectations of women. I strongly, strongly agree with this. This falls into the passive sexism i mentioned in my long-ass post a minute ago, and it is indeed extremely insidious. While it's easy for an individual to overcome the low expectations, the low expectations make it so t…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:31 AM
1

My point was that you are the one making the claim that the suffering of women is much more prevalent. Thus, the burden of proof is on you.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:29 AM
1

Sorry for the novel here. I'm first going to try to lay a foundation for discussion here, one that I think both of us can agree to, and which will put everything else into perspective. Then I'll move on to your talking points. For clarity's sake, let's assume a gender binary. There are three basic types of sexism: Passive/Cultural Sexism: This is how society views men and women, and what society expects from them. Examples: Men are encouraged to be competitive and go into lucrative fields, while…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:25 AM
0

There's a miniature teapot floating around mars. Until you disprove it, the teapot exists.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 10:09 PM
2

Also, why not judge by the top? You do not base an argument on an entire population entirely off of outliers. When looking at an overall population, there is no reason to target the top but no the bottom. That's just poor statistical methodology. The income range of men has a much higher standard deviation than that of women. Yes, the mean is higher somewhat, but the standard deviation is what affects the high and low ranges the most. Politics - I will not argue that religious people tend to hav…
/r/MensRights14/03/12 09:23 AM
0

I'm not trying to say men have it worse. I am arguing against your claim that "the suffering of women is much more prevalent". Thus, all that I need to do is poke holes in your claim.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 05:32 AM
0

So the entire basis for your argument is women are less than 25% more likely to live in poverty? You do realize the the poverty line is arbitrarily drawn, right? For exmaple, if we moved the threshold for homelessness, then men would be approximately 100% more likely to live in poverty. While it may be easy to look up poverty rates, they do not give a good picture. how a society treats its most vulnerable. I am curious, by what mechanisms do you think society treats these women poorly?
/r/MensRights14/03/12 05:26 AM
0

Looking at one single perspective gives a skewed vision. If I were not concerned with objectivity, I could point towards suicide rates, workplace fatalities, homelessness, victimhood in violent crimes, military deaths, incarceration rates, etc and claim that women have it super easy. You can not look only at one side in this issue.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 04:48 AM
0

look at how many women millionaires there are And look at how many homeless women there are. The problem here is that you look to the top, but not to the bottom. how many women in science math and cs Yet women make up the majority in higher education, and have for a while now. I will concede that this is definitely a case of gender-norms discouraging girls from being involved in the maths and sciences. If you want to look at the other side, as an engineer I see woman-only scholarships, and I see…
/r/MensRights14/03/12 04:45 AM
1

sure, true. but if you look at women of almost any country independently, women are worse off than men. Would you care to validate this claim for me? Keep in mind that I am not talking about Afghanistan and the likes, this thread in general is fairly U.S. centric, so let's keep it within those bounds
/r/MensRights14/03/12 04:07 AM
1

While it sucks that you had a rough upbringing, it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the topic at hand. Pathos is not a valid debate strategy. i also was very religious growing up and learned that sexism kept women from being pastors Surprise surprise, if you surround yourself with bigoted ideologies, you will have to deal with bigotry. I don't feel sorry for people who willingly partake in sexism like that. i am for equality for men AND women. i'm not for either ruling over the other. i t…
/r/MensRights14/03/12 03:58 AM
5

And the issues that women in America face are nothing compared to the human rights abuses going on in Syria. This isn't the suffering Olympics; suffering by one group does not invalidate suffering by another.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:56 AM
1

I didn't downvote you for being a woman, and I didn't even downvote you for making an invalid point. I downvoted you for wording it in a sarcastic, nonconstructive way. But yeah, go ahead and blame that on sexism too.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:50 AM
3

i lie awake at night wondering how hard it is to have 23 cents more per dollar than me. I plan on starting up a company that pays women only 22 cents less per dollar than men. I'll have no shortage of female employees and I'll be able to undercut all of my competitors. Or wait, possibly that won't work, because that ignores every contributing factor to this discrepancy in favor of blaming sexism. But seriously, watch the video TuckerTheCat linked, it's very informative.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 12:44 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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