TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MissStrawberry Archive

View 0 posts and 50 comments by MissStrawberry 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)
2

Fun fact that I suddenly remembered: One of the many middle names of "Pippi Langstrumpf" in the German version is "Pfefferminz", "Peppermint". Had I thought about the name for even a bit, I might have come to the conclusion that "PP" stands for "Pippi Peppermint".
/r/MensRights02/07/12 11:23 PM
2

"Pe". In English, that would approximately be "Pay", but without the "j"-sound at the end (or "y" for anyone who pronounces the "j"-sound as in "jewel"). "Pippi" doesn't sound like "PP" in German (which would be "Pepe").
/r/MensRights02/07/12 09:01 PM
3

Well now I feel stupid. I still spell my ABCs in German, so that didn't occur to me.
/r/MensRights02/07/12 08:37 PM
1

Have you read my ultimate paragraph?
/r/MensRights01/07/12 10:27 PM
1

Here is my problem. Domestic violence when committed by men against women usually happens without weaponry, as does domestic violence when committed by a man against a child of any gender. Further, domestic violence committed by men against men usually happens without weaponry (this is an assertion I don't have proof for). Given your reasoning, every time a man hits anyone, that is an act of violence in a domestic violence manner. My contention is that domestic violence isn't a specific way of u…
/r/MensRights01/07/12 10:18 PM
1

So you're saying we should reject any analysis of this display of female on male violence just so we don't appear like feminists? No, I'm saying that we don't have to be offended about something merely because feminists would be, were the roles reversed. That's immature. Analyse the hell out of Tangled, but don't argue "well if the roles were reversed, feminists would be angry, so now I'm angry". Having said that, role-reversal can be an interesting excercise, but any critique (or rationale for …
/r/MensRights29/06/12 07:10 PM
2

I don't know. I suspect "the feminist lobby" could have a problem with it, whoever they are, but we don't have to ape them, now do we? Also, that has nothing to do with what I said. I said that the Rapunzel-scene has nothing to do with DV, and I tried to explain why I think that when I was made aware that I had changed the wording slightly. Whether violence against men is normal in our culture is a different question.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:13 PM
4

I am not sure I'd see a difference here. Domestic violence is just violence in a specific context. I don't think there is something especially "domestically violent" about hitting someone with a pan, is there? If women are more likely to use ad-hoc weaponry to offset lesser physical strength, then I'd argue that Rapunzel just uses violence in a manner more likely to be employed by women, not a "DV manner". If there is a difference I don't see, I accept your rebuke, though.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 02:56 PM
5

The article itself mentions that there is a difference in how the porn is produced. I think that difference might be substantial for anyone criticising porn or the porn industry. Also, is there written erotica or porn targeted at men? There's hentai, which someone else mentioned, and which whilst having an additional visual element, is perhaps unfairly demonised in some circles, but part of that reaction might be due to cultural differences. But are there porn novels for men?
/r/MensRights29/06/12 03:04 AM
13

In Tangled, the male hero breaks into her home. That's not a DV situation. If you are trying to say that there would be an outcry if a man were to strike a female breaker-and-enterer, that I might agree with. Also, after having come up with a mutually beneficial deal, the heroine and the hero of that movie actually work together, as far as I can remember.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 01:10 AM
5

Similar to this? Note the almost identical username. from distrustladies12451 (_) sent 2 days ago If you think building better men is a cause worth fighting for, come chime in. <3 `ph0cus With links to /r/seduction and http://www.bmrrm.org/. It's somewhat ironic that I'd get that spam.
/r/MensRights26/06/12 02:06 AM
2

SRS is meant to be contained in its own sub. From time to time it leaks, but browse SRS and note how many issues they find and how little, for all their zeal, they go out and preach. But to answer your question, that depends on the normative moral framework you use. Are you Kantian? Then yes.
/r/MensRights22/06/12 11:12 PM
3

I don't like them either (I think). I was objecting to the "sexism against men is totally okay"-bit, as that lacks the context. Whether one agrees with the context and justification or not. It's missing the point like criticising the Paul Elam article about Daffodils for Dumpsters for demonising women is missing the point. Unfortunately cleos stopped responding to me half-way into the discussion, but that was my point there: The message it is trying to cast is that generalising all men as abusiv…
/r/MensRights22/06/12 03:05 PM
0

I don't particularly like SRS, I think. But that here: Apparently, however, it is totally okay to joke about sexism against men, violence against men, etc. there. So... Massive nest of circlejerking trolls. is somewhat missing the point. They do what they do in an attempt to present the world of reddit with a mirror that reflects their behaviour and norms back at them. According to SRS, misogyny (violence or sexism against women), transphobia (same, but against trans people), homophobia, and so …
/r/MensRights22/06/12 02:50 PM
2

The difference in response to rape of female soldiers by male soldiers as compared to male soldiers being shot, raped, et cetera, by the "enemy", probably lies in the fact that we expect atrocities in combat with enemies. We don't expect soldiers stabbing each other in the back (proverbially). This would align with the interesting cognitive fuck up that makes us shrug when considering traffic deaths (or lung cancer deaths), but disintegrate completely when a much lower number of people die from,…
/r/MensRights21/06/12 12:02 AM
3

Well that wasn't well-phrased, I see that now. I'll use "you" as a pronoun in the following, but I don't mean you you, I mean someone you. If you justify either more funding for healthcare for women or try to dismiss more founding for healthcare for women by stating that the male body had been the standard model of medicine for so long, and hence either it is justified to now focus on women or there is no focus on women, you are making a fallacious argument. The first argument, namely that there…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 11:46 PM
2

Thanks.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 11:07 PM
5

Thanks. The article is relatively old (94). Is the situation still the same?
/r/MensRights20/06/12 06:57 PM
8

I don't know that is true. Do you have sources for that? I know how troublesome it was to get corpses for anatomical studies for long swaths of time (in Europe), which leads me to believe that perhaps experimenting with live men wasn't that well received either.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 06:56 PM
4

Healthcare is actually an interesting problem. It is entirely true that the male body was the medical default for centuries. This then enters into the areas of original sin and the like. Do you have a source for the healthcare disparity in the US?
/r/MensRights20/06/12 06:32 PM
4

Kyriarchy. The wikipedia article gives a brief introduction. As a sidenote, the term patriarchy itself as defined by wikipedia is actually alright I suppose: "Patriarchy is a social system in which the male acts as the primary authority figure central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property." Don't apply this to modern life in European democracies for now, and just take it as it is. The problem of the MRM begins with the following sentence I th…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 06:29 PM
5

So next week they will be reviewing mien kampf? That actually isn't that bad an idea. Not to children, mind you, but Helmut Qualtinger did a really good interpretative reading of Mein Kampf. If you can find a version of Der Herr Karl with good English subtitles, I'd recommend watching that, also. It's heavily mired in local custom and character, which is exactly the point, but it is a critical reflection of Austrian post-war society. Which you might also find extremely boring.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 12:44 AM
1

I personally think that misogyny is a term that has become so meaningless through misuse that anything depicting women could be misogyny. Misandry still has a more focused meaning, which could for example exclude the example someone else gave of hordes of faceless male mooks being slaughtered in most action video games.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 10:56 PM
2

The difference being, according to the article, that the male stereotypes are not bad or damaging. I don't know whether that is the case or not, but the argument doesn't merely revolve around unrealistic portrayals.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 03:33 AM
7

This will also make it very uncomfortable to walk into or in the bathroom. I wonder whether men would then choose to just piss outside of the bathroom. Where they don't have to crouch.
/r/MensRights14/06/12 02:21 PM
1

Which is reasonable, but then you are, by your own admission, not particularly thin, and at best "cute", so one wonders who would be the one settling ;)
/r/MensRights13/06/12 01:33 AM
3

I'm not finding any worthy of me. Well that right here might be the problem.
/r/MensRights13/06/12 12:29 AM
2

The women at the bottom are skinny as well. Bettie Page in particular, but also Marilyn Monroe at the height of her career, and Elizabeth Taylor, were extraordinarily thin women (if that's who the "Elizabeth" is). Is that Shirley Temple? I only know her as a child actress; but in any case that woman isn't exactly thick on that picture either.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 08:32 PM
3

Which is great, but shouldn't be connected to your masculinity. That is one good thing that came from (parts of) the feminist movement: Women don't lose their womanhood if they decide to not conform to traditional gender roles. A child-less spinster bull-dyke working as a mechanic is no less a woman than a house wife with 8 children and a broom in hand (Stereotypes purposefully chosen). Neither "metrosexual" men nor traditional "soldier-type" men are not men, because their masculinity is not bou…
/r/MensRights31/05/12 08:20 PM
6

Penetrative sex (vaginal? or oral, too)? Or all sex in general? How do we discriminate acts that are "more special" from "less special" acts? If someone were to touch the genitals of another person, is that "touching" or a "more special act"? Nothing, at all, is clear. In fact, your categories seem to be rather arbitrary. Could you expand on your categories a bit?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 09:05 PM
8

That still is a form of implicit consent, which is what you argue against in other threads. Why the disparity?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 06:44 PM
6

Why are they grinding against him? Shouldn't they ask for consent beforehand? Or is not pushing them away giving consent?
/r/MensRights27/05/12 06:06 PM
1

Reason is partly dependent on circumstance, but in general, sure. This has gotten silly in any case, I don't think we need to discuss this further, do you?
/r/MensRights18/05/12 04:54 PM
0

If she hadn't spent the money on tattoos (and we still don't know whether she spent any money on tattoos after she became homeless), she would have spent it on other more immediate concerns rather than saving money for clothing (at least that would be likely). You are clearly not poor ;)
/r/MensRights18/05/12 04:39 PM
1

You are not in her position, and she looks and sounds very much like a person who lives hand-to-mouth. We both have no idea how able we'd be to save for nice clothes (where do you store them, by the way? How do you keep them clean? And so on) if we are mostly concerned about where we will sleep come night.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 04:22 PM
2

Have you considered reporting her to a school counselor? There is a number of mental illnesses that might manifest in that way, and she/he might need help.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 03:33 PM
1

Two things: In so far as homelessness is self-inflicted and not just a product of circumstance: duh. Secondly, we have no idea when she got the tattoos or how much every single one cost. It is easier to accumulated the 50 USD to get a crappy small tattoo than to have enough money to rent a place. I'm not homeless, but among the working poor, and I can afford my rent and some food. But if the refrigerator were to break, I could not replace it. Now imagine someone for whom rent is the refrigerator…
/r/MensRights18/05/12 03:31 PM
1

No, because it doesn't appear to be true (and it is a poor world in which that is a conjecture and not just fantasy). To argue with evo-psych for any behaviour, you need a direct benefit, by which I mean a benefit to the person behaving in such a way, otherwise you'd have to also assume group selection, and either is uncertain enough on its own. Which possible benefit could there be in destroying an ex-spouses property under your "conjecture"? There is no reason to believe that the ex-spouse wil…
/r/MensRights17/05/12 07:04 AM
3

You can't just make shit up.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 06:32 AM
5

Your "if they still were behind" is a certainty! Female athletes are machines. They are already at the top of what the female body can do. What kind of ability could a female athlete possibly find that would allow her to supplement her lower athletic ability that a man couldn't adopt as well? Magic? I'm actually not opposed to non-sex-based discrimination in sports, but that would mean that there would be almost no woman among the top 100 in any sport.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 12:13 AM
8

but i am saying that it is possible. And everyone is rightly saying that you are wrong. There are biological differences between the sexes. Men have more muscle mass, different muscle composition, and a different skeletal structure. This has nothing to do with training, it is a result of genetics (and hormones, but that follows). Do you think that women are on average less tall than men because society tells women that lack of height is sexy?
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:55 PM
1

When a critical mass of men drop out, there will be problems, that much is true, but that isn't especially gendered. Any system that loses the support of its inhabitants is doomed.
/r/MensRights14/05/12 11:39 AM
6

To be fair, the "well the few [something] I met are [something bad]" is a very common "argument". I've even seen people who are sympathetic to the MRM use it (and perhaps people from this subreddit, but I'm not sure about that).
/r/MensRights04/05/12 11:56 PM
2

Austria, Germany and IIRC Switzerland all have "Frauenparkplätze", i.e. women's parking spots, and parking spots reserved for the disabled. If they combine them I can't say.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:53 PM
0

Ideally, of course the content is more important (note that someone posted this to /r/feminism, and some good criticism came from that). Unfortunately, presentation has a huge influence on how people perceive arguments. That is why a bum holding up a sign saying "global warming is not real, and here is why:" has less impact than someone like Monckton doing the same thing, even though both are equally wrong.1 I didn't mean to hijack the thread, I merely meant to help improve the presentation of t…
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:29 PM
1

True. It also isn't as if it were only Maddow that did this kind of thing. We all view the world through a lens ground by our ideology, experience, belief, and the data we have and choose to accept.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:07 PM
1

That's a can of worms that I don't want to open, suffice it to say that I agree that both genders show this attitude. In my very own personal experience, women are in the majority, though (I realise this is only anecdotal), and it is further not really pertinent to the topic at hand, which is why I didn't include it. But still, you are correct.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:05 PM
5

Well the guy at first hesitated until she ended her statement with "for the same work", at which point he affirmed his earlier dismissal of her statement. Had she stopped at "that women make less than men per hour", he would have had to say "in general, I don't disagree with that statement". So that was a bit of a tactical error on her part. It is in the nature of short news and discussion segments that soundbites like that are all they really can provide, so that might have had an impact. As it…
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:18 AM
17

A bit off topic: I have trouble parsing some sentences: In 2), "than" should be "then" In 4), you use "it" to "connect" two sentences. There is no referent for that "it". I suggest "That it is socially unacceptable for men to signal distress does not mean that they don't have feelings." In 5), "Nothing is worse when ..." should be "Nothing is worse for men than putting a lot of effort into a date which is then labeled 'boring'" or something like that. In 6), "Plan B" should be capitalised In 7),…
/r/MensRights30/04/12 04:05 AM
21

Do those women realise how perilously close they are to outright prostitution? I also imagine that she is part of the majority of women who like sex - making this even weirder, because now the man isn't paying a prostitute for her time or service, but so that she can have fun. I wish this "we give/allow men sex"-attitude weren't so prevalent amongst my "sisters".
/r/MensRights28/04/12 09:57 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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