TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

MooseFlyer Archive

View 0 posts and 68 comments by MooseFlyer 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

Have an example of a man doing essentially the same thing and getting zero prison time: https://www.iheartradio.ca/cjad/news/tmr-doctor-loses-licence-for-three-years-over-female-patient-pics-1.9264006
/r/PussyPassDenied30/03/21 12:13 PM
3

Here's a man who did the same thing getting a three year suspension of his medical license and a $7500 (Canadian) fine: https://www.iheartradio.ca/cjad/news/tmr-doctor-loses-licence-for-three-years-over-female-patient-pics-1.9264006
/r/PussyPassDenied30/03/21 12:11 PM
1

Ah, very precise. Thank you.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/11/19 05:52 PM
1

racially diverse and culturally diverse are not the same thing. I'm not suggesting there's no relationship, but yeah, not the same thing.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/11/19 05:51 PM
-1

By what definition is Brazil the most multicultural state on earth?
/r/PussyPassDenied30/11/19 05:37 PM
1

I genuinely don't know what you're trying to say. Could you explain?
/r/MensRights02/02/17 08:09 PM
-1

Yeah and the women totally chilled at home smoking pot during that time.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 10:47 PM
1

I literally know people who do. But sure LGBT activist
/r/MensRights01/02/17 10:10 PM
-3

Nope. I believe women have it worse than men and it makes sense to mostly focus on women's issues to create equality. Feminism can be about equality as much as, say, queer activists
/r/MensRights01/02/17 09:34 PM
-2

I mean, I would call myself one, but I believe in equality, think there are plenty of issues with how lots of feminists ignore anything bad happening to men, and believe that a commitment to equality does necessitate trying to solve issues like the higher rates of male suicide.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 08:33 PM
-4

No, she fucking shouldn't. Her actions are reprehensible, but they are not as reprehensible as raping a child.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 05:42 PM
2

Be married to someone who is down with that situation?
/r/MensRights31/12/16 08:07 PM
8

Yeah, because stay at home parents never do any work (getting paid =/= work) at all.
/r/MensRights31/12/16 07:31 PM
10

The numbers are for mothers, not single mothers.
/r/MensRights31/12/16 06:45 PM
0

Rape! Rape! Repeated, violent, unapologetic rape!
/r/MensRights10/11/14 05:04 AM
-1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 03:35 AM
-1

How dare I think it more likely that these women are telling the truth rather than a massive conspiracy including double digits of women accusing a man of sexual assault, with a few of them now going public, and an active police investigation.
/r/MensRights10/11/14 03:13 AM
1

I think the key point is that Ghomeshi's post has no evidence in it. If they didn't respond with what they had found, what he had posted would be the only source of information, and that's unacceptable. They had a duty to provide what they knew, with the caveat that it wasn't a great deal of evidence.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 04:06 AM
1

At no point do they say that Ghomeshi's statement is corroborating evidence. He created a new story with his post - they're reporting on what he talked about.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 02:50 AM
1

If the Star wanted to burn Ghomeshi, they would have done it a while ago when they first received this information. Ghomeshi publicly stated that they he'd been investigated by a media outlet. They, reasonably enough, went out, said "yep, that was us - here's what we found." Then, a woman came forward who was willing to go public, which any newspaper in the world would publish.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 01:47 AM
3

It's a major Canadian newspaper with no evidence to the contrary?
/r/MensRights30/10/14 11:39 PM
1

I do base my belief on evidence and sound reasoning - I just don't require the same amount of evidence a court does to believe someone is guilty.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 11:39 PM
2

Yeah - not sure..
/r/MensRights30/10/14 06:20 AM
1

Actually, drunk driving is the only thing I can thing of where people are held responsible for their actions even if they are drunk to the point of incapacity.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 05:32 AM
2

The researchers' best guess is apparently that regular ejaculation helps prevent it, and having sex with more than 20 women throughout your life means it's likely that you're having regular sex throughout your life. But that doesn't explain that the same affect doesn't apply to men who have had se with 20+ men, as they admit.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 05:10 AM
1

Oh, interesting. The only conclusion our conversation has come to is that you're bad at analogies, yet I'm the idiot?
/r/MensRights30/10/14 03:27 AM
2

I don't regularly visit this subreddit, no. In regards to your article: the article itself notes that that area's rate of false accusation is significantly higher than other places. What I don't understand in your analogy is what you're actually comparing it to. This is the structure you're using, more or less, right? There is a [y] chance of [something bad] if you do [z]. If there was a [y] chance of getting hit crossing the street, would you do it? In your example there, [z] is marriage. Makes…
/r/MensRights30/10/14 03:23 AM
2

Any study finding rates that high is considering "the police did not bring charges" as "false" (or is being misrepresented as doing so). I honestly would like you to try to explain the analogy to me. I don't understand at all, and I'd like to.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 03:05 AM
2

Ok, except that you pulled the numbers out of thin air and give no context to what they're supposed to correlate to. And even if those were, say,the percentage chance that a sexual encounter result in a false rape accusation (which, of course it is not - the chance is minuscule) what would the point of your comment be? The best interpretation I can come up with is that I shouldn't have sex.
/r/MensRights30/10/14 02:30 AM
2

Where did I jump to conclusions here? I said I am more inclined to believe the accusers than Ghomeshi. Nothing more. As for the judge question, it's a stupid question, for two reasons. One, judges don't decide guilt - juries do. Two, I'm not a judge, and I have no obligation to believe that someone is innocent until they are proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Like any other normal human, I believe that which is most likely. I acknowledge that he could be telling the truth, and that's all I n…
/r/MensRights29/10/14 10:35 PM
2

They don't have any, aside from the women's testimony. Which is why they are not claiming to know the truth. My point was that the accusations are unquestionably not "all from the same woman"
/r/MensRights29/10/14 10:32 PM
8

The fact that rape is falsely reported more often than other crimes does not mean that false rape accusations are not rare. Yes, he implied that the women know each other. Which is exactly what would be convenient for him in terms of denying the charges - no reason to assume it's true. The Xojane piece has him grabbing her ass, her telling him to stop, him holding her hand, her pulling it away, him rubbing her shoulders, her telling him to stop, him putting his arm around her, her removing it, h…
/r/MensRights27/10/14 11:34 PM
5

A reputable newspaper interviewed all of the women. Whether you believe them or not, they all exist.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 04:48 PM
4

Sorry, what are you talking about?
/r/MensRights27/10/14 04:41 PM
14

I will say, I lean towards believing the women. False rape accusations are pretty rare, even if you take the highest numbers. While it doesn't guarantee anything, there being 4 women accusing him of things, and that their stories are similar, does lend credence to what they're saying. A woman once posted a blogpost about a date with a man who pretty much everyone assumes was Ghomeshi, saying that he repeatedly touched her against her will. This is both another accusation, as well as a reason why…
/r/MensRights27/10/14 06:21 AM
1

I know plenty of women who don't feel that way. Don't be an idiot.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 07:37 PM
2

No, they aren't. It's a not particularly funny joke.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 03:10 AM
1

His sexuality is demonized because it involves having sex with the daughter, which would be shameful to her and to her father. We like our girls to be pure. I don't think what I said is the whole truth. There's probably some truth in the point you're trying to raise, but my point certainly isn't false.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 11:11 PM
1

Well, single mothers are, on average, worse off economically than single fathers, non-parents, and married parents.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 08:06 PM
0

Only if you assume all rape to be the nightmare scenario of someone dragging you into an alley and threatening you with a knife. There are plenty of people who aren't psychopaths who would feel they deserve sex from a partner, or that it's ok to have sex with someone who's way to drunk to consent, and so on. People who think that "no" said once means yes, or can't recognize that not saying "yes" is sometimes "I'm too scared to say no".
/r/MensRights27/01/13 08:03 PM
0

And then made up for by the number of men who commit more than one rape. The stat is probably way lower.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 08:00 PM
0

I'd argue it is. It's putting a maximum possible number of 25%, with the understanding that it's far less. If people listen to the logic there, at least no one will think it's more than 25%.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 07:59 PM
1

This post: sweeping generalizations!
/r/MensRights24/01/13 06:31 AM
1

To my knowledge, alimony in Canada is simply given to the partner making a smaller income. It's often a woman, sure, but I don't think you can talk about it as a Men's Rights issue.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:33 PM
1

Oh god, suggesting ways to avoid someone getting the wrong idea about your feelings towards them. The feminist oppression!
/r/MensRights16/01/13 05:44 AM
1

The pay gap being a myth is thrown around here a lot, but I've never seen the evidence. Care to link me?
/r/MensRights12/01/13 04:03 AM
2

I think my point here is that men "work for women to supply money" because it's what society expects, and that women don't do the same because it's not what society expects. There's nothing (or little, at least) inherent in either gender that makes them chose to do a certain kind of work.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:26 PM
1

Oh?
/r/MensRights11/01/13 04:30 AM
2

Women don't need money?
/r/MensRights11/01/13 03:13 AM
1

They are both bad things. From what I've seen (though I may be misinformed) I believe the worst kinds of FGM that actually occur commonly to be worse than the worst kinds of MGM that occur commonly. A nick to the clitoris isn't horrid, no. Nor would a nick to the foreskin be.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 03:12 AM
1

From some people who are using the attack incorrectly.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 05:52 PM
2

I've been an intern at a theatre company; that's all. My preferences are only relevant in the sense of my point that preferring "soft jobs" has to do with personality and socialization, not gender.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 05:49 PM
1

The worse kinds of FGM are worse, but I never said men don't feel pain.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 05:47 PM
1

I honestly did not see your reasons. Skimming through I guess. While I think you're wrong, what you posted isn't irrelevant, no.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 06:54 AM
1

I believe unequivocally that male circumcision should be banned. Not much of an apologist.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 06:51 AM
1

But you see, I'm not making it out like it's true or likely. I freely admit that there is no reason someone should believe with my gut instinct on an issue. Whereas you say "it's probably well over 90%" as if you know that that's likely true.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 05:18 AM
1

I'm not making a contrary assertion. While I don't think that it's "probably well over 90%" I know I don't have any solid evidence on hand, so I'm not trying to convince anyone of that. Saying that over 90% of rape accusations are false without any evidence is just as meaningless a comment as saying that 90% of men want to rape people, without evidence.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:55 AM
1

More likely to get elected to office. Not allowed to be emotional, sensitive. In essence, not allowed to be feminine. There, I'm privileged and hurt by the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:46 AM
4

" It's probably well over 90%" Evidence or irrelevant.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:39 AM
5

You mean, a strong message that a particular woman preferred a "softer job". I'd prefer to be a cellist too. And I have a dick! Shocking, I know.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:28 AM
7

I would not argue against ED drugs being discounted. I'm sure that would be great. But not being able to get it up and having an unwanted child are not the same thing.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 10:35 PM
2

They're allowed to have beef with religion; it's done some fucked up shit. And while it is directed at religion, it is certainly directed more specifically at having laws based on religion (a very legitimate beef, and if it's an Abrahamic religion, a logical belief for a feminist to hold) and even more specifically at Sharia law which, as I said, treats women horribly.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 10:24 PM
-1

Nicking a clitoris isn't mutilation, and isn't considered circumcision. Maybe it should be, but it isn't. Which makes it far more reasonable for FGM to come up when you type in female circumcision; what's considered circumcision is mutilation, and it is even worse than male circumcision. I obviously I meant that men can get off without a foreskin.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 04:42 AM
0

According to the WHO, the least horrible form of female genital mutilation is removal of the clitoris. Now, I get that the clitoris and foreskin are similar in many ways. However, almost all men can get off without a clitoris. Many (if not most) women can't. As for the mutilation that involves "removal of all or part of the inner and outer labia, and usually the clitoris, and the fusion of the wound, leaving a small hole for the passage of urine and menstrual blood", it makes sex as painful as p…
/r/MensRights23/12/12 02:53 AM
2

If she starts crying when presented with a sexual act? Probably, yeah.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 07:08 PM
6

You're seriously trying to argue that Sharia law doesn't treat women horribly? What a joke.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 06:10 PM
0

Look, I believe we should ban male circumcision without medical reasons. I do. But arguing it's as bad as FGM is just silly.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 06:05 PM
-1

Seriously?! PEDIPHILE?! -.-
/r/MensRights24/01/11 04:25 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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