TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Murky42 Archive

View 4 posts and 149 comments by Murky42 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
10

Suicide statements rarely work out very well. Just ask R Budd Dwyer.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 08:29 PM
3

Besides lets be realistic such laws would inevitably primarily target men anyway.
/r/MensRights30/05/16 09:54 AM
2

Not that I am by any means a dating expert but still should be more then possible to get girls while maintaining your current persona. Pick a random hobby that you could stand a decent chance at finding genuinely interesting that exposes you to more women. Then just get in the habit of picking a girl you like and asking her to go watch a movie together. If you succeed great! If you fail and run out of girls in any given hobby circle start a new hobby and start all over again. Not the easiest way…
/r/MensRights09/05/16 09:07 AM
1

Sounds like a good idea to me.
/r/MensRights08/05/16 10:25 PM
-1

Your line of argument is completely asinine. Even if your assumption of biology determines whether you are willing or not is true (hint its not). There are plenty of ugly female prison guards and ugly women on this planet in general. Now if what you said about biology was true then people that do not have access to sex would automatically flock to undesirable people. But that doesn't happen does it now? Could it be that human sexuality is more complicated then your average toaster? Furthermore c…
/r/MensRights23/04/16 06:24 PM
1

Wouldn't a phone that records speech run in to issues due to laws about recording conversations? That might be legal in some places but it would definitely be a problem in other scenarios. People could also claim that there is no way to prove that you were actually the one holding your phone.
/r/MensRights20/04/16 10:33 AM
1

Very true but knowing how to cut off one of the heads of a hydra and then cauterizing the wounds is better then not knowing anything at all. Being able to label accountability for non equality based measures or disproportionate funding can be useful for lowering the amount of funding/support they receive from the public.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 04:11 PM
1

God forbid I ask others how to do it so I can actually brush up on some info. Clearly if I don't possess a large amount of info on any given topic I should instead decide that its much wiser to never attempt to learn anything at all. You think I am gonna go out there using only some info from an anon reddit user and plan on innovating/crusading the world with my special brand of MRA values? It can't possibly be that I simply find the process itself fascinating and would like to learn more about …
/r/MensRights06/04/16 04:01 PM
1

You think I expected a solution that would fit all sizes? I am simply asking for some methods as I currently know just about none. Surely precedents have been set in the past and I am asking here because I want to know if this sort of thing has already been done in the past on the specific topic of feminism. I don't expect it to be insanely easy 24/7 but sometimes funding figures and proclamations of responsibility are broadcasted via loudspeaker.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 03:28 PM
1

That's a good trick I'll have to keep that in mind.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 07:09 AM
2

Haven't you ever played pokemon? There is a time and place for everything. But now now!
/r/MensRights06/04/16 05:15 AM
1

Exactly the "power" of this argument is enormous unless you are very well informed on feminism or critical thinking. That's why I find the need for solid proofs on what feminism is or isn't responsible for important. That way you can start forcing them to pick either "feminism is equality for genders" or "feminism is equality for women". From that point on then you can start busting balls from a precision angle. Being able to reliably provide solid facts that feminism is a woeful male gender equ…
/r/MensRights05/04/16 07:43 PM
1

As far as reducing the amount of funding on a child is concerned I don't think putting the child up for adoption is a good measure. That just puts even more care in the hands of children. Furthermore being put in an orphanage in many cases fucks people up. Certainly not a good alternative if you want to lower the crime rate in comparison to a single mother raising the baby. http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/31/the-orphanage-problem/ Citation needed is indeed justly said as I do not…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 10:26 AM
13

Maddox adresses this much better then I could. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB6TiRJNI-Q Or in case you prefer text form http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=spiderwomans_ass Either way who gives a rats ass if something is sexualised.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 05:20 AM
1

Problem is that sometimes those options aren't available (religious women does not feel capable of having an abortion). Now you can spite her for her religion but that isn't gonna solve the problem. Now we need to figure out how to make sure that despite the unpleasant situation we need to help out. Because otherwise chances are he is gonna have a shit life and become a shitty person and eventually a shitty criminal. The loss of productivity+ the cost of the crime + the cost of prison is more th…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 05:11 AM
1

It's better to come face to face now when you can easily present a good argument against them rather then facing them later with a new issue. At least this way you know who you need to worry about.
/r/MensRights30/03/16 06:48 AM
0

I think believing women at their word only is wrong in the first place. That being said with these kinds of laws you have to be very careful that you don't swing the pendulum to hard to one direction. Making the burden of proof for determining a false accusation too low will result in the rich getting away with rapes. Whiiich will result in the pendulum swinging back the other way again.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 08:58 PM
-1

The proof that he didn't do it would have to be VERY strong before you should be able to convict her as a liar. I also think the punishment for the lie would have to be at least partially based on the incentive for lying in the first place. As much as people that accuse a man of rape when they need an excuse for X are terrible people. They usually aren't nearly as dangerous as people that make such accusations with clear intended malice towards the target. Just really fucking stupid and really f…
/r/MensRights29/03/16 05:56 PM
3

Womens brains are different on average. They can and are perfectly competent in adapting to a STEM education. However if you make the assumption that something is horribly wrong unless representation is 50/50 that's when you start running in to walls. Either way brains that function slightly differently can be useful for offering a fresh perspective. This however stops being the case when people are practically being shoe horned in the industry due to quotas needing to be met. This will make the…
/r/MensRights25/03/16 06:36 PM
2

Among others yes. I'm all for more women in stem but trying to force it will only end in disaster.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 02:14 PM
1

The only link I can think of is using this as yet another showcase that men and women really are different on average. If you take a proven aspect of: Men and women think differently. Then it might be easier to convince somebody that other things relating to the mind might be different as well. Which can then be used to argue expecting equality of outcome simply doesn't work.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 07:28 AM
3

Yeah but then you also have this lovely statement. In 99% of sexual assaults, the accused perpetrator is male. Gotta keep up the narrative after all. I love how claiming that women are different from men is sexist until they pull shit like this out of their ass. Also the classic Only 2-8% of rape claims are false reports. Now I don't take the Kanin numbers at face value but the way this number is derived is bollocks and over simplifies a complex issue.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 09:09 PM
1

I find the term earning gap to be useful in this sort of discussion.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 07:03 AM
2

I certainly don't. You always have people of that become extremists and get deluded. You also don't have to fear being banned as much here as in other places. Disagreement/criticism is perfectly acceptable here unlike some other places.
/r/MensRights13/03/16 08:31 AM
10

What makes you say the person advocating "for" (more saying enforcing such legislation would be a legal nightmare) marital rape is an MRA? Just take a look at her title: Minister for Women and Child Development
/r/MensRights13/03/16 06:23 AM
1

Problem is people are going to be irresponsible and have babies anyway. These babies will then grow up in extreme poverty with no support and become the next generation of fucked up people that will end up costing a lot of money in the long run. Probably more then if we just tax everybody to help with child support. Taxes effect everyone though so its a relatively gender equal solution. Although I suppose men probably pay more taxes then women on average.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 04:08 AM
1

I used to think that technically as long as the person was alive and signed a waiver that his corpse would be allowed to be a prostitute and a method could be devised to ensure that corpse fucking was medically safe it would technically be sort of okay. But I thought about it again and in practice the poor and destitute will probably end up selling their own corpses to make ends meet. Can you imagine the psychological damage it would do to the poor to know that their loved ones corpses are being…
/r/MensRights05/03/16 05:25 AM
1

Not the most effective question for those deeply entrenched as they will spout the usual, hetciswhitemale consersative scurmbergs!
/r/MensRights05/03/16 05:19 AM
1

I think people should have the right to kill themselves. That being said guns are too quick and there are too many cases of suicide where its very likely that the judgement to kill one self was made in a very impaired state of mind. Euthanasia is a better option despite it being inconvenient.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 03:33 PM
7

But experts on medical ethics, commenting on the proposal, said procedures to modify girls' genitals could not be compared to male circumcision because they are designed to control women and curb their sexual desire. These "experts" should be fired for failing their history lessons.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 09:11 AM
1

I keep delaying reading Kafka's the trial despite the fact that I know I would like the book. Why settle for fiction when you can read about the real deal?
/r/MensRights18/02/16 08:20 PM
3

Why can't she just be a misogynist or a sexist? Or perhaps just an annoying person? Is this really a gendered issue? No instead the term used is internalized misogyny which as far as I can tell whenever its used pretty much means internalized patriarchy. EDIT: just take a look at these hashtags: #‎feminism‬ ‪#‎feminist‬ ‪#‎internalisedmisogyny‬ ‪#‎patriarchalsociety"‬
/r/MensRights18/02/16 08:12 PM
1

Is it wrong to use different definitions? I decided to look up a description of scientology with dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scientology trademark the philosophy of the Church of Scientology, a nondenominational movement founded in the US in the 1950s, which emphasizes self-knowledge as a means of realizing full spiritual potential Is this how you would personally describe scientology and do you think its entirely accurate? Does it cover the whole of its ups and downs? …
/r/MensRights18/02/16 05:06 AM
1

"teaching a lesson" so that they won't repeat it is bollocks. The real way to not tolerate an abuser is to abandon them and say sorry you just ruined our relationship get out of my house. Sure that's not always an option but violence truly is should be a measure of last resort. I say this not because I think women should be granted some unique protection from violence I say this because I think that for the most part violence is a tool used by fools.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 06:49 PM
2

Don't you think that for an organization that is supposed to represent equality they spend very little time and effort on circumcision in comparison to other issues. FGM despite being less prominent then circumcision today receives far more attention then MGM.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 04:27 AM
3

Does rape culture exist to some certain small extent? Yes. There are still backwards countries and the occasional senile fool with power or just idiots in general. Does it exist too the extent or in the specific fashion that most people mean when they use the word? No. I don't believe that rape is seen as culturally acceptable in the vast majority of first world countries. Specifically looking at the US that becomes clear in the way the law treats rape cases and grants victims a considerable leg…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 07:11 AM
1

Honestly let art be art even if it sends "bad messages". However nobody should pretend that sexism is a one edged sword.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 10:37 PM
2

Alright then. You assume OP has hostile intentions versus the chick that got him in trouble. Notice how he said that she told her mother not "SHE TOLD HER I WAS A MONSTER". What likely happened is that she was sharing what she considered happy moments with her mom and then her mother took offense to it. You assume that somebody is an "evil bitch" without having any firm evidence that is in fact the case. In fact you are harming the one that is probably least responsible for the whole chain of ev…
/r/MensRights16/01/16 04:47 PM
1

That is some of the worst "advice" I have ever read.
/r/MensRights16/01/16 01:26 PM
1

I would take a peek at the mens ref subreddit. Its a huge catalog of sources. https://www.reddit.com/r/MRRef
/r/MensRights16/01/16 01:15 PM
1

First of all think from your GF's perspective: 1: Estimate how important the institution of marriage is for her. 2: Estimate what her political spectrum is and her view of feminism. 3: Estimate how plausible it is for you to just have a talk about the pros and cons of marriage. 4: Estimate how she might take your concerns about getting married. I don't know how it is in australia but in holland from what I remember reading you can customize your marriage contract a bit. You might be able to do t…
/r/MensRights09/01/16 05:13 PM
2

Vice is corrupt to the core from top to bottom. They are fraudulent liars in every aspect of what they do in and out of the job. I would recommend reading this piece: https://medium.com/thoughts-on-media/vice-media-kit-warning-for-advertisers-25ad0600f61d#.1z4f3xsv6
/r/MensRights09/01/16 04:52 PM
5

I'm not interested in this trash. Here's a video from a bloke with actual talent deconstructing what a stupid attention seeker she is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVIoy1yCptg She's just using whatever she can latch on to attention whore.
/r/MensRights09/01/16 03:29 PM
1

Thanks I never heard about that before. Will look in to it.
/r/MensRights09/01/16 07:35 AM
1

Problem with root causes is that it's much harder to prove and convince others of. Money is a simple tangible thing that is much easier to center a debate around.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 03:45 PM
1

While certainly possible that is a much harder thing to prove and it is certainly a much harder thing to convince an outsider of. It's also something that has happened in the past and anything in the past is incomprehensible to most people. We also can't change the past anymore but we still have some options in the present and in the future. For all those reasons I think it's important to focus on how the money is traveling to feminists these days. Sure it's just the tip of the iceberg but once …
/r/MensRights02/01/16 01:34 PM
1

Probably a good idea to categorize who benefits from various forms of inequality. Worth keeping in mind that even if supporting equality makes sense business wise profit seekers generally don't want to swim against the tide unless its very lucrative due to risk vs reward factors. Most obvious picks I can think of: Prison industry: They have reasons to both support and attack feminism. Support seems obvious enough: Keeping men in jail by being "tough on crime" and making it easier for men to get …
/r/MensRights02/01/16 11:06 AM
15

It doesn't but the chronically fat are world renown under-estimators and in a state of denial.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 04:16 AM
1

I have a feeling most people will read this and assume they are just some extremists. A collection like this would be more valuable if it linked to proof of how influential they are/were. Kind of like how u/_snoo did it.
/r/MensRights01/01/16 08:25 PM
1

I really have no idea where feminism enters in all this. She has issues with low self respect and low education. Is this due to systematic oppression? Will learning about systematic "oppression" magically gain her confidence back? If anything it would probably undermine it at this stage. Making people believe there is oppression where there is none or relatively little only undermines your efforts. I remember reading a scientific study where they compared how unfair it was for women in politics …
/r/MensRights31/12/15 09:16 AM
18

It's also worth noting that you have to stick by certain principles even when it's inconvenient. Even if he was guilty as all hell he still has his rights.
/r/MensRights31/12/15 08:36 AM
1

It's bad situation that is starting to become better. It's not that domestic violence is rising this change convictions is due to justice being handed out more equally. It's definitely a positive thing it's just bittersweet.
/r/MensRights30/12/15 07:32 AM
6

You make a mistake right away, acid attacks aren't a gendered problem. The propaganda spreads far and wide. A 2007 literature review analyzed 24 studies in 13 countries over the past 40 years, covering 771 cases.[12] In the cases studied, men were more frequently victims in every country, with the exception of Bangladesh and Taiwan, with a male/female ratio ranging from 0.15:1 in Bangladesh to 6.14:1 in the UK. However, according to the London-based charity Acid Survivors Trust International 60 …
/r/MensRights26/12/15 09:06 PM
1

I don't think this story is a fabrication. However I think it's important to not go full on "listen and believe" mode. Is there anyway we can confirm the truth/contents of this story?
/r/MensRights24/12/15 11:51 PM
3

No thanks.
/r/MensRights23/12/15 07:20 AM
8

Eh redditors laugh at pretty much every single crude joke on the planet.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 05:52 AM
1

Hmm that is sickening luckily I don't think they will be able to gain all that much traction.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 05:06 PM
1

You make a good point. However I think there is a difference between believing that something is the cause of issues and being able to believe that they must be violently oppressed. "Achieving" that by 2019 would be an impressive feat in my book.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 01:15 PM
22

That study was biased as it only studied the forced prostitution of Siamese twins.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 12:17 PM
1

If I had to make a guess its the egalitarians not liking the fact that your statement sounds very absolute. As in they read you as saying "female independence doesn't occur period". Which as an absolute statement is patently false as there are plenty of women in the workforce that are childless and in essence just work till they die. Obviously the above doesn't represent the majority of women but seemingly ignoring the existence of the above group may rub people the wrong way.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 12:11 PM
3

Even if opressive governments get in power in the US I sincerely doubt that his purported claim of renewed persecution of homosexuals (stated at the end of the vid) will happen unless its a very right wing government that takes over. It would take decades of of brainwashing too undo the acceptability of homosexuals. I think one important thing to consider when comparing old brainwashing and new brainwashing is the difference in technology. No longer is it possible to smash and burn all the old l…
/r/MensRights06/12/15 11:24 AM
1

Thanks I do try.
/r/MensRights05/12/15 01:40 AM
2

http://www.usashooting.org/news/2012/2/28/195-usa-shooting-viewpoint--men-vs-women-in-competitive-shooting http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203960804577239540945498130 Shooting is one of the few collegiate sports where men and women regularly compete against one another—and women are often winning. In 2010, Scherer's TCU squad became the first all-women's team to win the NCAA rifle championship. And the Horned Frogs did it by beating perennial powerhouse Alaska-Fairbanks, winner of ni…
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:19 PM
2

Looking at this briefly I doubt she would be among the hate mob. She certainly wouldn't be sympathetic though.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:00 PM
1

Just me speaking here but the first post comes off as high and mighty. You state that a suspended jail sentence is serious but you don't explain why its so serious. The original post does not make it clear that you have expertise in the area. This is a pretty good recipe for making your post get downvotes.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 01:36 PM
3

Honestly no presidential candidate is perfect. If I was 100% american and not some dirty half blood I would vote for him even if I disagreed with over 50% of his policy. Why? Simply because I believe he is one of the least corrupt candidates in years and an outsider to a system that has been a closed circuit for decades. Furthermore electing him would be a big punch against the traditional two party system which is fucking awful.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:04 AM
1

The counter argument to that is that such matters should be judged on an individual basis. If a woman is judged to be a "family starter" and thus paid less even when she isn't then we have a problem. If the above frequently happens then there is a genuine problem however is this really the case? That is something that requires evidence and I haven't seen any evidence that states that the above scenario is frequently the reason behind why women are paid lower.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 09:22 AM
1

Well it depends on the job. Perhaps for a modeling or porn job you could justify it. However for most jobs even if it has some minor effect (black salesman,etc) it is not an acceptable justification.
/r/MensRights04/12/15 09:16 AM
1

That might influence republican advocacy against alimony so that is a sword that cuts both ways. So them taxing (according to GoHoMOThrow) isn't all bad.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 10:28 AM
3

An argument could be made that perhaps its better to encourage ex feminists to consider themselves egalitarians instead. This way feminism will slowly become more and more corrupt until it collapses. I think its better if we just let it happen despite the loss of funding for some actual issues. The future funding gained by addressing more actual issues is more then worth it.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 07:22 AM
3

Oh god I was reading this when I saw this choice quote: Praise of Warren Farrell include Kate Zernike of The Boston Globe ranking him as "the sage of the men's movement," and the description of him as the "Gloria Steinem of men's liberation" "Gloria Steinem of men's liberation" I nearly vomited at the sheer awfulness of this comparison.
/r/MensRights02/12/15 02:53 PM
5

Did you see it being discussed in your social circles? And what do you think of how it was received by the public in norway in general?
/r/MensRights23/11/15 04:00 PM
3

Indeed a great watch.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 03:59 PM
1

Pretty shitty thing to do but somewhat understandable. Although even if you ascribe to the men are more dangerous belief completely denying all men instead of just increasing screening procedures is still fucking shit. We can't say "the genders are obviously distinct from each other in X, Y and Z ways" and then at the same time say men should be treated equally under all circumstances. I do not feel like being a hypocrite and I will stick by my convictions even if they are used against me. This …
/r/MensRights23/11/15 02:56 PM
1

These gender roles only become problematic once you assume that they are entirely caused by the social pressure of the patriarchy that prevents freedom for men and women. So in that case if you argue we have all the reasons in the world to believe that the above isn't the case and that people do as they want. Important examples being countries with the most gender freedom (sweden,etc) having very gendered job division is an indication of people simply doing what they want. So my position (I don'…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 09:41 AM
2

Oh crap I got the lib dems confused with the liberal party. Ignore my post entirely.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 08:00 AM
17

People should be given their individual choice and not be demonized for whatever they choose. If they want traditional roles let them. If they want "modern" roles let them. Nobody should shoehorn their ideal version of roles down others throats and demonize them for it.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 07:40 AM
0

Well I agree with that its not meant to be 1/1 replication generally. But some actions will simply be too jarring too weird to be watchable for certain demographics. Cumming the moment a shoe is in your vag is no less fake then cumming the moment you put your peepee in her belly button. A 10 minute blowjob is unrealistic however its not overtly absurd. Which among other factors will make it seem more fake. Fake can still be enjoyable though whether it be for titillation or accidental comedy.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 07:28 AM
-1

Girl on girl porn sometimes has bad production values and does insane stuff to try to appease to male viewers. I remember watching this video called lesbians watch girl-on-girl porn and they didn't feel that the scene where high heels were being used as a sex toy was very pleasing to the eyes. Basically a straight team of directors/actors will have a harder time emulating the gay experience due to not being gay and thus having to make shit up. The above situation is pretty much the equivalent of…
/r/MensRights09/11/15 07:01 AM
1

Well that's terrible news as the liberal democrats consistently sound like one of the worst political parties on the human planet. FriendlyJordies is pretty convincing in any case. EDIT: Oh crap I got the lib dems confused with the liberal party. Ignore my post entirely.
/r/MensRights09/11/15 06:53 AM
6

Tits are almost pretty much universally loved. Girls like em and men like em. Dicks are only attractive to approximately 50% of the population. Then you need to deal with obscenity laws. You can make a banner with scantily clad women that only hide the nipples and then present it in public. If you put up pictures in public with a penis with only the very tip being out of sight it would be considered obscene and taken down. Most important of all though I think that pictures of exclusively dicks a…
/r/MensRights02/11/15 01:26 PM
10

Even without accounting for that its simply far easier to make provocative imagery saying "donate for breasts!" then it is for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer just simply cannot be sold in a sexy fashion.
/r/MensRights02/11/15 08:54 AM
2

I wonder how effective of a conversion method it would be to take studies and results like these. Then lie and replace all instances of america with some third world country. Then replace men with women. Convince them by pouring through the methodology that all of the above is the truth. Then give the big reveal of the lies that have been told.
/r/MensRights25/10/15 09:55 AM
1

I might be being a biased European here but from a distance it looks like the republican party might be in trouble because of other reasons as well. At least personally I find a pretty good portion of their policies and overall voting patterns somehow even more disagreeable then the democrats. Besides lets be honest this isn't a movement with media control abilities. Gotta play too your strengths. From what I see we have an unpopular truth but its still the truth so what we have we gotta use rig…
/r/MensRights15/10/15 02:14 AM
1

Suppose I might as well post this here as I don't know if it warrants its own thread. I think the mensright movement needs an equivalent to deepfreeze.it. What I mean with this is that we need more places that show only the facts without any slang, lingo or any form of insults. If we already have one we need to give it a more prominent place. Furthermore it should have clear categorizations. Such a site might also be useful for collecting info on the "evils" that feminism has commited. Why is th…
/r/MensRights14/10/15 09:02 PM
1

Positive ratings post immediately; negative ratings are queued in a private inbox for 48 hours in case of disputes. If you haven’t registered for the site, and thus can’t contest those negative ratings, your profile only shows positive reviews. They take these and some other countermeasures for the fucked up results that will inevitably come out of this. But something like this simply cannot end well no matter the measures taken.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 11:31 AM
1

I agree but if its only women that get sent back to serve the community then it is still an injustice. Not sure if that is case in this article because I don't really care about her guilt.
/r/MensRights30/09/15 05:31 AM
1

Partially that but there are multiple other factors. First of all its owned by rupert murdoch of news corp. Which is a known gaping asshole that uses his power of large amount of news outlets to control the political sphere and public opinion. If you follow the intense corruption of australian news outlet and then realize that their owner is rupert murdoch and how incredibly shit australian reporting is. Then it becomes much harder to take fox news seriously as a source of information. As a news…
/r/MensRights30/09/15 04:55 AM
1

Yeah I suppose such a list wouldn't useful for anything other then a quick reference point. Which isn't very useful in a matter like this.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 08:51 PM
2

I'm saying that their standards or rather their lack of them make them shite.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 08:48 PM
2

Yeah which is why university "courts" are bullshit.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 07:01 PM
1

Nope I am just an idiot. I didn't mean wrong in the moral sense more in the sense of spreading falsities. More in the sense of checking to see how many claims have been made that range on a scale from very false and very easily demonstrably false to just the theories that are unsubstantiated or make relatively minor claims. I mean its very useful to be able to outright discard schools of thought that are clearly insanity. I mean they are allowed to think it but we don't have to take them serious…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 06:54 PM
4

So bad but not nearly as bad as the title makes it sound. If the scenario was 2 male prostitutes its plausible that a similar sentence would be given. I've said it before but its worth saying again: Not everything is a femspiracy. PS Thanks for the research btw you are a real human bean.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 12:48 PM
0

Wow 52 comments from a single comment chain started by souless_ging with not a single other comment. Impressive I suppose that rarely occurs.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 11:33 AM
2

I don't feel like heavily researching especially with only a facebook link from something fox 12 (is that fox news?) But are there any extenuating circumstances or a plea deal? Always important to research the reasoning behind a sentencing before claiming its an injustice.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 11:30 AM
1

One could argue that to be in certain male focused things you might need multiple typical male traits and for certain women focused things a man would need multiple typically female traits. You don't need just a certain type of preference for group A you also need risk taking behavior and so on. If in specific sorts of groups there are enough of these typical male traits where almost all of them are needed for success that could explain the side difference. Lets add some math to demonstrate the …
/r/MensRights29/09/15 10:47 AM
1

A lot of feminists demand that all male privileges must be eliminated before any female privilege is allowed to change. This is extremely stupid. Not that I don't believe this is untrue but a lot isn't a very specific number. Just curious has anyone ever made a list that states how wrong different schools of feminism are in orders of magnitude. Like some are 100% full of shit from its core concepts while others are wrong but for less terribad reasons. Kind of like the difference between a two pe…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 10:10 AM
1

Hmm how come? Prisons? Doesn't that apply to women as well (just in lower quantities for obvious reasons). I am afraid my US politics has gotten rusty.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 10:02 AM
2

Its just high enough to scare away anyone that isn't serious but low enough that it is quite affordable for anyone worth noting. Either they can pay it out of hand due to status or they can convince followers to help out.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 10:01 AM
1

thus the idea of exterminating all men is acceptable if it will make the world a better place. Bullshit. To think that would be justice even if you had "solid evidence" would be insanity. We have had "solid evidence" that killing X will solve our problems repeatedly. Yet in the end we always look back and say wow this was a really bad idea. Considering are woeful past when it comes to matters like these the idea that there is such a thing as correct genocide is insanity. It is far more logical t…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 09:56 AM
1

Well the fucked up thing is that women waiting for men too come to them is so ingrained by now. That when women are the active players tons of people start wondering "wait a minute is there a reason she NEEDS to do this can I really trust her? what is wrong?". So really all genders get fucked by stereotypes in one way or another. Only the severity of getting fucked varies in different aspects of it. No clue why I felt like pointing that out TBH it kinda just sprung to mind.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 09:42 AM
1

That's Duluth you are looking for. Understandably quite hard to spell correctly based only off of pronunciation. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=duluth+model
/r/MensRights29/09/15 09:34 AM
1

I'm going to upvote not because I agree with you but because I think its a shame that the entire comment chain is rendered invisible because you made some inflammatory remarks.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 09:22 AM
1

I'm not saying that just because something is written in breitbart it automatically isn't true. But the audience that you are trying to address might be happier with another source.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 06:47 AM
1

Women don't dominate those sorts of field generally that isn't something I am trying to dispute. Men are undeniably risk takers and are more likely to thrive in those environments. That being said its not exactly unheard of that some women can thrive in those environments. The problem with your statement in the first place was that you made it sound like the mere thought that a woman could possibly be a decent surgeon was absurd. Women are less likely to be in certain industries. The women that …
/r/MensRights23/09/15 08:29 PM
1

the likelihood is that the name of my alleged attacker would be made public in order to encourage any other victims to come forward. This has on several occasions proved to be effective and isn't entirely without merit. So is a blanket ban on naming truly a good idea? On the one hand there is undeniably merit to saying principles are important to up hold even if at times it is inconvenient. On the other hand I find publishing the name if there is sufficient evidence/a PROPER investigation and a …
/r/MensRights23/09/15 04:46 PM
3

Broad sweeping generalizations. Calm your tits and stop presuming outliers are an indication that all women are literally satan. Generalizations aren't per se false. That being said if you say all of X is Y you better name some damned strong evidence for you claims and I don't see any in your post.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 04:30 PM
1

This is why you see a shitload of money going into breast cancer and very little to prostate cancer. Sorry but I think that statement is nonsense. Breast cancer gets more research because its X1000000 times easier to market. Just flash some tits and say look at me! save da tittaaays! I can tell you for a fact that a similar approach with prostates would be poorly received.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 04:19 PM
2

You see this is an actually sexist comment. Low female representation in an industry does not mean that the few women in that industry are only there by virtue of their sex. If both are top surgeons then fuck it both are gonna be close to being the same quality. If you have to pick the very best surgeon in the world odds are higher of him being male. This has more to do with the fact that the male pool is bigger then an inherent difference between the sexes. Lets take your sentence and modify it…
/r/MensRights23/09/15 03:48 PM
2

Just curious does the mary sue have any actual influence or is it just a "super progressive" masturbation blog that pretends to be genuine news. I mean its fun to mock them but does it have any merit/utility?
/r/MensRights22/09/15 07:54 PM
1

They had a full delete feature but you had to pay for it. It also didn't actually work and their data got leaked.
/r/MensRights22/09/15 07:52 PM
1

Interesting perspective on the nature of slut shaming. I might be wrong but I think its pretty much a cultural practice that is practiced globally. Which means you might be on to something there.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 12:59 PM
1

As of yet especially as it involves LGBT issues and would make them look bad. If an exactly similar case like this came about (with a genderswap) his point is that feminists could cause a shit storm about it. Its speculative but I don't think its a awful argument personally when you keep in mind what kind of bullshit they sometimes spew. But its a bit too speculative for my tastes (unless we have some other good examples to compare it too).
/r/MensRights17/09/15 04:23 PM
1

Rationally yes. I think brontide's point is that in todays political climate you could easily start a shitstorm about his reversed gender scenario and possibly get results even if its irrational.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:36 PM
1

Somebody can be qualified and biased. That being said not everything is a femspiracy and I personally doubt that is the case in this scenario. But it might be worth checking out. If the guy that made the decision was a radical feminist then the decision would be just a teensy bit fishy. Seems to me like the at risk system they currently have is a bit weak though and could probably use some improvement. Don't ask me how though.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 03:30 PM
1

The outrage warriors want an easy PC correct target that won't get them much/any backlash. Fighting oppression without actually having to face any opposition in other words. They desire to crush a boogeyman so that they can feel that they have made a difference. First it starts with the culture critics and then the attention seekers and profiteers (politicians classify as both) latch on to the new outrage business to try and get what they desire.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 08:16 AM
14

Not an expert in this matter but what is the limiting factor? Are we simply saying well we could do this but that requires X amount of extra cash so we aren't gonna bother? Or is it that we do not have the required materials/manpower to immunize boys as well? If its the former then I would say we just need to accept that perhaps we should just increase the budget and deal with the ramifications that follow to try and remain consistently ethical. If its the latter then its far more justifiable IM…
/r/MensRights17/09/15 07:25 AM
3

Wait a minute you are telling me that its possible for a member of one community to disagree with an aspect of that community!? Why that is heresy! Please out him as the scumberg that he is in the red pill community. I should have known that he was a lizard/feminazi all this time!
/r/MensRights15/09/15 08:01 PM
1

Truly disgusting. You are doing good work out there keep it up!
/r/MensRights06/09/15 08:30 PM
1

Thank you very much! I'd do it myself but I don't have a wiki account and somebody with a longer editing history would have better odds of success.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 08:24 AM
1

Didn't read that and the link is broken. That and sadly 5 lines ago is far enough away to cause confusion. I still believe that it should be as clear as humanly possible to instantly prove the claim. Typically when reading an scientific article one doesn't have to look under section X to find Y. So I can say this study proves Y. However I think its important to state right next to it you have to look at section X though because of yada yada. When directly citing numbers accuracy is incredibly im…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 09:44 PM
1

Sorry that analogy just doesn't make any sense. What I am advocating with the same analogy would be more something like. The nazi study states of the people we killed 20% were a bunch of niggers. If it turns out their definition of nigger also included white people from africa for some arbitrary reason then if I made a follow up study I would have to clarify: When they state nigger they actually mean X. Thus I need to account for this figure and conclude that of the stated 20% Y% may be white pe…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 09:26 PM
1

No I am saying it is twisting THEIR terminology. Huge difference. I am saying that a statement needs to be made that states: their terminology is wrong this is why without further ado with this change to correct terminology we can use their data to prove the 80% of rape figure definitely. If looking directly at the study without any outside knowledge it is confusing. During the section that talks about rape in that study it gives a different number then we give. Because the study is fucking stup…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 09:20 PM
1

TBH that is pretty much what I think should be added somewhere in that section not much more.
/r/MensRights04/09/15 09:15 PM
1

There is a difference between commenting upon and using the data as part of your argument. Even then I would say once or twice when they say X I mean Y. If I used their data to represent my argument and then changed their definitions to suit my purposes. I would feel obliged to mention that I changed the terminology because I believed that the nazis were being well nazis. I can demonize their terminology and use their data in the same breath and be honest and moral in doing so. What I can't do i…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 08:52 PM
1

Well just because something is tough doesn't mean its not the right thing to do. Its bullshit that we have to point out such a disgusting lie that being said I think its important to point it out furthermore if we don't we become no different from some of the people that we work very hard to not become. I don't think its right to take a scientific document and play with definitions just because their definitions are obviously wrong and not disclose it. I don't think its right to simultaneously h…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 07:41 PM
1

Welp this matter seems to be settled from the looks of it. I'll let the thread run its natural life for a bit and then I'll send it to the mods and see if they agree with my premise that the FAQ should be adjusted slightly to clarify exactly which data points are being used from the CID study and the justification behind doing so. It makes perfect sense and I don't disagree with it but I think full disclosure is important which means I don't think taking sexual violence and turning it in to rape…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 07:19 PM
1

Well the fact that they played those word games in the study in the first place is disgraceful. That being said if we use their statistics we shouldn't take their "sexual violence" and turn it in to rape without disclosing that fact. That's exactly the kind of thing that outrage warriors do and I would rather we don't use any of their tactics on purpose or as is most likely in this case by accident.
/r/MensRights04/09/15 07:16 PM
1

Ah yes that would do it. Welp that's some fucked up shit. In that case an addendum in the FAQ to explain that atrocity in that section might be a good idea. As it stands somebody can read that section see the twist from talking about sexual violence to 80% of men are raped and start getting dubious. It might be more convincing to a true skeptic if there is full disclosure. Heck I am on your side and even I looked at that difference and started wondering if there was a chance that I was getting h…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 07:08 PM
1

Still to suddenly change definition is an iffy tactic/mistake. It should be corrected IMO. Clarified rather. Lets leave the word games to the extremists.
/r/MensRights04/09/15 05:03 PM
2

Yes. I am not doing a very good job today. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/wiki/faq#wiki_21._are_male_victims_of_sexual_assault.2C_harassment.2C_or_rape_often_taken_less_seriously_than_their_female_counterparts_or_discriminated_against.3F EDIT: Think I found the exact cause of the discrepancy on page 24 of the CID pdf: Most perpetrators of all forms of sexual violence against women were male. For female rape victims, 98.1% reported only male perpetrators. Additionally, 92.5% of female victim…
/r/MensRights04/09/15 03:22 PM
1

Wiki quote: 93.3% reported that all the perpetrators were male. Faq quote: 80% of the men were raped by women. Discrepancy probably exists because of language change within the FAQ I think. It goes from talking about who is perpetuating sexual violence to 80% is raped. Sexual violence isn't the same as rape.
/r/MensRights04/09/15 03:16 PM
1

Damnit something went wrong with making the thread. This link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_rape#Female-on-male_rape
/r/MensRights04/09/15 03:05 PM
7

That and MRA's on youtube will typically be covering "breaking news". This has been going for so long now that its not very breaking so unless something new and spicy happens its "old news". Probably any MRA activist worth his salt has either made a video on the topic or at the very least thought about it/discussed it at some level. But one can't have a popular channel and at the same time release the same video every week in a row.
/r/MensRights04/09/15 07:11 AM
3

Sadly IMO if the gender gap is ever closed it will probably be due to females getting harsher sentences rather then males getting lowered sentences to be on equal footing with females.
/r/MensRights04/09/15 07:08 AM
3

I am seeing a lot of radical statements here. First of all unless you have a reason to believe that your wife is very malicious just talk to her. Just sit down and say "hey our kids said so and so and this concerns me deeply and I think its because of this." If your wife is somewhat reasonable that should be enough to open some dialogue on the issue. Just try to pick a decent time to talk to her about it. Opening a thought provoking emotional argument at the end of a long dreary day is probably …
/r/MensRights19/08/15 08:35 PM
3

"Legal system not to blame" Source: Legal system Brilliant journalism there busters.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 08:14 PM
2

Due to consent, health and safety concerns as of right now bestiality is a pretty practical taboo. Problem is defining harmless in an area where creatures cannot consent in the way that humans can. How intelligent does an animal have to be before it has "no rights" and other such ethical questions. Furthermore to bring it back to the silly republican joke there is no practical reason behind marrying an animal. Really as far as risk vs reward goes legalizing bestiality carries terrible odds. Even…
/r/MensRights17/08/15 03:10 PM
0

I remember when people all laughed at republicans when they said "AND ANIMALS WILL BE NEXT!" They are still largely bigoted idiots in my mind but in the end they might not have been entirely wrong.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 10:37 AM
0

Well there are genuine nice guys but a problem that is worth noting about "nice guys" is that they sometimes put women on a pedestal. Viewing a person by an idealized fictionalized version of them only is a way of disrespecting them simply by not being able to actually see them for what they really are and thus not treat them as a person. That being said I agree with you overall.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 10:24 AM
1

Hmm fair enough.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 10:15 AM
3

Well one its just good ethics to do so but two you get autobanned if you post too much of your content exclusively in a sub (not sure if all subs or just specific subs). I think it might be an option to get rid of that problem if you talk with the mods though.
/r/MensRights16/08/15 09:47 PM
0

Not bleeding on the workfloor is considered a luxury these days? Man I support MRA issues but did you even read the article? Absolute statements/idealogies/principles are usually (so tempting to say always) bad mmmkay?
/r/MensRights16/08/15 04:15 PM
1

Reminds me of the story of the scientist that discovered the importance of washing hands. Media/people do the exact same thing with that story as they did with this one.
/r/MensRights16/08/15 04:10 PM
5

Just don't self promote too often and always be honest with it and its perfectly fine. In other words keep going.
/r/MensRights16/08/15 03:58 PM
1

As its tiny and completely illegible it might have slipped by the censors.
/r/MensRights16/08/15 12:09 AM
2

Keeping a significant male-female friendship up could lead to VERY awkward situations though. Although she had a girlfriend at the time so that shouldn't have been too much of a problem.
/r/MensRights15/08/15 11:29 PM
3

Megan can actually date her attraction to silver foxes back to childhood and a certain ex-President from the late 1980s/early 1990s: "I think this is all George H.W. Bush's fault," she explains. "From an early age I just found older men to seem reliable and supportive. In middle school we had an assignment to write a letter to a famous person. I thought George H.W. Bush (he was president at the time) was the most handsome man in the world. The rest of my sixth grade class felt this way about Don…
/r/MensRights15/08/15 02:43 PM
1

Unless one of the parties admits that they are lying, or if there is audio/video of the entire event, there is literally no way to know whether the even represents a rape, or a false rape accusation. Eh violently raping somebody often leaves its marks so that isn't entirely true. That being said for the milder varieties that is most certainly true.
/r/MensRights15/08/15 01:01 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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