TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Niall87 Archive

View 0 posts and 79 comments by Niall87 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Murder is taking things a bit far, mainly because it is personal (you know who the victim is). But think of taxes, how many people would pay their full share if they knew they were not going to get caught? Or piracy, how many people would pay full price for a game/cd/dvd if they knew there would be no consequences? In both cases the number of people who would do the right thing is miniscule. I'm not saying that there are no morally strong individuals, but that it's more like Pandora's box. Also …
/r/MensRights20/04/13 06:02 PM
-1

You're missing the point. You are imagining one group of individuals over everyone. That's not it. You need each group with power to be supervised by another, independent group. Corruption always runs rampant at the top, because there is no-one keeping it in check. It would also be more useful if you abolished campaign funding, and political parties. It is no longer that unrealistic with the Internet.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 05:43 PM
1

$$$$ Why else?
/r/MensRights20/04/13 05:37 PM
-1

Have you lived with the tribes in the Amazon or Africa? That's very impressive. Humans are corrupt by their own nature, but they have become lazy and apathetic. And I never said I was not corrupt, of course I am, if I can get away with something, I'll do it. My problem is I'm not above judgement, so I don't try to get away with it, because I will get punished.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 05:36 PM
-6

I think the people could be incontrol of the government, when they stop being lazy idiots.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 05:20 PM
-6

Ever hear of a referendum? Who said they have to be in charge of the rules?
/r/MensRights20/04/13 05:17 PM
-3

Reading EPIC MEGA fail. I never said give a small group of people power. I said those who have power need to have others making sure they're not abusing said power.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 05:17 PM
-3

Why? Why? By it's very definition a private organization is only interested in profit, so sides with the highest bidder. Humans are corrupt and power corrupts, so we should give some humans in Capitol Hill immense power over our money, families, food, and so on, and they will not take advantage of that--yet give humans an inch and they'll take a mile. You're contradicting yourself. No, I'm not, I never said give more power to Caitol Hill. The point is a power is needed to reign in Capitol Hill, …
/r/MensRights20/04/13 04:40 PM
-5

Run by rules, with constant oversight. The reason corruption is so rampant is because no-one polices the ones with power and money. They are above the law. The only way to solve that is to bring the law above them, not get rid of it like you libertardians want.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 04:32 PM
1

That is exactly what humans would do, out of jealousy. Why should he see, when no-one else can?
/r/MensRights18/04/13 08:43 PM
2

I get averages tend to be skewed, but isn't the average higher than 100 now? I remember hearing that the average IQ has been increasing with every generation. Maybe only younger people should be allowed on juries.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 03:06 PM
1

High standards? Not believing a lot of bullshit is a high standard? Then either jurers should be given an IQ test before hand, or the judge must intervene when the lawyer spieling out a load of crap which has nothing to do with the case (although that would require judges to actually be completely impartial and for them to be held accountable)
/r/MensRights18/04/13 12:15 PM
2

Why is it not fair? They should be imune to the crap by now, it's been in the public eye for decades, jsut think of politicians. Ignorance is not a defense in the eyes of the law, so why would it be a defense for those enforcing the law?
/r/MensRights18/04/13 11:56 AM
2

he's legally and professionally obligated to do his "best". But a lawyer's best should not include slander. They should face consequences for such crap.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 11:54 AM
0

On the one hand eye for eye is a stupid logic, it just leaves everybody blind and does no-one any good. On the other she must be punished, and an example must be made of her. It will be very hard balance the two. In the end I doubt the punishment will even come near matching the crime.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 11:53 AM
-29

A private organization? As bad as it is, your suggestion would completely get rid of any hope of impartiality. Great idea. What next? Let a private organization decide what chemicals companies can put in food? The current situation is pretty crap, and very corrupt, but what you literarians choose to ignore is that humans are corrupt by their very nature, give them an inch and they take a mile. The only hope of preventing this is an impartial central power. Creating private organizations to deal …
/r/MensRights18/04/13 10:15 AM
1

Why not? Biologically, how useful is a uterus without testicles? And how useful are testicles without a uterus? Surely if one if pretty much useless without the other, they are of the same worth.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 10:12 PM
-11

And how well would no laws work in custody battles? Are you just going to use brute strength? What next? Why not just shoot the other person, that would solve all the problems.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 09:13 PM
1

Yeah I got that, you said it was mainstream in Oz, I was askign if feminism was not also mainstream.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 10:07 AM
1

Feminism's not?
/r/MensRights02/04/13 07:36 PM
3

But men can't be raped /s
/r/MensRights29/03/13 11:54 PM
1

I didn't really follow the story in India, what did the male friend on the bus do? Was he involved in the rape?
/r/MensRights23/03/13 08:53 PM
18

Yeah, so if you don't want that then don't poke someone else's eye out to begin with.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:54 PM
21

Cirucumcision isn't in the best interest of the child but women are allowed to do it. Let's lay the blame where it belongs, circumcised men are more likely to push for their son to be circumcised than women are. The only thing you can say about women (or feminists of both sexes) is the hypocrisy in their different reactions to male and female circumcision.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:57 PM
1

Two were fired for smoking on the premise. One was fired for using his phone during his shift And women don't do those things? Odd, I've been working in education for a few years now, in different countries and with colleagues of many different nationalities. Anywhere I've worked female teachers tend to be more likely to use their phone during work (in fact the last few female American teachers in my current school would even leave class just to use their phone during lesson, and were sacked for…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 11:33 AM
6

The problem with that is he didn't interupt with a slur, he exposed a sexual organ just as some of them were doing. Are you saying breats are acceptable but penises aren't? Personally I find breats far more attractive, apart from that I don't see much difference in the act.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 03:26 PM
0

"Personal boundaries"? I've never met a mediterranean person who even knows what personal boundaries are. Trying to get someone arrested because they stood too close to you is moronic. There is no mention of an aggresive tone, he asked one question and then walked away.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 02:54 PM
1

It was a joke, it's a two person dish so you have to split the bill for it unless you want to actually weigh how much each person ate.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:57 PM
1

Because it comes as a two person minimum (at least when ever I've seen it on the menu).
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:54 PM
1

I am only referring to places were the prices are within a few bucks/euro of each other. Of course if one person has lobster and the other plain rice then even thinking of sharing the bill is a douche thing to do, but then so is ordering lobster to begin with.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:46 PM
0

There are three problems with that 1) the last person you mention is an asshole not a friend 2) you either have the exact change with you all the time or you waste your time and the staffs time over a couple of euros 3) you're approximating, dishes normally cost approximately the same to begin with unless you're having a completely different meal (which is just weird), so what's the point? Going Dutch is a fucking annoying system, it is a waste of time to quibble over less than five euros when y…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:44 PM
0

Over here if you're having a burger and I'm having a steak I'd feel a bit weird sharing the bill tbh because we'd be in very different restaurants. Unless we're in one of those "posh"/"trendy" places in which case your burger is probably more expensive than my steak anyway.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:55 PM
0

But that's the point, it is weird for one person to be eating something very different from the rest. If we go for a pizza everyone has a pizza and the range is from 5 euros to 7 euros max. If we go for a Chinese we all have a starter (between 1 and 3 euros) a main (between 5 and 7) and a side/rice (3-4). In the long run it averages out. If then just one individual has dessert they'll be paying extra for that, but getting your calculator out to divide tiny differences is just a pain in the ass a…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:52 PM
0

Which was my point from the start. Split the cost, don't count the pennies or drops. If everyone's had more or less the same then everyone's bill is going to be more or less the same in which case "going dutch" is just a pain in the ass, and unnecessarily complicates things for the restaurant staff who have to ring up a number of receipts.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:48 PM
0

Not by me, I couldn't give a damn if someone is tight enough to kick up a fuss over a couple of euros, but I've noticed that friends/colleagues of friends who do that stuff never get invited again, and I must say I've never had a friend or colleague i invited who did it (in fact if anything I know a couple of people who insist on paying for the whole bottle or wine or what not because they had one glass more). edit: also the ones who do that, creating a lot more work for the restaurant staff, te…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:40 PM
0

Which completely ignores things that get shared; do Americas really never share entrees or wine?
/r/MensRights09/10/12 03:37 PM
0

It's a custom I think, I don't know it is a law. But basically if you sit in the restaurant you pay the basic service charge and get "unlimited" bread and water thrown in.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:21 PM
0

Mandatory service charge is exactly what the name says, in restaurants in many European countries (well at least Uk, Ireland, Italy, Spain, France, and a couple of Eastern European countries) there is a service charge already included in the bill (normally covers bread, water and cover), it is usually a couple of Euros and it is why isn't really a "tipping" culture in Europe. I don't know how it is in Germany because I don't know many Germans, but I do know a lot of Dutch and I've never actually…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:18 PM
-2

Going Dutch is everyone pays for their own and having the bill itemized to divide everything up precisely, in a normal meal between friends/people dating it is unusual for one person to eat a lot more than the other. It is also unusual for one person to drink alone and the most common drink with food is wine which rarely comes in individual glasses. Anytime I've been out with friends and friends of friends, etc. and one person starts with the "well I had x, y, and z so I should be paying __" tha…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 02:10 PM
0

It goes without saying that if one person's meal costs significantly less then you don't split evenly, but personally I've rarely come across that situation, normally the difference would be a couple of euros. Sometimes you pay a bit more sometimes a bit less. It's like the "rounds" principle in the UK and Ireland, who gives a fuck if you lose out on a couple of bucks if you've had a good night?
/r/MensRights09/10/12 01:43 PM
3

So I'm supposed to remember how many mls of wine I had then divide the total amount in the bottle by the amount I had to find out how much I owe on the wine? Same with bottles of water. How about shared starters? Do I calculate based on number or weight? What about if someone eats one of my chips/wings/anything, do I ask them to pay for that? What about the service charge? Do I expect to pay less because I only ordered one plate were as someone else might have ordered two? It's not really a ques…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 01:40 PM
1

Are you indoctrinated or stupid? By not feeding a baby we are actively causing its death, not circumcising we are causing absolutely no harm. No one suffers, what about those who actually die because of the procedure? A minority true, but a minority dying from a useless procedure which is inflicted upon them for no good reason is still far too many. As for negative consequences how do you know? How can anyone tell? It is a decision which is irreversible so there is no way to compare the effects …
/r/MensRights09/10/12 12:51 PM
-2

That's way too complicated, you actually have to keep count of what you've had, how do you do that after a few pints? I prefer the Italian style, total bill/ number of people eating .
/r/MensRights09/10/12 12:31 PM
2

to mutilate: To disfigure by damaging irreparably. Can the piece that is cut off be reattached? No, hence it is mutilation. And the second part is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Many things do not affect anyone but the person subjected to them. For starters circumcision does not affect the parents and doctor who have it done but only the child it is done to; hence why it is immoral, the child has no say and once it's done it cannot be undone. There is nothing wrong with a consenting adult …
/r/MensRights09/10/12 12:11 PM
4

Do to "their" newborns? They are mutilating a defenseless child for no good reason, only a shit human being would not care.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 11:01 AM
1

Well why don't you cut off your son's eyelids then? It's not like they're all that important. While you're at it, what about your earlobes. After all it's just skin.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 10:43 AM
2

we had the same thing only it was the p.e. teacher who divivded the teams, and in whatever sport as soon as the boys started to completely dominate the teacher who was refing would start to play silly monkey. Still didn't stop us from winning. The most plesant was volleyball because the girls team was supposed to be the best around and there wasn't even a proper boys team, but we still destroyed them everytime.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 08:18 AM
2

Good for you, doesn't mean others are willing to forgive or forget what was done to them. One of my friends' parents divorced because the mother wanted him cut and the father didn't, she got full custody, he got cut, and he hasn't spoken to his mother since he turned 18. I can’t say I don’t understand his hate for her. Luckily for me neither of my parents are complete idiots.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 04:56 PM
2

He was sentenced to 18 months, the appeals court judge reduced it to 9 months suspended, the title is still correct the original sentence for this heinous crime was 18 months. Evans has already spent three months in jail for what seems like nothing more than a hideously unfortunate typo, and still has a sex crime conviction against his name And he had already spent three months in jail. “It is difficult to conclude that he was targeting anyone,” Judge Elias concluded, before freeing – but not cl…
/r/MensRights29/09/12 11:15 AM
2

Well I don't see why they shouldn't hate the parents who did it to them, but far more importantly they should know/be shamed into knowing not to do the same to their own sons, which is a lot more helpful.
/r/MensRights29/09/12 10:52 AM
1

The lack of contraceptive rights is the fault of the church and the idiots who allow corruption (religion) to guide their morality, fortunately religion is dying in Ireland (albeit not soon enough), but it is entirely linked to religion not sexism. This is not about one 15-year-old this is about a law which is pure sexism against men, or better boys, and about ruining their lives for no goddamn good reason.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 09:15 AM
10

Wouldn't the child support be considered reparations for damage caused in this case? Does America have that? Like if you beat a guy up without cause you get stuck with the medical bills and possibly a lot more.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 08:13 PM
1

It's basically how I see the P&G add before the Olympics which was thanking moms for raising the athletes. It's targeted at women because men tendd to buy the product they know and are familiar with, all the advertisement is more likely to win over a woman than a man.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 09:08 AM
1

Because that would be barbaric /s As an outsider I've never seen the American justice system to be about anything but punishment. Although aren't a lot of your jails basically private institutions? Which would make it about profit.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 12:34 PM
10

Make sure to keep copies of it, if nothing comes from it go striaght to the boss with the copies. If nothing still comes of it and things don't change...sue? Find another job?
/r/MensRights19/09/12 06:47 PM
6

Story 4 is common place and stupid, when I was working as a waiter in a hotel/restaurant/bar/conference centre whilst at Uni I was hired as a waiter. Most of our clients were foreign business people from and the manager had hired me because I can speak two languages fluently, two at a B2 level and can “survive” (A2) in two others. Despite that whenever the manager wasn't there (i.e. the assistant manager or a supervisor was in charge) the girls (most could barely speak English) got to work the r…
/r/MensRights16/09/12 08:24 PM
3

Well you can handle more than two at a time, you just do them all terribly.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 06:16 PM
1

I guessed as much, does any country have a minister for the status of men?
/r/MensRights12/09/12 03:06 PM
16

Not if it's done to you when you're way too young to object.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:38 AM
1

I like how they openly admit women are a minority in both cases and then claim this some how makes helping them more important. Also what the fuck is a Minister for the Status of Women? And am I reading it right that the minister for Women is also the minister for housing?
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:30 AM
0

"Innocent" refers to being innocent, he was innocent of one crime but not of others.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 06:58 AM
1

Innocent man? He had two outstanding warrants, one for resisting arrest with a deadly weapon, he was innocent of rape but not an "innocent man". I still wish in cases like the woman could be accused of manslaughter or something (didn't one of the CSI's have a case where SWAT were used to kill a guy?)
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:41 AM
1

I said this in the original thread, it was allegedly physical and emotional torture that went on for months, it is not the "right" thing to do, but when you get pushed that far reacting with extreme violence is not surprising. Of course she should have gone to the police and gone through the legal system, but when you're at the end of your tether you no longer see things clearly. If the man did the things he is being accused of then the way I see it his blood is on his own hands. If he didn't sh…
/r/MensRights07/09/12 06:31 AM
0

"Some are more equal then others."
/r/MensRights02/09/12 04:21 PM
4

If you're going to carry a weapon you better know how to use it and be ready to use it, a guy in my class used to always carry a knife, until he got mugged and had his knife taken out of his hand, he's just lucky he didn't get stabbed with it.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 09:10 PM
1

real men carry an axe ;)
/r/MensRights26/08/12 09:07 PM
7

Didn't the women in Turkey vote no when they were asked to vote on whether women should be allowed vote in 90's?
/r/MensRights22/08/12 12:00 PM
1

Or I could live there, I've lived in Milan (Italy) most of my life, spent a couple of years in Madrid (Spain) and three years in Manchester (UK). Italy is definitely not a great place for homosexual men (religious influence), but very few of the men here are what I'd consider masculine. edit: misread your statement, you're right Italy is not a great place for masculinity. edit2: although thinking back the UK was far more annoying, anywhere I worked you couldn't have a beard/had to be clean-shave…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:55 PM
1

Isn't sexual assault a lesser offence? So the vocabulary used means women cannot commit rape.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:42 PM
1

I don't know much about any of the northern European nations, but I definitely wouldn't cite the UK as one of the least do they still have the word penis in their definition of rape? And I know for a fact all it takes to severely limit those fathers rights is for the mother to make unsubstantiated claims the father has abused the child (happened to my uncle in his recent divorce case).
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:13 PM
0

What countries in Europe are man-hating? The only one I can think of is the Uk because they always go way over the top in their political correctness bullshit.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 01:02 PM
2

And punishing the moron judge (county judge) who originally breached the father's rights.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 11:50 PM
2

To be fair aiming the ad at mothers makes sense in my opinion. It has nothing to do with what is actually done in the house, rather in my experience men tend to buy the product they are familiar with and are unlikely to change it unless the other product is discounted or such, and this was also explained to me by some of my students who work at Nielsen the marketing research company, men are less likely to be affected by this sort of advertisement/advertisement for this sort of products. Also wo…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 09:10 AM
9

If that job requires those physical standards then lowering the required results to allow women in is only reducing the quality of those doing the job.
/r/MensRights07/07/12 09:19 PM
1

I was actually being facetious, I agree entirely with your point. Although personally I would have taken it further, using complex language to describe simple things is not a sign of intelligence or knowledge it is the exact opposite. Explaining the most difficult things in the simplest words is more difficult and productive than using "big" words to talk about simple things. However the length and difficulty of the words used does actually affect an argument/discussion/debate, especially in an …
/r/MensRights02/06/12 11:55 AM
0

Actually you're wrong, use of low syllabic words and a simpler vocabulary make the discussion available/accessible to a larger audience reducing communication barriers and preventing misunderstandings, this is especially true when discussing things on the internet where many people are not mother tongue speakers. So not only is it not necessary, as you say, it is actually counter-productive.
/r/MensRights02/06/12 11:16 AM
2

I'm no lawyer and don't live in the the US, so I'm not familiar with your law, but linguistically this is criminally negligent homicide. She committed a crime, drink driving, it resulted in a death. No matter what a month and a half in jail is very, very light imo and the judge claiming its a "severe sentence" is offensive to the victim. Overall I agree prosecutors should do their best to not overcharge, but this reminds me of a case in Italy where a guy celebrating New Year's shot a gun off in …
/r/MensRights11/05/12 02:49 PM
2

Correct me if I'm wrong but SHE claims the other car "was over the centre line" and she was driving drunk, I missed where her claim is confirmed. I have enough trouble believing anything my drunk alter-ego does, sees or says and I've never driven drunk, why should she be believed? Based on the article the only proven fact is she got drunk then decided to drive, and that resulted in a death.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 08:57 PM
1

The wage gap is a myth. "Glass ceilings" are not, but read up on it a bit, or even just read the papers claiming the gap and you realise that in the vast majority of cases a woman and a man working the same job and same hours are paid the same. Men on average are paid more because 1) it is easier for a man to reach top positions in a company (a few years ago only 1.5% of Fortune 500 CEOs were women, I don't know the number now but I doubt it is much better) 2) Men are more likely to take on dang…
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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