TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Nion_zaNari Archive

View 0 posts and 123 comments by Nion_zaNari 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

Feminism is the prevailing movement fighting against gender equality
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/09/25 02:30 AM
3

Your argument might work if we lived in a reality where the rich and powerful fought on the frontlines while the poor didn't get to. But we don't, so it doesn't.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/09/25 11:47 PM
6

I'll take that as a no. Thanks for proving my point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 08:39 PM
2

Is there any definition I could give where you could provide an example of someone being ostracized from any feminist space for doing that?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 08:33 PM
3

Like how North Korea is about democracy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 08:25 PM
8

So, you have admitted that the feminist movement is perfectly capable of removing people who say and believe things the rest of the movement opposes. I have yet to see any feminist in a feminist space get any negative reactions for any level of misandry. If they wanted to, they would.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/25 08:24 PM
15

You seem to conveniently have forgotten about conscription. The vast majority of soldiers in Ukraine were forcibly conscripted, and so never had the opportunity to be "applicants". By the numbers in that article, a bit less than 9000 women have joined. That is not even 1% of the total number of Ukrainian soldiers.
/r/MensRights30/05/25 03:19 PM
8

I think men learn not to talk about being autistic because for them it typically closes doors and lead to problems, whereas for women it's much more likely to open doors and lead to assistance.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/05/25 10:52 PM
3

How do you know that's what the study did? Not the person you responded to, but I remember my mother participating in a few studies like this one. She found it quite amusing that it instructed her to count all the times the washing machine was running as housework she had done, even if she wasn't involved in any way. Same with the dishwasher.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/25 01:14 AM
41

That's kind of why I said men and women hurt men. ...you didn't say that. You said men hurt men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/02/25 04:56 AM
4

Ah, you're just a troll. Good to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/25 06:16 AM
3

Your strawman seems to have put on its pants backwards. Your logic is completely flawed. In the argument you are strawmanning, person A wants X while person B doesn't, but did in previous relationships. In the argument you are presenting, person A wants X, which they did in previous relationships, while person B doesn't. These are not even remotely the same argument. Expecting someone to be interested in something they really liked in the past is not the same as expecting someone to be intereste…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/25 04:42 AM
0

The logistics and cost of doing routine paternity tests would be a tiny fraction of the logistics and cost that are currently done to make sure babies aren't accidentally switched in the hospital. Would you be ok with a 10% chance to take home the wrong baby?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/25 10:21 PM
2

That says 2%-8% can be conclusively proved to be false. https://rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system RAINN estimates that less than 1% are convicted, meaning the accusations were conclusively proved to be true. Why should we assume that the remaining 91%-97% are all true?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 06:50 AM
1

Or, 2% are actually true, which means 98% are false accusations but the majority of the time they’ll get away with it due to lack of evidence. What evidence are you using to determine that all the cases that had insufficient evidence were actually true?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 06:36 AM
2

If 2-4% are proven false and less than 2% are proven true, why would you assume that all of the remaining ones were true?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 11:44 PM
2

Despite your clearly staggering brain power, you seem to have completely missed that I'm not the person you were previously talking to. You might want to pay more attention in the future to prevent people from thinking you are a complete moron. Neither of those links help your argument at all. They mention masks, but only as a mild suggestion, and don't mention children at all. As evidence of your stance that toddlers should be forced to wear masks, they are completely useless. https://www.fhi.n…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 10:23 PM
2

You have presented the same amount of evidence for masking being an effective way to stop COVID as you have for yelling racial slurs being an effective way to stop COVID. Why aren't you out yelling racial slurs at toddlers right now? Do you want them all to die from COVID?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 01:32 AM
3

Sure, a paternity test can cost hundreds of dollars if you want a single one done as a private individual. But so do any of the hundreds of tests and procedures that are currently done during a pregnancy. Through the magic of economies of scale (and some collective bargaining, if you live in the more civilized parts of the world), the real cost would be a tiny fraction of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 10:42 PM
6

It's like trying to hold Christianity accountable for the West Burrough Baptist Church. Technically they are Christians, and the major (and even most conservative) denominations all disagree with them and rebuke them, but they are loud and don't care what other denominations have to say. I wouldn't disagree that Christianity should hold some accountability for them, but I am baffled at what they could do to change it. The difference is that other Christians do disagree with them and rebuke them.…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/24 10:59 PM
1

Circumcision in the US happens because the corn flakes man thought masturbation was dirty. It's literally a purity culture.
/r/MensRights26/11/24 06:07 AM
0

Saying that something can't be a democracy because it's a republic is like saying something can't be green because it's a rectangle.
/r/MensRights10/10/24 04:37 AM
3

If you were foraging for mushrooms and didnt know which ones would kill you and which ones were edible would you eat them? Probably not right? Would you blame the edible mushrooms for not being identifiable from the poison mushrooms? No. But you still wouldnt go around eating mushrooms right? You realize you are quoting Nazi propaganda, right?
/r/MensRights03/05/24 10:56 PM
2

Actually, they are kind of using the word more correctly than you. Shakespeare wrote about cuckolds in the men being cheated on sense, and that meaning of the word is still the "real" one today. The fetish meaning of the word is much, much more recent. It's similar to the word "slave". The existence of a consensual fetish version of the concept does not make someone wrong for talking about slavery in a way that doesn't match the fetish version of the word.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/24 05:57 AM
3

Can you provide any actual examples of men being given non-custodial sentences in similar situations?
/r/MensRights22/04/24 09:36 PM
1

In Norway less than 30% of those who are drafted are women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/10/23 03:25 PM
11

It might also be a problem if other people are capable of lying. Say, people who hate you, or who hate men in general. By your logic, murders aren't a problem. Just don't do anything bad enough that anyone wants to kill you for it.
/r/MensRights13/06/23 09:58 AM
1

we don't want something that has personally liberated us to become a misandrist platform. And yet you are here defending feminism and not in feminist spaces calling out misandry.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/23 04:00 AM
5

bioessentialist, radical feminist ideology in which males are always oppressors and females are innocent victims of oppression. As opposed to the other kind of feminism, where men are always oppressors and women are innocent victims of oppression?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/04/23 12:40 AM
2

You were indeed wrong, thanks for confirming.
/r/MensRights14/02/23 04:46 PM
1

I found the page you probably took that quote from, and it quite clearly states that voluntarily giving up your parental rights only applies in the case of giving the child up for adoption. "It is difficult to voluntarily terminate parental rights. Essentially, the only way to do so is through the adoption of the child."
/r/MensRights14/02/23 03:03 AM
3

"An adult may voluntarily terminate or “sign away” their parental rights, but doing so rarely eliminates the requirement to pay child support. Generally speaking, the only situation where the courts will absolve a parent of their child support obligation is when another adult is willing to adopt the child." First Google result.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 10:25 PM
3

Terminating your parental rights doesn't terminate your child support obligation. It probably should, but it currently doesn't anywhere that I'm aware of.
/r/MensRights12/02/23 06:59 PM
0

While this may explain why the numbers for liberal women are generally lower, it does nothing to explain why the numbers for liberal women are so massively different depending on if the hypothetical cheater is a man or a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/23 11:41 PM
6

In Norway both men and women, regardless of sex and gender identity, have to undergo mandatory basic military training, and both will indiscriminately be drafted for combat roles doing wartime. In theory, yes. In practice, less than a third of those drafted are women.
/r/MensRights14/09/22 08:10 PM
4

I suspect that it's not a genuine gesture, and that anyone using it would be more likely to be arrested than to receive any help. It just doesn't seem realistic that anyone would pick that obvious (and politically charged) a name for it if they were actually looking to help male victims.
/r/AntiFeminists16/07/22 11:19 PM
0

A miserable little pile of secrets! But enough talk! Have at you!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/21 02:45 AM
8

Really ridiculous that these people would try and pretend like they're making a grand statement when the only things they've really done is use a few grammatical phrases that carry no content whatsoever. Their text included the same ideas (but applied to a different group), presented in the same order, but rephrased enough to not be immediately detected as plagiarism. Personally, I'm opposed to the ideas presented in Mein Kampf, not the specific phrasing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/04/21 02:28 AM
9

You are a conspiracy theorist, not a leftist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/04/21 07:12 PM
9

There's a huge difference between not being able to isolate every variable, and being essentially a blogger. There are many good reasons not to publish Mein Kampf in a scientific journal. One of the comparatively lesser ones is that it's entirely an expression of personal opinion. Even if one accepts the argument that the paraphrasing removed the morally and ethically objectionable parts, you still have a scientific journal accepting what is essentially a blog post about the authors feelings on …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/03/21 03:40 AM
6

But if a non-feminist who wants to legalize prostitution gets in an argument with one of the feminists who wants to ban porn, a feminist who also wants to legalize prostitution is much more likely to step in to support their fellow feminist than to step in to support the person who, in theory, shares their position. Internal disagreements within feminism might exist, but they never seem to be strong enough to make a dent in their tribalism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/11/20 05:03 AM
3

You are technically right in the sense that there exists a political movement named the identitarian movement that is far-right. But, "identitarian" has been in use as a term separate from that movement for quite a while now (though most people who use it in this new way would probably include any member of the identitarian movement in it). From what I've observed, it's generally used to encompass various groups on both sides that actually have rather similar views but simply have different in-g…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/10/20 12:42 AM
8

She consistently uses "bias" or "discrimination", repeatedly, to describe what is happening to this father, and only uses "sexism" the one time it applies to women.
/r/MensRights29/09/20 09:13 PM
1

You can't generalize on the sub, unless you are a (particular brand of mod-approved) feminist. Most of my deleted comments there have happened after I copy-pasted the exact phrasing from a feminist poster after the mods had ruled that those posts weren't generalizing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/09/20 06:28 PM
3

I looked it up and there doesn't seem to be a part 2. Or twitter is being weird and not showing them as part of the same thread. https://twitter.com/NSPCC/status/1100414188403384320
/r/MensRights12/07/20 12:46 PM
9

But the same argument you can also "prove" that men aren't the social majority in Saudi Arabia, given that all the problems that women there face are all present elsewhere as well. Your arguments only work if you start from the assumption that you are right.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/07/20 05:22 PM
2

So stats that don't conform to your faith can be discarded, but stats that do conform to your faith should be trusted implicitly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/20 07:50 AM
1

I have refuted every point you've made, and you haven't even responded to any of the points I've made. Also, you might want to take a look at a globe sometime. Time zones are a thing. The world doesn't revolve around you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/20 07:25 AM
1

Kindly go away, bigot.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/20 07:08 AM
1

But you don't have the scientific and statistical understanding to know men and women shouldn't be treated as the same group. I believe that both men and black people are disproportionately affected by police brutality, and that serious police reform is needed to address both. (And police brutality in general as well. Having police brutalizing people in a completely statistically fair distribution would still suck.) You believe that black people are disproportionately affected by police brutalit…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/06/20 07:03 AM
4

If you don't care about men, why are you on this subreddit?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 05:30 PM
2

Sir, that is quite alarming to realize a Black Man has close to 3 times the chance to die compared to a White Man. Yet you seem quite unconcerned that a Man has close to 20 times the chance to die compared to a Woman.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 04:10 AM
3

Given that you found his arguments regarding crime rates unconvincing, I'm sure that your argument for why the proper focus of the protests against police brutality should be race and not gender (or both) despite the disparity being even larger for gender than for race does not rely on any such statistical evidence. Would you mind sharing said argument?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/06/20 02:04 AM
3

Your insistence that the law being equal on paper necessarily means that things will be equal in practice is indeed extremely dumb.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/20 01:18 PM
5

White people and black people have the exact same rights protecting them from police brutality. Is the idea that black people are disproportionally targeted by police brutality a false premise?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/20 03:33 AM
1

Tenets. Due process rights don't pay rent to constitutions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/05/20 04:18 AM
7

I am pointing out that unless the point of your post was to demonstrate the massive flaws in your own argument, you should have put a bit more thought into it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 07:31 AM
7

I'd say that the slave owner is generally better off, despite having to depend on the slaves to keep a roof over their head.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 07:21 AM
2

in general, women had less rights than men without it being a fucking competition for who was the best victim
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/05/20 07:14 AM
2

If we don't defend them, we might end up with no slefs.
/r/MensRights03/02/20 08:42 PM
27

It's kind of hilarious how she acknowledges how bad the standard feminist paradigm of 'women's problems should be fixed by changing society, men's problems should be fixed by changing men' is... and then she makes the exact same argument herself 5 seconds later.
/r/MensRights24/08/19 04:47 AM
3

The only actual difference between "I don't want to ever have children" and "I medically can't ever have children" is that the first leaves open the possibility of birth control accidentally or "accidentally" failing. Anyone who would treat the two differently is a complete asshole. If her hopes were up because she thought he merely didn't want to rather than couldn't have kids, then she was hoping to trick him into becoming a parent against his will. In this case, hope being crushed is unambigu…
/r/MensRights26/06/19 03:30 AM
4

You are the one who called your own logic retarded. If you and yourself want to have a retard slapfight, kindly leave me out of it.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 12:52 AM
7

Your logic is indeed retarded.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 12:41 AM
7

So men all like the same "type", but constantly jerk off to women they aren't attracted to?
/r/MensRights25/06/19 12:31 AM
9

Which is why women in porn aimed at men are all the same body type while men in porn aimed at women vary wildly. You know, except for the part where the exact opposite is true.
/r/MensRights25/06/19 12:24 AM
3

So terms with many years of history should never be changed because people find them hurtful?
/r/MensRights19/06/19 03:31 AM
3

Using a different term would get a lot more support behind said work. But I guess getting to use a phrase that many people feel is a personal attack is more important to you. All those young boys can go fuck themselves as long as you get to have an excuse for calling men toxic, right?
/r/MensRights19/06/19 03:04 AM
2

So your occupation believes that men are the only group that can be negatively affected by societal pressures and expectations?
/r/MensRights19/06/19 02:49 AM
3

You seem to care a lot more about the name than the concept it supposedly represents.
/r/MensRights19/06/19 02:15 AM
3

Does there exist one or more other group identities that experience negative effects from societal expectations and/or pressures? Do you use any terminology in those cases that is not poor and adversarial?
/r/MensRights19/06/19 01:27 AM
3

If "toxic masculinity" is an acceptable way to phrase it when gendered expectations and societal pressure negatively affects men, then presumably the same would hold true for other groups.
/r/MensRights19/06/19 01:25 AM
4

Name some other examples of negative societal pressures on a group being called toxic something.
/r/MensRights18/06/19 10:59 PM
5

Do you have any other examples of poor and adversarial wording that you still happily use? Are the societal pressures that adversely affect women called toxic femininity? Are the societal pressures that adversely affect black people called toxic blackness?
/r/MensRights18/06/19 10:54 PM
2

A shallow, pointless video, which won't convince anyone of anything because it doesn't even try to put forward an argument beyond declaring it's own beliefs to be true.
/r/MensRights28/04/19 11:21 PM
0

Team leader of one of the four(I think) teams working in parallel on the last part of the project. With plenty of other people working on this for decades before she got involved, and plenty of people above her in the org chart on this particular project. And yet, the media is giving her sole credit for the whole thing. EDIT: The actual leader of the entire project is named Heino Falcke, and he is actively giving credit to all 200+ people working on this project. And so is she, actually. But the…
/r/MensRights11/04/19 08:38 PM
14

Did you get your ears cut off too so you don't have to clean those? Cleaning an ear takes more effort than cleaning a penis, and there are even two of them, so there is lots of potential gain there. Oh, and you've got a whole bunch of toes. Plenty of seconds to gain by lopping off all your toes so you don't have to clean between them.
/r/MensRights12/02/19 01:36 AM
2

I suppose it makes it easier to spot sexist and racist (and other -ist) asshats if their response to an accusation is to fully admit that they are doing the sexist/racist/whatever thing they are accused of, they just insist that a different word be used to describe it.
/r/MensRights12/01/19 01:02 AM
38

Sure, you might care about men's rights. But when your instinctive reaction to seeing someone who identifies as a feminist attack men's rights is to protect the reputation of feminism rather than protect men's rights, that does rather pointedly demonstrate exactly how much you care about men's rights compared to other things.
/r/MensRights08/01/19 03:29 AM
5

And it counts as an hour of work for the woman regardless of who actually moves the clothes.
/r/MensRights23/12/18 10:33 PM
3

*flack *flak
/r/MensRights19/11/18 08:48 PM
3

No. Your math is bad.
/r/MensRights03/10/18 05:30 AM
9

Seeing how the Bevin Boys were neither in combat not female, that's a complete non-sequitur.
/r/MensRights26/06/18 11:08 PM
5

Exactly. Those people are retarded misandrists and opportunists who don't want equality. They're not behaving in a very feminist fashion. Why do you have a greater right to the term "feminist" than they do?
/r/MensRights25/06/18 06:12 PM
2

Yes, I know. I used the term 'banned' because we are in a different sub at the moment, and 'tiered' doesn't really mean much to someone who doesn't frequent FeMRADebates. And it's really telling that you describe sandboxing like that. According to the rules, sandboxing is for comments that don't break any rules, but are unreasonably antagonistic or borderline. The way you describe it as a step that comes before the tiers is accurate to how feminists are treated. But that's not how anyone else is…
/r/MensRights24/06/18 08:44 PM
5

We are talking here about literally the same statements with the genders flipped being treated differently. Even things like someone being banned for repeating an insult back to a feminist verbatim, while the feminist's post was allowed to stay.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 08:33 PM
3

Do you have any evidence that anyone who made and/or implemented the Duluth model intended for there to be a separate model used for male victims? Or even any evidence that any of them acknowledged the existence of male victims at all?
/r/MensRights24/06/18 08:26 PM
4

Menslib types are on there, but there are plenty of antifeminists and nonfeminists as well. you just have to be civil, polite, and follow the rules. As opposed to the feminists, who don't have to be civil, polite, or follow the rules.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 08:20 PM
2

it peaked my interest Piqued. It piqued your interest.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 09:52 PM
28

I'd estimate that in 90+% of heterosexual relationships I've observed, the woman regularly does most of these.
/r/MensRights09/02/18 09:41 PM
3

If you want to have 100% of the authority to decide how something is done, you also get 100% of the responsibility of making sure it gets done. I'm certain that every man who acts in the ways described in that comic has plenty of anecdotes of them trying to be more proactive and getting yelled at for doing it "wrong".
/r/MensRights08/01/18 05:27 AM
16

She deleted it when people started reacting badly to it. I've seen nothing to indicate she has in any way changed her mind.
/r/MensRights01/01/18 01:24 AM
4

This is the kind of thing I'd choose to read as a joke with multiple meanings (with the more male-friendly reading being that women are so sure they are inherently always right they couldn't even handle their toilet being on the left), because the other way lies madness. It helps that whoever decided to put this sign up probably didn't even consider any alternate ways to read it, so it's probably an attempted attack on men that kind of backfires.
/r/MensRights30/12/17 04:08 PM
5

She then said I was mostly right but feminism "needs reclaimed from the misandrists." You should ask her why defending the label of "feminism" is a bigger priority to her than speaking out against said misandrists.
/r/MensRights18/10/17 02:12 AM
1

Were there any examples using women that did show malicious intent? Or did their gender-neutrality vanish once they got beyond the accidental stuff?
/r/MensRights17/10/17 10:15 PM
5

But it probably won't draft similar numbers of men and women. Norway recently made its draft gender neutral, and ended up with about 1/3 of the conscripts being women.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 09:53 PM
7

While I mostly agree with you, there is a significant difference between "it's shitty, but not illegal" and "it's justifiable".
/r/MensRights13/09/17 05:26 PM
3

To me the bigger issue with that revelation was that pretty much every single element of it makes zero sense. High Septons don't have names, annulling a marriage after children have been born makes no sense, Rhaegar wanting his two other children to be declared bastards makes no sense (as he was obsessed with having exactly three children, because prophecy), him even needing an annulment makes no sense as Targaryens have a tradition of marry multiple people. And Rhaegar bringing Lyanna to King's…
/r/MensRights16/08/17 09:49 PM
33

A toddler wanting to use the same sign as both of their parents doesn't really seem indicative of gender dysphoria to me. If that's the strongest example they've got, it seems much more likely to me that the kid (like most children) modeled their behavior on their parents, and thus picked up a lot of more female-coded behaviors and mannerisms on account of having no male parental figure. One thought that occurred to me is that if this was two parents sharing some other trait besides gender adopt…
/r/MensRights26/07/17 08:46 PM
6

It seems very likely that the site isn't quite genuine, but I'm not really sure I'd call it satire. These are all opinions shared by plenty of actual people. I don't think something counts as satire if the targets of that satire would uncritically agree with it. At that point it's more or less just a recap of the viewpoints it portrays.
/r/MensRights25/06/17 10:20 PM
1

FRP is literally on the opposite side of the political spectrum from socialism.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 03:29 PM
6

"It's against the law" is kind of a strange way to put it. Not exactly the strongest words one could use. Sounds more like the argument you'd put forth to stop someone from doing an illegal u-turn when there are no other cars in sight.
/r/MensRights30/11/16 04:19 AM
2

I'm sure someone who has been elected as a "women's officer" is going to frame things in an entirely gender-neutral way. I suppose it might be gender-neutral in that it teaches people of all genders that men are evil.
/r/MensRights28/09/16 04:35 PM
2

"Isn't a prerequisite" is an oddly specific, yet very telling, phrasing. You'd think any group advocating for actual equality would be incompatible with that kind of hatred. And yet your defense of feminism somehow falls short of even that.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 07:50 PM
7

This is either a very good sign, or a very bad one. Depending on why she finds this funny ("lol, traditional relationships are shit" vs "lol, this is so true") you've either got a keeper or (hopefully) an ex.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 02:11 PM
2

They actually try to bring his character into question by making him seem like a liar because he didn't spoil the story. Even more hilariously, he didn't actually lie. He said that Jon Snow was dead, and he was. He just didn't mention what happens next.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 10:23 PM
5

This is why I kind of hope Trump wins. It's the clearest way I can see for the two-party system to end, as once the system doesn't produce candidates the establishment likes there is incentive to change it for the people with the power to change it. A Trump vs Sanders election would be even better, but that seems unlikely at this point.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 10:20 PM
4

The optimistic way of viewing this is that people are becoming more likely to report women, and police are taking the reports more seriously. The pessimistic way of viewing this is that decades of "empowerment" has had a rather predictable effect. Being dead certain that you are right and another person is wrong because you belong to different demographics doesn't generally lead to you respecting said other persons rights.
/r/MensRights22/05/16 07:51 PM
10

They seem to have missed the fact that women are already working less hours. What they should make is a clock that tells women to stay and work overtime.
/r/MensRights30/04/16 09:01 AM
2

What really makes those parts of the books uncomfortable for me is the "you go girl" reaction to it from a lot of female readers.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 07:39 PM
2

The grandmother saying it isn't really a big deal. Your wife laughing too might be. If she was laughing because she didn't want to start an argument with her grandmother at christmas, that's perfectly fine. If she didn't see anything wrong with the comment, I'd advise you to at least have a very serious conversation with her about it.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 08:44 PM
0

My opinion of this depends heavily on one important detail that the quote doesn't provide: What was she going to call the supplier to say? There's a huge difference between "Fuck you and all your white males, we're not going to do business with you any more" and "You might want to look into getting a more diverse team, it's making you look really bad."
/r/MensRights15/12/15 01:25 AM
2

Just like with the Ghostbusters remake, I predict this will fail mainly because the original relies on a cast of rather flawed characters, and I've yet to see any female character in any media be flawed in the same way and be portrayed in the same way. For example, a lot of female characters are flawed in my eyes, but the script/acting/directing doesn't seem to view it that way. "It's funny that she failed because she was arrogant and overconfident" and such doesn't really happen the way it does…
/r/MensRights31/10/15 03:34 AM
1

Dump The Motherfucker Already
/r/MensRights02/10/15 01:11 AM
1

DTMFA
/r/MensRights30/09/15 01:09 AM
4

It also cites 3-4%, and talks of the "undeniable fact that even if we had accurate numbers, they would be drastically lower than those of cis and trans women, trans men, and non-binary people who are raped by men".
/r/MensRights25/09/15 05:27 AM
15

Kind of torn on the article. It's good that this kind of article gets written, but way too much of the article is spent backtracking and assuring everyone that even though there aren't good statistics on how many men get raped by women, it's guaranteed to be an utterly tiny number compared to how many women get raped by men. They know this because reasons.
/r/MensRights25/09/15 01:57 AM
24

The response many women have to paternity tests also clearly illustrates that many of them want to keep (or have already taken advantage of) the ability to lie about paternity.
/r/MensRights20/09/15 02:32 AM
8

I think you're very much right. On reading the article a bit more carefully, it's kind of amazing how it dances around having to admit that the actual victim of the paternity fraud might be hurt in any way.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 12:09 AM
1

While this is a good thing, there is very much a limit on how much good something like this can do at the moment. "Sorry, we've got nothing to offer you beyond the very short-term, and you rapist is not going to see any consequences." isn't really what a rape victim needs to hear.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 11:15 PM
2

He'd fire this person, but doesn't react at all to the idea that a subset of his employees are described as "bullies". Presumably, he's well aware that bullying is going on (otherwise the reaction to an employee anonymously calling out bullies in you organization would be to look into it and try to fix things, I'd assume), and doesn't care as long as it's the "good" people bullying the "acceptable" targets.
/r/MensRights25/08/15 04:11 PM
8

Sad part is, even with her newfound enlightenment, she seems to still view him less as an equal and more as a servant that she has accidentally mistreated.
/r/MensRights13/08/15 12:23 AM
2

Pretty good article, but I doubt she'd talk of a hypothetical daughter in terms of growing up to be a "better, fairer" woman. She seems to still be stuck in the mindset where women are inherently good, while men can only become good if properly educated.
/r/MensRights17/09/14 12:36 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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