TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Other-Barry1234 Archive

View 0 posts and 36 comments by Other-Barry1234 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)
-26

This headline made me inexplicably happy.
/r/MensRights16/10/21 09:22 PM
0

I have been in two jobs where hair length for both genders were precisely dictated in the employment manual. So you do you, if you think you have a claim I’d advise you to go to the eeoc first before paying for legal counsel. 🤷🏿‍♂️👍🏿👍🏿
/r/MensRights02/10/21 10:11 PM
1

Bruh. I’m literally a corporate hiring manager. I have worked in racist NY, racist Cali, TX and now AR. In all instances, when hiring front-facing staff, I absolutely had to take cleanliness and appearance into consideration. I kept detailed notes and scored every point with complete ubiquitously. I’ve had complaints made to hr, formal grievances filed with eeoc, even a lawsuit- I won in each and every case. I am not saying you or I are correct, only that this is simply the way things are. 🤷🏿‍♂️
/r/MensRights02/10/21 09:34 PM
0

Under the law, no, there is no difference unless there are state level statutes that explicitly state such, but few of those exist
/r/MensRights02/10/21 08:05 PM
1

Operational issues isn’t taken into consideration in such a suit.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 08:04 PM
1

Bruh. I understand what you are saying. All I’m saying is that a person must conform to the job to which they apply. The job does not and will not conform to the applicant.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 02:31 PM
-3

No, but if the auto factory required hard hats that went against your beliefs, there is zero difference in the concept. Especially in legal terms.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 02:29 PM
2

And a decision to hire or not was completely devoid of consideration of your religion, believe, ideology, creed or heritage. I’m just saying that legally you absolutely cannot make this argument.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 02:03 AM
-9

Precisely. If a customer service centric business adopts a sock hop model and requires poodle dresses and low cut sweaters. Or a legal firm’s dress code being a full and rather expensive suit. Or hospital ORs requiring staff to wear a particular kind of scrubs as opposed to everyone else. This is both appropriate, legal and standard
/r/MensRights02/10/21 02:02 AM
0

Good for you. Doesn’t change the business and legal issue. 🤷🏿‍♂️
/r/MensRights02/10/21 01:56 AM
-1

Fine. Enjoy your current remuneration because it will definitely have a cap.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 01:46 AM
0

Sexy and clean cut is the point you are missing. Not to mention the that a claim discrimination for this in most non-mom and pop corporations would never hold water, legally, and would be kicked in summary judgement. Eeoc might side with you, but they are not the court.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 01:43 AM
0

No. No it isn’t. In a public facing customer service position, it is always helpful to have a woman, especially an attractive one, be part of their image. Especially if this is regarding both contract jobs and / or at will employment, a hiring manager is allowed a wide discretion, legally, regarding their choice, so long as they apply the standard ubiquitously. In a service industry that employs clean cut people? Want the job? Cut your damn hair for the interview. Once past your 90 days, you can…
/r/MensRights02/10/21 01:36 AM
-12

How, on God’s green earth, would that be discriminatory? An employer wants a particular presentation, culture, view to the public etc. they will take appearance and how it fits their image and culture into consideration. If he wants a job, and now he knows it is impeding him getting a paycheck, tell him to grow up and cut his damn hair.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 01:04 AM
-5

How, on God’s green earth, would that be discriminatory? An employer wants a particular presentation, culture, view to the public etc. they will take appearance and how it fits their image and culture into consideration. If he wants a job, and now he knows it is impeding him getting a paycheck, tell him to grow up and cut his damn hair.
/r/MensRights02/10/21 01:03 AM
18

Under the law, you cannot stop your wife from petitioning the court to divorce. You don’t even have to show up for her request to be granted. You need to start moving assets immediately because most counties include a TRO against any big purchases or movement of assets from the date the suit is filed. The only thing you can do is simply capitulate and subjugate yourself to your wife’s demands to buy you time to try to change her mind. Additionally, if your wife has any decency whatsoever, you ca…
/r/MensRights21/09/21 02:02 PM
1

Ah, thank you for catching the typos. Much appreciated.
/r/MensRights01/09/21 08:36 PM
0

Ah, so you have a reading comprehension problem. As I suspected… Do you need anything diagrammed or spelled out phonetically?
/r/MensRights01/09/21 05:58 PM
0

Yes, however to combat the unconstitutional law they have stand your ground laws. Also, the more educated law enforcements usually refuse to follow such laws. Thankfully.
/r/MensRights01/09/21 04:18 PM
1

No red state will allow red flag laws. It is blatantly unconstitutional and, as we all know, no racist democrat cares about the constitution 🤷🏿‍♂️
/r/MensRights01/09/21 12:02 PM
5

Ah, but remember LBJ’s racist plan to win the black vote? And there is no comparison; they are infinitely worse than their 1860’s slave owning ancestors. The racist Democrats may no longer purchase our bodies on the auction block, but now they purchase our souls via our vote. Democrats are the shame of America
/r/MensRights31/08/21 06:56 PM
6

Show me on this doll🧍where the maga hat hurt you 🤷🏿‍♂️
/r/MensRights31/08/21 06:55 PM
-2

Look more closely.
/r/MensRights31/08/21 03:24 PM
0

Of course they are. Remember Lincoln and Dr. King- when Democrats get mad, they turn murderous. 🤷🏿‍♂️
/r/MensRights31/08/21 03:24 PM
42

If he lives in a majority racist Democrat state they need no charges. They can detain and remove a child under the unconstitutional red flag laws. And, if you are a minority in the same state, they need zero proof. Only a suggestion from the caller.
/r/MensRights31/08/21 11:15 AM
9

In her defense, assaulting her seems like a 15 man job…
/r/MensRights10/07/21 07:50 PM
-1

You say that like you’ve never been a black man, standing in a group of racist democrats. Scary as hell.
/r/MensRights10/05/21 04:37 PM
1

Sounds like cnn...
/r/MensRights02/05/21 06:36 PM
2

Blind justice does not exist. And thanks to the democrats, due process is nearly extinct
/r/MensRights02/05/21 03:34 PM
8

You need a better lawyer.
/r/MensRights01/05/21 11:36 PM
3

Because your school is indoctrinating you, rather than educating you. Any teacher or professor who does this is likely not able to debate. I’d challenge their intellectual capacity and make them look like the imbecile they are
/r/MensRights29/04/21 06:52 PM
2

Challenge accepted
/r/MensRights15/04/21 04:40 PM
2

I’d need to see your source on the nursing part. In healthcare, especially in the wards regarding hiring practices, males are rare and thus, more valued because they can physically lift a patient iff the ground or support a person needing the bed pan etc.
/r/MensRights13/04/21 08:24 PM
2

Any time 👍🏿
/r/MensRights07/04/21 01:15 PM
7

Seriously? If you want to help men, start a tax payer slush fund to help men who lost everything in a divorce.
/r/MensRights07/04/21 12:05 AM
0

Only if there are instructionals on how to be a man.
/r/MensRights23/03/21 03:25 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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