TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PorkRocket Archive

View 0 posts and 76 comments by PorkRocket 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)
8

It's not its own person, it's inside the mother. Property of the mother. Edit: The point here isn't about abortion legislation and when life begins, that's not "a man getting a say" -- the point is to talk about the man's responsibility when a woman gets pregnant. I don't wanna go off-topic. :-)
/r/MensRights21/10/11 02:13 PM
7

We should still have some sort of a meaningful say in a medical abortion. No. It's the woman's body. You can't have a say in what someone can or cannot do with her body, that's monstrous. But it's her body. Not only is it her right to do what she wants with it, but she is also responsible for it. If she doesn't want to get pregnant, that responsibility is, ultimately, hers. If she gets pregnant by mistake, well, that was her mistake -- she took her gamble and lost. That doesn't automatically mak…
/r/MensRights21/10/11 02:09 PM
16

What about the child? There is no child pre-birth. The man has a choice to be a father or not be a father, just like the woman.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 02:05 PM
1

I mean, do you expect poor people to vote for the GOP when the GOP doesn't seem to care about poor people? Hell, many of the GOP supporters seem to complain about poor people wanting "handouts" all the time, even if a lot of those people aren't welfare moms or whatever. Note: I am not a Republican (also independent.) When you feel you have entitlement to other peoples' property, you will vote for whoever is going to give you stuff, and you don't give a shit who they're taking it from. Poor peopl…
/r/MensRights19/10/11 01:26 AM
0

I guess you don't know how to read, so here's your downvote, and I'll quote myself... the answer was there before I asked the question: And empowering poor people with a vote is like giving a robber a gun; the first thing they'll vote for is entitlements, every time. Also... if you're stuck in a "Democrat versus Republican" mindset, you're a child intellectually.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 11:10 PM
1

So instead of supporting rationality, and realizing that a black man doesn't represent black men any better than a white man, or that a woman doesn't represent women any better than a man -- you'd rather pander to the irrational mindset that they have some sort of superior group representation? When you pander, you give moral sanction to the irrationality. If women, blacks, etc. want to get elected, they should earn it, not on the basis of their "protected group" but on the merit of their abilit…
/r/MensRights16/10/11 11:08 PM
7

men are vastly over-represented at all levels of government This is a fallacy. Men, in government, do not represent the "interests of men", they represent the interests of their constituents -- men, women, black, white, etc. Quotas and "equal representation" are an anti-intellectual joke, egalitarian collectivism run wild. There is nothing wrong with having so many men in government, other than that women with collectivist leanings and entitlement complexes falsely believe they are somehow under…
/r/MensRights14/10/11 06:59 PM
2

Equal rights are a proper cause; equality in the corrupted feminist sense is just egalitarianism, which is monstrous.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 06:54 PM
6

Usually people that call themselves "nice guys" are passive-aggressive, predatory leeches, driven by self-pity. If you ever decide to abandon this username, please PM me the password. I love it!
/r/MensRights05/10/11 03:24 PM
2

I would agree that they are generally idiots (I admit that I agree with Limbaugh a lot, but definitely not all of the time, and I am categorically not a conservative.) But what is wrong with an "extreme" belief, exactly? I believe in individual rights (property above all, freedom of speech, freedom of ideas and religion, etc.), and that those rights must never be violated for any reason. Does that make me an extremist? Doesn't it just make me well-defined? My point is that "extremism" is an anti…
/r/MensRights04/10/11 06:56 PM
0

Wait -- How exactly is Michael Moore not a liberal? How exactly are Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh not conservative?
/r/MensRights04/10/11 06:29 PM
0

Michael Moore is a fat fucking liberal idiot. Nothing he says, nothing he writes, no movies he makes, are worth the slightest bit of consideration, because they are so far out of touch with reality. The good news is that he is mortal, so he will die someday.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 05:19 PM
29

Women will never systematically rape and destroy the male sex class because 1) We believe all humans should be free of oppression and 2) we don't have any social power to somehow turn the tables and systematically oppress the male sex in the same way they do to us. It's ironic how this feminist can't recognize other females as anything other than interchangeable parts in a collectivist machine, instead of what they are: individuals with their own independent thoughts, desires, and situations.
/r/MensRights30/09/11 05:14 PM
19

I think I actually agree with this. If a woman is pregnant, it's her body; a man cannot choose to have an abortion for her, or to give the child up for adoption for her. In literal effect, until the child is born, it's the woman's property. When the child is born, it then becomes her responsibility. It was hers, and it still is; unless a man chooses to take the child on as a dependent, he shouldn't be forced to. The consequence of sex could definitely be a child, but it doesn't follow that the m…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 08:28 PM
4

yet they apologize - profusely, enthusiastically and repetitively - for every single thing every male has done to every woman on the planet since time immemorial Collective guilt is irrational. That's like the idea of original sin; like I'm somehow guilty for something that others have done, and generations before me? Fuck that
/r/MensRights28/09/11 04:39 PM
2

http://www.ageofconsent.com/
/r/MensRights21/09/11 04:49 PM
0

I don't base my political views on blurbs I cribbed from a Ron Paul flyer. That's encouraging to hear. You're not a libertarian...you just happen to believe and say the same exact shit as them. Yeah, but that doesn't make you a libertarian...it just makes you a liber....uhh...hmm No, I definitely don't say the same exact shit as them. For one thing: Ron Paul's "let the states decide!" isn't a solution to a problem. It creates 50 small tyrranies instead of one big one. That's just for starters. L…
/r/MensRights19/09/11 08:51 PM
-2

Then why did you bother replying in the first place? Oh, you thought I'd be a pushover. No, I thought you would lack a philosophical base for your argument, and I was correct. The same thing that happens every time will happen: I will argue you into a corner. You will have three options, of which only two are likely: 1) You will accept reality 2) You will stop responding to me when you realize you have no valid argument, and eventually rationalize the incident away because it would upset your fl…
/r/MensRights19/09/11 07:50 PM
-1

I can't stand people like you, but I want to live in a society where you could get medical attention if you were sick I can't stand people like you, and I would want you to die if you were sick. "Kill the rich" is about as offensive as it gets. You are an egalitarian; you get off on punishing success and want to glorify mediocrity. I'll answer your bullshit when I have time. But you are definitely wrong, and I can prove it.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 07:17 PM
-4

And you are still misusing "force".
/r/MensRights19/09/11 05:32 PM
-2

The mechanisms in place which allow you to earn that money come about through the collective efforts of those within your society. False. I earn money by entering into voluntary agreements, and working. No "collective effort" puts money into my pocket. I work for myself, to support my life. Not yours. Not anyone else's. I'm saying society should be set up in such a way that those who wish to participate in said society will contribute to the well-being of all within that society. I'm going to ma…
/r/MensRights19/09/11 05:31 PM
0

Asks innocent question; posits ridiculous answer without waiting for a response. My answer isn't ridiculous, it's rational. You cannot hold a gun to people's heads and call it charity. However, our society shouldn't be set up in such a way that someone is forced to rely on the good will of individuals for such situations. a) You are not using the word "force" correctly b) You are saying that society should be set up to force individuals to take care of other people (and I am using the word "forc…
/r/MensRights19/09/11 05:00 PM
-1

If you're worried about her, why don't you help her out financially? Oh, because you expect everyone else to do it. Socialist mentality 101
/r/MensRights19/09/11 04:20 PM
-6

Because of the prevailing philosophy in our culture that substitutes altruism and egalitarianism with freedom and justice. edit: Downvotes don't make me wrong. If you disagree with me, explain why, pussy.
/r/MensRights14/09/11 02:20 PM
10

Men get raped and abused too! We just aren't supposed to talk about it really.
/r/MensRights09/08/11 04:14 PM
1

anarchafeminism feminism racism RadicalFeminism TwoXChromosomes etc. etc. Every now and then they get their periods and decide to carpet-bomb MR with downvotes. (Yes, I'm aware that sounds misogynistic, it's a form of humor called "playing to the stereotype" for any overly-sensitive MR regulars, and you know who you are.)
/r/MensRights05/08/11 02:24 PM
5

Looks like some anti-MR cunts are attacking the thread with downvotes.
/r/MensRights04/08/11 09:07 PM
14

tl;dr: It is also very difficult for students to seek help (even absent an accusation) if they believe they may have abused someone else The implication is that if you are accused you are guilty.
/r/MensRights04/08/11 08:24 PM
0

Downvoted for pointless quotation
/r/MensRights26/07/11 01:28 PM
-1

Yes of course, because one offensive joke invalidates all of my well-reasoned posts. Also, this is off-topic, but your political views are fucking terrible. If you think I'm an asshole now, just wait til I spank you on some of the political threads.
/r/MensRights25/07/11 11:39 PM
-3

I wasn't promoting it, I was using it as a joke. That said, I get where you're coming from -- you don't want this subreddit to look like a bunch of misogynists -- but I think the downvote button took good care of that! Just my two cents.
/r/MensRights25/07/11 07:45 PM
3

Well kudos to you for staying cool; probably best to keep calm and stay strong for your kids. Not a fan of your situation, and I wish you luck.
/r/MensRights25/07/11 07:38 PM
-5

Was sarcastically implying that you should beat her; was trying to get a laugh, maybe not the time or place, but hopefully I made you smile. If not, apologies.
/r/MensRights25/07/11 07:24 PM
-22

/r/beatingwomen
/r/MensRights25/07/11 06:44 PM
2

Just so it's crystal clear, I don't think discrimination by individuals and private businesses is "OK", I think it is irrational, but it has to be allowed because those people have rights. You have a right not to associate with them.
/r/MensRights23/07/11 05:12 PM
1

Discrimination on the basis of race, gender, etc. is irrational, but it's not a violation of anyone's rights when a private firm or an individual does it. Nobody has a RIGHT to work for you if you don't WANT them to work for you. Perhaps you think it's ok for me to say "no blacks allowed, we only hire whites?" If you're not a government entity, yes, it is perfectly OK for you to say. I mean, is the KKK going to hire a black guy? What I'm saying is not wrong; the principle involved is rights. You…
/r/MensRights23/07/11 05:11 PM
5

This is just egalitarian crap. If a private company hires only women for its managerial positions, so be it -- that should be their right. If a private company hires only men for its managerial positions, so be it -- that should be their right. We shouldn't be cheering for this, we should be pointing out how retarded it is, and advocating against this nonsense. FORCING PEOPLE TO DO THINGS IS THE OPPOSITE OF RIGHTS, MEN'S OR OTHERWISE.
/r/MensRights22/07/11 06:50 PM
6

That's what the upvote button is for! ;-) /karmawhoring
/r/MensRights19/07/11 03:50 PM
11

There are no excuses for violating another person's rights, only explanations. If this woman suffers from anything, that might help to explain the actions she took, but she still made a choice to perform those actions, and she is responsible for her actions. As we all are, for any choices we make, regardless of what "issues" any one of us may have.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 03:19 PM
1

I am an American University student I dated a woman I call bullshit! :-) Seriously though... lawyer
/r/MensRights18/07/11 02:43 PM
25

"Why should it be a woman's nation??" "That would be my preference." What a cunt.
/r/MensRights15/07/11 09:25 PM
1

What did I not refute? I've addressed everything, you're being irrational. As far as the last word contest, keep trying, but I'm going to win. You will break.
/r/MensRights14/07/11 12:11 AM
2

Slight correction: the Declaration does not give us those rights, the Declaration highlights the fact that we have those rights (and that government exists to protect them): We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Those rights are ABOVE government. You can safely ignore TheRealPariah, the guy doesn't know how to argue or how to …
/r/MensRights14/07/11 12:07 AM
0

You're not offering counter-arguments, you're turning this into a last word contest. I'm going to win that too.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 11:58 PM
0

And by implicit you mean it doesn't declare that at all, you would just like to read it into the language. I really think you need to re-read the Constitution and actually try to understand it. "No one has the right to play basketball" fits into your logic, which is just plain retarded. That's a logical jump. I'm dealing with an idiot. Peace.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 11:27 PM
1

If you're asking for a paper trail to demonstrate where the government is granted the authority: It's stated explicitly in the Declaration of Independence that each man has a right to his own life, and that this right is self-evident. The Ninth Amendment of the Constitution (which says that rights that aren't explicitly enumerated in the Constitution itself aren't denied to the people) implicitly declares that. The Constitution sets up the government in part to "establish Justice" -- that's in t…
/r/MensRights13/07/11 02:27 PM
1

Too bad they don't have trollface for you to use in MR :-)
/r/MensRights12/07/11 09:13 PM
1

Serious. And correct.
/r/MensRights12/07/11 09:12 PM
1

Philosophy is where ideas come from. Culture is based upon ideas. Culture isn't something magically separate from philosophy; it's a derivative. How do you view the world? What values do you act upon? That is philosophy. If your culture supports mutilating a child, your philosophy necessarily supports it. So please enlighten me. Which ubiquitous, uniquely American philosophy led to more than 80% of American parents to mutilate their own newborn babies. Altruism. It's not uniquely American, eithe…
/r/MensRights12/07/11 04:31 PM
1

And?
/r/MensRights12/07/11 04:28 PM
1

Circumcision is a cultural thing, yes, but the thinking and justification underlying it is absolutely philosophical. All people follow some sort of philosophy -- whether they realize it or not. Philosophy is critically important. And you are right, the average person doesn't have concrete philosophical positions, because they don't realize that philosophy is so important. My argument is that the prevailing philosophy in this country is what allows cultural stupidity like this to persist.
/r/MensRights12/07/11 03:09 PM
2

Not culture -- philosophy. Philosophy needs to change and become rational.
/r/MensRights12/07/11 02:34 PM
7

Human beings do not have a right to mutilate other human beings. That's how.
/r/MensRights12/07/11 02:32 PM
1

You don't know what an ad hominem attack is. Wrong. Learn to read. And now you admit I was correct all along. Hallelujah! Wrong. Learn to read. You will break.
/r/MensRights12/07/11 02:13 PM
-1

Ad hom is "You are stupid, therefore your argument is wrong." My comment was "Your argument is so wrong that it's clear you're stupid." You didn't demonstrate anything wrong with my argument, all you did was make a character attack. I know the difference, and that's exactly why I called you on it. Explain to me where rights exist, logically and scientifically. I can explain the existence of rights logically, but you need to pay attention here: PHILOSOPHY Rights are a political concept, and they …
/r/MensRights12/07/11 05:01 AM
2

I said: I predict ad hominem attacks now You said: you have mental health issues Surprise, I was right again. You can't refute anything I wrote or anything she wrote, so you behave like a child and attack. And if you try to turn this into a last word contest, I'll just win that too.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 08:52 PM
1

You countered my argument that individual rights are self-evident with "I deal in logic" -- yet you imply "Ayn Rand is wrong" as if that were self-evident... do you honestly not see the irony? As if that wasn't funny enough... I'm sorry, I deal in logic. ... then why are you trying to discredit Ayn Rand with an argument from authority, one of the classic logical fallacies? So obviously I'm very skeptical of your "I deal in logic" claim. I can virtually guarantee that you aren't actually familiar…
/r/MensRights11/07/11 08:38 PM
0

You deal in logic? Fantastic! You shouldn't have any reason (see what I did there?) to reply after I post this link: http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/individual_rights.html All the proof is there, just take your time and absorb it.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 07:24 PM
0

It's self-evident that every man has a right to his own life. The Founding Fathers of the USA were aware of it; it's in the Declaration of Independence. If you disagree, and need further proof, I can certainly start with the fact that existence is self-evident, and we can work our way up from there.
/r/MensRights11/07/11 03:14 PM
3

As soon as I saw "Feminist Epistemology and the Construction of Knowledge", I laughed out loud and stopped reading. One bad premise invalidates the entire conclusion.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 03:21 PM
2

I don’t believe in rights. I have wandered the whole world, and never found such a thing. That's enough that you don't need to read the rest of the article. A faulty premise like that leads to incorrect conclusions. He's right about whining, but it's not about "parity" or "unique roles". It's about people being free to do what they want -- to exercise their rights -- and not have the government grant favors to anyone. Government exists to protect people. That's the only thing it should be doing.…
/r/MensRights01/07/11 01:46 PM
1

So if a man is made to choose between a quick death and a swift death, would you say he voluntarily chose to die? You can't compare this man's choice of employment to the false choice presented by a murderer who is violating his rights. First, there are literally thousands of actual choices that the man can make, of his own free will, with regards to employment. This was absolutely NOT the only job available to him. Even if somehow it was the ONLY job left in Sweden, and he either had to take it…
/r/MensRights26/06/11 05:09 AM
1

Voluntary is not relative. He either took the job of his own free will or he didn't. This is only a dead-end if you refuse to think.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 07:36 PM
1

There might be outrage that way too, but it wouldn't make the women any more right. My whole point was you can't fight injustice with more injustice, and some of the comments here are definitely encouraging that. I mean, seriously, that guy is a dick. If I was the employer he'd have been fired the first time. lol
/r/MensRights24/06/11 03:17 PM
-1

I couldn't care less about what anyone else believes is immoral/unjust/wrong, or why, unless their argument could persuade me to change my idea of what is immoral/unjust/wrong. I define injustice for myself and work to make the world agree. This company isn't forcing anyone to do anything; no one forced this man to work there. The terms of employment were set by the employer, and the man agreed. The employee is being immoral, by flagrantly violating the terms that he voluntarily agreed to, and f…
/r/MensRights24/06/11 02:32 PM
2

It's not immoral. At all. A private business has the right to dictate the clothing that employees wear, and they have the right to choose based on gender. This is not a "men's rights" issue. This whole post and a lot of the comments on here are egalitarian bullshit. This is going down the "affirmative action" line, like saying that all strip clubs must employ male and female dancers, or that there should be an equal number of male Hooters waiters in addition to females. In case you aren't aware,…
/r/MensRights24/06/11 02:24 PM
2

Fucking idiot
/r/MensRights22/06/11 07:27 PM
-3

lol how did this get downvoted? guess some "feminist" twats have found their way in here. here, have an upvote
/r/MensRights20/06/11 08:28 PM
1

it seems obvious to me that we are hard wired for sex and eating Then you don't understand volition or how the mind works. No need to continue this discussion with you, take care.
/r/MensRights15/06/11 03:49 PM
2

Punch her in the face. You can't fix people who don't choose to think.
/r/MensRights15/06/11 02:24 PM
2

I meant maximum. I didn't word that well, I apologize.
/r/MensRights15/06/11 01:48 PM
0

We are wired to eat, sleep, breath and have sex. Breathe, yes. Sleep, yes. Those are automatic actions that don't require conscious effort. Eating and sex, absolutely not -- they require conscious effort and thought. If your parents don't feed you, if you don't ultimately learn what food is, you will die. There is no automatic knowledge of food. The same goes for sex, you don't know what sex is or how to have it if you don't learn it. You have to choose to eat and choose to have sex. it is like …
/r/MensRights15/06/11 01:48 PM
0

No one is wired to do anything. Ideas are learned, or formed from other ideas. If we were all wired to do certain things, then no one would be responsible for their actions.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 08:10 PM
10

"Only"? There is no minimum sentence for that offense, she could theoretically wind up in jail for life. Maybe it's just semantics, but she is going to get off any easier than he; this doesn't look sexist to me.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 05:52 PM
1

Of course, tax money that goes to anything aside from the military, courts, and law enforcement is discriminatory -- subsidies go to businesses that people otherwise wouldn't be supporting, and that money is of course taken away from people who could spend it on something that benefits them -- it discriminates against legitimate, viable businesses and individuals earning an income in favor of unprofitable (or less profitable) businesses.
/r/MensRights14/06/11 03:35 PM
2

Did they approve it?
/r/MensRights14/06/11 03:08 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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