TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Pugs_of_war Archive

View 3 posts and 62 comments by Pugs_of_war 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)
1

Pretty sure we have most the illegal ones as well.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 09:11 PM
0

I'm not dying on that hill. I care very little for the medical benefits. I care significantly for the risks, and I care the most about bodily autonomy. My goal here is the same as it always is. I care little if people agree with me on any given subject, I just want people to have more rational and nuanced opinions. I don't see it much from either side, but the antis are definitely better about it. I just don't want to see people defending their opinions with fallacies and half truths. Being able…
/r/MensRights26/12/18 11:06 PM
0

It's not, according to actual doctors, from a pure medical standpoint. My opinion has little to do with that.
/r/MensRights26/12/18 05:37 PM
0

They used logic and reason to disprove your argument; No, they didn't. namely that if a certain (ANY) part of the body benefited (has a function) it in any way and it was healthy, there are no benefits to be gained from removing it. That's simply not true. It's also not logical or reasonable. A thing having a benefit does not mean not having it does not have benefits. Your logical fallacy is false ditchotomy. Foreskin is not a detriment to the body! Ok? Who disagrees with you? If it has a functi…
/r/MensRights26/12/18 05:30 PM
0

I'm against it because it's unnecessary, risky, and not the parents' penis. I'm not playing both sides. I just don't ignore the benefits of the procedure, regardless of how minor they might be. It's my view that the benefits are irrelevant, not non-existent.
/r/MensRights26/12/18 05:19 PM
-1

Dear or dear! Someone can't handle the fact their parents mutilated their genitals when they were an infant for no good reason. 😂 Literally the opposite of what I said. Thank you for confirming that you are in fact illiterate.
/r/MensRights26/12/18 01:47 PM
-2

Yes, I said that.
/r/MensRights26/12/18 01:40 PM
-5

We’ll here’s some of that “emotional hand waving” — cleverly disguised as medical facts and research. 😉 No, it's not. It's blatant examples of your own illiteracy. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights26/12/18 01:37 PM
-3

There are no “benefits” to slicing off chunks of healthy, functional human tissue: Thanks for warning me that you're not interesting in anything beyond confirmation bias. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights26/12/18 01:35 PM
3

This explains my view 100%. I was circumcised relatively late, I distinctly remember having a foreskin, then nothing. In fact I thought it just went away naturally until much later in life. I guess I was 4 at the oldest that last I remember having it. I don't even remember recovering from losing it. Understanding that it doesn't just disappear bothers me more than almost anything. Realizing that it disappeared while my memory was usable and I can't pinpoint the event is worse. Did I imagine the …
/r/MensRights26/12/18 01:03 PM
-7

Don't come here expecting a rational stance on circumcision. They get about half way there, they can rationalize the cons all day. But you'll get nothing but emotional hand waving if you dare mention that circumcision isn't a net loss. Edit: the responses to my comments here are exactly my problem with most people who are anti-circumcision. Too fucking nuts to realize that we're on the same side. I'd almost rather have the rest of my dick cut off than be associated with these people. Nothing hur…
/r/MensRights26/12/18 12:11 PM
1

I'm agreeing with you, idiot. Or do you really really think that every single cop/serviceman, without exception, joined with malicious intent? Who's fault is it that we have 7+ billion people? Nobody's.
/r/MensRights15/12/18 09:36 PM
0

You're absolutely correct. Treating people like they're saints because of their job is at least as bad as treating them like saints because of their gender. The biggest difference is that cops and military might have signed up to do good. This, however, is countered by the fact that police abuse is a much bigger problem.
/r/MensRights15/12/18 01:10 PM
11

He probably did. https://i.imgur.com/Aq9xK8A.jpg
/r/MensRights13/11/18 07:28 PM
9

So you're differently impulsive. Both failing at an attempt and changing opinions are indicators of poor impulse control. Besides, most men don't commit suicide impulsively. It's carefully planned out so that it works.
/r/MensRights23/10/18 03:31 PM
10

No, being mildly to moderately annoyed before finding the relief of /s has become fairly addictive.
/r/MensRights14/10/18 01:00 PM
1

Yeah, there's definitely warning signs, but not always. A lifetime is a long time, especially considering how much people change in the years that coincide with typical early years of marriage. People focus on the issues most relevant to them. Some people do it to the point that they become single issue voters. It's not optimal, but it's just part of reality. It's not really fair to say that people should only focus on certain things, especially when those things are just what concerns you the m…
/r/MensRights15/08/18 09:52 PM
1

Family court is one of the most corrupt and inept parts of our legal system. Sure, others are worse, but someone else suffering more doesn't make you suffer less. People change. It's not just about knowing the person you marry, it's about how the person changes. But your logic still doesn't work. Would you blame a woman for marrying a man that eventually started beating her? You don't have to have any kids to pay out. Alimony is a thing still, and divorces still often result in the man getting l…
/r/MensRights15/08/18 08:54 PM
1

and then shit hits the fan. The problem with this is is not anyone's fault. They didn't just wake up one morning and say "hey I want to spend the next few years eating beans so my psycho ex can have steak every night with my son I'm only allowed to see briefly every couple weeks. also it’s not fucking slavery, indentured servant maybe but it is 100% fucking retarded to call it slavery. What's the difference? You're going to prison if you don't pay. Is it because they don't get whipped for disobe…
/r/MensRights15/08/18 08:03 PM
1

This entire sub is full of examples. Want more? Go to r/mgtow and dig for the stories of what they're going through. How is it not slavery? You're forced to work or be punished. It's not a "bitch mentality" or a victim complex. I don't understand how you can justify the government forcing a man to provide for his ex wife, or even the exorbitant amount of money they're supposed to give to their ex allegedly for the children. How is it being a bitch to lose your children and half your income to a …
/r/MensRights15/08/18 07:47 PM
1

Funny how you fixate on the factoid, deny it, and ignore the entire point of my comment. It's almost like you're being less than honest and don't actually care about facts.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 06:55 PM
3

A paternity test won't save you, sometimes even if you're innocent. Even if you are the father, being forced into slavery or prison by your ex is obscene. The fault lies equally on the mother and the government, and on nobody else.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 11:28 AM
2

What I meant was that the tiny portion that is women aren't going to have that kind of influence. Looking again, I see that he wasn't saying that women get lighter sentences because they typically plea (as in the statistic influences the punishment), but that they are simply taking the plea and getting off light. Which I still see as ridiculous. Men and women aren't even given the same options. Women almost always see lesser punishments and more forgiving pleas than men. On top of that, people a…
/r/MensRights10/07/18 04:37 PM
3

That makes no sense. Women don't even get charged for crimes at half the rate of men, and you're telling me that enough women get charged to make up a majority of the 80% that take a plea?
/r/MensRights10/07/18 01:15 PM
3

"legally" doesn't mean "actually." And if consent is your argument, then you're out. The man can't consent either, therefore she raped him. Throw in a little consistency and we have a bizarre scenario where two people simultaneously raped each other while having consensual sex. Legalism is not an argument.
/r/MensRights10/07/18 01:12 PM
2

r/dreadfort approves.
/r/MensRights05/07/18 10:59 PM
2

I wouldn't call it highly effective unless your goal is to simply prevent HPV. Even then, there's been quite a few payouts due to the vaccine. Sure, you can say that it helps a lot more than it harms, but HPV is pretty benign to begin with in all but the rarest of cases. Harming a few to help a few is pretty questionable. Going through every source I found I can't find any statistics on HPV causing cancer. Cancer.gov claims that 70% of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions are caused by HPV w…
/r/MensRights28/05/18 04:51 PM
1

For the people downvoting you: The HPV vaccine hasn't been shown to be effective at anything beyond preventing a virus that is fairly benign and easily treated by your own immune system. It has never been shown to be effective at anything, but there's plenty of evidence that it is almost as harmful as anti-vaxxers believe most vaccines to be. Anyone who wants to defend vaccination should stay away from the HPV vaccine, you're just handing your enemy a loaded gun.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 11:36 AM
16

I can tell you read the first 10 words and came to your own conclusion about the content of the post you're replying to.
/r/MensRights26/03/18 11:03 AM
62

Reproduction. Reproduction. Re-ion product. Rei-product. Reiproduct. Rape product. I think we've seen enough.
/r/MensRights18/03/18 05:32 PM
3

"At that time, I did feel objectified, and now I’ve learned how to control that and just shutting it down.” Is that a subtle jab at the people who don't shut it down? I want to believe.
/r/MensRights03/11/17 02:19 PM
18

Libertarianism is about restoring rights to the individuals. In other words, everyone has "privilege." Take your racist batshittery back to r/politics where it belongs.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 09:44 PM
1

That's not the point. Obviously. The point is that a parent does not require the consent of their child to make those decisions. It's not rape. It's not sexual abuse. It's not sexual assault.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 11:30 PM
0

Alright, let's play. You lose, unless circumcision is a process that must be repeated. Otherwise it would be "sexual assault." It's also not sexual assault, as circumcision isn't sexual in nature, and parents/doctors don't need the consent of an infant to touch their genitals. "Excuse me, baby, do I have your consent to wipe your ass and clean the piss off your crotch?" Are you fucking serious? Go play semantics with someone else, you're clearly not taking your bullshit serious enough to do it w…
/r/MensRights16/09/17 12:47 PM
1

Masturbation? Yet another thing not part of Christianity.
/r/MensRights16/09/17 12:37 PM
0

Oh, I don't disagree with that at all. I just hate to see emotionally loaded phrases in a discussion that should be rational first and foremost. I disagree with circumcision, but I try to stick to facts because emotional appeals tend to only work on few, and cement the opinions of those that already disagree. It's basically a circlejerk.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 08:52 PM
-3

I did take my advice and I'm not a hypocrite. You're not being clever, you're being an idiot. Pointing out an emotional appeal is not an emotional appeal. The fact that you think otherwise is mildly disturbing.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 08:48 PM
0

Your mean the only part that you didn't actually address? relating to, denoting, or preserving the character of an early stage in the evolutionary or historical development of something. The word is useless except as an emotional appeal. The fact that you're using it is evidence of this. Were it primitive, as you say, then what? Fucking is primitive as well. Your usage of it is just a dressed up "but it's the current year!" Totally devoid of any actually rationality, and that is a huge problem i…
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:53 PM
0

No. I'm not going to go out and do your work for you. If you have something to say, say it here. Emotional appeals and cries of rape are the hallmarks of feminism. Get that bullshit out of here.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:25 PM
1

Read my comment. You're not disagreeing with me, you're agreeing with me in an abrasive and blind manner.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 06:23 PM
-14

That doesn't make it primitive. "Primitive" is just a weasel word, and a shitty one at that. All you're doing is making your case worse for those that realize that obvious fact.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:16 PM
-6

The benefits of circumcision isn't a lie. They're not worth the risks, but they're still not lies. Removing your breasts prevents you from getting breast cancer, but that's not worth the removal of your breasts. And a mark of religion? That seems extremely unlikely, at least in the US. The dominate religion, Christianity, says that circumcision is only good as a way to help you reach out to Jews. Not that valuable back then, definitely not now.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 05:14 PM
-1

Ridiculous dramatization is ridiculous. Also, it's not rape, you stupid feminist. Rape is exclusively forced sex, not "thing that involves genitals"
/r/MensRights14/09/17 04:56 PM
-14

It's not unscientific or a religious conversion. And calling it "primitive" is meaningless. This is garbage, no matter your opinion on circumcision.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 03:19 PM
6

Username... doesn't check out?
/r/MensRights23/08/17 12:40 AM
1

I only checked it out with my phone's​ ad blocker running. Left a handful of crap that you see everywhere, like "x HATES this" and "One simple trick to" spam. Most the internet runs those ads.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 06:45 PM
1

It crossed my mind, but I used to live in Sebring. It's completely believable.
/r/MensRights08/05/17 05:47 PM
4

at least they're admitting that men can change, almost like they're human or something.
/r/MensRights18/03/17 10:50 PM
0

I'm not going to argue with a crackhead, definitely not one that takes 24 hours to type out every nonsensical response. Learn to read. Stop making things. Up. Grow a backbone. Stop being a dumbass. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 11:11 AM
0

I can walk freely anywhere i want If I dont break the law. That's not what I said. I never said that you aren't allowed to walk around. Cameras have been around city centres for years now. Nothing has ever happened to me in the negative because of them. Im betting nothing will in future. So you think that because nothing bad has happened, nothing bad will happen? Thanks for answering my question, you're naieve. For sure things have been deterred which would effect me negatively. Doesn't matter, …
/r/MensRights30/01/17 10:12 PM
2

Well, that's not what I said at all, so fuck off.
/r/MensRights30/01/17 10:47 AM
-2

You're not walking freely if you're being spied on by a group that thinks they own you. And what do you mean "nothing will ever happen"? Are you naive or stupid? Maybe you should stick your tinfoil hat up your ass so it could properly cover your head.
/r/MensRights30/01/17 03:51 AM
0

No, it's more of a cattle thing.
/r/MensRights30/01/17 01:59 AM
13

Because this isn't a measure of peak ability for your gender. It's just a low bar fitness test. There's no reason that both genders couldn't or shouldn't reach it. Even if it were a more difficult test for a more physical role, the scale should still be the same. If you get a job that requires lifting 100lb boxes, should women get the job if they max out at 85lbs? Peak ability is an arbitrary number in this. The test isn't to see if you're as good as you could reasonably get, it's just to see if…
/r/MensRights02/01/17 05:14 AM
1

You can tell the author is lying because she claimed the ACA benefits her.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 12:58 AM
5

amok. Bad spelling is a capital offense on the Internet.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 03:49 PM
6

"We found that if we ask people nonsensical questions about a baby's cry, people tend to guess incorrectly."
/r/MensRights25/04/16 04:55 PM
0

Biology is what determines whether you're willing or not and that's what determines whether it's rape. That is arguing like a feminist. You are the one incapable of rational discussion seeing how you're quick to run away. You are the one incapable of intellectual honesty, seeing how you're pulling crap out of nowhere and projecting it on me. And finally, you are the one incapable of objectivity, seeing as you can't stand back and see that you're acting like a feminist. I'm done here Of course yo…
/r/MensRights23/04/16 03:00 AM
2

Emotion determines whether you're willing or not. You're just regurgitating the "men are incapable of not wanting sex" nonsense. You're not even biologically correct or you'd be saying that women can't be raped as they have a stronger sex drive than men.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 10:03 PM
2

Biology doesn't prevent rape.
/r/MensRights22/04/16 08:30 PM
1

No. It's not. The purpose of a dictionary is to catalogue words and the ways they are typically used. If a word is typically used in reference to something a man did, including that information is part of the dictionary's task. You just said "no", then rephrased what I said. Yes. It does. It's called context. Dictionaries don't contain context. You just called it a catalog, now you're saying it's a narrative. Where'd you get psychic powers? I want some. You're an idiot. Yes they absolutely do. N…
/r/MensRights28/03/16 07:25 PM
1

The point of a dictionary is to help people understand the meaning of words. The phrase "Typically committed by a man" does not help one understand what "rape" means. The people who write dictionaries aren't stupid, they included that phrase for a reason and they know it doesn't clarify the word's meaning. A dictionary is not a book of statistics. Statistics have no relevance on the meaning of words.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:52 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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