TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ReallyNotARabbit Archive

View 0 posts and 110 comments by ReallyNotARabbit 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)
-4

I know for a fact return of kings is fucking garbage. It was created by roosh v who said brilliant things like: On elliot rodger: "Until you give men like Rodger a way to have sex, either by encouraging them to learn game, seek out a Thai wife, or engage in legalized prostitution ... it's inevitable for another massacre to occur" The dude also wants to legalize rape on private property (of which he said is satircal but he blames rape victims for being raped) which doesn't seem sarital due to the…
/r/MensRights13/02/19 04:09 AM
2

Morally speaking I think because the life-long consequences of what the woman did (and the destruction of consent here), the retaliation is not unacceptable. However, all birth control pills do is prevent fertilization, not abort it. But I was strictly speaking legally, because it's a huge risk.
/r/MensRights11/02/19 06:38 PM
4

Yeah I do. Sewage dumps occur when maintainence work is done on city plumbing (which can be clogged by condoms), when these happen. When sewage is processed, it goes back into waterways. Filters don't catch anything and thus, condoms and other non-human waste also go to the water. Hell, it could even clog the filters/piping at waste treatment plants. It's latex, it can be stretched out or compressed depending on pressure and object's weight on it https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3878254/…
/r/MensRights10/02/19 08:37 PM
-2

It's battery, tampering with food, and poisoning. It's highly illegal to drug someone without their knowledge, even if it's as minor as tylenol So unless you are willing to take the risk for it, I'd suggest against it. Edit to clarify my point and opinion
/r/MensRights10/02/19 07:08 PM
3

Some condoms have spermicide in them. Not most, but it exists
/r/MensRights10/02/19 07:04 PM
10

No. Don't flush condoms down the toilet. It makes cleanup of sewage more difficult and can clog piping. Ya want fish to choke on death by condoms? Because that's how you get fish to choke to death from condoms Just don't. Only human waste and toilet paper go in the toilet
/r/MensRights10/02/19 06:52 PM
0

IMO if I'm citing sources over a subject I find important to me, I will study sources then. I'm only leaving these comments because I'm irked at the amount of blatantly wrong information this subreddit espouses. I an MRA and don't want to be associated with the dumbasses saying vaginas get loosened permanently from sex, or that women enjoy rape. This kind if thing is just irritating enough for me to argue about it, but to truly figure out credible sources takes quite a while. You have to find st…
/r/MensRights07/02/19 10:22 PM
3

I have 0 clue who they are, if you disagree with the next sources then go find good ones yourself. I'm not going to study my sources over something this petty. Here are two different gynecologicsts saying it stretches for the duration of sex and returns afterwards to it's original tightness http://amp.timeinc.net/health/sexual-health/loose-vagina https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5106737/amp/Can-sex-stretch-vagina-Gynecologists-explain.html If anyone is going to know this stuff, it's Gy…
/r/MensRights07/02/19 09:31 PM
0

It's so great for the mens rights movement to perpetuate myths. Makes us seem so intelligent Here's 2 4 links on it, I would grab more, but I feel you won't care: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201109/the-rare-truth-about-tight-and-loose-women?amp https://www.elitedaily.com/life/science-vagina-women-dont-get-looser-sex/964710 http://amp.timeinc.net/health/sexual-health/loose-vagina https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5106737/amp/Can-sex-stretch-vagina-Gynecologists-…
/r/MensRights07/02/19 07:35 PM
0

Yeah, I never understood it either, maybe they don't know what triggering is.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 04:14 PM
6

Exactly, I would just like consistency. Isn't it still 3rd wave though? And I would certainly agree there are many sexist aspects of it.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 12:26 AM
1

A common thing here (and on youtube) is to call feminists 'triggered' when they disagree with something the OP, or another person says. Being against trigger warnings is definitely believing triggering isn't a bad (or as bad as people say it is) thing.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 09:09 PM
-9

Tbf I initially didn't, but added them to improve my point
/r/MensRights17/01/19 08:34 PM
-13

Go in r/mensrights and type 'trigger', 'feminist' or 'safe space' in the search bar. There's a shit ton of stuff against all of those three, and many are very upvoted. I feel like this place is becoming less mens rights discussion, and more anti-feminism These are just a small sample. Trigger warning posts: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4ehntv/even_stephen_fry_himself_has_now_been_attacked/?utm_source=reddit-android https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4zmfo4/university_of…
/r/MensRights17/01/19 07:46 PM
-28

How come this sub, a place where trigger warnings and safe spaces are hated, is being triggered from a razor ad?
/r/MensRights17/01/19 07:27 PM
2

That line of thinking is far too pessimistic. By that logic, half of this sub shouldn't exist (only stuff strictly dealing with legalites allowed), the civil rights movements shouldn't have occured, you're taking on society after all. I completely agree we throw men under the bus too easily The way we fix this is we try to convince individuals. Sure, it will be a very slow process, but hopefully we'll make more progress. We have to try to fix something, because seeing an issue and being idle abo…
/r/MensRights16/01/19 11:51 PM
3

I agree in that society doesn't let men open up, and that we need to fix that. It's a multi-facet issue, society needs to accept men's and boy's emotions, parents need to teach boys to be expressive, and people just need to treat men and women the same, even on a social level. Thank you for getting at where I missed
/r/MensRights16/01/19 11:16 PM
1

I feel like growing up boys to not show emotion is a detrimental thing to boys and society as a whole. It causes more emotional outbursts, makes men and boys bottle their emotions up, etc. It's frustrating that if a boy shows sadness, they get made fun of. I'm not saying it's the men that need to fix it, I think it's parents that need to fix it.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 09:18 PM
0

The first thing I tried was ignoring it, it was initially name calling which didnt bother me, it caused them to eventually escalate from the normal name-calling to death threats/rape threats. The only thing that stopped them was when I had to leave school due to a death. I never said emotional weakness would solve the problem, but it is a problem when I go to a school board saying "this kid wants to murder my family, he also keeps leaving dead animals outside my door" and they don't do anything …
/r/MensRights16/01/19 05:37 PM
2

I think you seem to be misunderstanding me, as I wasn't saying bullying was an example of toxic masculinity. The responses I got was: be stoic, the parents saying 'boys will be boys' when I told them their kid told me he would rape my mom with their shotguns barrel. The responses was the entire point of that, not the bullying itself. Me being told to be stoic, and their parents ignoring behavior that should be a red flag is toxic to everyone involved.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 05:27 PM
0

You would disagree that boys are raised to be violent, stoic, and taught that girls play hard to get? Or do you disagree that those are masculine behaviors? In addition, would you disagree with calling the behaviors I put for women toxic femininity? About the 'toxic' part of toxic masculinity. When someone says toxic masculinity, they aren't calling masculinity as a whole toxic (at least, sane people aren't), they are pointing to specific behaviors, like I did, that boys are told/taught to do an…
/r/MensRights16/01/19 04:09 PM
-8

I both agree toxic elements of masculinity exist (being overly-stoic, violence, 'playing hard to get', etc.) and think this whole sub is being over-reactive about this. Sure there are certainly elements of toxic femininity (treating other women like shit, manipulative behavior, getting a kid to financially dominate your partner, etc.) and it is a double standard, but that's not what this sub says. This sub says there aren't toxic elements of masculinity and simultaneously gets offended (which th…
/r/MensRights16/01/19 03:48 PM
3

Rule 6 of their sub "TRUMP SUPPORTERS ONLY". They are promoting themselves as a Trump-only space. A safe-space for trump supporters if you will. Do you see a similar role here? I don't. I can disagree with posts on this sub and not get banned. Not in the_donald, though
/r/MensRights16/01/19 07:36 AM
3

Y'know what, I don't idolize him and I don't know anyone who does. I have 0 idea why the right thinks we idolize soros, I've never met a person who likes the dude. If it were anyone but himself saying it, my point stands. Now I just think there's an equal chance of lying/him being a piece of shit. If it's true, however, that's fucking insane. I think he's lying because risk/reward ratio. He's jewish, it wouldn't make sense for him to be working for the nazis as he would be killed. It's a strange…
/r/MensRights16/01/19 01:11 AM
11

When you X-Post, the crossposted thing gets a comment saying "this post has been posted in another sub", which usually either promotes brigading or will eventually turn this sub into another T_D2.0 which is what happened to cringeanarchy.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 07:29 PM
21

It'a a right-wing safe-space, this is supposed to be a place for us to focus on men's issues. You can't properly discuss in a safe space. People would be equally against it if someone x-posted from Politics or LSC, because this is a place for discussion and none of those subs allow dissent. They're all juat circle-jerks and don't promote discussion nor debate
/r/MensRights15/01/19 07:21 PM
2

Holy shit, are you really that insane? Soros was born in 1930, the holocaust started in 1941. He was 11 at the start and 15 at the end. Do you think the nazis allowed a 11-15 year old JEW to become a nazi? That's insane. He fucking said that. He's either lying or a piece of shit, and IMO both have an equal chance.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 07:07 PM
4

No. A jury would be the accountable ones here, they decided he was guilty. The judge handed out the sentence and oversaw the trial, that's it. Even then, that is beyond backwards, if you implemented that, nobody would put a man in jail for fear of being put in jail. Jury duty is fucked as is and this would make it so much worse. Sure, I'm all for any ideas that are sane to improve the "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" idea in action, but this is not sane. In addition, you …
/r/MensRights06/01/19 07:50 AM
1

"If the man is innocent until proven guilty, then she is lying until proven otherwise." This directly implies you either want Defamation cases against women who accuse someone of sexual abuse to be guilty until proven innocent. You disbelieve sexual abuse victims entering an investigation, which biases in favor of the abuser. In addition, that "she is lying until proven otherwise" line could be used to make sexual abusers sue their victim when the victim makes the claim, to silence them. In addi…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 10:35 PM
1

What? You are literally in favor of guilty until proven innocent. That would become a tool to imprison those you don't like, and would imprison far more people who are innocent. I'm simply saying that I understand people are flawed and therefore the justice system is flawed. False imprisonment is rare but will happen. In a perfect world nobody innocent would be imprisoned. There is no system in which there is no innocent people imprisoned, save for a system without justice.
/r/MensRights28/12/18 08:51 PM
1

I would much rather someone be condemned falsely rather than have a raped person be sued for trying to convict their rapist. So you're saying these two things: It does default You can accuse someone of a sex crime and it condemns them So what is the point of defaulting if it isn't helping with the first part enough to stop it or slow it enough so the false rape claims stop/are in acceptable limits? Hell, from what I've researched, about 2-8% of claims of sexual abuse are false, which is acceptab…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 06:59 PM
1

Your hypothetical isn't taking into account the majority of claims where a sexual abuse claim doesn't result in jail time. Insufficient evidence. Insufficient evidence towards abuse taking place shouldn't default the idea that the accuser is lying, which is what you want. The worst that can happen by doing that is a raped girl is sued for trying to take her rapist to court, and losing the initial case and is sued for defamation and the rapist default wins. Thats a perversion of justice, we shoul…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 06:29 PM
1

Because this case she likely wasn't assaulted, she is guilty of defamation. I don't deny that. Two things: The ambiguity of the statements you linked (also, from what source?) makes it seem like saying "x abused me in the past" when x did abuse the person is defametion by recklessness. That makes 0 fucking sense to me, it shouldn't be illegal to correctly say that. You said it's impossible to have 2 parties be innocent until proven guilty, I was arguing about that, not the finer points of defama…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 05:33 PM
1

If it was false or recklessley made is what you should have emphasized. You still need to prove it's false or recklessly made (I'm presuming that means spreading the accusation even when true to defame them). A false accusation of criminal conduct is defamatory. It needs to be false. You can't go switching to guilty until proven innocent because you're worried about being falsely accused. That's batshit insane.
/r/MensRights28/12/18 04:39 PM
1

What? You need: proof of harmed reputation, proof the statement is false, and proof that the accused (of defamation) made the statement. IIRC a true claim of a crime committed (where the defamed commits a crime against the defamer) is not defamation. I don't find it strange to continue with the way our justice system has been for hundreds of years, because it is a net benifit. Anything besides innocent until proven guilty gives the state way too much power. They could make baseless claims and ho…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 04:15 PM
1

No. Because she's, in this hypothetical, also being accused of defamation. Even if she wasnt in this hypothetical, they can both be innocent until proven guilty, our justice system would be broken if we started assuming the accuser is lying. Think about how you could abuse that: Being accused of sexual assault? Say they're defaming you! Instantly she's guilty until proven innocent! The justice system isn't just innocent until proven guilty, its innocent until proven guilty and statements have to…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 03:44 PM
2

That's fine, however, the fact that this sub still assumes the girl is lying when the investigation is pending still happens. I am all for pursuing people who put false claims forth for defamation suits. The recent one that bugged me
/r/MensRights28/12/18 03:23 PM
0

No but it's certainly wrong to believe all accusers are lying when they accuse. Assume nothing, investigate and find the truth. Unless an investigation finds something we shouldn't be calling anyone liars or abusers
/r/MensRights28/12/18 03:11 PM
1

What? I get sick of the fact that all the time in this sub it's filled with false accusation stuff, jordan peterson stuff, anti-feminist stuff, etc. We don't really focus on issues all that much, just indivudal stories without even knowing the full story and the women is defaulted to be lying rather than nobody defaulted to be anything. Like that picture of a vet holding up a sign that was a list of shit like "paid 50k in, don't have custody, a vet wasn't picked over a normal person" and no arti…
/r/MensRights28/12/18 03:09 PM
-21

r/menslib is a pretty good alt. I use this for supplemental stuff that it misses.
/r/MensRights28/12/18 02:33 AM
10

How the fuck did I miss that? Still, the point stands. The post about "man kills self after sexual assault allegation" is what irked me today. It's filled with people saying the accuser should go to jail but nowhere does it say the accusations were false. Shit happens all the time on this sub, and it's annoying because it blocks the real issues.
/r/MensRights28/12/18 02:24 AM
-3

Where does it say that?
/r/MensRights28/12/18 02:19 AM
24

I really hate how many people in this sub think that an unproven accusation = a false accusation.
/r/MensRights28/12/18 02:11 AM
1

Men and Women both support sharia law in north africa. The reason men support it and the reason women support it is the same. They believe their religion should supersede all. I understand no two nonrandomly selected groups have the same merit, I never said that. So you're a race realist? K. When it comes to differences between whites and non-whites in standardized testing is the difference between the amount of whites in poverty vs the amount of non-whites in poverty, in addition to the lack of…
/r/MensRights23/11/18 05:50 PM
-1

You can't control longevity, I am all for letting men have more rights when it comes to parenting, the justice system needs reform, etc. I think we agree on most, the original guy was seemingly against equality of opportunity, which is asinine The thing I might disagree with you on is the 'equality of presence' point. I think the only equality of presence should occur organically, with no governmental intervention Also, i never said that equality meant only affecting women, the rules I stated ne…
/r/MensRights23/11/18 01:11 AM
-2

As for A. Because the differences between a functional adult and a child/disabled person are Non-Negligable as noted in D B. That doesn't matter, as we should be basing employment and higher ed scholarships on merit. Skipping C because you gave no examples to discuss D. What specific differences, may I ask? They must be non-negligible/significant. For the "women use more healthcare", that's true but remedied by giving everyone healthcare They are taxed at the same rate, as they should be, it sho…
/r/MensRights22/11/18 11:35 PM
1

You are sincerely misinterpreting equality Equality means this (my pseudo definition to explain this to you), it requires these 4 things to be actually equal A. The people in question are viewed as legally the same, meaning if they did the same crime they get the same time B. Legal, Occupational, and Education discrimination is illegal, and the groups in question are viewed as equal, only discriminating based on merit C. There are institutions in place to prevent the discrimination mentioned abo…
/r/MensRights22/11/18 10:55 PM
12

r/ihadastroke
/r/MensRights19/11/18 10:42 PM
1

Was talking about the United States because that's where the majority of people on this sub are from, and the article is written about the United States
/r/MensRights19/11/18 04:21 AM
1

I'm serious when I say this: Either you have no idea how bad blacks had it in the 50s, or you have a seriously skewed view on how badly men are treated now
/r/MensRights19/11/18 03:47 AM
1

Please send me the first two, I need discrimination to the point of not being able to be educated or vote respectively, these have to be equal to a black person in the 50s The work force is majority men. If someone said "only 5% of ceos are female in field x" you would be saying it's their choice to work that hard. Same applies for majority female jobs, so don't include those. What blatant anti-male gender discrimination happens in the workforce? As for the modern hiring practices, education, et…
/r/MensRights19/11/18 03:11 AM
2

I still disagree. Men aren't being barred from half of all schools in existence, facing the inability to vote from "literacy tests", being barred from a signifigant amount of places to work, facing pay discrimination, I could go on, but the point stands
/r/MensRights18/11/18 07:36 PM
13

Not to be annoying, but be said "men aren't nearly as persecuted as black men were" So using the modern racial gap does not work for that, as he was saying the difference in persecution from the past. It would work if he was comparing the difference between persecution of blacks and just men in general now.
/r/MensRights16/11/18 06:58 PM
10

If anything against this was presented without sources, we would be asking for sources. It is literally your job to provide sources, as the person making the claim has the burden of proof on them. So by posting this, it became your job to provide sources, but it was originally the person who created its job.
/r/MensRights13/11/18 12:29 AM
11

There should be a list of sources at the bottom for each stat Like this : men are 3.4x more likely than women to be imprisoned for the same crime1 Yadda yadda 1: source url
/r/MensRights12/11/18 06:56 PM
3

Ten muscly men
/r/MensRights10/11/18 03:44 AM
6

No, dumbo. It's ten million money
/r/MensRights10/11/18 03:26 AM
2

Fair point
/r/MensRights29/10/18 09:44 PM
2

No. It's someone beating someone else. It's your civic duty to at the very least call the cops.
/r/MensRights29/10/18 08:31 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 02:16 PM
0

You'd be suprised. If you try and search for stats on false rape claims, there are only about 4 sources readily avalible not behind paywall. The one I cited. The three that the above one cited.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 02:14 PM
0

Sorry. Was in a different argument here and was told to "google fbi source on false rape stats" and I did and got this. But if you're gonna get info on false rape stats, I think the National Sexual Violence Resource Center isn't the worst idea for a source. This is the first time I'm hearing of issuss related to Lisak.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 02:04 PM
0

Source is here https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjAsrvnvp3eAhVSn-AKHa9mDNMQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1zs97YRv7CpQEzK8W0wyDP&cshid=1540329592608 It's on end of page 2, start of 3. I literally pasted what they put. Every claim you "debunk" is there.
/r/MensRights24/10/18 08:18 PM
0

No it doesnt. I pasted the source RAINN uses pertinent information above. Their criteria for a "false rape" claim is both ridiciulous and not widely used First of all, the source says "some police stations use these requirements, but many do not" Second of all, the standards include things such as delayed reporting and not enough evidence. So, essentially, the criteria allow a claim that isn't proven to be as false as one disproven.
/r/MensRights24/10/18 06:54 PM
1

Yes and no. The report worked with the data it had. It wasn't complete, inferred from the statement "some police offices follow this criteria, but most don't" In addition, the critera for a false rape claim is blatantly wrong. Mainly the "delayed report" and "not enough evidence" ones, although one could argue "not taking issue to injury" being one, as some people could call pregnancy an injury. Say a woman gets raped and doesn't abort for religious reasons, therefore according to these criteria…
/r/MensRights24/10/18 12:49 AM
5

Okay. So I did some searching and the issue is far more complicated than you were saying. This is a direct quote from this source (Noted things important in bold done by me) "To date, much of the research conducted on the prevalence of false allegations of sexual assaults is unreliable because of inconsistencies with definitions and methods employed to evaluate data (Archambault, n.d.). A review of research finds that the prevalence of false reporting is between 2 percent and 10 percent. The fol…
/r/MensRights23/10/18 09:26 PM
-1

Wait, what. You're really saying that 2.25 accusations of rape are true? And you're saying RAINN said that? Well, that is utter bullshit. The closest thing I found to that was "only 6 out of 1000 perpetrators of sexual assault will go to prison". This makes sense, as it's a fucking hard crime to prove. SOURCE (its in a big box at the top)
/r/MensRights23/10/18 09:19 PM
2

Ya got a source on that? If so, I'd love to have it.
/r/MensRights23/10/18 09:12 PM
1

Sex isn't inherently predatory, adults using kids for behaviors outside of their best interest is. I assume a greater age gap implies less concern because it does. Preteens and adolescents aren't able to rear children, raise children, etc. By the way, sexual maturity and the best time for child rearing is mid to late twenties. Not fucking 12. Younger people, like the ages of 10-12, literally do not have a sex drive.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 11:18 PM
0

No we aren't in agreement here. The brain isn't developed enough until about 18-20 to make decisions like that. I'm in agreement with the law, because it agrees with biology. If two 16 year olds want to, that's fine, but a 16 and a 12 year old? Fuck no. A 22 and a 12 year old? Way worse. Also, the whole "you need a bachelors degree to be an adult" line is retarded. College isn't for everyone, trades are also needed. You become an adult, depending on the person, at age 18-20. The 1890s was awful …
/r/MensRights17/10/18 07:01 PM
1

While it is obvious you are parroting what I said and changing the age, I will still address it. Quick note, you did say age 12, so I will be talking about adolescence and the age of the early twenties There are two main points which disprove what you are saying. Frontal Lobe Development The frontal lobe is responsible for decision making in the brain. It has it's largest developmental period during the ages of 10-14. The second least development happens in the ages of 18-24, and the development…
/r/MensRights17/10/18 04:34 PM
1

No it doesn't. For two reasons It's inherently predatory for a teacher student relationship to exist. Even if they are both consenting adults. It always becomes either the teacher using grades to blackmail or the teacher biasing grades in favor of the student. The male case started with the kid being 12. 12 year old cannot consent. Their brains are not able to make educated decisions on those sorts of things.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 01:19 AM
1

From a different comment " Alaina Ferguson (Texas) had a two-month affair with a 16 year-old student, during which she regularly provided him with alcohol. Sentenced to 120 days, to be served intermittently (at least two weeks per year). Dennis Turner (Florida) had a three-year relationship with a student that became sexual when she turned 15, but was romantic prior to that. According to this story, "[t]he victim told authorities that Turner committed sexual acts with her on a near daily basis d…
/r/MensRights17/10/18 01:08 AM
1

Vastly different crimes. The woman had sex with a student one time The dude had sex with a student many times, almost daily, called her his wife and gave her booze (both are evidence of grooming), etc. Also different states, so sentancing goes into play there as well. Not saying attraction may not change things, just that here it isn't much of a factor
/r/MensRights17/10/18 01:07 AM
1

Because he was grooming a child. I know it seems weird, but doing shit like dressing up as santa and making kids sit on your lap would be a red flag to me, if coming from someone who was convicted as a pedophile. This dude had sex with a 15 year old girl daily, gave her booze, called her his wife, etc. So for a probation officer, this would make sense to have as red flags.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 01:05 AM
4

Your last line is "which would only be a problem if some women are making false claims" which they are. It seems like you're saying they aren't.
/r/MensRights08/10/18 09:16 PM
5

Some women are making false claims.
/r/MensRights08/10/18 08:14 PM
1

They wouldn't call it gang rape unless they actually fucked her, they'd say it's harassment.
/r/MensRights12/06/18 02:40 PM
3

I completely disagree that there should be a test.
/r/MensRights26/04/18 06:52 PM
0

Sorry. I meant it had 0 numbers at all besides the raw number of overall people employed
/r/MensRights30/01/18 05:17 AM
-8

I checked the source for "power plant operators" and there were no numbers for racial groups male or female amounts
/r/MensRights30/01/18 04:51 AM
146

r/titlegore
/r/MensRights21/01/18 03:36 AM
2

From that article "Women do of course commit homicide offences, but nearly always the victim is a relative and the crime was committed against the backdrop of an abusive relationship or depressive mindset. "
/r/MensRights21/12/17 02:29 AM
11

Many people in this sub have read up on privilege or heard of it from people in the media. Some agree on the concept of racial and gender privilege, and many (including myself), reject the idea that just being a certain race entails you into having privileges over others of different races. The initial image is satire based on the idea that homeless men are still more privileged than non homeless women or non whites. Here is an example of the thing this post is mocking ( https://m.huffpost.com/u…
/r/MensRights24/10/17 06:08 AM
5

Forgot the "/s"
/r/MensRights24/10/17 05:58 AM
0

666th updoot
/r/MensRights24/10/17 04:57 AM
2

This might sound stupid, but was he able to unregister as a sex offender?
/r/MensRights09/10/17 10:00 PM
1

Twice the posts, double the karma
/r/MensRights08/10/17 11:05 PM
1

Sorry to be a dick but, if you click the article, one of the first lines is "Gender term like 'male' and 'female' could be stripped from Australian classrooms as a way to make transgender children more comfortable". Note the "could be"
/r/MensRights04/10/17 07:15 AM
10

Mkay.
/r/MensRights30/09/17 05:42 PM
7

Envelopment was the one I was struggling to think of
/r/MensRights30/09/17 04:49 PM
9

Why are a lot of your posts about rape?
/r/MensRights30/09/17 04:46 PM
9

Whats the stupid term for forcing a vagina on a man before they wake up?
/r/MensRights30/09/17 04:44 PM
2

Someone can both be a feminist and make a false rape claim. Making a false rape claim does not turn them into a non-feminist
/r/MensRights30/08/17 03:09 PM
1

"Fake police reports and phony articles about a possibly non-existent wage gap are not real feminism" is committing a no true scotsman fallacy. You then attribute faking feminist account and activity as regular activity for anti-feminists, both sides try to make the other look bad. It's just how humans argue, we're all dicks
/r/MensRights30/08/17 12:42 PM
93

Heads women lose, tails men win FTFY
/r/MensRights26/08/17 11:11 PM
2

r/mildlyinteresting ? More like r/mildlyinfuriating
/r/MensRights13/08/17 04:13 AM
-4

I would have to go through that and read it again. I'm currently busy so i can't
/r/MensRights01/08/17 10:00 PM
1

Right after where she talks about the flaccid penis
/r/MensRights01/08/17 09:38 PM
1

The part that may make it rape is he may not have been able to consent. If consent wasn't possible, and the story happened, rape occurred. She kept riding him with a flaccid penis while he was passed out. It seems equivalent to fucking an unconcious girl who's vagina is dry because she isn't awake and not horny
/r/MensRights01/08/17 07:41 PM
13

If she wasn't in stable mind, to the point of passing out multiple times, and you keep reinitiating the sexual act before reaffirming consent and even make sure they can consent, then yes you would be. In my mind, it does have to be handled on a case by case basis, but passing out is a sign that consent cannot occur. This story makes it sound like he was on the verge of going to the E.R over alcohol poisoning, which would be a situation where consent can't occur
/r/MensRights01/08/17 06:13 PM
63

I'm not going to downvote you, as i like having actual conveesation. First thing, she went to his dorm. Not that it matters, just clearing it up. It says in the transcript "Is it still considered getting head if the guy falls asleep every three seconds". It explicitly says the dude kept falling asleep, she knew that, and continued fucking him. Read my other comment about consent and rape definitions and why i think this falls undee the definition of rape as defined by the department of justice. …
/r/MensRights01/08/17 05:29 PM
1

I actually want to have a conversation, so I'm not going to downvote comments that disagree with mr btw. I would love a response, as i don't want the fifteen minutes of finding conclusive definitions to go to waste
/r/MensRights01/08/17 05:21 PM
1

U/MexicanTeenGuy, thanks for bringing this to my attention
/r/MensRights01/08/17 05:18 PM
6

He passed out multiple times, she woke him up with penetration while he was sleeping, and was still fucking him
/r/MensRights01/08/17 05:17 PM
2

I didn't know until today
/r/MensRights01/08/17 05:16 PM
4

Im going to quote the exact words so that we don't have a misunderstanding. "It is not rape just because he was drunk, especially considering he fell asleep during sex and she just left" According to https://www.justice.gov/archives/ovw/blog/updated-definition-rape (on mobile, don't know how to do links) “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” Consent is d…
/r/MensRights01/08/17 05:13 PM
2

The guy was slipping in and out of conciousness. He wasn't in stable mind. If i were to see any guy i know be like that, i would rush him to the E.R, as he might be suffering from alochol poisoning. If its a guy fucking a guy, or a girl fucking a girl, or a guy fucking a girl, or a girl fucking a guy, the standard should be the same. In my opinion, i think if the either person is falling unconcious due to drugs or alcohol, or even sleep deprivation, and the other person fully knows that, and con…
/r/MensRights01/08/17 04:38 PM
2

Turning a few paragraphs long story into a single sentence, leaving out key details is what people who want clicks do. You are giving the other guy shit for not having nuance, but when he is adressing the actual transcript, you reverted to simplifying and lying by omission. You, get some damn nuance
/r/MensRights01/08/17 04:31 PM
7

Yes. You can deliberately twist words and leave details out to fit a narrative or to try and protray something as it is not. It's called lying by omission.
/r/MensRights01/08/17 04:27 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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