TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

RobotPolarbear Archive

View 1 posts and 33 comments by RobotPolarbear 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)
5

RobotPolarbear/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:14 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-7

I'd have a lot more respect for the mens rights movement if rape denial was not part of the agenda.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 06:50 PM
1

That's a good point. The biological father has never paid child support to anyone and he refuses to pay child support to the adoptive parents. He feels no responsibility to his child. It's like he views the child as property that he is entitled to.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 01:29 AM
1

I'm actually really relieved to know that his viewpoints aren't representative of the majority.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 01:25 AM
1

It depends on the state, apparently. Sometimes they consider what the child wants, sometimes they don't. Apparently in this case they didn't care that the kid wants nothing to do with his bio-father and is terrified of him.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 10:24 PM
1

The fetishization of biology harms everyone involved.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 09:45 PM
2

It should. I really like to believe that most people accept this, but I've worked with children who had been removed from their homes because of abuse and/or neglect, and it's exceedingly common for the parents in those situations to think that their "parental rights" are more important than their child's wellbeing. They don't even deny the abuse/neglect. They just argue that no one should interfere.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 09:43 PM
2

I agree with all of this, with the small exception that neglect or harm of the child invalidates whatever rights a person has to them. In this situation bio-mom already willingly legally gave up her rights to her children and I feel that the bio-dad passively gave up his rights by showing no interest for the first 7 years.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 09:34 PM
2

You know, I'm really not sure. I think it might be differences in state laws. It might also be because the bio-dad never formally had his parental rights terminated. He knew about the baby and he made it clear that he didn't want anything to do with it, but they never went through the formality of terminating his rights. The interesting thing is that my friend actually paid child support when the kids were with their mom. He never objected to paying the child support (when the kids were actually…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 09:32 PM
2

I'm seriously confused by the way you view this issue. In my opinion, the child's rights and safety are the most important issue. Putting the child first would lead to making different decisions about custody in every situation. Being "consistent" about what influence biology has on the situation is less important than doing what is right for the child.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 09:15 PM
–

Do you always view the world in black and white or is it just on this issue?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 08:18 PM
1

Determining what is best for a child isn't a "feeling". Laws can be written to favor whatever custody arrangement is objectively best for a child. Why should this man's "right" to his child trump the child's rights?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:50 PM
2

I don't want to be too specific, just in case. I feel I should be especially discrete since this is not my story. I can say that it happened in the US, in a state that falls under the ninth circuit. My friend did mention that this state usually favors the biological parent in cases where adoptive parents or step-parents fight for custody.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:48 PM
1

Consistency is what matters? What about the child's rights and what's best for them?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:43 PM
2

From the bio-father's own admission, he knew about the child but had never tried to make contact. He fully admitted in court that he'd had no interest in the child until he was seven. Their current arrangement is pretty similar to that. The child visits bio-dad and grandparents now. However, bio-dad and grandparents are now poisoning the child against his adoptive parents and interfering with parenting. For example, my friend provided the child with a cellphone to keep during visitation in case …
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:35 PM
2

For a while it actually looked like the bio-dad was going to get full custody simply because the bio-mom had already signed away her parental rights and the court refused to recognize my friend as a parent. The only reason he didn't end up getting full custody was that he had some prior drug convictions and refused to sign and affidavit stating that he was clean.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:30 PM
1

I guess you must approach it differently than I do. The few times I've brought it up, circumcised men have gotten angry at me for suggesting that they are mutilated.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:16 PM
2

From the beginning of my argument I said that I understood that there were multiple forms of FGM and that some forms of FGM could be comparable to traditional male circumcision. I was not aware that there were multiple forms of MGM beyond the usual male circumcision performed in the US. So I will concede that it could be accurate to compare FGM and MGM, depending on what types you were discussing. I stand by my position that it's not necessary to make these comparisons in order to form an effect…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:58 PM
2

If you can get someone to actively listen to you for that sort of argument, then it would an effective point. In my experience, people don't listen well when discussing circumcision. For example, when I was still living at home with my parents I babysat a friend's infant son. He was not circumcised, which I already knew, but my parents found out when I changed his diaper. My parents were shocked and it sparked a conversation about circumcision and whether or not I would ever circumcise my child …
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:32 PM
0

I have often heard men claim that they would kill any man who raped their wife or child, but I've always interpreted this as a very emotional reaction. As common as this sentiment is, I'm not sure I see it as being heavily influenced by cultural expectations and masculinity. As a woman, I have a very emotional reaction to the idea of anyone sexually assaulting any of my loved ones. If someone I cared about very much were raped, my initial reaction probably would be a desire to kill the perpetrat…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:15 PM
-1

Hmm... Well, I guess we are at an impasse then. I think culture teaches men to be aggressive in getting what they want and that they are entitled to sex. The combination of these two masculinity myths can contribute to (not cause) rape.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:02 PM
3

Actually, that's one of the reasons WHY I think comparing them doesn't work. FGM is already illegal in most areas and at this point we're just working on changing people's oppinions in order to stop it being done illegally. We're at a very different point in combating MGM because it is still widely practiced and legal almost everywhere. In that sense, MGM is a bigger problem. Your assumptions about my beliefs are wrong. However, because most people do think that FGM is barbaric and MGM is civili…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:46 PM
3

See, there's so much cultural context in all these arguments that I just think it's more effective to discuss them without comparing them. I'm not in favor of any of them and I think everyone should be working to advocate for children's bodily integrity, but the way approach that is going to be different in every culture.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:03 PM
1

Really? I was unaware that there are multiple forms of male circumcision. Well, I know that the Jewish ceremony regarding circumcision differs from the way it's performed in a hospital, but I was under the impression that the results were the same.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:43 PM
-1

I'm not advocating anything. I'm discussing the social context and intention of the phrase "Real Men Don't Rape". That phrase doesn't create a harmful or restrictive limitation. The phrase "Real women don't kill their children" wouldn't create harmful or restrictive limitations either, but wouldn't make sense since women aren't culturally encouraged to kill their children and such acts are fairly uncommon. If female perpetrated rape was as common a problem as male perpetrated rape, I would be su…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:33 PM
-2

I'd agree with that too. The problem is that people internalize and react to stereotypes differently. Some men internalize stereotypes about masculinity that lead to more "chivalrous" and self-sacrificing behavior. Other man internalize stereotypes about masculinity in ways that lead to violence when their "masculinity" is threatened by rejection or feeling weak. Both are unhealthy in different ways.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:17 PM
–

You don't think there are any stereotypes about masculinity and "being a man" that contribute to rape?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:02 PM
–

I tried to touch on the fact that not all forms of female circumcision are the same and that there are varying degrees of severity. It's difficult to have a conversation about comparison without getting into the detailed description of the procedures, which I don't want to do. The point is, the comparison between female and male circumcision does not need to be a part of forming a good argument against male circumcision. Since there are so many forms of female circumcision, it's not going to be …
/r/MensRights06/08/12 03:39 PM
-4

If such a message was being promoted because it counterbalanced actual gender stereotype messages about women's behavior, it would make sense. But there's aren't any female gender stereotypes that support the idea that women should kill their children. Also, the actual percentage of women who kill their children is small, especially compared to the percentage of men who rape.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 03:32 PM
–

I'm completely against infant circumcision. I think it should be illegal (no religious exception) and if I ever had a male child I wouldn't even consider circumcision. That said, I don't believe that male and female circumcision are equal. Both are wrong and both should be stopped, but they are not equally physically damaging. There are actually many types of female circumcision and while some forms are less severe and could possibly be equated to male circumcision in terms of levels of pain and…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:36 AM
0

I'd love to see your source.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:08 AM
0

I'm familiar with rape statistics but not very familiar with car accident statistics. Personally knowing far more rape victims than car accident victims, I suspect that the chances of being raped are much higher than being hit by a car.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:01 AM
–

The message "Real men don't rape" stems from a desire to undo the cultural messages about masculinity that can contribute to rape. Society contains so many restrictive gender stereotypes about what "Real men" do, like "real men take what the want" and "real men demand respect". While "Real men don't rape" isn't really an ideal anti-rape campaign message, it doesn't impose a restrictive gender stereotype on men. Other messages like "Real men don't cry" are harmful to men for obvious reasons. The …
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:57 AM
0

I tried to find some statistics on what percentage of people are hit by cars, but the exact numbers were a little hard to find. I'm wondering where you got yours because it just seems a little unrealistic.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:48 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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