| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | First Manspreading arrest in NYCThis I understand and agree with. It is seriously contradictive with the quote in question though (which has been deeply agreed upon here, judging from all the upvotes and further answer to my question), which makes me wonder. | /r/TheRedPill | 31/05/15 10:47 AM |
| 4 | First Manspreading arrest in NYCYou've got to be joking though, right? You can't seriously claim that you have a dick so large that it impedes your legs from being a moderate 10-30 degree angle (depending on how buff your legs are) from each other and require a 90 degree spread? That is definitely something straight out of imaginary lat syndrome. | /r/TheRedPill | 31/05/15 10:39 AM |
| -4 | First Manspreading arrest in NYCSo, are you familiar with something people call I.L.S. or Imaginary Lat Syndrome? Is that really manly too? Since it really is kind of what you are describing. In PL/BB communities these types of people are usually heavily frowned upon. I imagined that "manspreading" is certainly not much different. I certainly agree that by itself banning "manspreading" before banning fat people is pretty unreasonable. I only question the single quote I've outlined in my earlier comment. | /r/TheRedPill | 31/05/15 08:42 AM |
| 3 | First Manspreading arrest in NYCHey, I am just interested. Does the red pill train of thought seriously support this claim: "physiological fact that if you don't manspread, that makes you less of a man."? If so, why? | /r/TheRedPill | 31/05/15 07:53 AM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter