TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Sabremesh Archive

View 0 posts and 74 comments by Sabremesh 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)
0

As I said in my earlier comment, that convenient "selfie" is pretty laughable as evidence. What does it prove? It isn't clear who it is, or when it was taken.
/r/MensRights09/08/19 05:21 PM
2

I believe the "False Accusation" flair is premature in this instance. The woman appears to have consented to sex with more than one guy, but it seems this devolved into a gang-rape with several others becoming involved without her consent. Also, serious questions have been raised about the conduct of the police in this case, and how/why the woman supposedly retracted her allegations. My understanding is that the woman spent 8 hours in a Cypriot police station without legal representation, becaus…
/r/MensRights09/08/19 04:44 PM
-6

Feminism - really, the clue is in the name. It has only ever been about the promotion of women's rights, at the expense of everyone else's, including children. This is why feminist advocates never stop pushing (let alone concede ground) even in areas where women have more legal rights than men, such as family law. What everyone should demand is: Equal rights, equal opportunities, equal treatment. The playing field will be equal, but the outcomes will vary, because they are down to what you contr…
/r/MensRights14/02/18 03:00 PM
8

Personally, I use 3.1415, but I'm sure others go even further. Actually, for four places of decimals, rounding up to 3.1416 would be more accurate.
/r/TheRedPill31/08/16 12:06 AM
1

It's a "one-step" by compliments. I think that's good news. It is very important you do your own research on this - if necessary ask a pharmacist, but I believe this is one of the basic urine tests that only works after a woman has missed her period (menstruation). As I mentioned earlier, if she was fertile seven days ago (the supposed conception date), she would not have reached her usual menstruation time by now. So, if the image she sent you of the "positive" test is really hers, it's almost …
/r/MensRights07/08/16 07:55 PM
2

Seven days? That's very unlikely to be true then, because most self-tests don't work until the woman's next period is due which is 14 days after ovulation, and it is unlikely that a woman can still conceive a week after ovulation (ie 7 days ago). So it sounds like you're being scammed. You're a good target because, as you've told us, you have a good job = $$$ in her mind. Either she was already pregnant when you had sex (and she knew it - it's why she had unprotected sex with you) OR she's not p…
/r/MensRights07/08/16 02:10 PM
1

Affirmative action was ... to create, hopefully, an unbiased admissions system. Its purpose was actually to create a biased admissions system, so as to counteract perceived biases further upstream in the education system. In regards to this article, which is about the UK (where affirmative action is not a thing), the issue is more to do with how children are taught and assessed. Until the 1990s, school performance in most of the UK was purely based on exam results (at age 16 and 18), a system th…
/r/MensRights05/06/16 08:19 PM
4

I think true alphas are too busy making money and fucking women to be reading shit like this on /r/TheRedPill. In any event, this parable is misleading. Self-confidence is a necessary condition for true alpha status, but it is not "sufficient". Confidence will enable you to seduce many women, sure, but there has to be some alpha substance (ie not just a facade) for attractive women to actively try to seduce YOU. That's the true definition of alpha, surely. Also true alphas are recognised as such…
/r/TheRedPill15/10/14 12:58 AM
5

It's an embarrassing situation, granted, but it shouldn't invalidate a trial automatically. Eyewitness testimony is not very compelling on its own. It could be down to something as banal as the woman having poor eyesight, or not wanting to make eye-contact with the defendant. Presumably the accused had already been visually identified at some point before the trial. In addition, there appears to be some physical evidence (fingerprint) which would be far more significant than a visual (mis)identi…
/r/MensRights28/11/12 07:00 PM
6

But, but....you mean women aren't the primary victims of war? Mind blown (into tiny pieces by an artillery round).
/r/MensRights18/11/12 02:57 PM
10

The medical profession in the US has a conflict of interest on this issue (circumcision is a nice little earner for them). I think parents would be well advised to heed the medical advice from other developed countries which are not conflicted, and which don't advocate the systematic genital mutilation of infants for profit.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 10:59 PM
7

First of all you boldly state "there's no such thing as race" and then you ask me for a definition of it! I think you may be a bit of an idiot.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 10:01 AM
12

You are relying on an arse-backwards definition of "race". If you had access to basic common sense and a pair of spectacles (since you are clearly crippled by myopia), it would be quite obvious that there are distinct physiological differences between humans from different parts of the world.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 09:06 AM
7

do you now feel absolutely free and unrestrained by customs and morals in regards to women? You think we should throw morality out of the window. What are we, savages?
/r/MensRights23/04/12 08:37 PM
1

Did he force her to have sex? Even if he didn't, she might have claimed this was the case to exculpate herself from a statutory rape charge.
/r/MensRights05/04/12 01:03 PM
1

Here is an alternative scenario, because the very idea that someone would actually go to the POLICE to report that they were "downloading some files illegally when they accidentally downloaded some child porn" really does stretch credulity. Innocent until proven guilty and all that, but let us suppose it was the wife who actually found these images on the guy's computer. She confronts her husband who tries to fob her off with the "downloaded by accident" excuse. She then insists he goes to the p…
/r/MensRights07/03/12 12:05 PM
3

Wanting/not wanting is not the TEST for rape. It is quite possible to consent to something you don't really want or desire, in the absence of illegal coercion. I consent to cleaning the toilet from time to time, but do I want to do it? Do I fuck. Do people sometimes consent to having sex without really feeling like it (ie unwanted sex)? Well, yes they do. It is only rape when they say "no". Consent (implied or explicit) is everything. Conversely, if a woman really wants sex and yet clearly says …
/r/MensRights18/02/12 02:54 PM
1

Women might well be more likely to use protection when cheating, and this would spare some spouses from catching STDs from their unfaithful wives, so yes, a good thing from that perspective. I am not pro-life but I think the modern "consensus" that abortion is just another type of contraception with no wider implications than the rights of the host female is philosophically untenable.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 05:18 PM
1

There is a reason which doesn't seem to have been mentioned. Whilst I am absolutely in favour of mandatory paternity testing, there is little doubt that it would increase abortion rates. Many women who go to full term now, knowing (or suspecting) their spouse is not the father, would terminate to avoid the test.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 04:54 PM
6

Wise? I am not sure if that is the right question. Human rights transcend "wisdom", and freedom from (non-consensual) mutilation (for social or religious reasons) is undoubtedly a human right.
/r/MensRights04/12/11 04:12 PM
5

As regards the US, I am sure you are right. In many EU countries, this type of placard would be a criminal offence - if not for incitement, then for hate speech.
/r/MensRights18/11/11 05:23 PM
8

What if it said "Kill a nigger and I will give you $1000"?
/r/MensRights18/11/11 04:57 PM
10

Incitement to genocide is a crime. Incitement to gendercide should be too.
/r/MensRights18/11/11 04:04 PM
1

Is this a story from the 11th century, or is this woman a time travelling perv?
/r/MensRights11/11/11 03:26 PM
2

Strauss-Khan had a private suite. He didn't pursue the maid down a public corridor, so there won't be any cctv records.
/r/MensRights16/05/11 09:19 PM
0

Primitive human societies operated this way and it is only in recent human history (particularly with the Judaeo-Christian doctrine of MONOGAMY) that beta males were able to compete more fairly for access to females. However, rising income inequality between the rich and everyone else, particularly in the US, has once again resulted in a skewed sexual marketplace. The majority of women gravitate towards a limited pool of rich/alpha men (ie excluding 90% of men), and inevitably, most of these wom…
/r/MensRights27/02/11 01:43 PM
4

Only a beta male would say this. Similarly the only people who think we live in a classless society are lower middle class. It is partly denial, partly because they have no experience of alphas/upper classes.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 01:29 PM
3

About as valid an argument as saying that "women who are raped can sometimes gain from the experience".
/r/MensRights14/02/11 02:08 PM
2

The "intimidation" excuse is absurd. Women simply aren't good enough to compete consistently at the highest level. Why the surprise? Virtually all competitive activities (physical or intellectual) are segregated on gender lines at elite level, and those that are not (eg Scrabble) are completely dominated by men. All humans are in competition, but competition amongst females is largely passive - a woman's looks are primarily responsible for her ability to secure high quality mates (however unfair…
/r/MensRights19/01/11 07:39 PM
2

Once the foreskin is removed it doesn't really matter what happens to it. Totally disingenuous argument. Can't you see that?
/r/MensRights19/11/10 01:16 PM
11

You need to think beyond your own little world, and consider the ethical implications of an unnecessary mutilation of another human being. Even if you think it's acceptable to inflict this procedure a male infant, would it be OK at age 4? Or at 8? Or at 12? The logic seems to be that a baby does not know/feel what is going on, so it's acceptable. It isn't.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 11:14 PM
1

Fair play to you. I believe that the inviter should naturally pay for the meal of the invitee without the expectation of anything being returned (the invitee's acceptance of and attendance on the date is sufficient consideration to complete the contract). However, it is good manners of the part of invitee to offer go dutch if they feel that there is "no future" with the inviter. Of course, if the invitee does feel there is a future, they can and should reciprocate by offering to pay for the next…
/r/MensRights13/10/10 09:34 PM
1

Our "paki" shops (term is not PC) also sell toiletries, tinned food and have a display of wilted vegetables which nobody buys. More synonymous with "corner shop" I guess.
/r/MensRights27/09/10 09:51 AM
0

Look, we already have a ritual like this in the UK. It doesn't have a name, but it involves making an under-age purchase of a 2-litre bottle of diamond white cider from a "Paki" shop, and drinking so much you puke and then fall unconscious on the pavement.
/r/MensRights25/09/10 06:45 PM
3

So, if I can interpret what you're saying, a painful and unnecessary pseudo-medical procedure on a human infant is fine, as long as they're not girls?
/r/MensRights25/07/10 05:45 PM
7

Strange that a word that doesn't exist can still get 2,150,000 hits on Google. You do know how to use Google, right? Note: Saying the word aloud WILL give you zero matches in Google, but this is not normally a reliable result. You actually have to type in the word you are looking up.
/r/MensRights25/07/10 10:50 AM
5

In England vets take care of animals. Perhaps American vets would be happier over here?
/r/MensRights13/07/10 10:21 PM
1

You have stated that being accused of rape is worse than actually being raped. The logical extension of your staggeringly nonsensical point of view is that you would rather be murdered than accused of murder. As well as being unbalanced, you have delusions of intelligence far above the reality of your special needs, and it would be unfair of me to taunt you any further.
/r/MensRights08/06/10 09:22 PM
0

You are clearly unbalanced.
/r/MensRights08/06/10 04:58 PM
1

There are estimated stats on the likelihood of an actual rapist getting sent to jail, and it is considerably below 10%. Realistically, the chances of an innocent person being sent to jail for a rape they did not commit must surely be less than 1%. So, on balance, the false accusation would be preferable, simply because you would have a good chance of clearing of your name. Just ask yourself, would you rather be raped or accused of rape.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 05:23 PM
8

I daresay the parents of a 15 year old daughter who is raped might think their "nightmare" is just as bad. I think reddit needs to remember that not every accusation of rape is "false". This is the defence strategy in virtually all cases of actual rape, so it's important to keep an open mind.
/r/MensRights07/06/10 11:26 AM
6

Well, ask yourself this. Is it offensive for a woman to dupe a man into a believing a baby is his, when she knows it is (or is likely) another man's? What would be a reasonable course of action for the duped man, in your view?
/r/MensRights04/06/10 09:03 PM
2

You seem to be agreeing with me. I refer you to my first comment in which I said. "It is more rational and much fairer to keep an open mind until you hear the evidence". The original OP said he would "not believe" (ie treat as false) any rape claim by a woman. I am saying he should keep an open mind until he has heard the evidence!
/r/MensRights16/05/10 11:31 PM
3

It is called "prejudice" - he has decided in advance that an accusation of rape must be a lie, irrespective of the facts. Rape exists, it is not a myth. In fact it is an integral part of what it means to be human, and has proven to be a successful procreative tactic by males throughout human history. I will stick my neck out and say that every human alive today owes their existence to to conceptions from forced intercourse in previous generations. However, at an individual level, rape is a gross…
/r/MensRights15/05/10 12:37 PM
6

Frankly, I hope you never get to serve on a jury, because you are clearly someone who would struggle to make an impartial decision. You are no better than a "feminist" who believes all accusations of rape are automatically true. It is more rational and much fairer to keep an open mind until you hear the evidence. Also, I don't want to mess with your preconceptions but for every man who goes to jail on a false rape conviction, a dozen genuine rape cases end in an acquittal, and a hundred never ev…
/r/MensRights13/05/10 11:53 PM
22

The men are killed. At this point they become a statistic, which disqualifies them from ongoing "victimhood" status that feminists esteem so highly. On that fucked up logic, yes, women are the "primary victims" of war.
/r/MensRights28/04/10 10:20 AM
3

Wait. Can you hear that heart-wrenching noise? It's the sound a baby foetus makes when your doctor chops it up inside you. Look, I support a woman's right to terminate. I do find it appalling that so many women who exercise their right to choose end up doing so on more than one occasion, as if it were a trivial lifestyle choice like having botox. Let's just agree to disagree.
/r/MensRights25/04/10 11:11 PM
1

I'm more concerned with the welfare of children in the societies the 'opt-out' scheme would produce. I see. So why are you not "more concerned with the welfare of the children" who are chopped into little pieces and removed from the womb with forceps?
/r/MensRights25/04/10 09:39 PM
4

Abortion is sexist and the law should be modified. I mean why should only women be allowed to murder foetuses? But seriously, since a prospective mother can decide to sever the connection between herself and the foetus she is hosting without the father's consent, this right should be extended to the man, in the sense that he should be allowed to sever any legal link or financial obligation between the foetus and himself. Incidentally, women can also do this legal severance thing even after the b…
/r/MensRights25/04/10 04:20 PM
4

FBI to subscribers of r/jailbait: be afraid - all your history of deviant downloads are belong to us.
/r/MensRights20/04/10 12:07 AM
3

Cognitive delays, retarded, slow - these words are idiotic euphemisms, because really dumb people are not simply slow in achieving comprehension - often their brains are not capable of comprehending a concept however much time they are given. They are cognitively impaired.
/r/MensRights09/04/10 10:57 AM
-3

but honestly it doesn't really bother me. of course you don't, they are "only" Chinese. But seriously, vastly more men than women are killed in industrial accidents, and the press is not much concerned with such stories. Particularly if they happen in another country.
/r/MensRights01/04/10 03:53 PM
7

Absurd comparison. Diamonds are not affected by wear and tear or mechanical obsolescence - they are virtually indestructible in normal use as jewellery, so there is no good reason why they should mysteriously depreciate by 50% (which they do!) on leaving the jeweller's. You are paying a massive premium or "social tax" to demonstrate your undying love for your fiance. Just like you pay a massive premium for those large wooden boxes, sorry, caskets when a loved one dies. You will be made to look a…
/r/MensRights19/03/10 05:17 PM
0

According to this logic every issue that has ever affected a man is a men's issue. At which point, MR becomes meaningless.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 12:06 PM
19

Diamonds are NOT worth a lot when are you trying to sell one - they are a scam designed to make de Beers and jewellers rich. Buy a $1000 diamond ring from a jewellery store and see what you can sell it for. You won't even get half your money back, because nobody wants to buy second hand retail diamonds....because they are a scam.
/r/MensRights19/03/10 11:39 AM
1

Proscribing what redditors should and should not read because you don't like the message is something the Daily Mail might do. This makes you a censorious, petty fascist and therefore, a hypocrite. I demand the right to read whatever shit I want. So fuck you.
/r/MensRights19/02/10 05:38 PM
1

Yew...
/r/MensRights16/12/09 11:03 AM
3

Coincidentally, the same amount that Tiger bribed his girlfriend to call off her press conference.
/r/MensRights03/12/09 11:47 PM
1

Would we still exist if there was no such thing as sexual attraction or desire? Humans would never have existed in the first place, and nor would any living thing which reproduced sexually. Or do you think we evolved from animals that spent time thinking about family planning issues?
/r/MensRights07/11/09 12:01 AM
1

Very clever piece (I am embarassed to say I didn't guess what it was about despite the obvious clues). I can't believe this has so few upvotes.
/r/MensRights15/09/09 10:04 AM
0

No, I meant "tack". Why don't you ask one of your carers to get you a dictionary, so you can look it up? Awesome. Incidentally, the word "tact" would have made absolutely no sense in this context, so I suggest you look that one up too.
/r/MensRights10/09/09 09:26 PM
1

So somebody saying "You are a rapist" is comparable to being raped? The way that you have phrased the question is idiotic, because there is no "equivalence" between the two options. How about comparing being raped v being convicted and imprisoned for a rape you didn't commit?
/r/MensRights08/09/09 10:49 AM
0

Grammar, spelling, content, relevance - all epic fails. Back to drawing board, kiddo.
/r/MensRights01/09/09 09:24 PM
26

Women are just so amazing. So reasonable, so balanced, so insightful. Men are so dirty, so gross, sooooo...shut the fuck up, bitch!
/r/MensRights17/08/09 01:10 PM
3

Jeez, what a horrible, self-obsessed person. In fact she could be a cyborg.
/r/MensRights18/06/09 10:52 PM
0

Have you not been in college? Have I not been "what" in college, exactly? "Learning how to write proper english", perhaps?
/r/MensRights21/03/09 08:38 AM
5

I don't believe for one nanosecond that women use as much marijuana as men. Crazy talk.
/r/MensRights20/03/09 11:19 PM
12

Can you imagine a father writing an article in which he systematically slags off his daughter(s) because he thinks boys are better? Women really do feel that they have a right to say whatever hurtful shit they want about males.
/r/MensRights09/03/09 11:40 PM
0

Then in the context of the story "bighearted" is actually "smallbrained".
/r/MensRights18/02/09 08:59 AM
1

This has everything to do with the absurd bias of family/divorce courts which require (and thereby encourage) women to character-assassinate the father of their children so as to secure a better settlement for themselves. It is an affront to natural justice.
/r/MensRights18/01/09 11:15 PM
4

Presumably because it isn't.
/r/MensRights16/01/09 10:54 PM
9

Sadly, journalism doesn't appear to be one of them...
/r/MensRights29/12/08 11:52 PM
3

"US circumcision rates too low" - don't you just love the Onion?
/r/MensRights24/12/08 12:50 PM
0

How...surprising. I think I want to marry her.
/r/MensRights04/12/08 04:21 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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