TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SacredWeapon Archive

View 1 post and 164 comments by SacredWeapon 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)
5

Author's response is basically: "Here's some praise. Give me money." I don't judge that too harshly.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen07/08/18 01:38 PM
2

I have. I've been reposting the study for years. The gender gap is larger between black men and black women than white men and white women. The gender gap is larger than the racial gap by quite a bit, but to treat it as some trivial effect that 'doesnt change much' is misleading and wrong.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:35 PM
2

Well ya, statistically race doesnt change much in the courts, either for sentencing Um, yes it does. Just less than gender. http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1164&context=law_econ_current Our oft-quoted paper compares gender and racial gaps, and the gender gap is about 2-3x the racial gap, making the racial gap still pretty large.
/r/MensRights14/08/17 06:25 PM
1

I doubt our enemies are thinking that. A draft is not likely to be effective in the modern era.
/r/MensRights04/08/17 04:00 PM
1

"In Boston." You capitalized "Nearly", knowing it was preceded by the words "In Boston." Editorialized your title to make a study of one city appear to reflect on the entire nation.
/r/MensRights24/05/17 01:00 PM
0

what sucks is, as a MRA that thinks feminism has plenty of good left to do for women (mostly internationally, but also within US communities that worship athletes), I feel the issues I care passionately about--mass incarceration and educational underperformance of boys--have become toxic because people associate them with the loudmouthed jackasses and not just with the victims. some feminists are complicit in drawing this link. some are not. i try not to judge them all at once and hope they'll d…
/r/MensRights08/05/17 05:25 PM
1

I don't have to be an ass which would amount to nothing. that is the kind of respect being referred to here. that random strangers not violate their personal space.
/r/MensRights08/02/17 01:22 PM
3

Women do 2 hours more chores then men do, therefor men should do 14 hours more labor then women do. 2 hours more chores per day, vs 14 hours more per week, it does sum correctly, but completely leaves out detail on the level of intensity of that labor, suggesting that cooking is equally stressful to welding.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 06:20 PM
13

No, no, the jobs you mentioned don't count as unpaid domestic work.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 06:18 PM
0

you're still a little shit.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 12:51 PM
0

no but i'll call you a little shit.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 03:18 AM
5

no, it is not OK to hate women now.
/r/MensRights31/01/17 02:15 PM
2

I would suspect the actual reason is simpler than what others have proposed here, as much of it is factored by the study as confounding variables: What proportion of male and female medical school graduates go into each specialty? This, specifically, is NOT one of their confounding variables, because its effect is not easy to measure. This study was only of hospital internists. Given the tendency of male graduates to favor higher earning fields relative to female graduates, the men choosing to b…
/r/MensRights21/12/16 06:38 PM
2

Yeah, you are correct-- ~11% mortality vs ~11.44% mortality.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 06:28 PM
9

That was accounted for, yes. This was not a study of all medical professionals, as always the media distorts the story.
/r/MensRights21/12/16 06:27 PM
8

I initially got directed to r/theredpill which is more about gaming women to fuck you by using psychology and strategies that probably work. I don't know, not my thing. I think It comes off as a bit crude but if it helps guys who struggle with women, more power to them. It's about a lot of far more disgusting things than that, really. One of the rather unfortunate things about Cassie Jaye's movie is she chose a name co-opted by a hate group that is often falsely associated with the MRM. The Red …
/r/MensRights06/12/16 06:14 PM
1

can do.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 03:07 PM
3

It's known that students are punished in grading, not just in principal's office visits, for their misbehavior, and that because boys misbehave more overall and thus are punished more overall, this hampers their long term performance. More recently, yes, Dr. Jayanti Owens found that boys are indeed punished more harshly for the same behaviors, as compared to girls. She considers this--and its aggravating effect on boys' more frequent behavioral issues--at the core of why there is a huge educatio…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 01:48 PM
3

username checks out
/r/MensRights01/12/16 09:05 PM
1

I read the transcript of this and was left wondering why he was asking these questions, as opposed to a defense attorney.
/r/MensRights01/12/16 03:57 PM
4

I didn't create the drug. Point is, if it's tied to the hormones that a trans-person uses, it'd be no issue; if it's tied to something else, there might be an issue.
/r/MensRights29/11/16 03:58 PM
4

Depends on whether the reason it works is testosterone related (likely transman usable) or genetic structures tied to lack of a second X chromosome (transman not-usable)
/r/MensRights29/11/16 02:09 PM
45

It was added that in some drugs testing cases, these generalisations may have instead put men’s health at risk. Lazaroids, a rejected stroke treatment, may have worked for men but was deemed as no longer working after being used on both sexes.
/r/MensRights29/11/16 01:34 PM
1

sounds like he had some serious privilege and maybe we shouldn't be taking our lessons from him.
/r/MensRights29/11/16 12:35 PM
12

I think that jesus guy said something similar. sounds kinda dumb to me, didn't he get tortured to death?
/r/MensRights29/11/16 12:23 PM
5

it's half right: there is nobody helping a man achieve what he's pursuing. no elevator either, of course.
/r/MensRights17/11/16 01:19 PM
2

no.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 06:14 PM
3

Important thing to know: this isn't an echo chamber. Don't hesitate to criticize when you see something here you feel is wrong. In my mind, that's part of making sure you feel at home: feeling free to share a differing view on a subject. Most men come in here already knowing that, and I hope I don't come across as condescending for not assuming the same of you. But especially seeing as you're coming from a place of having your opinions shut down by your peers, I want to be sure you know that you…
/r/MensRights10/11/16 05:29 PM
19

Never divert from the narrative! Even when it's a lie.
/r/MensRights10/11/16 04:05 PM
-1

Like black lives matter, the implication is "too." "You are valuable too."
/r/MensRights10/11/16 01:40 PM
7

There will not be equal rights for fathers until we loosen the restrictions on mothers. You could say this of just about any equal rights issue. Of equal pay, you could say that the forces that push women towards lesser jobs are also pushing men towards better paying jobs because we as men are shamed when we aren't the big earners, and because women rarely are willing to 'date down' economically. That doesn't make it OK. That doesn't mean that the problems that affect women are strictly women's …
/r/MensRights07/11/16 04:54 PM
0

Don't tell me that PP doesn't use federal funding for abortions. What's your criteria for this? Do you oppose all federal funding for any institution that provides any amount of abortions? Or is there a threshold? I fear you might find yourself opposing funding to a lot of necessary institutions if so. PP is the #1 abortion provider because it's huge, not because abortions are its primary purpose.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 04:50 PM
2

Yes. Now comprehend what that means: The study has results The committee concluded that the results were sufficient to answer the hypothesis and complete the Phase II research goals The committee determined that subjecting more humans to AEs would not increase accuracy further, but WOULD subject those humans to AEs The study was not canceled. It was concluded early. The difference is that it accomplished its goals.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 03:49 PM
2

This is an attempt to point out what they view as a double standard. Because they didn't read the study. They think it was canceled because men dropped out due to those effects, and that is not what occurred. They were all wound up and looking for something to rage about, and were more than happy to jump on this.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 02:03 PM
3

actually "the thing" is it wasn't canceled--the external review committee determined the study had achieved sufficient results and adding new test subjects would not improve the quality of the results but would subject them to AEs needlessly. nearly 100% of the reporting on the study is complete bullshit from morons who never read the study. it has its own snopes article for fuck's sake.
/r/MensRights04/11/16 02:03 PM
1

Within one sentence of this article, they clarify that they STILL haven't read the study.
/r/MensRights03/11/16 11:52 AM
3

Full study text: http://press.endocrine.org/doi/pdf/10.1210/jc.2016-2141
/r/MensRights02/11/16 07:03 PM
2

But the trial of the drug has already been halted – because just 20 of the men (out of 320, don’t forget) found the side effects of the injection intolerable and it was decided that more research needed to be done to try and counteract them. Those side effects included depression, muscle pain, mood swings, acne and changes to the libido. As always, the author didn't read the study which is why it doesn't even link to the damn study. Was halted because an external committee (one of two) decided t…
/r/MensRights02/11/16 01:10 PM
1

20 people higher so not a ton. Nearly everyone who stayed was happy with the results.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 05:59 PM
5

http://press.endocrine.org/doi/pdf/10.1210/jc.2016-2141
/r/MensRights01/11/16 04:33 PM
6

As you wish. here is the full study http://press.endocrine.org/doi/pdf/10.1210/jc.2016-2141 big takeaway: when the chemical effects first reached efficacy, 1.5% of men reported dissatisfaction despite nearly all the symptoms having already occurred. the men who dropped out did so because their sperm count didn't come back up.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 04:32 PM
29

More importantly, IMO, the study was shut down by the external panel...not the men who undertook it. When the effectiveness period was reached, only 1.1% had negative opinions of their experience and 1.5% said they wouldn't use it.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 04:12 PM
9

Other work by this author Obvious satire is obvious.
/r/MensRights28/10/16 12:34 PM
5

Video does not look like a crotch grab to me.
/r/MensRights27/10/16 07:15 PM
1

also, this is provable. much harder to prove false accusations of forcible rape, so the least damaging thing to do is punish nobody.
/r/MensRights26/10/16 12:29 PM
2

what are you talking about? this isn't an attempt to ban cross-examiniation, it's an attempt to require it be done by someone other than the accused.
/r/MensRights25/10/16 12:41 PM
3

I want to emphasize that the issue is that the alleged victim can be cross-examined by the accused, not by the accused's lawyer. In the US this is basically a non-issue as everyone can get a public defender. Is that not the case in Australia? I guess maybe family law cases are civil court and as such a lawyer isn't provided. In which case it's just handing a smoking gun to women whose husbands can't afford a lawyer to be able to go to family court and accuse them of whatever, then turn around an…
/r/MensRights25/10/16 11:43 AM
6

I mean, this is exactly what we told her would happen when she titled her film about the men's movement to be the name of an actual online hate group.
/r/MensRights24/10/16 12:59 PM
-7

I don't think it's fair to editorialize the title with the words of her defense lawyer. I'd be more interested in seeing how the judges decided that when two individuals pool their money to run a drug business, the younger one is the one who should go to jail for most of their 20s.
/r/MensRights13/10/16 04:46 PM
5

Was hoping to find some credible data one or the other at some point. Here you go. http://www.hawaii.edu/religion/courses/Gender_Wage_Gap_Report.pdf http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/graduating-to-a-pay-gap-the-earnings-of-women-and-men-one-year-after-college-graduation.pdf http://www.payscale.com/data-packages/gender-pay-gap tl;dr: there is a single-digit pay gap that could realistically be attributed to discrimination. it is largely being overwhelmed by the education gap among young people, ho…
/r/MensRights11/10/16 12:56 PM
3

It seems like you're a very poor socialist if you accept the idea of the job market setting wages. It seems your knowledge of socialists is limited to what you learned in US History class. That's basically the core principle of socialism that you're throwing out with the bathwater. It is not. The core principle of socialism is the state replacing capital in control of the means of production. Wages, per the famous quote, are secondary to this. And the famous quote was idealistic and unrealistic …
/r/MensRights11/10/16 12:50 PM
2

socialist here the author is a complete moron. "from each according to his ability" means that everyone is taking comparable levels of risk in their work. this is often unrealistic logistically, and so most socialist parties and economies offer more rewards to those who do the jobs that are most taxing. it is a 'compromise' in socialist philosophy out of need and recognition that capitalism got some things right. the people who propose this shit have never been in the real world and are citing t…
/r/MensRights11/10/16 12:45 PM
2

Anytime I see someone revert to the dictionary definition in a discussion of a philosophical concept, I think of the motte and bailey doctrine
/r/MensRights10/10/16 05:43 PM
1

More the reason for our mod team to be extra active right now, and beefed up if needed. But a good answer is "When it actually has some upvotes"
/r/MensRights10/10/16 01:55 PM
6

As always, the subreddit /r/theredpill has nothing to do with men's rights. I hate that we even have to call attention to this fact. But it is what it is. And yes, the truth about domestic violence is that women are as violent as men; their assaults are just less likely to kill or severely harm their partners.
/r/MensRights10/10/16 01:40 PM
1

a screencap WOULD show how recently the post was made, though. something '1 hour ago' begs the question "how did you find this so fast?"
/r/MensRights10/10/16 01:33 PM
-1

My suggestion is for /u/sillymod to consider adding mods to the team.
/r/MensRights10/10/16 01:33 PM
1

Posts here are grossly misunderstanding what she said. It's clear to me, though. The Paycheck Fairness Act--a piece of legislation she helped write--is mostly a virtue signal of democrats to women. It's an insane piece of legislation that should never be allowed to become law, but so long as republicans hold congress, the democrats can propose it, vote YEA, then score points against republicans for voting it down. In reality, Ledbetter and the original paycheck fairness act are more than enough …
/r/MensRights10/10/16 01:21 PM
9

They were not charged for the same crimes. He was charged with 18 counts, she with 10, with no clear information on whether those charges were all for the same thing or not. They ultimately plead guilty to different charges.
/r/MensRights06/10/16 11:55 AM
1

So, 2.6% of female students are raped in each 12 month period. Or 97.4% of female students are NOT raped in each 12 month period. For simplicity, I will assume each victim of sexual assault in each year is unique and did not experience such in past years. This probably results in an overestimate to some degree, but hard to say how much. If it takes 4 years to finish college, that's 0.9744 = .899. So about one in ten women are raped, not one in five. But still--not nearly as far off as we sometim…
/r/MensRights03/10/16 06:43 PM
2

Not what it says. Read the fucking thing.
/r/MensRights03/10/16 06:38 PM
1

by extending automatic denial of probation to individuals who commit any penetrative sexual assault That's certainly one way to make sure that the law is not gender-neutral.
/r/MensRights03/10/16 01:38 PM
4

is this a real quote or just a meme poster someone made reusing her quote about women who were voting for bernie sanders instead of hillary clinton
/r/MensRights03/10/16 11:29 AM
1

yeah. he has the crush. not her. he's not her crush. she's his crush. she doesn't like him.
/r/MensRights21/09/16 11:49 AM
0

"rules for her crush" article is about a boy who has a crush on her wtf
/r/MensRights21/09/16 11:38 AM
1

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states
/r/MensRights20/09/16 04:50 PM
121

men also get called "pricks" to imply they're rude obnoxious jerks.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 02:45 PM
8

In other words, all they do is shuffle around paperwork - what governments deal with exclusively. I think you're bringing your own personal biases into this discussion.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 01:45 PM
1

Indeed. Publicly. What is public? Going to a mosque that is identified by the NSA as "radical." Affiliating with any of the thousands of Imams identified as "radical." Ever showing up at an anti-America rally. So, so many other things that are used to dramatically reduce the percentage of radicals in our refugee pool under consideration from 17%.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 12:36 PM
5

We collect this data from people who are already in refugee camps. Not random people off the streets of Aleppo. They're being processed by the UN, and they're re-processsed by us.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 12:29 PM
4

You do realize that anyone who publicly identifies as radical gets immediately disqualified for relocation to the US, right?
/r/MensRights20/09/16 12:29 PM
6

We're talking about integrating hundreds of thousands to millions of people from a culture that is at war with all other cultures no, we're talking about integrating these people from refugee camps, after they pass a series of steps detailed here
/r/MensRights20/09/16 12:15 PM
4

if at all, because government is profoundly incapable of knowing and identifying people as individuals, or in assessing character. I don't know what you're basing that on, but it's not reality If you're immediately thinking about the recent attack in NYC, read this profile of college-educated American citizen Ahmad Rahami and recognize the issue here is he was radicalized when traveling abroad--something entirely unrelated to screening of refugees
/r/MensRights20/09/16 11:45 AM
29

I hope we can see that both of these ideas are very, very wrong.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 11:44 AM
6

Not in any part of any state law that I am aware of.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:39 PM
3

Unless the mitigating factors, such as "they are teen lovers", which are codified into most state laws, indicate that in fact yes, they can consent. As I said- the law is poorly written. The mitigating factors here are used to avoid the injustices you suggest were intended.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:38 PM
2

Certainly not. You asked about rape. I answered. Now you're trying to tie it to statutory rape. It stops trolling or it gets the hose again. Statutory rape is entirely different, and is the one form of sexual assault where a party may be 'guilty' but due to mitigating factors 'free to go'.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:34 PM
4

AOC laws are about statutory rape, not rape. Coercion would make the crime 'rape'.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:33 PM
5

That potential doesn't stop because partners are similarly aged. Sure, it doesn't stop. But it is greatly reduced as the number of avenues of a similarly aged person to manipulate a peer into giving consent for sex that they wouldn't otherwise give are few. As a note, R+J laws do not provide 'immunity' in all cases. I expect the cases you're thinking of when you think of a teenager exploiting another teenager would result in some legal action. I doubt Austin's case is similar to what you're thin…
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:24 PM
2

http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/training/primers/2015_Primer_Sex_Offense_Abuse.pdf Mostly for rape it's a matter of 'absence of aggravating factors.'
/r/MensRights16/09/16 12:21 PM
2

So something is uniformly illegal and then granted exceptions? Yes, that's how law works in the United States. I suggest you get used to it.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:59 AM
5

The law is designed to be interpreted in degrees, not black and white. It is in practice, interpreted in degrees, not black and white. So in other words, now their brain is magically capable of consent? Their brains were always capable of consent; the R+J exception recognizes the mitigating factor of "these are teen lovers" is so strong the whole case shouldn't go to court. The law exists because despite capability of consent, the potential for exploitation exists as well. It is poorly written.
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:58 AM
13

A smoking gun that was fired into ballistic gel, not a person's insides. The law is interpreted by a judge and sentences are handed down based on mitigating factors. One mitigating factor for possessing child pornography is "The pornography was of a romantic partner who wanted them to have it." Another is "the pornography was produced by the partner." Typically in cases like this, you see the court do all they can to hand down a no-jail sentence (ex: suspended sentence) provided the defendant ha…
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:29 AM
184

He is being represented by the public defender assigned to him. His family can't afford better legal representation. This is an action opportunity. Can the mods get in touch with his family and set up a gofundme for them to get real legal representation? Public defenders are why the likes of Brian Banks went to prison. This time we can make that not happen. He can get a lawyer that isn't completely overloaded, one who won't just tell him "plead guilty and destroy your life" as his legal advice. …
/r/MensRights16/09/16 11:22 AM
5

older than dirt and fake
/r/MensRights31/08/16 01:16 PM
6

just to be clear, 'shadow minister' means 'on the opposition party with no actual power whatsoever, but would be in the cabinet if the opposition ever got elected...maybe'
/r/MensRights31/08/16 01:15 PM
0

setting the attempts at getting clicks through ragebait and exclusive focus on men when women do this shit too aside, most of it is good advice on how to not be a jackass i was expecting the point about dominance/aggression to suggest men be submissive because it's now "women's turn" but it didnt even do that, it just said dont act like a tyrant in your relationship.
/r/MensRights30/08/16 03:23 PM
1

but no other group of people. eh. criminal justice system is bad for all men, but especially bad for black men. this is when you control for issues like crime chosen, background, etc.
/r/MensRights29/08/16 11:32 AM
2

And we should be fighting for the police and legal system to do their job correctly. Not against legislation that protects pets.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 02:43 PM
2

Latest version of VAWA (finally) explicitly requires protection to male victims. I agree, there are problems, but this law is not creating more of them.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 02:32 PM
1

Bill text is gender neutral--they seem to have seized on the title One of the groups supporting the bill also notes that this supports both female and male DV victims
/r/MensRights15/08/16 12:49 PM
–

I've been here forever. We never did AMAs before. We don't have experience with it. I strongly recommend that /u/sillymod or another mod here request someone from /r/askreddit to assist in our AMAs, so that we can run them with the same level of professionalism they have. We're a huge community and our AMAs will have real visibility. They should be done as well as possible.
/r/MensRights12/08/16 06:19 PM
–

Critical/negative questions were removed. It was a softballfest. Not made open to the rest of reddit. Only answered a few questions.
/r/MensRights12/08/16 06:04 PM
–

One thing we should keep in mind is how shit the Trump AMA was on /r/The_Donald. To the best of our ability we should emulate /r/askreddit
/r/MensRights12/08/16 04:13 PM
1

that looks like the silver spring apt complex that blew up
/r/MensRights12/08/16 03:45 PM
1

I don't. I see America following a trajectory comparable to Japan if we let interest rates spike up again. Remember--earnings fell the last two quarters. Right now we have a lot of great technologies that are in their infancy. But the companies developing them are hugely dependent on debt to stay afloat, and if we spike that debt many will go under, and the opportunities for future growth they'd create will be lost. If we are very slow and gentle in raising rates, there will be time for these co…
/r/MensRights12/08/16 02:50 PM
1

I run a small investment advisory business (none of this pay me 1%/year bullshit--I charge $50/hr to people who want me to walk them through building a portfolio that matches their risk levels. My fee is low because I'm new and trying to get a loyal client base who will keep coming back to me). Let me be frank with you: a Trump presidency would be cause for a stock market crash. Not 2008 level, but definitely 2001 level. If Trump starts going up in the polls I will be shifting my own portfolio--…
/r/MensRights12/08/16 02:33 PM
4

A lot of that article is crazed ranting, notably the ideas that our social ills are strictly a result of "lack of female influence" as though the evils of slavery and war came about because of testosterone rather than competition for resources. But it does make one very real, succinct point: Women don’t benefit from seeing a woman elevated to the top as a reward for her faithful service to the patriarchy. Women benefit from a healthier society. The best person to help women is not, de facto, a w…
/r/MensRights12/08/16 01:21 PM
0

One thing to keep in mind is that there's unlikely any evidence in the case, so the sentence was never going to be severe. I don't even know why the abuser plead guilty. Probably part of a bargain.
/r/MensRights12/08/16 11:06 AM
1

i don't think you're in the right community. /r/mensrights is a place for men who see women as equal to men, and oppose social structures and viewpoints that elevate women above men. you might prefer /r/theredpill
/r/MensRights11/08/16 12:48 PM
1

'as you open the door to cunts' is that really necessary?
/r/MensRights11/08/16 11:49 AM
2

"1 vote"
/r/MensRights09/08/16 03:39 PM
0

It really depends on how you define 'respect.' I think there are two definitions: The basic decency of being a human being, which means not being randomly assaulted or insulted by a complete stranger out of the blue. The elevated respect of being a human being who is perceived to have value, and thus meriting treatment above and beyond the basic requirement to not be actively hurting them. Nearly all men do enjoy that basic decency. Most women do too, but a small percentage of men don't grant wo…
/r/MensRights09/08/16 12:09 PM
5

"The asymmetry in your arsenal of weapons: she can abuse you and you can't do shit so bend over and take it, bitch." Updated to be more clear.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 05:01 PM
2

5 . Sue on grounds that a convict in the house is a dangerous environment for your boy and you should be the one with primary custody.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 12:55 PM
3

Ah yes, the revenge argument. How you know the person you're interacting with should be treated as an enemy: they see you as one. As always, remember that cosmo exists to create a feedback loop. Their advice column is designed to bring chaos to relationships so people need to read more advice columns. Same could be assumed of anything else they produce.
/r/MensRights08/08/16 12:10 PM
3

i have a hard time getting angry about the 'red heart campaign.' didn't we do that to RedFemHub? sounds like the same shit to me.
/r/MensRights05/08/16 11:59 AM
1

Tom Foil? Who's that? I'm calling the police. I think he invaded my safe space.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 06:29 PM
1

Is this how we do that? Listen and believe. Sounds like your husband is the real mastermind behind her violence.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 06:24 PM
3

I don't know what you're talking about. Women are only violent in self defense!
/r/MensRights04/08/16 06:20 PM
3

clearly that is proof that courts dont take violence against women seriously!
/r/MensRights04/08/16 06:16 PM
9

why is the cover sexualized i dont see why they'd do that
/r/MensRights04/08/16 01:46 PM
6

might just be the disparity of reactions in /r/sex and /r/relationships relationships is known to be the "you are always right" echo chamber (except when people are really, really, unacceptably way fucking wrong)
/r/MensRights03/08/16 04:10 PM
33

The trend was also greater for women than for men: the authors found that 2.3% of women born in the 1960s are sexually inactive, compared to 5.4% of those born in the 1990s. That, the authors suggest, could in part be down to a rise in so-called virginity pledges as well as concerns about social stigma. The research, conducted in the US, found that the percentage of young adults aged between 20 and 24 who reported having no sexual partner after the age of 18 increased from 6% among those born in…
/r/MensRights03/08/16 01:11 PM
13

Lying with statistics 101: mix percentages of different event populations without clarifying the size of the underlying populations. We know that far fewer rapes go to court than happen. The 'proven to be false' statistic is itself a lowball because it can only be derived from cases that went to court. Ergo, 7% of the rapes that happen is a fucking lot more instances than 8% of the rapes that go to court. If you want to attack the 'false rape accusations are not an issue' bullshit, focus on the …
/r/MensRights03/08/16 12:15 PM
1

It's actually very unclear whether the husband is actually being punished as well. The linked article only mentions her losing custody, not him losing custody. Considering the paternal grandparents gained custody, he almost certainly has access to his kids.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 06:20 PM
15

Maybe this is weird, but I'm left wondering if her pet is okay. Only survivor of all this, but if she wasn't found for a few days, he may have starved.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 01:57 PM
2

Seen Gravity?
/r/MensRights29/07/16 01:49 PM
6

It's also worth pointing out that Sigourney Weaver is one hell of an actress. Not sure who else could have pulled it off. Sandra Bullock has shown she certainly can. I want to see her in more stuff.
/r/MensRights29/07/16 11:31 AM
3

I liked the slavery analogue, because it was noting how far we'd come--that slaves built it, but people who might have been slaves 200 years ago now live there and lead the nation from it. Was a good look at how far we'd come in the right direction. The rest of it, I feel, was mostly an attempt to push against the "Make America Great Again" tagline of Trump's campaign by pushing, ironically, nationalism: "We're already the greatest nation on earth." Good political move for unity, and it worked a…
/r/MensRights26/07/16 04:42 PM
0

then edit your comment
/r/MensRights26/07/16 12:59 PM
8

i think we're watching this show with entirely different perspectives. the show does a great job ripping into the current crop of female-only ridesharing companies, whose feminist/moralizing message is so clearly just profiteering masquerading as social justice. bojack pulls no punches with that. and that's the most feminist idea that they even bring up.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 12:28 PM
12

Did you stop watching the episode at that point? Because you missed how they thoroughly lampooned Diane's ridiculous SJW attitude about abortion like, five minutes later, when she asks some teen girl if the lyrics from Sexxtina's song are offensive to her, and the girl is like "You know that's a joke, right?" This is a running gag with Diane: taking the feminist position so far she sounds insane because she is being insane. Bojack Horseman is unrepentant in its desire to mock all aspects of Amer…
/r/MensRights26/07/16 11:58 AM
1

not much of this conversation was nice, honestly. this is an article that cites an email she sent about her personal views, not her doing anything wrong, and a bunch of stuff she said when most users here were not eligible to vote.
/r/MensRights26/07/16 11:33 AM
0

edit: better. i still dont care what she said when i was a kid but your post is accurate now
/r/MensRights26/07/16 11:32 AM
2

This is how you identify a journalist who is being directly influenced by the campaign staff. It's not wrong for Hillary's people to ask her to write these kind of stories, but it is very wrong for her to do so--that's Journalism 101. Especially funny that the original point of the wikileaks post is carefully cut off--they were receiving death threats over twitter that they'd been reporting, then complained about selective banning. The writer proceeded to carefully trim out that part of the quot…
/r/MensRights25/07/16 11:43 AM
2

the convention is a meaningless cheerleading/networking session meant to just get some people excited about clinton and future "rising stars" in the party, little else i'm OK with them demanding gender equality among delegates whose job it is to vote for a pre-determined candidate. it's as if the electoral college were still made up of people, would we really care if they were half men and women or not?
/r/MensRights23/07/16 01:50 PM
13

I think it's important to be flexible on the topic. Racism is real, and we're not reactionary conservatives but men aware of the fact that society needs to change in ways that the contemporary progressive has chosen to ignore. That doesn't mean that every way said progressives want things to change is wrong.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 12:43 PM
2

I've buried all of it you should see a professional for help in actually confronting what happened. trauma doesn't stay buried forever. it comes back when you most wish it wouldn't. i support whatever choice you make, though.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 12:59 AM
7

the really interesting thing is that imdb staff rated the film very high, but the "top voters" did not
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:44 PM
1

how does that break down among age of imdb accounts? i'm less inclined to assume an account that has been around forever is troll-voting than one that was just created. lots of people probably created accounts to participate in the 'battle'.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:41 PM
3

don't be afraid to start a fight, this community is supposed to be supportive of free speech and internal criticism. transmen are men and thus we should care about them. trans women are hurt by people who assign them the male gender and punish them for not conforming to it. we better care about them.
/r/MensRights15/07/16 11:48 AM
1

Ivan Reitman was originally set to direct, and to write with Dan Akyroyd years ago, with a mixed cast and some of the original Ghostbusters. A Sony Pictures executive wanted a young person to direct. She plotted and schemed for almost a decade to have him relegated to producer and quietly planned the movie around him so that she could hire Paul Feig to write and direct. paul feig is 53
/r/MensRights13/07/16 07:23 PM
3

But it sure should be a misdemeanor. With caveats and careful management. One has to be careful not to turn this into a weapon to be used against anyone who a person feels has slighted them. Evil people exist and they will abuse laws that give them too much power. Harassment is bad; bringing the force of the legal system down on the head of someone undeserving is much worse.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 03:37 PM
3

Isn't Wiig covering that? Aside from being a bit of a perv
/r/MensRights13/07/16 02:24 PM
4

This is my thought. It sounds like it's mostly a way for the police to collect data for release to interested parties, and to "provide support to victims" as it is still noting that the actions are not crimes even if they're being recorded as hate crimes. The fear is that it will turn the police into a loaded gun in the hands of all women, including cruel, aggressive, hateful women who will use it to hurt men because they feel like it.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 11:41 AM
52

But by the same token, if what we’re talking about isn’t a big deal, then why shouldn’t Holtzmann be gay? If she was, in fact, conceived that way, but Feig is trying to obscure that through coy hedging because Columbia Pictures (owned by Sony) is concerned that a gay character will be unmarketable, or offensive to idiots, or maybe reach out from the screen to molest the children sitting in the theater, then that’s fucked up Or, you know, it serves no narrative purpose and makes you look like a B…
/r/MensRights13/07/16 11:36 AM
4

there's something particularly bizarre about emily R doing this seeing as she was made famous by the music video of blurred lines, a song that is universally reviled in feminist circles.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 11:23 AM
2

"A leading cause." It's a term that can mean whatever you want it to mean.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 03:53 PM
7

You meet some fellow students and they’re AWESOME. The girls are funny and smart and don’t take sh*t from anyone. The guys are funky and kind and some of them have mowhawks. Hmm, so the author's describing women in terms of their intellect and men in terms of their appearance. This article has promise! Oh wait, the other thing. I don't know why we bother caring what these idiots yell into the void. It is meaningless.
/r/MensRights12/07/16 12:00 PM
2

You realize that a hypothetical draft almost certainly would be focused on these roles rather than front-line soldiers, right? We have more than enough warfighters, and a few of the women who want to serve qualify to be warfighters. The rest would, as you note, be in less physically demanding roles. You can tell their motivation from their rhetoric. It's not about keeping the military strong. It's about how their daughters should be protected. Real white-knighty bullshit. The last vestiges of tr…
/r/MensRights11/07/16 06:04 PM
2

The feminist outrage against the draft extension is not very large. And not at all establishment. All the dem senators voted for it. It's more the ted cruz types--guys yearning for all elements of the old system and pretending that fighting changes for women is helping men--that are opposing it now.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 02:26 PM
3

i'm not such a nice bloke. let's fight fire with fire. general feminism pages are probably not housing people doing this, anti-MRA pages probably are. they're going after ALL MRM pages, we can just go after the ones that are targeting us.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 01:29 PM
1

Take gaming. Women make up only 22% of game developers yet represent 50% of people who play video games, said Elizabeth Brown, the chief people officer of Unity Technologies, which provides products and services for game developers. So it makes good business sense to want to hire more women developers because the people who create the games should represent an industry's customer base, Brown said. So, CNN's approach is "we are going to represent a broad industry with a wide variety of products--…
/r/MensRights08/07/16 02:52 PM
10

Black Nick Fury (OK, because SLJ) Be fair: this was an improvement. A big improvement. Not OK, great. Excellent.
/r/MensRights08/07/16 02:02 PM
1

Did this even have marketing?
/r/MensRights06/07/16 05:13 PM
19

Bad movie Released in 3 theaters Intended to be direct-to-video for the most part OP's conclusion: "It's because of her feminism!" I mean come on.
/r/MensRights06/07/16 12:08 PM
1

That's no small task. It's hell on the body. Getting pregnant doesn't disqualify you from signing up for selective service, anyway.
/r/MensRights30/06/16 12:36 PM
4

45000 rupees = 666 dollars symbolism clearly unintentional. sum clearly trivial.
/r/MensRights30/06/16 11:41 AM
1

I agree, and our society will too within 24 hours of women being on the draft. One of the gender roles thrust onto men is the obligation to protect. We live in a world of guns and tanks and automatic drones that can drop bombs with their controllers a thousand miles away. But the gender role persists, as it is based on ten thousand years of history where we had none of that. How do you make the obligation to serve seem idiotic today? You extend it to everyone. A million voices will scream that w…
/r/MensRights29/06/16 09:57 PM
5

I don't have a problem with the idea that pregnant women and mothers should be excluded I feel like "is pregnant" would be a near-automatic 4F anyway. We have a system to deal with this, we don't need to create another new one on top of it. Women have been enlisting for a long time--it's already able to deal with them.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 11:54 AM
8

Too far. Instead, impose the punishment men are already subject to for not signing up for the draft: ineligibility for government-subsidized student loans, no access to federal employment positions, no qualification for security clearances. The $250k/10 year prison fine is a fucked up idea for enforcing the draft and ought to be done away with entirely.
/r/MensRights29/06/16 11:25 AM
6

Two years before, in preparation for launching a feminist campaign when I was editor of Girl Talk magazine, I had interviewed girls aged from seven to 13 on a similar subject - and their views were just as troubling. They frequently mentioned being treated differently at school. Boys 'got away' with being naughty, but girls were expected to be sensible and helpful. Meanwhile, when actual science is used, the opposite is discovered by objective scientists: http://www.business-standard.com/article…
/r/MensRights23/06/16 01:35 PM
2

The latter is a non-starter without women being on the draft. But yes, we should be clear that this is our strategy. I agree the spiteful mocking is counter-productive.
/r/MensRights20/06/16 07:52 PM
4

As you're a regular on /r/anarcho_capitalism you should know that the only way to end a system of discrimination against one group is to apply that discrimination to all groups. The collective call for its removal is only strong enough when there are no in-groups. If women are made to sign up for selective service, it will cease to be within a few years.
/r/MensRights20/06/16 01:30 PM
1

I agree with you on this point.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 03:34 PM
1

I was trying to make that clear in noting that "Female 1" is a rare occurrence at all. I agree that this is closer to the real world example. The legitimate point feminists make on the subject is that women seeking those board positions are significantly less likely to have an inside connection with the CEO--even when accounting for how rare they are individually. And the reason for that is simple: CEO's probably male, and people are mostly friends with the same gender. Feminists take an illogic…
/r/MensRights14/06/16 03:17 PM
2

At the board level, you can ignore this: all those who made it that far are at least competent. Degrees of competency still exist, of course. So now you're looking at: Person 1. Male. 80% competent at the job. Person 2. Male. 70% competent at the job but he's dating the CEO's daughter and they're likely to get engaged soon. The CEO knows him well and is certain he's 70% competent, vs only being "pretty sure" about the others. Person 3. Female. 75% competent at the job. In an ideal world, person …
/r/MensRights14/06/16 02:55 PM
4

This is all completely correct in theory. In practice, the man who got it, also got it over other more qualified men because they don't golf with the existing board. Their argument is more "it's nepotism anyway. how 'bout some woman-favoring nepotism, since we're not changing the overall system?" I kind of understand their point. Responding to this with "most qualified person should get it" is like responding to calls for the draft to be equal with "just end the draft." It won't happen. What's o…
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:38 PM
5

Because men do not have a strong in-group bias as women do
/r/MensRights13/06/16 11:56 AM
1

He could have easily just restrained her. Dude...that's how you get bit and lose a finger. I do agree that it's best to only harm others as a last resort. Most self defense classes teach you how to knock someone down when they're attacking you, which will mostly just give them a bump on the ass rather than any actual injury.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 06:47 PM
2

Most of the top comments seem to agree that what he did was wrong, while noting what she did was also wrong. Question for you: had he hit her while she was still actively assaulting him--and only done so once--would your judgment of his actions be different? Because I think that's the response the people replying to you are suggesting would've been valid.
/r/MensRights10/06/16 05:30 PM
-1

That's not a government action, that's a university action responding to the DoE being vague in their requirements.
/r/MensRights09/06/16 06:14 PM
2

A man interrupted you? So what? Men interrupt men, women interrupt women, women interrupt men. I'm a tall guy and I will say, personally, I feel much more comfortable interrupting people who are smaller than I am to the point that I have to consciously think "let them finish" when talking to women and short men. The psychology behind the motivation to interrupt is one that is worth studying, but I think right now activists are just running with it based on conclusions they want to assume are tru…
/r/MensRights31/05/16 11:40 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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