TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

StatusUnk Archive

View 0 posts and 33 comments by StatusUnk 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)
5

Obviously this is a poor attempt at trying to relate men to violence against women, which is just the worst thing you can do here with a dumb question like this. No one, in their right mind, is going to pick getting stuck with any apex predator you can think of, wolves, bears, alligators, any big cats, etc., doesn't matter, over a man or women. Curl up in a ball, they will mostly leave you alone is what the people who got killed by bears probably thought too.
/r/MensRights29/04/24 06:43 PM
–

It's fine if she asks me once but when I refuse that needs to be the end of it. I am not going to have an elective surgery which could increase my risks for life long pain and prostate cancer that gives me zero physical health benefits.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/23 11:15 PM
1

There weren't many studies done on it in India because of an allergic reaction to the polymer used. It also wasn't consistently reversible with a small fractions of men permanently sterilized. The theory I have seen is that if you inject too much polymer it destroys the vas, but too little and it doesn't work. Everyone's vas is not the same size which is why it has been in limbo since the 1990s. Honestly, this isn't likely to be approved anywhere in the next 10-20 years if ever.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/23 01:28 AM
12

Similar side effects yes. But the effects were far greater in occurrence and magnitude. Some effects were orders of magnitude worse then any women's bc and I believe two men died of depression linked to the trials. Of course, it got reported that men couldn't handle the side effects that women get with birth control but that obviously wasn't the case. It wasn't feasible to continue with a far worse product than what's already available. They are still working on several new versions but I don't …
/r/MensRights10/06/23 08:37 PM
6

They have been working on different versions for decades now but they still haven't found a viable option yet with minimal side effects. Any new drug can't be worse than the thing it's trying to treat. In the case of male bc, that's an incredibly high bar as it should be.
/r/MensRights10/06/23 06:40 PM
1

This isn't going to happen. They have no money to do any trials. This has been the case in India where they have only been to test 1000 men in the last 30 years.
/r/MensRights26/04/23 09:47 PM
1

The conversation is cool and all except that this product is nowhere close to being reality. It's not available anywhere nor has it received or is close to receiving approval from any country. The handful studies show promising results but it's far from 100% reversible or safe. Best case scenario this is available in a decade but it is possible this never makes it to market.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/23 10:03 PM
3

Doesn't depend on where you're at and what you want out of a relationship? If you want to have a family, I would think a vasectomy would be a negative at least before you have kids. If your child free or done with having kids then yeah a guy with a vasectomy may be a huge plus for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 02:57 AM
1

India would only "approve" it as a permanent bc as of 2020. I had not been used outside of trials since then. It has never been tested in the US. It simply does work as a temporary solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/22 03:44 AM
1

They haven't even tested it yet in the USA. It's been under development in India for 20 years and they haven't even come close to approving it as it still has some pretty big issues. It's likely not going to happen within the next decade.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/22 12:11 AM
1

This isn't going to be approved anytime soon. They have been working on it for 20 years in India and still hasn't been approved. It has some really big issues like permanent sterilization in the test groups. They haven't even animal tested it yet in the US. It's unlikely to hit the market in the next 20 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/22 12:05 AM
5

You have to consider if you want kids how much money it will be to use the sperm. That's either IVF or IVI which is extremely expensive assuming enough sperm survive and not covered by insurance. Your also going to put your partner through some invasive medical procedures to get this to work. This is why this plan is highly discouraged by medical professionals.
/r/MensRights23/01/22 03:07 AM
1

You posted a link that agrees with my statement? They are permanent as any reputable urologist will tell you. You can try to get them reversed but the success rate is quite low and the procedure is expensive. Also, it should be noted the success rate in most instances only means they were able to connect the tubs again. It doesn't mean fertility has returned as there are numerous factors that contribute to that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/12/21 08:50 PM
11

No such thing as a reversible vasectomy. They are considered permanent. It's possible to reverse but the odds aren't good and the procedure is very expensive. That's why doctors don't do them on people that aren't sure about having kids.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/21 08:15 PM
2

There are different kinds of tubal available. Some cut the tubes and some procedures remove the tubes. There effectiveness and safety varies with each type of procedure. The common tubal procedure (cutting the tubes) is statistically less effective and more invasive. However, the Bi-salp version (removal of the tubes entirely) is much more effective and safer than a vasectomy at least according to the literature. Recovery time is about the same as a vasectomy It's important to note what version …
/r/MensRights16/12/21 07:56 PM
1

This assume that vasagel will get approved an time soon and as of now it hasn't been anywhere in the world. India is the closet to approval but there is no guarantee it will actually happen as it still has more hurdles to clear. It's hasn't even started phase 1 trials (animal testing in the US) so it's unlikely to be approved in the next 20 years. That being said, it's unlikely have little impact on the developed world. It might change shared responsibility of bc for couples but that isn't going…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/21 07:47 PM
3

https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/manma7/vasectomy_battle/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
/r/MensRights25/03/21 11:01 PM
2

https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/manma7/vasectomy_battle/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
/r/MensRights25/03/21 11:01 PM
1

The implant is literally the best bc you can get. It has a failure rate of 0.05 per 1000 however it technically has never failed. According to the literature, there have been 7 failures all due to untrained provider incorrectly injecting the device. Even using the 0.05 failure rate that's still 3 times better than a vasectomy.
/r/MensRights25/03/21 10:57 PM
2

I guess I shouldn't be surprised but it is interesting how little the op and most of the commentors on the original post don't know about vasectomies. A lot of them treat it like it's not big deal but the procedure can have serious side effects for a not so small group of men (depending on the study 5-15%). Far worse side effects than most other bc and far less effective than implant, bi-salp and the IUD (depending on age and type). Recent research (from europe and asian) has shown vasectomies l…
/r/MensRights25/03/21 10:51 PM
2

A lot of people on here seemed to be really misinformed. Vasectomies aren't meant to be reversed. The success rates in trying it are fairly low so why would any man that wants to have kids do it? It doesn't make sense logically to use vasectomy as a temporary solution. For one, even under the best circumstances, under 3 years gives you a 90% success rate. Condoms or the pill gives you 98% effectiveness. So you give up 10% chance (at best) to have kids in the future to improve your odds to not ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/20 05:03 AM
1

Again, it isn't that simple. It's a law because the federal government negotiated with insurance companies over it. (Religious organization even got an exemption to not included it). The federal government didn't just say you need to do this. They negotiated for it over months before they made the law as that was the only way the law would happen. (Insurance companies lobby is huge and have lots of friends in congress.) No way were they going to negotiate on something that doesn't exist. And mal…
/r/MensRights23/11/20 03:03 PM
1

It really isn't that simple. There is no FDA-approved contraceptive for men and likely won't be for a very long time. Why would any insurance company include anything to a plan where they didn't know the costs involved? It makes more sense to do nothing and wait to see what actually gets approved if anything at all. They will likely want to negotiate with drug companies and the federal government on cost sharing. But you can't do any of that until there is an actual FDA approved product. There i…
/r/MensRights23/11/20 02:26 PM
1

It's hard to include something that doesn't exist. Male bc is being worked on but no where close to being approved (at best it will be another decade or so). Insurance companies won't agree to cover something without knowing the costs involved.
/r/MensRights23/11/20 04:17 AM
0

You could use all that saved money for sperm extraction and IVF treatments (which I hear isn't a great experience for women). Doing this isn't going to save any money.
/r/MensRights02/11/20 09:21 PM
1

Also freezing sperm doesn't always work. Why would you take the risk when you could just wait on sterilization until after you have kids? This technology should improve and get cheaper but none of this is covered by insurance.
/r/MensRights28/10/20 10:43 AM
1

It kind of depends on your situation if it's worth it or not. A vasectomy does care some hefty side effects like pvps and increased risk of prostate cancer. You should do your own research to figure out if this is the best option for you long term.
/r/askTRP03/01/20 12:31 AM
3

It's not true. Most studies show there is no change in sex drive. This is just propaganda.
/r/askTRP11/09/19 08:16 PM
7

That appears to be based on circumstances according to the comments. I guess since he doesn't take his wife's feeling into account and he wants to be able to replace his kids if they die early, that he looses his body rights. My IQ just lowered 30 points after writing this.
/r/MensRights05/09/19 07:29 PM
1

So you just proved my point. The only gain would be if a condom broke which happens 3% of the time. Still don't see any advantage of this surgery for such a small gain.
/r/MensRights19/05/19 04:05 AM
3

You still have to wear a condom to prevent STDs if your sleeping around so there is really no point to getting the procedure.
/r/MensRights19/05/19 12:57 AM
1

Don't let anyone pressure you into surgery. Whether your an alpha or not you have to be comfortable with your life. She can easily get sterilized too so don't do anything unless you want it.
/r/askTRP15/01/19 06:00 PM
2

A vasectomy can be reversed but it is by far from a guarantee to work. The reversal procedure is more painful, requires a longer recovery time, is expensive and not usually covered by insurance. If you do it, I would consider it permanent.
/r/MGTOW23/12/18 12:54 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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