TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Supertrinko Archive

View 1 post and 71 comments by Supertrinko 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)
16

Supertrinko/r/MensRights22/02/12 01:44 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

How did you compare the wage/salary of men and women in the same job with the same education and same hours worked to know that it's within 1%?
/r/MensRights16/03/22 07:47 PM
1

How did you compare to that level?
/r/MensRights16/03/22 05:25 PM
-1

I know, I was just mocking you.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 04:21 AM
-5

Citation: Most news stories about feminists complaining about something seemingly trivial, or about something intended as a joke.
/r/MensRights13/03/12 04:58 PM
-9

No, they get shamed as well. Don't be disingenuous. It doesn't help.
/r/MensRights13/03/12 02:34 PM
1

I won't tell my partner for one-night-stands and the like because my medical history is none of his or her business and it's not my duty to assume that he or she is transphobic enough to care Interesting, in some ways yes, it is your right to keep your medical history private. What does it matter, they don't know the difference. From the other point of view, they might feel violated by not knowing if they find out (maybe they shouldn't, but with their own body, that's up to them). It's a debate …
/r/MensRights05/03/12 08:08 PM
3

There shouldn't be some quota, if boardrooms have 100% females, I don't have a problem. So long as they are the best people for the job. That should be the rule. "Best person for the job".
/r/MensRights05/03/12 06:29 PM
3

Question about "trans etiquette", you note that even when talking about your past, you prefer to be referred to as female. What of when talking about your birth? Do you say "born a boy" or something like that? I'm a genealogist, when I input data on a family tree, I put birth names and dates. It doesn't matter if a person changes their name, I put their birth name, their maiden name, etc... Would it bother you if you were put as "Male" with a note "Gender change to male on [date here]"? Or do yo…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 06:18 PM
1

I just said official because I note that different countries use different people for these sorts of things. A Justice of the peace, a judge, a representative of the above. The woman would have to prove that she sent notification and the man would need proof that he responded. Dates would need to be verifyable. Any notifications would work like a contract. Both parents take it to [insert appropriate official here] and sign it in front of them. Or if the other parent refuses, it works like a tres…
/r/MensRights27/02/12 07:29 PM
1

Contracts. You sign, they sign in front of an official who also signs.
/r/MensRights27/02/12 10:46 AM
1

I don't think it would be terribly hard to regulate. I would much rather fight for equal parenting rights and unbiased child support and custody. If a father is willing to provide equal care for his child, he should not have to pay support. These issues are important, but they are different issues. There's nothing wrong with addressing different issues at the same time. "I would much rather fight for..." is a pointless statement, we can fight for equal rights on multiple fronts. It is hard to sa…
/r/MensRights27/02/12 02:18 AM
1

Opting out, is essentially a way to abort, without aborting. Removing your rights and responsibilities, "handing the reigns over" to the other parent. You can't do this if the other parent is unwilling to take the child. If they both opt-out, then abortion is the option left (during pregnancy). If the mother doesn't want an abortion, then she is choosing to keep the baby, at least until birth. The father shouldn't be trapped in the pregnancy because of a choice by the mother.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 11:12 AM
1

Then perhaps it is a good idea to have routine paternal tests, I can agree with that. But I don't think we need to have parental contracts for each to accept the parental rights and responsibilities.
/r/MensRights24/02/12 12:11 AM
1

Ahh, I misunderstood you, I apologise. It is an extremely rare thing that a mother gets the wrong child. At least in countries with a decent system. So it would likely be a waste of money. People are free to get a paternity test at their wish. I don't think there's much point in forcing it. When people are concerned, they can get one.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 07:44 PM
1

Having to pass a test to gain paternity of your own child? Not in favour. This would just make things harder for males that want to be a father.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 07:24 PM
1

Not in favour of this. It leaves open many situation where the father can be denied paternity. I'm not here to give fathers even less rights.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 06:23 PM
1

You misunderstand things. It's not about having to "accept" being a father. In the eyes of the law, if the female conceives, she's the mother, you're the father. No "acceptance" is required. For this reason, women are afforded ways to "opt-out". The purpose of legal parental surrender is to give another way to opt-out. One that doesn't mean the other parent also loses their rights and responsibilities. It's an option available to both parents. Meaning it has nothing to do with the mother taking …
/r/MensRights23/02/12 06:17 PM
1

Yes, I've seen some of that, heard of the idea of a financial abortion beforehand. Thought I'd flesh out the idea into something of my own.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 06:04 PM
1

How does that differ from how things currently are for women? If she doesn't abort then she keeps it (in your scenario signing a contract), or she gives it up for abortion, or to a safe-haven, or any other option. The contract doesn't seem to do anything, as it changes nothing for her.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 09:48 PM
1

Hmm... What happens after she gives birth? If neither parent signs it, the state claims the child (don't worry, I'm not calling this a bad thing)?
/r/MensRights22/02/12 09:44 PM
1

And what if the mother doesn't sign it? She's already pregnant.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 09:41 PM
2

I'm not attached to the name, and that does seem more accurate. I leave discussing semantics to people better at it.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 08:24 PM
1

It's just an analogy, it's not suggesting parenthood is slavery. I made that clear. The focal point isn't enslavement, it's that the idea of removing a punishment from one person in a way punishes another, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. Please don't assume I'm trying to compare the enslavement aspect of slavery to parenthood, as I already made clear.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 08:12 PM
1

In what way are any of the scenarios I used punitive? Do you mean that my solutions would punish someone? I would deny that and instead suggest I'm providing a solution to people who are already being punished. Sort of like suggesting that when the slaves were freed, their masters were punished with the extra work load. (Note my intent is not to compare slavery with pregnancy or child support or anything related. It's just an analogy) I agree that it wouldn't be a common thing that someone would…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:35 PM
1

Why are you speaking as if into reply to something I said about it? Reference the whole sentence next time. Your comment was as though I had already mentioned child support, so you can understand my confusion. I hadn't mentioned anything about where child support goes, but you seem to assume I thought it went to the mother. I have already stated my opinion on financial abortion, I don't agree with males being able to walk away without any responsibility. I will not repeat this again.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:15 PM
2

I address that in the OP: If the father is only told of the pregnancy after the abortion cut-off date, he should not then be forced to pay child support, I would suggest he get a short time to make his decision on whether he wants to be a parent (whether the child is already born or not is irrelevant). She had a choice, but has devoid him of it. It's only fair that he be given the opportunity to have a choice too.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:03 PM
1

Are you referring to conception? They opt-in at conception? If so then the father should still have to opt-out rather than opt-in after impregnating the female.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:02 PM
1

I have stated nothing about child support. Why are you speaking as if into reply to something I said about it? I agree with everything else you say. Which is why if the father decides to have a "financial abortion" he should be required to pay for his fair share up until that date, and half the cost of the abortion if the mother then decides to get one. Like I said, I don't support a male just being able to walk away and forget anything happened.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 07:00 PM
2

essentially the guy who fucks the woman splits I don't agree with this either. But I do think that if the female has choice, so should the male.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:35 PM
1

Not entirely sure I agree with that. Does the female get to opt-in? I'm not for making inequality. EDIT: Oh and note, the suggestion I provided in the OP does make the case that both genders have the choice. If the mother opted out (without an abortion), she would simply become a surrogate mother. Just as the male could become just a sperm donor.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:26 PM
2

I do not support a financial abortion after the normal abortion cut-off date. If you've made your choice to keep the child, then that's it. I just don't support sex being that moment where your choice is made. The problem with a planned pregnancy is you can't prove it can you? But yes, I do support them being able to opt-out of it. But I wouldn't expect that to happen often. A male who performs a financial abortion before this date would effectively become just the sperm donor. Entitled to legal…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:13 PM
1

Yeah, so in that first situation, where the female didn't know, then they had no choice, and then neither should the male until both have the opportunity to make a choice (adoption, safe-haven drop-off). In the second example, where someone might conceal it. That is the female's choice. And so too should the male have that choice. Good luck on your pregnancy!
/r/MensRights22/02/12 06:07 PM
1

when the mother wants to keep the baby without extending any parenting rights to the father. Yes, I find that ridiculous. I don't know that it's ever been successful, do you? But it's a separate issue to the one I'm discussing. And yet it has a similarity in that my suggestion is an attempt to reconcile biological differences by giving both genders the opt-out option (without allowing the male to shirk all responsibility). In your first paragraph, it expresses using biology as an excuse to remov…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 05:50 PM
1

My sister, at 18 weeks, who normally isn't too skinny, is showing rather prominently. In many places, the cut off date is past 20-24 weeks. I've never heard of a case where a female was unaware that they were pregnant until after this date. At any rate, it would be provable that the woman couldn't have known she was pregnant. The main point of the idea is that the man should only be as responsible for as long as the female has to be. Meaning if she can't get an abortion for whatever reason. The …
/r/MensRights22/02/12 05:33 PM
1

Are sperm holders also withholding child support? No, certainly not. A father who gets a financial abortion would be nothing more than a sperm donor.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 12:04 PM
2

The idea is that this decision wouldn't be limited to men. If the male wanted the baby, and the female didn't (but also didn't want an abortion), then she too should be able to have a financial abortion, leaving responsibility to the father. Note there is already the option of adoption for either (or both together) parent. So the father getting a financial abortion shouldn't be something that might pressure the mother into getting an abortion, she still has options. The very nature of a financia…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 11:53 AM
0

The only thing to "see", is that in a nation that pays tax, you are expected to pay just like everyone else. It would be a terrible system if everyone got to choose what tax they paid. Because why would you choose to pay for anything?
/r/MensRights04/02/12 09:05 AM
0

As a democracy, the country can change it. Vote for representatives that want to change all that. You could run yourself.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 06:26 PM
0

It's a democracy. If you got to approve of everything the government does, then it would then become a dictatorship.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 06:20 PM
3

I should not be forced to move or pay someone because I plopped out on dirt some elected gang claims is colored for tax collection! You live in a taxpayers country, it's like expecting free rent at a motel because you were born in it. If I owned that motel, I would kick you out if you didn't pay your rent. This will be the case until that "inevitable" fall of the tax system you spoke of.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 06:11 PM
3

Where to? Not anyone else's problem. But there are islands out there that you could survive on. Tribes in jungles and deserts that aren't required to pay taxes because they don't earn money, they're self-sufficient. You know the tax system will fall, because of past experience? Because of history? I'm pretty sure some form of tax has been a pretty constant factor throughout human history.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 05:43 PM
2

You aren't forced. Is anyone making you stay here? Hop on a boat, leave.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 05:07 PM
1

So nothing, you're welcome to talk about whatever you want, freedom of speech and all that. But I'm not going to start talking about different things at your whim.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 05:06 PM
2

This has no relation to what I just said.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 05:02 PM
2

You aren't being trampled, you're paying your part.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 05:01 PM
2

Speak to a government representative, ask them about things that tax pays for. You do not get to choose what benefits you receive. The country would not run very well if you did, so it's all or nothing.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:41 PM
2

Scumbag Jeremiah, Complains about tax, makes use of all its benefits.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:24 PM
2

Stop making use of everything your taxes pay for and you'll have the moral high ground to say you shouldn't have to pay them.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:17 PM
2

I feel like getting a comment on there is like a badge of honour, along with getting banned from r/pyongyang.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 04:06 PM
1

Remember, before accusing people of double standards, remember that public opinion is not one large hive mind. Not that many people have double standards, but people do comment on the things they disagree with, so it gives that illusion.
/r/MensRights02/01/12 11:33 AM
1

It's not about punishing them, it's about discouraging gold diggers. Listen, I mean, if the divorcees can sort out something different and agree on it Absolutely. you accept that if it ends, you'll both have to divy up your holdings and go your separate ways. Great way to mean that unless both people have similar wealth, marriage has no benefit for the more wealthy of the two. If you really don't trust the person you're about to marry (begs the question...) It's not about trust, it's a simple fa…
/r/MensRights01/01/12 04:58 AM
1

Sometimes 50/50 isn't exactly fair though is it? Small time person marries rich billionaire. Split after five years, should the wealth be split in two?
/r/MensRights01/01/12 04:08 AM
2

much easier to sell the organ since it would not be a black market and hard to prove that a surgeon made the mistake on purpose Actually, having an established system in place would make such a thing much more difficult.
/r/MensRights31/12/11 06:27 PM
1

Marriage is extremely important for societal stability and survival. Not sure that I agree, I think society would survive and adapt without marriage.
/r/MensRights31/12/11 06:32 AM
2

I only wish there was a way I could make a self-binding contract that says I cannot legally get married until both parties sign a pre-nup with x, y, and z conditions. Because asking for a pre-nup is a massive insult and sign of distrust, not asking for one is idiotic. But saying "Sorry babe, I want to get married, but I can't get myself out of this contract" seems to solve this problem.
/r/MensRights31/12/11 06:30 AM
-1

Such as discriminate. There you go again. Like the "colored" drinking fountain? Nope, not at all. Those are areas that nudity could occur, and the sexes aren't permitted to be there during that time. No one is changing their clothes in a hotel hallway. So why does nudity matter? Men and women are the same after all aren't they? It's discriminatory to allow one gender a specific room without allowing another there. Congratulations, you've found the problem. I know there are problems with the real…
/r/MensRights28/12/11 04:45 AM
-1

Such as? It hardly matters. We're not here to make laws for things only if they're a good idea. The law doesn't tell us what we're allowed to do, only what we aren't. This makes zero sense. Men are forced to separate from the floor. Women don't have to be forced in for men to be forced out. This is like saying that black students weren't forced out of a particular school because white kids weren't forced in. This again? Having entire systems built around keeping races separate is entirely differ…
/r/MensRights28/12/11 04:12 AM
0

Where? On the other hand. As I've said, men and women most certainly are different. Both men and women can equally benefit from single gender floors. As each floor can specialise to the average wants of the gender. Um, one is forcibly removed from the floor if they are not a woman. But no one forces the women to stay in there, which means no one is forcing separation. But why be sexist and prohibit men from enjoying the hotel rooms? Are you purposefully ignoring the things I say to further your …
/r/MensRights28/12/11 03:24 AM
-2

Why make it a women's floor? I have addressed the benefits of having separate sex floors, and what it allows a company to do for the benefit of all involved. Yes, but what does that have to do with segregating hotel rooms? Segregation: The action or state of setting someone or something apart from other people or things or being set apart. Segregation implies a level of force. That's not what is going on here, don't be disingenuous. How? By creating scheduling nightmares? I think the businesses …
/r/MensRights28/12/11 02:58 AM
1

"safe haven"? I'm not aware they're advertising this as a safe haven from men. Can you give me a source on this? Because if it's true, then I agree, this needs to be fought. But if that's just how you're worried it could be interpreted as, then no. Intentions are important to me, if the company do not intend it as a "refuge from men", then I will not treat it as one. Men and women are different. Anatomically we are different, and we statistically like and value different things. This is not a co…
/r/MensRights28/12/11 02:06 AM
-1

Maybe not today, but some day it will. Completely unfounded assumption. This is not forced separation. There is still the unisex option. What problems could possibly arise? We don't ban things based on unforeseen problems. Doesn't "something is bound to go wrong in the future, we should ban it now!" sound absolutely vague and ridiculous to you?
/r/MensRights28/12/11 12:19 AM
10

Do you think the same person who created unisex toilets did so under the same philosophy? For a less sarcastic response: It's not forcing separation if there are still unisex floors. I posit that separation is only wrong if it's forced. There's nothing wrong with choosing to be separate.
/r/MensRights27/12/11 10:50 PM
11

I think if there is equal opportunity for a male-only floor, then I have no problem with it.
/r/MensRights27/12/11 10:27 PM
3

The "male abortion" concept does seem much better than how things are currently. If this chap took the case to the supreme court, can the judge say "This seems fair, let's do it" even if it's not a law?
/r/MensRights26/12/11 05:54 PM
4

She said in her comment, she said no, then he tried to convince her otherwise. Then the point it's vague about is whether he started giving her oral before or after she "finally gave in". "Finally gave in" is consent. However if he started before that, then yes, it's rape. EDIT: 8 months and 20 days isn't new. By that standard, I'm prenatal.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 11:44 AM
3

This right here! People are quick to say "You made the child, sack up and take responsibility". While completely ignoring the inequality of it. Oh, not saying "GET_A_PATERNITY_TEST" is ignoring any inequalities, (s)he's probably just telling you the reality of the situation. It may be unfair, but yes, you're done for.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 10:57 AM
1

Why aren't they? Is it to encourage them to come clean? If there's a massive penalty, I expect many innocent people would still be in prison because their accuser didn't want to suffer the penalty of coming clean. Not saying I think this, just asking why.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 10:17 AM
7

Look at us, complimenting 4Chan. Oh the things we get up to.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 08:35 AM
1

Some people are natural beaters. I wasn't suggesting this went on for long.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 08:32 AM
15

Okay so I don't think this was full blown rape, but she's not a "crazy" who simply regretted her drunken hookup. It's as though you think people can't possibly have conflicting emotions. Her explanation of the point of consent ("I finally just gave in"), it doesn't state whether he was already giving her oral before she did that, or if she allowed it before he started. But I believe in innocent until proven guilty so I'm not going to say he raped her.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 08:14 AM
5

A good beater can do it silently.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 07:52 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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