TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Suspicious-Yam5111 Archive

View 0 posts and 109 comments by Suspicious-Yam5111 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)
1

By no means should people not have the right to exclude others from their group if they're a minority. Not exactly a piss in the sea if such a group is inundated by a much larger group. The unsafeness of their own places is hardly an excuse, especially with the possibility of them bringing similar unsafeness (groping, flirting, sexualization, etc.) where they go.
/r/MensRights16/08/26 03:14 AM
1

If you can afford to have professionals do them, but cooking and dishes doesn't take nearly as much time as these labors and aren't nearly as difficult, unless you consider life itself a chore. You aren't cleaning the whole house every day, and laundry is mostly a machine doing the work. Not to mention that the man is working an 8 hour job
/r/MensRights11/07/26 10:09 AM
1

Why would a woman resort to making more work for herself because she has 'tried other communication methods?' Why is she the victim here, playing blame games and giving herself unneeded work?
/r/MensRights05/07/26 06:07 PM
1

Who says it is because they are more impulsive? This may just be a case of correlation without causation.
/r/MensRights05/07/26 06:00 PM
5

That's commendable
/r/MensRights28/06/26 05:56 PM
-4

Porn is just sexual art or photography. If it keeps men weak in ways we don't understand, we mitigate those problems like we would for anything else in our society and lives.
/r/MensRights24/06/26 03:25 AM
1

Ironically, what you're saying is not much different from what homophobic troglodytes say, either. Just concern trolling because you didn't get your way- indeed, when two men are being intimate, it can be gay. No one says it MUST be gay, or 'it's so gay, bro,' but it is no longer necessarily only platonic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/26 07:26 PM
1

This is idiotic, in no way would it be more progressive for Luca to not be gay. We are already comfortable with close Platonic relationships between men, they inundate all media; don't project your insecurities and let them cloud the facts. How is it bad that two men having a close relationship is seen as gay, anyways? Just move on to media that represents what you want to see; if you feel that them being gay means male intimacy is seen as gay, that's a non sequitur that you need to resolve with…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/05/26 07:24 PM
1

From who, lady?
/r/MensRights07/05/26 10:55 AM
1

Who cares if you want all gay men to look one way or another? You aren't even gay yourself, and it's not a stereotype of gay men that they are feminine, or anything else, at worse it's a trend or tendency.
/r/MensRights07/05/26 10:52 AM
1

They definitely are not out there, thankfully
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/05/26 07:07 PM
2

Who says gay men are overwhelmingly masculine? Or that it is insulting or stereotypical to imply they would be feminine or effeminate? If anything, they would be afraid to be feminine, so they seek to overcompensate.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/05/26 07:24 PM
1

I don't think not attacking someone's sexuality in the heat of the moment is proof of tolerance; they might just fear hypocrisy or overt bigotry. They'll then mask their hatred by undermining the person in other, indirect ways, like making them out to be creeps or some other of the myriad things people can scrounge up.
/r/MensRights29/04/26 07:35 AM
1

Who cares if they 'turn' the characters gay? I disregard the canon as a cheap and bad faith pandering to the heterosexual majority, and the romances and pairings are schlocky and mandatory; it's not just women who do this or like to see it, nor do I agree with the poisoning of the well in calling things 'stereotypes' (as all art relies on so-called 'stereotypes' that are stirring and attractive; you just call it that when it's not catering to the image you like projected). I'm not aware of these…
/r/MensRights29/04/26 07:32 AM
2

Witchcraft. Voodoo. Hexes
/r/MensRights27/04/26 07:21 PM
15

It's a degenerate species, mate. We're mortal and ignorant and full of diseases and flaws
/r/MensRights24/04/26 05:06 AM
1

So you think people prior to 25-29 don't have authentic or natural sexual desires? Or they possess such to a lesser degree? Seems like there would rather be a norm relative to each age group.
/r/MensRights14/04/26 08:45 AM
1

So who determines what is narcissistic grandiosity and what is normality? Is the group or majority being opposed also narcissistic or suffering from a 'group narcissism,' or is it absolutely correct?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/26 08:42 AM
1

10 months later, and you are still dead wrong. To be sexualized is not to be thought of only as a sexual being, as even to consider someone as a sexual being is, implicitly, to acknowledge other, important characteristics (though I'm not sure some outside party determines what characteristics are 'important;' that's up to the two people involved). It is not wrong to be sexualized, and every aspect of human interaction involves an active and a passive party. Most instances of sexualization you fi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/25 06:11 PM
1

Who says dressing sexy is not an invitation? Who gets to determine these things, because I am certain not many people agree with you, at all, and those who do are not always consistent in their behavior. What's so wrong about treating people who wear sexy outfits as approachable for erotic interest or appreciation? No one says she 'must acquiesce,' nor was that evident in your example. It's just people's entitlement that they expect everyone around them to decouple what other wear from what they…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/25 06:06 PM
1

The point is the woman shouldn't feel entitled to relying on other people to force how they see features they find attractive. They shouldn't have to stay inside, but just because someone doesn't 'regard their body as sexual' or want to be sexualized doesn't mean they can't, or shouldn't. The real problem would be people ogling you or being hamfisted or oafish in their approach. So it's foolish to say he should be accepting of women physically harassing him if he dresses in a revealing manner be…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/10/25 06:04 PM
1

Don't be foolish. What is wrong with projecting our modern 'sensibility' onto a past civilization? Why is victimhood inextricably Christian, despite any professing Christian denying this oversimplistic smear? Christ is not the ultimate victim, but the savior who defeated death and opened the way for human salvation (according to Christianity, and especially if you hold to universal salvation). The second coming hardly seems fitting for such a feeble and ill-constituted 'ultimate victim.' Sure, n…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/10/25 07:10 PM
4

Aye, women don't want any competition from men of any age or gender expression. It's a real blow to your ego to be unattractive to a man you like because of unchangeable innate characteristics (like being a man, even a very attractive or feminine one), and women don't want to be in that position. So the man who is rejecting or not showing them the attention they are entitled to must be defective. In the past, it would have been because he was corrupted by a sodomite, or he saw a Greek statue or …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/09/25 03:45 PM
2

People still shouldn't organize their personalities around natalism and see it ad their holy of holies. It is just an expectation, a duty- no need for sentimentalism or flanderization
/r/MensRights03/09/25 06:22 PM
1

Interesting, me too, to an extent. It's like almost all of my sexuality is blown away out of fear of buzzwords like 'fetishization, sexualization, objectification,' thinking it's unwanted, dirty, cheap, or that I cannot love someone if my behaviors can be smeared using such words. It's not so much disgust as it is fear that I will like something so much and be reduced to a 'fetishist' or an 'objectifier.' Much easier to just ignore these feelings and adopt the much more life-affirming, amoral (n…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/25 10:47 AM
1

Who says it's perfectly fine if they're not as gay as they thought? What objective moral standard do you have by which to say that? Maybe someone doesn't like that even the few gay people just default back to heterosexuality, even if only to a degree. No pressure on them to accept or be well-disposed towards everything and everyone in this world.
/r/EverydayMisandry02/07/25 08:47 AM
1

Why are parasocial relationships 'always unhealthy?' Why is this the one thing that is always bad, for fictional characters, celebrities, or deities/religious figures, hands down?
/r/EverydayMisandry02/07/25 08:46 AM
1

What's wrong with parasocial relationships?
/r/EverydayMisandry02/07/25 08:45 AM
1

What do you mean by fetishizing? And what's wrong with that? Are you fetishizing bisexuality or openness?
/r/EverydayMisandry02/07/25 08:36 AM
1

How do you prove all bi women don't love women less than lesbians? What are the odds you would love both sexes at a perfect 50-50 ratio? What's more likely- you can't serve two masters.
/r/EverydayMisandry02/07/25 08:35 AM
-2

I can't really be arsed with many of their comments. People calling me things, making me out to be a power bottom, or speculating about my sexuality never bothered me, even when I was really closeted and (hypocritically) homophobic. I quite enjoyed it. I don't think women calling someone uke or seme or dressing them up is in itself bad, just trying to harass or personally hook up with them (to 'turn them straight,' which isn't even funny). But this deriding of it as a 'fetish' and that it 'shoul…
/r/EverydayMisandry19/06/25 07:55 PM
0

It could just be that men are unattractive to most women, and our beauty ideals are shot because men need to be manly, and you cannot at the same time be manly and beautiful (think of a renaissance angel, or Greek sculpture, or the like; leagues beyond even Hollywood actors). No surprise you need to be less visually driven when your partner will be balding, bearded, and uninspiring for most of his life. Now, what is this about one of the characters in yaoi being a 'substitute for a girl?' That s…
/r/EverydayMisandry19/06/25 07:40 PM
-4

If you ship or sexualize real people, even as an extension of their character, why is this bad? Why do you view a 'real person' as 'less than a person?' This sounds reductionist and slanderous, you can view them as a real person while being invested in the persona they play, and you can sexualize other people without dehumanizing them.
/r/EverydayMisandry19/06/25 07:31 PM
-3

Wouldn't it be disrespectful of these artists' boundaries to tell them they cannot make and consume this artwork in their private communities? Why stop at artwork on the internet, why not crack down on art work people do not share, or private fantasies?
/r/EverydayMisandry19/06/25 07:29 PM
-1

So, what is the problem with fetishizing men? You can't write two paragraphs about wanting to get screwed by an attractive man, and you're supposed to 'call this out?' Am I supposed to notify people before I have sexual fantasies about them, or talk about how attractive they are? Do you even have an objective moral standard to ground why 'fetishization' (whatever that exactly means) is bad, or is one supposed to indulge your personal feelings?
/r/EverydayMisandry19/06/25 07:27 PM
1

Bi washing is the greater issue, what are you talking about? People are always forced to marry and get with the opposite sex, not to mention the interminable "are you sure you're not somewhat attracted? Are you sure you won't find the right woman?" No one is obligated to identify by a recently invented label to artificially inflate the numbers of those calling themselves 'bisexual.'
/r/EverydayMisandry17/06/25 12:53 PM
1

I don't see the problem. I am one such person and consume the material they produce, only feeling insulted when they say things like 'by straight women, for straight women' or make it clear their communities are male-skeptical or testy towards men. Now, what is the problem with 'fetishizing?' Why does it concern you?
/r/EverydayMisandry12/06/25 08:05 AM
2

Always the obsession with male sexuality and entertainment.
/r/EverydayMisandry09/06/25 08:41 AM
14

No wonder, considering how there are significantly more straight men and women than gay men and women
/r/EverydayMisandry31/05/25 09:54 AM
7

Women posing alongside minorities they have historically oppressed, Season 3, Episode 29
/r/EverydayMisandry23/05/25 07:39 PM
1

Perhaps these women should focus on the homophobia and heterocentrism that makes gay men desire to marry them instead of reducing it to 'misogyny.'
/r/EverydayMisandry10/05/25 02:31 PM
1

Gay men forced into straight marriages, women most affected
/r/EverydayMisandry10/05/25 02:29 PM
0

As a cis gay man it's not fetishizing and I myself consume the material and like the presentation. It's just the hypocrisy of these fans I don't like
/r/EverydayMisandry28/04/25 06:21 AM
1

What is 'fetishizing?'
/r/EverydayMisandry28/04/25 06:20 AM
1

No, they are mostly straight women. BL manga, danmei novels, all that market for certain gay material is 'by and for straight women.'
/r/EverydayMisandry28/04/25 06:19 AM
1

How do you know? Forget the countless feminine men and manly women who went through the wringer of a traditional family
/r/MensRights03/04/25 09:59 AM
1

Is short-term pleasure bad? Is only long-term pleasure good, and is such pleasure not just composed of several, smaller short-term pleasures (e.g., remembering that you have children, or having someone by your side on your deathbed instead of having no one)? By that standard, you can just replace these long-term pleasures with other long-term pleasures, like friends, or remove the need altogether through abstinence or some kind of austerity. There's no inherent reason why these should be cheaper…
/r/MensRights23/03/25 12:57 PM
0

Essentially, women do all of what you said. Aside from the presumed need to reproduce or maintain human Earthly civilization, why should recreation and entertainment (and whatever else porn or video games, when indulged in healthfully) be less important than chasing women and relationships with women? A friend can cover the need for company or touch. Besides, you have accomplished what was needed; you have fulfilled your desire for external gain or conquest, and you have fulfilled your desire fo…
/r/MensRights23/03/25 12:36 PM
3

What's wrong with supernormal stimuli and indulging in pornography? Who says sensitivity to "natural rewards" like intimacy or social connection are lost, or are you implying that cutting porn or all other forms of satisfaction or supernormal stimuli will make you bored enough to crave that satisfaction from social connection? Any ways, it's not been my experience. The suppliers of porn are not necessarily exploiting other men, as any pleasure can be abused or damaging if used improperly, and th…
/r/MensRights09/03/25 08:28 PM
1

Yes, your analogy was shite- in one case, a customer is being discriminated against because the baker doesn't like a group of people, and in the other case the customer is being 'discriminated against' because the baker doesn't want to make an erotic cake. The two cases are only superficially similar but most people won't sympathize with the latter. because the cause for discrimination is different. Hence my reference to a "rational or respectable decision" determining what is discrimination and…
/r/MensRights09/03/25 12:11 PM
1

How desperate are the single women?
/r/MensRights09/03/25 12:03 PM
1

Sexualizing what are presumed to be platonic male relationships is not mutually exclusive to men having deep friendships. Just insist that men can show intimacy without necessarily being gay, not that all acts of male intimacy are merely platonic and cannot be read as more (if in fiction, as fictional characters cannot object to these interpretations, being unreal). Not to mention that this just feels highly reactive; I see more bellyaching about gay ships than an actual push for the kinds of so…
/r/MensRights09/03/25 11:39 AM
1

It should be totally fine to not have to compete with someone who may prefer the same or opposite sex, and then to be blamed for the relationship not working out, if you choose to enter into it (with someone who may just see you as a side dish on his or her way to the entrée).
/r/MensRights07/03/25 11:28 AM
1

But why ought gay men to enter into relationships with you lest they be "biphobic?" They have a right to choose people they feel will have a greater chance of being a good fit for them, at least on the basis that they both exclusively love men and there is no need for envy of the other sex, comparison, or trying to outcompete women for the same man's attention (a losing battle). And still- why don't bisexual men seek out more relationships with bisexual and gay men? It doesn't sound like they de…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/03/25 09:11 PM
1

How is it unfair to imply bisexual people are less trustworthy in love? Indeed, anyone could leave you, but some people are more likely to leave you than others, and I shouldn't have to engage with people on a specific basis rather than a heuristic because they "might be different from the others;" better not to waste nerves or emotional attachment. If bisexual people have a larger chance of ending up with a straight person of the opposite sex, why complain that gay people are not dating them? T…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/03/25 09:09 PM
1

Slinging around buzzwords like "biphobia" to shut down hurtful realities won't help us find out the truth. Obviously, people will leave you or not prefer you for a variety of reasons- but you are allowed not to engage in a relationship with them. Somehow, the same logic does not apply to bisexual people. Who said the promise of a 'loving relationship' is sufficient grounds for entering into a relationship with a bi person? These stereotypes exist for a reason; bisexual people may just not want t…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/03/25 09:05 PM
1

Most bisexual people are in long-term relationships with the opposite sex, so the point the commenter was making is that a bisexual man would just leave a gay man, who was not much more than a fling, for the real meat and potatoes- a marriage with a woman he will have children with. Trying to obfuscate with whataboutisms doesn't prove any point. Besides, homosexuals are told that they "just haven't met the right woman" or are "immature" due to God-knows-what psychological or hormonal problem dur…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/03/25 09:03 PM
1

You really think straight men are more disadvantaged nowadays? That the same toxicity and problems don't permeate gay relationships and communities? Don't say this when on the other hand straight people are telling me about disease, addiction, suicide rates, mental health statistics, and other things to put me down and justify taking away my dignity. On occasion, even self-hating gay people who wish they were straight
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/03/25 09:01 PM
1

Aye, similar troubles exist for gay/monosexual people. "Are you sure you're utterly incapable of being attracted to the opposite sex?" (as if you were, you would be funneled into bi identity, and could no longer call yourself gay). Or that bisexual people have the best of both worlds, or love men and women better than straight or gay people because they have experience with both worlds, etc. Or that everyone is actually bisexual, so no one should identify as gay or straight, apparently; I unders…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/25 05:34 PM
1

Does there have to be 100% accuracy in order to say there are "gay characteristics?" Do "female characteristics" not exist because 100% of women might not necessarily have one, shared characteristic? Or consider any other grouping of people, if the female example is flawed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/25 05:26 PM
1

Well, what do you think people love each other for, anyways? After all, you want men with game and big dicks who can serve you well, so why would it be a problem if the man who's with you wants frequent sex? Even so, why don't you just allow him to masturbate or masturbate with porn? Why is he totally dependent on you for sexual relief?
/r/MensRights15/02/25 09:59 AM
1

Do you think any of these are problems inherent to porn? That there is no conceivable way you can reconcile porn use and masturbation with sex and ambition? Or that your depression did not arise from other causes, such as shame associated with masturbation, or the belief you are losing vitality, focus, health, etc. by ejaculating? After all, such a simple just-so story as "coming off porn, the ED cleared up" is a mere anecdote.
/r/MensRights14/02/25 08:00 PM
-7

Is it mutually exclusive for them to want men to have friends but also ship same-sex characters on the basis of scenes of intimacy? Aye, friends can kiss or love each other, but this is also what lovers will do; perhaps it is anachronistic or naive to force a gay reading on that relationship in Tolkien's work, but it is by no means wrong or baseless.
/r/MensRights08/02/25 05:08 PM
0

So what is they do it? Besides, you cannot compare gay ships of some of the vast numbers of 'straight' (theyre fictional, who can pin them down for sure?) characters to straight ships of the few gay characters that gay people might strongly desire to have and identify with.
/r/MensRights08/02/25 05:05 PM
2

What is objectification in this context? Because I've heard people argue that compliments are objectifying in the bad way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 10:13 PM
1

What you call subjectification, others would call self-objectification. A woman fulfilling male desires would be 'self-objectifying herself' in that she is treating herself as a means to the male's end of getting himself off. Where are you getting this term 'subjectification' from? Feminists seem to have a problem with consensual objectification, too; it is still presented as morally suspicious, in keeping with Kant's idea that extramarital sex reduced (female) partners to objects rather than hu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 09:59 PM
1

Your view is incoherent. What is the problem with depicting female sexuality as an object of desire? An external image or person can only be the object- i.e., the recipient, of someone's desire. You cannot be the "subject" of someone's desire. It does not encourage men to treat women as objects, because by that you mean that they will only see women as the object of their sexual desire and without their own individual needs and desires. This is not the product of advertisements with women in lin…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 09:55 PM
1

Sure, but why only men? Why are women entitled to not changing anything, and men accommodating them and doing more work for their refusal to stop wielding the power (e.g., attractiveness) that they have?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 09:27 PM
1

Accentuating the parts of yourself that are sexually attractive, whether you know why you are doing this or not. That would be being sexual, or sexualizing yourself. You can, however, be sexually attractive without sexualizing yourself, that would be 'women simply existing,' without all of the mannerisms, ways of speaking, dressing, etc. that are supposed to be exciting or titillating to men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 09:25 PM
1

Says who?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 09:17 PM
1

Can you defend this assertion? How is it possible to ever see someone as a person rather than an object, when so much of our reasons for engaging with people are selfish or arguably, all are (as they are only in relation with what we feel)?
/r/MensRights06/01/25 05:46 PM
1

What's wrong with female characters, even main characters, being dressed skimpily (what you call ridiculously)? Or being masturbatory aids? If there is a dearth of female characters, it is probably because comics, video games, etc. didn't used to appeal to women as much as they do now. There was no market for such.
/r/MensRights06/01/25 05:35 PM
1

But what you said is wrong. Female characters drawn in sexually flattering ways are complete characters, it is just that the characteristic feminists focus on is their appearance, because it's what irks them very badly. Men find them attractive because they are a beautiful body attached to a personality, especially an interesting or alluring personality (rather than being the stereotypical airhead bimbo or annoying and unpleasant). I don't see the problem with actual supporting characters playin…
/r/MensRights06/01/25 05:34 PM
1

Porn addiction is a nonsensical idea as you're applying it. And why should we take into consideration the words of an ex-gay who hates his sexuality and truncates a third of his body for an unproven, unhistorical faith? If you've never seen that side of women you haven't gotten around much. It doesn't even have to be sexual objectification; romantic, aesthetic, emotional objectification can suffice (look at Tumblr, deviantart, BL manga, Danmei novels, fanfic and slash fanfic, etc.).
/r/MensRights06/01/25 05:19 PM
1

So what is the problem with objectification? It is not actually reductive, in that it does not insist a person is, for instance, only a sexual being (which is impossible to do). It just focuses on that aspect. That can feel degrading or like your 'inner self' is not being seen in certain contexts, but that doesn't mean it is inherently bad.
/r/MensRights06/01/25 04:45 PM
1

You dont have a point at all. The comment did not imply you actually see the batista as a 'thing' or 'object' you use. You just focus only on them as a human and a batista or bus driver, and whatever else is pertinent. Their dreams, hobbies, personality, etc. is not pertinent​ to your needs, so there is no reason to consider these things, and it isnt reductionist but rather efficient. Because you see them as a human, and we don't live in a society where we have slaves and lower castes we are tau…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 02:32 PM
1

Why would that justify hating them? An intervention or something productive would be better than exacerbating their situation. It's like saying that it's fair to hate black men because they engage in armed violence (without analyzing the reasons why, and how these reasons should be addressed rather than engorging the prison industrial complex further).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 12:24 PM
1

No, it doesn't quite help. What is wrong with any of what you listed? Almost everything that is projected onto the outside makes others "passive." Having expectations, making predictions, holding people responsible, etc., requires that they be the passive recipient of something. But why do you need to think about the other person's feelings or sexuality? If there is a consensual scenario between two people where the 'passive' or 'sexualized' partner is aware of what is happening and is fine with…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/01/25 12:18 PM
1

How is it possible to treat people as ends in themselves? There is always an element of selfishness, even if it is just, for instance, the desire to fulfill your desire to give gifts or be charitable. In such an instance, you would just be using the recipient of a gift as a means to the end of fulfilling that desire, however tightly bound-up that desire is with their own interests.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/01/25 05:09 PM
1

What would be wrong with this kind of thinking? That is, what is wrong for liking someone because of the traits you think typify their race? It does not mean that you 'only want to be with a black man because of their reputation for a larger penis,' as if that were their only quality. It might mean that it's the reason you prefer a black man over other men, and if an individual black man doesn't have that penis, you can go on your merry way without insulting them or being surprised.
/r/MensRights27/12/24 01:54 PM
1

If you think men's feminization is a recent artifact you need to read some more. Especially if seen as a 'product of the pill.' I can provide some resources.
/r/MensRights25/12/24 11:58 AM
1

Substantiate even a single one of your claims. Beyond bad history and a fallacy of relative privation, I'm not seeing much. The 'strong' blame and resent the weak (or egalitarianism, or democracy, or individualism) all the time. ​People complained in the past and people today aren't these caricatures who only want a good life. A war? I'd like to see you fight in it
/r/MensRights25/12/24 11:27 AM
1

What was his source? Is his idea of narcissism or covert narcissism accurate to the research?
/r/MensRights23/12/24 11:22 AM
1

The word involuntary doesn't concern women or the object of desire, just that there are characteristics that make these men undesirable that they cannot change. They do not 'choose' not to change and they are not 'lazy,' whatever you mean by these words (e.g., demoralization, lack of will-power, etc.). Not that women unconditionally owe them sex or whatever inane strawman you dishonestly push. So indeed, they are involuntarily celibate. They lack the qualities they need to get the thing they wan…
/r/MensRights23/12/24 11:19 AM
1

You mocked incels for presenting sex as transactional and now depict it in perfectly transactional, Capitalistic terms. Link the study done on the attractiveness of incels; you are likely extrapolating too much from it or it was limited in scope. Furthermore, why do men need to jump through all of these hoops in order to 'get' women? Obviously, you will need to do all of these things if you want a relationship, but what gives women the right to demand these things, and to feel entitled to them, …
/r/MensRights23/12/24 11:12 AM
1

But why do men owe women a drastic 'stepping up' of their game? Why do women deserve to command other's emotions in this way, rather than lowering their standards or being more proactive? Why do women take precedence here?
/r/MensRights23/12/24 11:04 AM
1

What are your sources on this?
/r/MensRights22/12/24 05:47 PM
1

How are you any different than the trans moralizing you complain about? No one wants to see this matriarchal Christian trash pushed on men anymore, that demonized their sexuality, lives, freedom, and any raison d'etre they might have outside of communion with your cosmic father figure
/r/MensRights19/12/24 03:17 PM
1

Hypocrite, why shouldn't people be free to accept transgender people's identity if they so choose to? People do give a fuck, people do want to hear them complain (even if you and your lot don't), and there's nothing oppressive about being called 'cis-gender.' Although I don't understand why you don't just suck it up. As for your 'arguments,' I'd recommend actually reading what gender theorists and trans philosophers have to say on the matter.
/r/MensRights19/12/24 03:15 PM
1

This is idiocy after idiocy. Why not legally force the business to set up shop in a country that respects their right to discriminate against their clientele? The accusation that 'it is too difficult or inconvenient' could be similarly shot down by accusing them of laziness. They aren't owed these kinds of freedoms in a country that morally disagrees with their discrimination, or finds it unsympathetic or antisocial. Why is 'forcing yourself on a business that doesn't want you to be a customer' …
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:35 AM
1

Why should a minority be forced to find a competitor's business if exclusion 'bothers them?' Yet you side with the small business that is supposedly being so aggrieved by being forced to service a minority they discriminate against for possibly frivolous or baseless reasons? Who gives these companies the 'freedom' that is supposedly being 'violated?' And why should they be given the right to violate the freedom of minorities? Why don't they find a different country to set up in?
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:27 AM
1

How is making a Christian bake a gay wedding cake oppression of straight people or Christians, especially on par with what has historically been done to gay people? This just sounds like exaggeration.
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:22 AM
1

How is the Christian refusing service to gay men on the basis of personal feelings or an unproven faith be any better?
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:22 AM
1

How is a gay wedding cake like a Swastika cake to a Jewish baker? This is just a bad analogy
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:21 AM
1

Why should they be forced to go to the other baker? Who says it was about self-importance and abuse? It was about highlighting a regressive hang-up against gay marriages and morality, more likely. Should anyone's frivolous desires be respected? Should a business be allowed to reject service on any whim or personal desire, even if there are other options? Why should the minorities inevitably affected by this have to put up with it?
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:20 AM
1

It's not discrimination because one is inherently scandalous, the other is not inherently scandalous. It's a bad analogy, and the insistence on the part of the bakery to 'not make cakes with two men's names' is not inherently a rational or respectable decision
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:04 AM
1

Why not?
/r/MensRights16/12/24 11:01 AM
1

Why are women owed a man's assertiveness? Why should they not be equitable partners and approach as readily as the man is expected to? "Men and women aren't equal" doesn't answer this.
/r/MensRights15/12/24 09:33 PM
1

Are you really sure that hating weakness is the main reason men grow up and stop being weak? Why do people keep hating even those weak people for whom hatred does not work? Did they forget to hate stupidity?
/r/MensRights15/12/24 09:27 PM
1

About what?
/r/MensRights15/12/24 08:10 PM
1

(Citation needed)
/r/MensRights15/12/24 06:55 PM
1

Bisexual would then just be a subset of pansexual
/r/MensRights15/12/24 06:35 PM
1

I'm curious, because as a gay man (AMAB, mind you), I don't have any trouble with women 'fetishizing' gay guys in yaoi porn and M/M fiction (among the other things they make, like art, fanfic, BL manga) which I myself consume and enjoy greatly. So why is it immoral or problematic in itself?
/r/MensRights15/12/24 10:30 AM
1

Why do you have so much empathy and understanding for these people who have a moral disagreement with your sexuality? Why don't you consider them audacious and importunate for caring about other people's sexualities? And how is it in any way lacking in empathy to clown on homophobes and make true statements such as 'homophobes say all gay men are predators." Some, in fact, do make claims like these- not in a spirit of honesty, but as more of an insult (like 'all trans people are mentally ill'- t…
/r/MensRights14/12/24 10:39 PM
1

What's wrong with considering people who morally object to homosexuality as homophobes? How is it the same as calling them pigs? You don't need to accept the contrary opinions or ideas other people may have by any means, what are you prattling on about? Nor can I, a gay man, stand this macho man Tom of Finland clone bullshit that complains about femininity among gay men.
/r/MensRights14/12/24 10:32 PM
-12

What's wrong with commiserating with another man or having a talk about emotions? Why do I need to immediately focus on solutions? For instance- "Your wife is dead. Are you going to wallow in 'self-victimization' and 'self-pity' or are you going to go to therapy, or take drug X or Y, or go to grief counselling, etc.?" Why the false dichotomy? A real man would converse around the emotion and then seek a solution, denying or rejecting someone's emotions just leads to the same emotional retardation…
/r/MensRights01/12/24 03:08 PM
1

They probably can't change whatever needs to be changed. They lack the motivation, conscientiousness, information, peers, etc. You could similarly say "men just want to blame women instead of fixing crime and protecting women (by virtue of their greater strength- I mean, shit, I don't have larger nostrils and big ass hands, joints, and feet for nothing).
/r/MensRights01/12/24 02:43 PM
1

There are cultures and time periods where men could do that and homosexuality was not seen as a mental illness or nonexistent (more rhetoric and cope than truth) to the extent modern Muslim fanatics want it to be. Hell, the pederastya and eunuchs and homosexuality in their own culture, for instance.
/r/MensRights30/10/24 01:41 PM
1

How so? There were greek 'homosexuals,' even if you take issue with the term and believe it is a 'modern, Western term' (as is man, woman, state, religion, etc.). Nevertheless, behaviors and natures akin to modern conceptions of homosexuality or bisexuality existed, as well as, indubitably, eros between men.
/r/ExRedPill21/08/24 06:47 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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