TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Suspiciously_Flawed Archive

View 0 posts and 108 comments by Suspiciously_Flawed on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

Your internal delusions ramped up and became so absurd that they in turn became interesting. I suppose this serves as an answer to my questions though, you cannot even communicate effectively with yourself, I am sorry for you, have a good night.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 12:16 AM
1

Even after you have blatantly stated that you acknowledge that there are stereotypes associated with sex(gender) you are unable to recognize that you have actually admitted this. The cognitive dissonance is both fascinating and worrying. As a reminder this is what you said: There are social stereotypes associated with sex. This is a direct admission that you believe gender exists. I'm curious I have a few questions: When you experience these delusions, can you even read your own words or do they…
/r/MensRights11/10/22 12:12 AM
1

All I was attempting to test was that you believed in gender, I have done that. I don't care about the rest of your whining, I didn't expect any worthwhile information from you and I got none. You can barely form coherent sentences much less arguments. There are subs with intelligent user bases who can prove me wrong and who I can have actual conversations, this is not one of them. You were just a test for my hypothesis, for that I thank you, have a good night.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 12:07 AM
1

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neo-Nazi Neo-Nazi is a noun. https://www.merriam-webster.com/ Use the dictionary for further reference, and have a good night.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 12:05 AM
1

​ There are social stereotypes associated with sex. There, you just acknowledged gender exists. That is what gender is.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 12:04 AM
0

I have friends in real life, I don't need the incels in this sub to be nice to me. ut you’re incorrect because you think words are limited to 1 definition. God I was so stupid, how could I say that. Oh wait, I didn't. I never once made that claim. Strawman fallacy. Really? You’re going to scrape the bottom of the barrel by listing logical fallacies while you ignore your own? Eg: “no true scotsman!” fallacy (you’re literally making an argument FOR this fallacy lol) Anyone disagreeing is a committ…
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:56 PM
-1

Lots of trans-people are saying they are "real women" or "real men," attempting to erase the distinction between biology and identity. No one is claiming to change sex. Hence the word gender in transgender and not sex. You have now openly admitted that there are social stereotypes associated with sex by openly admitting that there are exceptions to your rule. I just wanted to confirm my hypothesis, and I have. Whether or not you'd like to acknowledge what you believe is up to you now, have a goo…
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:51 PM
1

So neo-Nazis do not exist? I think I get your point, you're saying that I don't get to decide what the word incel means and I agree. The experts who study semantics their entire lives and constantly and harshly peer-review one another over the meaning of words do. I am simply repeating what they have said. Understand?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:48 PM
1

Bullshit but it doesn't matter, you've admitted to believing in gender in your other reply and that was my point all along.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:45 PM
0

​ Gender as you know it, are the social signifiers of a sex, but like I said biology informs that. Just because someone dons the markers of a sex doesn't mean they are that sex. All "gender" is is fashion and stereotypes. Yes, you are correct, and you have also just confirmed that you believe in gender. That is what gender is, you've just described it. Gender is the social perception of a sex, it may be rooted in biology as all things are, but on top it is a social set of stereotypes. . Just bec…
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:43 PM
-1

Being a dick doesn't make me wrong. You've also just committed the following logical fallacies: ad hominem, appeal to emotions, and hasty generalization fallacy.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:41 PM
1

So you believe that there are no people who still believe in Nazi ideology? I love crackheads, they're always happy to talk and have interesting things to say. People fear them for no reason, they mean no harm. They have excuses for being nuts, you don't. Unless you literally are a crackhead. And I'll know by how you answer this question whether or not you actually are: What does George Soros being a Nazi have to do with your argument that if you are part of a group you alone get to change the m…
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:37 PM
0

What's your source that biological men pass as women more or as often as they don't pass? I did not claim that. I said it is possible, and these exceptions shatter your rule. Anecdotally, I agree most do not pass. So again, how does the fact that biological men can pass as women not shatter your theory that gender is STRICTLY biological. They don't change their sex so how are they perceived that way? Could it be... social?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:36 PM
1

You did not understand my question, rethink and reply again. Hint: The things your describing, that cannot be changed, that's the biological base I am referencing. They have very little to do with social perception. You don't look at someone and judge whether they can give birth, you don't know what's in their pants.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:27 PM
0

First of all, you still need a source, but I can tell you cannot and will not provide one so I'll move on to another critique. What about the fact that biological men can pass as women and vice versa? How does that not shatter the idea that gender is entirely biological?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:24 PM
-3

Not really addressing your post OP. Your entire post is a hypocritical fallacy, that's all that needs to be said to you and I'm tired of pointing out basic logical fallacies to dumb people so I didn't reply to your argument. The entire post is utterly invalid and illogical.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:22 PM
-11

I know words are hard but the following ones are where the very important distinction lies: who regards himself or herself
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:21 PM
1

No, like your comment is so far removed from anything I said. George Soros, the only Nazi? No one with any rational thought could come to the conclusion that there was only one Nazi on all of Earth. Also I've only ever heard schizo crackheads talk about Soros, always weird conspiracy shit that makes no sense. The left? Who even brought them up what do those libfucks have to do with anything? Just a very bizarre reply in general, feels like I stopped to talk to the neighborhood crackhead.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:20 PM
1

Did I say that or did I say our brains evolved over billions of years? You very specifically said: Human's brains But, I understand typos and whatnot, not a big deal, I understand you now. I said evolved to recognize patterns. The most basic pattern is man and woman. You don't need a source to tell you the water is wet. It's obvious. If it is so simple, a source should be easy to provide. You're making a massive biological and social claim, you cannot go without providing a source. The most basi…
/r/MensRights10/10/22 11:09 PM
2

Humans have not existed for billions of years... Even distant ancestors existed only less than a million years ago... Also you now need to provide a source for this claim that humans have very specific gender orientated pattern recognition inherently programmed into their genetics.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:39 PM
-4

Except you don't actually believe that. When you look at a person on the street, you assume their gender. You don't know what's in their pants, but you assume regardless. The things that you are basing that assumption on are what make up gender. You are judging the way they are dressed, their general behavior, their social appearance. That is gender, and you believe in it and you know it is different from sex. Understand?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:28 PM
0

Lmao what? Stop making men's right men Vs. women, that's all I'm saying. We both have our issues, this isn't a competition and you only make us look bad by making it look like one. Is it that hard to understand?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:19 PM
-1

Are you literally schizophrenic?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:17 PM
0

So? Just keep advocating for what you believe in, don't make this an anti-woman battle.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:11 PM
-6

To some degree, I agree. However you still believe in and acknowledge gender on a daily basis.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:10 PM
2

Dictionary==what semantic experts think. I am not speaking for them, I am simply pointing out what they say. None of this is my personal opinion. YOU claim to be "Right" here? I am not correct, the sources I provide however are. This has nothing to do with me.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 10:04 PM
-16

Bad news, you believe in and acknowledge gender as a societal construct constantly whether or not you like it or are aware of it.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 09:59 PM
1

Just cut out the parts where you talk about women and you'll be fine. Literally no need to compare this to women, just advocate for men if you want to advocate for men.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 09:58 PM
2

If that is the case then why has the definition of Feminism not been updated to be more accurate to the actual goals / intent of the feminism movement? Because you're wrong about it. Those definitions are VERY much outdated! You are simply wrong, the thousands of people who constantly review and peer review and study and research the subject of semantics know more about it than you. You are wrong and they are right.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 09:57 PM
-14

No, the strict definition itself is simply not "involuntary celibate." https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incel Genuine question, is it that fucking difficult to take five seconds and google a word before you try to talk about what that word means?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 09:56 PM
2

Merriam Webster is one of the most accredited and respected semantic sources of knowledge in all of history. You have to do better than this if you're going to accuse them of doing a "hack job."
/r/MensRights10/10/22 09:55 PM
1

https://www.google.com/ for future reference when you're confused, as I assume you are all the time
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:38 PM
1

Can't even accept and understand basic definitions and then gets upset when they are linked to him as proof. Have a good day, get better soon, I know brain cancer can be a tough thing to deal with.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:36 PM
1

It's a word, whether or not people use it as a shaming tactic has no bearing on the definition. You can use any word to shame someone if you try hard enough.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:34 PM
1

You called one of their definitions wrong, thus directly implying you know more than them. Point out the flaw in my logic? If you were referencing the Tu quoque fallacy ( you don't seem to understand how to communicate so I'm taking some guesses here) here is a link to that to source my definition of a hypocritical fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu\_quoque
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:32 PM
1

Newsflash buddy, definitions of things change over time Yeah and the definitions are then updated. There are thousands of people and groups worldwide who study words their entire lives. These definitions are not outdated. You are not smarter than the semantic experts who study this their entire life.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:31 PM
2

and use these same (wrong) definition to give yourself reason So for the record, you are asserting that you have more semantic expertise than Merriam Webster? You haven't made a valid argument thus far, I'd be happy to respond if you attempt to, otherwise have a good day brother.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:29 PM
1

Lmao, what so we all get to start defining our own words? Does this mean Nazis can now logically pretend to be friendly humanitarians if they want to call themselves that?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:26 PM
1

That is exactly what I intended to label him with.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:26 PM
1

That is different from involuntary celibate. Words are hard I know, but these ones specifically in the definition are important: who regards himself...and typically expresses extreme resentment and hostility toward those who are sexually active
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:25 PM
3

is he not an incel? According to the definition of incel, no he is not an incel. If no women will have sex with him, but he's a female supremac..... I mean feminist is he still an incel? Again, the definition is right there. The blue text means it's a link you can click on...
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:24 PM
0

You are the definition of willfully ignorant. Google a word before you use it, it is incredibly easy.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:13 PM
-3

You are objectively incorrect, google words before you use them and shut up. Don't know what's wrong with you people, google is very easy to operate. You type in the word and follow it up with "definition" and you find the meaning. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incel
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:11 PM
-4

People see through very clearly.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:10 PM
-19

Involuntary celibate is what incels say the word means. It has a lot more connotation than that though.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:08 PM
3

You can just compare it to the current level of exposure the subject is getting. Nothing in media will ever be absolutely balanced, that's a pipe dream. There's nothing we can do except advocate for our rights, by constantly attacking women in the process we only further the public image we have of being a bunch of incels.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:08 PM
2

That is not what a hypocritical fallacy is... In fact your explanation of a hypocritical fallacy is a perfect example of someone committing one. That is exactly what you do not do. A hypocritical fallacy is when you accuse someone of being a hypocrite, and thus try to discredit their argument. You cannot do this, you must attack the argument not the person. For example, a murderer could argue that murder is wrong and should never be done. If you accused him of being wrong because he's a hypocrit…
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:05 PM
2

Why does it have to be a competition? It shouldn't be men get less than women, it should simply be men don't get enough. There is no reason to attack an entire gender when it can be avoided.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 07:57 PM
-10

Incel does not stand for "involuntary celibate." That is the meaning incels came up with for themselves. In reality incel refers to a subgroup of men who believe in stuff like women are all whores who get fucked by the top 1% most attractive men while the "rest of us" get nothing. There are lots of other connotations attached to the word, general misogyny and stuff like that. In reality, their attitude towards women and this view of the world is what prevents them from getting laid.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 07:37 PM
2

he’s just comparing things and pointing out the double standards and hypocrisy Versus: in contrast to or as the alternative of .... Also pointing out hypocrisy is not a valid argument, that's a hypocritical fallacy, so in your own words OP's statements are logically invalid.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 07:07 PM
-9

Words are very hard, I know, but try reading this. Extrapolate: to infer (values of a variable in an unobserved interval) from values within an already observed interval
/r/MensRights10/10/22 07:05 PM
0

Quite a claim, going to elaborate? I highly doubt you will.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 07:04 PM
-25

You have zero ability to comprehend anything. This is not even remotely a reply to what I said. You're trying to insult someone who doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:37 PM
6

These fucking idiots just don't understand what words mean, ignore them they aren't worth a minute of our time.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:34 PM
4

You and u/monkeyman68 have zero fucking reading comprehension. The OP is very clearly not speaking how own opinions on how things are or should be, but rather pointing out the way they are generally seen.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:31 PM
-19

And he did so by comparing it to women's issues, in other words...
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:29 PM
8

Here is what your title should've been dude: Men in many countries are forced to go to war and die. (Notice how women were not mentioned because that's not fucking relevant.)
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:29 PM
7

Burden of proof lies on her, not you. Just provide evidence that you're a stable person with a job, a home, no criminal history, etc...
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:28 PM
2

This is about what I expected, I should know better than to expect actual discussions on this sub. Also your insult was so fucking boring, just call me stupid or something, that would be more entertaining than that shit.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:27 PM
4

You just provided another example. You can't justify doing this stupid thing by saying other people do it...
/r/MensRights10/10/22 06:24 PM
1

They sterilized girls before too... Reproductive rights have been under fire for humans (not men or women just humans) for a very long time now. This is not an exclusively male issue. The promoting of masturbation (despite its clearly addictive effects and it’s tendency to lead to depression and self elimination) as a safe, normal, morally right, popular thing. Being on nofap myself, I am quite familiar with these claims and have researched this subject thoroughly which is why I can safely tell …
/r/MensRights10/10/22 04:20 PM
0

and how men don’t care about other male victims Well yes, when you only bring up men's issues when someone brings up women's issues then you probably don't care that much about male victims. There's nothing wrong with discussing women's issues without bringing up men's issues and vice versa. Your first response to hearing a conversation about women's issues should not be to go "Well what about men?"
/r/MensRights10/10/22 04:07 PM
1

The fact that adoption exists and there are thousands of perfectly healthy babies given up a year makes your entire argument null.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 04:01 PM
1

Involuntary celibates is what incels say incel stands for. Incel means a lot more than that, it's a stereotype. Incel refers to the type of guys who created the term, those 4chan dwelling creepy fucks. There are plenty of guys who can't get laid who aren't incels. Incel : a person (usually a man) who regards himself or herself as being involuntarily celibate and typically expresses extreme resentment and hostility toward those who are sexually active Incel:a member of an online community of youn…
/r/MensRights22/09/22 03:47 AM
1

Provide ANY evidence that the people who downvoted you don't have sex (celibate) but wish they could (involuntary). Before I say anything else I think I left out an important specification. When I say incel I don't mean the official definition that incels crafted for themselves. Being an incel is more than not being able to get laid, it's a stereotype for guys who have the whole sort of "I can't get laid because women are all stupid whores who only go after Chad" kinda thing. My apologies for no…
/r/MensRights22/09/22 03:36 AM
1

Incel is a subgroup of the other.
/r/MensRights22/09/22 03:34 AM
1

If you dislike a comment insulting incels and only incels, it is logical to assume that you are either an incel or someone who likes incels. If you like incels, I'd assume you have a similar ideology and so are closely comparable. It is also possible that you are someone who believes that there are no incels in this sub, and in that case you'd be simply mistaken. Care to find a flaw in my reasoning? more correct in the bigot vernacular. Degrees of correctness do not exist in logic, something is …
/r/MensRights22/09/22 02:41 AM
1

Certainly, most words are a the original meaning with societal context laid on top. When I say incel I specifically mean men who fall into that stereotype, guys who think women are all whores who only go for chads and stuff like that. So when I say incel I mean horrible misogynist men, but a very specific type which I find commonly in subs like this for some sad reason. Really incel has very little to do with not getting laid anymore, statistically barely anyone gets laid anymore. Incel refers t…
/r/MensRights21/09/22 07:34 PM
1

Interesting, care to make an argument or would you rather stick to your dreadfully boring ad hominem?
/r/MensRights21/09/22 03:57 PM
1

What, you okay brother?
/r/MensRights21/09/22 03:33 PM
0

Incel means more than just that nowadays.
/r/MensRights21/09/22 03:31 PM
0

Everyone can get laid, everyone.
/r/MensRights21/09/22 03:30 PM
-1

No I called incels incels, can you please point out where I said that?
/r/MensRights21/09/22 03:30 PM
-37

There are great guys in here, guys concerned about our issues. There are also pathetic men who use this sub and groups like it as an excuse to hate women. It's interesting that you're so offended by this, little snowflake.
/r/MensRights21/09/22 03:58 AM
-58

After people became more aware of the rising incel issue in our society and started recognizing and tolerating such things less. A lot of people have steered clear of subs and groups like this. Because, and I'll be disliked for this truth, just as feminist groups are hiding places for horrible misandrist women who hate on men in the name of equality, the same goes for little pathetic incels in groups like this. EditL Looks like the incels among us are incredibly offended, oh no poor little snowf…
/r/MensRights21/09/22 02:32 AM
2

This article is good in general but fails to confront one line of reasoning in support of the idea that there is a gender pay gap. A feminist would argue that men work more dangerous jobs and are more ambitious because of gender norms which push women into easy jobs and push men into hard ones, and that this is proof of sexism.
/r/MensRights19/09/22 03:31 PM
1

Speaking about the Duluth Model is unfortunately not the same argument as your argument about the queen. They both take the same side in the general discourse obviously, but they are different avenues of reasoning.
/r/MensRights19/09/22 03:18 PM
1

Certainly, anyone who's willing to engage in a good faith debate should be heard if you have the time.
/r/MensRights19/09/22 04:33 AM
1

It’s not a singular example though. Everything you said after this was incoherent nonsense. Get your beliefs in order before you attempt to share them, it appears your arguments are irrationally bleeding into one another. So at this point, to back up your claim you would provide examples proving that it's not a singular example.
/r/MensRights18/09/22 10:15 PM
1

Yeah I did miss that, you're correct. Once again though, singular examples are not valid attacks against sociological theories.
/r/MensRights18/09/22 09:22 PM
1

If all you know about Johnny Depp is from this latest trial, sure. However he has a long and questionable history. He's had a long reputation of being violent that goes back to the 80's when he assaulted a security guard. He also assaulted a location scout for a film he was making while throwing a temper tantrum on set, sure he won that defamation case but there was another actual (not defamation) assault case from Amber Heard against him that he was found guilty in, dude has said some very ques…
/r/MensRights18/09/22 12:04 AM
1

A PM is not comparable to the monarchy, different arguments. To say otherwise is a false equivalence fallacy.
/r/MensRights17/09/22 05:38 PM
1

The first Queen Elizabeth did exercise full executive power though. Not according to the Crown's official website: Although The Sovereign no longer has a political or executive role, he or she continues to play an important part in the life of the nation. ... And feminists love to go on about how men have “voted for centuries” even though only a very small number of men did have the vote, and many places didn’t have voting at all. You are yelling into a void. This has nothing to do with what I'v…
/r/MensRights16/09/22 10:34 PM
1

You did not understand my comment brother.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 09:48 PM
0

Certainly, that's a different argument though.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 09:30 PM
1

Understandable, it was just implied by the topic of the post that you offered it as an argument. Have a good day brother
/r/MensRights16/09/22 03:40 PM
1

Evidence has to match claim brother, yours does not. Let me explain what you did wrong. Person you're replying to: The British Monarchy is not a good example because they have no actual power. You cannot say that a theory concerning power structures is wrong based on a singular example of someone who only has ceremonial power. Ceremonial power is not real power. You: They have ceremonial power though. Do you not see the issue? I don't even disagree with your side, but your opinion is about as we…
/r/MensRights16/09/22 03:33 PM
-5

Johnny was a victim in this scenario, but that doesn't mean that he isn't still a very questionable human being.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 03:13 PM
0

You argue like a child who's yet to take high school English. Here's generally how you're meant to structure arguments for future reference: Make a coherent claim that does not use any logical fallacies or contradict itself. Provide detail on your claim. Provide evidence, then explain how you're evidence thoroughly proves your claim.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 03:09 PM
0

Yes.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 03:06 PM
1

I'm not hurt in anyway brother, it'll be okay. You just take your time and recover, I know what it's like
/r/MensRights16/09/22 04:37 AM
0

You seem to be going through a rough patch, good luck out there brother
/r/MensRights16/09/22 04:35 AM
1

Sorry, when I read your post I can't help but imagining a whining 8 year old. Should've been more accurate.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 04:27 AM
1

So, a singular example can discredit a theory concerning hundreds of years of history and billions of people? Come on, I don't buy into the patriarchy shit but this argument is utterly worthless.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 04:19 AM
3

You sound like an 8 year old.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 04:18 AM
-4

Disregarding the rest of the argument and topic, your argument is really poorly put together. A show queen with no actual power is proof that a theory about the overall functioning of society is wrong? Make better arguments brother.
/r/MensRights16/09/22 04:14 AM
-9

The fact that he's putting himself first. Causing such a mess is not in the child's favor. Imagine how confused this kid will be growing up if he continues. Being an adopted child already has it's difficulties. Also, he'd be a 20 year old single father.
/r/MensRights08/09/22 06:10 PM
-14

Shitty situation for both of you. If the adoption is finalized it's finalized. Legally it's not fraudulent, it's up to the mother. You don't even know that he is your son, you're young, too young to raise a child. Let it rest. If they are so hellbent on being the parents, they'll probably be devoted ones. To even adopt a kid in the first place it takes lots of time, money, and proof that you'll be a good parent. This time in his life is crucial, he doesn't need the instability you'll cause by fi…
/r/MensRights08/09/22 06:05 PM
6

In my opinion, we do have a biological instinct to reproduce, but it is not specific to men. When speaking about types of relationships, I do not believe we have any specific type we are biologically programmed for, and that relationship norms are generally social not biological.
/r/MensRights27/12/21 12:04 AM
7

No, by definition you were not passionate. Angry: feeling or showing strong annoyance, displeasure, or hostility; full of anger. Passionate: showing or caused by strong feelings or a strong belief. Anger is defined by hostility, which you clearly showed by insulting me. You say I have the intellect of a fish yet you do not know the meaning of the words you use...
/r/MensRights26/12/21 11:57 PM
4

Angry little people like you are the reason that MensRights movements are viewed as a joke.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 11:52 PM
4

I don't believe that societal pressure is unique to men.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 11:47 PM
2

Incel is a fair term though, I think that it accurately calls out a huge issue. Just because this is a mensrights sub, let's not pretend like there are not large groups of creepy and abhorrent men who are most aptly called incels. It's not like it's a gendered idea, the word femcel exists as well.
/r/MensRights26/12/21 11:37 PM
-58

Yes, men are at risk too, women are simply at greater risk. Why? Islam is an extremely misogynistic religion, especially Jihadist Islam. Also your claim is most likely incorrect, the Taliban will not kill every man who doesn't conform, that would simply require too many resources.
/r/MensRights17/08/21 09:02 PM
-61

You don't understand why they are upset about this, women face a much greater threat from the Taliban's ideology then men do. Ideally, any who want to get out of there should be able to get out, but because we don't live in an ideal world it's imperative to save those at greatest risk.
/r/MensRights17/08/21 08:52 PM
-30

I don't believe you understand why people are upset that those were mostly men on the plane... The Taliban's ideology is specifically hateful towards women, they are the ones at greatest risk in this case.
/r/MensRights17/08/21 08:51 PM
-7

Does this mean that you believe that there is no such thing as 'right' or 'wrong'? Some positions are indefensible, most discussions are about these indefensible things. No there is right and wrong, however I think there's a very little chance that any one person is entirely correct about something. Even if one person in an argument is completely correct, I still see both sides as 'winners' because the wrong person learned something and the right person is now more sure that they are right. This…
/r/MensRights25/06/21 10:51 PM
-62

You are very dumb if you believe there is a winner and loser in a discussion. A discussion is something both people should win from, both people should learn something new and maybe adjust their views based on that. Chances are in most discussions no one is completely correct. Viewing discussions as competitions is toxic and makes it less likely that you'll be open to learn from your partner and vice versa.
/r/MensRights25/06/21 08:46 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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