TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TheDarkMaster13 Archive

View 0 posts and 64 comments by TheDarkMaster13 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)
11

This story got me a little teary eyed as I read through it with a big smile on my face. It's even got the rarely used intrigue for good.
/r/MensRights04/12/18 07:30 PM
21

So, gender has nothing to do with people being out of school then. It's a complete non-factor.
/r/MensRights08/10/18 04:42 AM
10

There's also a lot of Americans that consider Liberals a dirty thing, because those liberals were for equal voting, improving democratic rights, and general end of discrimination against blacks. It then became a generic negative term. For those curious, liberalism generally refers to movements for improving civil rights, republicanism, and egalitarianism.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 02:49 AM
1

The problem is that there's two kinds of feminists in this equation. One thinks that feminism is an egalitarian movement and gets mad if you imply otherwise. The other thinks that feminism should be about female issues only and gets mad if you imply otherwise. The two are separate, but ascribe to the same name. So the movement seems to be hypocritical as a result, even if most individuals are not.
/r/MensRights28/09/18 05:05 AM
2

The problem isn't that feminism is a women's advocacy movement or that it's an egalitarian movement. It's that there's different people in it that believe in each side and they get pissed when it's treated as something else. They can't have it both ways, the movement needs to clearly define what it represents one way or another. I would argue that it would be best if feminism was changed to be specifically about women's advocacy and egalitarianism was about gender equality so it was less likely …
/r/MensRights22/08/18 05:43 PM
7

There are many things like this in the world. You may know how things are, but not actually understand it or truly empathize with it. I recently was reading through a story which made it clear to me for the first time on an emotional level what it would be like living homeless, desperate, and never knowing where your next meal would come from.
/r/MensRights21/08/18 07:07 PM
1

It's essentially the same sort of brainwashing you get with cults or propaganda for extremist movements where people are made to unlearn rational thought since that's not useful for the narrative they're trying to force onto their followers.
/r/MensRights21/06/18 06:38 PM
27

These sound like they are irrational fears and should be treated the same way phobias are. A crippling fear of a group of people, regardless of who they are, isn't something that other people should have to adapt to in order to deal with. That's undue pressure on society as a whole to solve a problem that is ultimately irrational.
/r/MensRights10/04/18 11:24 PM
12

Both of the linked articles talking about how unfair the sex registry is are both talking about unfortunate male teenagers that are now permanently on the list. I don't think this particular article is actually making this a gender issue, it's more aimed at the problem of the list in general.
/r/MensRights20/09/17 01:38 AM
5

If I remember right, the problem originally was that they'd ignore or try to brush off any harassment for a long as possible, especially if it was a high level athlete committing the crime. With new laws put into place, they've now swung around all the way to the other side and essentially just assume that all men accused of harassment are guilty out the gate. It really is the worst of both worlds with either extreme.
/r/MensRights19/11/16 11:18 AM
-5

This doesn't really sound like it was mainly an issue with men's rights, it's a systemic issue in the county's justice system. My guess would be that this is due to private jails looking to maximize their prison population. EDIT: I'm talking about how the guy was kept in prison for much longer than he should have been. My mistake for not specifying. There are all manner of issues here, the man's rights issue was only the catalyst that got things started.
/r/MensRights17/08/16 12:03 AM
1

If your dorm mate is trying to sleep, you studying might be making that rather hard for THEM. If they're entertaining a guest on their desktop PC and showing them a program on that, they can't actually go somewhere else. Your roommate might not be the sort to actually do that as a consideration for you, besides, if they were there first, it's rude for you to ask them to leave on your behalf. Studying on your bed might not be an option if you're doing something like architecture drafting. Having …
/r/MensRights01/08/16 07:47 PM
1

Your dorm mate might be trying to sleep, they might be entertaining a guest, they might be on the phone, they might be playing a game with voice chat, there might not be much desk space in your dorm, etc. There are LOTS of reasons why your dorm might not work for studying.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 06:47 PM
1

The more interesting thing here is the effects this has had on boys development later in life.
/r/MensRights23/06/16 01:44 AM
3

Yes, laws as they are currently written means that this is the only legal outcome. The problem can only be fixed by changing the laws, not by getting mad at the court rulings that result from the current ones.
/r/MensRights19/06/16 02:56 PM
31

They're basically doing whatever is most profitable or simplest for them. A decade ago it was best if they simply brushed all the rape accusations under the rug, even if they were legitimate. So that's what they did. With recent changes to the laws, it's now easiest for them to just treat everyone accused as being guilty. So that's what they do. The root of the issue is the institutions and laws that lead to these two extremes in the first place.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 05:22 PM
1

I wouldn't say all ground operations, since they can definitely be in supporting roles or long range combat roles. It's the up close and personal stuff in gorilla or urban combat where all these problems come up.
/r/MensRights12/01/16 02:23 AM
1

No, that's not the case. You just hear about a lot of these people because they're very vocal minority and the shear stupidity of some of their comments gets a lot of attention. The majority of feminists don't seek to perpetuate double standards that favor women or increase them, they're just normal people concerned about women's rights.
/r/MensRights30/12/15 02:47 PM
3

I wouldn't say it's the whole organization, but there are some people who call themselves feminists that genuinely do just want power or think that women need special treatment or powers.
/r/MensRights30/12/15 12:40 AM
6

The current situation benefits actual rapists and people who throw out false accusations. It isn't helpful for actual victims....
/r/MensRights14/12/15 05:28 AM
-13

That's something someone without any clue would say. It's never a middle-ground situation. Not both groups in this discussion 'benefit' equally. Are you talking about the issue with the University, or with online harassment? I was referring to online harassment alone. Now I will admit that I shouldn't have said both sides, as it's pretty much just assholes in general who benefit. They don't need to be on any particular side. Except in this case, there is a clear predominance of women abusing men…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 09:20 PM
-18

Everyone is a victim here. The people sending the threats and harassing people don't really care what you are, they will harass you anyway.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 09:18 PM
-23

What advice do you give to people who can't do that? There are people who have that problem, they cannot ignore it and move on. They end up obsessing over it until it destroys them. The worst part about this is that its actually a minority of people who can ignore it without it affecting them. Fortunately most people aren't affected by it too badly.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 09:17 PM
-34

That's great for you. Not everyone has the same ability to suck it up. Many people take this sort of harassment very personally and can end up having to go offline to get away from it. The problem is that most of our society these days is online. EDIT: I'd argue that the fact that this is getting downvoted demonstrates just how little the people here understand this issue.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 08:23 PM
-21

I'm glad to hear that it is in fact illegal there, however, are the reports actually publicly available for people to view? How often is online harassment investigated and arrested for? It happens extremely often. For every famous person who gets their harassment investigated, how many people are ignored because their story doesn't get media attention?
/r/MensRights18/11/15 08:21 PM
-48

1) It is actually legal in the states to make those threats online. So people can do it without consequence. 2) The police won't actually do much about the threats, simply because they don't really have the capability to do so. 3) Anybody who has any kind of online fame will receive hate messages in some form, regardless of the situation. The more famous your are, the more you will get this. This happens regardless of sex, ethnicity, or any other factors or traits. 4) Thanks to the anonymity of …
/r/MensRights18/11/15 06:32 PM
-48

I wouldn't actually be all that surprised if the rape threat stuff is legitimate. A lot of women do get these on a regular basis from some pretty nasty guys. You end up having assholes on both sides being the only ones who're actually benefiting from the current situation. EDIT: Why the heck would I get downvoted for saying this? People getting harassed online happens all the time and many people actually go to therapy for it, regardless of sex.
/r/MensRights18/11/15 05:33 PM
13

The thing is that you should still be horrified by this even if you only believe that women are damaged by this because men who were abused as children are more likely to abuse other children when they get older. By condoning the abuse of boys, you make more men that will in turn abuse children, including girls.
/r/MensRights06/10/15 07:19 PM
1

I don't think they should be lower, I think that this is a flaw in how they're going about opening up the field.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 06:04 AM
0

Technology is increasingly making sex irrelevant in many fields. Likely you will see more and more women filling in all roles in society as physically strength no longer matters. So long as the barriers of entry are torn down (work environment, such as co-workers can be a barrier of entry and is often the biggest one for many women), this issue will correct itself. People who's natural talents align with certain fields will naturally move into them. We just have to not be stupid about what we're…
/r/MensRights01/10/15 02:40 PM
1

The issue I'm bringing forward is the necessity of an outside force to make changes to an existing flawed system. I think that you're arguing that the way that they're going about making changes is causing problems. Is that a fair assessment? Like it would be possible to open up the military to women without lowering standards or creating quotas, for example.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 02:23 PM
-1

My point is that history has taught us that the people who'd have to change are the ones who won't make the decision, regardless of whether or not they're justified doing that or not.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 02:19 PM
-7

Slave owners are a special case! They couldn't run their farms without them and they're doing the slaves a favor anyway. Being forced to uphold safety regulations puts undo stress on the owners that will force them to close their businesses down, the government doesn't understand how things work here and should butt out! Basically everyone has that same opinion when its them that's being regulated.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 02:08 PM
0

Usually it's politicians that have to step in to force necessary changes. History has taught us that they simply won't be changed otherwise. See the civil rights movement or factory safety regulations.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 01:53 PM
1

Extreme responses end up being more or less the same regardless of what direction you went to get to them in the first place. Measured, reasonable responses should always be what we endeavor to solve problems unless you're in a life or death situation.
/r/MensRights27/09/15 01:19 PM
-2

I don't think of them as being legitimate threats, they're cyber harassment and bullying. Basically everyone who gets any amount of attention online will eventually get this at some point or another and many of them are actually taking regular therapy for it because of how damaging it is to them. This is not limited to just feminists. Don't assume that this is nothing because you might be made of stronger stuff or because you haven't experienced it yourself. There are lot of ways people can actu…
/r/MensRights27/09/15 01:17 PM
-3

There are legitimate concerns that they're bringing up with regards to online harassment. People shouldn't be getting constant death threats and destructive criticism while only being told that they need to suck it up and deal with it. Those sorts of messages can be very damaging to a person, regardless of sex or gender. However, it is important to distinguish between debate and hate. There is a difference between constructive and destructive feedback. You cannot make a blanket statement about a…
/r/MensRights26/09/15 09:56 PM
1

I don't think that's really that big of an issue if you have to pay for university. My universities have a number of low level classes that are used to 'weed' the people who apply. They make sure that everyone has at least a certain level of ability early on to make sure that only those who should be there remain there.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 07:47 PM
2

That or they're trying to show how stupid the laws are by pressing insane charges like this to get them changed.
/r/MensRights03/09/15 08:36 AM
10

How many would actually read far enough in the article to actually get to that point?
/r/MensRights29/08/15 12:44 AM
1

Where is this information? I don't see it anywhere in the article, there is no mention of a daughter at all.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 06:39 PM
1

I don't anymore. I was able to read it once, but when I tried to reopen it to confirm the comment I couldn't.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 01:37 AM
8

Some of the comments in the article itself are pretty good. I think one of the best ones was by someone named Helen? I can't check because the site won't let me view the article again. Anyway, they pointed out that a big problem is because of the way education has changed in recent years has been in a way that favors women but makes boys feel like school is boring and uninteresting. The main point being that boys like clear challenges and tests, while girls prefer non-confrontational discussion …
/r/MensRights17/08/15 04:42 PM
2

It is possible that they automatically remove any cross posts with this sub. I hope that nothing like that is happening on this sub too.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 08:48 PM
10

Sometimes, but there is no need to do it to all children. If there are medical problems down the line, it makes more medical sense to do the circumcision then.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 09:55 PM
1

That's basically it. Americans want children to be protected because of family values, but they don't want to foot the bill because that's communism. The money has to come from somewhere, and parents are pretty much the only option. Since the mother almost always takes care of the kid, the father has to pay child support to her. Good luck getting the law repealed, since that's taking money away from children or is being uncaring towards the needs of children. At least, that's how your position w…
/r/MensRights10/08/15 05:32 PM
-2

The child's real father cannot provide enough money to make sure the child's standard of living does not decrease. The courts have a legal responsibility to make sure that the child's standard of living does not decrease in divorce cases. The ONLY way for them to accomplish this is to force the OP to pay child support and mortgage fees.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 07:38 AM
5

I've poked around online a bit for some more information on this. From what I can tell, if there are no kids then the divorce laws do not favor either spouse and are more or less equal. If there is a child, then legally the parent who is given legal custody of the child is the one who will receive the house so that the child has as little stress as possible due to the situation. Unfortunately, women receive custody of the child about 85% of the time (for various reasons) and this is what leads t…
/r/MensRights10/08/15 07:35 AM
1

Probably.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 04:28 AM
10

Just to give more perspective, the law itself is setup to ensure financial support for the child. No mater what, the (legal) father must pay for child support. This is regardless of whether or not the child is actually his or if the child was born without the man's consent. Legally, the state can seek reparations for state funded child support from the father even if he was raped by the mother as a minor if the mother applies for state funded child support. This is regardless of whether or not t…
/r/MensRights10/08/15 03:29 AM
2

In this case it's more of a bad system built up around protecting the child that unfairly benefits the mother even if she's the one who did all the wrong.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 03:24 AM
8

He doesn't want the custody of the child because it isn't his. The problem is that he's still financially responsible for the child because that's the only legal way for the child's standard of living to be maintained.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 03:23 AM
5

I believe that was a new lover, not the old one.
/r/MensRights10/08/15 03:22 AM
3

I do agree on the part of self sufficiency. I hold this to be a major goal that people should strive for and is a very respectable (and attractive) trait in people. On the other hand, I also think of everyone as being a part of a greater whole and that everyone should be striving to improve the world for everyone else. All individuals die, but the species carries on. I also know and accept that not everyone is capable of standing on their own two feet and we should not expect that of everyone. A…
/r/MensRights06/08/15 11:40 PM
3

Agreed. That's only if you intentionally try to frame someone for rape.
/r/MensRights26/07/15 10:55 PM
5

You know what might help resolve a lot of these issues? Make it so that any investigation into sexual misconduct in schools must be done privately with no media attention whatsoever (by private I mean no one outside the case and the police should know anything about it). Make it a crime to disclose information about the people who've been accused of the crime. Punish people who falsely accuse others of rape on the same grounds as if they'd been the rapist. Re-balance the punishment if you think …
/r/MensRights26/07/15 08:35 PM
3

Pretty much.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 06:45 PM
3

And who's responsible for perpetuating that image?
/r/MensRights23/07/15 06:26 PM
2

Basically that's when a group of people on one side of an argument only talk with each other, never hearing what the other side has to say. In most cases both sides will have legitimate views and concerns, but if they end up in echo chamber situations they'll think the other group to be nothing but indefensible monsters since they never talk to the other group. All they do is talk to people who share their own opinions, reinforcing them over and over again.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 04:58 PM
1

Sorry if I jumped to conclusions. I was just worried about echo chamber issues.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 04:00 PM
1

Be careful you don't end up thinking like the very people you're against. Women do not always get their way. There are very real cases that brought about some of those policies in the first place. Example that I was able to find with with just a little searching: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/04/21/michigan-high-school-protects-student-athlete-at-expense-of-rape-victim/
/r/MensRights23/07/15 01:10 AM
5

The point was that regardless of whether or not the guy is a rapist the college will come to the guy's defense or block any inquiries at all if he's a sports star for a team that's a big part of the college. Sometimes he is innocent, sometimes not. The point is that if they have a vested interest in seeing that he's innocent, they'll do whatever they can to make it look that way. Otherwise they'll generally just go with what the girl says happened and throw the guy under the bus.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 02:19 PM
24

That is unless of course the rapist is a star member of a famous college sports team, then the athlete could never do any wrong and can get away with anything.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 01:53 AM
5

Sexual misconduct is a pretty vague description. Obviously this isn't right either way, but I am curious exactly what the breakdown is for this conduct. Kissing, groping, rape? How far do most of these cases go? EDIT: According to the article, any sexual activity between the staff and the youth is considered sexual misconduct. So it is quite possible that a lot of these were initiated by the youth and would still be classified as sexual misconduct on the part of the staff. This is what it should…
/r/MensRights19/06/15 10:41 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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