TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ThePraetor Archive

View 1 post and 70 comments by ThePraetor 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)
26

ThePraetor/r/MensRights12/08/13 04:12 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

If this is trolling, it's equally pathetic. You've been at it fir years and literally no one but you believes you're successful.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 01:50 PM
1

Dude, you're insane. You've been insane for years. Get some help.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 04:53 AM
1

femiloon Again with this bullshit? Stop being silly. You are pulling certain old style femiloon devices Name them.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 09:51 PM
1

Does the concept of the burden of proof escape you? You're not a researcher, not if you can't even back up your own claims.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 03:56 PM
1

Daft Femiloon Stop talking like a brainwashed idiot. No sane, intelligent person talks like you. It's not funny, it's childish and simplistic. I point you to the work of Tim Fields on Abuse, Bullying and Sociopathy, which was built upon work by others including Hare. Link it, then. Your claim, your burden of proof. They tried the same with PTSD and Rape Trauma Syndrome too. Claims. Proof. Dumbass.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 03:04 AM
1

The link i gave you is literally from the person who invented the term. You're too damn obsessed with the MRM to be a troll. Just look at your post history, if you were a feminist you'd make fun of yourself for being a slacktivist attention whore, meaning that you actually believe the shit you spout.
/r/MensRights21/11/16 01:18 AM
1

Dude, seriously. You argue like a five-year-old. All you ever do is talk about DARVO-this, and DARVO-that, and, given that DARVO refers specifically to something sex offenders do to their victims, I can't escape the conclusion that you're obsessed with sex offenders and/or the shit they do to their victims. That's not fucking normal. If someone gave you a cigar, you'd probably try to smoke it by shoving it up your ass and sitting on a campfire.
/r/MensRights20/11/16 10:06 AM
1

Pity that you just attacked my points rather than addressing them. I addressed your points by attacking them. On the topic of addressing points, you didn't even touch And what bad info is there? What poor activity is there? All I see is a site full of resources for people who need them. The fact that it doesn't coddle you and your need to be pandered to doesn't mean that it's incapable of helping men with their suicidal thoughts or depression. Pull your head out of your ideology and look at the …
/r/MensRights24/08/16 08:02 PM
1

It's not even available on the supposed owning site. I can't find any posters on the up2sd site, actually. The ones I found are on that UCOP site. What a Pity that you failed to follow the full Data Trail to This Full Size Poster Boo-fucking-hoo, I only found the preview. Fuck off. Intersting that you failed to find a full poster .... but only a tiny image This is the hill you're going to die on? That I couldn't be bothered to find a full-sized poster, because the one I found is a clear example …
/r/MensRights24/08/16 05:24 PM
–

Maybe you are unaware of the "Gender Paradox" In Suicide? Study, please? Also, for all we know, there are posters with men on them as well at the school. OP may not have seen them. I found one example here. OP posted one image; there are likely more posters than the ones he's elected to show. You can't take one data point and generalize it. I'm not lying Yes, you are. That site has a multitude of resources for men and women. Somehow that doesn't jive with your statement that it only presents wom…
/r/MensRights24/08/16 08:49 AM
–

First, it's a help site. I'm happy with it because, if I, a man, were looking for help with suicidal thoughts, that site would be useful to me. I don't give a flying shit whether I don't look like the men in the pictures, because I'm not some weak-willed flower who can't relate to anything that doesn't explicitly represent me. Quit with the ragebait. Second, you can't say They are sexist - ill-informed - and only present women as involved in suicide. when the site literally presents men as invol…
/r/MensRights24/08/16 08:06 AM
6

There's literally a link on the site labeled "Men."
/r/MensRights24/08/16 04:06 AM
1

Careful with that edge, you might cut yourself.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 09:39 PM
2

Thanks!
/r/MensRights23/02/16 12:36 AM
2

Source?
/r/MensRights22/02/16 06:15 PM
25

The school literally has a picture of St. George fighting a dragon on the front. I guess emulation of the mascot's actions aren't allowed.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 07:32 AM
0

People ignoring abused men or thinking that women have the right to abuse men is a men's rights issue. This is a matter of semantics, but the abuse itself does not have to be a men's rights issue for the reaction to it to be one. I agree that the behavior of those who are trusting that the wife's actions are justified are ignoring the abuse, but I'm not sure whether the abuse itself has anything to do with men's rights, which is what I said in my original post.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:44 PM
8

Yeah, fuck that noise. I'd have a full TOR setup and a private Gmail just in case.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:44 PM
–

The husband should lawyer up ASAFP. This isn't a men's rights issue, this is an abuse issue.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 08:19 AM
1

Fair, I'm only speculating.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 01:28 AM
-1

I'm not sure. I think Reddit still has enough name-recognition that people are willing to work for it regardless of whether they get to negotiate for salary.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 01:04 AM
0

No, she hasn't. She's reduced the talent pool, yes, but doing so doesn't ensure that the best and brightest won't work there.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 07:44 PM
7

I have knowledge of this outside of reading the article. According to someone I know who used to attend the college, and has friends who still go there, the student was incessantly going on about rape culture, etc. even when the class topic had nothing to do with the subject. In other words, he was a disruption. There's a Reason article that throws a different light on the situation. As far as I can tell, this is a case of a disruptive student being thrown out of the discussion portion of a clas…
/r/MensRights20/03/15 06:29 AM
17

I've talked to people with knowledge of the situation. Apparently this guy would bring up rape culture, etc. regardless of what the actual topic of discussion was. I am not taking a stance on the question of rape culture, but it's understandable if True was banned from class because he was a disruption.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 11:49 PM
1

Good to know.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 07:38 AM
2

These models are only plus-sized if your start size is the average SI model. When i think plus-sized, I think of rotund whales, not decently attractive women.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 06:31 AM
6

Look, if people want more women's restrooms so they can have more toilets, that's great. No one likes waiting in line to piss. What gets to me is this constant injection of oppression narratives into situations which are, for the most part, perfectly innocuous.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 05:54 AM
1

These "actual differences" don't seem to affect many female scientists, academics, doctors, and lawyers. They are just as logical as their male counterparts, and just as effective. Are there biological differences between people of different sexes? Sure. That doesn't justify saying that women can't understand statistics or logic when that is clearly not the case.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 06:30 PM
1

Look! Actual misogyny!
/r/MensRights26/12/14 06:58 AM
1

Don't get me wrong, it would be awesome if something like this actually happened, and it may well have. I just never trust anyone on the internet unless I can independently verify their story.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:48 PM
23

Sorry to say this, but I have the same response to this as I have to the tumblr crazies when they post about their fatshaming doctors, shitlord male friends, etc. I doubt it happened. I wish it had, but it seems too good to be true, at some level.
/r/MensRights22/12/14 11:20 PM
6

If the punishment is the same as you imply, then is this even a men's rights issue? Sounds more like a problem with the justice system to me.
/r/MensRights22/11/14 07:08 PM
5

Quit your no-true-scotsman bullshit.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 04:40 AM
7

So, screwed if you screw, screwed if you don't?
/r/MensRights13/08/14 06:22 PM
1

Because convictions are the golden standard by which to tell whether a crime is perpetrated by a certain gender. It's not like there are many rape cases that don't get reported or go to trial.
/r/MensRights20/02/14 10:25 PM
3

The evil sorceress' life is tied to the main character's blonde hair, which is is imbued with some sort of life-sustaining force. At the ultimate confrontation, the male protagonist severs Rapunzel's hair and kills the evil sorceress. It's actually a good movie, although Frozen is better.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 03:59 AM
4

Remember Tangled? How the evil sorceress died? Notice that, in Tangled, the villain's ultimate punishment was to have her agency removed, in this case by removing her life force and killing her as a result. In Frozen, Hans loses his agency when he's involuntarily punched off the side of a boat and later thrown in the brig. It's not about gender or violence, it's about retributive justice.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 03:54 AM
4

I see your point, and we can debate the morality of punching a defenseless person in the face is ever justified, but I don't think the situation would be different if reversed. If the villain had been female, she wouldn't have been punched in the face per se, but there would have been some sort of retribution.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 03:45 AM
9

I'd say that the fact that Hans (the prince in question) tried to usurp the throne, deceive Anna, kill Elsa, and generally fuck things up makes him deserving of a punch or two in the face. I'm actually surprised that he got off so easily. Him being punched had nothing to do with the fact that he was a man.
/r/MensRights18/01/14 12:47 AM
1

Quite simply, it fails to offer solutions. It calls out a bunch of problems, and, regardless of whether their points are valid or not, they seldom do anything more. Find some feminist literature and read it, and you'll find that it doesn't often offer a solution.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 12:06 AM
3

Poe's Law?
/r/MensRights29/12/13 09:02 AM
2

Hope the court date goes well.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 01:39 AM
2

Good, and best of luck to you.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 09:08 PM
2

Lawyer up, and watch what you say to your wife. She'll take anything that you say and turn it against you. Best of luck, and I sincerely hope that you can resolve this. This is not legal advice, and I am not a lawyer.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 06:06 PM
2

Hell of an article. Let's see the SJ crowd try and refute this one.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 04:30 AM
1

I don't think this is the best thing to do. Yes, the pages you went after probably deserved a ban. However, I am of the belief that the best way to fight bullshit is with calm, collected refutation. No reason to give the feminazis more reasons to call out MRAs.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 04:28 AM
2

Wrong. I'll shamelessly criticize any movement I see an issue with. Including the MRM. And feminism. And atheism. And any other one.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 06:55 AM
2

At some level, yes. Until the MRM has completely distanced itself from the piece of shit whose blog you linked to, then the movement is stained and cannot be as credible as it would like. Of course, this person's actions do not outweigh the actions of the thousands of good people in the movement. I meant to say that the movement is only perceived as being as good as its worst member. Perception is huge in matters like this. Perhaps my statement was an oversimplification, but until the movement d…
/r/MensRights12/08/13 10:37 PM
1

Perhaps I should make myself even more clear. You're right that the AskFeminists post was a technical violation of the rules. I never implied that stop signs are bullshit, I said that I'd be less inclined to stop at one in the middle of the night, when I'm the only driver on the road for miles. If stopping is clearly unnecessary and pointless due to the fact that there is no one around and there will not be anyone around for hours, if at all, why do it? To relate my point to the actual issue, I …
/r/MensRights12/08/13 07:14 PM
1

Correct. The rules are legitimate when they actually make sense. If a post is new and answers are flooding in, then it makes all the sense in the world to give feminists first dibs at posting. When, on the other hand, a post is practically inactive (like the intersection at 3 AM), then I see no reason why anyone would object to me posting a simple, one-sentence reply to a post which has been left behind by those with feminist answers. The ban is equivalent to me being arrested and charged with r…
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:43 PM
0

I already addressed this. If men are shouted down whenever they try to debate, then there is serious problem. If the movement is committed to solving things civilly, then debate is essential. If we are not allowed to debate, then we cannot make progress. I used my case as an example of how no dissent is allowed in feminist communities to exemplify the challenges MR activists face in fighting back against the bigotry of feminism.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:37 PM
2

And dissent is the equivalent of rape!
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:29 PM
2

You're technically correct. However, the post you mentioned was 18 days old and had been answered by multiple feminists. I chimed in late, and wasn't expecting to be banned. i read the rule in question, and figured that no one would care, seeing as the thread was old. Following it on a post like that would have been the equivalent of stopping at a stop sign at 3 AM when no one was around. Pointless. Ironically enough, the comment I made on the thread was the only one to be answered by the OP.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:26 PM
0

The rules aren't changed. They can ban whoever they want, whenever they want. I can call them out on it, and if they ban me for doing so, then they are intellectually dishonest.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 06:19 PM
0

It is hypocritical for a group to bitch and moan about how they are "oppressed" (which feminists often do) and then proceed to ban anyone who dares to speak up against their bullshit. I agree with you about private spaces, but I still think the distinction is unimportant in context with my point. Private does indeed mean having personal control. The misuse of personal control is what I'm going on about.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:44 PM
2

You said it better than I could have. Thanks.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:41 PM
2

Yes, I suppose I deserved to get banned from a forum that only allows its members to have the privilege of commenting first so that any dissenting voices are shut out. The rules there, as I said before, are provisions for a circlejerk.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:40 PM
1

Finally, someone gets the joke!
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:39 PM
3

A movement is only as good as its worst member. This goes for everyone.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:36 PM
10

An upvote to counter the downvote flood. Not much, but it's something. And at least the feminists are being honest now.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:34 PM
0

Look! Atheism Plus is just as bad! http://imgur.com/OjUQoTd
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:28 PM
1

I'm not asking to be allowed to speak. I'm pointing out that not allowing people to speak is hypocritical.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:09 PM
1

Agreed. At the same time, pointing out that debating with feminists is, for the most part, a useless exercise is an issue of mens' rights. If we can't debate the ones holding the MR movement back, then we can't make progress.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 04:28 PM
19

I honestly don't. I just see the fact that dissent is cause for being banhammered as disturbingly close-minded.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:00 AM
22

The rules in both are basically designed to remove any and all dissent. Both subs seem like feminist circlejerks, TBH.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 04:53 AM
1

I tried to reply, but found that I had been banned from posting to AskFeminists and Feminism. Censoring pansies.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 04:07 AM
1

Go Stossel!
/r/MensRights02/08/13 06:08 PM
1

A baton is a great self-defense weapon, due to its ease of concealability.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 06:06 PM
1

Self-Defense Lesson One: Carry a gun.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 06:05 PM
10

OF COURSE you were banned. Sarkeesian and her ilk are anti-free-speech and couldn't care less about being intellectually honest.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 05:50 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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