TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TheTyger Archive

View 3 posts and 97 comments by TheTyger on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
24

In development companies, we've used "Brogrammer" to actually describe people who don't know how to actually code, but have gotten work by using the paint-by-numbers templates.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 05:05 AM
6

hmmm, attending class is difficult? It's ok, just pay the tuition and we'll call it even!
/r/MensRights10/04/13 05:01 AM
1

Thanks for throwing out a stat. I question that site, however, because they say 41-50% of first marriages fail, then: 25% of adults experience a minimum of 1 divorce during the course of their life I did a cursory check, and it seems that around 75% of adults get married at some point of their life.(just quick Google results) If my math is correct, 25% getting a divorce from the 75% who get married would only be around 1/3, not 2/5-1/2. (It is super early, so I might not be able to math just yet…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 04:13 PM
1

That's more what I figured. It really means that 80% of people succeed at marriage, and 20% do it over and over. I am also interested in any stats regarding the rate connected to birth year and age of divorce, because I wonder if the rates have huge swings by generation.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 01:39 AM
8

Quick note, your phrasing is incorrect. Marriage has not failed for 50% of participants, just 50% of occurrences. People who get divorced multiple times skew that stat rather heavily.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:01 PM
28

I don't like the 50% end in divorce stat. There are a number of people who heavily skew those numbers. If I get married and stay married for my entire live, I count as 1 non-divorce, but Larry King has 7 ex-wives. That one person gets a much stronger weight in the numbers. I think the number should be represented by the % of people who get divorced, not the % of marriages that fail, because I would have to guess that divorce is like killing: after the first one, it becomes easier. This is not a …
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:00 PM
5

That is a curious angle. I had not considered the HIPPA ramifications to requiring another party to agree to the procedure. I had only considered the point from "Doctor doesn't want to get sued, I guess he has the right", but considering that, he may actually not even have the right to request that. Out of curiosity, can a doctor be sued/disciplined for attempting to coerce a patient to give up HIPPA rights?
/r/MensRights20/12/12 10:53 PM
7

That is not always true. Many fields have different rules about it. Where I work, you include in the quotes only the exact things you want in the quotes. If the sentence ends, but the "." is not intended to be quoted, it goes outside. Inside the quote punctuation is fine for literature, but not as much for technical or conversational writing.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 03:25 PM
27

I understand your position, and I think most people who post here at some time have to think this position through, so please let me do my best to explain why it is that you are getting downvoted for this opinion. How can you ignore the fact that everyone outside of this little group makes fun of you? (BTW, before I begin, I am going to take the position that you are someone that actually cares about the cause, despite your using a second person pronoun in describing it, as opposed to a first pe…
/r/MensRights07/11/12 04:04 PM
2

I have to disagree about which group should find a new sub. Not because I think you are wrong, mind you, but because of the nature of reddit. Unless the mods here decide that this sub is only for "High-Level Discussion" (by which I mean more like how truegaming is as opposed to gaming or games), this sub will always be the general place. If you would like to create a sub with a more specific, non-venting feel, that would likely be the better use of efforts, as this sub is the central hub for eve…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 05:08 AM
2

don't forget that a post with numbers like that one may very well be effected by reddit vote fuzzing.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 05:05 AM
2

My concern would be that if the laws were not written well (like all laws), the fathers could still be just as trapped.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 01:07 AM
2

Sports are a totally different ballgame. depending on the activity, some restrictions can be beneficial. It was strongly suggested that football players have short hair, and at the varsity camp, other players would help "enforce" that suggestion with rope and clippers... note: The short hair is because long flowing locks coming out of your helmet can become a great handle for defenses.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 07:20 PM
6

What happens here if the mother does not inform the father beforehand? I agree with the idea, but it feels like there is just as much room for abuse on that system (potentially, depending on how it is setup)
/r/MensRights25/10/12 07:00 PM
0

again, I believe that (and if I am incorrect, please clarify this), the threats were not directly linked to the simple "or else". Instead, it was implied that removal of the account would be beneficial, but without any explicit "or else" being mentioned. For better or worse, that would make the situation outside the realm of blackmail. If I am wrong, and the conditional was explicitly stated, then blackmail is certainly the correct call.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:09 PM
-4

I believe they never said explicitly that if he deleted, they would definitely NOT dox him. It is much more a threat, or cyber bullying or something than proper blackmail edit: See Canadian4Paul's link to extortion, which is likely more fitting.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:53 PM
2

That start to become a grey area. Especially when you account for the fact that even a relatively "naked" belly has some hair on it, and once you start, it become noticeable. My general "go to" was either trim the chest area, tightly trim the happy trail, shave my upper thighs (figuring out where to stop there is more of an art than a science), and very tightly trim pubic hair, or to just keep pulling that razor until i stopped finding hair from thighs and above. Also, nair works wonders, just s…
/r/MensRights11/10/12 04:38 PM
2

Let me talk a bit about the hairless-ness of models, being that I made a good portion of my money modeling a few years back. I can start by saying that leg hair is a bit of a wildcard, and men are not expected (usually) to have hairless legs. Sometimes yes, but more often than not, nobody cares about your legs. Arm hair is generally the same, unless you have especially dark/thick arm hair. Facial hair: Typically, photographers prefer clean shaven men, because it allows makeup to be applied more …
/r/MensRights11/10/12 03:43 PM
3

risking fatal electrocution and frostbite as a linesman in Winnipeg Maybe I should take another look into Canadian Football...
/r/MensRights10/10/12 05:43 PM
1

A person who is not a public figure does in fact have protection of their likeness. A person in the "public eye" has limitations, but a private person does not. Using someone else's picture just because you took it is not legal.
/r/MensRights06/10/12 01:15 AM
2

1) He will really love it if you grab his testicles, one in each hand, squeeze as hard as you can, and then pull away from his body as forcefully as possible.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 07:35 PM
2

Additionally, If you think the post is from a troll, it is a better reaction to just not post than it is to try to fight the troll.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 07:20 PM
3

I am of the opinion that arguing with these people is a good way to force yourself to think about your points, and make intelligent arguments, which are helpful for the times you are not trying to defeat crazy. After having argued about the concept multiple times (for the sake of argument), my wife was able to articulately defend how FGM and male circumcision were essentially the same damn thing to a neutral co-worker, and get him critically thinking about the point. Obviously, no point I would …
/r/MensRights28/09/12 06:09 PM
1

I apologize for using the who had it worst line, what I meant was more along the lines of who is really property. Further, the argument that 18th century society is relevant to modern day is what I am taking issue with. You claim that the big issue with the preceding post is one of pertinence, not one of accuracy. If the argument is one of pertinence, then I argue that 18th century society is also not relevant to conversations about modern day, just as crime stats for gun related deaths from tha…
/r/MensRights27/09/12 09:42 PM
7

While it is better than nothing, I would say that it is really her getting 8 months 3 times, as there were 3 victims in the case. I would not say that 8 months is justice. If it was 2 years per person, I would think the sentence would be much more fair.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 06:33 PM
1

... MRAs ... Blame you for ...that. Clearly, southern asshole is talking about victim blaming in rape scenarios.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:02 AM
3

I think he means a high number of serial rapists. From the 200, if you assume an average of 3 or 4 rapes per serial offender, you have up to 84 of the 200 kits accounted for, meaning that the other 116 would be from separate offenders who have not popped more than once in the database. That does not mean that there are only 21 identified people in the 200 kits.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 06:33 PM
7

What is strange to me is that the Augusta golf club is still men only. There is a consistent complaint about it (especially around the Masters tournament), but they have been able to maintain their policy. Until 1990, it was whites only, and by maintaining that they are a private club, they are permitted. In the US, it seems that as long as you are not a public institution (I believe requiring a membership with fees or something), you are permitted to discriminate pretty wholesale. Ninja edit: i…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 06:02 PM
12

.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:47 PM
8

I assume that the olympic teams are a bit shorter than the NBA ones, as the NBA seems to already gather the biggest people, but your point still stands. As a 6' 1" male, planes are too damn small. If we assume that the average olympic female athlete is < 6', and male (basketball player) is >6' 1", this makes perfect sense.
/r/MensRights20/07/12 03:33 PM
2

There was, IIRC, a recent case where it was shown that Title IX cannot be targeted to a single group, and must be applied equally. I have no idea where it was, and if someone else remembers this and can chime in with a source, that would rock (and give me some solace that it did happen).
/r/MensRights18/07/12 07:32 PM
5

ooo, maybe it means that you should carry around a checklist and whenever you see something that you get for being a man, you mark it off. With a little clever structure, it could even become Male Privilege Bingo!
/r/MensRights18/07/12 06:24 PM
4

Which means we need to Title IX that shit. Seriously though, if they start to enforce equality of enrollment, wouldn't it be possible to apply for a heavily female program (as a male, Veterinary Medicine works well for this one) that you are not entirely qualified for (on the cusp, not outright a bad fit), and when you don't get in, file a Title IX complaint (or whatever you do when there is discrimination)? I say Vet because if I took something like education there could be the only math and sc…
/r/MensRights18/07/12 06:21 PM
7

One thing I haven't been quite clear on about that phrase: Does it mean check it at the door (like a coat check) and become equal, or like make sure that it is still there (sorta like making sure that someone hasn't lifted your wallet)? Cause last time I did the latter, I think it was replaced by a leather-bound pile of shit...
/r/MensRights18/07/12 06:16 PM
5

Oh, hey look at this. Reddit proves that women should be given more money in health care, more social security money, higher percentages for retirement as their longer life expectancy will require more end of life money. But money placed in the system should be weighted equally between everyone, because equality.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 06:14 PM
1

From reading the source, I am led to a question: If a father takes a baby to a safe haven then the mother reclaims the child, what happens? It seems that some states will end the mother's parental rights when she does it, and some may attempt to locate the father, but what about the opposite situation?
/r/MensRights16/07/12 07:27 PM
12

alright, I will take a shot at looking at your points one by one Abortion deals with a fetus, while "LPS" or "financial surrender" deals with a child. They are incomparable. The idea is that neither biological parent should be compelled into parenthood. If one of the parents does not want to be at all involved, they should have the right to not be forced to spend 18 years punished for a result in which they had no choice. (No choice as in a woman, who says that she on birth control [is lying abo…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 03:54 PM
3

That is correct, the headliner was Dane Cook...
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:20 PM
0

Your equation would need a bit more work shown to follow. I think what you are going for (which is an interesting concept BTW) looks more like this: if Sexism = Prejudice + Power : Sexism - Prejudice = Power + Prejudice - Prejudice Sexism - Prejudice = Power or if Sexism = Prejudice + Power : Sexism - Power = Power + Prejudice - Power Sexism - Power = Prejudice Obviously, we cannot exactly use this method to define terms, but as a concept it is interesting. If you are confronted with the Prejudi…
/r/MensRights09/07/12 06:50 AM
2

If you think that women will always make less then men, then men should pay alimony. If you think that lifetime alimony is the same as finding a way to allow two people who have had all their finances intertwined to get separate money adjusted back to, then let's call them the same. I'm gonna stop responding to you now, cause damn... you haven't addressed any concerns with what I suggested, but the fact that your world view doesn't accept the possibility of equality. I'm sorry mate, but I am don…
/r/MensRights02/07/12 11:11 PM
2

The point of trying to affect change is to talk about how things can be, not how they are. That's why discussing a better situation is worth something, instead of just bitching about how things have been. Being a cynical prick does nothing good, so it would help to actually try and make the world a better place, M'kay?
/r/MensRights02/07/12 10:13 PM
1

Please keep in mind that this is a non-gendered explanation. Custody is another issue entirely, and default female custody is an entirely different problem. The solutions that I am coming up with here are specifically crafted for equality of opportunity. The lost wages issue is a real problem. That "free room and board" is a trade-off typically for cooking, cleaning, and you not having to spend money on daycare for your children. Couples make the choice to have one person at home, and treating t…
/r/MensRights02/07/12 08:33 PM
1

See my response to AlexFeiton for my explanation of why alimony is not inherently a bad thing.
/r/MensRights02/07/12 08:23 PM
5

Right, so I agree with the general sentiment of why the hell should people have to pay for each other later, but there is one issue in the concept (also, I am not gendering this either way): If a couple has been married for 10 years, with one partner staying home and cooking/cleaning/raising kids, they are not immediately able to make a fair amount of money. I know the counter argument to this, about how it is their choice to stay home and all, but the choice to stay home was contingent upon the…
/r/MensRights02/07/12 06:14 PM
55

Text of the Article so there is no reason to go to Jez: Men’s Rights Activists Upset the Word ‘Men’ Isn’t Used More in Affordable Care Act Erin Gloria Ryan The best part of today, aside from the fact that the Affordable Care Act was upheld, has been the rush of schadenfreude that comes from watching sourpuss Michele Bachmann types flip the fuck out about it. The latest group to react poorly are men's rights activists who are upset that health care reform spends too much time focusing on women an…
/r/MensRights29/06/12 04:56 PM
2

Unfortunately, because there will always be differences between people, we clever people will always have a new fun way to attack someone because of their difference. Until and unless people start to be entirely the same, we will always have gender/race/whatever based poo slinging
/r/MensRights29/06/12 01:40 AM
6

To be fair, this is the same website that wrote an article last week discussing the new controller for the Nintendo Wii, the Wii U. Cnn.com has managed to pretty quickly stop paying attention to news, and replace it entirely with gossip and inaccurate facts.
/r/MensRights14/06/12 09:05 PM
-1

Just a little devil's advocate here, but if someone like the EU decided to launch an attack on US shores, and have enough people to put up a serious fight, would you refuse to defend your country? I am not saying that the draft is a good thing, but if it comes to it, what other option is there?
/r/MensRights07/06/12 02:30 AM
2

Your point 2 is flawed, in that it suggests that the field should be male dominated, because it should be male dominated. Your premise about different choices stemming from hormone levels is valid, but suggesting that you know what the choice would be is not valid.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 12:35 AM
6

You make the assume that the questions will be answered directly. In my experience, when a question like paternity fraud comes into play, very few women will say that they think it is good. However, another answer is that the ones who lie are rare, so we should just trust women in general to be honest, and doing a test on them would be traumatic. Feminists have no interest in this debate, and will avoid engaging with you.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 01:37 PM
23

This really needs to be formatted and presented more clearly, instead of copy pasting a ton of old posts.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 12:58 PM
15

Read the first post and thought "I guess that she is interested in some form of discourse about how that term can be used to marginalize people who are looking for equality" Read the second and through "Nope, just another bigot"
/r/MensRights09/05/12 05:29 PM
3

not exactly the right way. The auto downvotes are a thing that stops single posts from getting to the top in a short time using spam alone, and I think there is some social idea in the method as well. The decay is actually a formula that takes score (upvotes-downvotes)/time, where time is some formula like minutesminutes/60. It is actually much more complicated, but the decay is achieved not through downvotes, but time. There is a blog post somewhere some more concrete info about how it works, b…
/r/MensRights09/05/12 04:53 PM
1

Admitting discrimination is better than acting like what they are doing isn't. But I guess that would be like being the the thinnest kid at fat camp...
/r/MensRights28/04/12 03:00 PM
9

Let me take your argument a little farther then. For each sport, there only needs to be the offer for the opposite sex to form a team. So a school changes their offered sport dynamic somewhat. Football, Wrestling, Rugby. If there are not enough girls to play those, there is no longer a girls athletics program. While I agree that gender segregated sports does make sense, you start to run into a problem if you fully codify this concept. Further, it is generally accepted that in many 'Guy' sports, …
/r/MensRights26/04/12 05:28 PM
4

I'm sorry to slightly go off topic on this one, but... The Salvation Army, which began the support service six months ago, also dealt with the first recorded case of an individual being trafficked to Britain to have their organs harvested. This is an actual thing??
/r/MensRights26/04/12 05:16 PM
20

While I agree that child support should not be present in any way in this case, I also think it was correct to punish the doctor, and also likely the facility in general had his sperm frozen in 2004. The storage contract was limited to twelve months. The twins were born in November 2007. This shows that the sperm that was used should not have still existed. Unless there is a further contract, it is the duty of the facility to actually destroy the sperm when it is time to do so. Unfortunately, on…
/r/MensRights20/04/12 05:45 PM
1

Just a quick note for you here, when you say that the average X is better than the average Y... That is generalizing.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 07:55 AM
3

just out of curiosity, who was it that sent you this way?
/r/MensRights18/04/12 02:29 AM
5

HEY YOU1@3 SHUT UP AND LISTEN TO THE POST I wrote about the wage gap. women make money, men make money, I think there was a picture. (Why?) (You Got a problem with me???)
/r/MensRights17/04/12 07:09 AM
3

the lack of replies to direct questions does support your thesis
/r/MensRights17/04/12 06:58 AM
-2

Marriage was never necessary. It's just a thing. Is it right for me? Yeah, I think so. Is it right for you? I cannot say anything about that. I do not get car insurance because I want to be protected, just because the law says I have to. Otherwise, depending on the current situation, I would consider not being insured, depending on a whole mess of considerations. Lemme see if I can dig up good studies about the divorce stats, or at least something that explains the shortcomings of the common one…
/r/MensRights17/04/12 06:44 AM
4

There is one thing that I would point out as a flaw in the common knowledge that both you and others in this thread are agreeing on. 50% of people do not get divorced. Many predictions of future divorce rates, based on faulty math have 43% of first marriages ending in divorce. Other than the fact that the math that is being used here is questionable, there are a couple of other, larger issues that confuse these numbers. First, the 43% is a guess, based on trends that are not fully understood. My…
/r/MensRights17/04/12 06:21 AM
1

Sidebar here, when you say that people should have whatever type of workplace they want (to a certain degree), at what degree do you draw the line?
/r/MensRights10/04/12 08:02 AM
1

I knew I was on to something when I met her and she was selling swords...
/r/MensRights25/03/12 09:48 PM
2

I'm a lucky one, as I have found a great woman, who is also a MRA. Shit could go down, but I decided I was willing to take that risk with her.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 08:16 PM
3

I have the same experience about finding MR as a result of seeing society as fucked up (although I have not been dragged through the ringer personally). What is interesting is that my best friend, who himself had to fight a false rape charge 6 years ago, still refuses to engage in debate about the validity Men's Rights. I respect him as an intelligent person, and respect his counter argument (he thinks that currently there are worse issues, and would rather care about those), despite my protests…
/r/MensRights25/03/12 07:23 PM
8

Doesn't matter if she truly believed she was right or not. She was wrong. Thus, it's a false accusation. I think we need to be careful about how we discuss a few things here. The accusation was not false in the way that false rape accusations are generally discussed here. While I agree that there was a wrongful accusation, in the general context of /MensRights, false rape usually refers to something more malice driven. Not saying you are wrong here, just that clarity is important. This was a fai…
/r/MensRights24/03/12 08:56 AM
1

Women don't want to be objectified for their beauty. This is just false. Both Men and Women like being objectified SOMETIMES. It's only being objectified constantly that is what people do not like.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 08:06 AM
0

I don't think people think things through as much as you believe. I have met tons of people (men and women) who say "I support feminism because it's about equality", and wholly mean it. They also say thing to the effect of "If you want things to be equal, then why do you have to be a part of Men's Rights when feminism already strives for that". When I question the idea that the very word feminism is biased, it becomes a game of "Why should feminists start calling themselves by another name when …
/r/MensRights24/03/12 07:50 AM
5

I will note that if I heard correctly, the woman had been raped, and picked him from a police line-up. Assuming that is what happened 17 years ago, she was likely traumatized, and her memory could have just been totally fucked. After she picked the person that she did believe (I am assuming that not all women want to send random men to jail, just as not all men are rapists) was the correct choice, her memory likely filled in blanks to make her honestly think she had the right person. For me, it …
/r/MensRights24/03/12 07:40 AM
-6

And you've been caught. Redditing at work... silly wife.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 11:59 PM
1

I find that RES tagging SRS-ers everytime they pop up (Silver, SRS) helps ever so slowly in marking the field to simplify life. Sure, they switch accounts, but the ones that don't can be ignored without ever reading the baiting posts.
/r/MensRights26/02/12 06:34 PM
1

I think that the idea is close, but should read something more along the lines of: This guy is a hero, he chose to save the person that he loved above himself. This has nothing to do with being a man or a woman, but being in love. Making the choice to save the person you love at the expense of your own life is fucking Epic. Regardless of gender, sacrificing yourself for another is a heroic act. Give this guy a fucking statue for being an awesome person. (Assuming that when they go through his be…
/r/MensRights16/02/12 07:11 PM
1

Just to clarify here, are you saying that people should get equal pay for unequal work? Sorry if I am misunderstanding, but if one person can do a job better (in this case, presumably men carry more weight than a woman, likely speeding up the job and increasing the profit of a company), they should still be paid equally because the job is the "same"?
/r/MensRights16/02/12 07:05 PM
5

So if people are feeding the trolls, should they be downvoted as well?
/r/MensRights16/02/12 01:33 AM
4

because there are no women involved.
/r/MensRights31/01/12 07:40 AM
2

Their article on the SOPA blackouts is also illuminating. They call it a protest against a "piracy bill"
/r/MensRights28/01/12 12:06 AM
3

Your comments appear to show you are male. Your feelings are worth nothing. You don't get to have feelings. Suck it up, pansy
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:19 PM
5

Sadly, I feel that just like people who must have something terrible happen to them to leave a church (or more accurately in this situation a cult), there is no way to externally convince most people. While inside the cult, they cannot see the other side, because their entire understanding of the world is based upon this notion. If someone one day finds out that the priest has been raping kids (or that the feminism argument does not hold up), the whole world around them ceases to make sense.
/r/MensRights24/01/12 10:14 PM
8

Only if the girls are permitted to wear the boys. If a girl can wear a skirt or pants, and a boy can only wear pants, then the dress code is discriminatory. That fight has been done many times, and it seems that the result is always schools giving up and saying boys can wear the girls skirt. I also believe that there was a case where girls could wear skirts or pants, but boys just pants. The summers were hot there, and a boy fought for the right to wear shorts. tl;dr Citation Needed.
/r/MensRights23/01/12 09:24 PM
3

I am saying that fixing a wrong definition is not an attack on men. If they said that prostate cancer was not a real disease, that is an attack on men, but the definition of autism was watered down, and stopped really meaning anything.
/r/MensRights21/01/12 01:55 AM
3

I want to start this off by saying that I understand that most of those effected by this will be male, however I do not feel that this one is specifically a MR issue. My mom is a Special Education teacher. She has spend the last 15 years of her life working in classrooms with variously disabled children, and when I lived in the same city, I would often come help her with some special projects. Having this background, I must agree that the definition of autism was made far too broad. Many of the …
/r/MensRights20/01/12 10:28 PM
3

That is what made me think of adding title IX to the mix
/r/MensRights12/01/12 07:49 PM
11

If you can show that this is something they often do to males, you can file a title IX grievance against the school as well. Title IX does not only protect girls...
/r/MensRights12/01/12 07:18 PM
6

I think that anyone that needs to go to college to understand any Bachelors level coursework will never be educated. The only classes that were challenging in my undergrad were those that lack a "right" answer. The science and math classes are a giant joke, because the undergraduate level that is taught is just high school level. See, I can do that too.
/r/MensRights06/12/11 02:48 PM
6

I agree, and wholly disagree. The issue that you are bringing up seems to be related very slightly to a rights movement, and more one about the government paying for college. I can tell you from my current experience, that I am better off with my BA (Theatre) working in Programming than many people that I know who got CS degrees. This is not due to the education exactly, but rather seems to be related to learning how to be a thinker. I actually think that vocational professions (Medicine and Com…
/r/MensRights05/12/11 08:05 PM
18

Much the same applies at university where standards have been significantly reduced and where spongiform subjects have been promoted over real subjects like science and technology. The other subjects are "real". Stating that a subject that lacks a concrete "right" answer is not a real subject is idiotic. That would nullify the entirety of literature, philosophy, and the arts. My current belief is that those real subjects, and the focus on them is one of the core issues in education.
/r/MensRights05/12/11 05:06 PM
1

I came here to say approximately this, only to see that you already have with eloquence and grace. I stand exactly where you do on this, and I present to you my upvotes of agreement.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 05:55 AM
1

I know that, but in this case, all us actors were treated equally shitty. Yay equality.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 04:51 AM
1

Look in the comments... the link to the rest of the information is linked.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 04:48 AM
5

at faires, I have seen like numbers both get kicked out for it. General rule there is: assault a cast member, get kicked the hell out.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 10:08 PM
3

This is generally less a Men's Rights issue, and more a 'Don't treat actors like they are not real people' issue, but when I was working at a renaissance faire some time back, a woman asked me for a picture, and when I went in for the clamp (a thing we are taught to minimize getting groped), one of her hands went straight to my crotch. I say this is less Men's Rights, because in this situation it happens consistently to members of both genders, by members of both genders. Just one that sticks ou…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 05:09 PM
2

I don't have the ability to watch that right now... any chance for a TL:DW?
/r/MensRights26/09/11 06:08 PM
13

These arguments sound great, where can I support this "fem-in-iz-um" thing? All I have to do is treat women like people and not objects? Sign me up. I would love to have my wife work all day, while I am at a swim up bar, come home to Steak and Beer, and then have great sex.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 07:57 PM
3

You seem to be discounting the fact that some people are raped more than once. If 10% of rapes happen to a person who has already been raped, it throws a wrench into the works. Edit: make writing less shitty
/r/MensRights13/09/11 01:37 PM
6

I came here to bring this up. He was drinking, and she grabbed his crotch. So in this situation, there is no way she is clear from her own charges... right?
/r/MensRights27/08/11 12:41 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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