TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ThereIsAThingForThat Archive

View 2 posts and 113 comments by ThereIsAThingForThat 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)
16

Utopia, USA Why did you write the same thing twice?
/r/MensRights20/03/13 06:27 PM
1

Aaaaaaaaand added. Thanks!
/r/MensRights19/03/13 09:36 PM
1

What is that plugin?
/r/MensRights19/03/13 09:00 PM
1

Nono, the cat (which you love very much) will also participate.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 02:50 PM
1

So, reddit. Except for the "sexy" and "being able to talk to women" part.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 08:05 AM
-2

It's fairly common knowledge that you should try to be conspicuously noisy and pass someone quickly and at a distance. But if he starts screaming, waving his arms and running around he'll probably get the cops called on him, what are you supposed to do?
/r/MensRights20/01/13 03:20 PM
1

What if instead there was a section specifically for unaccompanied minors? Wouldn't that make more sense? Where do you want to put them? There can't be many of them (I doubt there's 30+ children flying on every plane unaccompanied), so it'll be like 2-3 extra seats, which further means that the airline either have to lose seats (by seperating them), lose tickets for having too few, or lose tickets for having too many.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:13 AM
2

Because one person earned that seat through hard work and the other had the seat given to them. Which one deserves the seat? What if the adult had the seat paid for him by work? What if he's on welfare? What if he stole stuff to pay for it? You can't just make sweeping declarations "All adults deserve it, all children do not."
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:12 AM
9

unaccompanied 16 year old girl. ...are 16 year olds covered by the "unaccompanied children" policies? Really?
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:10 AM
5

Even if my fiancée was being an irrational hateful bitch, I'd still try to talk to her and tell her my feelings before deciding that it won't work. He told her "He was tired of walking a tightrope around her." which means he probably had thought about it a lot, and then her actions after his fathers death just put him over the edge.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 06:45 PM
3

Say you are pinned down behind a wall would you rather have someone more mentally stable at the moment by your side or would you take anyone becuase you want to be equal. There's a very very fine way to avoid this. Don't fucking send mentally unstable people to war! Male or female.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 11:06 AM
1

Well the odds of there being a draft in America is extremely unlikely Because we all know America doesn't get into wars. There are some countries that have mandatory service for everybody so this is better than that. Mandatory service for nobody > Mandatory service for all > Mandatory service based upon sexism.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 11:04 AM
1

I am pretty sure he told her specifically he was jewish. This can also in no way be compared to the modern US, since it would be like not telling you're black in 1960's southern Texas.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 04:06 PM
8

Could you be charged if you never actually told them you had a ferrari? As in, they just assume you have one?
/r/MensRights04/01/13 08:33 AM
0

Because sex is rape.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 07:21 PM
2

Well, there's a hotel in Copenhagen that "recently" made their 17th floor women-only with a locked gate entrance. Despite the fact that they have been told (by the Equal Treatment Board (a governmental agency focused on resolving cases of discrimination, and is open to all citizens to complain)) that it's against the law, they will still continue, you can read about it here: CNN, when it started Hotel refuses to comply with ETB demand Information about the ETB Choice quotes: The hotel has been o…
/r/MensRights16/11/12 05:56 PM
1

Who says I want to bake cookies for a bake sale? Who says I want to make a poster to raise awareness?
/r/MensRights15/11/12 02:02 PM
2

Well, if you're jewish in general.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 10:29 PM
16

Or being in Germany around 1940 if you're a jewish white male.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 08:09 PM
28

"The man was later found with three stab wounds, five shots to the body and one in the back of the head. His ex-wife has a history of violent behavior, and was found with a gun matching the caliber of the bullets used. Suicide truly is terrible."
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:52 PM
3

Literally a girl walked up and drank my cocktail out of my straw, then walked away, without saying anything. Maybe she thought it was flirting? She was probably a swede. I'm sorry, I got overly danish there for a second. And excuse my french, but what the fuck kind of girls did you meet that did something like that?! I have never seen or heard about that happening until now.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 04:55 PM
2

A police officer would be more professional. Do you seriously believe an officer would turn around and uppercut this person? Especially with a crowd of onlookers, one of which is filming? No, he would have used pepper spray or a tazer, do bus drivers in Cleveland have access to these? He should have dragged her off the bus and left her there while he drove off. That is the professional thing to do. Instead, he tried to show off by doing a little "move" for the crowd. And that will hopefully lose…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 08:10 PM
5

But No she did not "attack" him. She pushed him, shoved him, maybe even grabbed his arm and moved it around a bit. That, my friends, is all we see. She does not punch him, she does not scratch his eyes out, she does nothing to provoke such an over-the-top twat-fest of an attack. So if I "pushed, shoved and garbbed the arm" of a police officer driving, he wouldn't be able to do anything about it? Sweet! I mean, I didn't actually DO anything. Or shouldn't bus drivers driving multi-ton vehicles ful…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 08:02 PM
0

What about rent? Electricity? Water? Heat? How much can you say you spend of that on the children? A % based on age and amount of children? Couldn't you say "If I was childless, there's no way I would live in a 3bedroom house, nor use that amount of electricity/water/heat!"? If you can do that, $600 wouldn't even cover those charges. Also, who pays for it and how would it work? Would you have to go to a judge every month to show him these receipts? Who pays for court costs? The state?
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:28 AM
39

I was being sarcastic, should have maybe added the /s tag, but I was more or less reciting the plot of South Park Season 6 Episode 11, where all the parents send their children away because it was proven that the majority of abusers was parents.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 10:08 PM
126

So we shouldn't let children be with their families, they need to be moved daily between strangers. This is a great idea!
/r/MensRights06/09/12 09:44 PM
7

Does it work like that in Australia (where I assume this took place since it ends with .au)? I know that the country where I live, names etc aren't in newspapers before after the trials.
/r/MensRights21/07/12 09:48 PM
2

if anyone touches them they have the right to use force right? I don't know if you're american, but if I understood correctly, this happened in australia, I think the police are a little more lenient there than the US.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 07:06 PM
1

How do you get anything done if you have to think of everyone you meet?
/r/MensRights30/06/12 10:49 PM
1

Ah, I just find it interesting, since I live in a place where it's only a small minority (muslims is a prime example) that gets circumcised, christians don't even do it, so when people talk about a large majority getting circumcised, it seems... weird, in my eyes.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 08:08 AM
0

I have one time had a chick tell me I should have warned her that I wasn't circumcised Really? Are everyone in the US (I guess that's where you live) circumcised? o.o
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:57 AM
4

If you're in a car crash and suffer from memory loss, causing you to not remember being in a car crash, won't magically make your crushed arm work right again. I'm sure someone can put that in a way that makes sense.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:55 AM
2

Better: Don't have "friends" who aren't friends on facebook.
/r/MensRights19/05/12 09:36 PM
1

Where did I say I was upset? I was saying using the fact that some women might feel uneasy about too many guys is a stupid argument for it. I'm also for the legalization of marijuana, but I don't believe "But dude, everyone who are against it are just stuck up white guys" is a proper argument.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 06:43 PM
1

I wasn't arguing the men:women ratio or anything, but the guy saying too many males "creates a tense and uncomfortable atmosphere for women", and I was saying blacks cause a tense and uncomfortable atmosphere for some people from other races, homo- and transsexuals cause a tense and uncomfortable atmosphere for some straight people, but it's illegal to limit them, therefor males shouldn't be kept out "because it creates a tense atmosphere for some women", that's the only point I was arguing. For…
/r/MensRights10/05/12 05:56 PM
2

If I want to make a policy for my business that boots out any customer wearing white sneakers I can do that. ...but you can't for black people, which is the point.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 01:57 PM
2

I'm narrow minded because I believe that business' should be able to run as they want? That makes no sense.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 01:57 PM
1

I have no idea what I was thinking.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 01:56 PM
2

it creates a tense and uncomfortable atmosphere for women But it creates a tense and uncomfortable atmosphere for whites when there's blacks in there, why is there a law against that?
/r/MensRights10/05/12 05:33 AM
3

If they did, then no blacks would go and no non-racist whites would go, it would be a selection of hardcore racists. Then you would know where all the racists are, and could start a fire or something. Edit: Well, that was idiotic.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 05:31 AM
1

Keypoint, public.
/r/MensRights10/05/12 05:28 AM
3

I don't know. Personally I wouldn't display a trophy from getting kicked out of the handicapped olympics. A SRS ban though? I'd print it out in 4x size and cover my wall with it.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 07:33 AM
3

A person could EASILY post on SRS just like everyone else, if they honestly believe everything they say, but what would it help banning them then? Would that give them a chance to learn? Do you think they would stay and see what this is all about, if they're automatically banned when they post? I don't know about you, but I'd rather not automatically ban 999 SRS trolls than ban 1 person from SRS who can still learn. and I think that showing SRS people that they are bad is useful. Then let the mo…
/r/MensRights09/05/12 07:31 AM
7

And then you would exclude anyone who might have just been ignorant, come to see what this /MR thing is, get banned and then think "Wow these guys are assholes, can't even handle some questions", and lost a possible supporter. Even if it's only once in 100, that's still too many.
/r/MensRights09/05/12 06:15 AM
24

That's kind of like winning a trophy for getting kicked out of the handicapped olympics though, isn't it?
/r/MensRights09/05/12 06:12 AM
0

To be fair, that could also portray men poorly, it really depends on the context. Is he cheating? Is she? Is she a prostitute? Are nobody cheating? Etc.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 06:00 PM
2

I don't know if there is a federal law about rape, but there was a definition made by the FBI, that only counted penetration by a male to a female. Although they have changed it, but I can't remember to what. And since that was the definition, the Government couldn't say anything was rape that didn't fit that definition.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 02:30 AM
2

would have gotten a much stiffer penalty Well, the judgement haven't fell yet, so we don't know what the penalty is. I agree, this shit is why everybody thinks the MRA is just a bunch of whining babies, think /r/MR is a "Look what this woman did, why are we so hated?????", and it really feels that way sometimes sigh
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:07 PM
3

I think it's one of those "Think if a man did this!"
/r/MensRights02/05/12 10:40 AM
6

I don't know about Germany, but in Denmark the picture of ACCUSED criminals don't get paraded around the news, male or female. I think that's a very US-centric thing.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 05:52 PM
1

See, this is the kind of thing you should link. I will look through it closer when I have slept though.
/r/MensRights25/04/12 12:02 AM
8

Why is there no links to said research? Or am I just blind?
/r/MensRights24/04/12 11:25 PM
16

Because you can't be sexist against men, silly.
/r/MensRights14/04/12 08:12 AM
5

Here in Denmark it is practically unheard of. Actually, googling the danish word for prison rape gives no "real" results, except for a norwegian man who was stopped in "raping" his cellmate (he never raped him, but he touched him, because the prison guards stopped it), and he got 10 months added to his sentence, while the victim is getting 40.000 norwegian kroners from the rapist. That's ~$8000 by some quick math without knowing the exact exchange rates. However, you have to remember, normally, …
/r/MensRights13/04/12 07:45 PM
-1

Did you atleast tell your mother to act like a human being?
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:40 AM
5

Patrick S. was convicted of incest for the first time in February 2002 and given a suspended sentence. In subsequent years, he was convicted several more times and was sentenced to prison time. His sister was never convicted, having been found by a German court to be only partially liable for her actions due to, as the European Court of Human Rights writes in its Thursday press release, "a timid and withdrawn personality structure." Can you really use that as a defense? A timid and withdrawn per…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 10:38 AM
9

and they rape everybody. ftfy.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 03:08 PM
13

Rep. Rory Ellinger, D-University City, said he is strongly against the bill. He said in the case of a woman getting pregnant and deciding not to tell the father, that this bill would not only deprive the man of the right to be a father, but would also get him out of his duty to pay child support. I don't know if I should be happy that this guy is against the bill, or sad because of his reasons.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:45 PM
1

You didn't...that's why I had a question mark on the end there, before you left it out: so I could ask your opinion. No, I don't think that punishment is resonable. I just don't think saying "He got arrested because they hate free speech!" is okay, when he was arrested for "inciting racial hatred". Well, I don't think you actually did say that until just now, but whatever. Not word for word, I didn't, but I never said the law was fair either. Are you saying the punishment was just because it was…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 09:06 AM
1

Well, you could as well say "When the law states you can't kill homosexuals, why shouldn't it be okay to not follow the law if you think it's unjust.", and we can keep continuing in that vain. And that's all fine and dandy, but would you start whining if you got a ticket for driving 60 where the speed limit was 45, and being outrageous about the horrible laws? No? That's where you and most of the commenters on that article disagree. Hell, I've broken laws before, but if I get a fine/jail because…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 08:52 AM
1

This clearly isn't civil disobedience though. If it was to show that the racist laws are wrong, it would be (slightly) different, but just breaking the law is not okay, no matter how idiotic the law is.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 08:29 AM
0

I'm sorry, but I don't really know the history of MLK, what exactly did he do that was against the law? All we learned about MLK here was that he ended race segregation in Alabama(?).
/r/MensRights08/04/12 08:22 AM
-1

So what's the "big difference?" That there's a law against inciting racist hate in the UK? Just like there's a law against making death threats? That's the big difference, he used his free speech to break the law, is the law wrong? Arguably. Should he have broken it because he thought the law was wrong? No. What about all the other laws you think is wrong? Should we just break them too? Racist speech is a type of offensive speech. But not a type of protected speech, exactly like death threats, a…
/r/MensRights08/04/12 07:23 AM
-1

It wasn't for saying something offensive, it was for saying something racist, there's a big difference there, seeing that most countries have a freedom of speech, but still under account of the law, and if you have a law against racist speech, freedom of speech doesn't cover it. Just like you can't walk up to a guy and say you're going to kill him, since that's against the law as well, but nobody seems to have a problem with that.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 06:54 AM
3

I'm lucky that feminism doesn't have a stranglehold on Denmark... Yet.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 06:51 AM
3

What is this, logic? Edit: I think most think that rape of males don't happen except for in prisons, so it's okay to joke about it, because all males in prison are evil rapist themselves.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 06:49 AM
7

“You know, if Trayvon would have been the triggerman, it’s nothing Trayvon Martin could have said to keep police from arresting him Day 1, Hour 1.” Even the police chief recognizes this reality, even while disputing claims of racial bias in the investigation Everybody knows nobody would believe it if the roles were reversed.
/r/MensRights19/03/12 01:01 PM
3

Then I have no idea. That's sad really.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 07:37 PM
3

I think it's just Europe in general, or atleast, in Denmark it is like that too, I have never heard of a guy getting the police called on him just because he helped a kid.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:14 PM
2

Well, yes and no. The law specifies pedophilia as X, if it is not X, it is not pedophilia. It really depends if you mean the "moral" definition, or the legal definition.
/r/MensRights03/03/12 01:44 PM
2

Yes, some places theres a X Years Rule, but that doesn't account for people in a state of authority.
/r/MensRights22/01/12 04:04 PM
8

The thing I'd like to point out is that in just about every part of the World 16 is a legal age of consent and there would be no issue whatsoever from that perspective. I just have to break in here, but what? If you are a teacher or another adult trusted with the education or upbringing of a child, you have to be 18+ most places. Quotes: Denmark The age of consent in The Kingdom of Denmark is 15 as specified by Section 222, part 1. Section 223, part 1, reads: "Any person who has sexual intercour…
/r/MensRights22/01/12 12:44 PM
2

Now I need to watch that movie again, thanks a lot :D
/r/MensRights04/01/12 01:56 PM
1

It's kinda sad really.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 11:40 PM
2

USA: Where stupid people go to become world leaders.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 07:46 PM
8

So USA really believe they're the leaders of the world huh?
/r/MensRights03/01/12 05:46 PM
4

Susanne Fischer, an attorney with the board, said that the Bella Sky Hotel would not face "financial sanctions at the moment, because the board does not have the authority to sanction." How I love living in Denmark.
/r/MensRights27/12/11 08:17 PM
2

One sperm for one big mac. God I'm going to get so much food.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 06:02 PM
6

I'm sorry, what? I said that the fact that one might find the girls unattractive is going to heavily influence whether or not one might want to have sex with that girl, and therefor one might understand why one might turn down sex, if they are, in fact, ugly.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 06:01 PM
4

God I wish I could trade in my sperm for a big mac. I don't want to go craft some food.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 02:22 PM
6

Because obviously it reduces the value of sperm! No sane male would ever sell his body like that! Wait... I think I've heard that before... Yeah... From Feminists... About prostitues and strippers... I thought the MRA was into personal choice.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 02:14 PM
4

I'm sorry, what? Sperm has always been a commodity. Unless sperm banks just happened 5 years ago.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 01:09 PM
8

He didn't say anything about them being HOT girls, think about that for a minute.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 12:59 PM
1

I think this is a case of different cultural environments, because here, a lot of fathers take the kids sick days. Yes, she could have children, but males could die in a work accident, so why ever hire males? Actually, why ever hire anyone? From a financial perspective it makes perfect sense, if the woman is a better worker than a man, she should be hired, and vice versa.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 01:54 AM
1

I don't think so because they wouldn't earn as much money as the business who hire the more skilled workers. One might even argue that the thought process of business is inherently sexist. It is not sexist to think "I will hire the person who makes me the most amount of money." though. Because of the child bearing and rearing thing I would never hire a woman. Since it still is - even with modern fathers around - that the mom has to stay home if the kid is sick or has some other thing. The first …
/r/MensRights12/12/11 01:26 AM
5

Welp, so much for this. What do you mean? It says right there that police officers evacuated the rapists, RAPE CULTURE!!!! /s
/r/MensRights12/12/11 01:07 AM
1

More costly, but you would also get more work done if you did it, unless you promote someone to a position where you only need to work 4 hours a day. And you're right, a business has a completely seperately thought process, namely: Does this make me more money? To be frank, I doubt any business who goes "Oh, I'll just promote/hire this guy even if this girl works better/have better qualification" would be around for long, which is why I hate the quota system governments are starting to make, it …
/r/MensRights12/12/11 01:01 AM
2

An erection can occur because of physical stimuli, would the woman rape him by simply laying there doing nothing? That's a pretty shitty attempt at rape then.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 12:51 AM
1

You said "Even though the quality of work is the same.", which is what I went from, a person working full time vs. a person working part time with the same quality of work.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 12:47 AM
1

That part-time workers do not get promoted as full timers do (even though the quality of work is the same) Ofcourse they don't. If you ran a business, would you promote a person who worked 60 hours a week, or a person who worked 20 hours a week? I know what I'd choose. And that has nothing to do with sexism per se, unless Female part-time workers with the same qualifications, same work ethic, same skills, work hours, etc doesn't get promoted, while the Male part-time workers does. And sorry that…
/r/MensRights12/12/11 12:41 AM
1

But sexism (I am working in the IT sector - another male dominated field) exists. Especially for working moms. You are a bad mother if you give your child into care. You are less of a woman if you cannot clean your own house and hire someone to help. What does that have to do with the work itself? Sorry if it sounds like a stupid question, I am not american, and it might be an american thing...
/r/MensRights12/12/11 12:26 AM
2

There is no way to win that argument that I can think of, sorry!
/r/MensRights14/11/11 09:00 PM
7

Ask her how it can be sexist that a woman can do what she wants, and trade what she wants for what she needs. If that is sexist, then we would need to take womens right to control their own bodies away.
/r/MensRights14/11/11 08:29 PM
3

I would just have looked at her. Then looked away. Then looked at her. Then I would walk away. There is no reason to try to reason with that kind of person.
/r/MensRights14/11/11 08:14 PM
1

Ofcourse it's normal, but since a psychologist said it, it must be true, right /s The problem I have is not whether or not I'm normal, it's that people want to use the most "scary" words, and forget the actual meaning. If they HAVE to use a word to call people, I'd rather they use the "right" one. How "child" porn can include 17 year olds I have no idea, if you can go to jail you are not a "child".
/r/MensRights04/11/11 11:23 AM
1

Did you read further? But we learned the new legislation will not help Thomas because his case is old and the courts are looking not backward, but forward. And the attorney general's office confirmed for us that Thomas still must pay $52,000 in back child support -- $13,000 of that is interest. While this helps in the future, it is still fucking over males.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 01:24 AM
1

I agree. Some people put too much weight on biological notions of parenthood. Unless it's a male.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:58 AM
1

Well, if she wants the baby, it should also be her responsibility to pay for it. If I want a brand new Dodge Charger LX, but I can't afford it, I will just have to live without it, I can't see how that's any different from a child, seeing as a child isn't something you need to survive. It would take a court decision to mandate whether or not she is financially able, at a specific point in time. Well, it wouldn't, if she feels she is able to support the child, she can do just that without going t…
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:46 AM
3

I guess you could say I live in a better place, however, there is just very few "extreme" christians in Denmark, studies (on wikipedia) show that Denmark is the fourth-most atheist country on Earth, so I do not have much experience with people doing something like that for religious reasons. I wouldn't call "Don't have a baby if you can't afford it." discriminating against religion, especially when (even if the woman is against abortion) there is still adoption as an option. I do not know if the…
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:32 AM
3

It is a sad thought that pedophiles should be scoffed and jailed, even if they never did something wrong, especially considering drawings and such as child porn, which is just weird in so many ways. Overall, I handle these two extremes to try to make a balanced point of view. If a pedophile is actively trying to keep himself from harming a child, I think he should receive praise, not scorn, from me. I would hate to live knowing I could never even touch a woman again, yet that is how a pedophile …
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:27 AM
6

Well... No, I don't advocate more funds. If a woman can't afford a child, she shouldn't have one. If a couple can't afford a child, they shouldn't have one. If a man can't afford a child, he shouldn't have one. When did children become a thing you should be allowed to have? If someone wants a 50 inch flatscreen tv, but don't work, should the state pay for it then? Or a car? Or maybe a house? The only thing I think that the state should help fund for is essentials. Food, clothing, housing and so …
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:17 AM
3

Statuatory rape, for one.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 11:52 PM
2

Or she lies about saying he should put on a condom, instead said SHE did not want him to put on a condom, to milk him for money?
/r/MensRights02/11/11 11:50 PM
7

Well... Yes, men should not be able to force women to or to not have a baby. Men should have a choice about whether THEY want to have a baby, if not, why should they force them to pay child support, when women are so "powerful" and "don't need men"? Shouldn't the woman actually be able to take care of the child without a man acting as a paycheck?
/r/MensRights02/11/11 11:48 PM
1

In a hand-signed affidavit, sworn under the penalty of perjury They still have perjury for women? On topic, not really surprising either way.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 05:42 PM
-1

Yeah! It's not like Pre-ejaculation exists at all! What do you mean ignorance?
/r/MensRights25/10/11 06:07 PM
17

Consider my mind blown.
/r/MensRights24/10/11 12:42 AM
2

Exactly, and there's too much at stake to really be able to properly assess the situation before it's actually there.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 08:28 PM
2

One thing I forgot, that should really go without saying, but might say it anyway, is that if a man chooses not to financially support the child, he should lose any and all rights to visit, hear from or otherwise have contact with the child. For married couples it gets blurry, but personally I believe it should still apply, seeing as a marriage should not take rights away. However, i'm against marriage in any shape, so I might not be the best to talk about that part.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 08:02 PM
7

Say he need to opt in. In that way, no woman would be able to just "forget" to tell him that she's pregnant. Then make him sign a form with the date and the signature of both the mother and the father where the father agrees to paying child support. In this way, it's on the mother to make sure that the father signs, and if she lies or hides it, she gets hurt. Edit: I have no idea what the majority of MRAs wants, but this is how I personally see it being easiest to implement and enforce.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 06:23 PM
5

I totally find this story/outcome disturbing, but can I say to the men who are cyring "double standards"...suck it up!! Just keep justifying your lusty sex drives, the porn industry and your double standards when it comes to how you treat your daughters as opposed to how you educate your sons. This also reminds me of back in 2001 when a child psychiatrist gave permission to a 15 year old BOY to have sex with a prostitute (without his parents knowledge) because he wanted to and was dying of cance…
/r/MensRights20/10/11 12:48 AM
3

There is women-only train cars in New Delhi
/r/MensRights19/10/11 09:09 PM
5

The "true" definition of a male is a person with one X and one Y chromosome. Everything else is personal preference.
/r/MensRights24/09/11 09:44 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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