TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

WilyRedditor Archive

View 1 post and 40 comments by WilyRedditor 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)
19

StoryWilyRedditor/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:20 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Read where I said: Even the one with the smaller salary is often happier sticking it out. A divorce would mean losing the big house and comfortable life style too. They rather have all the money than some of the money if it's not so terrible. Emphasis on if it's not so terrible. It's not just woman looking to flee evil men they despise out there. Marriage still keeps some people together. Just not as many as it used to. Still has a purpose. Not necessarily a good one.
/r/MensRights12/09/14 11:01 PM
1

Financial concerns primarily.
/r/MensRights12/09/14 10:14 PM
1

No, I'm saying people still stay together in unhappy marriages despite no fault. In other words, marriage's purpose of keeping people together who don't really want to be is still valid even in light of no fault.
/r/MensRights12/09/14 12:55 PM
3

The entire article becomes a joke the moment she says men cannot possibly be oppressed because of their gender. If a rich kid is made fun of and beaten up because of his wealth, is he not being oppressed because of his wealth? But let's focus on a basic logical inconsistency in one of her key arguments: that men commuting suicide at higher rates, being homeless at higher rates, etc. cannot be due to oppression due to their gender. If men are homeless at a higher rate simply because of class, wou…
/r/MensRights12/09/14 05:41 AM
1

Even the one with the smaller salary is often happier sticking it out. A divorce would mean losing the big house and comfortable life style too. They rather have all the money than some of the money if it's not so terrible.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 11:32 PM
1

Not so. The desire to not take the financial hit, not give up the big house, etc. has kept many an unhappy married couple together.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 11:25 PM
1

True. Marriage in the end is specifically designed to keep you together when you no longer want to be. That is its basic and fundamental purpose.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 08:05 PM
1

Tax breaks and to put them on your health insurance. This is how the government ensures that marriage keeps going, by making it practical so long as you don't get divorced.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 06:46 PM
6

Now it all makes sense. If only everyone else knew that, maybe I would've gotten some sympathy from their friends and family when I told them.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 04:12 PM
1

No I mean as in indentured servant like they used to have back in the colonial days. Essentially voluntary slavery. We do choose to get married after all. We just don't have an easy way out once we make that decision.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 04:03 PM
1

I'd say it's more like indentured servitude.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 02:51 PM
6

I guess the three women who have committed domestic violence against me all had penises cleverly tucked away somewhere.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 02:50 PM
1

I'd say they are both serious problems, but definitely agree that the latter is more serious. Especially since that involves the man getting beaten and in my case injured. In terms of turning everyone against you, she would often tell me that no one really cares about me except for her. She liked that I don't have a good relationship with my family and hated me trying to have a good one with hers even though she did.
/r/MensRights11/09/14 01:33 PM
8

No, forcing people who don't really want to stay together to stay together because they don't have a good enough reason doesn't help anyone. That said, the concept that there is only no fault divorce is wrong and of course if someone violates the marriage contract through adultery, the other spouse should not have to pay for that financially speaking after the marriage is over. When there is clear fault, then that should be recognized and taken into consideration. In what other situation can som…
/r/MensRights11/09/14 02:15 AM
3

If I had cuts, bruises, and other marks on my body from a man beating me in the head and he was untouched, I would not worry about the police believing him when he says I was the assaulter because the evidence is on my side and gender bias is not applicable. What part of there was supporting evidence in my favor and yet I was still afraid of what gender bias could do do you not understand? Is my fear of gender bias proof that I would actually be discriminated against? Of course not and I never s…
/r/MensRights10/09/14 11:03 PM
3

Where did I say the police not believing I had been assaulted was the issue? I had plenty of marks on my body to show I had been assaulted. The issue was whether or not they would believe her if she said I had hit her even if there were no marks on her. Or what if there had been marks on her because I had defended myself instead of just letting my myself get repeatedly hit? Or what if she actually hurt herself just to have evidence that I had hurt her? As for objective fact and evidence that I c…
/r/MensRights10/09/14 10:39 PM
3

How am I supposed to understand acting to mean reporting when you said that immediately following a statement that I could've recorded the incident if I was really that worried about being believed? Maybe you should work on being more clear instead of assuming everyone else is incapable of understanding the English language. And I never said I didn't report it because I didn't think anyone would do anything. In fact I did report it. What I said was I didn't defend myself and I didn't agree to te…
/r/MensRights10/09/14 10:08 PM
2

"I'm saying that your inability to act is your responsibility"
/r/MensRights10/09/14 09:38 PM
2

I don't think I've ever heard something so "blame the victim" as it's your fault because you didn't record yourself getting assaulted to prove it happened. That's like saying it was a woman's fault she got raped because she didn't record the rape as it was happening. How good are you with a video recording device while you are getting punched in the face and mauled by a dog? Have a lot of personal experience with that?
/r/MensRights10/09/14 09:25 PM
1

Then those rights need to be re-examined.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 08:05 PM
2

I said there is a difference and you responded no there isn't.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 08:03 PM
1

Agreed it doesn't mean right wing asshole. I'm assuming this moderator leans quite far to the left actually. You can appeal to the downtrodden and still be opposed to freedom. The downtrodden don't want freedom, they want hope. Unfortunately they are willing to trade freedom for hope and wind up with neither in the end.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 06:07 PM
1

We'll like I said, I wasn't trying to imply he is a member of the Fascist party. You don't seem familiar with the way the word fascism is commonly used these days to describe someone who diametrically opposes freedom.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 05:58 PM
1

He may not be a true fascist in the political sense, but his actions certainly embody the principles of authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and intolerance. A fascist moderator if ever I saw one.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 05:49 PM
1

I disagree. I don't think anyone really owns a sub. Especially when you are talking about something so generic and big as /r/feminism.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 05:45 PM
2

Right. It's never ok to blame the victim...unless the victim is a man.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:34 PM
2

I was just banned from commenting in the feminism sub because I simply asked a poster who had said a school borderline sexually harassed a student what the poster's definition of sexual harassment is.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:31 PM
2

Well I've reported him. Such blatantly discriminatory behavior and such a fascist approach toward differing opinions has no place on reddit.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:19 PM
2

Unfortunately you may be right. Like I said in the original post, I've even had a female officer talk me out of pressing charges before. When I asked her if she would be doing the same thing if I was a woman, she got upset and said "we are done here" and left.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:07 PM
2

No fortunately she ran away when I called the police and wasn't there to lie to the police. Besides, she didn't have any marks on her as I literally just did nothing as she repeatedly punched me. I had all the marks on me from both her punching me and her dog attacking me. I do have to wonder if it was me that had hit her and run away, would the police have looked for me even if she said she wasn't going to testify?
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:03 PM
2

Wow I was blocked in the feminism sub simply for asking what the poster's definition of sexual harassment is. Their moderator is a fascist and told me to get the f*ck out simply because I am a man who has posted in this men's rights sub.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:00 PM
2

Lucky how?
/r/MensRights10/09/14 03:28 PM
2

You don't think there is a difference between an arrest and a prosecution? They are two entirely different steps in the legal process. They only prosecute cases they feel they have a shot of winning. They don't feel they have much of a chance of winning a domestic violence case without a witness. Again, I actually went through this. The prosecutor never even bothered to contact me after I told the officer I wasn't going to testify when he asked me.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 03:24 PM
1

In theory they can but in practice they won't. They had plenty of evidence in my case.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 03:03 PM
3

It's great that their website explicitly restricts their concern to abuse against women and they consider "domestic violence [to be] the result of patriarchal ideology in which men are encouraged and expected to control their partners".
/r/MensRights10/09/14 03:01 PM
2

But the DA won't prosecute if the victim will not testify. The officer asked me if I would testify, and as soon as I said I wouldn't, that was the end of it. He just have me a report number in case I changed my mind.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 12:51 PM
2

Yes, but there is a difference between an arrest and prosecution. And they won't look very hard for the abuser if they know the victim isn't going to testify.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 12:48 PM
3

Sure but there's a difference between seeing violence in action and the remaining signs of that violence after the fact.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 05:12 AM
1

No one ever loses their victim status until they act violently themselves. Would you ever dream of saying a woman lost her victim status the moment she didn't leave an abusive husband or decided to keep verbally attacking her boyfriend? Since when does not being smart equal not being a victim?
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:07 AM
2

I believe him. It's all he said, she said in the end. Just like a court is more willing to believe a cop, it's more willing to believe a woman.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 03:57 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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