TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Xhiro Archive

View 0 posts and 127 comments by Xhiro 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)
5

Do you remember pictures of the 1950/60s where black people would be vilified, arrested, or assaulted - especially by those in power - for standing up for their rights? Same thing - those in privilege will fight to keep that privilege.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:29 PM
1

Simple. She's a misandrist.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:26 PM
115

Outstanding sir. Do you have a posting of punishment to those involved?
/r/MensRights07/03/13 05:12 PM
3

No, if the toys don't want to play they're being discerning.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 06:56 PM
1

This is so hypocritical as to be hilarious.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 06:55 PM
8

Juvenile and illegal, but good for a chuckle.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 03:29 PM
2

Does your instructor have the power over your grade? If she makes a decision on your grade based on your gender, that's sexism.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:42 PM
3

One can not argue for the best interest of the child when abortion is on the table.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:40 PM
5

Check the sources. She uses selective quotations from the government sources and some sources that are questionable at best, while deriding university level peer reviewed sources. What checks on sources exist at any of the ones she chose?
/r/MensRights15/01/13 04:41 PM
6

Only once did I deal with this. I was hit (clearly with intent to do damage), and I swung back and knocked out her tooth. I then had to prove I was willing to physically harm the white knights who stepped in without context. Bartender told the cop what happened, she couldn't press charges without facing charges herself. I was lucky.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 12:21 AM
1

One can't argue best interest of the child when abortion is on one side of the debate.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 12:45 AM
2

Best for the kid arguments get sucked out the vacuum used to remove him after he is aborted.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 02:39 PM
6

When the source of the dictionary is in question, yes.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:13 PM
6

How about a link that isn't from a feminist blog? sex·ism [sek-siz-uhm] Show IPA noun 1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sexism?s=t
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:12 PM
0

In the same universe where men who can't take care of their children are given prison time and women who can't take care of their children are given welfare.
/r/MensRights17/01/11 04:43 AM
4

How about an entire lost generation of men? Does that count? Men locked into debtor's prisons at the wills of feminists. Men whose freedoms are taken by false rape accusers. Men who are pushed into suicide by a complete elimination of options. All this at the hands of feminism.
/r/MensRights16/01/11 02:09 AM
2

This is correct. I saw the 35 and blipped on the have served. Not my intent to distort facts. That being said, is it an anti-woman stance that keeps them from getting elected? Or is it that when a qualified woman runs, she does get elected? Isn't that how it is supposed to work? Also, there's a fallacy behind us being sexist that a woman hasn't been elected president. We were racist fi we didn't vote for Obama, but we can't call ourselves enlightened now that he's elected. Electing a woman is me…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 11:07 PM
4

How many women are now Governors of states? As of January 12, 2011, thirty-five women have served or are serving as the governor of a U.S. state. That's 70% of the country! But because one hasn't been president yet ... ? Beyond sitcoms ... Most sideline reporters and in locker room reporters nowadays are women - in a male dominated industry. Is it the fault of men that women don't want to do foundry/industrial/construction work? In road work, the disparity in pay is between the woman who holds t…
/r/MensRights14/01/11 06:55 PM
1

They were 20, 19, 16, and 11 - did you read the article?
/r/MensRights18/12/10 08:16 PM
3

The most current study that debunks it was done by the department of labor under Obama. Article breaking the study down: http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/03/08/department-of-labor-gender-wage-gap-a-myth/ Study itself: http://www.the-spearhead.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Gender-Wage-Gap-Final-Report.pdf
/r/MensRights16/12/10 12:53 AM
7

So was Delta's Soul Plane ad, but hey, Black people have no right to be pissed about that, right? I mean, it's just a joke!
/r/MensRights11/12/10 07:00 PM
6

JC Penney made the list of stores that won't get dime one out of me.
/r/MensRights11/12/10 06:56 PM
0

I keep hearing continuously, but there is only one issue cited, his putting the info of the Assange accusers online. If there are other times of TE doing this, they should be cited as a reason. All of this stems from issues derived from one posting (as discussed herein). If this was not an isolated case, the will concede the point. However, if it is an isolated case ... then we are back sliding down the slippery slope.
/r/MensRights11/12/10 08:41 AM
-2

Or a dedicated person keeping the message from being silenced. Point of View, and all.
/r/MensRights11/12/10 01:37 AM
0

Pancho knows. Pancho always knows. I'm sure Pancho is watching even now. Slushy? Shaved Ice, to be sure.
/r/MensRights10/12/10 11:17 PM
0

For Dulcinea!
/r/MensRights10/12/10 10:54 PM
-3

Not banning is not the same as pushing. No one believes vigilantes are being encouraged. Mayhaps it's just tilting at windmills, but if it gets people's attention, then it's doing it's job.
/r/MensRights10/12/10 09:35 PM
-1

Just like we should automatically have trusted Clinton's/Bush's/Obama's judgment, because they were/are the President.
/r/MensRights10/12/10 07:24 PM
-2

The banhammer should not have fallen. It comes down to a question of personal information. The two women in question were in the public domain. I found their personal information starting from CNN.com. That I found their personal information easily or that they were in the public domain is immaterial, even a red herring. The relevant question is moderation. We have up and down votes that moderate for us, allowing us to judge based on the hive. That ban hammer is borderline useless, and it sends …
/r/MensRights10/12/10 07:23 PM
2

More generalizations, I love it!
/r/MensRights01/12/10 11:56 PM
3

Hitting people get you arrested if you're a man, and it will linger forever. Brutalizing someone is expunged and forgotten if you are a woman. See above.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 09:32 PM
3

By being born concave.< Wow. Soda just came out my nose.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 08:21 PM
10

It's either take the fiscal hit now, or spend the rest of your life at that gas station.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 06:45 PM
9

Feminism is why you're being punished. She's a delicate flower, your an evil pscyho rapist man who should be imprisoned at the least, castrated and subservient at the most. Get a lawyer.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 06:27 PM
1

I'd feel better if it lost for the right reasons as compared to being merely a partisan split.
/r/MensRights18/11/10 02:36 PM
6

Fair enough, but as civil discourse goes, we shouldn't call out Misandry until it's actually happening, or we cheapen the word.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 09:27 PM
4

I don't see how this is misandrist. Misguided, yes, but not misandrist. I have experienced several of these as a single white straight male, so I know this is crap.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 08:32 PM
1

This is terrible crap. The satire of the important ones is lost on me.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 05:41 PM
2

How about the gender inequality at the teacher level? M vs F teachers.
/r/MensRights15/11/10 06:26 PM
1

Excellent.
/r/MensRights12/11/10 02:48 PM
1

Well played. On a technical note, [4] would be better served by linking to wikipedia's source. I'm just hearing the echo of a professor in my head ...
/r/MensRights12/11/10 02:57 AM
1

Absolutely. When I think about how the money is split up, especially for a child, and the costs for the child over and above what each parent needs to live, $500 a month is perfectly acceptable. *This assumes the parents in question don't live in an overcosted tax hell hole like NYC, but in a second tier major metro area like Memphis, Milwaukee, or Flagstaff.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 05:22 AM
1

They are examples. I'm waiting to see a justification on the breakdown of cost, not just a vacuous amount a father should pay. As for what a parent should support, if we are to assume that a parent should spend more on the child than themselves, we deny the responsibility of the other parent.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 04:58 AM
1

I've had to feed, clothe and shelter myself at less than $500 per month - so, yes I can. I am arguing that child support should be evenly divisible. The father should not pay ALL the child's expenses at the other parent's house, plus there should be a deduction since the mother is paying ZERO of the expenses when the child is with Dad (gee, this is overlooked often, isn't it). The average increase of an extra bedroom is $100-$150 whether you live in the ghetto or the suburbs of the very wealthy …
/r/MensRights08/11/10 10:16 PM
2

So, if you have kids your rent magically goes up? When you consider his share of the rent, it's perfectly reasonable. 2 bedroom apartments are not double the cost of one bedroom apartments. Around here, they're $100-$150 more. So his increased share of the rent is $50-$75, as hers is the cost of a 1 bedroom if she didn't have the kid.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 09:39 PM
27

A woman who degrades men in her article thinks the manual should be re-written? She proceeds from some false assumptions. 1) Nothing bad happened to women because of the feminist movement. 2) How a man should behave is dictated by women. 3) Most men are irreparably broken. Of course HuffPo would publish this trash.
/r/MensRights08/11/10 02:27 PM
2

You were very lucky. It was over quickly and she admitted it publicly. Keep on keepin' on.
/r/MensRights05/11/10 06:04 PM
2

Two very enthusiastic thumbs up. Do you still have to deal with the dirty looks? Are you still self conscious when near the ladies?
/r/MensRights05/11/10 05:35 PM
38

Sue. The only way to make people learn is to punch them in the wallet - institutions especially.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 06:30 PM
4

No.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 06:46 PM
3

What is your damage? Enslaving women is ... I can't find a word to explain how repellant, foolish, and dumb it is all rolled into one.
/r/MensRights21/10/10 01:51 PM
7

HOLY SHIT! Why isn't the unemployed lady locked up for not being able to care for her child?
/r/MensRights21/10/10 01:48 PM
1

The problem is the voices for both are being dominated by the extreme feminists. The shame bullshit needs to be broken. However, the political lobbies are so entrenched I don't expect it to be found peaceably in my lifetime.
/r/MensRights20/10/10 09:29 PM
2

Thus the magic words: in a position of authority You need a voice that "counts" amongst the group to make change.
/r/MensRights20/10/10 09:05 PM
5

A silent majority gives approval to the extremists with their silence. Hence many Muslim clerics from the Horn of Africa through Baghdad and elsewhere denouncing the violence; hence Republicans like Paul Ryan disavowing the kooks. I don't here the voices of women connected with the movement in a position of authority disavowing any of the misandry.
/r/MensRights20/10/10 08:13 PM
-5

The sad part is it paints a pretty accurate picture - it is ceasing to be the exception.
/r/MensRights06/10/10 01:48 AM
3

If you're in the midwest, I'd buy you a beer.
/r/MensRights24/09/10 03:44 AM
1

In this subreddit, that word has extra power, especially with the need to be aware of false allegations. However, even with the flame war ass pipes in this subreddit, I speak to the need for people to fight the good fight. Jack McCoy once said, "It's thou shalt not kill, not thou shall not kill nice people." We need to fight, even for the assholes.
/r/MensRights22/09/10 02:45 AM
3

That comment demeans the horrible reality that is rape. The two are nowhere near each other.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 05:15 PM
1

Wow, just had to use the word Rape.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 03:43 PM
4

Israel v. Palestine. You're not supposed to understand it.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 01:22 PM
1

Lost your momentum right there: The fact that you weren't considered someone capable of taking care of the kid for a week You came tumbling down head first from the high ground.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 07:30 PM
-1

SAHW?
/r/MensRights13/09/10 08:40 PM
-1

Therein is the difference. We both see a problem, we disagree on its degree.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 07:50 PM
-2

Not the divorce rate, the rate of men getting destroyed by divorce.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 07:50 PM
-1

You want those numbers? Go to the front page of /mr, I got them from links on that page, you know, the place where we take everything as gospel. As stated, if we can't trust the links given to and upvoted on /mr, then any argument about marriage becomes a non sequitor or a 'I know one guy who got screwed..."
/r/MensRights13/09/10 06:52 PM
-1

No, i used numbers from sites frequently referenced in this subreddit. If my numbers - taken directly from linked sites - are underestimations, then the problem is the people who tell us how bad it is feeding us bad statistics. Since part of their drive for hits is to show us how bad it is, one would assume their numbers are either accurate, or skewed to make the percentages bigger, not underestimate the problem.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 06:19 PM
-2

Except the numbers for marriage aren't like you state. Also, it depends on what you expect to get out of a marriage.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 06:17 PM
-4

You act like this happens in every case. It's the exception to a well drawn up pre-nup, not the rule.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:52 PM
0

I quote (or paraphrase, memory's rusty) Matt Damon: You can't lose what you don't put in the middle. But then again, you can't win much either.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:51 PM
-5

rough estimate of 52,000,000 men who marry. Using the 5,000,000 men are pulled through the ringer (from another post on /mr today) gives us 5,000,000/52,000,000 ~ .09615 (or about 10%) men who marry who are eventually chewed up by the system.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:51 PM
-5

And that is research that should be done to protect oneself versus the idea of never being married.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 05:08 PM
-6

Sure there is. That's the one problem with this subreddit, we focus on how we are losing the game, not how people win. We see so many articles on men getting taken for everything in the divorce, but none about men who don't get taken for everything. The number I see on websites all over are 5 million American men are being ground up to gristle by the court system. However, with a population of 300,000,000, we need to put that into perspective. I (conservatively) assume half of the country is too…
/r/MensRights13/09/10 04:45 PM
-2

You did. Go ahead and justify it however you want, let the choir of justification float you up. Either way, that attitude broke you. Marriage is death only if you go in unprepared. As informed as one in r/mr should be, you could have very easily prepared and protected yourself.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 03:49 PM
-3

Can, and do, invalidate if signed too close to the wedding (calling it signed under duress) or if people were shown not to be in their right mind. In this case, it seems like a pre-nup would be fine. A pre-nup designed by a divorce lawyer would stand up in court.
/r/MensRights13/09/10 03:45 PM
1

Where do we see the difference between chivalry and courtesy? I'll hold the door for the next person, not cut people off in traffic, let that stuck person merge, smile and say hi to those I pass on the street. These are courtesies not often returned to me. Even when chivalrous, my example isn't followed, and no courtesy returned (I am leaving out the stories explicitly involving women, as I believe the courtesy aspect greater). Society isn't changing. Why shouldn't I learn to play by it's rules?
/r/MensRights03/09/10 02:50 PM
4

I was surprised by the difference in the deomgraphics - 33%! Wholly unbelievable.
/r/MensRights31/08/10 08:58 PM
1

Who cares how they run their subreddit? Let them earn the title feminazi.
/r/MensRights30/08/10 03:06 PM
3

I will agree with that. He had to know of his predilections. I can only assume his sponsors pushed him into the family mold. Whereas it is right for some, it wasn't for him.
/r/MensRights25/08/10 02:51 PM
8

Yes. he. did. If he wanted to screw around, he should have divorced, then slept with the planet.
/r/MensRights25/08/10 02:06 PM
4

Sure, paying lip service to it has to be on the resume to claim to be about equality. However, I'd like to see serious consideration from one of the feminism patron saints, i.e. Dworkin et al.
/r/MensRights10/08/10 09:15 PM
3

Why? Because the silent majority does nothing about the vocal majority they let represent them (by remaining silent).
/r/MensRights10/08/10 09:02 PM
2

No, a poor male would not have gotten the education either.
/r/MensRights10/08/10 08:53 PM
1

The division isn't based on gender. The division is based on socioeconomic status. I can scream this until I am blue in the face. Equality will NEVER exist. As long as any difference exists, equality can't. Someone will always be at a disadvantage.
/r/MensRights10/08/10 06:11 PM
1

It does make sense. You assume that a male peasant of those ages had opportunities more aligned with the local lord than his wife. A lack of equal opportunity is not due to skin color, gender, religion, or orientation. It is about economics. Those with the money (or connections) make the rules. Take Marie Currie. If her cousin isn't running the Museum or Agriculture and Industry (her cousin a scientist of note for studying under Russian master chemist Dmitri Mendeleyev), she doesn't get her acad…
/r/MensRights10/08/10 02:42 PM
1

Not all of them. I've downloaded a corrupted virus PDF from google books. They may have gotten better, but the people at google are not the ones doing the scanning, and I doubt QA checks all of them. If there's a problem,. they wait to be reported. I had a bad experience with Google books, and therefore google books has to re-earn my trust.
/r/MensRights10/08/10 02:20 PM
1

Done trolling yet?
/r/MensRights10/08/10 02:18 PM
-2

Through their privilege? You are in the wrong subreddit. 2x is that way --->>, and feminism is even farther that way.
/r/MensRights10/08/10 02:18 PM
4

"None of you will do anything half so great as any of the men listed here" Speak for yourself. Some of us will have our moment. I fully intend to.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 09:16 PM
5

Katz is U of P Katz, Solomon H., and Fritz Maytag, "Brewing an Ancient Beer," Archaeology, July/August 1991, pp. 24-3 A. Leo Oppenheim was U of C, can't find link again, but you might get there via Miguel Civil, also U of C, The Oriental Institute News and Notes, No. 132, Autumn 1991 Also, a book can be an original source, and google books has been a conduit of issues via a downloaded PDF - I'd read the book. Not via google books.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 09:03 PM
2

Equal opportunity - between any two people in a society is a myth. This isn't about equal opportunity. I state women aren't as helpless as we are led to believe throughout history. I do not defend Medieval Europe, as women of all walks of life were treated worse than some male peasants. However, Medieval Europe is not the span and scope of world geography and history.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 08:41 PM
5

None of this is common knowledge. The sky is blue is common knowledge. Will Ferell is not funny is common knowledge. Politicians are self serving is common knowledge. Computers use Keyboards and mice is common knowledge, but the fact that the current generation of keyboards all hail from one design at IBM isn't.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 08:38 PM
0

I don't drink beer, and could not care less who invented it. I didn't click on the google book link - I prefer original sources. there were no books to link, only research papers. If you really want to see the papers, let me know and I shall link them for you within 48 hours.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 08:36 PM
2

Speaking just of Chinese history, several dynasties had a Matriarchal bent, and women could break the traditional cultural mold. If you are interested in the books, message me, they are on my shelf at home.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:44 PM
7

I showed you my source (I assume an Ivy League school along with one of the most historically significant computer companies would be reputable enough). Yours?
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:42 PM
2

I expect that attitude from you every time 2X goes on a women are great spree, or any other subreddit specific to race, gender, orientation, religion, culture, or subculture tries to toot the horn of the history of it's members. You know, to avoid hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:39 PM
3

Not ignorant at all. I was pointing out the ignorance in your word choice, the axiom that an absolute (like all, never etc) only shows a built in bias, as you would not even CONSIDER the possibility of a man brewing. Hunter/Gatherer/Agrarian societies had roles, and women did most of the brewing, but reviewing works from the Universities of Pennsylvania and Chicago, this work in pre-Mesopotamia Sumeria show that this work wasn't exclusively for women. I'll take published researchers over google …
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:37 PM
5

Your reference of the compiler of the first machine language in the 1940's would sure come as one hell of a surprise to Herman Hollerith. http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/census-tabulator.html
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:25 PM
2

Tied my only opponent's feet together? I was under the impression that women had contributed since the dawn of time, especially based on readings of scientific achievement in the Middle East and Asia. So whose feet were tied together? Or are we only considering a brief subset of geography/history for the sake of a red herring?
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:22 PM
3

Every message in the media is how I'm the root of all evil for being a white male from "affluence." I have accomplished what I have in spite of this handicap - no specialty scholarships for me specifically because of gender and skin pigmentation. I earn my way in life working very damn hard while I'm told I'm getting "favorable treatment" and that I should get an unfair shake because someone didn't work as hard as me, and it's Bullshit.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:20 PM
5

... all? Disagree. Be careful about "where terms come from..." as that sounds a lot like how does a stereotype become a stereotype. Even 'back in the day' everything wasn't set in stone (or iron, or bronze, depending).
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:12 PM
1

Except everyone of a group that isn't of the white/male/English derivative will claim successes of ancestors as their victories of what they can achieve, that their heritage is something to be proud of. If everyone else can, why can't I?
/r/MensRights09/08/10 07:10 PM
2

It's not silly. What's silly is the trivialization of men. If it takes a thread like this to remind us of our pride, that we have been and are capable of so much despite with feminists and the MSM tell us then it is important.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 04:35 PM
2

Once again reddiquette downvote - this thread is about invention, not production.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 02:17 PM
3

The downvotes aren't a lack of knowledge, but adherence to reddiquette - you add nothing to this thread's conversation.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 02:14 PM
1

Except we're not supposed to be proud of our accomplishments. I am a white male of English descent, and am I not allowed to take ANY pride in my ancestor's accomplishments simply because they were male/white/English? The authors of the Magna Carta and U.S. Constitution - my heroes.
/r/MensRights09/08/10 02:12 PM
2

Define rare. No sample size is perfect, but watching the MainStream Media the cheating husband gets far more coverage (Oprah, Maury, et al) than the cheating wife. Plus, when a wife cheats, people try to find cause. No one here who is serious ever comes out and would question why he left his wife and took his kids. He will get reamed in court for custodial interference - especially in Florida. An attack like this reeks of trolling - whether intended or not.
/r/MensRights05/08/10 07:56 PM
14

If you believe a double standard exists, please cite where in /mr you see the supporters of rights for men willing to protect or stand behind a guy like the one in the referenced article.
/r/MensRights05/08/10 05:55 PM
1

God be with you for choosing correctly. Lesson learned, damage done.
/r/MensRights29/07/10 09:24 PM
18

Fucking Wisconsin. I can't believe you won in this state. I can't imagine ever getting married here.
/r/MensRights29/07/10 07:53 PM
1

Good sir, SHE THREATENED TO KILL YOU. GET OUT, GET OUT NOW. If you are in SE WI I can help.
/r/MensRights14/07/10 04:31 PM
16

I am forced to agree. If there is a sex offender registry, there should be a registry for those who cry wolf, because we (society) should be protected. And no, Anonymous should not get involved.
/r/MensRights30/06/10 08:58 PM
1

The doctor's issue is about causing pain, not lowering rape statistics. She had said in her research "some" men (no numerical value given) would not rape if they knew these were out there. However, in the case of a violent act like rape, with this attached to the perpetrator who now knows he will end up doing time, it's in the rapist's best interest to kill the victim, so as to not leave a witness. This will only make things worse. I am all about lowering incidences of rape. The target point sho…
/r/MensRights21/06/10 05:09 PM
3

It will always be offensive. If they haven't cheated, this (for them) is a huge breach of trust. If they have cheated, they're offended you'd have the gall to call them on it in front of the doctors and nurses. Don't ask them for the paternity test. Ask the doctor.
/r/MensRights04/06/10 02:33 PM
10

Still hungry troll? Hmmm? I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt, and listen to what she has to say. If her actions prove otherwise, I'll deal with it then, champ.
/r/MensRights25/05/10 06:11 PM
10

Nope, took you less than five minutes to prove your a troll. Maybe, just maybe, having more women in Mens rights is a very good thing.
/r/MensRights25/05/10 05:26 PM
1

No, a constitutional right to free speech means the government has no right. However, if we don't respect the speech of others (i.e. let them post and troll) we become worse than the trolls themselves. Not only does this lead to groupthink, but it puts us more high and mighty than the evil we stand against.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 07:33 PM
-5

The one thing that stands MensRights out from feminism or XX is that we tolerate free speech, whereas they go on victimattack. I agree with papadelicious - if we censor, then we are worse than the feminazis we are censoring.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 02:28 PM
2

We see it differently in practice. I live in Wisconsin, and my peers (those I deal with on a regular basis) fall into the 18-35 demographic, with about 90%+ of my clients being male (hobby shop owner). I work in a trendy area in my city, it's known as where the idealists go when they see what the real world is really like but want to keep their trendy nature. There has been a definite schism in the feminists I've dealt with (they need to play games too - board games et al). Other than acting sup…
/r/MensRights08/03/10 05:26 PM
1

I believe the phrase is "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." I then quote Bill Murray,"Who ... wants ... flies?" The problem there is with the silent majority. Those who are the most vocal are the believers, they who disagree with any point (rational or otherwise) made against their belief structure. The most downvotes go against the flamers or those who can not defend their position or try to wish wash it.
/r/MensRights08/03/10 06:42 AM
0

Don't be lazy enough to let the iPhone do the work for either of you.
/r/MensRights20/12/09 07:20 AM
9

Communism, in its most basic, idealistic form, is equality. Dismissing someone based on their belief in feminism is NOT sexism, as belief in an ism on either side of the divide is sexism in and of itself. The scales will never balance. Check out /r/science on the laws of entropy for extended explanation. Change is constant. The same reason I think practicing feminists are full of excrement is the same reason many feminists think I lived a life full of privilege. The grass is greener elsewhere, a…
/r/MensRights20/12/09 07:19 AM
2

Actually, I meant diad, (per google/define: A sequence of two (different) monomers in a polymer), the principle of two things put together acting in a specific pattern every time. But, your definition was correct, though I prefer the Middle Eastern one to the British one.
/r/MensRights02/11/09 05:11 AM
8

This post is built on broad generalizations. However, how do stereotypes and broad generalizations come into being? However, I am forced to agree with one of the underlying principles. The traditional diadem has changed. Traditionally, it costs a man much more to get into a relationship: Can I buy you a drink, let me take you to dinner, I got you some flowers. These are expected on different levels, and the argument from the ladies is this lets them know the man thinks they're worth it. However,…
/r/MensRights29/10/09 12:39 AM
2

Same reason Islam is not respected in America.
/r/MensRights11/10/09 05:20 AM
2

I have found (specifically as has happened to friends and family) that the first strike method is always upheld for a woman, and that - pointed out in 1997 by a Harvard study and not changed since - the Wisconsin maxim for two unemployed parents is give the mother welfare and the father jail time. I will neither have sex where a child can be conceived nor get married as long as I live in Wisconsin. I have too much to lose - property, freedom, and future.
/r/MensRights11/10/09 05:19 AM
5

I have heard this argument from a woman I was seeing (thank all that is sacred and holy) albeit briefly. She has a PhD in Neonatal Nursing Care, training the next generation of nurses. This tripe is commonplace in major universities. Quite honestly, it's commentary like this that have me too afraid to ever get involved with any woman (devastating to a heterosexual male) because I have too much to lose, especially in a state like Wisconsin. Honest and truly, read the entire blog post. Sun Tsu, Ar…
/r/MensRights09/10/09 04:26 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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