TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ZerefGodslayer Archive

View 3 posts and 174 comments by ZerefGodslayer 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)
2

I want to apologize for my late answer, but I had quite a stressful time and couldn't take time earlier. But I was really delighted that you answered as I am not used to it on reddit. ​ To put it bluntly, the system was designed a long time ago by an exclusive group of elite people, none of whom were women or minorities. ​ There is our first disconnect. I don't think that is actually important as of today. Just because someone is not your gender or ethnic group, doesn't mean that they can't act …
/r/MensRights23/01/19 01:02 AM
1

I just think it's unfortunate how the current economic system makes investing resources into a family a bad thing. Usually, if one parent stays at home there are one of 2 reasons: 1) the other parent earns enough and it's earning potential has more potential to rise 2) if the stay at home parent would work, child care would cost a similar amount as the wage of that person Sometimes this is accompanied with a desire to raise the children or to spend more time with them. ​ Women are economically p…
/r/MensRights01/12/18 10:31 PM
1

I can't agree that the only reason people work is for themselves. It seems a little weird to say that someone spends 8 hours a day working a job they hate because it's important only to them, and to no one else in society. Work is an essential part of self-fulfillment because it makes you relevant to society, it makes you necessary for its good function, and societal recognition is a pillar of self-worth. Sure, there is always some work that is only beneficial to the person who does it, but in t…
/r/MensRights28/11/18 11:48 AM
1

When you work a job, you benefit society three times — by working a necessary labour, and second by contributing to taxes with your salary. You can convert the rest of your salary into necessary goods (home, food, heat, etc) or recreational goods for your own pleasure and enjoyment, which it turns out contributes right back to society by paying a company to pay their employees. That’s a healthy cycle. You don't work to benefit society. You work to survive and benefit yourself. The benefit to soc…
/r/MensRights25/11/18 11:26 PM
7

Don’t you think it would be nicer for everyone if the market considered raising a family as just as integral to the good function of society as working a job? The thing is, if one parent is working and the other one stays at home to raise the children/to do housework the "working parent" employs the "at home parent" for their work and pays with housing, food, etc in most cases. "The market" already considers it as a job, because that Person is being paid.
/r/MensRights25/11/18 04:28 PM
1

I think his source is RAINN. AT least they have similar numbers. Of 1000 rapes only 350 or so are reported (I still don't know how they 'calculated' this) and only 6 lead to a conviction.
/r/MensRights15/07/18 04:57 PM
11

Tbh I would've liked to have sex with her at that age (also now) and I think the problem here is not su much the age but that a) the teacher clearly in a position of power to the pupils and b) the double standard for male teachers. Also how stupid is the post? How about her (also) taking responsibility for her actions? You know like not fucking her students, that's what I would call responsible action as she quite sure knew it was illegal. Edit: But honestly if the students are 16-18 or so I don…
/r/MensRights09/07/18 06:08 PM
1

Well, then you met someone who knows damn well that those are men's rights issues but, doesn't want to admit it.
/r/MensRights06/07/18 05:07 PM
4

I would feel shitty, but he 'father' is the victim and the mother the culprit. Is is her fault.
/r/MensRights06/07/18 11:37 AM
14

Puh, someone can't read
/r/MensRights30/06/18 09:21 AM
2

Just WTF..
/r/MensRights29/06/18 08:13 PM
2

First of all that's a generalization and it's wrong. As it would be wrong to say "teach black people not to steal" or "teach muslims not to bomb". So it should not be "teach men not to rape" but "teach (male)* rapist not to rape" which is kinda just as effective as to "teach murderers not to murder". In other words this is not effective and most likely an argument made in bad faith. *As we all know and are told numerous times, only men are capable of rape...
/r/MensRights20/06/18 04:32 PM
10

Well, I probably will get some downvotes for this, but I think some kind of women's rights movement is still needed as women also still face issues. The thing is feminism has created or worsened male issues. I think we don't need feminism in first world countries because it is destructive and divisive and hypocritical. But we still Nerd gender advocacy groups.
/r/MensRights11/06/18 09:55 AM
11

That is not really true. I know you want to say that ruling queens were statistically more likely to wage war and gain new territories than ruling kings, which is true as far as I know. But " all queens in history waged more wars with far more deaths than kings " is false.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 05:24 PM
1

I don't think there exist 2 perfectly equal candidates. Bit of they are perfectly equal I would take the younger one, more social or throw a coin.
/r/MensRights08/06/18 10:26 AM
2

95 per cent of the fatalities were caused by men and 60 per cent of those were white men. Doesn't that men that while men are overpresented white men are unterpresented in that group?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 10:43 AM
5

Just gonna drop this article I found some time ago https://www.economist.com/christmas-specials/2017/12/19/the-link-between-polygamy-and-war
/r/MensRights20/05/18 03:58 PM
14

I'd rather say that it doesn't matter what gender/races or whatever holds any office. What is important is that: everyone has the same rights (voting for men is bound to conscription) equality before the law (men face higher sentences than women and the "gender Gap" in sentences is bigger then the "race gap") equal pay for the same work (that is law in nearly all western countries) kinda equal opportunity in education (yound boys have no male role models, etc) If it's beneficial to society or no…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 03:12 PM
10

Between what things? Between gender equality and a strong economy/high quality of life? First off I wouldn't say that "gender equality" lead Norway and sweden to be very strong economies. Norway is a little country with huge oil reserves and Sweden got very rich during their "laissez-faire" capitalism until 1950. So some aspects yes, in others no. If the overall population is better educated and both genders are in the working force, this will at the very least drive labour costs down and busine…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 02:53 PM
20

The OP posted an articlen and I answered some of it. Just gonna post it as an own comment for more visibility. Hi there thanks for your response and no problem! www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/04/the-us-gender-gap-in-5-charts Hope that helps. So I read most of that and I'm just gonna quote some parts. According to data taken from the US Census Bureau, the average gender pay gap in the United States is around 21%, meaning that, on average, a woman earns 21% less than her male counterpart. That gap ca…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 02:31 PM
5

So I read most of that and I'm just gonna quote some parts. According to data taken from the US Census Bureau, the average gender pay gap in the United States is around 21%, meaning that, on average, a woman earns 21% less than her male counterpart. That gap can be larger or smaller depending on the state someone lives in. meaning that, on average, a woman earns 21% less than her male counterpart. First off, it's not an pay gap. It's an earnings gap. Second, that doesn't mean that. It means that…
/r/MensRights15/05/18 02:28 PM
7

"So you are admiting that feminism is a female supremacist movement and not an egalitarian movement?" Works quite often, but that's kinda your point A, while also gives the other party burden of proof why those policies would be for equal rights.
/r/MensRights01/05/18 04:06 PM
82

Do you guys have the link to the study that if men were treated as women in the justice system there would be around 80% less male inmates?
/r/MensRights27/04/18 10:51 AM
2

It allows capital punishment for anyone convicted of raping children under the age of 12. Is the title wrong? But a completely objective look on that is that rape victims under 12 will be more likely to be killed as that lowers the chance to be caught. I am not gonna judge what's better, but one have to keep that in mind. Minimum prison sentences for rape against girls under the age of 16 and women have also been raised. Yeah, I've seen that part.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 11:55 AM
20

That is probably the reason why there are so few female CEO's /s
/r/MensRights18/04/18 01:37 AM
3

I agree that men in general are not unconditionally loved. But I also think that's the case for most women, children, or dogs. But have you looked where this was also posted and read the comments? Those comments are fucking weird
/r/MensRights16/04/18 02:34 PM
34

No they push it so real discrimination engulfes and they can push laws against that
/r/MensRights29/03/18 11:44 AM
2

then they just fucked every couple where the woman is older than the man. Not gonna defend that policy, but that case is far more unlikely than the reverse
/r/MensRights22/03/18 11:04 PM
3

I meant also concerning AA. With that little change you could easily throw away every accusations of racism and sexism.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 11:03 PM
3

So why not make socio economic class the variable you want to discriminate instead of gender/race?
/r/MensRights22/03/18 06:24 PM
19

Actually the reasoning behind it was that wifes were in general a few years younger than their husbands and they wanted it so that both can retire at nearly the same time. Well, that the official statement in mots countries. But why force one half of the population to subsidize the other because of their gender? WTF
/r/MensRights22/03/18 06:20 PM
3

verboten What's up with this weird trend to just throw german words into an english comment?
/r/MensRights10/03/18 09:23 PM
40

Why firefox?
/r/MensRights07/03/18 10:19 PM
12

Well, I really am bitter that we don't have similar free speech laws as the USA. Edit: I'm not saying that it is ok to do it, but there shouldn't really be punishment for saying anything.
/r/MensRights06/03/18 10:02 PM
1

-I know my teacher will bring up the fact that more women study at university than men, and somehow are paid less, and I'd like to attack that, too. Look at statistics for your country for wage by age and gender. You will probably find that young women onr average will earn more than young men on average.
/r/MensRights06/03/18 12:29 AM
2

So she stated that 80% of all DV victims are female. We know that it's less, but with her logic why aren't 20% of the funding for DV centers going to those for men?
/r/MensRights03/03/18 03:23 PM
5

I'll be honest, I would have liked it to have sex swith her at that age or even now. But that doesn't change the fact that she showed predatory behaviour and should be punished as stated by law.
/r/MensRights01/03/18 11:36 AM
1

You got a source on that? I don't thinkk´you are wrong, but I always want a source on such topics.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 01:27 PM
2

Quick google search and Kevin Johnson is Starbucks' CEO right now. I was there only once in my life, but I can't see that as a reason, because she isn't the CEO anymore. Edit: She was never the CEO, but is the acting COO right now. Now that's a reason to boycott starbucks
/r/MensRights21/02/18 12:27 AM
1

Well the nuclear familiy has on average the best outcomes as far as I know. most mother's who do this do it due to lack of support that should have been provided by the other family members, but overworked fathers and isolation from extended family caused by the nuclear family model lead to children being solely dependent on their mother. So people who live under constant stress but dont get help from society (meant as people around them) are more likely to have a mental health issue? I might se…
/r/MensRights19/02/18 10:48 AM
3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide https://web.archive.org/web/20120414214219/http://www.publications.villanova.edu/Concept/2005/Filicide.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2922347/ Actually it seems that I was wrong. Women are just more likely to commit neonaticide (in the first 24 hours) and infanticide (in the first year). And please understand, that I wanted to highlight the hypocrisy and not blame all women.
/r/MensRights19/02/18 10:45 AM
30

Wait wait 'Men also go through hormonal changes. Yet the majority of people killing their own children are female. This isn't about hormonal changes.' Am I doing it correctly?
/r/MensRights19/02/18 12:34 AM
11

The point of the post is to say that if a man impregnates a women he has no other choice than paying for the child while women have many choices along the way. I'm not talking about abortion, but about adoption and or giving it to an orphany. Both those things are not possible for men (at least not without the consent of the mother). Can you explain to me why women should have more choices in that situation than men?
/r/MensRights11/02/18 03:05 AM
1

I really don't see that problem with such offers. I mean if it really annoys me, I won't go and that bar just missed $15.
/r/MensRights02/02/18 11:06 PM
9

I know that. I just wanted to note that not everything under 18 is peodphilia. Can't understand the downvotes though
/r/MensRights26/01/18 05:08 AM
1

I agree that weed should be legal. But how can you be so sure that there is no victim if a female teacher sleeps with a teenage boy? I probably would have slept with my hot teachers a few years ago, if I had the chance. Doesn't mean I can decide for everyone. You want it legal? Then lower the age of consent for boys and accept all other consequences because of that. If you are not fine with that, then punish breaking the law.
/r/MensRights26/01/18 04:21 AM
5

There are too possibilities. Either punish them for the crime they do or lower the age of consent for boys. Everything else is hypocrisy. Also good luck lowering the age of consent while not sounding like a sexual predator.
/r/MensRights26/01/18 03:57 AM
0

Technically it's still not pedophilia. It's either hebepilia (pubescent) or ephebophilia (adolescents).
/r/MensRights26/01/18 03:48 AM
1

Meh tradcons give men rewards for the burden they bear
/r/MensRights25/01/18 04:20 PM
1

Well, now the budget cut seems deserved
/r/MensRights24/01/18 05:51 PM
21

Just a quick question: are soldiers that died in war also counted as 'workplace deaths'?
/r/MensRights21/01/18 04:35 AM
1

What kind of regulations? Tax increases for whom? Basic income won't be feasible over many generations. The whole problem is, that fair is subjectiv and not objectiv. What's fair to me isn't fair to you.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/18 06:17 PM
0

You can't go back into the past. It's now. What do you suggest? Killing them, so other's take their place. Nationalizing their industies so government officials and their friends take their place? Taxing them in a way they can dodge? Taxing Corporations more? Until the new tax bill Corporations tax in the was/is one of the highe st in the woeld. I would start with not bailing them out if they.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/18 06:02 PM
0

What do you suggest? You can't equalize luck. I can't think of a fairer indication for the reward of work than value added. Maybe you could equalize oppurtunity more, but that's also not completely possible.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/18 05:52 PM
0

Probably not, but can easily say that he provided 400x more value than normal workers.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/18 05:24 PM
1

But if for so long men take up for most of the crime rate, the penalties will become more severely. But why should someone be stronger punished because others in the same demographic group commit more crimes?
/r/MensRights13/01/18 11:31 PM
0

And this collectivist thinking is THE problem
/r/MensRights13/01/18 09:28 PM
2

So because blacks as a group commit more crimes than whites they should be punished harsher? That's exactly what you are saying....
/r/MensRights13/01/18 05:53 PM
1

So where is the difference if I say 'all blacks are...' or 'all asians are...'?
/r/MensRights09/01/18 02:25 PM
1

No that is not a protection, it is a necessity. If men think that allowing women time off for being pregnant is men doing women a special favour, it shows the mentality of men.!! Ah the usual women deserve more because they are women. That is true for pregnancy but why for maternl leave? Also you said men had more protections, I proved you wrong and now you are moving the goalpost? Great! Yikes Men are so self important and so self concerned they can't see anything outside of their own androcent…
/r/MensRights07/01/18 08:11 PM
1

Yeah The number of American troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq between 2001 and 2012 was 6,488. The number of American women who were murdered by current or ex male partners during that time was 11,766. That's nearly double the amount of casualties lost during war. IF that number is true I only get about 20 per week. But where is your source?
/r/MensRights05/01/18 08:19 PM
1

men in America murder an astounding 50 women per week Do you have a source for that?
/r/MensRights05/01/18 06:55 PM
2

89% of the unpaid work force and women with families spend the vast majority of their income on their families What income if they are unpaid? How can they even afford to live if they are unpaid? Unfortunately women just don't have the same protections as men when it comes to their careers You know, that women have more protections than men like pregnancy protection and maternal leave, right? as men are not willing to relinquish theirs careers to end up ultimately at their wives financial mercy.…
/r/MensRights05/01/18 06:30 PM
2

the fact is many people are involved and employed by it because of women's good nature You are missing the point. The money would have been spent anyway. The only difference with spending their (husband's) money for cards is who is employed, not if.
/r/MensRights05/01/18 12:31 PM
2

It also employs many and keeps the economy going in more ways than one. Ah, the famous "A broken window is good for the economy" fallacy. It's not like that money would have been spent otherwise. It would have been burnt if it were not for those cards.
/r/MensRights05/01/18 03:06 AM
10

Meh, if a women only wants me when she is settling down I don't want her. She is basically saying that I wasn't good enough for her in her prime. That's not something I would call flattering. But if that's not the case it is fine, but never flattering.
/r/MensRights29/12/17 01:57 PM
1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty
/r/MensRights28/12/17 12:41 AM
1

Not authoritarian. Atleast there we agree. We don't know because we have never seen a socialist country that wasn't intentionally destroyed. But wouldn't that go on forever or until the capitalist nations are meaningless? We do have Scandavian capitalism to look at, they use many policies that would be considered socialist in the US. Funny, because feminism is strongly represented there, just saying. Yeah there is a really loose definition of socialism in the USn and it gives socialism way too m…
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:19 PM
1

So I think the question you should ask is, why are the capitalist information sources that say over and over that it never worked, leaving out the part where they did their best to stop it working? I have to say that I'm discussing on the hypothesis, that everything you say is correct, even if I disagree. What kind of socialism are you reffering to? High taxes and the state provides everything to the population (the utterly bullshit version) or the worker's ownership of businesses? I assume that…
/r/MensRights27/12/17 05:18 PM
1

It consumes more than it produces. It cannot survive without other nations. The US economy could easily produce enough food if it's necessary. It's just doesn't do it because the demand isn't high enough becasue import is possible.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 05:07 PM
1

Yeah, the US deemed all socialist countries the enemy and sabotaged them. So socialism can not work until the US collapses? It is, it sabotaged and destroyed socialist economies so it could take control of their natural resources and gain entrance into their markets. That's not dependency. That's taking by force.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 05:02 PM
1

First I want to note, that that isn't my downvote. While I don't deny the possibility that that could happen it don't see it as realistic. BuT as of now every real world example failed extremely. You can give the responibilty to capitalistic countries or not (which I don't). I see it as a problem in the system. But that doesn't even matter. If it's really the capitalistic countries that are suppressing socialism, it will not work until these capitalistic countries fall apart.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 05:00 PM
1

The revolution in Russia, overthrew the enemies of the US in russia. Well, they were also deemed the enemy, so same difference. It took 100s of years of importing, trade and setting up. While it was never dependant on socialist/communist countries.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 04:53 PM
1

The US depends on slave labour, puppet dictator regimes, wars, murder and theft all over the world. It uses those for proftis, not for survival. It isn't dependant on them. Also slave labour? Do you mean like companies or Banladesh or what do you refer to? And sorry I made a mistake. I meant to say it is self-sufficient in the meaning that it doesn't need help from other nations.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 04:51 PM
1

So they are against the exploitation of the working class, but still want the advantages of it? That's supporting what they are against. It's not really consistent.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 04:48 PM
1

The other countries refused, so a decade or so down the line when the next famine struck, its was devastating, then capitalist countries agreed to trade modern equipment for grain and not gold when the people were starving. All countries need not to be ganged up on and not have economic warfare waged against them. You are saying that the US (nearly the only country that wasn't devastated in boths WWs) didn't want to help their enemies? SHOCKING! If it was the other way around, the majority socia…
/r/MensRights27/12/17 03:45 PM
1

Hey, you don't have to convince me that sanctions mostly hit the non ruling class and not the ruling class. But the question is, if socialists/communists see capitalism as the exploitation of the working class, why do they even WANT to trade with those countries, as they would partake in that exploitation.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 03:39 PM
1

If you can produce it cheaper so undercutting is viable, why do you need products from capitalistic countries?
/r/MensRights27/12/17 02:34 PM
0

The thing is, if capitalism is oppressing and exploiting the working class, then any nation trading with them is also doing it by proxy. They are basically doing what they condemn.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 02:20 PM
2

Won't work. The woman will say she signed it under duress because she thought she couldn't have sex without it. Just like marriage. But she also didn't consent so it's rape.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 02:06 PM
0

But why do communist and socialist countries help from the evil capitalist countries?
/r/MensRights27/12/17 01:26 PM
0

Yeah just look how good the war on poverty worked in the US
/r/MensRights27/12/17 01:24 PM
2

But not all female prisoners are serving time for a victimless crime.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 07:17 PM
0

Didn't say I don't believe it, just that I never heard it, or better thought of it. Also to the last part, military is like that too as far as I know. Women have to pass easier physical entrance test.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 06:26 PM
2

I never read “harder“, just longer and with less absent days. Also men are less risky to hire because they have no extra protection because of their gender. And somehow that's mysogonistic...
/r/MensRights24/12/17 05:58 PM
1

It doesn't
/r/MensRights24/12/17 05:49 PM
4

So why not just take the prison sentence away from nonviolent crimes? Would help many black men in prison
/r/MensRights24/12/17 05:43 PM
1

Thanks, that was exactly what I was looking for. But doesn't that say, that it's still legal?
/r/MensRights19/12/17 03:32 PM
5

The comments there give me hope
/r/MensRights18/12/17 05:10 PM
2

gay couples (specifically men, not lesbian women) outperform hetero couples in child outcomes. then comes single fathers and lesbian couples after hetero couples. Basically just that. What's the reason? Because I think the main reason is that gay couples are "better" is that they have to adopt, which is kinda expensive. So they are more likely to be rich and that's the main reason why their children have better results. Also the claim that single fathers have better results than single mothers. …
/r/MensRights11/12/17 03:57 PM
0

You got any sources for those claims?
/r/MensRights10/12/17 01:07 PM
1

Tribes don't really have a concept of property and selfishness. They are group surviving together. The population is way too big for that. Its regulation of economy though. It's regulated, but without force. That individuum isn't entitled to their attention.
/r/MensRights03/12/17 09:02 PM
1

And that's why I don't call myself a libertarian. I'm not against all form of taxes,in general just against income tax, as it is akin to slavery to me (yeah I know, the conditions are way better). And some taxes that distort the market heavily. But I'm not against a capital gains tax or if dividends would be taxed separately as example.
/r/MensRights03/12/17 08:59 PM
1

I explained that foreign aid is a joke. And I think what I wrote implied that were countries like Africa not being systematically drained of their resources by western capitalist interests, there would be no need for this aid in the first place. So we both agree we should stop exploiting them, nice. Not so easy to fund when private interests are controlling all the wealth and paying little to no tax. Nationalized business keeps money in the economy, provides better paid jobs with more security, …
/r/MensRights03/12/17 08:33 PM
1

Ok, but wouldn't that individual have a right to keep his property? It's a bit blurred because ownership over hunted animals can be a difficult topic. But if that were fruits, that he grew on his field and everyone on the tribe agreed that it's his field and the only food in the village, what right do those people have to take it away? But I'm totally fine with that person becoming an outcast, as long he isn't attacked directly.
/r/MensRights03/12/17 08:27 PM
1

African countries are either colonized by western countries or they have their " independence". Which means that western capitalist interests and the elite of those countries are stealing all the wealth and resources, while putting little to no tax back in. Then there is destabilization of non compliant countries, economic warfare, refusal of credit, starting wars, bombing, drone strikes, arming rebels and extremists, making food shortages worse, creating food shortages, putting puppet dictators…
/r/MensRights03/12/17 07:43 PM
1

I don't understand your analogy How would that individual sell the food if it belongs to the whole tribe? If it belongs to that individual what moral right would the tribe hqve to forbid him to sell his property?
/r/MensRights03/12/17 07:33 PM
1

I meant foreign aid as most western nations send to many african countries as food or money for infrastructure etc If you are for the nationalization of an industry so the money stays in that economy, are you against foreign aid? What happens when resources run out? We live in a crazy system that consumes more than the planet can sustain. There will have to be something new. I didn't mean it like that. If you nationalize oil to fund social programs, what will happen when you run out of oil? How …
/r/MensRights02/12/17 11:32 PM
1

A free market is basically just the combinaion of all voluntary tradings between 2 consenting parties without the interference of a third party. I don't really see a problem with that.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 11:26 PM
1

Hey we found a common point. Transparency should be mandated or in some other kind “enforced“ (not necessarily by law). Ok, I have to restate my point. Free market leads to better quality if consumers want better quality. I don't know the exact stats of every country, but it can be (and is as far as I know) true that the health of the population in the US is worse. The thing is, the quality is better in the US. If you have, access
/r/MensRights02/12/17 09:34 PM
1

Its much more profitable for the country to have nationalized oil production that keeps the money in the economy along with strict environmental protection laws. That's exactly why Norway is so rich. There are just 2 problems: not every country has natural ressources at some point there won't be any reserves, what then? Also another question for you. If you want to nationalize oil, what is your stance on foreign aid?
/r/MensRights02/12/17 09:25 PM
1

The problem of food there are 2 things that could be seen as “quality“: taste and healthiness. It's the cosumer's choice what they want the companies to “improve“
/r/MensRights02/12/17 09:10 PM
1

What exactly do you mean by food standard?
/r/MensRights02/12/17 09:05 PM
1

So you think competition doesn't lead to efficiency and better quality? I could understand if you were concerned about access/affordability but it ist outright denial of reality if you think a free market leads to worse quality
/r/MensRights02/12/17 08:52 PM
1

Universal healthcare in germany -> not really true, you have co-pays. Also for those publicly insured the wait times are longer than in the US. Not as dramatic as you see on the media, but it's still longer. Also here the quality isn't as good as in the US. Education? There is much displeasure about the education system in germany. Yeah, it's affordable, but again quality and now also access suffers because of it. The only reason Germany profited is because it was alrewdy strong and the crisis m…
/r/MensRights02/12/17 02:10 PM
1

To what legislation are you reffering? Haven't heard about it.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 01:52 PM
2

Honestly I doubt that. But even if that's true military disportortionately benefits men as there are way more men than women in the military. The same for tax breaks for the super wealthy. You can see it as a problem, but I really don't see why you are debating that on a men's right subreddit as it doesn't disportionately hurts men and a big welfare state does, as is proven right now.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 01:51 PM
2

You know that Germany and the scandinavian countries you listed as good examples are rather high in that list, right? You might see that a free market hurts the general population, but I can't see how men are hurt more. So why make it a gender issue? Setting up economies to benefit the top at the expense of average people is not a good way to run things. That's not a result of a free market. In a really free market, if a company sets it's prices too high investors will see an oppurtinity and sta…
/r/MensRights30/11/17 11:32 AM
2

It's "hurting" men because men are the big funders and women the big benefiters. If as example both genders would have their own system, men would be better off. I'm not advocating for that, but it's obvious that men are used as an ATM for government funding. And it would only get worse if government spending increases.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 11:09 AM
1

I don't know about the property markets but the regulations for the banks are given by the EZB, so they are the same in every Euro-country.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 11:05 AM
1

You might want to look into the economic freedommof those countries. Spain and Greece are more regulated than Germany. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Freedom_of_the_World http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
/r/MensRights29/11/17 09:34 PM
2

Ok now I would like you to explain me how a giant jobcenter like the military industry, which is mainly populated by men, is hurting men? I mean yeah, I can understand if someone wants to cut funding, but that's really the wrong premise. And safety nets would be for everyone, not exclusevely for men. So how does the absence hurt men more than women. I mean safety nets are important to some degree but why make it a gender issue?
/r/MensRights29/11/17 09:29 PM
1

Lol, nearly every country felt it. It just that the strong economies recovered way faster than the ones that were weak even before the crisis.
/r/MensRights29/11/17 03:18 PM
2

And military spending is costs far, far more than the welfare state helping poor people and creating jobs. Lol, you should really look into federal spending. You could argue that military spending is too high, but by no means is it higher than welfare spending. Yeah welfare state can have advantages. Doesn't change the fact that men get less than they pay on average.
/r/MensRights29/11/17 03:17 PM
2

Wait, you think the european countries hardly felt the crisis? Most countries are still highly in debt. And a bubble popping is normal. As soon a bubble is formed regulations only move the point to the future or limits the damage. That's why bubbles should be prevented. And it wasn't created through small government. I am not saying that a free market helps men. A free market doesn't care about your gender or race. It cares about your worth. It doesn't hurt men more than anyone else. A big welfa…
/r/MensRights29/11/17 02:45 PM
2

As a result of that the economy crashed harder in 2008 and men suffered disproportionately from that too. I don't even know where to start... Yeah you could argue that the popping of the housing bubble is because of too much deregulation. Or you could look a bit further and ask what created the housing bubble in the first place. I.e. mandated loans, i.e. overreach of the government, i.e. the opposite of a small government... But I don't know what you even propose if you think voting right hurts …
/r/MensRights29/11/17 01:43 PM
2

I don't know what you want to say but if you mean with economic hardships that the welfare state isn't big enough I have to remind you that men are paying a way bigger part to the state.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 08:14 PM
2

My point is that those men with a IQ of <85 or somewhere there tend to die young so those men alive have a higher average IQ.
/r/MensRights21/11/17 08:39 PM
3

Honestly I doubt that the average woman is smarter than the average man. You are right, men are both smarter and dumber than the average woman and even have nearly the same, median IQ. The thing is stupid people tend to die earlier.
/r/MensRights21/11/17 04:31 PM
1

Are women even 40% of the workforce?
/r/MensRights20/11/17 10:32 PM
1

Most people I know don't know that about me. I don't talk about that unless asked or if I hear blatant feminist lies.
/r/MensRights14/11/17 11:16 AM
1

It's basically "being forced to work together is bad" if you want a simple answer
/r/MensRights14/11/17 10:43 AM
1

I haven't read much there. I just saw lonely, angry men the few times I read something there / about them. But I don't even care about that because reddit can decide what it wants. I'm just against this reasoning. Ps: do you really think that ban changed anything? Because they will only regroup on another website.
/r/MensRights09/11/17 12:36 PM
1

That is the theory behind parking fines, putting criminals in jail, and medical deregistration Yeah, there the individual did something that can justify their punishment. But it can be justified with 'for the greater good'. But also for their behaviour. Yesterday I was way too harsh. My point is, that no one should justify something with it being for the 'greater good'. If it really is a moral action it can be justified with a specification.
/r/MensRights09/11/17 10:43 AM
2

If the individual did not show in any way that he/she is a danger apart from owning a gun, that's immoral. If the individual did show it in any way apart from owning a gun, that's fine. The justification isn't for the 'greater good', while it can be used, there is a specification to it. That that individual showed with their behaviour that they are a threat. All I'm saying is that 'for the greater good' is a term way too broad, that can be used for nearly all cruelties ever done. Also I want to …
/r/MensRights09/11/17 10:37 AM
1

Yeah, that's true. Because if you try to justify an action with that phrase it shows that you have no other justification. And if you have no other justification that action is probably immoral.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 08:24 PM
1

Actually if that individual obtained the gun legally with some background checks and is not acting threatening it's wrong. Also if that individual lives in the US it's a huge infringment of their rights. But you really try to misunderstand me, right? I said that nearly all cruelties can be justified with it. Not that's limited to cruelties.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 08:03 PM
1

You don't justify taking something from someone by saying it's for the 'greater good'. Nearly all cruelties can be justified with it.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 06:09 PM
1

Wait, what the fuck is that reasoning? That's like saying I signed a buying contract of a car under duress because “I believed I wouldn't get the car if I don't“ A pre-nup is a contract that's a condition for one party to agree to another (marriage). If the condition isn't met of course that party isn't agreeing anymore.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 02:29 PM
2

The small loss of their space is a price worth paying for the greater good. I don't know what happened there but that phtasing enabled enough shit in history so screw yourself!
/r/MensRights08/11/17 02:08 PM
2

As soon as feminist stop hating men I'll change my mind about feminists. I don't. I just stepin in if lies are told. I don't. But if I had to think of a reason that would be that men can't lie to women about the mother of her child. “Male privilege“ only exist for rich and powerful men. The other men are underprivileged to the average woman. Rape culture exists. In prisons.
/r/MensRights07/11/17 03:26 PM
22

So it still took 5 years? WTF
/r/MensRights07/11/17 09:33 AM
2

You don't see the difference? Fucking misogynist! /s
/r/MensRights02/11/17 12:18 PM
2

Unfortunately you are soooo wrong :/
/r/MensRights27/10/17 08:49 AM
1

I still think the whole feminism movement were started by business owners to double the workforce to decrease wages.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 10:01 PM
2

I've read some threads there but never saw rape and pedophiliea apologies there. Maybe I did not read enough to find it. If it's true that would be horrible. All I'm saying is those people have given up on life and to hate them won't better the situation of anyone.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 04:51 PM
2

I'm not saying that it's justified. I am saying that they are unhappy with their life and don't seek to change it and look for something to hate. I understand them a little bit. The deserve pity, not hate
/r/MensRights23/10/17 04:20 PM
2

Well, the little difference is that you decided that for yourself. They did not.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 04:07 PM
2

You should think about how it would feel if you are 30+ and never got laid or got good attention. Hell, my school time was shit with women, because I had acne, was really weak, low self esteem and some other fucked up problems. When I started to work on that my life improved. But it really sucks to know that I've lost out on maybe the best time in life. I can't even try to understand how life would be if I thought I never had a chance to start with.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 10:52 AM
2

Well, I use TRP to self improve and not to get women. If your focus is only on banging women you haven't understand TRP yet. I'm still supporting men's rights. But more on the legal basis, not so much on the cultural.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 10:45 AM
1

He atleast can sue for the tution fee of the year.
/r/MensRights27/09/17 01:23 PM
2

So you are arguing that we need more laws in favour to women because existing laws protect them and businesses can't treat them as worse as men? Dude wtf
/r/MensRights26/09/17 01:33 PM
1

Yeah, I want that too, but not if it means I'd have to force the other person with violence or threaten with jail
/r/MensRights11/09/17 10:08 PM
3

I think it shouldn't be illegal. No discrimination should be illegal. We all should be free to be assholes
/r/MensRights09/09/17 02:16 PM
2

Well thats why female teachers get away with sleeping with male students Well atleast that is changing at the moment
/r/MensRights04/09/17 09:28 AM
2

There is a scale of innocence in our society: Girl>Women>Boy>Man If you go from left to right no problem
/r/MensRights03/09/17 06:52 PM
1

Those false rape claims aside, don't people think that we convict on no basis if someone is proven to be innocent yet was in jail?
/r/MensRights24/08/17 05:24 PM
1

Did you just copy http://www.realsexism.com ?
/r/MensRights12/08/17 01:25 PM
2

It's not positive discrimination! It's just simple discrimination against men
/r/MensRights06/08/17 11:51 AM
2

Dems did by far way more damage to men in the last years. Libertarian here
/r/MensRights31/07/17 11:09 PM
1

What I don't get is why it is deemed islamophobic to teach “muslims not to explode“ (don't worry I am not saying it isn't) but not sexist to teach men not to rape....
/r/MensRights31/07/17 08:58 AM
4

Actually I really want to marry, but not in that fucked up system..
/r/MensRights24/07/17 10:37 AM
4

Honestly my main priority is to get DNA tests legal without the consent of the mother here (Germany). The other things are important too but when I get screwed over I want at least that it is my child
/r/MensRights09/07/17 10:23 AM
1

I should have specified it more I mean most men in my circle and their argumentation is that they don't want to deal with all that side effects but even if the male pill would have "only" those of the female pill (I don't want to belittle those side effects, just saying they are not as bad as those of the male pill) I would use them so I would be sure not to get screwed over.
/r/MensRights07/07/17 11:55 AM
6

In Germany and France it is like this In other european countries probably too but I don't know there
/r/MensRights06/07/17 09:10 AM
1

That's why it should be a standard procedure. It will be seen as normal after some time then
/r/MensRights04/07/17 10:37 AM
3

Why is it not the standard to make a DNA test at birth?
/r/MensRights03/07/17 08:58 PM
1

Sorry I just had to laugh :/
/r/MensRights01/07/17 12:46 PM
1

Can you name her?
/r/MensRights30/06/17 09:48 AM
28

I hate the term positive discrimination. If you give someone an advantage you are discriminating against someone else...
/r/MensRights30/06/17 09:05 AM
3

The already are.. Women have in average 60% more sick days than men
/r/MensRights23/06/17 11:39 PM
3

Can you name the law?
/r/MensRights23/06/17 11:38 PM
3

As I am not a native speaker I can't assure that I can put it in words. But I can try it. But before I want to say that this is about if the father discovers it nearly at birth. Yeah, there is no real reason why there is a need of a biological connection beside our instinct to pass on our genes. Why should a person even care about someone without any kind of connection to that person? To that baby the only connection is the biological. If that is severed the father that baby is a stranger to him…
/r/MensRights22/06/17 02:01 AM
3

Maybe the person who cheated on the father? I kinda understand you if the father discovers it after like ten years and the child has build a relationship that he shouldn't care if it is his because it has become his. This is how I'd do it, but just because I'd do it no one has the right to shame a man to become a father to a child that isn't his. But directly at birth there is no such relationship and the father shouldn't be forced to care for the child of his cheating (hopefully then ex) partne…
/r/MensRights22/06/17 01:35 AM
1

I've never understood this shit... If the product for the other gender is cheaper and not worse why should I care for what gender my shampoo etc is?
/r/MensRights22/06/17 01:27 AM
3

Imagine I come to your house and say you have to raise that specific new born child of which you know that it isn't yours. You don't want to do it? What kind of man/woman are you???
/r/MensRights22/06/17 01:14 AM
3

Last time I checked my skin it was pinkish... As far as I know pink is a colour so where are my reparations???
/r/MensRights18/06/17 08:12 PM
1

Why do people even form those demographic groups? Holy shit, we are individuals and I feel it's pretty sexist to judge/assess because of their gender...
/r/MensRights17/06/17 03:50 PM
3

Nope The mother is allowed. There can be cases where it goes to court then it can be done when the judge wants it but I read of cases where the man was forced to take custody even though it was proven not to be his child.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 11:24 AM
18

The problem is that it many european countries it is forbidden to do it as father without the mother's consent...
/r/MensRights12/06/17 08:30 PM
1

So, what I wondered for quite some time is if the difference is because there are more young man dying (army, more dangerous jobs,..) or because men don't get as much help as women or because women are "biologically build" to live longer
/r/MensRights31/05/17 07:43 AM
23

The problem is that the government doesn't want that. They entrap men in this shit because if there isn't a father they have to take the role of the father and support the single mother with money. The government screws men over just to save some money
/r/MensRights29/05/17 11:14 AM
3

I trink it's okay They will lose customers because of it and hopefully adapt their policy because of the loss
/r/MensRights26/05/17 02:16 PM
4

So why should women get help to pay their student loans if 40% of female graduates get atleast 40k/year and just 16% of male? Shouldn't men get help?? But of course we live in a patriarchy..
/r/MensRights24/05/17 02:43 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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