TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

_Harkn_ Archive

View 0 posts and 62 comments by _Harkn_ 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)
15

What's wrong with being anti-feminism when feminism is strictly anti-equality? Feminism pushes the oppression boogeyman to its fullest extent at every opportunity, even if it doesn't line up with reality. What's wrong with calling bullshit on it so we can deal with the actual issues that affect both men and women?
/r/MensRights30/11/15 02:22 AM
–

I just recently ended a casual fling with a pretty radical feminist. I didn't know she was like that until she asked for tips on her wage gap paper. After that we had a falling out pretty quickly. I'm actually deeply afraid that any time now I'm gonna be visited by the police.
/r/MensRights23/11/15 12:48 AM
1

Sorry I'm late to the party, but here it is. It's physiology. There's more than a single neuron on the way from the brain to the penis. There's a synapse in the spinal cord. So basically, the standard way of getting an erection is you take in the sensory information, it gets processed in the brain and sent through the spinal cord synapse to the penis making it erect. However, because of the interneuron, a signal can be generated in the spinal cord spontaneously with no relevant sensory input (er…
/r/MensRights25/08/15 08:04 PM
2

We didn't "make up" the concept of fun. That's not how any of this works. Most mammals are capable of understanding and indicating enjoyment at least on a basic level. When you pet an animal what does it do? And where do you think the ability to do this comes from? Do you think that people and all the other animals that enjoy things are just doing so for no natural or evolutionary reason? Fuck no. It's because those things are good for the animal. You said yourself, the natural reason to have se…
/r/MensRights24/08/15 09:20 PM
1

Have any of these people ever read any critically acclaimed novels? Not even just graphic novels, almost ANY fucking novel that garners widespread acclaim is going to have some really really dark themes and imagery. That said, like the top comment says, I doubt this is due to radical feminism, these people just seem like your ordinary run-of-the-mill fucktards.
/r/MensRights20/08/15 07:28 PM
1

None of the drones I know of (an engineering friend of mine from Dubai owns many) even have zoom. Digital zoom sure, but not optical. For example, he has a cheap AR drone with a piece of shit camera no better than ones you'll find in a smartphone from 2010, with some really crappy digital zoom feature. And then there's his phantom 3, a drone which costs $3000, has a 4k camera but no zoom. You can crop a photo down to 1080p or smaller and still get reasonable zoom, but that's besides the point.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 09:43 PM
1

I know the one you're talking about, because I saved the thread it was in. It was a /r/bestof post, where somebody linked a study which indicated men made up 42% of victims of DV, somebody called it out for being "just one study" and then somebody else posted the meta-analysis of like 207 papers that all came to similar conclusions, which is what warranted the bestof post. Unfortunately, I think the thread must've been deleted (surprise surprise) because I can't find it in my saved folder. Sorry…
/r/MensRights12/08/15 09:00 PM
4

We're not calling women cunts. We're calling cunts cunts. What's the problem?
/r/MensRights06/08/15 05:37 PM
4

Good one. Where do I assume that exactly? I didn't imply gender, I said if you want to jump to the conclusion that marketing has something to do with the target's value then that's on you, and it is. I guess a more proper pronoun would've been "them", but you seemed to share their point of view so I used "you".
/r/MensRights04/08/15 07:17 PM
3

Nobody in the media is stating that outright though. If that's your takeaway message from seeing makeup ads everywhere or seeing headlines of how great Caitlyn Jenner looks then that's on you. It's a pretty big mental leap to go from being the target of marketing strategies to being only valued for your sexuality. The only reason there's so much focus on attractiveness for women anyway is because there's a market for it, which they themselves perpetuate.
/r/MensRights04/08/15 04:31 PM
31

I don't think it's so much that men are being represented solely for their sexuality that people here have a problem with. Objectify men all you want. I really really do not care, because sex sells and as a rational adult I understand that. It's the double standard that annoys me. You don't get to do things like that and then do a complete 180 and go "Ugh, fucking misogynistic pigs objectifying women".
/r/MensRights04/08/15 03:26 PM
2

Sulkowicz hasn't had any allegations brought against her, though if Nungesser wanted I'm sure he could sue based on the evidence he has that he's innocent, the Facebook messages he has are quite clear in that regard. Cosby's accusers on the other hand have nothing. There's no evidence to speak of. What they have is a signed court document from him stating that he gave them drugs and they voluntarily took those drugs and had sex. These scenarios aren't analogous by any means, especially not if we…
/r/MensRights01/08/15 03:49 PM
2

Exactly. He's going up against Hilary, who you can be sure is getting almost half of the vote just on account of her vagina. If he didn't come out in strong support of women's issues (even ones that aren't truly issues) he'd have no chance in hell of winning. He probably doesn't either way.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 05:43 PM
1

That stands for 'I am not a lawyer'? Jesus, I had no idea. I thought people were just really pumped to let everyone know they were into butt stuff.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 11:59 PM
2

His lawyer absolutely took her to town with this
/r/MensRights22/07/15 05:16 PM
2

He might be able to sue for damages or defamation given that he lost his job and was incorrectly branded a pedophile by the complainants. That's just my guess, I'm no lawyer nor do I know much about law.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 04:02 PM
1

Okay, from the very excerpt you posted about that study: "Sometimes sex happens when a person is unable to consent to it or stop it from happening because they were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out from alcohol, drugs, or medications. This can include times when they voluntarily consumed alcohol or drugs or they were given drugs or alcohol without their knowledge or consent. Please remember that even if someone uses alcohol or drugs, what happens to them is not their fault. The next set of qu…
/r/MensRights22/07/15 12:59 PM
1

You still managed to outline one of the major problems with that statistic. It was made very clear what the study was about, and the response rate as a result was very low. 42%. While nobody can say for certain what that means, as in nobody knows how many of the other 58% have experienced sexual assault, it's always a safe assumption that people that have stake in the survey (ie women who have experienced sexual assault) are more likely to respond. In other words, the study only concludes that 1…
/r/MensRights21/07/15 11:52 PM
1

I believe the study the statistic is based on did. I don't have a link, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I've heard the study asked questions like "have you ever had sex under the influence of a drug?", while never actually asking "have you ever been raped?" and then included those numbers. If that's true, then they've declared a lot of women to be rape victims that never actually said "yes, I've been raped". I'll see if I can find a link to the study or any source detailing the study. E…
/r/MensRights20/07/15 04:35 PM
1

"Not sure why you're having such a hard time with this." I could say the same to you. You still haven't provided any reason to abolish marriage under the hypothetical that the current problems can be fixed. My point has only ever been that you're not rallying against the actual problem. Marriage is not the problem. Divorce laws are. Sure, abolishing marriage would certainly ensure that no man ever gets cheated in family court, but you're going to have a much harder time doing that. You'll be met…
/r/MensRights17/07/15 09:01 PM
1

But what if I want to do the vows and the certificate and the whole nine yards? And what if it's for religious reasons? Of course people are already capable of operating as a financial unit and spending their lives together without marriage. I've never disputed that. That doesn't make the entire idea of marriage obsolete. We just need to fix the part where one gender is inherently favoured in the outcome of it failing, as I've been saying the whole time. So again, on what authority can you tell …
/r/MensRights17/07/15 06:40 PM
1

Of course, but if I want to have a large ceremony before my friends and family and God if I were religious, stating that I want to share my life and everything I have and become a single financial entity with another person, and there's no downside should it eventually fail, then what's the problem? And on whose authority could you deny somebody that choice?
/r/MensRights17/07/15 05:17 PM
1

Okay, so the government has no business "regulating" my relationship. I'm glad we agree on that. Once the divorce laws are fixed that won't be a problem, will it? ie. Once we remove the downsides of marriage, what's the problem?
/r/MensRights17/07/15 04:58 PM
1

You realize the earliest concept of marriage was for signing women over as property right? Take your fucking tin-foil hat off, it was never created FOR women. Divorce laws were however, because it used to be a woman who got divorced had no way of supporting herself. Now that that's not the case we need to change those laws, but there's no need to abolish it in its entirety. Christ, now I know why so many people see us as extreme resentful assholes that hate all women.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 04:39 PM
214

What a fucking idiot. How do these people come up with this bullshit? I've not once ever referred to any behaviour as "beta" until now. This is as beta as it fucking gets. There is nothing misogynistic or oppressive about being monogamous when both parties AGREE to it you dumb fuck. Even in a monogamous relationship women are technically free to fuck whoever they want, and often do, it just has disastrous effects on the relationship. Not to mention IT WORKS BOTH WAYS. Jesus Christ. Fuck this. Fu…
/r/MensRights17/07/15 04:33 PM
1

Sure, but the idea of having a grand ceremony where you actually pledge your lives to each other is still appealing. It's the ultimate form of celebrating your relationship. If we could just reform the divorce laws to not favour women so ludicrously you can get all the joy and happiness marriage is supposed to bring without all of the potential risk.
/r/MensRights17/07/15 04:17 PM
1

I guess I'm nobody. I just find it odd that you're so vehemently opposed to the concept of such a thing. Marriage never used to be such a bad deal. When second-wave feminism won it was a major victory for equality, awesome, but we didn't change the marriage and divorce laws to reflect that change, resulting in inequality on our side because divorce historically had to favour the woman until this point. I wholeheartedly agree that alimony is bullshit in an era in which a woman should be fully cap…
/r/MensRights17/07/15 03:45 AM
1

Any sex that takes time and effort and investment to achieve is delayed gratification. Waiting until marriage is just the extreme end of it, and he didn't imply that's what he was referring to at all. Being resentful towards relationships and marriage in general is not what this sub is about. Yes, there is essentially no reason for a man to get married right now except to please his would-be wife, but that's not to say that you should go around giving people shit for even mentioning courtship, w…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 07:17 PM
2

Of course, it'll likely prove to be very helpful to lots of young men in all kinds of situations, not just the hook up culture one night stand scenario. It is however unfortunate that we've gone this far down the rabbit hole that an app like this is necessary.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 05:02 PM
6

Slow down, he never said anything about marriage or diamond rings or any of the conclusions you jumped to. As a man in my third year of university I totally understand what he means. Hook up culture is fucking depressing unless you're the type of guy women immediately want to sleep with. I am not. I know perfectly well what it's like to go to parties and bars and clubs and get rejected every single night. It's much easier for me to meet someone in a class, build rapport, ask them out for a few d…
/r/MensRights16/07/15 04:32 PM
13

Well, the people he's dealing with are stupid. It's not as if he just calls them stupid, he explains why they're stupid and then proceeds to actually call them stupid. He's not debating these people, he's dismantling their bullshit arguments, he doesn't have to be polite about it.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 05:11 PM
2

Because this app actually stands to reduce the incidences of young men being charged for rape. That's not what they want. They need to continue the narrative.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:52 PM
7

He grabbed her wrist because she was issuing a threat. Next she tries to kick him in the balls and then punches him in the face. Only then did he retaliate. I don't agree with how hard he hit her, but he had every right to do so.
/r/MensRights08/07/15 04:09 PM
1

Never know, he could've popped one on the drive over.
/r/MensRights24/06/15 05:55 PM
1

See I thought it was the other way around, and he accepted the offer, and then she reported him. That's how I interpreted it anyway. There was never a scene that confirmed it one way or the other, just cut to him being relieved of duty over the accusation, so I think what actually happened will probably come out later. As for Farrell's character, I'm really looking forward to seeing the character development. We already know he's a sick, twisted, corrupt asshole, but I want to see exactly what h…
/r/MensRights24/06/15 05:44 PM
1

He shoves her because she gets back up and looks like she's going to get back in his face. If he wanted to hit her and escalate he could've done that from the very start. Instead he threw her away, which is pretty clearly a defensive move. He was on the defensive at every moment in the video. Also nobody here is saying we should hit women, only that if you hit a man you should expect him to defend himself.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/06/15 04:58 PM
3

I have no doubt in my mind he's only regurgitating it because that's what 50% of the population wants to hear. Running against Hilary he'd have no chance if he came out and said "the wage gap is a myth", even though he almost certainly knows it. He's campaigning, let him campaign. If he gets elected and tries to implement some bullshit "women deserve more pay for equal work" law then we riot. However he'll never do that because nobody in power actually believes that nonsense. Even Hilary's femal…
/r/MensRights12/06/15 04:52 PM
10

I live in Toronto and go to U of T, it's an absolute cesspool of radical feminism. The entire city is like a college campus and the actual campuses are even worse. There aren't many rational women left here. Save yourself.
/r/MensRights08/06/15 05:06 PM
2

I have an Iranian roommate and an Indian roommate, I have a Filipino girlfriend, I have a black cousin and many black friends, and I have a handful of Chinese friends, Latino friends, gay friends, etc. I would love nothing more than to attend an event with my non-cis-white-male friends and tell them how much I care about them and support them in their plight to end the discrimination they may still face. This cunt would have me barred from attending and then tell me that I deserve to die because…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 04:21 PM
3

I think it's the "American men should man up" part. It perpetuates age old gender roles that we shouldn't be reinforcing. The idea here, just like it was for the second-wave feminist movement, is that we should have the choice of living a particular lifestyle. While it's great that this woman and her husband have found lifestyles which they both enjoy, we should not expect everyone to follow suit, and that's exactly what she's suggesting. That point of view only serves to stop both women and men…
/r/MensRights25/05/15 09:49 PM
3

I'd like to ask that guy what the fuck he thinks the words "not" and "guilty" mean when put together like that. It's absolutely disgusting that the assistant DA (that's what he was right?) would say something like that. He doesn't deserve to keep practicing law after that statement.
/r/MensRights24/05/15 03:48 PM
5

Clearly they're just too traumatized by the assault to remember what happened. Sarcasm aside, I was having a "debate" (it wasn't a debate, they were never going to be convinced by fact and logic) with some SJWs about this, and they honestly wholeheartedly believe that the messages that Emma and Paul exchanged could not be used as evidence to prove his innocence because she was just in denial, too traumatized. Yep, they think it's more likely that this guy violently raped her and traumatized her …
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:29 PM
4

There is, his testimony didn't line up with recovered exchanges between himself and Nungesser, whereas they matched Nungesser's testimony completely. http://reason.com/archives/2015/05/20/columbia-rape-saga-lingers-after-mattres
/r/MensRights23/05/15 09:14 PM
1

They already are. I was having a discussion about the Nungesser case with a feminist and I asked her what her explanation was for Emma's messages to Paul after the alleged rape. She said "It's not uncommon for victims of severe trauma to go into denial or try to pretend like everything is normal. Maybe she did still love him after he raped her, those messages cannot be considered evidence in his defence."
/r/MensRights22/05/15 01:46 PM
23

I really hope he files slander charges. I know he's already suing the university but he really needs to try take that bitch down too. It's not okay what this has done to his reputation, and yet she's a hero. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? For fucks sake this kid was proven not guilty and he's still not innocent. As a university student things like this just make me angry and quite honestly terrified. I think next time I have casual sex with someone I'm getting written consent com…
/r/MensRights19/05/15 06:40 PM
35

Incredibly disrespectful doesn't cut it considering he was cleared of the charges. She should be thrown in jail for the false accusation yet she's allowed to continue dragging this guy's name through the mud at a fucking graduation ceremony no less.
/r/MensRights19/05/15 05:52 PM
3

"How would that happen?" Well gee bitch, it's almost like getting an erection is a biological response, not necessarily a sign of arousal. Similar to the way a lot of women get wet during rape, yet that is in no way an indication of arousal. It's only "Unwanted contact", not rape, even though he was drugged. Fuck that bitch. I need to stop coming to this sub, it's giving me high blood pressure.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 12:30 AM
2

It came up further down in the thread that his room was on the same floor. They had been drinking all night together and his room was on the same floor. How in the fuck would that have not come up in conversation/ how would she not have noticed him get in the elevator with her, especially assuming they probably left the bar and went to the elevator together. There's nothing creepy about the story. At all. The whole thing reeks of bullshit yet "yay rape avoided!"
/r/MensRights17/05/15 04:06 AM
6

I think that was her being a sarcastic cunt more than anything.
/r/MensRights16/05/15 04:02 PM
8

That actually sounds reasonable and I'll look into it, thanks for clearing that up.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 05:29 PM
0

Source?
/r/MensRights08/05/15 05:01 PM
10

McMaster University just lately decided they're going to give all of their female faculty a $3000 raise to account for the wage gap. They're literally giving men unequal pay for equal work, or rather, the women equal pay for unequal work. There's also a new bill that's been proposed in Ontario (I believe it's just ontario, there's no way it's a federal bill) to adjust the salaries of all woman dominated jobs to shrink the wage gap. They would essentially be making it so that a secretary can make…
/r/MensRights07/05/15 06:49 PM
13

Jesus, I was actually at the MRA lectures at U of T. It's horrible walking into a lecture room through a mob of people that are making it quite clear that nobody in society gives a shit about you, and that the slightest mention of any problem you may have is completely irrelevant. Not only irrelevant, but oppressive. The mere mention of men's issues is like a joke to them, and apparently we should all burn for it.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 05:25 PM
13

Not governmentally, no, but socially it's already happened. Women are seen as victims now more than ever, and men as violent powerful assholes. On the one hand, you've got the average women with equal rights who generally get treated better because they're seen as victims of an oppressive society. On the other you've got the average men whose rights are diminishing and who get treated like shit because we're the oppressors, right? Nobody should actually be a victim, and I'm completely for empowe…
/r/MensRights07/05/15 05:18 PM
-1

For making a logical argument? Lol. What exactly are you assuming I would do to bring a lawsuit against myself?
/r/MensRights03/05/15 02:50 AM
5

Correct, but surveys can also be systematically biased to not include all factors or target a certain demographic, in this case women. You are correct that these would be problems with the methodology, but they would be imposed by the author's viewpoints. Suggesting diversified viewpoints would be one way of remedying this, though of course I can see why they'd be reluctant to do so. We haven't seen the full review, which may have indicated problems with the methodology and they simply chose to …
/r/MensRights02/05/15 04:52 PM
1

In an observational study it most certainly does matter who is doing the observing. Confirmation bias can skew results. It doesn't matter how objective your methods are when you are only going to see what you want to see and have already concluded that your hypothesis is correct from the get go.
/r/MensRights02/05/15 04:30 PM
7

Well the paper hasn't been released yet, so it's hard to say what their methodology was. However now that's it's guaranteed to be published I'm sure we'll all get a chance to read it. Biased sample size is only one way to get biased results. Confirmation bias is another, and I believe that's why the reviewer suggested they get a point of view from a male colleague. I don't see anything inherently sexist about that. If my male friends and I set out to prove that males were disadvantaged in some p…
/r/MensRights02/05/15 04:04 PM
167

As a consequence also explains the so-called "wage gap". I'm sorry ladies, but your gender studies degree simply will not payoff as much as an engineering degree.
/r/MensRights02/05/15 07:26 AM
57

Biased science is bad science. And not publishing bad science now equals misogyny? Imagine if a team of all males tried to publish the same study. I would be very surprised if they didn't receive the same response. Objectivity is one of the tenets the scientific method was founded on for fucks sake. With a study like this it'd be near impossible to stay objective unless all viewpoints and variables are considered, and as I see it that's really all the reviewer was asking. Instead of taking the c…
/r/MensRights02/05/15 05:53 AM
4

I agree, but in real life it's far more damaging to identify as a men's rights activist than as a feminist. I would identify as both, and I seriously wish we could all just unite under the non-gender-biased term of egalitarian, but apparently suggesting even that is misogynistic too, as the foundation that held the talks was called Canadian Activists for Equality. I do have to disagree with the homicide statistic being irrelevant. In my opinion I'm much more concerned about who's the victim than…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 08:07 PM
4

You're completely right, we should all be fighting for the same things, we're two sides of the same coin and both men's and women's issues can he tackled simultaneously. However the current situation is polarized because of the censorship that the radical feminists have imposed. The biggest example that sticks out to me, because I witnessed it, were the talks about men's rights held at the University of Toronto. They were heavily protested, with most of the protestors waving signs about misogyny…
/r/MensRights19/04/15 07:44 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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