TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

absonous Archive

View 7 posts and 58 comments by absonous 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)
1

No, I completely understand the common definition. But the link you posted deals with statutory rape. While I am not here to debate the morality, legality, or ethics of a 40-something year old man having sex with a 14 year old girl (and just for reference, I don't think it is moral, ethical, or should be legal) it is absolutely ignorant (not directed at you, speaking generally) to take the position that a young girls and boys do not take agency and pursue sexual relationships with adults. Saying…
/r/MensRights10/09/15 10:25 PM
1

The level of stupidity you have shown here is difficult to put into words. People like you are what give everyone on this sub a bad name.
/r/MensRights10/09/15 02:43 PM
0

Can you cite one? I'm looking for an actual case where this has happened. I'm not on some ideological crusade here, I genuinely want to know if there is any evidence to support their assertion.
/r/MensRights10/09/15 02:42 PM
0

None of those fit my criteria. The first three do not deal with court officials and the last one, though it was a judge, did not "blame the victim". The exact quotes in the article stated he said the girl appeared "older than her chronological age," and "as much in control of the situation" as her teacher. That's not victim blaming (unless maybe the article left something out?). Ignorant? Maybe. Victim blaming? Absolutely not. No where did he say that she somehow instigated her own rape. If you …
/r/MensRights10/09/15 02:39 PM
16

Well, it finally hits a major paper. I mean, it's the NYPost, but that's still a major publication. Now, we just have to watch as the whole thing unravels....
/r/MensRights31/08/15 12:44 PM
1

You mean my feelings of male entitlement might not be a real thing?
/r/MensRights27/08/15 11:35 PM
2

This entire case is hearsay. How did this even make it to court?
/r/MensRights27/08/15 04:12 PM
5

I think the only thing with what is written here (and not having actually read the study cited, this is just an armchair observation) is the assumption that you have to be a "social perfectionist" in order to be subject to overwhelming social demands. I mean, look at this guy in the article -- he's the shining stereotypical example of what people on this sub bitch about so often: As a man, he is expected be a provider for his family, contribute to his community, advance his career, etc., but the…
/r/MensRights15/08/15 05:52 PM
3

I don't think he's talking about the brutality part, more the fact that they tend to take some rather radical positions that we probably don't want to associate with.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 08:16 PM
6

-76 by the time I down-voted. There is no sexism in the articles she linked. But that's the problem with feminists, dismiss anything you disagree with by showing a vague, tenuous link to something that may perhaps, in some realm of existence, be construed as sexism against women. I don't mind the blatant man-hating. It's blatant hatred and everyone sees it for what it is. It's the shit like what /u/labiaflutteringby says that gets me, personally.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 08:12 PM
4

Doctors aren't omniscient, you dumb fuck. Nobody was dismissing the symptoms by claiming they were hypochondriacs suffering from females "hysteria" like the guy in the OPs article. Their symptoms were taken seriously, they were just given bad diagnosis. I've PERSONALLY been in and out of doctors offices for nearly ten years now for symptoms my doctors can't seem to explain, and been handed more diagnoses than I care to remember only to find out said diagnosis was wrong. There was no gender bias,…
/r/MensRights12/08/15 08:07 PM
2

You have a downvote button. Use it. Maybe if people stopped cluttering up the sub with posts bitching about the content of the sub we'd have more quality posts on this sub. Seriously, if you're really frequent this sub like you say you do, you should know that at there are at least 3-4 posts EXACTLY like this every week.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 07:52 PM
2

No shit. What he's saying is that adults shouldn't be coddled to like children and is their own problem if they can't resist peer pressure. Now maybe you don't agree with that point of view, which is perfectly fine, but if you don't understand that then you're ignorant.
/r/MensRights09/08/15 10:16 PM
3

I've never heard any biological arguments for color preferences, but this link has a number of studies on the subject summarized all in one article: http://www.parentingscience.com/girl-toys-and-parenting.html A note on the first (incorrect) article linked by /u/mochacola: the "tracking eye movements of newborns" premise is shaky at best. It's been done numerous times with results that are all over the place.
/r/MensRights09/08/15 09:03 PM
2

That's because there is no such thing as a rational feminist, just varying degrees of indoctrination. Asking how to identify a rational feminist is like asking how to identify a rational scientologist.
/r/MensRights09/08/15 12:34 PM
0

OP, you seem to be here more to debate and try and prove MRAs "wrong" than anything judging by the content of your replies here. The problem that arises with most of your arguments is the problem with most feminists with regards to science: you don't understand it. Let me give you a run-down: A study is presented. It comes to a specific conclusion. It is meaningless all on it's lonesome. It must be replicated a number of times by other researchers. It must be challenged. When sufficient time has…
/r/MensRights08/08/15 05:13 PM
4

Assuming it's real is the most important part of this statement in my opinion. The OP should keep in mind that this "study" was conducted by a source known to harbor extreme anti-male, pro-radical feminist bias. All Gawker affiliates have a history of ethical issues and most of their "journalists" have been caught in outright fabrication at one time or another (and often more than once).
/r/MensRights08/08/15 04:31 PM
2

This is a very good point. I would like to see her send out her manuscripts with a random female and random male name. If you are an established writing and have more trouble getting your manuscripts accepted over an unknown you have a reputation problem.
/r/MensRights08/08/15 04:25 PM
1

Still a loaded question. No, I don't know what you mean. What do women do for women, or gays do for gays that men don't do for men? Truthfully, and not to be insulting, I don't think you even know what question you are trying to ask (either that or you're just trolling). If a women gets fired from her job not all women are flocking to save her nor can most women do anything about it. Likely, no woman could do anything about it. Mostly, most women don't care. With that being said, there are often…
/r/MensRights04/08/15 03:11 AM
7

Loaded question. I don't do any "activism" outside the sub if that's what you are asking. Honestly, there are so many "activists" these days I find they just blend in with the background and all their work is for naught. I use this sub as hub of useful source of information and current events, as they relate to men. Education and knowledge are powerful weapons. Being able to inform or correct people about issues in casual conversation, in my opinion, is far more effective than waving a sign and …
/r/MensRights04/08/15 01:14 AM
3

The AAUW (a feminist organization) inadvertently de-bunked the wage gap when trying to show that it existed when controlling for factors such as hours worked, experience, etc. Their study was replicated by (I believe) the BLS but I can't remember exactly. I think another organization also replicated the study but, again, I'm working off fuzzy memory. Now, I could site a bunch of sources, but I'm feeling lazy and Maddox did a pretty thorough (and humorous if you like his style) take-down of this,…
/r/MensRights27/07/15 11:44 PM
17

This is classic feminist logic though: An organization is hosting events by siphoning billions of dollars from underprivileged people in third world countries, many of which don't have basic shelter, food, medical care or even clean water? And they're using slave labor en-masse, putting workers in horrendous, dangerous conditions, often literally working them to death? What, you say? They're only paying they're female members $200,000 dollars a piece when their male members are making $1,000,000…
/r/MensRights07/07/15 04:25 AM
4

Voat is almost exactly like Reddit. I agree with you, Frizbee is... weird.... It's too.... Hipster for me.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 02:29 AM
11

He hasn't stated much directly that I know of (not that I think he's hiding anything, he seems pretty straight-forward) but the language in his speeches and writing definitely play to an assumed acceptance of the Feminist narrative by his audience. For example, he wrote an article title "United Against the War on Women" (https://archive.is/ZO49T) which, by the title alone assumes that you, the audience, accept or believe there is a war on Women. Further, he makes a handful of ludicrous statement…
/r/MensRights06/07/15 02:23 AM
6

This is hilarious. Currently, Amy Schumer is being attacked by Feminists for being racist and not being Feminist. Sooo..... Why IS there always a backlash against Feminist stars.....? http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/amy-schumer-feminist-comedy-women/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2015/06/29/amy-schumer-responds-to-criticism-by-insisting-shes-not-racist-just-funny/
/r/MensRights06/07/15 01:36 AM
7

If it's so terrible just kill yourself and give your money to someone who will appreciate it. Maybe someone in the third world who is literally starving to death or scraping together tiny portions of food to feed their children and doesn't view life as such a "cruelty".
/r/MensRights06/07/15 01:27 AM
15

Eh, he's definitely "full-femtard" so to speak. Still, I'm going to vote for him in the primary (along with Rand Paul) and I'll end up voting for either him or Paul if either wins their primary. Personally, he's one of those candidates that even though I disagree with 70% of what he says I'd still rather see him in office than any of the other idiots running. Why? He's not corrupted by money and lobbyists. He actually gives a shit. He's not some spit-and-polish turd of a politician. Those three …
/r/MensRights06/07/15 01:18 AM
4

I had a similar experience working as a CAD manager in a construction office. We would actually get two types of women primarily: Those who wouldn't take 5 seconds to figure out a simple problem on their own, and would constantly pester their co-workers Those who were extremely competent and capable but HATED the work. It was very hard for us to retain female employees for the above reasons. Not to mention the fact that it was very hard to find them in the first place as they would make up 10% o…
/r/MensRights30/06/15 03:25 AM
22

This is the end result of pushing this BS 'rape culture' propaganda. Welcome to our feminist future: everyone is a victim.
/r/MensRights24/06/15 08:24 PM
2

Sort of. It's an open response that they categorized to an extent if I remember correctly. Unfortunately, I don't have time to re-read the report. One point I made is that women do tend to blow their harassment out-of-proportion as a whole. See "Part 4: The Aftermath" in the study. To summarize: this is possible, and if it has happened it is more likely that women, not men, are exaggerating their harassment claims.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 09:42 PM
3

Excuse me, you're right. I knew something seemed funny when I re-read this before posting. I was looking at the 18-24 chart not the overall chart. However, it wouldn't be two out of six, it would be two out of four with men being victim to sustained harassment and being physically threatened and women being stalked and sexual harassed. The other two categories aren't really 'severe' harassment.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 07:15 PM
13

No, it isn't a fact. The rate of false rape accusations is what is known as a "dark number" meaning that the exact number isn't known. There have been multiple studies on this subject with the false accusation rate being anywhere from 2% to 80%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Crown_Prosecution_Service_report_.282011.E2.80.932012.29.
/r/MensRights24/02/15 10:00 PM
1

This came out of left field. Why don't we add a few comments to the video, there seem to be a lot of MRM haters on there.
/r/MensRights03/02/15 11:04 PM
1

Who said anything about class warfare? Sorry but if you think that 14th-century males born into peasant families had the same right/opportunities/privileges, etc as 14th-century female nobles you're insane. It's not a men-vs-women argument, it's a privileged vs non-privledged argument. And sorry, but when you can explain to me how I can measure rights outside the the concept of a cultural norm I will admit to you that they are objective.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:48 PM
2

I agree with that entirely. Honestly, though, given our currently evolving, disparate social structure I'm personally not worried about any single over-arching culture. That's just my view though. I see where you're coming from.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:43 PM
2

No, I would argue that you're conflating feminism with the advocacy for women's rights, which I would argue that it is not. With the exception of the suffrage movement, I would argue that feminism has done little to nothing to actually advance women's rights and has, just as often as not, promoted misogynistic views. But that's another subject entirely. Either way, I would still disagree with you.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:38 PM
1

There are only two ways to interpret this: feminism feed on two world wars but there were valid reasons there. at the time women had lesser rights and represented a minority on the work force You are making a female-to-male comparison and saying women had fewer rights than men You are making a time-period female-to-female comparison. At which point you are saying that feminism was justified in previous times because women had fewer rights than they do now. I disagree with #1 and #2 makes absolut…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:19 PM
0

Never argued they weren't. Just said that the vast majority of men never had it any better. And not all women were property. Highly privileged women, just like highly privileged men, were not treated as property.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:15 PM
1

No, it's still subjective because your comparing two groups on the basis of a cultural norm. Do you believe grown adults should have the right to have sex with children? Or do you believe that children should have the right to be protected from sex? But what if we consider someone a child but that child has the mental capacity to think for themselves? It's an inherently subjective comparison and argument, you cannot measure rights objectively. But let's examine this further: ...that's the very d…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 08:08 PM
0

I just used your comparison of women's rights to women's rights. How is that men vs women? And I'm not playing oppression Olympics, I'm pointing out that there has been a very misandrist view of history that "women have always had it worse" that is at the base of the modern-feminist victim-culture power grab. It completely ignores the fact that 90-95% of men throughout history have been virtual slaves and treated as property. I never once said that "men have had it worse" nor do I believe that. …
/r/MensRights12/12/14 07:51 PM
0

That's the very definition of subjective. You're saying they had lesser rights by the basis of comparison of two different time periods, cultures and social standards. I can't whip out a slide rule and come up with an "objective" measurement of the amount of rights someone has. There are no "rights units". Most people couldn't even agree on a solid definition of what a "right" was in the first place. Besides, even if we accept the "objective" argument, then what? So you're saying that because wo…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 07:45 PM
1

Please explain how one can "objectively" measure a human right.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 07:33 PM
1

It's your quote. If women had lesser rights then men obviously had greater rights, and therefore "had it better" so to speak.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 07:32 PM
1

Objective using what as a basis? Only a subjective comparison can be made; your cannot "objectively" measure a right. It's an abstract notion. And I am arguing that the vast majority of men have had no more rights or privileges than women PERIOD. I believe that's what my last post said.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 07:30 PM
2

Yeah, that's an extremely reputable source and an incredibly objective, well-thought out article. That was sarcasm, in case you didn't catch it.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 03:21 PM
4

Feminism caused two world wars. Uhhh..... How about, no?
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:42 PM
1

What I am trying to get at is that women did not have the same social rights as men, like being able to speak out against something or going to college to pursue a career. As I said, the argument that "women had it worse" is a harmful fallacy that needs to die. I've never been presented with any objective account of any period of history where, outside of a small group of highly privileged men, males have had more social rights than women. What percentage of men, outside of the upper-class went …
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:20 PM
0

What's your point? There is no objective argument to support the assertion that outside of a very small group of highly privileged males men have had: More civil or social rights than women An easier or better life than women The only argument any proponent of this ideology can ever make is that it is "obvious" that women had it worse. Well, no, it isn't obvious. The large majority of men have been virtual slaves throughout history, given no rights, no comforts, and no social support.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:14 PM
14

I don't think we should be trying to "prevent" anything. I'm sick of these unending "-isms" and their "Thou Shalt Nots!" For all the years I was raised to be more "progressive" and "egalitarian" I've never been happier in my life than when conforming to a "traditional" gender role and I've never had better relationships than when I've been in "traditional" relationships. Now, I don't think they're everyone's cup of tea and I don't want to force them down anyone's throat, but the point still stan…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:05 PM
1

I would argue that "women had it worse" is a harmful fallacy that needs to die. Per my last comment: Basically, pre-1950 in the US, if you weren't part of the top 5-10% you were basically a glorified slave as a man. Men throughout history have been: Primary victims of War Primary victims of Slave labor Primary victims of Forced labor (differing from slave labor as a "labor of taxation" where you were "technically" free) Punished for the actions of their families Given no social support in any wa…
/r/MensRights12/12/14 11:55 AM
1

Actually, yes. That' exactly what you said. at the time women had lesser rights and represented a minority on the work force
/r/MensRights12/12/14 11:48 AM
9

Truth, but there were also millions of men: Working in the same sweatshops in higher numbers Fighting a high-casualty war Working in mines in miserable, dangerous conditions Working in a construction industry with no safety standards or regard for human life Among other things. Basically, pre-1950 in the US, if you weren't part of the top 5-10% you were basically a glorified slave as a man.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 03:50 AM
6

One at a time. It seems like we've gotten the ball rolling. Now we just need to keep the momentum.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 03:32 AM
12

Great analogy. I forgot about the comet landing! There was a huge media backlash on that too.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 03:27 AM
11

http://www.npr.org/2014/12/11/370156326/justice-department-numbers-paint-different-picture-of-sexual-assault
/r/MensRights12/12/14 03:14 AM
5

A half victory is better than no victory. Baby steps.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:58 AM
23

2 or 3 percent of a company's yearly profit is a HUGE deal.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 02:57 AM
3

I was just in Target about two hours after you made this post. Passing by the toy aisle, I saw some new Star Wars Lego sets that I thought would be cool for my cousin. I walked in the aisle to check them out and saw a young girl (maybe 8 or 9) alone in the aisle. I immediately turned around and walked out. It's sad when your gut reaction as an adult male is "don't be within 10 feet of children". But seriously, a late 20s dude standing in the toy aisle alone with an 8-year-old girl? What's the fi…
/r/MensRights11/12/14 12:37 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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