TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

anarchists_R_enemies Archive

View 5 posts and 50 comments by anarchists_R_enemies 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

The second part, I disagree. I want to know about my DNA and the health implications of it, even if the government believes that I am too stupid to evaluate the information correctly. It's about not getting scammed. If you want people to tell you something about your health, even if the data they have is insufficient to do so, then you might as well go to a faith healer. Of course there is nothing wrong with that, but it's not something a self-proclaimed skeptic should promote.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 01:55 PM
2

I was horrified that as esteemed a skeptical organization as TAM allowed Watson anywhere near their conferences. Meh, TAM is less about credentials and more about popularity.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 01:46 PM
2

Can't we all just agree that being an atheist merely means that you do not believe that deities exist'? Although I know that atheists like to claim that they care about facts, evidence and the scientific method (Watson claims that too), a lot of them actually don't. Please don't get me wrong, I'm an atheist myself, but I feel like a lot of people who adopt the label just use "science" as a buzzword and are otherwise not any more scientific than the common person.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 01:44 PM
1

Stories like that are why I think that this sub should get more popular: http://www.reddit.com/r/BadMods/
/r/MensRights23/02/14 07:13 PM
22

It's funny because I'm not even a heterosexual. I don't find women sexually attractive at all, but I still notice in many situations that I'm treated like a lecher. When I was sitting in a train, for example, I saw a shiny gemstone hanging over a woman's cleavage. I looked at it for a while without thinking about the woman at all. She noticed it and it was pretty obvious that she assumed that I was staring at her cleavage. She didn't say anything, but she looked at me disgusted and shook her hea…
/r/MensRights18/01/14 01:08 PM
2

It's called "sarcasm".
/r/MensRights22/12/13 06:01 PM
46

Strange. I thought feminists are against sexism in general. I mean, it would be unfair to assume that they just care about issues that affect women, right? Those are just straw-feminists and radicals who don't represent feminism as a whole!
/r/MensRights22/12/13 02:58 PM
1

Are you trying to make me even more mad?
/r/MensRights18/11/13 02:42 PM
11

German here. I am so mad right now. So fucking mad.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 02:21 PM
2

Either free birth control for both sexes, or for none.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 05:52 PM
0

He views you as the enemy. Then we have something in common with regard to gun nuts. Such people are a threat to me, and I see no reason why I should have the obligation to accept that.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 08:24 PM
0

they cause more good than harm. A firearm increases the health risk of everybody around. Ok and what happens when some big bruiser 2x strength 2x your speed comes along? Bet you will wish you had that gun. Why? Because I want the situation to escalate so that somebody ends up dead? Because I want to endanger myself and the people around me 24/7 in case one of your thought experiments actually comes to pass? Because I am too dumb for general cautioned decision-making in public? People in a civili…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:56 AM
1

Bit of an interesting double standard there. Yes yes, every source that concludes that firearms in the home increase health risks is biased. The Harvard School of Public Health cannot be trusted. Gotcha. But maybe there is a reason why homicides can be measured more easily than the anecdotal evidence of wannabe cowboys. Perhaps because the former are cases which result in conviction? Unless you think that your country's justice system is so incredibly broken that it actually punishes more innoce…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:42 AM
1

Miserable healthcare, lousy cities, horrible education, crime galore, embarrassing rates of teen pregnancy, religious indoctrination, rampant anti-intellectualism, and a cesspit of feminist propaganda - yet, nothing seems to disturb the contented air of the Amis. Yeah, living in my country is like living in the dark ages because the idea that an invisible sky fairy created the earth in six days isn't as popular among the populace in my country as it is among the blobs in fatty nation. You have b…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 03:59 AM
3

But of course, it's clear you haven't thought carefully about this issue or done much reading. Or perhaps you're too unintelligent to have a discussion without making assertions you have no relevant knowledge to make. Just curious, how does accidental firearm death compare to other forms of accidental death and injury? Are there certain characteristics strongly associated with those involved in firearm accidents? They are completely unnecessary, for instance. Really? What source do you have that…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 03:43 AM
2

Yes you can, you can deny it quite readily. It's faulty reasoning, promulgated by people pursuing an agenda. Kellerman's 43x number, for example, comes from comparing all murders to a very narrow subset of SDGU. Is this copypasta? We weren't talking about murders. If firearms were in fact such a certain vector for death, the sociological groups of men most associated with firearm ownership -older, middle class, rural, white - would have the highest murder rates. In fact, the highest murder rates…
/r/MensRights27/10/13 01:25 PM
2

Are you denying this fact? If this isn't a discussion about freedom vs. safety, but simply a utilitarian assessment of what causes more deaths and injuries, then one cannot deny that guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense. But even if the reverse were to be true, I would still contend that I have no obligation whatsoever to let common people run around with dangerous weapon…
/r/MensRights27/10/13 12:50 PM
0

Let me guess: you're an American, right? If so, then it's hardly surprising that you actually believe that stuff. Frankly, I would feel safer in a Gorilla enclosure than in an American metropolis. I also don't get why you would call something a "great equalizer" when it effectively turns the owner into a greater potential threat than anybody around him.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 11:06 AM
1

Less because you're more likely to accidentally (or intentionally) kill yourself than to fend off a potential murderer.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 11:02 AM
1

I think Frogtarius' point is that it's poetic justice. It's like a robber getting mugged.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 12:24 AM
3

Berlusconi certainly is an asshole that belongs in prison. I think OP's point is that such sums are ridiculous and Berlusconi is just an example. In any event, I consider it to be poetic justice that this guy is a victim of alimony.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 12:22 AM
2

Berlusconi is a criminal that is unfairly privileged (I'm talking about real privilege, not the empty buzzword feminists use). It would be poetic justice if he was mugged.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 12:20 AM
5

What annoys me the most is that it's pointed out that the killers are male. Why is that important? Is it somehow less relevant when people are murdered by female killers?
/r/MensRights27/10/13 12:09 AM
0

I knew it! I freaking knew it!
/r/MensRights21/10/13 12:31 AM
1

Agreed. Dump her.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:10 AM
2

But at the same time he seems to try to deny it's existence. Ok my mind is starting to hurt wrapping itself around something so hypocritical and contradictory. True. On the one hand, he seems to say that misandry "isn't a thing", but at the same time he has characters who obviously hate men. Oh and the forums were beautiful in them trying to explain how "why shouldn't I hate my oppressors?" didn't actually mean that she hated men. The same character says "Kill all men!" How can anybody claim tha…
/r/MensRights25/09/13 12:06 PM
2

He even has a character who openly says stuff like "Kill all men!", and when asked why she hates men so much, the character responds "Why shouldn't I hate my oppressors?" I think that Ishida doesn't just say that misandry is insignificant, but rather that it's appropriate.
/r/MensRights24/09/13 07:15 PM
2

he has made even one making fun of the concept of misandry This one, or this one, or this one, or this one, or this one, or this one?
/r/MensRights24/09/13 12:54 PM
9

But that's exactly my point. We don't have enough evidence that suggests that she belongs to the "best people" and that's why I won't designate her as such.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:13 PM
49

Best people? You barely know anything about her. She could be a thief or KKK member for all you know.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 12:43 AM
7

http://i.imgur.com/CHJfhsd.jpg
/r/MensRights19/09/13 10:02 AM
6

True. In Germany, it was a man (Holm Putzke) who was on the forefront of fighting mgm. Meanwhile, the other side was telling us stories about the plight of Jewish women who tried to get their sons circumcised during WW2.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 09:54 AM
5

I'm still mad that the German government didn't do the same when it had the chance.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 09:46 AM
12

http://i.imgur.com/sN0qDOR.jpg
/r/MensRights09/09/13 05:03 PM
5

Awww that's so sweet. It's a shame that so many kids grow up without a dad.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 12:57 PM
4

There is a good evolutionary reason for such an impulse to exist, but I honestly never felt it myself.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 08:09 PM
1

As a single male with little income my chances of adopting are zero. Isn't that kinda crazy though? There are orphans starving on the streets in some countries, but it's not allowed for a man to take care of a child unless he is rich/married.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:41 PM
1

Maybe it was an honest mistake?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:40 PM
4

Your TL;DR is longer than the rest of the post.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:40 PM
3

Why not just adopt?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:35 PM
0

People obviously cannot do what they love all day long, and I don't think the message of the comic is that you should just act recklessly even if it means that you're going to starve. Rather, I think it tries to tell us that we shouldn't let others decide for us what our goals in life are. The media as well as the people around us put certain ideas about what a good life looks like into our minds. However, this life might not be good for us. For example, our culture bombards boys with a message …
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:26 PM
5

Yet again, would you really want to have a child with somebody who is only after your money? Maybe adoption might be an option.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:09 PM
1

I also would like silk sheets, candles, a Barry White CD and free K-Y Jelly.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:32 PM
0

That might get a little bit frustrating after the 20th take. :P
/r/MensRights28/07/13 01:13 PM
4

You really think so? It's not hard to choreograph a fake slap so I see no reason why the actress would have actually hit him.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 01:29 AM
51

Me too. Just a tiny bit less now that I know that at least the boy from my OP wasn't actually hurt.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 07:07 PM
270

Thank you. I didn't know that. This makes me less upset.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 03:50 PM
2

From my experience, if you treat someone like <anything>, eventually they will act like <anything>. True. There is a lot of data on the effects of stigmatization, especially with regard to children. Tell a child that he is a trouble maker over and over and he eventually will identify himself as a trouble maker as well, and act accordingly. Everybody love everybody. Well, let's not go too far.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:22 PM
1

Stuff like this just pisses me off too much.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:09 PM
-2

Was that picture really necessary?
/r/MensRights27/06/13 12:08 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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