TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

angry_cupcake_swarm Archive

View 0 posts and 32 comments by angry_cupcake_swarm 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)
1

If you read the whole article and his email, this almost certainly played into things - one of his fellow students even said his views initially provoked some good discussions.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 11:43 AM
1

Yeah, this could either be about people not liking his views or him being a jerk about his views. From reading the article (and skimming his email) it is is definitely possible that the issue was primarily about him being a jerk. Sending incredibly lengthy emails to the entire faculty is a red flag One of his fellow students is quoted as saying that his views initially resulted in interesting discussions. Then it was implied that over time he was more abrasive about his views. The way he writes …
/r/MensRights20/03/15 11:39 AM
7

This is great - the covers you link cover a whole spectrum of "vulnerable" positions & emotions. I just wish it wasn't part of such a down voted thread!
/r/MensRights18/03/15 10:58 PM
1

Because you can't fight myopia with more myopia. One of the MRA criticisms about feminism is that it tends to myopically focus on women's issues to the exclusion of men's issues. Combatting that consists of pointing out how men are affected too, not playing some kind of game where we try to figure out how to make a reductionist case for how men are 'truly' the ones being harmed. Reductionism doesn't get us farther, rather it serves as a justification for myopia. Shitty gender roles are shitty fo…
/r/MensRights24/11/14 02:08 AM
8

The "damsel in distress trope" is shitty, but being overly reductionist and acting like things can have only one "true" meaning helps nobody. You articulated why this can be a shitty-for-the-knight trope, but lets think of the other side too: you are a damsel trapped in a tower for years on end and have no agency. You can't rescue yourself and you have to marry whichever asshole figures out how to slay the dragon, regardless of if you like them. So depending on the details of a particular story …
/r/MensRights23/11/14 02:53 PM
-1

A court case about the legality of sales restrictions based on a video game rating system has nothing to do with legislating depictions of different genders in video games. Nobody is suggesting this as part of GamerGate/anti-GamerGate. Nobody is suggesting making changes to categories of games. Nobody is arguing about particular depictions about FPS's, rather they are pointing out that games like The Sims have huge, non-stereotypical audiences and that more and more of them are being created. Yo…
/r/MensRights06/11/14 01:59 PM
-3

But who really cares? If the "agenda" being alleged is true, and this agenda is successful in influencing game companies, ten what happens? Gaming companies make some games designed to appeal to either a broader audience and/or women specifically. Then these games will either succeed or fail in the marketplace. The worst thing that happens is some gaming companies make some unpopular games.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 05:33 AM
1

LGBT people aren't selfish for wanting families. Plenty of research shows that children do just as well when raised by same-sex Due to the number of laws tied up in marriage, the practical consequence to arguing against same-sex marriage is that one is arguing (depending on the state): gays don't deserve to visit their loved ones in hospitals they don't deserve to inherit anything when their partner passes away they should pay more in taxes & get taxed for benefits that straight couples don't ha…
/r/MensRights23/09/14 02:22 PM
1

Avoiding offensive terms lets you get back to the real discussion at hand. The difference is between "oh, I didn't know Gyp was a slur against Roma (Gypsies), thanks for the FYI" Versus "well in 1837 nigger was a perfectly acceptable term and blah blah blah some highly detailed argument as to why it still shouldn't be offensive" Clearly one of the above responses allows people to continue with a rational discussion and the other devolves into a useless discussion about the history of a word. (An…
/r/MensRights23/09/14 02:08 PM
1

Sexuality isn't necessarily more fluid in women: the penalties for women admitting same sex attraction have been so much lower than for men that men are much less likely to admit any fluidity. As society becomes more accepting I think the number of people admitting to same sex will even out betwixt the genders.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 04:03 AM
2

People making it illegal for minorities to do things like build families or visit their loved ones in the hospital are pretty shitty. Not liking a class of people is a problem, whether that is gender, orientation, political beliefs or anything else.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 03:58 AM
1

How a word develops a negative connotation is utterly irrelevant. If the group it is being applied to finds it objectionable, that is plenty sufficient. It doesn't take much effort to use a different term, so get over it and stop using it already.
/r/MensRights23/09/14 03:48 AM
2

Stop with the copypasta already
/r/MensRights23/09/14 03:40 AM
1

My point was only to refute the assertion that they are "so rare to be nearly a myth" - for such a strict standard, I think the anecdotal evidence is sufficient. Even if the once a week prevalence is isolated to certain bars, it does show that at least in some places it is far more common than "nearly mythical".
/r/MensRights15/07/14 01:30 AM
1

There was an askreddit about this: some bartenders mentioned seeing an attempt once a week. The thing is the predator often acts like they are taking the person home to to take care of them, which is not an uncommon sight at bars. Most people don't think to double-check that the helper and the helpee know each other.
/r/MensRights14/07/14 04:44 AM
1

Nope! This is just saying you are bound by a court order until you can get that court order overturned. (Such as via an appeal.) Imagine if it wasn't that way: the court orders somebody to pay you, and that person says it is an error and doesn't pay. Now what? *Do you just not get paid because the other person claims it is a mistake? That would be absurd, nobody would get paid as everyone would claim things to be a mistake. *Do you have to take somebody back to court to get the second ruling to …
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:59 AM
21

A person can withdraw consent at any time during a sexual encounter: once that change is communicated clearly to the other partner(s), the partner(s) are obligated to stop.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 09:14 PM
5

But then your punctuation for numbers and for language are out of sync. Linguistically a comma means slow down, a period means full stop. Numerically the decimal point is far more important ('stop, we are now dealing with fractions') than marking groupings of zeroes to make things easier to read.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 02:57 PM
8

Do tell, how many children you have raised? Babies and small children need constant supervision.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 01:11 AM
1

Even without the dig at men at the end this is ridiculous for an HR department to send. The images alone are not professional for something coming from the HR department, (unless you are a modeling agency or something). The text about women makes it worse, and the dig at men makes it even worse that that.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 12:20 AM
3

Isn't C redundant?
/r/MensRights06/05/12 10:19 PM
4

Posting an article where there are 3000 comments and 25%, 50%, 75% of them are misandrous (if that isn't a word, it is now), and people who call out the misandry are minimized and ignored, that is a solid example of misandry and is certainly worth posting. A post where just one idiot says something stupid isn't really worth it - finding one person on the internet saying something dumb is as unremarkable as finding porn on the internet.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:15 AM
2

Well said.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 09:53 PM
15

One idiot on FB is different from dozens of people condoning something. This link wasn't worth posting in the first place.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 09:44 PM
1

Sorry to be the grammar police, but I've seen this mistake a couple of times: the word you are looking for is principle, not principal.
/r/MensRights30/04/12 11:47 PM
1

Not sure if you're joking or not, so here's the serious answer: neither. I meant sex as in the biological determination between male and female (as in, having a vagina = female), as opposed to gender, which is the social determination. While for most people one's gender corresponds to one's sex, there are people (intersex, transgender, genderqueer, etc.) for whom they don't match up. My point would be much the same if you substituted the word sex for gender, as neither are grounds for self-cente…
/r/MensRights30/04/12 10:53 PM
2

Sure, I think I more wanted to point out that if somebody just said something like the following without the context you describe, I (as a man) would be upset: "I don't respect women because of their sex" which is very different from: "I don't believe women are entitled to special privileges because of their sex"
/r/MensRights29/04/12 11:57 PM
2

I think part of the problem is respect is the wrong word. Being given privileges because their gender is what you are objecting to, not to women being treated with common courtesy just like every other human being.
/r/MensRights29/04/12 11:37 PM
3

C'mon dude, condoms are what, a dollar each? Is having sex with somebody worth a dollar? Is avoiding an unexpected pregnancy not worth $30/month? Also, I forgot to mention this before - how important is slaying pugs to you relative to being in a relationship? Most women are rather fond of them, so this may be dramatically limiting your options. Maybe you should go after cat people - some of them might even see this... "hobby" of yours as an asset.
/r/MensRights16/04/12 01:02 AM
6

I'm supposed to listen to her every complaint while not complaining about her. If this is a typo and you can't complain to her about your problems then that is an issue, but if it isn't a typo then I don't know if you understand relationships. Issues about another person have to be handled delicately (by both parties, not just one side). Do you complain about your friends directly to them? If she isn't on the pill and sometimes even if she is, I'm expected to have contraceptives. Not having your…
/r/MensRights16/04/12 12:24 AM
1

You don't think I understand how insurance works? Nope. Hence my explanation. You may statistically be right, but you fuck a lot of innocent people along the way. The only way insurance works is if people who don't end up in car crashes pay money to cover the people who do get into car crashes. If you say the people who avoid accidents getting "fucked" by having to pay for others, then you are implicitly challenging the concept of insurance, whether you realized it or not. If it could statistica…
/r/MensRights16/03/12 06:19 AM
-2

i don't think you understand how insurance works: it is applying lots of statistics to groups of people to shuffle risk around. If you don't lump policyholders into groups, the industry would fall apart. While we can debate if there are certain groupings that should/should not be allowed, to say that insurance companies cannot group policy holders is to say they have to charge everyone the same price, would destroy the industry. (If my apartment insurance was the same price as Bill Gate's mansio…
/r/MensRights16/03/12 01:41 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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