TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

azwethinkweizm Archive

View 3 posts and 34 comments by azwethinkweizm 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)
-3

Ah so I am correct. They can wear shorts too but would rather comply with a societal expectation than feel comfortable at work while at the same time throwing a fit about it.
/r/MensRights22/07/26 02:09 PM
1

Are they required to wear pants or they're just choosing to wear them and complaining about their choice?
/r/MensRights22/07/26 01:57 PM
-12

The outrage isn't because of the men's leg hair, it's because of the expectation that women wear long pants but the men aren't required to do that? Is that it?
/r/MensRights22/07/26 01:56 PM
13

Why are the words "sex" and "sexual" censored so much in the article?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/01/26 03:47 PM
3

Because that's what it is. The word "rape" doesn't appear in the Texas Penal Code
/r/MensRights05/08/22 12:37 PM
1

This is why we need the Equal Rights Amendment to be passed. Laws like this would be unconstitutional
/r/MensRights06/02/20 12:34 PM
14

This gender bending nonsense needs to stop. Just go to the damn bathroom. Nobody cares! Quit being such a damn drama queen
/r/PussyPassDenied04/07/19 11:59 AM
2

Because separate facilities are inherently unequal.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 02:02 PM
2

Separate schools for men and women yet we should be treated equally? Can't have it both ways.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:27 AM
1

As opposed to staring at mindless posts on facebook all day long? I would say so.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:24 AM
1

Did you go to high school? Everything I learned about "society" in school was wrong.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:23 AM
2

Dress codes serve the purpose of not caring about what people wear. Poor kids can't get bullied for wearing old clothes with holes and the fashion police can't make a big deal about Suzie wearing a new mini skirt if everyone is dressed the same. Everyone likes to cite "individuality" as a reason for being against dress codes but since when did we define ourselves by the clothes we wear rather than the men, women, mothers, fathers, leaders, and entrepreneurs we could be?
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:23 AM
2

What's wrong with being open minded? You make it sound like tolerating differing opinions is a bad thing.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:18 AM
2

Great attitude when you're in high school. Horrible when you get older. Free razor blades sounds great until you realize you get the single blade Chinese knock off with shaving cream that's more sludge than cream.
/r/MensRights22/08/15 04:15 AM
-1

Men have to shave and women have to wear pads/tampons. What's the beef, sir?
/r/MensRights21/08/15 11:35 PM
1

Isn't equal? Most female high school students do not grow facial hair. I don't see where equality comes into the equation when the topic is facial hair.
/r/MensRights21/08/15 11:23 PM
3

I went to high school in Texas along with the parent user and we had a strict dress code. Sideburns not allowed to go past the earlobe, hair could not go over ears, and stuble was a no-no. Clean shaven or you were given a single razor with a mini can of shaving cream to take care of it.
/r/MensRights21/08/15 10:32 PM
11

You can't control facial hair? I can go to Dollar General, buy a dollar pack of razors and shaving cream, and show you how to control facial hair if you would like.
/r/MensRights21/08/15 10:30 PM
5

Sex contracts are about to be a real thing.
/r/MensRights30/08/14 11:44 AM
7

The problem with zero tolerance rules that punish kids if they fight back is that they empower the bully. Let me give you an example using hockey. Back in the old days if players got into a fight, the refs just let them get it out of their system and play later resumed. Now if there is a fight both players are sent to the penalty box for either 2 or 5 minutes. What does that mean to a hockey player? It means they can smash you into the boards, elbow your throat, and do dirty tricks knowing that …
/r/MensRights17/04/14 03:26 AM
0

This isn't a feminist thing, it's a liberal thing.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 04:54 AM
2

Everyone in this thread is wrong. Here is the only thing you should ever say to the police: I know you're just doing your job but I don't talk to police. I'm invoking my 5th amendment protection from being a witness against myself. If you have any questions for me, please direct them to my attorney.
/r/MensRights11/03/14 03:29 PM
5

I don't know where you went for college but at mine, all posters had to be stamped with approval from administration. All posters without the stamp were removed.
/r/MensRights04/02/14 12:10 PM
1

You're delusional if you think family courts benefit men and women equally. I've heard of cases where a man divorces a woman he's married to, the woman ends up in a homeless shelter, and is awarded custody of their child over than man.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 08:36 PM
-7

Why didn't you fight back? That is a fair question that deserves an answer.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 01:55 AM
1

How is "I will not marry you unless you sign this contract" different from "I will not let you live on this property unless you sign this contract"?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 11:42 PM
2

So why can't a man claim that she's not under duress because she agreed to marry him?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:16 PM
6

That's all it takes? How does that hold up in divorce court and not any other court in the world? I wish I could go up to my apartment manager and tell them I signed my lease under duress.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:06 AM
2

What if you videotaped the woman with their attorney both saying this contract is not being signed under duress?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 12:25 AM
2

What are you credentials? My best friend from high school had a clause in his prenup that says he doesn't want children, she must acknowledge that, and that she is not entitled to child support. They divorced with kids and he doesn't pay a dime. Is this a state-to-state thing?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 12:24 AM
6

This would be true for couples that don't have/don't plan on having children. Couples that want children SHOULD get married not just for the benefits of the child when it comes to taxes and insurance but divorce and custody is A LOT easier with a married couple than a live-in. Expect to spend thousands of dollars more on an attorney to contest or gain custody. By the way, if you think life is all about sex then you're the type that shouldn't even be calling someone a girlfriend in the first plac…
/r/MensRights05/09/10 09:00 PM
-1

Primary way? I strongly disagree. They can only get some much but when you have assets that outweigh the cost of a child then you are definitely wrong. A good prenup won't get thrown out in court if an attorney is assisting you with it. But good job trying to make stuff up.
/r/MensRights05/09/10 08:27 PM
-4

Nope, my girlfriend and I are the subject of that sentence so "her and I" is correct. "Fair" is not a verb in the sentence.
/r/MensRights05/09/10 07:00 PM
2

This is why you should always get a prenup. It doesn't matter if you think you have nothing to lose, who are you to say that you don't come up with an idea and start a company that makes billions? You can always put that kind of stuff in there. When I get married, I am going to have one. It's fair for both her and I.
/r/MensRights05/09/10 06:36 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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