TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

barbadosslim Archive

View 2 posts and 1,590 comments by barbadosslim 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)
0

barbadosslim/r/MensRights18/04/11 11:45 PM
0

barbadosslim/r/MensRights20/08/11 08:03 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,590 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Yeah a definition can't be wrong. By their definition they are the only feminists. By non-TERF definitions, they are not feminists. Their definition of feminism isn't discreditable (same as any definition ever created for any term), but their movement is discreditable on the basis that it is transphobic. What's the problem?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/17 08:01 PM
1

updeltas to the left please
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/17 07:56 PM
3

It is usually called out in situations that don't lead from true premises to false conclusions. People are allowed to define their terms. If someone defines "feminism" in a way that excludes TERFs, that is allowed. Then if someone else says "Feminists are bad because TERFs are feminists and they are transphobic," it is ok to respond with, "I don't care, I don't defend TERFs or include them as feminists." That is not a fallacy. What would be a fallacy is using two non-equivalent definitions for t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/17 06:12 PM
1

maybe you should learn how fallacies work hint: insisting that someone else defend an idea they don't want to defend is not a fallacy on their part
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/17 02:25 PM
1

I'm sorry you feel that way. I hope you decide to learn how fallacies and critical thinking actually work.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/17 02:19 PM
1

The thing about the no true scotsman fallacy is that it usually isn't a real fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/17 12:14 PM
1

I'm sorry you feel that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/17 03:35 PM
–

Not much, just not going out of my way to make the world worse for its own sake. I hope you get over whatever is making you want to be a worthless person.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/17 10:37 AM
1

Good luck overcoming your racism etc and turning toward intellectual honesty and becoming a worthwhile person.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/17 02:59 AM
1

That's asinine.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/17 02:45 AM
–

It's too bad that some people simply have no interest in being good people. I wish I could help you.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/17 02:44 AM
2

christ read a fuckin book or something
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/17 04:05 PM
1

I learned that red pillers are very bad at reasoning and are very selfish.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/17 02:37 PM
1

You made that up completely.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 10:49 PM
2

Misogyny. It's shameful and deserves mocking, talking down, and shaming. Dumbshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 07:48 PM
2

You should be ashamed.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 03:26 PM
2

Probably not.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/16 05:25 PM
2

im a broken person who doesn't want to improve
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/16 12:06 AM
2

I'm sorry you feel that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/16 06:22 PM
5

good luck getting over this thing you've got going on in your head about women
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/16 08:38 PM
7

You're talking to a raving sexist incapable of honest thought about gender issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 06:12 PM
0

They used "strategy" as a noun. What?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 04:52 PM
1

if only there were a school you could go to in order to become a less terrible person
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 04:40 PM
1

Yes, learning about historical oppression of a race is the same as learning a theory of inferiority of a race. /s I'm sorry you're having so much trouble here. Good luck man.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 04:33 AM
0

Hmm that doesn't actually make any sense. Sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 04:50 PM
1

I'm sorry you have chosen to go with that deflection instead of confronting the glaring problems with your thought process.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 04:46 PM
0

At the top of my shit list are feminists, SJWs, #blacklivesmatter protestors, muslims, illegal immigrants, and basically anyone on the left. Are you actually bragging about how you're actively trying to make the world a worse place? When you talk about bullshit oppression and SJW bullshit, do you mean to say that you were never taught in school about the oppression of racial and sexual minorities and women? Like you just never learned about it? For far too long, you have demonized being a straig…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 04:32 PM
1

tbh you're kind of a raving sexist. You've posted about how TRP is gospel and how you find women who have sex revolting. Reasoning is probably not going to work with you. Good luck getting over whatever this stuff is that's ducking with your head. Just try to remember that TRP is not a hard truth, maybe that will help you become a good person again.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 04:21 PM
1

Are you actually bragging about being a shitty person now?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:44 PM
3

Good luck escaping that whole self reinforcing thing you've got going on in your head. It's ducking you up man. Your whole post is riddled with little mechanisms for taking TRP as "gospel" and rejecting anything else out of hand. You reject any advice from women, for example. To me it seems like the root might be: I find it delivers dozens of hard truths. Are they really hard truths? Or are they self-aggrandizing ideas that put you above women? This idea that you are accepting hard truths seems …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/16 12:43 PM
14

A therapist, a circle of friends, a hobby, and a gym membership. Again, regardless of the accuracy, TRP offers a comprehensive perspective of the female psyche. Haha yes, regardless of accuracy. Why would we give any regard to accuracy? Jesus.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/16 12:38 PM
1

That didn't actually happen though. You gave a distinction without a difference. Sorry you're so devoted to rationalizing your hate for women instead of self improvement. I thought self improvement was supposed to be the basis for TRP. Oh well.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 12:53 AM
1

This is really just all about your worldview, and that of your opponent. Your contrasting worldviews are such polar opposites that you, Barbados, believe any worldview other than your own is not only wrong, but evil. Nope, I believe that misogynistic worldviews are wrong and evil. But not only are you wrong, but that doesn't even make sense. This: Your contrasting worldviews are such polar opposites Is true. We have contrasting worldviews. that you, Barbados, believe any worldview other than you…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 12:39 AM
2

This is totally unfalsifiable and undebatable.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 05:18 AM
1

Of course. I think you're having trouble with some stuff. One is that if an idea or value or social norm is common, it must be good. I can see this popping up with how you defend your misogyny because it is very common, and how you just now demonized anti-sexism because it is uncommon. Another think you're having trouble with is confusing is and ought. You keep saying that women who have sex deserve failed relationships. You've even doubled down on it. Your justification is that since society is…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 04:35 AM
1

Yes, you have a misogynistic view that is very common. No, it doesn't mean that your rationalizations make sense, or that your hate for women who have sex is good or justified. If you're trying to prove that you can spew word salad longer than I can respond to it, you'll probably win eventually.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 04:32 AM
1

More of the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 04:25 AM
1

Nope. What has happened is you have started with a hate for women who have sex. Then you come up with poor quality rationalizations to justify this hate. But these justifications don't even make sense if I put myself in the position of someone who agreed with your conclusion. They're just scattered thoughts. You have a huge problem with is vs. ought, for one thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 03:35 AM
1

A conservative bias against sex-positive ideology isn't any different than a feminist's bias against "toxic masculinity". It's not illegal to be masculine, or sex-positive. Everyone has the right to be however they want to be. But not everybody will like people who have ideologies with which they disagree. When you have any ideology, any behavior - really, any choice - there are consequences. It's like imitation thought. This is just word salad. It isn't a well-formed idea. It doesn't support wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 03:29 AM
1

And there you go again, rationalizing your hatred for women who have sex. Just-world hypothesis in full force.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 02:24 AM
1

You said that they "deserve" these relationship difficulties.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 02:06 AM
1

So are you retracting your earlier position which was: The only "shaming" that sluts deserve is to have extreme difficulty finding marital or long-term relationship partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 01:45 AM
1

As I said. The second line is: The only "shaming" that sluts deserve is to have extreme difficulty finding marital or long-term relationship partners. You think that women who have sex deserve to have extreme difficulty finding marital or long-term relationship partners. This is awful, you're awful, and you're lying about your own stated position.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:34 PM
1

My original position was against slut shaming. Where are you getting this irrational hate? I specifically touted all the other great things sluts can accomplish that give them great worth as a person, and defended sluts as having value as human beings. As far as I can tell this is made up. Your position is "If I disagree with X, then X is wrong, stupid, and evil. X is not even a valid viewpoint worthy of thought or discussion, because I'm so obviously right that the only way anybody could think …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 02:56 PM
1

You seem to have a weird meaning for 'good faith' also.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:41 AM
1

He is not operating in good faith, and you have a bizarre view of hate movements.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:27 AM
1

On the second bit, exactly right, his arguments don't hold up but that's the thing -- You didn't make any of your own. I actually did get suckered into writing some. It was just as pointless as every other time. You're on reddit, and you're reasonable, right? It's unfair to label everyone with a certain belief as all being the same right off the bat. What a bizarre thing to say, if you have actually read this guy's posts as you say.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:13 AM
1

So not wanting your own daughter to be slutty makes a man an evil person? At least in this respect, yes. You have started out with an irrational hate for women who have sex. That's why you call them "sluts", to denigrate them. Potentially to denigrate your own children, as you have expressly said. Then you have come up with this pseudologic to justify it. But your logic makes no sense. It is circular. Do you have kids? None of your business.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:07 AM
1

Neutral parties don't come into here thinking "hmm these posts in favor of shaming my own daughter for having sex sure are reasonable." Neutral parties don't even come in here. e: not bothering to bring facts or logical reasoning to the table while the other at least seems to be trying for the most part. A neutral party who actually reads the this dude's arguments will see that they make no fucking sense. He keeps repeating that without slut shaming, there would be no expectations for his childr…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 05:57 AM
1

Disagrees with you = Irrational hate? Holy shit are you serious. It's like saying (If I understand your perspective on their positions) "Those Nazis are irrational, better not argue against them!" Yes, I believe peer pressure would be a much more effective way to combat Nazi beliefs than a debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 05:52 AM
1

It's elsewhere in the thread for the umpteenth time. The problem here is not a lack of reasoned counterpoints, it is irrational hate from TRP endorsed contributors. If reasoned responses changed minds, we wouldn't have 9/11 truthers or TRPers or other conspiracy theory type groups anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 05:42 AM
1

Well the second expectation isn't really baseline or similar to the first one. It's actually pretty sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 01:57 AM
1

Well you have picked some sexist expectations, and then you tried to rationalize them however you could, no matter how weak the reasoning. And now when someone comes along and reminds you that your expectations are sexist, you are pretending that it is all or nothing. You're pretending that either you have these sexist expectations or no expectations. This is why it's so frustrating to talk to you. You will just make shib up in order to justify your exist starting point.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 12:19 AM
1

Of course you don't. You are even lying about your own articulated position. What, do you expect no one to notice?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 11:59 PM
1

No, a person has to be able to reason to debate. Since you cannot do that, the only thing left to do is to encourage you to stop your irrational hate for women and hope you get better.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 09:52 PM
2

So would you consider your daughters worthless if they were "sluts"?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 02:53 PM
1

What a great phrase you have to avoid having to think. Too bad, you only stand to improve yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/15 02:23 AM
0

-- a bigot
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/15 02:13 AM
1

Ugh
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 07:25 PM
1

Who amended this? It sounds like you are talking about people being framed for rape, not some change of policy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 03:04 PM
0

That reply has nothing to do with anything I said or the topic, which was a change in law such that regrettable consensual sex is now a crime.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 06:22 AM
0

That isn't what you said earlier. Of course this is a possibility, and has been as long as rape has been a crime.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/15 01:27 AM
2

Well I hope you get over your white male supremacy and whatever else. Good luck with being able to join reasonable society.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 10:21 PM
0

Get better.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 01:16 PM
0

Anyhow, since you aren't able to reason very well, maybe you would be better off learning which generalizations are bad by rote. That way you could avoid hurting people at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 12:09 PM
1

So I guess that's a no, you don't understand. Because the thing you're saying isn't actually a fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 11:51 AM
1

That isn't what an ad hominem is. An ad hominem is when you use a character flaw in your opponent as evidence that their reasoning or conclusion is wrong. E.g. "You can't listen to anything Werner Von Braun says about rocketry. Dude's a Nazi." It is an informal fallacy because it leads from a true premise (Werner Von Braun is a Nazi) to an incorrect conclusion (Werner Von Braun doesn't know rocketry). Do you understand? Secondly, the parroting of names of informal fallacies doesn't make this a r…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 11:32 AM
2

Hah that was not an ad hominem. Something isn't an ad hominem just because it hurts your feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 11:20 AM
-1

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 11:18 AM
1

Are you taking the position that nothing is immoral?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 11:15 AM
2

Well, no. But if you aren't able to understand that sexism is bad, you might be better off just learning by rote which generalizations are bad. At least until you are able to understand it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 11:13 AM
1

You can. But making sexist generalizations and pretending they are some profound research instead of your own prejudices is dumb as hell. Can you see the difference?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 09:53 AM
1

Generalizations can be fine. Dogs are cute. TRPers are misogynists. Red haired people have red hair. Your post shows how poorly TRP understands objections to TRP. Thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/15 06:39 AM
6

It's good to call out sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/15 11:13 PM
0

Article 1 Idgi, this doesn't seem to have anything to do with the last guy's issue with a redefinition of rape. We are still talking about having sex with people who don't consent to sex. article 2 This is a directive to police for their investigations, not a change in the burden of proof in criminal trials. And the directive amounts to, "don't take the suspect's word for it that they're innocent." Makes sense to me, not sure what the problem is.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/15 05:07 AM
3

When was this law enacted? As far as I can tell, rape is when you have sex with someone without their consent. Nothing there about changing your mind or whatever. Not sure why exactly you are putting "victim" in quotes like that. Anyway you're getting hysterical, and you're starting to make stuff up.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 03:53 PM
5

It's mostly not the men who are the victims, so they can easily have an objective definition. What is the distinction here? What is an objective vs non-objective definition of rape?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 08:50 AM
3

If that is an option then the OP's point is moot too.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 08:46 AM
11

If the human race is going to survive, it needs healthy mothers Are you sure that you started here and then reached the conclusion that women shouldn't have sex with a lot of people? Are you sure you didn't start out thinking women shouldn't have sex with a lot of people and then grasp for any possible justification, no matter how weak and/or totally made up?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 08:43 AM
2

And even if a man tells a woman to wear modest clothing (out of respect), he's still a "misogynist". Well yeah. That isn't something you could do out of respect. feminists don't care whether the behavior itself is right or wrong ??? Wearing skimpy clothes is unethical? What? Men have an objective definition of rape, while women change their minds based on the circumstance. We all have the same definition of rape, I hope. And I don't think you should lump all men in as antifeminists. Idk maybe ta…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 08:40 AM
1

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/15 04:07 AM
0

Your post is bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 05:46 AM
0

Sorry I couldn't help you uncrank yourself. Better luck next time!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 12:26 AM
0

My point was more general. It was about the value of learning and education, and about the crankiness of rejecting academia. My point wasn't about my personal knowledge. That's why I kept trying to give you analogy after analogy in a range of disciplines. See why pointing out a gap in my knowledge doesn't really matter here?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:40 PM
0

Dodging what? That I don't know everything? I freely admit it. You got me. Your point still doesn't make any sense sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:27 PM
0

Why would I need to tell you anything, you have an entire area of academia dedicated to the study of gender, especially rape... That should be easy, especially for you, lecturing others. I mean you went as far as tell me to educate myself so why should I educate you? Doesn't it interest you in the least? You got me, academia is dumb because I don't know stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:25 PM
0

you're dodging the question and avoiding debate, sorry your reply came before my ninja edit: How often do women rape men? Idk dog. E: as I knew you would(which is why I implied you were the irrational "crank"). Debating feminists is like shooting fish in a barrel. lol, this is not actually a debate sorry. This is a bunch of RP cranks demanding to be taken seriously in a Reddit subforum, being engaged by feminists who have literally nothing better to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:15 PM
0

It's not hard when you're right. In fact, it's the easiest thing in the world. You just point out where they're wrong. That actually doesn't work, which is why I gave the similar examples of 9/11 truther and anti-vaccers to illustrate this point. Reasoned arguments simply do not work with cranks. I do it all the time with feminists who think they know their shit. I got a question for you: How often do women rape men? Idk dog. Before you tell me, am I allowed to dismiss any and all bodies of know…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:10 PM
0

I haven't figured out how to engage cranks who really believe they are thinking rationally sorry. I'm sure you've spoken to an anti-vaccer and felt the same frustration. Wish I could help u.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:05 PM
0

Haha yeah you're a crank all right. Classic. You might call a pro-academia stance an argument from authority fallacy, I'll just call it a heuristic.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 11:00 PM
0

you can reject an entire area of academia built by the collective efforts of intellectual giants at any level of personal study. You just are a crank if you do it is all. You can reject an anti-intellectual hate group too. Not really similar tbh. E: here's an example of what I'm talking about in a different setting. This person believes they understand physics, and are qualified to reject the opinions of a multitude of actual engineers and physicists. They think they're just thinking critically.…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:46 PM
0

Well sorry I mean it's not like TRPers generally take classes or read books about gender studies and then reject them. You sound like a flat earther who claims to have studied and rejected physics in general. It just isn't true. E: also this really isn't a debate, despite the subreddit title
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:40 PM
2

Well, until you can actually unequivocally, objectively prove this alleged "irrational hate for women," That's pretty unreasonable right there. Maybe the most unreasonable thing you've said here. You're rejecting almost every kind of knowledge lol
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:30 PM
2

No. Have you read her position on women's suffrage?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:29 PM
1

So you don't understand that it simply does not follow. Got it. Well maybe you could read about appeals to false balance.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:27 PM
1

Sounds like wishful thinking to cover a generally anti-education attitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:26 PM
2

Seems pretty anti-intellectual tbh
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 10:25 PM
2

You see, your flaw is in assuming that I believe your premise of "well-supported ideas" is true, even though you haven't given any real support for that. Well I mean you can study gender issues at Harvard. I think there's kind of a lot of worthwhile academic thought you're dismissing out of hand. To even suggest such an idea is completely absurd when viewed in the cold hard light of reality. So wouldn't it be handy to recognize when someone is expressing such an idea so that we can dismiss it an…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:37 PM
3

What a perfect example of how handy it is to be able to recognize a post as being about an irrational hatred for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:33 PM
1

Idk maybe take a class or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:30 PM
2

She opposes suffrage for women
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:29 PM
0

If the RP position is defined as "hatred of women," then feminism must also be defined as "hatred of men." Do you understand why this doesn't actually follow logically?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:23 PM
6

Anyone who calls someone else a "misogynist" is a liar and a troll. Prove me wrong. That's some uncritical thinking right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:19 PM
4

Idk where people got the idea that dismissing entire bodies of learning and progress is critical thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:17 PM
3

Really? Because it looked like you were writing a post about how bad and irrational it is to point out that an idea is an example of irrational hate for women. When you talk about "questioning authority", It seems like you really mean "dismiss well-supported ideas that disagree with my prejudices". To be clear, are you yourself a misogynist or what?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 09:09 PM
4

I hope you get over whatever it is that makes you think like that. It would be cool if you learned to think critically too. You have some weird hangup about objectivity that doesn't really make sense. I think you might be confusing your prejudices against women with some sort of unpleasant objective truth that others have just been brainwashed into.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:49 PM
2

Why is it so important to take a discussion to an emotional level or try to find some hidden motive? Misogyny is an irrational hate for women. Misogynistic arguments are poorly reasoned arguments to justify this irrational hate. Recognizing misogyny is handy as hell.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:33 PM
3

You're taking a very narrow meaning of "hate". Think of misogyny as an irrational antipathy toward women. Maybe you don't seethe with white hot hate; maybe you just think women are dumb. In any case it is an irrational and harmful view. Recognizing misogyny is a powerful way to get through bullshit ideas. It is a useful label. It makes it easier to sniff out a pseudological or pseudoscientific post. For example, take this post, where the OP argues that women who have a lot of sex are not valuabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:25 PM
1

Idk dog I'm not an epistemologist. Im pretty sure you didn't understand my OP though. For real, no sarcasm. My point was that drawing the implication (it is easy for women to get laid) -> (women who get laid are bad) is bad reasoning. It's bad reasoning, and it looks like the OP is just looking for reasons to justify hating women. Do you understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:33 AM
1

That's a motte and bailey.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:13 AM
1

I literally said that if he is interested in gender studies he should take a class. You took issue with this. I never changed my position to make it weaker in scope while pretending I didn't. There was no motte and bailey fallacy. While I did mock your post, I didn't attack your character and use this as a piece of evidence that my thesis (class=good idea) was correct. I just made fun of your very bad post. There was no ad hominem fallacy. I didn't misrepresent your argument, because you took th…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:04 AM
1

Hahaha dude learn to write an actual thought, and learn what exactly fallacies are. Repeating the names of unrelated informal fallacies is not a complete thought, and it adds nothing. It is a shit post. Post better. Or wait sorry I'm not supposed to give you stuff to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 11:50 PM
1

I guess you're right, I'm doing a bad job of defending my radical pro-learning stance in this debate we are having. I guess you win, education is for chumps. You sure are a smart one, and how'd you get to be so smart? By skipping school of course. I can't believe I ever thought it would be a good idea for someone looking for intellectual stimulation to take a class. Thank you for setting me straight. What a fallacy that was. Yessiree.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 11:30 PM
2

Well you're sounding pretty anti-intellectual now.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 07:56 PM
1

Why not take a class or something if you want to learn some gender studies?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 07:43 PM
2

A counter dating guide
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 07:43 PM
4

Hahaha nothing you wrote makes any sense. What the duck is a mangina? Deepening the understanding of the female imperative? Dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 06:05 PM
5

Why is that a requirement for TRP to be wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 06:04 PM
16

-- endorsed contributor
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 05:59 PM
1

How exactly could anyone change your view even in theory? Like assume you're wrong, but don't know it. How would anyone prove this to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/15 05:16 AM
1

Gender studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:49 PM
0

I look at the statement and see whether its conclusions follow from its premises, and whether it's premises seem reasonable or made up. If you're having trouble with this, I don't think I can help you understand anything, much less why TRP is wrong. But I know you understand this. You're just playing dumb. I don't know why. Just to waste my time I guess. Mission accomplished.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/15 12:49 AM
1

Circular logic. Their nonsensical reasoning means they're wrong, and they're wrong because their reasoning is nonsensical. Hahaha no ducking way. This is maybe the weakest thing I've seen posted here. Ever. Dude follow the arrows of implication here, because all you did was say the same thing twice. First statement: "Their nonsensical reasoning means they're wrong." Nonsensical reasoning -> wrong Second statement: "They're wrong because their reasoning is nonsensical." Nonsensical reasoning -> w…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 11:37 PM
0

I am certain that they are wrong because their reasoning makes no sense. But you can have a discussion with someone who is wrong. Just not with someone who both wrong, and really committed to being wrong. It's even worse when the person is committed to being hateful. Just check out what happens when people try to engage a true crank in /r/math. The crank doesn't respond to reason. TRP is like that except with bonus misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 09:41 PM
2

And this, after saying that women who have a lot of sex aren't valuable. Yeah. Right. Tell me all about how you don't hate women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 08:10 PM
3

Basically yeah, I don't know how to do that sometimes, e.g. when the other person is committed to rationalizing their hatred of women. Reasoned arguments have no effect. It's like trying to have a grown up conversation with a 9/11 truther. You can bring up how steel is softened at high temperatures all you want, but it's totally pointless. All I know to do is hope they get better.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 05:01 PM
1

You were so close!
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 06:16 AM
3

Yeah I just thought you were being lazy or doing the rhetorical device where you pretend you didn't see an argument or point you didn't like. Because my OP actually addresses your point perfectly. Here I'll restate it: Even if we stipulate that it is easier for women to get laid than men, it doesn't follow that we should hate women who get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 02:06 AM
3

My other comment was deleted, but the tl;dr is that this is not an ad hominem fallacy. Merely containing something insulting does not make an argument an ad hominem fallacy. You can read about it on Wikipedia or /r/badfallacy if you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:59 AM
4

No, I was mistaken. My OP is still up there. Just follow the comment tree back up. It explains why your reasoning doesn't even make sense in the context of justifying your hate for women who have sex. They deleted the one where I explained what an ad hominem fallacy is and how it is different from an insult or a curse word or being mean or w/e.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:56 AM
-1

Hahaha I might as well enjoy the irony there
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:47 AM
4

Mod's deleted it. It's not against the rule to post misogyny, but it is against the rules to point it out.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:38 AM
5

I don't know how to engage someone that committed to rationalizing their hatred of women, sorry. Good luck, get better.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 12:45 AM
3

What debate? Word salad is not a thesis. I'm not sure you understand what is going on. E: lol my words had no meaning anyway remember? You just chose to interpret them how you did.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 12:41 AM
1

See my original post.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 12:41 AM
4

Isn't it ironic that here spewing misogyny is polite debate, but calling it out as irrational bigotry "needs to result in an immediate, permanent ban".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 11:30 PM
8

It's the entire point of his post. He wants to justify hating women for doing something that men also do. Or did you miss the part where he is calling women sluts? Or the part where he says that women who have sex with a lot of men are not valuable?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 11:24 PM
12

Jesus Christ that's stupid as fuck. Suppose for a moment that it's easier for women to get laid than men. So what? In no way would this justify your hatred for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 09:29 PM
0

I'm sorry you feel that way. As an MGTOW/RP it must feel good to feel like you understand what other people don't, and to feel like it is as reasonable as any other belief. But one of the things about RP is a willingness to face a hard truth. What about the hard truth that you are in an irrational hate movement that rejects all worthwhile thought on gender issues?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 07:06 AM
0

They're you're honest views, but that doesn't make them valid. TRP values cold logic. Turn that logic inward on yourself. Compare yourself to other conspiracy theory movements or hate movements.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 06:02 AM
1

That isn't how this sub is used at all. And I don't know the best way to engage sexists and conspiracy theorists, but I am trying my best.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 01:58 AM
1

I feel like you're the one who needs the wool pulled over from your eyes. Hahaha in the very last post I drew a line between feeling like you've had the wool pulled from your eyes and conspiratorial thinking, and here you go and actually write that. Anyhow you sound exactly like a 9/11 truther. Rejecting academia, feeling like you've had the wool pulled from your eyes. Any minute you might start shouting, "wake up sheeple!"
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 10:21 PM
1

Jesus dude, this is just an insulation from having to consider how batshit your belief system really is.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 02:35 PM
1

You could say that, if you wanted to be a conspiracy theorist who rejects entire branches of academia in favor of their pet conspiracy theory. I know it makes you feel smart when you feel like the wool has been pulled from over your eyes, but it's really not.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 06:14 AM
3

Basically if you're into the red pill, you're really not thinking reasonably. You've found a self-aggrandizing philosophy and pseudoscience that you're passing off as a hard truth. You're throwing an entire branch of academia out, because you've had the wool pulled from over your eyes. TRP is a conspiracy theory, and I hope you get out of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 05:18 AM
-1

They're "back away quickly"
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 02:33 AM
0

You weren't going to improve anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/15 02:07 AM
3

If you're taking one person's opinion as evidence of the community... No Nah you're right, I'm probably hateful, ignorant, and stupid. Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/15 10:52 PM
2

It's almost like red pillers are simply very ignorant, hateful, and stupid. We keep looking for a complicated explanation for their awful thoughts, but maybe it's just that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/15 03:41 PM
0

It's almost impossible to change the mind of a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Just look at the 9/11 truth movement.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/15 07:01 PM
3

What an irrational response. You're clearly not able to approach this without letting emotion cloud your thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/15 04:07 PM
3

You're totally unwilling to consider that you are actually being sexist or misogynistic. Women and blue pill men perceive it as hatred toward women because a lack of positive sexism toward women is seen as misogyny. You're lying to yourself. You're not showing a simple lack of favoritism for women. You want them to be your inferiors. You're just rationalizing it away here instead of confronting your irrational hate for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/15 03:18 PM
1

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Women+body+fat+percentage 20% is pretty lean.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/15 03:10 PM
3

That's where you're wrong. I don't think it's hateful to want women to behave better. You do hate women, you do know it, and you lie about it here. It's like listening to someone say, "I'm not a racist, I just think blacks are inferior." It's trivially dishonest. You want women to be subservient to men, and you have antipathy toward women because they aren't. You said so in this very comment tree. You hate women. You're not writing anything remotely rational.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/15 01:21 AM
1

Yeah, and then pretended not to understand that it is a general attack. You write your honest opinions about how women should act, but then lie about it being hateful.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/15 12:37 AM
1

20% is fat as fuck lol OP does not understand body fat percentage
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 10:44 PM
2

Please explain how my comment was a general attack. It was a general attack on women in general. You are pretending that you don't understand this, because you are unwilling or unable to write in good faith. Even if it was, saying things that don't sound nice about groups of people (i.e. not specifically targeting users) is allowed on this subreddit. It may be allowed, but it is totally irrational and adds nothing to the discussion other than helping other users know that you cannot have an hone…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 10:38 PM
2

Do you have something to offer other than a general attack?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 08:31 PM
1

Yeah never could keep up with snatch or clean
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/15 03:33 AM
2

Yeah. 465/415/300/195 feminist
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/15 01:12 AM
1

Idk what's an emotional trait
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/15 01:09 AM
1

idk maybe
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/15 12:17 AM
1

-- a racist
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/15 03:11 AM
1

Yeah racism, xenophobia, and a whole suite of bigotry seems to come along with TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/15 02:14 AM
1

You are arguing with a very stupid, irrational, and stubborn person. Totally convinced that his musings are profound truths about human nature. I think we are better off ostracizing him than engaging him.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 06:38 PM
1

TBP does not need to offer any particular alternative to TRP. It is enough to show that TRP is malicious, pseudoscientific, wrong, and damaging. Like how a skeptic of dowsing doesn't need to offer an alternative to dowsing. It is enough to show that dowsing is really fucking stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 09:22 PM
2

I believe that TRP posters generally exaggerate their success. It doesn't really matter though, because doing malicious things in order to have more sex is bad even if it works.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 09:20 PM
1

Not having sex is a way better outcome than committing rape. This is true regardless of what women might or might not find attractive. Please respect a 'no', or people like myself will vote to convict.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 06:43 PM
1

Good. Now just stop having sex at all until you learn respect a 'no'. Otherwise I will happily vote to convict if I am on your jury.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 04:50 AM
0

Kablammo
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 04:27 AM
0

Based on what he wrote, is that enough to convict him in a court of law? Probably not. But according to him, he is a rapist, and rapists should be locked away in prison. That was the question in the OP. The reason he hasn't been charged is that none of his victims has accused him of rape, not because he has never raped anyone (because according to himself, he has raped people). It seems to me that if a woman is going to a venue specifically to get drunk and to find someone with whom to engage in…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 04:15 AM
0

He seems to say he is.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 09:03 PM
0

Well I don't know what kind of dishonest reply I expected. You are accusing me of harassment for responding to your reply with information that you requested. It must be easy to support TRP when you are willing to lie so blatantly and obviously. I have no idea why you do it though, that's a mystery.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 08:47 PM
0

Saw this highly upvoted endorsed contributor talking about how he likes to gaslight women today and thought of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 08:44 PM
1

Good point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 12:25 AM
0

That's a pretty out-there thing to think. Openly pro-sexist, and dismissing an entire area of academia. Yet you still think you're a non-emotional rationalist. Oh well nothing to do about it but ignore you and hope you don't abuse your kids or rape anyone. E: I'll try. Imagine how crazy you would think someone was for saying "racism is perfectly valid. Anti-racists are irrational, deluded, emotional thinkers. Civil rights activists and African American studies professors are raving lunatics." Yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 12:19 AM
0

I'm sure it does feel like rational thoughts to you. It's not though. Wish I could help. Also I don't even have a post, you are delusional. what are you talking about? Actually who cares it's probably just more irrational ranting.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 11:53 PM
4

So again, tl/dr, if discrimination "pisses you off", IDGAF. lol then why did you make it the topic of discussion
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 11:52 PM
1

lol you don't seem to know what these fallacies mean
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 11:46 PM
0

I see, reality just happens to conform with your self-aggrandizing prejudices. Also those academics that say the opposite are all shitheads. I've got to say, your post looks really irrational and anti-intellectual. I don't think you're going to be able to contribute to any discussion of gender when you're that bad at thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 11:20 PM
5

You don't get to jump from "AWALT" to "sexism" in a debate Yeah you do. It's pretty much modus ponens.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 11:17 PM
2

Do you mean that you can't derive understanding of sexual attraction with pure reason starting from almost nothing? Because that doesn't sound very controversial.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:30 PM
4

Because sexism is harmful to others, and sexism makes you a shitty person.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:28 PM
1

You're starting to slip back out of self awareness now. Too bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:22 PM
1

All good points. Don't forget about getting your daughter to internalize some of your misogyny too. And dismissing an entire area of academic study (gender studies).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:16 PM
1

A moment of clarity. But don't forget your complete refusal to learn about consent.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:10 PM
0

/r/thebluepill has a compilation of evidence right there on top. The TRP sidebar also is filled with misogyny. Here have an example. E: Haha oops didn't realize that was you again my bad dog.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:06 PM
0

Exactly, that is exactly the sort of example he is demanding. They exist, but they are irrationally dismissed as "anger phase". In any case, jumping up and down and saying "I hate all women" is not actually a requirement for someone to be a misogynist.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:03 PM
-1

You have seen the examples, and yet you still deny it. Do you think that your blatant lie is convincing? Because they have the same effect as your attempted diagnoses: they make you look really irrational. Here is your MO: demand examples, quote part of the reply that does not include the examples, demand examples again, say that the other person's (reasonable) opinion is evidence of a specific mental illness. E: here, because I am so trollable have another example from the TRP sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:48 PM
-1

here's a link to a different sub who satirizes TRP It is also a link to a compilation of misogynistic posts from TRP. Right there at the top. But you know that. You are just arguing in bad faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:44 PM
-2

So to recap me getting the shib trolled out of myself: TRPer: women are disloyal and childlike, and intellectually inferior to men Me: whoa that's pretty misogynostic TRPer: that is slander, you have no examples of TRP saying misogynostic things, except when in the anger phase, and also it has to be the words "I hate all women" said by an EC who isn't angry at the time in order to count as an example. Me: dude that's a really dishonest point You: so you gonna provide those examples of admit you'…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:36 PM
-2

I like how you skipped over where I said linking to TBP isn't proof of anything. Thank you for proving my earlier point about the catch-22. You dismiss examples without any rational basis, and then say I did not provide any. You are lying. I also like how you called me sexist but can't show where I've ever said anything remotely sexist. This series of posts you are making is evidence of your sexism. I even like how you say you are rational while believing in delusions. When you say stuff like th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:20 PM
-2

I like how you quote most of my post, and skip the part where I provide the examples.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:17 PM
-2

Man I'll be honest, I dont think I can convince someone who is happy to be a shitty person that they shouldn't be a shitty person. Just have to want to care about other people in my opinion. I could be wrong, maybe someone smarter than me can convince you that hating black people etc is bad. Tbh the best thing to do may be to keep you guys underground by ostracism. Someone else posted that they lie about their TRP beliefs in public for fear of getting fired. That's good at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:10 PM
-2

WHERE DID YOU PROVIDE IT? WHERE IS YOUR LINK? /r/thebluepill is the link. It is a compilation of thousands of examples. Try sorting by top. I honestly think you're delusional at this point. You are making claims that are objectively untrue. You have provided zero evidence or links, but you keep saying you did. No rational person could possibly believe this. It's like saying, "this person is very bad at arguing that the KKK is a racist organization. Therefore the KKK must not be a racist organiza…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 09:04 PM
-1

I provided it yet again, and you ignore it. The request for evidence is not a sincere one. You are arguing in bad faith. I don't know what to do to help you be rational about this.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:55 PM
-2

What a dishonest and poorly reasoned post you have just written me. You ignore my point, then misrepresent my point, and then pretend that I had never provided examples (I linked to /r/thebluepill which is a compilation of examples several times). And you top it off with a fallacy fallacy. If I hadn't been on nutty Internet forums this long I'd say you were trolling, but I think it's more likely that you are just a very stupid sexist. Great job, maybe next you can prove that there was no moon la…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:46 PM
-1

I know I did. You just don't want to admit it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:13 PM
0

lol that didn't even make sense
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:11 PM
-1

And the sexist was outraged to be called a TRPer, because while he did hold bigoted views, he did not subscribe to the particular sexist philosophy of TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:09 PM
-2

No I'm not. So you agree with that point then? And you should go ahead and provide it anyway. If you can prove them wrong, do so. Especially openly and publicly. If you can't, then you should stop claiming you can. I have already done that. There's a lovely and nearly endless compilation on /r/thebluepill. But you know that, you are just arguing in bad faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:06 PM
-1

You are neglecting the part where they irrationally and dishonestly pre-dismissed any examples of misogyny I could provide. There is no point in providing evidence that someone has already admitted they will not accept it. Their reasoning is bunk. In addition to this, this request for examples is just like a creationist's request for examples of transition fossils. In every case, the creationist has already seen examples and will not accept examples.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:56 PM
0

Next
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:51 PM
0

Alright bud. This is a debate sub. So how about you start writing well-reasoned, good faith arguments. Otherwise this will continue to not be a debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:48 PM
0

Feminism is the movement to end sexism. And even you should be able to see the irony of dismissing entire areas of academic study, and then calling those people anti-intellectual. And you close it up with an irrational and sexist comment. Your thoughts here are pretty worthless. I look forward to reading the next garbage you post.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:45 PM
0

So if I follow, you're not misogynists, but it doesn't matter because misogyny isn't bad, the very concept of misogyny is about controlling men, and who cares if people are misogynistic anyway. Goddamn you are one hell of a misogynistic nutcase. Tl;dr: Misogynist", "racist", "homophobe", "sexist", are all stupid words made up to describe stupid, useless concepts that don't make a lick of difference. -- a shitty person
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:38 PM
0

No. The problem here is that you aren't being shown evidence. The problem here is that you are irrationally and dishonestly dismissing the evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:36 PM
-2

I would post this to /r/badfallacy if I weren't involved. In any case please read up on what constitutes a no true Scotsman, for your own benefit. It's not a fallacy, and even if it were it is not material to my point. You argue in bad faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:16 PM
-1

No, I don't. I don't ever visit TBP. Then you know from visiting TRP itself. Why do you think we have an EC/Vanguard system? Find me a post by /u/Whisper or /u/Archwinger telling RP'ers how much he hates women. I'll wait. Examples abound, and you have seen them. They're on TBP if you would like a compilation. If they don't say something that can be construed as having come from a place where they hate women, then no, it doesn't count as hate. Saying things like "women are teenagers" isn't misogy…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:15 PM
0

Thank you for clearing that up. That is a legitimately good point about potentially larger TRP groups existing elsewhere. But your view of feminism shows either a sincere hate for women, or ignorance of feminism. Either way, it's an anti-intellectual position you're taking.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:10 PM
1

Sure I am. You have posted no rational basis for thinking otherwise, and admitted that your posts are in bad faith. So yeah. What other worthless shib would you like to post next?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:06 PM
1

Maybe you think that, and maybe you don't. Who knows what you really think! In any case, I am arguing my real beliefs in good faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:55 PM
0

That wasn't a fallacy, nor was it key to my point. But you have already said that you lie about your beliefs, so maybe you knew that and are just arguing in bad faith. Who knows!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:54 PM
-1

Right. You have very good reasons for lying about your beliefs. Thank you for conceding the point, which was that you lie about your beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:52 PM
0

You have already admitted that you are arguing in bad faith. This is just another example.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:50 PM
-1

Got it. You lie, post in bad faith, and cannot post an honest defense of your beliefs. I accept your concession.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:48 PM
-1

Basically. Any reasonable and informed person can see that TRP on the whole is hateful toward women. TRP objections to this are without exception argued in bad faith. I have supported this opinion of mine with solid reasons and comparisons. And you know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:45 PM
0

Oh I thought that was PUA. In any case, /r/TRP is being reported as the nexus of TRP thought, and endorsed and upvoted posts there seem to be representative of TRP thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:44 PM
0

Googling seems to show /r/TRP being reported as the nexus of TRP thought. What is bigger? Roosh? E: and it's a shame that you turtle up like this instead of trying to become a less awful person. I wish I could help, but you have to want to not be bad I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:40 PM
0

Sure that makes sense, like a KKK member might deny their racism in public in order to avoid being justifiably fired or persecuted against. But in addition to this, TRP posters tend to lie about their beliefs even on anonymous non-RP Internet forums. This is because you need to argue in bad faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:37 PM
0

That doesn't make any sense. Feminism is the movement to end sexism. Try again with a rational post if you'd like.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:30 PM
2

/r/thebluepill has thousands of examples, with no hyperbole. Representative examples from endorsed contributors even. But you know this already. This is why you have to come up with an irrational dismissal, in order to keep arguing in bad faith. So you require examples to come from TRPers who aren't in the "anger phase". Someone posts a representative example of misogyny from TRP. Does it count? No, because it's a man in the "anger phase". How do we know it's just an "anger phase" post? Because …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:23 PM
0

Exactly, you're like a creationist demanding proof of transition fossils. Or a KKK member demanding evidence that the KKK is a white supremacist organization. If you were able to be honest, you would have responded to the thousands of examples already given. But you're not honest. E: What's even more dishonest is demanding examples of misogyny, and then in the next sentence saying that examples of misogyny wouldn't even make a difference to you. Your writings about TRP are completely worthless. …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:02 PM
0

/r/TRP is the single largest meeting place of RPers. Would you care to make an honest post? Or are you just going to stick to your dishonest and anti-intellectual pseudoscience? Wouldn't you rather get smarter instead of dumber? I just don't get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 04:45 PM
1

Um there is a difference between "differences exist" and "differences exist, therefore my prejudices are true".
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 04:20 PM
0

[neuroscience] knows enough to prove that the purple pill theory, as you describe it, is the only one worth listening to. Hahaha what the fuck
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:34 PM
1

Sure, sexist aspects of a culture are bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:32 PM
1

TRPers simply lie about what they believe when speaking to non-RP people. That is the real issue here.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:31 PM
-1

None of those assumptions are good assumptions though. Red pillers are raving misogynists incapable of thinking rationally about any of the issues they write about. That's why these assumptions are made by BPers, and that's why this isn't a meaningful discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/15 12:11 AM
3

if you're using that as a euphemism for date rape or abuse then sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/15 02:14 PM
-1

Basically. Despite the name of the sub, there is no debate occurring here. There are three ways to change someone's opinion: rational argument, emotional argument, and societal pressure. Since RPers are irrational narcissists, that leaves just option 3.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/15 02:05 AM
1

You have dismissed an entire area of academic study, which shows that you aren't going to be able to have a rational discussion. The blatant sexism and blatant irrationality (seriously, your rape culture post doesnt follow logically at all) of your posting also make your points worthless. And sorry if it feels like an ad hominem, but pointing out that you are a potential rapist is more important than holding to good decorum in this nonexistent debate. But this isn't a debate. This is you, a craz…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 07:15 PM
-3

You are a dishonest person co-opting the language of nonviolence, all the while furthering rape culture and hate for women. You are totally unable to post a rational or honest thought about it. If you weren't so anti-intellectual maybe you could improve yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 07:05 PM
-1

That wasn't a fallacy because it wasn't a counterargument. You really aren't able to think about this subject, so just please try not to rape anyone. You sound like you pose a danger to others.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 07:00 PM
0

You're showing very poor thinking skills. Let me know if you ever decide to quit with your irrational, anti-intellectual, sexist shtick. In any case please don't rape anyone. You sound like a potential rapist :-/
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 06:55 PM
-1

With an attitude like that you might never have to learn anything at all! Just keep on being a committed misogynist, you seem to prefer it to having to think rationally.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 06:32 PM
-1

So one person deserves to be attacked physically for his speech, whilst another person does not deserve to be attacked for their speech? Got it. Yes. This only sounds weird to you because you're getting trapped in your own false equivalency. Secondly, "malicious person who harms people"....whom has he actually harmed? Victims of the rape culture he supports. Who gets to be the arbiter of who is malicious and who is not? You? No one. Plenty of gamers would argue that Zoe Quinn was indeed a malici…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 05:41 PM
-3

What if we flipped the script; i.e., a bunch of fat, brooding, neckbeard gamers started attacking Anita Sarkeesian or Zoe Quinn at a gamer conference, and threw Mountain Dew and Cheetos on her, and chased her out of the building in an aggressive fashion, shouting obscenities at her and pushing her around? The difference is that Roosh is a malicious person who harms people and Sarkeesian et al are not, obviously. Your "flip" makes a mistake of false balance.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/15 02:43 PM
1

Tbh posting that opinion just lets me know that there's probably nothing worth reading in all those words.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/15 02:40 AM
-1

Well that's what they deserve for killing people.
/r/MGTOW07/08/15 01:47 PM
0

Duh, they're crazy as duck.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 05:49 PM
1

You do hate women, you are just lying to yourself about it. You also may be hurting people as a result of your RP beliefs. You may consider yourself a pacifist but your philosophy has serious problems with consent.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 03:24 AM
0

try telling some other people in real life what your opinions are.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 03:22 AM
1

Next
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 01:26 AM
2

Yeah you're pretty far gone idk how to constructively respond.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 01:23 AM
1

Yeah that's what pseudoscientific sexism looks like. E: also you are ducking crazy and your thoughts don't make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 12:58 AM
1

You're placing too strong a condition here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 09:57 PM
-1

Yeah if you didn't see the importance of consent, you would be a danger. Or if you hated women you might abuse them. This would be possible despite pacifism.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 07:48 PM
0

It's because functionally there's nothing wrong with sexism. There are differences in the sexes that warrant differing treatment. Should all restrooms be unisex? Should all women be expected to be as strong as the average man? Should able-bodied women be forced in the name of outcome equality to engage in the most dangerous jobs? Your argument against sexism is unrealistic and ridiculous. Like I said, I can't convince someone to not like sexism. Except many achievable things are now achievable d…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 06:19 PM
0

You even showed how you fabricated the quote by using text from my post. This is pretty weird. Example of what you did. Here you even say "I made it up". See how that post of yours has the words "I made it up" but nowhere says that you made it up? Well that's exactly what you did to me. You took words from my post and then pretended that I said them. You are a dishonest poster. Anyhow I am really done. Respond with whatever new made up shib you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 06:10 PM
0

Why do I get the feeling that no matter what I say, you will make up something new? You clearly exposed your own earlier lie just 2 posts ago. It's right there in black and white. This is getting weird.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 06:08 PM
0

Thank you for proving my point. I will accept this in lieu of an apology. No need for you to respond further.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 06:06 PM
0

No, you fabricated the quote. You are doubling down now. Fuck off.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 06:04 PM
0

You made that up though. That didn't happen and you know it. You are lying and you know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 06:01 PM
0

That was in fact a lie. Good job. Please leave me alone now. E: damn you can't stop completely making shit up.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:57 PM
0

Jesus Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:55 PM
0

It was only 11 minutes ago, I think you can remember. You will receive no further response, good job on the time-waster.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:55 PM
0

No shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:53 PM
0

You also lied. Why should I repeat my debunking of an idea that you probably don't even believe? It's right there in any case.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:51 PM
0

You probably don't even believe that.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:48 PM
0

If you're going to continue to lie then there will be no point in responding to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:47 PM
0

You are showing blatant dishonesty. This shows that you probably don't believe what you say.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:45 PM
0

Because every reasonable and informed person knows that some feminists are educated about feminism. This isn't remotely controversial. Maybe next you'd like to ask me for proof that all reasonable and informed people know that the pope is Catholic.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:44 PM
0

Read it again. That was a point by point dispute, except for the one element I couldn't dispute. Point 1 is indisputable. I can't make you dislike sexism. Point 2 doesn't follow because there are many achievable things that have not been achieved. Point 3 stands as is.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:41 PM
1

I already pointed out your errors, and you doubled down on them. That means that you can't be reasonable and that its time to move on. I hope you get out of your pseudoscience when you have insulated it so well from actual education, but I have no idea how to help you do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:37 PM
1

You aren't in a place where you can think reasonably about any of this. Get there and I'll talk to you if you want. I don't think there's anything I can say to help you today though.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:32 PM
-1

No one has gotten rid of sexism because there's no reason to, the sexes are different thus to treat them exactly the same would be less than optimal for each sex. Oh ok, well I don't really think I have a good response for someone who knows he's a sexist and likes that. At least not a response to that part. If complete equality were possible or even necessary we would have done it by now. That doesn't follow. What modern feminists see as inequality is just life being unfair. No one will ever cha…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:31 PM
1

What an anti-intellectual attitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:26 PM
0

You are mistaken that feminism has caused a rise in sexism or in general caused more harm than good. Both of those things you have made up. Your analogy is clear. It makes sense. It just doesn't apply to anything that actually happened with regard to feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:23 PM
-1

Well people don't stop existing when they get rid of sexism. That hasn't happened. It's hard to see what the point of literal gibberish like that is though.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:21 PM
0

Which areas is being dismissed? Gender studies, for one. Not remotely comparable, but interesting to see how you view trpers. Im seeing your racial comments now and it's giving me a better sense of your point of view. I'm sure a profoundly irrational person like yourself might see no similarity between TRP and other groups in the lunatic fringe. And what makes you think you do? How are you any more right/better? I'm not dismissing entire areas of study that I know nothing about because of some s…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:19 PM
-1

That's conspiratorial thinking. It probably does feel like critical thinking, but it isn't. Man up and get over your ill will toward women or don't get married at all. E: and I don't know where you get the idea that any of this is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:08 PM
1

This isn't a debate. This is RPers subscribing to a sexist pseudoscience and dismissing an entire area of study. Therefore debate with an RPer is similar to debate with a 9/11 truther. I get it, you want to be taken seriously. You just don't deserve it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 05:04 PM
-1

The first sentence there was ok, but you really went off the deep end after that. I dismiss TRP, ergo I produce nothing. You are showing some pretty bad thinking skills there.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 04:59 PM
-3

You're wrong because you probably shouldn't marry a woman at all. You clearly have a lot of antipathy toward them, and you might harm the woman you marry.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 04:57 PM
1

Only as long as it still seems to be the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 04:46 PM
0

I would prefer if potential rapists swore off women. As an RPer, this man's willingness to get consent is suspect.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 04:33 PM
-1

Would be cool if you didn't put so much work into defending reactionary Internet blogs as sources of knowledge. You might not like it, but they really are terrible sources of knowledge. Not sure what the point about comparing degrees is either. We aren't talking about chemistry, debate, etc. We are talking about gender studies, which is a legit subject that you are dismissing. And you don't need a gender studies degree to know that TRP dismisses an entire legit area of study. And then you someho…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 04:30 PM
-2

You're treating this like a debate where both sides are valid. It is not. Only one side (feminism) is a subject of legitimate study. TRP is a pseudoscience. And "a university education" isn't the same as an education in gender studies. I can't guarantee that an education would help you, but it might.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:01 PM
0

Good, I'm glad you don't stand by what you said earlier.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 02:57 PM
-1

None. Do not get married or even date women. Look into MGTOW.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:56 PM
1

Hmm it looks like you get your information from reactionary Internet blogs. That may be part of the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:55 PM
-5

Dunning-Kruger effect right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:38 PM
-5

Sounds like you could use some education that didn't come from a reactionary blog.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:36 PM
-3

hahahaha what kind of gibberish is that? I've never seen that before.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:34 PM
-2

Well feminism has been applied in the real world with positive results. Glad to clear that up.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:30 PM
-4

Well any anti-oppression or anti-bigotry movement will run a risk of galvanizing bigots or oppressors. You're going to have a hard time making a case that this is bad or outweighs the benefits. If you're self aware enough to see that feminism has affected you like this, then it's a wonder you're not a feminist.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:42 AM
-3

In some sense they do get to decide, because they seem to be nearly all of the people in gender studies academia.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:41 AM
-6

Look at what he wrote, then look at what I wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:37 AM
-1

Ok, we are using "equal" in a different context. You are using it to mean "equal in status", i.e. The end goal of anti-sexism. I was using it to mean men and women are morally equal worth and are equally moral people. Redpillers do not believe women are as moral or ethical people as men. As for men being disadvantaged, well I suppose privilege loss can feel like a legitimate disadvantage.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:33 AM
-4

You've made your analogy clear. What you've made up is how it applies to feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:30 AM
-7

If you think that there are no very highly educated people who are highly critical of feminism, you don't know enough highly educated people well enough to get them to voice their true opinions. Read what he said, then read what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:29 AM
-3

what an anti-intellectual attitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:26 AM
-6

I did. You said that it is possible for a well-meaning movement to have very bad unintended consequences.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 03:25 AM
-5

What an anti-intellectual attitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 02:55 AM
-8

I think you have made up all of those ill effects though.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 01:19 AM
-6

Critical thinking is lacking in a pseudoscience like TRP. Look into gender studies and you will see critical thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:48 PM
-6

That is a completely different statement than this: Getting educated on this movement would do nothing for you but teach you to despise it. do you stand by this statement?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:47 PM
-4

Book or class would be a good start. Bell hooks has a short intro text.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:45 PM
-9

If you don't believe that there are feminists who have studied feminism, then you cannot be taken seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:44 PM
-1

It sounds like the problem here might be lack of education. If you're getting your information from reactionary blogs, you will think those things.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:43 PM
-1

RPers do not believe in gender equality. They say they they believe that the genders are not equal explicitly and frequently. Then to outsiders, they lie and say what you said.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:34 PM
-7

No reasonable and informed person thinks that. Not even one. There are many feminists who are well educated about feminism. This shows that you probably aren't informed (I hope). Maybe read a book or take a class.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:30 PM
-5

Oh well no, there isn't a downside to ending sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:28 PM
0

Shame men? I'm not sure how you're getting that. Then again you aren't able to think about this subject rationally.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:27 PM
-8

I guess education isn't a panacea after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 11:13 PM
-1

Of course not. Sexism is harmful, and feminism is the movement to end sexism. Many of the posters here have a distorted view because they learned about feminism from reactionary Internet blogs instead of from books or other good sources. Check out bell hooks, she has a great (short) intro text.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 10:49 PM
1

Hating women wouldn't be helpful even if a woman did harm me. If you were able to think you would see this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 10:36 PM
0

It's weird when RPers claim to believe this. No reasonable and informed person could believe this. I don't know if they are lying or just lying to themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 10:31 PM
0

You are clearly unable to think about any of this rationally.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 10:30 PM
3

It's a bad post for two big reasons that I see. 1 is that his girlfriend being ok with the posts doesn't seem to have any bearing on his posts' misogyny. We can see this is true because his posts are explicitly misogynistic and yet his girlfriend has ok'd them. 2 is that relying on his girlfriend to determine whether his posts are misogynistic doesn't fit with his view of the intellectual inferiority of women. That's a weird inconsistency. Blue Pill or Red Pill, how can you not see the truths in…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 10:23 PM
-1

Starting Strength is advice that originates outside TRP and is virtually always learned about outside of TRP. You are focusing on good, uncontroversial, widely available advice that happens to be recommended by TRP in an effort to take attention away from the parts that are more exclusive to TRP. You don't want attention on the parts that make TRP be TRP. I used to follow SS, and this doesn't make me any more redpill than any man. If I started believing that women are like children, THAT would b…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 10:09 PM
1

Yeah it would be funny if you were harmless.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:22 PM
2

You show very poor thinking skills in that post.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:21 PM
0

Thank you for proving my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:20 PM
3

You know nothing about feminism. Maybe learn about it from a book instead of a reactionary blog. Your research has somehow made you more ignorant. Follow the RP ideal of self improvement and fix this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:13 PM
1

Exactly, so don't claim them as essentially red pill ideas or advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:11 PM
0

You could almost be called an outlier in that you voice more hate for women than most other RPers. If it weren't for the fact that you are so popular it might be cherry picking to use you as an example of TRP. In any case, you definitely are not a data point that contradicts anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:09 PM
0

I'm starting to think that convincing RPers that it is good to be a good person is a losing game. Figuring better ways to minimize the harm they do seems like a better use of time.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/15 06:05 PM
1

It's not really an assumption, it is a conclusion based on the shit you say, e.g. what you just posted right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/15 12:08 AM
9

He is correct. You do not have a rational position that is just hard to accept. You have a bitter position based on antipathy toward women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 09:07 PM
0

I helped start SRS and I lift. I don't know where the idea that non-RP people are against lifting comes from.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/15 10:29 PM
1

They don't hate women, they just think they're disloyal, childlike, and generally inferior, and also hate them during "anger phase".
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/15 10:27 PM
0

I like how the title of the OP is supposed to look like its a bad thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/15 05:00 AM
-1

Which part? The part about a book, or the part about a class if the OP has time?
/r/ExRedPill12/06/15 01:34 AM
6

Man I think you're going for a pretty hardline behaviorist point of view, and one that supports your prejudices at that. If you want to study behaviorism that's cool, but you should be taking classes or reading books. Asking 17 year olds about TRP prejudices on internet forums is probably not a good way to gain knowledge or wisdom.
/r/ExRedPill12/06/15 01:27 AM
2

idk what quora is. I'm not sure you responded to the right person.
/r/ExRedPill10/06/15 02:08 AM
8

Man looking at your other posts in /r/mensrights I think you're getting off the track of progress. Maybe get a feminist book on masculinity or something. You don't want to just wind up in TRP-lite.
/r/ExRedPill10/06/15 12:50 AM
4

Maybe take a class if you have the time or read a book about privilege or feminism or even masculinity or something. IDK. Sorry if that sounds flippant, but that would probably be the best thing for you to do.
/r/ExRedPill09/06/15 06:43 PM
2

TBH you sound like a legit misogynist.
/r/ExRedPill07/06/15 11:44 PM
6

I guess that's good you're not redpill. You still sound kind of off, though. Maybe take a class if you have the time or read a book about privilege or feminism or even masculinity or something. IDK.
/r/ExRedPill07/06/15 11:42 PM
4

Unlike the BP crowd, TRP is open to dissenting opinion and understand there might be more to learn. That doesn't mesh with their general refusal to read books or take classes.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 04:07 PM
1

Next
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 04:04 PM
2

Can you see how that is an irrational response? You're just getting defensive when you could be getting informed.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:35 PM
1

It may feel like that, but it's going to be hard to interact with you without recommending that you become less ignorant or at least exercise critical thinking skills. It might come across as a personal attack, but there's no way around it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:19 PM
2

You're confusing your prejudices with profound hard-to-accept truths. Maybe read some books or something idk.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 06:37 PM
2

Ok well if you're not going to be rational then it's going to be hard to have a discussion. Next.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 06:18 PM
2

Dishonesty like that defeats the purpose of this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 04:27 PM
3

And it was proven pretty well.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 04:16 PM
1

without providing an avenue for doing so Go to your favorite university's web site. Look up a lower division class with feminism or women or gender in the title. Look up the syllabus. Make an Amazon account with a throwaway email. Add the book from the syllabus to your wish list and pm it to me. Receive the book 2 days later.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 01:56 AM
2

Thank you for providing another example.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 10:12 PM
4

I don't hate women, I just have antipathy toward them. Seriously this is like the ephebophile vs pedophile trope.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 10:10 PM
3

Aside from some anger-phase shitslingers and false-flag dipshits, that simple isn't the case. So close. "Aside from the ones who hate women and the no true scotsmen..."
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 10:06 PM
2

That is a pretty good example right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 10:04 PM
4

Because they all implicitly say they do and a lot of them explicitly say they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 10:04 PM
0

Ok well that's too bad, you're probably not going to improve with that attitude. Being snarky isn't as cool as being informed.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 03:44 PM
-1

I like how you attempt to lord your edumacted bonafides over me...but then don't actually provide any proof of them. Good luck with that feigned intellectual superiority thing. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that you sound uneducated on the topic and would benefit from a class or book.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/15 05:14 AM
1

TRP is a movement confined to the internet. The references you are looking for will necessarily come from sites like avfm, rok, /r/theredpill.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/15 09:52 PM
1

Well you made that up. That's the answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/15 09:50 PM
0

Idk you could take a class about masculinity or read a reputable book.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/15 09:49 PM
1

You seem like you would benefit from a little real education on the subject.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/15 09:48 PM
-1

Maybe read a book or take a class instead of getting your info from reddit.com subforums. That's what I would do instead of sounding ignorant and going against academia.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/15 09:44 PM
1

Probably. People have all sorts of contradictory beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/15 09:43 PM
2

Just because I don't want to to attend whatever the fuck gender studies course you did doesn't mean no one else is educated.... Starting to sound like you might thing reddit.com sub forums are a viable alternative to classes or books. Womp womp.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/15 07:37 PM
0

fta baby
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/15 02:33 AM
1

idk maybe take a class or read a book on gender studies or feminism or w/e then you would have a better basis to form an opinion about that
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/15 01:45 AM
0

Women are programmed to I found the pseudoscience.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/15 01:42 AM
5

We all know it even if the PC police don't want to admit a scientific fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/15 01:34 AM
2

to suggest after having it pointed out to them multiple times and even being quoted back to themselves, Didn't happen that opinions are necessarily dependant on education, that education can be known based purely on one's opinion, or that disagreement with your opinion is impossible in the presence of education, barring laws of nature, or mathematics. Didn't say that You're really only harming yourself here. You're letting your pride get in the way of your education. I'm not even saying that if …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/15 01:26 AM
1

It's pretty hard to reconcile libertarianism with an acknowledgement of privilege. As a member of at least one unprivileged class, it seems intuitive that women would be less inclined toward libertarianism. e: damn, lot of people here jumping right to biology. Seems pretty pseudoscientific to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 10:06 PM
1

Yeah it's my fault you won't get an education. I drove you away from it. You get prove me wrong by staying ignorant. I guess you "win".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 10:02 PM
1

I'm sure you really did try, too. Too bad that's the best you got.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 08:21 PM
1

well that's just, like, your opinion, man
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 06:18 PM
1

By your own words you hated women for a while and are just now lightening up. You seem to find the idea of books and classes insulting. You say things that are incompatible with having an education on the topic. Maybe you aren't really in a position to reason through all of these issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 02:27 PM
2

No, you are changing what you say it says now. This is kind of like when someone told me that pi wasn't a real number, and I suggested either taking a class or working through chapter 1 of Apostol. Pretty fallacious and insulting I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 04:08 AM
2

That doesn't say what you said it says.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/15 02:09 AM
2

None of that actually happened though. You're seeing stuff that just isn't there :-(
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/15 10:40 PM
2

I really don't know if I hate women. I'm in a weird stage where I was once hyper mega TRP. Like, 5 TRP rangers would have to combine their women hating powers to form how much I hated women, but I don't know if I do anymore. That is excellent that you recognize this. Really. You can see that you aren't able to figure it all out on your own or relying on internet forum analysis. Enroll in a class or PM me and I'll work out a way to Amazon you a book without you revealing your identity.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/15 05:25 PM
1

Not in gender relations. This is not even debatable. Women are obviously more spoiled socially and sexually. This is what happens when you consider books and classes to be worthless. You say things like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/15 05:14 PM
1

next
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/15 11:28 PM
2

No more free drinks. haha what
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/15 10:52 PM
2

1 Yeah 2 No 3 No 4 Probably 5 yeah
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/15 10:48 PM
2

Answering a question by dodging the entire premise and appealing to a gender studies class without proposing an opinion of your own is most certainly not a problem with me or anyone else champ. I don't know how to help you if you think that educating yourself is unproductive. In my opinion, trying to re-invent the wheel is pretty unproductive. That's why it's useful to have a baseline that isn't reddit.com subforum posts. You wouldn't want to post on an ethics subforum without knowing what a cat…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/15 10:41 PM
2

This is an unproductive and valueless comment. If that's unproductive, then it sounds like it's a problem with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/15 10:25 PM
2

Why do you think men generally wouldn't or shouldn't react with anger or hatred towards females after realizing things about female nature? Ie. hypergamy, AF+BB are pretty insulting concepts regardless of whether we accept they are "natural". That's a pretty loaded question. Assuming women are sociopaths, why shouldn't we hate them??? The OP is pretty dishonest. Intellectually bankrupt. Maybe take a class in ethics, and learn about different ideas of what is good. Then take a class in gender stu…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/15 05:33 PM
-1

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 10:25 PM
-2

Yeah, I'm sure you do have some confirmation bias when you combine your misogyny with a misogynistic pseudoscience. That's not surprising at all. Damn you crazy if you think that makes sense though. Like this: I don't even care if its's precisely scientifically accurate or not - it's close enough that it can be used towards achieving goals. right here. That's funny, because you've said that a bunch of made up shit is close enough to being precisely scientifically accurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:52 PM
-1

haha whoa
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:38 PM
-1

Yeah you're pretty deep in it. Dismissing a field of academia, conspiracy theories, and now delusional puppets. That sucks for you I guess. But even you must see the irony of dismissing gender studies and then accepting a misogynistic pseudoscience in its place. Or I guess you don't have to see that, because you're pretty deep in the whole wool-pulled-from-the-eyes feeling.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:33 PM
-1

it's all good dog
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:28 PM
-1

I did. I think it orangeredded you because I mentioned your username.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:23 PM
-1

Then what the fuck you complaining about? It's a term of art. You've miserably failed to make anyone consider gender studies in any way respectable. I hope at some point you realize that the reason for that is the fact that it spawns blind fuckwit fem-zealots like you who literally never make a comment that isn't both condescensing and self-righteous. Go back to the hole you came from. You were never going to consider it, because you are not capable of looking at gender studies with critical thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:18 PM
-1

Nope I was responding to /u/YES_BOIIS. You already agreed to disagree, remember? That way you never have to get any less ignorant.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:13 PM
-1

I know you don't accept it. Fortunately, universities and academia do qualify gender studies to be part of academia. Fortunately, the pseudoscientific rantings on reddit.com/r/theredpill aren't part of academia. And you'll never be taken seriously when you have conspiracy theory views of academia. Nor when you cling to your pseudoscience and your misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:09 PM
-2

I didn't say that either. It's pretty easy to argue against dumb things that I didn't say. I think if you check, you will see that it was actually /u/sixtysecondmonk who asserted that gender studies has been debunked or refuted. As far as I can tell this assertion is so vague that it's not even wrong. In any case, you really seem anti-intellectual when you dismiss an entire branch of academic study. It's downright hypocritical when you then hop on board with a bunch of misogynistic pseudoscience…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 09:02 PM
2

haha whoa
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 08:58 PM
-1

they're right that going to the gym is p good
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 08:57 PM
-1

You clearly have little exposure to gender studies, but you're convinced that it is out to brainwash you. You think that academia has it all wrong and you have the hidden truth. And you have some strange ideas about what exactly I have written here. Anyhow, your writing looks like a conspiracy theorist's or something. Good luck fixing all that I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 08:54 PM
-2

Yeah but all that means is that you'll continue to be excluded from academia and therefore de facto excluded from any progress in gender studies. Works for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 08:36 PM
-2

I didn't say that. You made it up, because you're very bad at applying rational thought to gender studies or TRP. Anyway it's very difficult to convince someone devoted to a pseudoscience that they are devoted to a pseudoscience (you). But maybe you can see that academia isn't out to brainwash you. Or maybe you can't see that, idk.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 08:28 PM
-2

That's pretty anti-intellectual all-in-all. Sounds like you're going to have a hard time learning with an attitude like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 08:27 PM
-6

Well yeah, you're going to get a confirmation bias when you start out with a hateful mindset and then come across a hateful theory. It doesn't make you wise, it makes you an anti-intellectual bigot.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:56 PM
-5

So you're going to dismiss gender studies because you don't want to look up any sources or papers, but you're going to accept TRP's baseless pseudoscience? I can't stop you, but I can tell you that's really dumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:49 PM
-1

I am a scientist. (Not one of those fraud social scientists) nope, no anti-intellectualism here I distinguish between learning and indoctrination. really? Let's see how this meshes with what you say elsewhere: Yet, TRP teaches me that betrayal is the natural state of woman. There is a massive clash between my personal sense of ethics that I have, and will always, run my life around, and women. Honor comes first, in most things, to me. hmm. Doesn't look like you can tell the difference at all!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:44 PM
-5

You really sound like you don't get it if you're demanding a foundation in hard science. You wouldn't demand that of a history class, for example. Or maybe you would, idk about you. It's also pretty ironic to demand a basis in hard science for gender studies, but then go along with the pseudoscientific evopsych of TRP with no problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:41 PM
-2

With that attitude you will never have to learn a thing!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:39 PM
-10

I'm not rebutting you, I'm just saying that it's apparent why you have a difficult time understanding gender studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:33 PM
-8

No wonder you had so much trouble with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 07:00 PM
-8

Well it's not physics. Idk what you were expecting.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 06:47 PM
-8

Sounds like you didn't learn anything I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 06:22 PM
-6

Maybe enroll in a class in gender studies or something IDK
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/15 03:07 PM
-1

Yes, Bill Maher is a sexist and all around stupid guy. Not seeing your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 10:31 PM
-2

This is what redpillers actually believe. Might as well debate the guys over in /r/geocentrism.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 09:12 PM
0

they bad
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/15 11:14 PM
2

Next up: CMV - I don't think black people are all criminals.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/15 08:36 PM
3

What a great set of questions. You should post these on your facebook
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/14 06:14 PM
2

Joining the military is immoral, and soldiers deserve scorn.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/14 03:03 PM
0

Well, for the purpose of removing someone from society entirely we have a court system. This is a separate system for maintaining a safe learning environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/14 05:49 AM
2

What good parts? Work out? I'd probably find that at the gym or /r/fitness or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 07:41 PM
-1

We aren't talking about witch hunts. We are talking about maintaining a safe learning environment. You cannot rape or sexually assault people and hope to stay in class. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is not always an appropriate standard. An example of when it is a bad standard is when we are trying to maintain a safe learning environment. We have a large problem with sexual assault and rape, and kicking offenders out is important to protect victims and potential victims. We do not have a big probl…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 07:14 PM
-2

Look it up your head is gonna explode
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 06:02 PM
-2

When you learn the standard of proof for civil liability it is going to blow your poor mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 04:48 PM
0

It's obviously right. You rape or sexually assault someone at school, you should face expulsion in addition to criminal penalties. This is controversial pretty much only on reddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 03:49 PM
-2

Well that's not really true for all purposes.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 03:47 PM
1

Ironically, it's precisely this federal funding that forces them to engage in craziness like using "preponderance of evidence" for their rape decisions instead of "beyond a reasonable doubt". how would another standard be workable?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 05:45 AM
0

That's an easy one. Rapists should face administrative penalties, not just criminal penalties. This helps keep them from potential victims. Same reason you might get fired from your job or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/14 05:16 AM
0

ou'd better have a lot of guns if you think you are going to do anything to keep me from both expressing my beliefs AND working to enact my beliefs into policy. I guess that's what I get for engaging a crazy person.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 10:43 PM
1

Now that is some crazy paranoid shit right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 10:29 PM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2mq21n/debate_week/cm76gxu
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 10:28 PM
0

Now you're outright lying. Not that cool.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 10:11 PM
-1

Because there's nothing totalitarian or protofascist about anything I've said. Glad to clear that up. What you are doing is trying to insulate yourself from the consequences of your speech.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 10:07 PM
-1

I have no idea. This is the third time I have told you. Anyway, get well soon.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 07:41 PM
-1

You encounter non-RP ideas all the time, but dismiss them as "Blue Pill". You get to dismiss these without really thinking it through because of the mentality that you have had the wool lifted from over your eyes. You have accepted the hard truth. But it is all based on bad social science, bad evolutionary psychology, and bad biology in general. Disagree? Well, that's because you're part of the SJW political correctness brigade, of course you'd disagree. My hope, and I could easily be wrong, is …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:47 PM
-1

How have I intentionally insulated myself from academia Again. Tell me, with specificity. What women's studies works have I read, what are my degrees in? I got you confused with the other crazy person who hopped in the comment thread. My bad. I do not know whether you avoid academia or whether you just dismiss it. It was the other guy who definitely avoids it. Do you believe disagreeing with women's studies is the same thing as disagreeing with the hard sciences? Please tell me, what falsifiable…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:40 PM
-3

So now you've gone from "irrational like a 9/11 truther" to shitty. Why not just admit you're dressing up "i dont like you because of your opinions" in the tattered clothes of "I hold the ABSOLUTE TRUTH". I don't like you because of your opinions, yes. I don't like you because of your opinions, I think you are a totalitarian protofascist who would disarm me for my opinions and send me to a re-education camp. So what? Do you care that I think that? This is also crazy. Your reaction to RP people i…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:35 PM
-1

You are the one intentionally insulating yourself from academia. I'm just trying to help out someone stuck in a rut. Take a look at the anti-vaccers, and take a look at your own writing.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:31 PM
-3

You could go to medical school and devote your life to helping people with Doctors without Borders, but still hate gays. You'd be a good person, but that homophobia would be a glaring character flaw. You could try to rationalize your homophobia with religion, but it's still shitty.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:25 PM
-1

So yeah, this is what I'm talking about with retreating back into your insular little group. Criticism, education, and debate do not change your mind or open you up. They just convince you more that the world is out to get you, and that you have the secret truth about women and feminism. It's really similar to anti-vaccers or 911 truthers. You don't want to be an anti-vaccer or a 911 truther. Take a class or something. Figure out what you can do to get out of this vicious cycle.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:21 PM
0

If you don't want gender equality, then I can't really debate you. I just have to dismiss you and hope that you get over this glaring character flaw, and maybe that you don't hurt anyone because of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:19 PM
-3

Nonsense. Then the best course of action might be to keep you out of any place you can have a real voice.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:08 PM
0

Can you read that again and see why your response is dishonest? It's dishonest because I specifically said the opposite of what you said, with few exceptions. You're throwing out a snarky response and retreating further into your shell. You'd be better off if you left the shell. I'll throw you another example. Disagreeing with me that affirmative action is a net good in trying to achieve racial equality could be rational. Disagreeing with me that the World Trade Center was hit by 2 jets makes yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:03 PM
-3

I'm not an academic. Now you're just retreating into defending your sexist views from the arrogant anti-RPers. You'd be better served if you got over your sexist views instead. It's not that all disagreement is irrational, it's that pseudoscientific, insular, sexist groups exist. You're in one. It's really hard to get over it. If you haven't taken a course, it might help you out though.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 06:00 PM
-1

So I have had zero exposure to (lol) "Real academic thought" like women's studies and that's why I have the beliefs I have? Tell me, have I been to college or grad school? Have I taken Women's studies classes or read the works associated with them? How old am I? Am I male or female? Do all people immediately become feminist and agree with you upon exposure to "real academic thought"? I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt. Never attribute to malice what could be ignorance. If you've done…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:49 PM
-1

I think you are exaggerating your ability to debate opponents with really bad base premises. If someone takes the position that human life is not desirable as a premise, then there is no resolving that. You can argue about the urgency of eliminating human life, but there is no way to resolve this basic difference. Your arguments will be based on the idea that preserving human life is desirable if we can do it while achieving other desirable ends. But your points won't have any effect on someone …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:39 PM
0

I guarantee that Einstein could still debate with that women. She has reasons for believing what she believes. Those reasons can be explored and probed. Then that is where you and I disagree. Then ask for sources. That's a legitimate comment. "Do you have a source for this?" "Why do you think this way?" "What information lead you to your conclusions?" Try it I guess. I don't think you're going to do anything but drive them back up into their shell.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:28 PM
0

Like if you were to want to get out of your rut, you should take a women's studies class if you have the means.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:25 PM
-1

No, it really does not. This has been shown time and time again. Their worldview is dependent on a feeling of having the wool pulled back from over their eyes. Everyone else either hates men, or is just unwilling to see the dark truth. Using logic against this just shows that you're one of the people unwilling to face a hard truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:24 PM
0

That's not the premise of the sidebar material in question. And even if it was something similar, you've formulated the idea in an inappropriately pejorative way. It is actually if you click the link. A faulty premise is determined post-debate. The debate itself is the test of whether the premise can hold up. Concluding the truth value of what is being tested before the test is illogical. Whether gender-equality is desirable or not is a base premise. You either disagree with it or not. In your t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:21 PM
-1

Yeah, you can react like that, or you can take steps to improve yourself. Maybe read a book or take a class. Retreating into your shell isn't going to do you any favors.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:16 PM
1

Not all disagreement is valuable. Disagreement on how to achieve gender equality is fine. Disagreement on whether gender equality is good at all is bad. That just means that one side of the debate is a shitty person deserving ostracism. Mutual respect is possible when we disagree how to achieve gender equality. Mutual respect is impossible when one side does not agree that gender equality is desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:11 PM
0

Then point out the unreasonable reasoning. That's the whole point of debate. Why is The Misandry Bubble unreasonable? "It's obvious" isn't an answer. If you asked Einstein to explain general relativity, do you think he would have said "it's obvious?" No, it's more like asking Einstein to debate with a woman who believes that the earth is just the back of a giant turtle swimming through space. The onus is on the redpiller to do basic research from legitimate sources, in order to get to a basic po…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 05:06 PM
0

If your premise is that feminism is bad because of biotruths, then debate is impossible. Here is an analogy. Suppose I wish to argue whether or not we should shove a fat man in front of a train in order to save five children. The classic utilitarian thought experiment. But my debate opponent takes the position that all human life should be extinguished. Debate becomes impossible. Is there a way that I can reason him out of this position? No, it is just a terrible premise. Similar to the premise …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 04:59 PM
2

Debate cannot change the minds of people who join up with an irrational, extremist, insular, conspiracy-theory worldview. There was a similar example with respect to vaccine denialists. Debate is harmful at worst, and pointless at best.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 04:54 PM
-1

Decorum and fairness are receding. Now here I will write about how feminism is the single cause of every societal ill, real or imagined. Yeah any reasonable person can see that the sidebar material is inaccurate and untruthful. It is untruthful because: Female oppression is not a myth They are interpreting loss of male privilege as misandry, which it is not They are interpreting female economic and sexual freedom as misandry, which it is not It's really just that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 04:49 PM
-1

I am contributing seriously. The topic of this debate is so deep in its own self-reinforcing sexism that it isn't a serious debate topic. This is a debate topic appropriate for one redpiller to debate another redpiller. It would be like posting this debate topic in /r/debateasocialist: "Is anarcho-capitalism superior to right libertarianism? Discuss." Or post in /r/skeptic: "Was the WTC brought down by a missile or controlled detonation? Discuss." Any person who is not already deeply misogynisti…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 04:41 PM
2

Read some of the responses and tell me honestly that you think this is a debate. Read the OP and tell me honestly that it is a well-formed prompt for a debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 04:38 PM
1

Oh hey a crazy person
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/14 09:16 PM
1

Yeah that's pretty crazy. It looks like something one of those Dark Enlightenment guys would write. It's a hard truth, so it must be right and everyone else is just in denial. It treats both men and women as acting out base urges, so the evo psych must be real. But really it's a bunch of made up and seriously hateful shit. Ramblings of a crazy person.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 05:57 PM
4

Well it's pseudoscience. Women are like this because of evolutionary selection pressure. It's really lazy and can be used to prove anything, real or not. And your point #1 is crazy on its face. TRP does not treat men and women's sexuality equally, as you are fully aware. You might as well be claiming that vaccines cause autism. There is no way that an intellectually honest person can reach that conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:54 PM
0

Yeah so that looked pretty insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:49 PM
1

That's insane. Try getting over your hate instead of rationalizing pseudoscientific justifications for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/14 02:02 AM
1

Yeah that's the sort of disregard for others that red pillers have. They are broken people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/14 11:16 PM
0

oh ok
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/14 02:15 AM
3

I thought I had read some stupid posts but that is some next level shit
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/14 01:31 AM
9

Maybe an admitted woman hater isn't the best judge of whether TRP is bad or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/14 03:08 PM
8

Well given your admission that you are a sexist, maybe people don't like your sexism. Just a possibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 09:43 PM
0

Ok, thank you for telling us that you are a crazy sexist beyond reasoning. I accept your concession of the debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 08:48 PM
1

"I'm not sexist in that way, I'm sexist in this way that I consider to be completely distinct! Your point is invalid!" -- you
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 08:04 PM
1

One means: They are mentally handicapped and can't love. The other means: They love differently than men. If you want to argue that women's love as it is defined in RP is not really love, than that could be a fascinating debate that is not as black and white. But you stick to your fucking madeup strawman. yep I made it all up OK, not only is this a disgusting statement that makes shitty assumptions on multiple levels(I'd respond to shaming, I didn't just humiliate you, I'd respond to shaming) I …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 07:50 PM
0

Of course quality is lacking. This is inherent to the premise of the debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 07:24 PM
0

His reasoning behind it is that if you had the chance to sleep with a 11/10 guy, you probably wouldn't make him wait. So why is it fair to make me wait? In my opinion, as long as you make every man wait for sex, that alone puts you leagues ahead of every other contender. The best case scenario is to save your virginity for your husband because not only is it very honorable, he will appreciate it more than anyone else. The second paragraph doesn't jive with the first. If she makes every man wait,…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 07:23 PM
1

That's a nice strawman. It is not a strawman, as you yourself point out later in your post when you say, "Women are incapable of love as men love." Did you make it yourself? We better pack it up then. There's no reason for this sub to exist. Since debate with RP is impossible. :/ Debate is impossible. That is why we need to move to silencing and ostracism of red pillers. You aren't able to reason, but you might respond to your bros making fun of you. You know why its really impossible? Because y…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 07:20 PM
1

it is like trying to debate with a scientologist. Here I will give you a synopsis of the "debate". TRP: Women are incapable of love. They are only valuable for their chastity. Also, you should work out. Reasonable person: Wow that's awful. TRP: What do you have against working out?????? And that was a person being touted as a reasonable redpiller saying that. Do you see the blatant dishonesty going on? Of course you don't. Because debate with a redpiller is impossible.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 12:44 PM
1

explaining how her boyfriend is now a controlling, abusive asshole who works out and wants sex (because these traits are, of course, very, very unique to The Red Pill, and any guy who exhibits them obviously went online, found us, and we ruined him). This is why debate with redpillers is impossible. This right here.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 02:08 AM
0

Why would you want them to change your view? Would you post, "I believe that 9/11 was planned by Osama bin Laden, CMV" or "I think segregation was a bad idea, CMV"?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 07:49 PM
24

You are arguing with a crazy person.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 09:51 PM
0

what the duck are you talking about? Since when have feminists ever done that anywhere ever in the history of mankind?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/14 01:40 AM
1

This is why silencing is the appropriate treatment for red pillers, not debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/14 11:09 PM
0

not even wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/14 11:07 PM
0

Well we can try by dismissing and mocking them anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/14 11:07 PM
5

The purpose of silencing TRP is to reduce its harm. If reason worked, we would use that. It's hard to reason with people devoted to an irrational ideology like TRP though.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/14 08:12 PM
1

It doesn't have to make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/14 04:58 AM
-2

Does your mother know you're a redpiller?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 04:15 AM
1

Who cares
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 04:13 AM
1

Sociopath doesn't care he is a sociopath. Also likes pseudoscience.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/14 02:28 AM
1

You sound irrational.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/14 02:19 AM
1

No, they are all assholes. They go out of their way to become assholes if they weren't already. It's kinda the point of becoming RP.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/14 02:11 AM
4

They're handsome and charming
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/14 10:24 PM
-1

Oh ok How's being an asshole working
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/14 08:32 PM
3

where exactly did you find a blue piller who said being a nice guy would lead to success with women
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/14 01:25 AM
-4

oh ok
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/14 01:24 AM
2

Next
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 09:24 PM
3

Was the question "do you want to read a long and irrational rant by a redpiller man?"
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 06:51 PM
3

Look at all them words
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/14 01:23 PM
0

you've bested me with powerful logic like "that is meaningless" and "that was simple cause and effect." I concede the formal debate we were definitely having.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/14 04:53 PM
0

next
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/14 05:14 AM
-3

Well that's not true. It refers to how you as a redpiller cannot string a rational thought together regarding trp. For example your posts here.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/14 02:56 AM
-2

Red pill logic
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/14 02:47 AM
0

Yeah, saying that women are not inferior is exactly like punching a cop. Red pill logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/14 01:44 AM
1

You are promoting a misogynistic hate group as a way to defend people from a misogynistic killer. It's irrational, it's shitty, and you deserve to be ignored and ostracized. By writing these opinions, you show that you are not reachable by rational thought, and the best approach to you is to keep you from fucking things up.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 11:15 PM
0

He is not being hateful or misogynistic by working out, reading, dressing better, etc. This is why red pillers cannot be debated with. Complete blatant dishonesty. No one argues against TRP because of its position on getting in shape, and you know this. The person in question sounds like he was an asshole to begin with, and his solution was to be a bigger asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 09:55 PM
0

I talked about how the red pill could have taught him to take responsibility for himself, and could have saved his life and the lives of those he killed, if only he had been capable of taking it. Some pretty evil shit right there. Good thing you and your ilk are ignored and ostracized in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 09:52 PM
-2

Oh ok
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 09:51 PM
-2

I actually made a point of saying things just like that to see whether I'd get banned.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 04:41 PM
0

Sounds like you deserved to get banned and generally ignored or ostracized for your opinions.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 02:14 AM
3

I got banned from TRP for not thinking women are inferior
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/14 02:12 AM
1

He is harming other people with his participation in TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 07:47 PM
4

It's like you have your fingers in your ears and are yelling "la la la I can't hear you"
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 05:44 PM
-3

Oh it's a red piller complaining that people are dicks. Why don't you go write an evopsych rant about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 05:29 PM
0

Yeah you sound really nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 05:25 PM
-2

Because he is doing it within the context of a hate group. That affects others
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 05:25 PM
1

No, i do not. I believe that society forgot to teach me how to be a man, so here i was virgin in my late twenties.. women telling me how nice i was and that i am a good person while having sex with other people. I don't know what's more abusive. Not having sex with you is not abusive. Now i changed thanks to trp. I focused on myself, i dress better, i do sports, i try to be considerate i read a lot and try to be as better as i can be. I had the bitter phase, it passed and i can say that i am fee…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 01:19 PM
-5

This is what redpillers actually believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 06:43 AM
3

Why not just work out and stay clean and amiable without the pseudoscience and misogyny instead
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/14 04:45 PM
1

Sorry about all the syllables: people that aren't very smart that talk to other people as though they are much smarter and wiser /u/villaintine
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 03:59 PM
1

condescending imbeciles
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 03:47 PM
3

Yes, that one. The one where many are outright saying yes, many are essentially saying yes but mincing words about it, and some are saying no.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 02:32 AM
2

I direct you to the post above this one, wherein TRP posters are saying that men are superior to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 02:20 AM
2

I guess it's a vicious cycle of confirming their prejudices that's hard to get out of.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 02:19 AM
3

Well, it's for making fun of TRP's various bigotries and general raving irrationality. Kinda makes sense that social justice minded people would like it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/14 02:17 AM
6

My opinion is that this is classic feminism, when they can't address an argument head on, they resort to naming and shaming- the last bastion of hope for the out-argued. this is what redpillers actually believe
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/14 03:33 PM
-3

There is no point in a purple pill debate with or without redpiller comments
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/14 09:56 PM
-2

Nope
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/14 09:56 PM
1

Redpillers are not capable of reasonable debate about red pill issues, though. If they approached red pill issues with reason, then they would not be redpillers.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/14 02:17 PM
4

idk
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/14 09:51 AM
4

Because redpiller comments detract from a worthwhile discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/14 04:41 AM
-1

Why do you need an argument against it
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/14 11:48 PM
5

Be curious no more!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 11:00 AM
1

Getting laid is pretty hard for a lot of people, but what does that have to do with forming a sexist hate group like TRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 11:05 PM
2

Nope
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 11:14 PM
1

yeah, they talk about how to date rape people
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 05:40 PM
3

What I am saying is, rather than explain how to treat people like people in a negative. Be interested in other people for their own sake. Then the way Blue Pillers treat Red Pillers is how to treat a person. This is how you should treat bad, malicious people. Silencing, ostracism, mocking.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 08:17 PM
1

seems like pretty solid advice
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 08:13 PM
1

ok then nevermind I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 08:01 PM
1

You are being extremely dishonest, but I am glad that you have an anti-American sentiment.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 07:46 PM
1

The bigotry you are speaking of isn't really bigotry, it is just virulent opposition to your beliefs. The opposition is justified because your beliefs make you a bad person who makes the world a worse place. Silencing and ostracism are pretty reasonable responses to your bigotry. Can't help you, but maybe we can make you less appealing to others.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 07:14 PM
1

what
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 06:56 PM
2

what
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 06:54 PM
1

what
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/14 06:51 PM
1

That is not a legitimate criticism of tbp though.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/14 09:00 PM
12

If that is your definition of bigotry, then bigotry is not necessarily bad. It's an asinine definition anyhow.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/14 08:58 PM
-5

You're a shitty person. I hope you never have a transgendered child to inflict your irrational hatred on.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/14 01:45 AM
1

Given recent graduation rates, I'm not sure you can support that position.
/r/AlreadyRed18/02/14 03:50 PM
1

It's really not the same at all, because of extremely common sentiment within TRP that consent is unnecessary. You might find it insulting that you are lumped in with "rape strategists". This is good that you feel insulted. You should feel insulted. Please, keep being insulted, or change. Compare this with the TRP criticism of women simply for being women. This is shitty.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/14 06:08 AM
6

Yeah it's totally made-up evolutionary psychology in order to back up sexist opinions. That doesn't really prepare anyone for anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/14 12:19 AM
9

You are misrepresenting what TRP is. It is not "preparation/learning about relationships." It is a very selfish and sexist worldview backed up with pseudoscience.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/14 07:11 PM
2

I have to take this with a grain of salt after your previous misrepresentations.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 05:39 PM
5

welp he shouldn't have a blatantly dishonest first paragraph then
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/14 02:18 AM
1

I don't know why you're trying to engage me when you haven't provided an ounce of data showing my position is that women are malicious or machines. I stopped reading here, at the first dishonest thing you said. Maybe the rest was gold, idk. But it isn't true that I provided no evidence. I provided your own statements. Ironically your response just goes to demonstrate my point, that debate with a redpiller is impossible.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 11:10 PM
3

Sure. Here is evidence of your antipathy toward women. Go back and read the side bar. Women can love you, but not the same way that men love women. In this statement, /u/redpillschool is referring to this article from the /u/theredpill sidebar. The article is about how women are not able to love a person for the sake of love, but only when expecting to get something in return. I would characterize this as a belief that women are machines. Best advice I ever received was back in my blue pill days…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 09:45 PM
0

This is just a denial without anything to back it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 09:17 PM
6

Debate with redpillers probably is not possible. We have to have mutual ground before a debate, and the redpillers cannot even agree on the most basic points. Eg that women aren't generally malicious or machines.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 04:38 PM
0

It's just not phrased exactly like that, which gives some people the ability to deny it. It's phrased like "no means yes" or "not no means yes" or that sort of thing. The problem could be with you though: edit: this might have to do with the fact that i deny 99% of what feminists and rape hysterics term "rape" bc that's pretty concerning.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/14 03:12 AM
5

Where are you getting that
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/14 08:00 PM
2

but when all girls are slutty, civilization is screwed. Well this is made up.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/14 07:53 PM
3

That isn't actually a response to what he or she said.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/14 07:51 PM
4

Because the narratives sound very made up
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/14 04:44 PM
-8

She flipped out because she is realizing she is friends with someone who is not capable of being friends back. Like all redpillers, you are a misogynist, incapable of true friendship. She would be better off without you.
/r/askTRP28/12/13 03:05 PM
-1

lol
/r/askTRP15/12/13 04:16 PM
6

Why is that grey? You need continuous consent. The only person who can decide whether she gives consent is herself. E: the mens rea is still there either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/13 09:42 PM
10

If you are unable to tell the difference between rape and sex, then you are ethically obligated to remain celibate. Having sex in this state would be depraved indifference of the other person's wellbeing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/13 09:27 PM
6

So in this case, it's rape retroactively? The act may be rape then? A crime that occurs due to a attitude afterwards isn't fair. So, assuming she liked it, it wasn't rape, according to your definition? That doesn't seem unfair at all. It seems in line with any other form of battery.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/13 07:51 PM
13

Disagree because it's just made-up red pill folk wisdom based on nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/13 03:39 AM
5

I guess we don't have any common ground then.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 08:59 PM
2

Thanks
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 05:35 AM
2

what
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 05:10 AM
10

You are making things up again. We were talking about a paragraph written by a poster on TRP. This poster was taking pride in racist killings by his ancestors. This is bad. This does not mean that the entire history of the world is racist violence. A lot of the history of the world is racist violence, though. e: Surely you can recognize that racist violence and mass murder is bad. Or maybe not. Maybe we don't have any common ground.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 05:06 AM
6

The purpose is to minimize racism in our society. Since you aren't open to being convinced not to be racist by debate, we need to ostracize and mock you. If you at least agreed that racism is bad, we would have enough of a common starting point that maybe debate would be fruitful. But since I can't really make you agree that racism is bad, all I can do is try to minimize the harm you can do. And that means mocking you and ostracizing you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 05:03 AM
5

Ok, well the paragraph that was quoted looks pretty white supremacist.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 04:59 AM
12

Yeah, you shouldn't be proud of racist violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/13 04:57 AM
9

In blue pill world, allowing discussion to broach the topic of race is racist, and discussion about the reality that violence has been used by some of our ancestors is an endorsement of violence. No, talking about race isn't itself racist. But this person wasn't just talking about race, he was taking pride in the racist violence of his ancestors .
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/13 06:55 PM
7

In blue pill world, allowing discussion to broach the topic of race is racist, and discussion about the reality that violence has been used by some of our ancestors is an endorsement of violence. No, talking about race isn't itself racist. But this person wasn't just talking about race, he was taking pride in the racist violence of his ancestors .
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/13 06:55 PM
2

Your posting seems irrational and dishonest.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 02:56 AM
1

Who here has suggested that you should face legal consequences for posting hate speech? And I don't think calling it out is a waste of time. If nothing else, it ostracizes the speaker from society.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 02:50 AM
3

you believe it could even POSSIBLY be considered some form of verboten "hate speech" for a private person to observe that women in general lack certain "positive" character traits? do you live in the book 1984? Calling out sexism is now literally 1984?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/13 02:25 AM
3

Yes, because TRP is an openly sexist hate group.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 04:22 PM
9

I think you have this backwards. Ever heard, "Alpha fucks, beta bucks?"
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/13 04:19 PM
7

Wrong, my point is the very first point. Where he calls out me saying 'date rape drugs aren't very prevalent and not all women are being raped' as wrong, and refuses to source his claims. You refer to the second point. I honestly can't see how anyone would take that in anything but humour. What are the odds that you can even pull that off without her waking up during the deed AND cleanup? My bad! I edited it but you beat me! It doesn't look like humor, because endorsed contributors seem to be ph…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/13 01:49 AM
9

Sure. The one you link to in the OP is a great example. The second point is a quote of an endorsed contributor saying that someone should ejaculate on a woman's face without her consent. It's got a screenshot and everything. Link The first point is in fact you, as you pointed out in the OP. It's a quote of you, using anecdotal evidence to incorrectly downplay drugged rape. Surprisingly, this is not as bad as some of the other quotes in the post though! And then you have your OP, in which you say…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/13 01:42 AM
8

TBP can form a coherent argument with sources. These arguments are augmented with mockery and insults, often sourced with statements by TRP posters, but not always. TRP thinks that TBP has a problem with reasoned argument in part because of TRP's problem with consent. If you don't think that you have a duty to respect, look out for, and have consent from the people you're having sex with, then you're probably not going to think that sexual assault and rape are pretty rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/13 01:32 AM
10

Well part of the problem seems to be with TRP's problem with consent. I mean, if you have TRP's concept of consent, then you're not going to think that rape and sexual assault are very common at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/13 01:12 AM
1

I am not mocking him, and he describes himself using the same language I use to label him. I do not think you can honestly classify anything I have said to him as hate speech or personal attacks. If you are looking for hate speech though, you could take a look at where he expresses his disdain for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/13 01:06 AM
1

There's a false equivalence there. Drunk driving is a crime because you're doing something potentially dangerous while incapable to make decisions. It's perfectly legal to drive a car when sober (and qualified). Then go with drunk bank robbery. Analogy holds perfectly.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/13 10:13 PM
1

yeah
/r/askTRP16/10/13 01:36 AM
1

I hope this is fake. Surely no one could be stupid enough to listen to that advice.
/r/askTRP16/10/13 12:02 AM
1

Shaming people for bigoted attitudes seems pretty appropriate. I think the confusion here is that shaming people for part of their identity, or for doing nothing wrong is bad. Shaming is not in general bad, though.
/r/MGTOW19/09/13 04:56 AM
-43

/r/MensRights is a reaction to privilege loss. It doesn't fight for equality, but it does fight for looser views of consent, and for complaining about women in general. e: also they like making up biological or evolutionary reasons for why women are inferior. Similar to /r/hbd.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 02:55 PM
3

ok well your response doesn't make sense, because I did not say anything even close to an ad hominem
/r/MensRights01/09/13 02:12 AM
2

that has nothing to do with anything I said, I think you may have responded to the wrong person
/r/MensRights31/08/13 10:10 PM
3

what child
/r/MensRights31/08/13 05:09 PM
-1

what
/r/MensRights31/08/13 04:50 PM
-1

seems pretty reasonable to me :-/
/r/MensRights31/08/13 04:17 PM
2

yeah
/r/MensRights31/08/13 04:06 PM
4

I am totally cool with shaming men who don't take care of their kids that's a great example of what shaming is for
/r/MensRights31/08/13 03:49 PM
1

W/E I know I'm not transphobic both by intent and definition, so you can call me names :D You're the ignorant one here, not me :) He said, just after spewing transphobia. See this is why we shouldn't have discussions with bigots. It accomplishes nothing. Just ostracize them.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 05:31 PM
1

How is that transphobic? He IS still male. That's a demonstrable fact. Saying you're a woman does not make you a woman. He hasn't gone on any medications, he hasn't had any surgeries, he hasn't even changed his clothing (he's in prison). All he's done is change his NICKNAME. I officially change my nickname from Henry to Sir Lionel The Great, King of America. That's like saying black people have dark skin makes me racist. Absurdity. That was even worse than before. You're getting worse, /u/GRAMMA…
/r/MensRights29/08/13 05:13 PM
1

But you said: I'm all for TG rights but he is still a male. Clothing does not determine gender, nor does psychological state. Chromosomes determine gender.(albeit there are scenarios like trisomy 21) which is transphobic as all hell.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 05:02 PM
1

but kind of like the old, "I'm not racist, but..."
/r/MensRights29/08/13 04:40 PM
1

I'll let you speak for yourself on that one: I'm all for TG rights but he is still a male. Clothing does not determine gender, nor does psychological state. Chromosomes determine gender.(albeit there are scenarios like trisomy 21)
/r/MensRights29/08/13 04:24 PM
2

yeah you have the right to be a transphobe I guess hopefully people like you will be ostracized
/r/MensRights29/08/13 04:13 PM
0

sounds like you do not support TG rights
/r/MensRights29/08/13 03:46 AM
-5

TRP please stop spewing misogyny and then asking why all the hate
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:14 PM
-5

men's rights is generally a place to complain about women, feminism, or privilege loss TRP is generally a place to come out and say that women are inferior
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:06 AM
-12

I bet the title of this /r/MensRights submission accurately reflects the content of the article it links to.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:40 AM
-6

ok, well there you go
/r/MensRights21/08/13 05:26 AM
-7

you oppose wealth redistribution?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 03:58 AM
1

I guess it just comes down to you being part of the problem. You don't seem to want to empathize with other people. You fundamentally support this misogyny and bigotry. Also you seem to be making up aspects of these situations that simply did not happen.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 12:04 AM
1

Is that what he said or what you interpreted him to be saying? Go find me the context of these comments he made, then you can tell me he was saying a Muslim cannot be a good scientist. Well, his statements in his tweets make it look like he was saying that Muslims make inferior scientists. If you believe that some context would show that he is not saying this, I think the onus is actually on you to find that context. I have him here saying, "All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than T…
/r/MensRights17/08/13 05:45 PM
-1

No, terrible font
/r/MensRights17/08/13 04:59 AM
2

Where did he say being Muslim makes you an inferior scientist? Or did he say that Muslim scientists haven't given us anything special in the recent scientific past? Now I dont know the context of these tweets, but if I were to, would I perhaps find out that he is responding to the idea that Muslim science has contributed significantly toward modern science as a defence of Islam as being scientific (as many Muslims can be seen arguing)? His conclusion seems to be that Muslims don't make good scie…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:51 PM
-3

Sounds like they're assuming the accuser is lying to me. What is your idea of assuming the accuser is lying?
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:38 PM
1

Silencing misogyny seems pretty reasonable
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:15 PM
2

No Dawkins said she was overreacting because what she was complaining about was stupid and a non issue, and is an insult to real injustices women face. She is a professional victim nothing more. You provided no examples of proving what he said was wrong, you provided tweets that's showed he didn't say what you claimed he said He wasn't wrong about Muslims being inferior scientists, and wrong to spew misogyny at some lady?
/r/MensRights16/08/13 06:04 PM
0

What does blackstone's formulation have to do with this
/r/MensRights14/08/13 05:57 PM
0

Just because there is no conviction does not mean that the accuser is lying.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 05:03 PM
9

The professor then defined feminism on the board as "equal rights, opportunity, and responsibility," and asked again; this time nearly all of the men had their hands up (ourselves included), and only a few of the women. that happened Response to /u/errythangthizzin
/r/MensRights14/08/13 08:12 AM
2

If you're stupid to not know the difference a goddamned sign isn't going to help you. You can fluff it up however you want, you're one of the many causes of false rape accusations in the world. How many times have we seen women decide, months after the fact, that because they never explicitly agreed to have sex with their boyfriend that just broke up with them, that they are suddenly raped? Too often and it's because of people like you. All thanks to my message of, "Get consent, and don't have s…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 07:44 AM
2

No, you must have a shitty sex life because you're completely out of touch with how real relationships develop. Contracts are not on site. It's about feelings, not about legalise. It's really not about legalese, it's about not having sex with people who don't want to have sex with you.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 07:33 AM
2

Either way, you suck at constructing sentences. Unbelievable. Also, I trust myself to judge body language, you obviously are too dumb to and need people to spell shit out for you. Well... after you said this: If they're just a little trashed and they're clawing for your dick incoherently, that's not rape, even if they regret it in the morning. It seems like maybe you're ok with having sex with people who really don't want to have sex with you. Your romantic life must suck. I can see it now... tw…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 07:23 AM
2

If you're saying "We don't want (to have sex) with (people who don't want to have sex with you)" then it's a pretty nonsensical statement. Rephrase and try again, because the way it's written it says "I don't want to have sex with those losers if they don't like you" and that doesn't make sense in the context. Ok, well that's not what I wrote. Your version omits a "you". We don't want you to have sex with people who don't want to have sex with you.
/r/MensRights14/08/13 07:03 AM
3

I don't understand it because it's a poorly written sentence that doesn't mean anything. It's the literary equivalent of "Grape are being has can what ciao". That sounds like a serious problem on your part if you don't understand what, "we don't want you to have sex with people who don't want to have sex with you," means. See there are people who don't want to have sex with you. And hopefully you won't just have sex with these people anyway. I cannot break it down more than that. Because if you'…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 06:52 AM
3

Oh shut up. You need some education on how people work. According to you, everyone and their mother is a rapist. Nope, actually I never said anything like that. Non-sensical statement. No, it means exactly what it says. I have no idea why you do not understand, but it seems to be on your end. When was the last time you dug a ditch? Why do you ask?
/r/MensRights14/08/13 02:18 AM
2

It's not rape unless they say "no" or have really negative body language. If they're trying to get away or holding themselves in a quasi-fetal-position, that's one thing, but I assume people aren't so stupid as to be incapable of deciphering basic body language. I shouldn't have to spell it out. Ok, so then you're exactly the kind of person who could benefit from education about consent. This depends on situation. If they were roophied, or are drunk to the point of alcohol poisoning, that's one …
/r/MensRights14/08/13 12:40 AM
2

I think that the posters posted recently are wrong. Silence does not mean "no", that's fucking stupid. 90 percent of communication is non-verbal, but in this on area we have to pretend that body language doesn't exist? Because you might have sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you. If you have sex with someone without getting consent, and then they say that they did not consent, we're probably going to have to believe them. Why not just tell people to "Just Say No"? If they are in…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 12:22 AM
2

So you can't give me any examples, so good to know. I provided examples here. What Dawkins said to Watson was not misogynist. Yes it was. Here is a link to the actual text. As you can see, his letter is just a rant full of irrational contempt for a woman because she complained about something. At no point does he make a logically valid point. You also ignore all my points about the situation in the elevator as if I never said anything . If that's how you're going to be then clearly we have nothi…
/r/MensRights14/08/13 12:12 AM
2

I didn't like her tone of acting like it was anything other than HER problem. Then after people told her she was overreacting she started comparing it to threat of rape, rather than her just being uncomfortable being politely asked out, or "sexualised" as she put it, and flinging accusations of misogyny to anyone who disagreed with her. Well, the furor over her complaint was and is pretty misogynistic. And the guy shouldn't have done what he did. And she didn't overreact, she just complained abo…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 11:00 PM
1

Well you seem to hold an indignation towards Dawkins and his defenders for simply asserting that Muslims have contributed much less to the advancement of knowledge than other groups? This is an attack on Islamic culture... but how is it bigotry? If I we're to say Nazis haven't really added to moral progress of late, would I be a bigot? If not, how do you distinguish the two cases? Nevermind forget I said anything. I hope you figure it out someday.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:17 PM
1

Fair enough. It seems you're not lying and you think bigotry involves any negative assessment of any group of people... that seems rather naive, but I'll let you roll with it. I hope one day you'll see the blaring logical contradiction of calling any criticism of people bigotry, whilst criticising people for it. here you go
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:03 PM
2

Why do you go around calling people bigots? If I were to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you actually believe I'm being bigoted, why wouldn't you try to change my position through persuasion? Am I being trolled? If so, good job. If not...I just don't understand what kind of person you can be. Well, I don't think I can change your mind basically. Can't reason someone out of a position if we can't agree on what is good. You made an argument for the validity of bigotry, so that's out. …
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:53 PM
2

Why would you lie on the internet? Like, what's the fucking point? wut
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:40 PM
2

So I present you with a reductio ad absurdum of your point...and you rebuttal is an explicit ad hominem. Looks like someone's losing confidence in their own position. Yet another reddit poster who does not know what an ad hominem is. In any case I can't really argue with you if you can't agree that bigotry is bad. So that's that I guess.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 09:10 PM
1

I just made up a religion where I'm the last prophet. I have no followers yet, but don't you dare tell me me and my lack of followers have not contributed to the advancement of knowledge as much as the next group of people. Don't be a bigot. We all know every single divisible category of people has equally contributed to science, even denominations within larger groups, because fuck you, racism! Welp, an outright pro-bigotry post. Great. Response to /u/memetherapy
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:50 PM
1

To be honest this whole "Atheism Plus" bullcrap is making me angry, because it's obvious these imbeciles are hijacking atheism in order to slip under the table their political ideologies. Atheism is a philosophical and rational standing regarding the lack of belief in deities and other outdated "spiritual" fables, and not "militant feminism 3.0", "White privilege checking" and such crap. Why does it make you angry that there is a group for atheists who are also feminists and anti-racists? Respon…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:38 PM
-1

Here is a thread where a bunch of /r/MensRights posters go off on a tangent about how they hate Rebecca Watson, social justice, and political correctness.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:27 PM
2

I see people spreading rape "awareness" (paranoia) involving telling rapists how not to rape. After all, if it's gender neutral, it makes it not stupid all of a sudden! The simple fact of the matter is rapists don't pay attention to this sort of thing because they're rapists. The MRM recently has been feeding this rape paranoia, this bizarro mentality that everyone, men, women, children, and cats are likely to be raped at any second. Well the basic point is that a lot of people don't understand …
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:15 PM
1

There's a difference between scientists that are Muslims and Muslim science What is Muslim science and how is it different from Muslim scientists? Regarding Watson, it would have been a fairly busy Hotel still at 4am especially considering those who attended the event were still up. I fail to see the relevance that it was at 4am especially as they had all been hanging out just earlier. It's fine if she wanted to say she felt uncomfortable and maybe some polite advise to guys delivered in the rig…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:04 PM
2

Because she acted like she was in some realistic situation where she could have been raped. It's all in the delivery. She first acted like what he did was harassment despite describing a polite exchange, and after her first video she started exaggerating even more when people reacted saying she was overreacting Sounds like you think it's ok to proposition strangers in elevators at 4 AM, but not ok to complain about it. Regarding Dawkins he did not say what you said he said. He said they did grea…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 06:41 PM
2

Getting politely chatted up in an elevator is not something that needs to be complained about and talked about as if she was at some high risk of rape. Watsons feminism is the one that is addicted to victimhood. lol It was creepy, and she complained about it. Why does this bother you so much? Where did he say that Muslims are worse scientists? 1 2 3 4 5 6
/r/MensRights13/08/13 06:01 PM
2

What is bigoted about Dawkins saying Watson is a complaining about nothing and the real victims would be offended at her first world problems? It's sexist as all hell. He's being condescending to a woman because he doesn't like that she complains about a particular issue. His argument is that some women are treated worse, so Watson should not complain. It's also a straw man. It's not only dripping with sexism, it's also a totally irrational argument. Furthermore, his comments about Muslims being…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 12:43 AM
-1

Well it's not every day that you see someone make a strawman of their own position. You guys need to open your minds and think critically about why your movement is called sexist.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:06 PM
1

I think you've misinterpreted me. I was saying that you're correlating people who reject others for pretending to be part of a group (in this case, 'core' gamers), with misogyny, when actually they're being scorned for pretending to be something they're not for the purpose of acceptance. Or to put it more succinctly, they're poseurs. Because they're women?
/r/MensRights11/08/13 06:22 AM
2

Feminists treat feminism to be part of their identity. Conservatives treat conservatism to be part of their identity. Ibid liberals, and other political ideologies. The Islamic religion teaches ideas that are anti-scientific. To criticize the religion, and its adherents, for such ideas is perfectly acceptable. It is not criticizing the culture or the people to criticize the ideas. He was implying the inferiority of Muslims in science. Which is racist as all hell. It's irrational, it's bigoted, a…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 05:40 PM
1

Religion is an idea, just as feminism is. It is not unfair to be prejudiced against an idea, because people choose to believe in it. Unlike other ideas, religion is generally part of someone's identity. Besides this, prejudice against an idea is different from prejudice against a group of people. Criticize scripture or whatever, but this anti-Muslim bigotry is bigotry. response to /u/sillymod
/r/MensRights10/08/13 05:00 PM
1

Is it misogyny or just out-group rejection based on humans' natural tribal tendencies that are being observed in a group that happens to be largely composed of males? I.e. it is misogyny but it's ok because it's natural. This is an appeal to nature fallacy. response to /u/Degraine
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:40 PM
1

he is atttacking islam because it makes scientific claims. Quote: "Were it not for Islamic science claims http://bit.ly/17CccI1[1] it WOULD have been unfair to pick on Muslims among groups who get few Nobels." so, if you wouldnt be just looking to be offended by something you would realize what he is criticizing and why and you would understand that he doesnt believe muslim scientists are automaticaly inferior. He's allowed to be bigoted because he doesn't like religion. Got it. so, if you would…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:29 PM
0

Saying something is inferior does not infer falsehood in objective reality. I could say 5 is inferior to 6 in numerical hierarchy. Does this mean I think 5's are infected with the gay/black/hispanic/asian/other stereotype for cretins, or that I am simply stating objective fact? You need to understand objective intent before applying your perception of intent towards language. That's the exact same sort of mentality prevalent in older generations of whites that led them to falsely assume older ge…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 04:04 PM
7

That was a pretty big rant about how made-up scientific evidence justifies your irrational sexist ideas, but in my opinion this: Women are great and memorizing but don't focus on understanding. was the best part. Thanks, /u/IHaveaLargePenis.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:46 AM
-1

It's completely relevant. Dawkins claims the Muslim religion promotes hostility. I'm not quite sure how that's bigotry. It's like saying the Christian religion promotes blind faith, and shaming against non-Christians. Are you insinuating that those claims make me Bigoted towards Christians, or "racist" against them as you so eloquently put it earlier? I am saying this. Criticizing a religious doctrine or scripture would probably not be bigotry. Saying that people who identify as a religion are i…
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:16 AM
-1

So do you believe Muslims make inferior scientists?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 01:02 AM
-5

Hey, I just realized something. You've been copying people's responses and giving attributions so that if we delete our comments people will know. Way to project, feminist. Well you guys are defending Dawkins's bigotry here really hard, I kind of wanted to save it. It's a good example for when people try to say that /r/MensRights is not a hate group.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 12:52 AM
-4

So basically, what you are saying is that a person who criticizes islam for the homophobia that leads young men to be stoned to death in Iran for having "emo" haircuts, is a bigot if he's criticizing while white... Gotcha. No, actually you made that up. What I am saying is this. Response to /u/girlwriteswhat
/r/MensRights10/08/13 12:42 AM
-1

Opposition to religion is bigotry? Irrelevant to our discussion. We are talking about Dawkins's claims of inferiority of Muslims. Response to /u/Ryau
/r/MensRights09/08/13 09:29 PM
-11

So we have: Women accusing men of sexual assault or harassment goes against men's rights. Hate for Atheism+ movement out of nowhere. This is just a movement that combines atheism with anti-bigotry. When Rebecca Watson wrote on a blog that it was creepy to be propositioned on an elevator, this was a morally reprehensible blog post that led to all of this. Also that's the same as saying asking someone out for coffee is rape. All of this is destroying the skeptic community. Can you see why all of t…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 07:29 PM
-1

with your logic, you also couldn't say something against KKK because they're mostly made up of white people (also a race) That doesn't follow at all, because opposition to the KKK is not bigotry. So would you prefer to call Dawkins a bigot instead of a racist?
/r/MensRights09/08/13 07:07 PM
-6

Would you call him a bigot instead? You don't understand what a race is, do you? To quote dawkins himself, "Am I surprised? Only at the number of people who seem to think Islam is a race, rather than a religion. I regard that view as racist. Anything you can convert to, or convert from, is NOT a race." Italicized my favorite part. In any case, the vast majority of Muslims are non-white. No one is saying "Islam is a race." It's an othered group of mostly non-white people, said to be inferior out …
/r/MensRights09/08/13 06:55 PM
-5

Maybe you guys should add fake geek girls to the sidebar. It's totally an example of how men are discriminated against. A real men's rights issue. Not just misogyny at all.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 06:38 PM
-7

If you want to say it's bigotry and not racism, I guess that's fine. Seems like thinking that hating African Americans isn't racism because white African Americans exist. Pretty pedantic, right?
/r/MensRights09/08/13 06:25 PM
-7

Yeah, that's why I took it out but almost as soon as I typed it. But you caught me! Serves me right for trying to sneak posts at work. That looks really similar to conceding the argument. If you agree that there's nothing to criticize about Islam and it's role in the middle east and their treatment of women, gays, and atheists, then I will agree that Richard Dawkins tweets were bigoted, and I'll leave it at that. Have the last word. ok
/r/MensRights09/08/13 06:10 PM
0

Muslim isn't a race. Your beliefs have NOTHING to do with your biology. Ok, if you prefer to call him an islamophobe or just a bigot I guess that's fine. Seems like a pretty nitpicky distinction. I don't really see what you're getting at with biology and racism though. Seems like thinking that hating Africa Americans isn't racism because white African Americans exist. So you're saying a Caucasian person born in Africa is the same race as a Black person born in Africa? Is that your argument? Welp…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 05:52 PM
-11

how is dawkins sexist or racist? both of those words mean the believe in superiority based on nothing but skin color or gender. accepting that there are differences between genders and between races mean to accept reality as it is. you know... bioligy. Posted by /u/pachan. It's called scientific sexism or scientific racism. The common euphemisms are human biological diversity and racial realism. It's not based on a progression of reasonable thought and experiment. It's a rationalization for bigo…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 05:30 PM
-8

Well, talking about white/male privilege isn't sexism. Maybe you have a better example somewhere. As for Dawkins, I'm talking about his recent tweets about Muslims in science and his older "dear Muslima" letter. If you want to say it's bigotry and not racism, I guess that's fine. Seems like thinking that hating African Americans isn't racism because white African Americans exist.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 05:15 PM
-23

The moment you saw a troll with nothing relevant to say like Rebecca Watson sitting next to motherfucking Richard Dawkins at a conference, you knew the skeptics movement was doomed. Seems like Dawkins is a bigger discredit to skepticism, with his outspoken racism and sexism. I still don't get all the irrational hate for Watson.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 03:59 PM
-27

All of this bullshit started a couple years ago with Rebecca -asking me out to coffee is literally rape That's cool, just make shit up
/r/MensRights09/08/13 02:11 PM
-3

Hmm, well you're saying no, but sometimes women say no and mean yes. Therefore I am going to have sex with you anyway. -- the OP
/r/MensRights27/07/13 02:54 PM
1

I think you might have responded to the wrong post by mistake
/r/MensRights25/07/13 11:04 PM
1

Whew good thing you made that up
/r/MensRights25/07/13 06:24 AM
-9

Yep, r/mensrights is impossible to parody.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 10:30 PM
0

Sure, but none of that has to do with what I said. /r/MensRights posters generally deny rape culture, refuse to be educated about consent, and blame rape victims under the guise of helpful advice. That really doesn't have anything to do with false accusations of rape.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 08:08 PM
2

why is the consent of the rapist something meaningful to talk about
/r/MensRights24/07/13 02:16 PM
-1

Seems pretty reasonable to associate the MRM with rape culture. A lot of people on /r/MensRights will deny the very existence of rape culture. They generally refuse to educate themselves about consent. A lot of them even seem to oppose campaigns to educate people about consent. These "Don't be that girl' posters are a good example. And let's not forget the victim blaming thinly veiled as advice. It's one of the bigger reasons that the MRM can be dismissed as misogynistic.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 02:00 PM
-15

seems like a reasonable explanation to me also fwiw being a proponent of equal rights and status for women is not really that similar to being a proponent of the systematic killing of Jews, Gypsies, gays, disabled people, etc
/r/MensRights24/07/13 01:50 PM
-1

Basically yeah, volunteer army and whatnot
/r/MensRights21/07/13 01:39 AM
6

Women not allowed in combat roles in the military was in fact male privilege, yeah.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 11:23 PM
3

If this were right, then anti-abortion arguments would mostly contain a punishment for abortion equal to the punishment for murder. This is not the case.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 10:50 PM
2

Good to see that /r/feminism is improving I guess. But the main point here is that a lot of positions are simply not worth entertaining. Even a civil argument in favor of white supremacy deserves a ban, for example.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 09:50 PM
3

Well yeah, compared to the cost of not investigating a confession of a violent crime.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 02:08 PM
2

Good on ya mate
/r/MensRights11/07/13 01:58 PM
-3

Seems like she's just following r/MensRights's most commonly prescribed rape prevention advice.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 08:07 PM
-2

Uhhhhh nope
/r/MensRights27/06/13 02:41 PM
8

Maybe you're right, if you define feminism as everything bad.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:26 PM
0

Almost like some sort of culture of rape, or rape culture, if you will.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 04:16 PM
-1

Good I guess
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:39 PM
-5

Your attitude suggests you're not in the 2%
/r/MensRights22/06/13 05:06 PM
0

Looks like social progress might leave you behind
/r/MensRights21/06/13 11:36 PM
1

really sounds like you have a picture of privilege and feminism that you have made up. Too bad you didn't try to learn anything in your gender studies class.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 11:50 PM
-1

you are dense, and therefore wrong: ad hominem You are wrong, and therefore dense: not
/r/MensRights13/05/13 11:54 PM
5

That is a very misleading headline.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 11:40 PM
-1

You are rape culture.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 02:03 PM
1

As I said, it's not at all hard to tell that a blackout drunk person has been drinking, but in some cases it can be impossible to tell that they're drunk to the point where they can't consent. Ok if you can't tell, then you need to err on the side of not raping people.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 08:07 PM
1

Ok, but there are two problems with that. One is never actually obtaining consent. Why does this man think this blackout drunk woman actually wanted to have sex with him when in reality she did not? Are we trying to protect his right to have sex with people without getting permission first, on the off chance that they coincidentally also wanted to have sex with him? No. If you have sex with someone without obtaining consent, and they do not want to have sex with you, that is a mens rea and an ac…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:42 PM
0

Nope, actually you just made that up. This argument is in fact a perfect straw man. Intentionally having sex with someone without obtaining consent would give you mens rea. If this person didn't want to have sex with you, then you have a guilty act and a guilty mind and have therefore committed the crime of rape. Mens rea doesn't mean you hate someone, or that you know your actions are criminal. It just means that you are acting on purpose. For example, having mens rea in a murder case would mea…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:19 PM
-1

Damn look at all those words trying to justify having sex with people who can't consent (rape).
/r/MensRights10/05/13 09:56 PM
-1

what
/r/MensRights10/05/13 07:37 PM
-2

So what they were both drinking? Why does it matter? You can't rape someone if you're drunk?
/r/MensRights10/05/13 05:32 PM
-1

This sounds like scientific sexism like in /r/hbd to be honest.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 04:31 PM
-1

Well, if she doesn't remember it and he does, why wouldn't she press charges?
/r/MensRights10/05/13 04:10 PM
5

Source: OThompson's ass, 2013
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:00 AM
5

In what way is SRS affiliated with gawker
/r/MensRights05/05/13 10:42 PM
1

if he made a statement to that effect, you would probably have a good case
/r/MensRights02/05/13 02:06 AM
6

really? I can't remember the last time I saw an SRS post about /pol/ or even 4chan
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:53 AM
4

never been to 4chan
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:41 AM
8

Damn those are some pretty outlandish conspiracy theories up there. SRS literally dismantled the Occupy movement, for example. SRS doxxed people, for another example. SRS is trying to take over moderatorship of /pol/, for another example. I had no idea that 4chan was so into conspiracies and social conservatism.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 12:35 AM
1

a bunch of misconceptions about feminism Would you like me to recommend some light reading material for you?
/r/MensRights30/04/13 04:09 AM
1

Nope, actually you made all of that up.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 03:53 AM
5

Yeah basically you are a huge misogynist, and your rants make no sense at all.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:53 PM
-1

Damn dog, that's some pretty misogynist shit!
/r/MensRights26/04/13 11:08 PM
-3

That's like saying that anti racist groups should learn to get along with /r/hbd
/r/MensRights26/04/13 10:21 PM
-8

Sort of! But mostly the MRM should stop existing. If you want to fight sexism, look into feminism dawg.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 10:03 PM
-4

The MRM demonizes male sexuality.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:53 PM
-3

Taking responsibility for your own safety by doing what exactly? Avoiding drinking with men? Avoiding clothes that might provoke men? Flirting with men without wanting sex? But don't think of men as sexually creepy.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 09:22 PM
-6

So stop demonizing male sexuality, but maybe women need to not take risks like hanging out with men and drinking. Got it.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 07:26 PM
4

This, but unironically.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 07:22 PM
8

No, you're supposed to find out there is no sexual connection before you shove your hand down someone's pants.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 06:53 PM
-11

This post of yours is exactly the misconception people are demonstrating against. Educate yourself, dog.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 04:51 PM
-5

Are you fuckin serious dude
/r/MensRights24/04/13 04:39 PM
-2

Well a lot of people on this very Internet forum don't seem to be educated on consent, so the point doesn't really make sense.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 04:15 PM
3

Someone might dislike r/mr because it is more or less a subreddit where you can come to gripe about women, try to disprove sexual assault claims, come up with ego-psych justifications for inequalities between men and women, and post explanations of why no doesn't mean no.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:16 AM
2

That is not patriarchy theory though. It's just some shit you made up.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 06:38 AM
1

Not in the context of a society continually bringing down women
/r/MensRights08/04/13 08:32 AM
1

Because gender is related to their qualifications
/r/MensRights07/04/13 03:03 AM
0

Which part, help me out dog.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 11:43 PM
-5

Right. I never said it's not silencing. There's just nothing wrong with that, because it is a perfectly valid nonviolent protest against sexism, and sexism should be silenced.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 11:18 PM
1

Which liberal values are you referring to, anyway?
/r/MensRights05/04/13 08:29 PM
-7

I guess it depends on your definition of silencing. I have been using the definition used around here, which is that opposition is silencing.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 08:11 PM
-6

You haven't listed anything violent yet
/r/MensRights05/04/13 07:23 PM
-12

Yes, silencing tactics like nonviolent protest are perfectly valid forms of free speech. This really shouldn't be controversial.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 05:34 PM
-15

Protesting an event by a problematic and generally sexist movement like the MRM seems like a perfectly appropriate silencing tactic tbh. A perfect example of free speech, too.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 05:22 PM
0

This is retributive group-based justice. I then demonstrated that retributive group-based justice is a very bad idea by providing two examples where the application of this principle leads to very bad results. Your examples were invalid because having an all female supreme court could be advantageous, serve to promote justice, do no harm, and could even arise by chance. Killing all Germans would be the opposite of all that. Your argument is like a bad parody of an earnest r/MR poster.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 05:02 PM
0

I think your ideas are a character flaw in you. That does not mean that your ideas go over my head.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 12:39 PM
3

This hasn't been a requirement for male justices.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 01:16 AM
0

No one is arguing that, you fucking tool. Women, blacks, and other minorities have been powerless for centuries in the united states. Ensuring that these groups have political power is not the same as retributively enslaving all white men. You are a for conflating fighting sexism/racism with perpetrating nazism. Fuck you.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 01:06 AM
2

Of course people should be chosen based on their own merits. You're just not accounting for all kinds of merit. One of them is that given two equal resumes, if one of these people has had the deck stacked systemically against them, then they probably show greater merit. For example, if you have only hired men for two hundred years, and an equally qualified woman arises, perhaps she merits the position.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 12:56 AM
1

Seems fairly reasonable. If 9 men was ok for hundreds of years, why not 9 women?
/r/MensRights05/04/13 12:44 AM
0

so no? so how do you stop people?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 09:32 PM
1

so people should be able to rape with impunity? is that your position?
/r/MensRights28/03/13 05:36 PM
-3

that has a bunch of different issues anyone could accuse with complete impunity This should of course be the case. No one should face punishment for coming out and telling people they were raped. and on a word send anyone to a cage this is relatively rare bc most rapes are not reported and the conviction rate is low where they can expect to be raped nightly throughout their years-long stay. no reasonable person supports this
/r/MensRights28/03/13 12:19 AM
-5

are you aware that you could rape with complete impunity if victim's testimony were not good enough
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:56 PM
1

You're exaclty right, because no one deserves $2bn
/r/MensRights27/03/13 04:43 AM
-2

Who is suggesting retribution? You are: People saw through that and she is now reaping what she sowed. She asked for attention and got it. Noone had to lose their job, all they had to do was nothing at all. Instead she tried to sink her company! Can you see why what you said is dishonest and generally awful?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:29 AM
-11

Woman makes blog post about casual sexism Woman is harassed and threatened by MRAs AnnArchist succinctly explains why she deserves this retribution for being the one exhibiting shitty behavior, being the real bully, and claiming victim status
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:16 AM
-14

This kinda confirms the perception of the MRM as a bunch of unbalanced misogynists. Two examples of a woman making a blog post about casual sexism and being met with widespread harassment and threats. Mras are just short of /r/whiterights.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:05 AM
-13

A bunch of MRAs harass and threaten you?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 04:39 AM
-25

Good news everyone! A new woman to hate!
/r/MensRights22/03/13 04:29 AM
-13

Well to be fair it is
/r/MensRights22/03/13 04:17 AM
-21

Well to be fair she didn't do anything wrong
/r/MensRights22/03/13 01:03 AM
-1

No?
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:46 PM
5

are you unable to come to conclusions other than the outcome of a trial
/r/MensRights21/03/13 08:05 PM
3

Aren't most male rape victims raped by men tho
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:51 AM
1

If your basic premise is that all men are sociopathic oppressors and sex maniacs then you are by definition, anti-male That seems like an MRA idea. It's where the rape victim blaming comes from. If men are not sex crazed sociopaths, then why should women have to take "precautions" to avoid triggering men to rape them?
/r/MensRights20/03/13 11:31 AM
1

In 43% of cases taken up by the innocence project. So, pretty rare.
/r/MensRights16/03/13 10:22 PM
2

Not a complete thought
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:03 PM
0

Of course they happen, they're just very rare.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:56 AM
1

This whole thread is an example of rape culture, in case anyone was wondering.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:30 AM
1

previously saying that you wish to have sex with someone does not equal consent What? Certainly that consent can be later rescinded (and the prosecutors can certainly present evidence that it was), but if saying that you want to have sex with someone isn't consent, then there is simply no such thing as consent. Deny rape culture now, motherfuckers!
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:19 AM
2

Their rights have not been violated. And don't forget that they could sue Reuters for libel. They won't though, because this is not libel.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:09 AM
2

Well, the burden of proof for convicting someone and sending them to prison is and should be beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof for staying away from someone is way lower. So knowing the names of these guys is in the public interest.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 03:58 AM
32

Well thats not what the article says at all
/r/MensRights13/03/13 04:51 PM
2

But telling women not to drink is unreasonable
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:41 PM
2

Well that's pretty unreasonable.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 08:15 PM
2

This is so vague it's not even wrong. Are you talking in order to explain shit or in order to rant? barbadosslim: Hey here's an article about how a lot of men will admit to rape if you don't use the word "rape." This seems to mean that rapists don't understand that what they're doing is not normal and is wrong. Sigil1: Oh really, because I interpret this as the men knowing what they're doing is wrong. barbadosslim: Oh hmm I guess that's reasonable, but it still shows that they think they're doin…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:35 PM
6

This wage-race will continue until the wages rest on the market value of the labor being performed. Two things: 1) Why doesn't that actually seem to happen? 2) What of a hypothetical person whose labor is worth less than minimum wage? Should they just have to live in poverty? they only have themselves to blame for not starting their own company and competing Corporation A out of the labor market. Mm yes, I, as a minimum wage employee with little education and less capital. I should just go start…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:25 PM
1

What do you think of the the coincidence that the % of men that commit most rapes, child abuse, domestic violence in the male sample is a very similar % as those that are thought to have personality disorders that are associated with abusing others? An unsourced, vaguely defined statistic in an internet forum? I don't think much of it all. For real, this: the % of men that commit most rapes, child abuse, domestic violence in the male sample has no meaning to me at all. I don't know what this num…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:15 PM
0

Its a bit of a coincidence that 6 - 8% is a similar number to that thought to have anti social type personality disorder among the male population. People with personality disorders generally cannot be taught to stop hurting people. Your logic is specious! A far better approach would be "teach women not to abuse children" - to catch adult dysfunction at the source. Teaching parents not to abuse children sounds pretty hard to oppose!
/r/MensRights06/03/13 09:37 PM
0

Good point. Still, they believe that their behavior is normal, even if they do know it is wrong.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 09:19 PM
0

No, because most people making minimum wage produce more than $7.25/hr for their employers.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 09:07 PM
-6

Well, a lot of rapists do not know that they are rapists. They see their behavior as acceptable and in line with what everyone else does. They will even admit to rape when asked about it, as long as the word "rape" is not used*. You see it a lot even on this very internet forum. Here are some examples of people not knowing what rape is: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Commenter 4 even has enough self-awareness that he points out that men might commit rape without knowing that what they are doing is rape. Anywa…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 08:55 PM
2

Of course. People should feel ashamed for their sexism. Problem?
/r/MensRights06/03/13 06:45 PM
1

Right off the bat I was called sexist for using the term 'cunt'. Which, I'm to learn, has feminine connotations when used. Unbelievable.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 03:41 PM
1

Yeah he is, because he's less likely to get interviewed for jobs, and more likely to get arrested for shit. Even if he's from the same economic background.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 12:10 AM
1

WHAT?! Are men meant to be mind readers? Well if you think you have to be a mind reader in order to avoid non-consensual sex, then you should just avoid sex entirely. If you do have sex, you're risking raping someone. That thread is days old. Secondly, your point is a complete straw man. I said nothing about men actually needing to be mind readers, and you know it. Go and troll somewhere else. -- A potential rapist
/r/MensRights04/03/13 09:26 PM
1

Well to be fair you are making yourself out to be a misogynizing rape-apologizing non-empathizing victim blaming shithead
/r/MensRights04/03/13 09:16 PM
0

typical racist feminist assumption. lol ok I guess racism doesn't count unless it's affirmative action? or identifying racism in the wild is racist? or something? It is ACTUAL sexism/racism as a response to PERCEIVED sexism/racism. lol White men have to be phenomenally better in all aspects in order to beat out a minority woman. no they don't, white men get hired way more often than minorities and women
/r/MensRights04/03/13 08:56 PM
1

unless you're fucking a psychic, how the hell is a guy able to read your mind itt, not having sex with people against their will requires psychic powers
/r/MensRights04/03/13 12:43 AM
-6

But the affirmative action is not a privilege. It is a compensation for a lack of privilege. Because being a white man is like always having affirmative action going for you naturally.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 12:38 AM
-3

What about differences in arrest rates, education level, job application callbacks, net worth, political positions, inheritance and so on Do these not indicate the existence of privilege or what
/r/MensRights02/03/13 07:13 PM
-2

hates people? e: benned
/r/TheRedPill27/02/13 03:19 AM
1

Yup
/r/MensRights26/02/13 11:29 AM
-23

Congratulations; you did good. -- an mgtow
/r/MensRights26/02/13 04:44 AM
-18

We talked about paternity fraud and how she could get IVF, get pregnant from some other dude then go after him too. Because this is totally a reasonable thing to fear. Not the rambling of a paranoid man who resents women at all. Nope. She: ... no plans or desire for kids. lol [She is] 50ish lol
/r/MensRights26/02/13 04:34 AM
1

yeah you got it
/r/MensRights25/02/13 03:31 AM
1

idgi who doesn't deserve what
/r/MensRights25/02/13 03:21 AM
1

They don't have the same opportunity though. That's what privilege is all about.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 03:10 AM
1

perpetuation of systemic sexism
/r/MensRights25/02/13 02:42 AM
1

No, it would be just as sexist if said by a woman.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 02:29 AM
1

quotas do not exist as it is now, and this: Whoever is most qualified deserves the job, regardless of what "type" of human they are. is easy to say as a member of a privileged group.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 02:10 AM
0

but sex is already a qualification, as you can see by the inequal results
/r/MensRights25/02/13 01:00 AM
0

but it's not racism
/r/MensRights24/02/13 04:28 AM
0

Affirmative action attempts to corrects for systemic racism, working toward a day where race will not matter. You know you make much more sense when you are being sarcastic!
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:46 PM
-1

Exactly.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:35 PM
-1

If the women are underrepresented, then that is systemic sexism until proven otherwise.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:45 AM
-4

you don't see why systemic sexism is a problem? I guess it's because you are the problem.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:30 AM
-5

Of course. Any program that corrects sexism will by definition benefit the affected sex more. You'd have to be a fucking idiot to call that sexism.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:15 AM
-1

It was a pretty sexist and defeatist comment tho
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:58 PM
-4

blaming other people for your misogyny doesn't really follow though, because you're responsible for your own misogyny
/r/TheRedPill20/02/13 05:18 AM
-6

Dehumanizing is the perfect descriptor for that whole thing.
/r/TheRedPill16/02/13 07:23 PM
-6

Well you guys are kinda dehumanizing women by considering them an entry in a book, with a cost of money and a benefit of virginity and sex.
/r/TheRedPill16/02/13 05:19 PM
-1

You should view them as people I guess. Same for men.
/r/TheRedPill16/02/13 04:49 PM
-16

Maybe you shouldn't view women as items valued for virginity and sex
/r/TheRedPill16/02/13 05:09 AM
-1

Good thing none of that ever happened
/r/MensRights02/02/13 12:41 PM
0

Ok, so you don't want forced abortions, you just think they should go to prison if they don't get an abortion. Pretty much I rest my case.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 03:30 AM
0

I never said forced abortions, i gave a choice between Abortion and continued service, or non-abortion and punishment and probably a dishonourable discharge, for the situation to be anything else it would involve changing the goalposts. Ok, so you don't want forced abortions, you just think they should go to prison if they don't get an abortion. I'm so sorry for misrepresenting your argument.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 03:10 AM
0

They should suffer the same punishment a male soldier does if they intentionally make themselves incapable of duty, proving intent falls to a military court and to whether they decided to get an abortion or not, it's not up to me to render judgement. Forced abortions are disgusting. This is disgusting. You are a disgusting person. Fuck you. Actually i am arguing that your constant attempts to defend women, and make-out that women are incapable of wrong, shows an underlying misogyny which you sho…
/r/MensRights27/01/13 03:00 AM
1

I'm not moving goalposts, i'm refining a vague idea so that i can be very specific for nitpickers who try to find any excuse to call misogyny You said that women should go to prison for getting pregnant. You backed up this point. You still haven't recanted. You piece of shit. (which is odd considering the level of misogyny from you) Good point dog, I guess pointing out misogyny the real misogyny. For real though you're awful. It's like talking to Mayonesa or some other really awful reddit charac…
/r/MensRights27/01/13 02:47 AM
1

The fact that you are moving the goalposts is good because maybe you're starting to realize how shitty your opinions are.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 02:37 AM
1

I never said generally, i merely stated the possibility, to indicate that women are so perfect that they are incapable of using their biology for their own gains? Thats misogyny, to pedestalise them is Misogyny, all i state is that within the heart of women as in Men there is the chance for evility. Of course it's in general when you explicitly equate EVER getting pregnant while in active duty with intentionally getting pregnant in order to avoid active duty. Your argument is therefore now disho…
/r/MensRights27/01/13 02:24 AM
1

the misogyny is the belief that women generally plan to get pregnant as a weapon or an excuse not to do shit the gap in logic is where you go from "woman gets pregnant" to "woman intentionally got pregnant in order to avoid combat duty." Your logic is fucked. You are a misogynist. You are fucked. QED.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 02:13 AM
1

None of that makes any goddamn sense, you frothing misogynist. I'm still missing the part where it's Misogyny to treat men and women the same, your issue is with pregnancy, well pregnancy is a choice if you choose it, it is the same a choosing to injure yourself to avoid duty, which in my mind should lead to the same punishments which are levelled at men, then again why do i bother arguing with one such as you? How can you even think this? This is a parody of an opinion. This is Poe's Law shit. …
/r/MensRights27/01/13 01:59 AM
-2

Well the point is that they're not actually nice, and that they should be ashamed.
/r/TheRedPill27/01/13 01:04 AM
1

Here you go, I circled the blatant illogical jump, and I underlined the blatant misogyny. It shows that you're a fucking sexist shithead who bends logic to fit his own misogynistic fantasies of jailing women for getting pregnant. You're a fucking misogynist, OThomson. http://i.imgur.com/nasaLCv.png
/r/MensRights27/01/13 12:20 AM
1

The
/r/MensRights25/01/13 11:16 PM
1

What
/r/MensRights25/01/13 11:05 PM
-5

Exactly! The view of a nice guy is that women are contemptuous.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 10:43 PM
1

A universe where it is an Empirical fact that 11% of women meant to be deployed each year miss their deployment due to pregnancy, these are professional soldiers so clearly they are either doing it on purpose to avoid service or are stupid. That is so illogical that just thinking it makes sense makes you a misogynist. It doesn't follow at all. You have very sexist opinions that you think are logical.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 10:29 PM
1

Women who it can be proven to have gotten pregnant for the express purpose of avoiding a deployment Women who it can be proven to have gotten pregnant for the express purpose of avoiding a deployment Women who it can be proven to have gotten pregnant for the express purpose of avoiding a deployment What the fuck universe do you live in. I love how it's not that reaction when men suffer the same, then it's just part of life. That isn't a real thing either!
/r/MensRights25/01/13 10:15 PM
2

There's actually a very good answer for that. It's not that nice guys are bad, but that sexually frustrated men who blame their lack of a girlfriend on their niceness are bad. These men often call themselves "nice guys". It boils down to this: treating female friends as vending machines who accept kindness coins and dispense sex is misogynistic.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 08:45 PM
1

Goddamn you are a misogynist. Women who get pregnant before deployment should go to prison. You are really fucking misogynistic. My position is that any women who gets "Oops Pregnant" just before a deployment should suffer the same punishments a male trooper shooting himself in the leg to avoid service would suffer, most likely prison, feel free to have kids and a family on your own time, but no dodging your deployments. Holy shit.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 08:31 PM
1

that sounds totally outside my experience dealing with people
/r/TheRedPill18/01/13 06:24 PM
2

But the story isn't even realistic. Did you see the part about holding the door open?
/r/TheRedPill18/01/13 05:26 PM
2

And you support this?
/r/TheRedPill18/01/13 04:43 PM
2

It really sounds like the author hates women and blames women for this tho
/r/TheRedPill18/01/13 04:06 PM
6

but the point of his character is that he's a complete sociopath and narcissist
/r/TheRedPill27/12/12 03:27 AM
-1

Ok, his slut shaming could be a counterproductive sexual strategy. Better?
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 11:37 PM
-3

He was generalizing. In any case, referring to women as used up sluts shows a hatred of women.
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 11:19 PM
-3

Ok, it's because you characterize women in general as "used-up sluts". Your words, not mine. Can you see why that's misogynistic?
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 09:55 PM
-6

How is it misogynistic to for a man to not want to marry and financially support a used-up slut who's looking for a guy to "settle for," after a decade in the amusement park? Is that a serious question? Why do you think it's misogynistic?
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 07:35 PM
-4

Idgi what do you mean
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 07:32 PM
1

That doesn't make any sense though
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 07:23 PM
-7

Then you should revamp your point of view, for your own benefit and everyone else's.
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 06:28 PM
-10

That seems like a misogynistic attitude. Maybe that's partly to blame for your troubles. I mean, why would many women want to date a man who thinks that women are whores?
/r/TheRedPill25/12/12 04:00 PM
1

Obvious concern troll is obvious
/r/MensRights25/10/12 06:34 PM
-5

77% is about 80% right?
/r/MensRights23/10/12 03:20 AM
1

holy shib
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:26 AM
2

Yeah pretty much time for male separatism. If a male engages in a long term relationship under these laws they are a mug. the best part about this idea is that it is both practical and sane
/r/MensRights04/02/12 05:00 PM
1

hell yeah get a lawyer dog
/r/MensRights04/02/12 12:54 AM
1

("unenthusiastic" consent, consent under the influence of moderate amounts of substance, especially when both parties have partaken, etc) It's not impossible to consent if you're under the influence of a moderate amount of a substance or are unenthusiastic. If either of these is the case, and the person in question feels like he or she was not consenting, then it was rape though. I disagree about whether the event in question is rape. of course, and this is pro-rape when you're talking about a p…
/r/MensRights04/02/12 12:43 AM
4

You fucking human trash.
/r/MensRights27/01/12 10:46 AM
-1

holy shit
/r/MensRights27/01/12 07:13 AM
11

which part of this is upsetting? The opposition to victim blaming? The opposition to transphobia? The part about how girl hate is bad?
/r/MensRights27/01/12 05:16 AM
-2

now they just need to remove this part “The revised definition includes instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity, including due to the influence of drugs or alcohol or because of age. The ability of the victim to give consent must be determined in accordance with state statute. Physical resistance from the victim is not required to demonstrate lack of consent.”
/r/MensRights06/01/12 11:35 PM
-10

you're fuckin crazy there's your pr problem
/r/MensRights28/12/11 07:25 AM
0

are you fuckin serious
/r/MensRights22/12/11 05:19 PM
1

Decades of scholarship implies it can be quantified nope
/r/MensRights21/12/11 05:16 PM
-2

how are you so sure? bc of decades of scholarship about it
/r/MensRights21/12/11 01:08 AM
-3

this: so it isn't. does not follow from this: Except you can't quantify that
/r/MensRights21/12/11 12:14 AM
-6

men do not face nearly as much discrimination as women bam cycle of logic fixed
/r/MensRights20/12/11 10:30 PM
5

being called out for being creepy is totally the same as systemic inequality
/r/MensRights20/12/11 04:12 PM
-31

hahaha you guys stuck on that elevator thing
/r/MensRights18/12/11 11:03 PM
-12

how has radical feminism affected your life
/r/MensRights16/12/11 04:18 PM
0

what is r/srs
/r/MensRights13/12/11 06:47 AM
1

They don't think that what they are advocating is rape. Kinda like how racists don't think they're racists, ya know?
/r/MensRights12/12/11 05:22 PM
2

Prohibition always makes vices more dangerous. Be it alcohol, drugs, or prostitution. The word "always" makes this an article of faith more than a statement of fact. For example, the Netherlands is a top destination for human trafficking, and has legalized prostitution (source).
/r/MensRights12/12/11 05:00 PM
0

Pointing out that people are exploited should not be shameful. Why would you want to shame someone for being exploited? That would be victim blaming.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 03:04 PM
0

I have literally no idea what I said that you don't like. I think it is bc you're an MRA on reddit. MRAs on reddit are disappointing people :(
/r/MensRights12/12/11 02:05 PM
0

idgi is this a fakepost?
/r/MensRights12/12/11 06:12 AM
0

I don't know why you worked in a random misogynistic remark into insulting my posting. :(
/r/MensRights12/12/11 04:16 AM
-19

mmm yes their right to be trafficked and exploited, quite
/r/MensRights11/12/11 10:21 PM
0

I think articles about how men want women to put their finger in the man's but w/out consent would be better evidence for your paper.
/r/MensRights11/12/11 08:12 PM
-6

How is it even evidence of a rape culture? All this shows it that writers for magazines that are known to show very little respect for women write things that (you guessed it) show very little respect for women. qed
/r/MensRights11/12/11 04:59 PM
-12

no it's not proof that all men are rapists. It is evidence of rape culture.
/r/MensRights11/12/11 04:20 PM
-7

this is the creepiest shit
/r/MensRights05/12/11 03:26 PM
1

Actually the article says that he was suspended pending a hearing and essentially plea bargained his way to expulsion. As I understand it, the accusation is not enough for the expulsion. The standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. This is common in cases with civil penalties, e.g. expulsion from school or money. If it were a criminal trial, then it would be proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 09:52 PM
-12

Sort of. From the point of view of a white cisman, something like affirmative action would appear like treating white cismen differently. In my opinion, it is treating them the same. From the point of view of someone with privilege, removing that privilege seems like an attack. It's really just treating them the same as everyone else, though.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 07:43 PM
-16

they are offensive to white cissexual men I guess
/r/MensRights20/11/11 05:51 PM
-13

tell me about how racial realism is not the same as white supremacy e: mayonesa moderates some racial realist subreddits, and gets mad when people call him a white supremacist.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 05:37 PM
5

If you're not getting ahead despite being a summa cum laude engineer, then maybe it is because no one wants to work with an insane misogynist.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 10:41 PM
0

hahaha you can't handle it
/r/MensRights16/11/11 10:25 PM
1

sorry I was being sarcastic
/r/MensRights08/11/11 03:20 PM
2

well wouldn't this be similar to the discrimination that zeta males face from women?
/r/MensRights06/11/11 12:36 AM
1

Of course not. You are being intellectually dishonest by recharacterizing my point to be something it's not. The point is that if you are attracted to someone, but choose not to pursue a relationship with them on the basis of some part of their identity, then you're a bigot. e.g. if you are a heterosexual man but break up with your girlfriend because you find out her father is Jewish, then you are anti-Semitic.
/r/MensRights06/11/11 12:26 AM
6

well if transmen face discrimination, then isn't that a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights06/11/11 12:11 AM
-7

well if you are a straight man, then that would be pretty transphobic. You are entitled to this personal preference of course, but that doesn't make it any less transphobic.
/r/MensRights05/11/11 11:57 PM
0

oh I see, it's not misogyny because it's actually true. I'm just inexperienced if women haven't soured me yet.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 10:24 PM
1

oh ok that's not misogynistic at all nope, just perfectly healthy views on women here
/r/MensRights04/11/11 08:33 PM
1

if you think it is reasonable to disguise your identity with the intention of avoiding child support because you believe that it is reasonable to assume that women just want to get your sperm for a baby and child support payments, then you are a misogynist. Biology has nothing to do with it. If you think that this is a reasonable thing to do, then you are a misogynist.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 02:01 PM
1

that's also misogynistic :(
/r/MensRights04/11/11 01:38 PM
4

the behavior of his coworker is misogynistic, in that he treats women like shit. He's not protecting himself from abuse, he's protecting himself from potentially having to pay for his kid and his opinion is misogynistic, in that he is justifying the chickenshit behavior of his coworker on the basis that it is reasonable to assume that women would intentionally get pregnant from him, and that if they were pregnant from him or whatever, it would be reasonable to try to evade child support that's p…
/r/MensRights04/11/11 01:25 PM
1

It's sad that such women are so rare.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 05:47 AM
4

that's kinda misogynistic don't you think?
/r/MensRights03/11/11 09:55 PM
-2

who cares what you think, you're a white nationalist
/r/MensRights02/11/11 02:35 AM
-4

take it to r/race_realism or r/hbd
/r/MensRights01/11/11 03:00 PM
1

"Slut" is bigotry because it involves judging a woman as immoral for engaging in behaviors that would be acceptable for a man.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 09:12 PM
1

The distinction you make is that "creepy" is valid when you think the behavior is creepy but bigotry when other people think the behavior is creepy. In fact, neither of these uses of "creepy" would be bigotry, because creepiness is not an immutable characteristic of a person.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 08:55 PM
2

There, you defend calling people creepy in some instances where you would be creeped out, and then you call anyone who would be creeped out by other stuff a bigot. This is dishonest, especially when your thesis has generally been that the word "creepy" is an inherently bigotry-loaded term. People have the right to form their own subjective opinions of other people based on their own feelings. This may include finding people to be creepy. This is not bigotry.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 08:42 PM
1

beep boop must come up with objective way to interact with people beep boop
/r/MensRights26/10/11 08:30 PM
-1

Subjective is not a synonym for wrong. Feelings are a valid basis for forming an opinion of someone.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:49 PM
0

barbadosslim is an avid poster in r/againstmensrights, am not propagates anti-equality lies like "patriarchy", "rape culture", I guess just because you have no idea what these things are doesn't mean you can't dismiss them as lies.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:37 PM
2

here is a link of you saying that the label "creep" applies to some people http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/loo3w/being_called_creepy_ostracizes_people_usually_men/c2ufz1g
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:19 PM
3

not only have I pointed out why this isn't bigotry, but you have actually defended the use of "creepy" elsewhere in this very thread. You're being totally dishonest.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 01:24 PM
0

in your opinion what would be a reasonable basis for ostracizing someone? Uh huh. Keep at it, bigot, you're doing a great job. I don't think that it qualifies as bigotry if it is in response to someone's actions as opposed to some part of a person's immutable identity. In fact, while we're at it. You're making me feel unsafe, and uncomfortable. I guess you're a "creepy creep". I guess that's an opinion you could have. You're being intellectually dishonest, but you're entitled to your opinions an…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 12:40 AM
2

really? because ostracizing people for acting in a way that makes other people feel unsafe (i.e. acting creepy) seems totally reasonable
/r/MensRights25/10/11 10:53 PM
-7

this is geek social fallacy #1
/r/MensRights25/10/11 10:43 PM
0

sup
/r/MensRights21/10/11 04:58 AM
0

the SRS submission was about how redditors oppose google's removal of several anti-semitic web sites from the top search results for "jewish". then an SRS comment imitated a hypothetical anti-semitic reddit poster ffs the comment ends with the neckbeard icon, indicating sarcasm e: i kinda agree actually, "ironic" racism just being another name for racism and whatnot
/r/MensRights20/10/11 08:51 PM
1

haha bullshit
/r/MensRights19/10/11 07:13 PM
2

How? By telling people : "you should act against your self-interests", and punishing the inevitable wrongdoers? Yeah, very bright. Yeah that's exactly right. In fact I think that's what any government does. I'm not rooting for anarcho-capitalism. Stop thinking in black and white, it isn't an either/or situation. Social democracy, with a mix of free market (self interest) and govermental regulation (protection of the commons) is a reasonable middle ground. If it wasn't gangrened by feminist & mar…
/r/MensRights19/10/11 03:21 PM
6

What is dumb is trying to create a social system that ignores basic human nature. No, they correct for human nature. Anarcho-capitalism is what ignores basic human nature. Both feminism and communism tried that, and created dystopias. lol yes feminism created a dystopia
/r/MensRights18/10/11 08:43 PM
3

that's dumb sorry
/r/MensRights18/10/11 03:45 PM
1

Hitler probably liked dogs because they're awesome. Why do you think that white supremacists love mensrights?
/r/MensRights18/10/11 06:33 AM
-6

because they have the right idea
/r/MensRights17/10/11 09:06 PM
-5

Why do you think they link to you?
/r/MensRights17/10/11 08:46 PM
2

White Supremacists don't go to college, because college is a hostile environment for anyone who doesn't tow a liberal party line. If "liberal party line" means "not white supremacy" then yeah that's pretty much how it's supposed to be.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 08:32 PM
0

Actually he said it right here.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 08:22 PM
4

If you act like an individual, it becomes very hard for racists to hate you. "Personally I blame my racism on the behavior of minorities."
/r/MensRights17/10/11 08:02 PM
1

no this is the only site I use it on
/r/MensRights17/10/11 07:49 PM
1

Correct. Only men are generally allowed to serve in combat roles.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 03:36 PM
0

Sometimes, but a lot of the time r/MR is just a place to vent against women in general.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 07:03 PM
-12

idgi what's wrong with political correctness
/r/MensRights14/10/11 01:18 PM
-4

i found some misogyny
/r/MensRights14/10/11 03:22 AM
-1

no it's not
/r/MensRights13/10/11 03:21 AM
-2

what the fuck
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:05 AM
-4

Yeah it pretty much does, because warning women not to get drunk is totally unreasonable. Also “If a woman drinks to excess during a night out on the town, is she partly to blame for being raped or assaulted?” His answer? While not excusing the ‘mongrels’ who commit such crimes, it was nevertheless a great big ‘yes'.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 11:02 PM
3

oh you caught me! you saw through the subterfuge
/r/MensRights12/10/11 10:51 PM
-3

I think I speak for most of us when I say that yes, it is rape, because the man has an interest in only sleeping with fertile women. As a transwoman cannot have children, he is neither a woman nor fertile, and by not disclosing his status, is not getting consent from the man. This is rape. Equal rights for transsexuals does not include the right to rape men.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 10:09 PM
0

except that it never happened
/r/MensRights12/10/11 07:34 PM
1

It's not a denial, it's your constant inaccurate attribution of problems to the "patriarchy" that is the problem. Blaming patriarchy for everything that goes wrong. No, it's pretty much just for stuff that is oppressive on gender lines afaik. The problem I have with the feminist's definition of rape culture is the idea that making sexist jokes and objectifying women leads to rape. It simply isn't true. Rapists rape not because people are making sexist jokes or objectifying women. Rapists rape be…
/r/MensRights11/10/11 04:00 PM
-1

Of course I can't defend it to you, you're a zealot.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 03:49 PM
1

Before we go much further, I'd like us to reach an agreement on what, exactly, would falsify a claim that a particular society is a patriarchy. If there's no slut shaming, and women are generally in positions of authority, that would go a long way. In my view, each of the aforementioned criteria must be met in order for a social system to be a patriarchy -- that is to say that, if even one point is not met, it would not be a patriarchy. Do you agree with this view? no
/r/MensRights11/10/11 03:38 PM
1

"a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property" that works I guess A) whether "patriarchy" is even the right term for that seems pretty dece to me B) if we do actually live in a patriarchy yeah because women are less likely to have positions of authority and men who are unemployed are considered useless, both of which one would expect in a patriarchy
/r/MensRights11/10/11 02:41 PM
-2

thank you for proving my point and saving me the the time
/r/MensRights11/10/11 02:28 PM
-1

I am just going to pull up a bunch of links about man-on-man rape, domestic violence against men, male homelessness, and the selective service only applying to men. If you still need the links, I guess I can do that.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 01:45 PM
-2

No. I do find the denial of the patriarchy and rape culture on r/mensrights really weird though given that they post examples of both of them all the fucking time.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 01:55 AM
-4

yup, the patriarchy hurts men too
/r/MensRights11/10/11 01:18 AM
-2

Unfortunately, the breakdown of the family, as targeted by feminists, has produced large numbers of children with no self-discipline and no good male role models. I know, right? I may not know what a feminist is, but I do know that they are the ones destroying everything good in the world.
/r/MensRights10/10/11 02:42 PM
3

what the fuck are you talkin about
/r/MensRights10/10/11 02:31 PM
-1

I have received the look of hate from women passing through a door I'm holding. never happened
/r/MensRights10/10/11 01:57 AM
-21

then I guess being bombed to death by unprivileged men is female privilege?
/r/MensRights10/10/11 01:46 AM
1

such as
/r/MensRights08/10/11 04:04 PM
0

if nice guys (TM) don't exist, how do you explain the popularity of the concept of the friend zone
/r/MensRights06/10/11 11:03 PM
3

political correctness is inherently anti male for realsies?
/r/MensRights03/10/11 03:15 PM
2

in the opinion of many r/SRS posters, the cherry picked comments represent r/mensrights
/r/MensRights29/09/11 09:05 PM
2

No, they're both moving the goal posts. You can't reasonably expect someone to respond to a point you haven't made yet and then criticise them on that basis, but then I suspect you know that given your documented history of unwillingness to think critically when faced with ideological opposition. Using more than one argument is not a logical fallacy. I suspect you know that given your documented history of unwillingness to think critically when faced with ideological opposition. Ok, and you're a…
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:49 AM
5

Defamation requires malice and lies, and since r/SRS does not lie about r/mensrights, it is not a defamation campaign.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:38 AM
1

changing my argument is totally kosher, whereas changing the situation we're arguing about is called "moving the goalposts". seriously if you don't understand "stop" then you should never have sex ever
/r/MensRights29/09/11 03:28 AM
1

lol that doesn't sound like a real thing
/r/MensRights29/09/11 02:21 AM
2

Explain what sexual assault is, then explain how this is sexual assault, and then I will know how to answer the question.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 12:02 AM
1

Which anti-equality advocates? All of them?
/r/MensRights28/09/11 07:32 PM
1

you're changing the situation completely now
/r/MensRights28/09/11 07:00 PM
2

Lets put it like this. You're in a boxing match. And you're boxing. Suddenly, in the middle of the 3rd round, as a punch is flying towards your face you just drop your guard and say "I'm done". Other guy doesn't hear, or doesn't care cause he's so psyched up, or thinks its a trick, and keeps wailing on you until the ref steps in, because that's what you DO. Did that consensual act of boxing someone just become assault? in the real life version of this analogy, the woman is trying to trick you by…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 03:53 PM
1

I don't think so. For one, r/SRS is a real subreddit populated by real people, unfunded by any corporation or NGO. For another thing, r/mensrights as a subreddit is reasonably unpopular on the rest of reddit.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 03:05 PM
1

Does the 13th amendment also apply to taxes? Why or why not?
/r/MensRights27/09/11 07:44 PM
1

Since the law requires him to pay child support, I actually can go with that. Same as if he didn't pay taxes.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 07:00 PM
0

Actually, the 13th amendment explicitly allows involuntary servitude. Go read it.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 02:52 PM
1

bc sexism is bad and opposing sexism is good whether you're a man or a woman also your caricature of a feminist is dumb as hell
/r/MensRights23/09/11 12:37 AM
-4

When civilians are attacked, do the paramilitaries not kill the strongest people (men)? Good question. It turns out that when you bomb an apartment complex or marketplace, everyone in the affected area dies, not just the military-age men.
/r/MensRights22/09/11 10:44 PM
18

what about masculinity do you think we want to reconfigure?
/r/MensRights22/09/11 10:30 PM
1

I'm a feminist
/r/MensRights22/09/11 09:54 PM
-1

I'm a man
/r/MensRights22/09/11 06:28 PM
-6

it still looks like a sexist troll post to me lol
/r/MensRights22/09/11 01:57 AM
-3

Sure, that is probably what the OP meant. It still doesn't show that r/AMR isn't egalitarian though.
/r/MensRights22/09/11 01:32 AM
-3

Saying that most of the world's maniacs have been men is not a sexist statement. This is because it does not mean that most of the evil people are men. It is because, taken in context with the comment, "Most of the great accomplishments have been by men," it shows out that most of the historical figures, good and evil, have been men. This is not because men are both smarter and more evil, but because there is a power structure that historically disproportionately allowed men to become powerful f…
/r/MensRights22/09/11 01:15 AM
-4

posts sexist stuff, gets banned, complains on r/mensrights
/r/MensRights22/09/11 12:52 AM
2

people with different political opinions than me are all like this people with different political opinions than me are stupid
/r/MensRights21/09/11 02:34 AM
1

The prior rape is admissible into evidence even if the man never takes the stand, and even if the man had been criminally acquitted of the prior sexual offense (despite the 5th Amendment right not to testify and its prohibition against double jeopardy); I don't see how the 5th amendment right to refuse to testify applies here. Also it's probably not double jeopardy. Basically it sounds like they're allowing evidence of the accused's propensity to commit the crime because of the he-said she-said …
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:47 PM
1

For the record, I write the dreaded False Rape Society (and I am sure you think you know all about us). We happen to take the radical position that rape is far too common; that women never deserve to be raped, whether they are "sluts" or not, drunk or perfectly sober, stupid or prudent, or for any other reason; that consent can never be inferred absent a manifestation of assent and silence doesn't cut it; and that all people should be treated as equals in every respect. how very reasonable Now, …
/r/MensRights20/09/11 08:07 PM
-1

What a great comment. You didn't reference the societal need for slut shaming, the necessity for women to vocally and physically express a lack of consent, or the ills brought on us by women's suffrage. I hope all of r/MR can post like you in the future.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:36 PM
1

what an insightful post, here have an upvote
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:26 PM
-1

rape culture definitely hurts men
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:16 PM
1

I don't want or need to defend congressional democrats at all. However, I will say that these taxes you are talking about were never passed, and the primary cause of the economic downturn was perpetrated by the businesses themselves. In addition to this, periods of high taxation in the past have been associated with strong growth.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 04:35 PM
1

It's critical to the point, because it exemplifies how liberals talk about helping people to make themselves feel better and publicly pat themselves on the back for what good people they are, but rarely if ever do it. You are absolutely right about that. The way to help people is not to vilify business, stunt economic growth and kill the economy so the poor can't find jobs. Empty words don't fill up peoples bank accounts. Raising taxes on the rich doesn't seem to kill the economy. Also, it seems…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 04:24 PM
2

Obama's shittiness is irrelevant to the point that liberalism's favoring of helping poor people and minorities is a good thing.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 04:13 PM
3

fucking liberals, trying to help poor people & minorities. Why do they keep trying to make the world a worse place???
/r/MensRights20/09/11 04:03 PM
2

liberallllllllllllls
/r/MensRights20/09/11 03:51 PM
1

You believe you are making fun of sexists, yeah but you are really trying to disrupt dialogue on equal rights for young men. Absolutely not. The patriarchy hurts men in easily-identifiable ways, and I oppose that.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 03:20 PM
1

I make fun of sexists, therefore I am stupid, not a good person, etc :(
/r/MensRights20/09/11 03:08 PM
2

The MRA doctrine is equality. maybe it is, but it's not the doctrine of loud r/MR posters What we do not do, is surreptitiously try to skew the internal discussion of other sub-Reddits and downvote valid points without comment because we are insecure. This is the same as, "Maybe we are sexists, but the real evil here is making a subreddit devoted to mocking/downvoting another." Also we are really trying to avoid downvoting shitty r/MR posts fwiw. You are not engaging in some small form of intern…
/r/MensRights19/09/11 11:31 PM
1

yeah, feminists hate their own children, totally
/r/MensRights19/09/11 03:55 PM
6

leftiiiiiiiiiiiiiies!
/r/MensRights18/09/11 11:34 PM
2

I don't think you're offensive for the reason you think you're offensive
/r/MensRights17/09/11 12:16 AM
0

They tend to argue that they should have the right to have sex with people who are blackout drunk but conscious, people who have been unintentionally intimidated into agreeing, and people who do not explicitly voice non-consent. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jp2oo/take_a_seat/
/r/MensRights16/09/11 08:30 PM
6

It sounds like you're hearing, "Don't have sex with people who are too drunk to consent. Also, don't coerce people into sex," and interpreting it as, "men simply should not pursue sex."
/r/MensRights14/09/11 11:07 PM
5

If you go in there acting like a man, the Gashes will have you expelled for being a rapist because you dont agree with them. First of all, you're framing your argument using misogynistic language, which is just great. Women as personified vaginas, that's really wonderful. It's also misandrist, in that you associate natural male behavior with opposing anti-rape groups. Second of all, it's a little different when it comes to arguing about rape, because a lot of MRAs on this subreddit would argue t…
/r/MensRights14/09/11 10:47 PM
2

how do you stop discrimination without disproportionately helping the discriminated group?
/r/MensRights12/09/11 09:53 PM
0

ah, the old "you're just bigoted against the bigots" argument (You bigoted shithead)
/r/MensRights12/09/11 09:41 PM
0

you're a bigot and a shithead
/r/MensRights12/09/11 09:17 PM
1

It is common knowledge that most people do not want to have sex with transexuals, so a transexual who does not disclose is infringing upon another's bodily rights. I need not be bigoted against transexuals to not want to fuck them. I'll rewrite this as though it is the year 1850. It is common knowledge that most people do not want to have sex with blacks, so a light-skinned black person who does not disclose is infringing upon another's bodily rights. I need not be bigoted against black people t…
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:54 PM
0

Of course they do. They can ask whether someone is transgendered. And I can call them a bigot for it. This in no way interferes with self-determination.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:41 PM
2

And that choice would be racist. Kind of like you have the right to decide who can enter your home, but if you ban all foreigners, you're a xenophobe. You have the right to do bigoted things. If you exercise this right, then you are a bigot.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:23 PM
1

I edited it to be a better analogy If I were a blind man I would feel betrayed if I dated someone who I thought was a white woman and it turned out she was just a black woman. I don't like to fuck black people any more than I like to fuck men pretending to be women. Black people are black people. Male humans are male humans. See? When you compare transgenders with any other group of people, the bigotry is obvious. When you make the analogy with animals, it fails because humans aren't like animal…
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:12 PM
1

because you're a transphobic shithead and go fuck yourself
/r/MensRights12/09/11 08:01 PM
1

So ask. Why should the transgendered person automatically cater to the wishes of a transphobe?
/r/MensRights12/09/11 07:49 PM
2

Correcting discrimination will always disproportionately affect the discriminated group. If this is to be considered discrimination itself, then it is necessary and good discrimination.
/r/MensRights12/09/11 06:59 PM
5

Actually that's wrong. In this case, the discrimination is counter to systemic discrimination.
/r/MensRights11/09/11 04:23 PM
2

you're like one of those great gimmick accounts except instead of great you're terrible
/r/MensRights11/09/11 04:05 PM
2

I understand what you are saying, and You should still not have sex with this blackout drunk person, because it is a bad thing when people wake up feeling raped.
/r/MensRights10/09/11 02:54 PM
4

crazy
/r/MensRights10/09/11 02:29 PM
4

You do not consider it rape if a person if you have sex with a blackout drunk person, and then this person wakes up feeling raped. You should still not have sex with this blackout drunk person, because it is a bad thing when people wake up feeling raped.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 04:51 PM
1

women should support male causes. Guess what? They never do that is blatant misogyny
/r/MensRights09/09/11 04:38 PM
2

I have not downvoted you in this thread, if you care. For the purposes of this particular thread I will assume that the following paragraph is 100% correct. If the accused says that the accuser consented to the sex and that it was not rape, then by definition they do not have mens rea because they think that the sex was consensual, so they do not have a guilty mind. Obviously they could be lying, so their story should be checked out. If this is the case, then there is a powerful rape culture tha…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:34 PM
-3

beep boop searching for correct stimulus formula for women beep boop
/r/seduction07/09/11 08:33 PM
0

it sounds like this is something that's not okay, yeah it's not ok I don't understand why this exclusively is singled out as being not okay. because you posted a thread about it
/r/MensRights07/09/11 02:28 PM
0

And some women are angry toward men because they have a bad ex, and that's okay? where'd I say that?
/r/MensRights07/09/11 02:00 PM
-1

Some MRAs are angry toward women but it's ok because of this movie
/r/MensRights07/09/11 01:25 PM
-6

troll
/r/MensRights06/09/11 10:26 PM
-2

lol what is the matter with you
/r/MensRights06/09/11 08:33 PM
0

I disagree with your post, but it is insightful and lends to the conversation. Have an upvote.
/r/MensRights06/09/11 03:40 AM
0

there is no way for anyone to answer that question in a way that is believable over the internet, so I won't :)
/r/MensRights06/09/11 03:29 AM
5

No, the part where your fucking head turns every man into a rapist. No, just men who have sex with people who don't or can't consent. This includes instances where the person: said "no" didn't say "yes" said "yes" but was intimidated said "yes" but was coerced said "yes" but was under the influence of a drug or alcohol to the point that he or she would not have said yes had it not been for the influence of the drug or alcohol Glad I could clear that up.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 09:21 PM
6

which part is the misandrist part? Calling people shitheads?
/r/MensRights05/09/11 09:11 PM
7

tell me more in a non-homophobic, non-misandrist, non-misogynist way about the different ways men, women, and gays think
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:57 PM
7

First, accuse them of hatred (ie- rape culture or misogynism, etc.) Yeah, the dude was saying misogynist shit, so I called him a misogynist and explained where the bigotry was in his post. For some reason you have a problem with this. Then you imply that they are for something they are clearly not, in this case, hatred of the mentally ill. In your case, pro rape. A lot of them were arguing for a definition of rape that would allow people to have sex with non-consenting people, which I would argu…
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:45 PM
3

You're more likely to be viewed as authoritative if you're a man, and you're more likely to hold a high paying, powerful job. You have greater opportunity in the military, too. You're viewed with less suspicion if you're white, and you're less likely to go to jail. Female privilege exists as well, and would include going in lifeboats first. It just really doesn't matter for day-to-day life, though.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:34 PM
4

Yeah, you could take that as an example of a privilege being removed and feeling like an attack, why not.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:21 PM
7

I think that this post by theindignation: that's what real men do, might be referencing this post by Warren_05: You should not call yourself a male. but idk. also this: you think mental illness is funny, so you hate the mentally ill. seems out of place because you're the only one referencing mental illness afaik. Also this passage: A misandrist - because you hate men, evidenced by the fact that you think men and women's brains are different. is kind of out of place, because it seems that by your…
/r/MensRights05/09/11 08:10 PM
3

Unlike those with tits or a darker skin color, white men get to be the scapegoat for all. Good luck to a man trying to file a sexual harassment lawsuit. They'll be alot of joking about him getting his balls tickled and he liked it, so why complain? Sounds like the rationale to justify rape back in the day, no? Yeah, rape culture hurts men, and it's definitely a bad thing. I'm white and my great grandfather was a sharecropper. White people can be born into poverty/slavery as well. Absolutely. Nah…
/r/MensRights05/09/11 07:59 PM
7

You are closer to a female than a male, and thus you think and feel like one. My remark about the gays was referring to the fact that those with feminized brains fit together, and therefore, you belong with them.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 07:48 PM
22

yeah that's a really homophobic and misogynistic thing to say It's misandrist because you're saying that I'm not thinking in a masculine enough way to call myself a man. It's homophobic because you're saying that gay people aren't as good at thinking as men are. It's misogynistic because you're saying that women aren't as good at thinking as men are. tl;dr you're a bigoted shithead
/r/MensRights05/09/11 07:19 PM
7

I don't think we support fucking drunks, we just don't think a drunk fuck is worthy of major crime charges. Can you admit the difference? Sure, there is a difference between what is moral and what is enforceable. This is the first I've heard in r/MR that it is unethical to have sex with a drunk person though. Progress!
/r/MensRights05/09/11 06:31 PM
0

I know what you mean. When you've been privileged, removing that privilege seems like an attack.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 06:15 PM
21

misogyny and homophobia in the same post, gj e: and misandry!!!
/r/MensRights05/09/11 06:02 PM
5

Well, one of the arguments against r/MR is the whole "I should be allowed to have sex with wasted people" attitude. In this thread, people are opposing the rape of this woman, which is good. They are also making it clear that had she not verbally said "no", this would not be a rape. This is wrong, because she was clearly too drunk to consent by her description of events. So this thread does not disprove the arguments against r/MR, but it is a step in the right direction.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 05:28 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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