TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

battlingfrog Archive

View 0 posts and 132 comments by battlingfrog on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-1

Feminists have been scoffing at the idea that women should to take on a certain amount of responsibility for they own safety for a while now. This is not true, and even if it was, it wouldn't at all be the same thing as advising women not to defend themselves. As I said, the feminists at women's resource centers are the ones who have made it a priority to provide and advertise Rape Aggression Defense courses on college campuses. Again, their point is that people who blame women for not knowing h…
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:44 AM
2

Doesn't really make a difference, her misinformed and generalist points about feminism aren't any more legitimate just because she's a woman. I will edit it, though.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:30 AM
-9

I shudder to imagine what would happen if a crotch grabber, or even a crotch flasher, appeared on campus today. We live, after all, in the age of the collegiate “trigger warning,” where schools shield fragile students from “offensive,” “disturbing,” or “traumatizing” material. This article is fucking insipid. What the fuck is she "shuddering" at? The thought that maybe people in nowadays wouldn't take kindly to someone running around molesting women? That maybe there'd be a little outrage, a lit…
/r/MensRights15/06/14 08:05 PM
0

adorable.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 04:26 PM
1

You seem to think you're entitled to an argument with me, and I'm sorry to inform you that you aren't.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 04:15 PM
1

You are clearly to discussions reddit. Lmao. Way to trip over yourself in your attempt to be condescending.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 03:47 PM
1

"quickly"? Dude, it's been two days. You need to go outside.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 03:39 PM
1

much wow
/r/MensRights14/05/14 03:00 PM
1

sure
/r/MensRights14/05/14 02:50 PM
1

k. You seem to think you're entitled to an argument with me, and I'm sorry to inform you that you aren't.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 02:43 PM
0

cool
/r/MensRights14/05/14 02:41 PM
0

hand waves
/r/MensRights14/05/14 04:47 AM
0

Yes. I "snipped" your evidence. Whatever, man.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 10:51 PM
0

Actually I did provide evidence, I told you exactly why that is the natural conclusion we have to draw if we take all feminists arguments and put them together. ^ this is so not evidence that it is actually hilarious. Saying that has the same weight as me saying, "If we put all MRMs arguments together, we see that MRAs are holocaust deniers. The evidence is my own biased conclusion based on misinterpretations of their platform!" Try harder. Or don't. Seriously, please don't. I can see your wheel…
/r/MensRights13/05/14 09:31 PM
1

I didn't make the claim; you did. Your claim was that feminists think all rape accusations are default true, which implies that they want to abolish trial procedures for accused rapists. I just pointed out that it's a completely groundless exaggeration. You responded, unsurprisingly, with no evidence. Also, the spelling for a non-verbal acquiesce (sarcastic or otherwise) is "Uh huh"; what you wrote, "uh uh" means literally the opposite. See how your points might be a bit difficult to parse out? …
/r/MensRights13/05/14 09:14 PM
1

That's a lil better. My answer now is just, "Yes. Yes, that is an exaggeration." You're making an outrageous claim with no supporting evidence, so it's really not worth my time to try to argue against it; the point defeats itself, though I know you'll never admit that. You'd much rather see all feminists as the ridiculous caricatures you get from the internet than actually look into the history of the movement you are so irrationally opposed to. I hope that made you feel better.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 09:06 PM
1

Both of yours are significantly longer. As in, neither can fit in one screen shot. And, to be honest, the more pressing disincentive is you aren't a very coherent writer. Like, check this out: What is exaggerated about how feminists treat all claims as necessarily true, and even when a man is found not-guilty they are included in a statistic, in an argument, that says these are some of the ones who got away with it due to a system that is failing rape victims? That's one interrogative sentence w…
/r/MensRights13/05/14 08:45 PM
1

I'm sorry, dude, you're just too verbose. You're points aren't very thought out, and I feel like I've already mostly addressed them, but I wouldn't even mind that if you didn't hit me with a wall of text every response. I don't have time for this sort of argument right now. Sorry again, thanks anyway.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 07:45 PM
1

This is very long, and I can't possibly imagine what its argument will be, since all I pointed out was the statistical fact that the vast majority of rape accusations do not end in conviction. I have a feeling we're about to enter into a semantics argument, and I don't really have time for that. So I'll just start with your first sentence and assume the rest of it flows from there. You said this doesnt prove its easy to make a false accusation. This is just splitting hairs. Anyone can accuse any…
/r/MensRights13/05/14 05:48 PM
1

if it's real then why wouldn't it be easy for her to make the accusation? Because, if she did, he has a text message saved in his phone proving that she was conspiring to falsely accuse him. Personally I think this whole set up looks really suspicious, but even if it is true, there's literally no way this sort of accusation would go through. All this "live text" shows is that one crazy woman, shown here, is willing to threaten it, not that it's "easy" for her to get away with it. Listen, our leg…
/r/MensRights12/05/14 03:31 PM
3

Nice rage-baiting, but this doesn't prove that a false rape accusation is "easy" to make as anything other than an empty threat from a preposterous individual, much less that they're common. A completely random anecdote is hardly any indication of the outrageous statement your title is making. This post is a fucking joke.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 10:20 PM
1

As noted recently by RAINN, "the anti-sexual assault efforts of feminism" are counterproductive. Link? Citation? Context? And do they say that MRM's efforts are working? When you have the recognized feminist authority on the collection and analysis of rape statistics advising the CDC that knowingly having sex with someone without their consent is not rape, it's time to go through everything we think we know about the statistics of rape with a fine toothed comb. You do realize that the source you…
/r/MensRights01/04/14 06:57 PM
1

And I'll probably post them on the internet. And I won't ask for your permission or be even slightly concerned if you don't like it. Yup. Spoken like someone who truly believes what he's doing has no negative consequences. Oh, and this one is nice too: But I'm gonna look. Hell I'm gonna stare. And stare and keep staring. No way that would make anyone uncomfortable amiright? Definitely sounds like you want your "exchange" to be "consensual and fair." Yup, no attempts to upset people here. /s Like…
/r/MensRights01/04/14 06:40 PM
0

the reaction to ~20% of women reporting they felt "sexually threatened" Once again, you took what was said out of context instead of addressing the actual statistic, which is, once again, that nearly 20% of women report a sexual assault in this New York Times featured study. It isn't a matter of 1 in 5 women coming in and saying "I felt uncomfortable when a man on the bus was staring at me"; we're talking about rape and rape attempts. I'll cite the line again: "Nearly one in five women surveyed …
/r/MensRights01/04/14 07:43 AM
1

Yes, actions have consequences. But if the consequence of your actions is that an asshole decides to take advantage of you, shouldn't we be blaming the asshole and not the person who was taken advantage of? ^ This was the point. Way to miss it. That and also all of the other ones. You are a creepy asshole for being so intent on objectifying/deliberately upsetting a woman for anti-rape activism, though. That is also a point I made, but it wasn't a main one. Those you just flat out ignored. Good f…
/r/MensRights01/04/14 07:26 AM
1

But I'm gonna look. Hell I'm gonna stare. And stare and keep staring. Then I'm gonna get my camera, the huge professional one because I'm a professional photographer, and I'm going to take pictures of you. Lots of them, high definition, huge megapixels. And I'll probably post them on the internet. And I won't ask for your permission or be even slightly concerned if you don't like it. If you did this, you'd be acting like an asshole. And don't try to deny it, either, because you know that you'd b…
/r/MensRights01/04/14 02:36 AM
1

Sooooo...source?
/r/MensRights01/04/14 02:11 AM
1

Gonna have to call bullshit on you here. Not only is this conversation immensely unlikely/unbelievable for a number of obvious reasons, but this image has been reposted over and over again on sites like Reddit, tumblr, and activist blogs and no one has ever claimed to have the story behind it as you are doing here. Surely someone would post the source that you describe, whether by doing a simple screenshot and editing out the names or creating an article without the graphic, or (more likely) the…
/r/MensRights01/04/14 02:08 AM
1

Do you have the source for this?
/r/MensRights01/04/14 01:43 AM
1

*female FTFY
/r/MensRights01/04/14 01:30 AM
0

simple words I dunno what you mean by "simple words," but it's pretty obvious you're intentionally making verbal assault seem trivial. I don't know why you would want to do that. accidental touching This is not part of the definition of sexual assault. And you know it. consented too behavior that they "regret" later. Saying stuff like this is really cruel to victims of sexual assault. They already have to deal with people saying that they wanted to be violated and that their pain is probably all…
/r/MensRights31/03/14 11:55 PM
2

It so sucks that you can't edit titles. I feel you, man.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 08:30 PM
2

I think that's a pretty common mistake. The statistic isn't that 1 in 5 women will be raped: it's that 1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted, which is very different. Still upsetting, though, for sure.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 08:23 PM
-7

Okay, I apologize for going against the current here, but.... Not all of the 616 people who passed by were men, were they? And all of the men they interviewed seemed to say that they would stop to help a lost child...do you really think that every man who walked by the children thought to himself "I am deliberately not going to help that child who is lost because, if I do, I'll be arrested"? Doesn't it seem more likely that they and the several hundred women who also passed by probably just thou…
/r/MensRights24/03/14 09:39 PM
1

Jesus, did you make this yourself? Could you have created a lazier, grosser, more ridiculous straw-man for feminists than this? How does your irrational hatred for "feminists" as you perceive them in your wack-a-doo worldview relate to anything regarding Men's Rights? Is the moral of the story that women can't be activists for themselves and still regard themselves as "women?" Do you see the irony of equating all feminists' complaints to the sound of a baby sobbing and then claiming to understan…
/r/MensRights19/03/14 02:32 PM
2

So oftentimes you hear from feminists and others this thing about how words aren't defined by the dictionary Are you referring to ethnic and homophobic slurs? That is the only context I can think of where a feminist would say this. I think that their point is that just because the word "faggot" appears in the dictionary as a "n. a bundle of sticks" doesn't mean that it's not a derogatory term for gay men. It still very much is. So why are they having such a big problem with most equating feminis…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:08 AM
1

Saying "you're worthless" to anyone is a pretty shitty opinion to have...
/r/MensRights16/03/14 02:59 PM
0

you'd be a hero, that you're some sort of altruistic saint, when the reality is you aren't, they aren't, hardly anyone is If I saw a child drowning, I wouldn't walk away. That doesn't make me a hero or a saint...it merely confirms I'm semi-decent enough to call myself part of the human race. We aren't talking about giving up all our belongings and living as a volunteer in a refugee camp, we're talking about responding to a physical crisis right in front of us. This guy said he'd ignore a woman w…
/r/MensRights13/03/14 09:45 PM
0

why not? If something didn't benefit me directly, why should I partake? Or, why wag the finger at people who see things differently? Okay, before addressing the other stuff I gotta know: are you advocating for what the original guy was saying, namely that men should walk by women and children in peril? That's what I chiefly object to. If you want to be a feckless epicurean, that's perfectly fine; I can't force empathy on you. I draw the morality line when you are deliberately seeing people suffe…
/r/MensRights13/03/14 08:35 PM
1

I'm not saying he's got to find a girlfriend. Read the rest of what I said. I'm saying that he would benefit from opening up as a person, rather than inherently expecting that everyone is lying in wait to destroy him. In this case, I'm specifying a "girl" because he clearly has some trust issues with women in particular. I said "relationship", not "sexual relationship". There are other kinds of relationships a man can have with a woman. He believes that being in a deeper relationship with a woma…
/r/MensRights13/03/14 08:26 PM
4

Self-preservation=fine "Self-preservation" informed by a remarkably paranoid, unrealistic, and frequently bigoted worldview=less fine. Sure, no one can stop you, but it's probably going to hurt you in the end. For most of the things on the list, this guy's hard-fast mistrust of women and generally skewed outlook are only going to hurt himself; he would probably benefit from finding a girl whom he feels comfortable around and developing a new relationship, but if he'd rather consider all women to…
/r/MensRights13/03/14 06:13 PM
0

The fact that a person was victimized does not change the fact that the victimization could have been avoided if the victim had made smarter decisions Yeah, I don't think you're going to get this by me mashing your face into it more times. I've said more or less what i wanted to say. Thanks for reading any way, I hope that by the best circumstances possible you someday change your mind.
/r/MensRights05/03/14 02:53 PM
0

I urge the person to replace the word "rape" with "murder" or "theft" and see how ridiculous it sounds. Telling me that it's dangerous to walk around downtown Richmond in the middle of the night with my wallet hanging out only enforces a culture of victim blaming. It's just not the same, dude. It's just not. I understand the logic you're using, but your equation is all off. Please, please try to let me change your mind about this. I really hate when people have mindsets like this, I hate the fuc…
/r/MensRights04/03/14 09:33 PM
0

Go out like what? The question only specifies "like a slut". Does that mean high heels? A short skirt? A tank top? A low cut blouse? Skin showing? Tight jeans? At what point is it okay to call a young woman "a slut" for the way she dresses and say she has no self-respect? Answer: just don't call women sluts. Don't humor the people who do, either. It's a charged word, intentionally vitriolic and accusatory. It implies that they're "asking for it" with what they wear, which is a fucking brain-dead…
/r/MensRights04/03/14 08:14 PM
16

women are actively uninterested. This is a bummer for you, but...oppression? Using oppressive language, gestures, or completely ignoring. Again, sort of confused by your idea of oppression. You realize that women aren't obligated to be interested in you sexually, correct? That women who do not know you are not required to pay attention to you? Women find it acceptable to be this way while Men are more and more expected to be expressive, accepting, well off and interesting. "Be this way"? You mea…
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:14 PM
2

He usually doesn't. Source: been to college. Drunk people hookin' up errday. Rape accusations still pretty rare.
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:26 AM
3

The men, who asked not to press charges Perhaps this is why she served no jail time? Because no charges were brought against her?
/r/MensRights03/03/14 02:24 AM
0

I think the point made in the comic still stands: the difference just has to do with the audience and purpose for each medium. Batman isn't drawn as muscular and intense because it appeals to women, that really wouldn't make any sense; the largest demographic of comic books continues to be single men. But I think we all know the reason that harley Quinn made the gradual progression from this to this. Don't we? Do we really need to be so in denial that superhero comics frequently objectify the fe…
/r/MensRights02/03/14 09:34 PM
1

The context of this screenshot is that the woman in the witness stand is responding to the question "Is this trained orca capable of harming humans?" She's saying that just because a person/animal is capable of doing harm doesn't mean that it's likely or that we should assume they will. She's actually making the opposite point from what this out-of-context image makes it seem.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 09:08 PM
6

That's a really ridiculous and stupid question being asked by the anon.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 09:03 PM
1

It calls him "mentally ill" because he was. Calling attention to the fact that a person who committed a murder/suicide was unstable is not an attack on the man's character, it's just a statement of fact.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 06:37 PM
1

Can you show me an example of this happening? Not that I don't believe you, necessarily, I just don't think the dichotomy is as pronounced as you think. This article does name all the stresses in Greg Anderson's life: in fact, the headline is "alone, jobless, and mentally ill". Then it goes out to list fully all of the issues in his life that might have caused him to snap: He was unemployed and now unemployable. He knew he would never be granted shared custody of his son or even allowed overnigh…
/r/MensRights16/02/14 05:56 PM
0

My view of what an "adult" is considers using gossip and emotional blackmail as being ruled out by definition. The majority of women to disagree Wow. That is what I thought you meant. And it is a really silly thing to think. Saying that the "majority of women" use emotional blackmail is fucking stupid. Your insulated worldview and selective attention to specific sub-cultures that cater to your own preconceived notions has given you a skewed and ridiculous idea that most women are actually like t…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 01:02 AM
1

okay, that's your decision. not really sure how your personal opinions on long term relationships are relevant here
/r/MensRights12/02/14 12:45 AM
0

I disagree with everything you say here, so dis is about to be one long-ass post. You throw around a lot of ridiculous generalizations, and your understanding of how genders interact is so misinformed that it almost seems satirical: the idea that men and women have the same frustrations and notions of success when it comes to dating because "we're 50/50 groups in the population" is just bizarrely dumb and demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding about how social expectations work. I may …
/r/MensRights12/02/14 12:36 AM
1

If they have gone out of their way to make themselves fearful of ordinary non threats then we needn't concern ourselves with their irrational response. Sure, but if a woman rejects your approach and you don't respect that, she's not "going out of her way" if she's made uncomfortable. If you give someone too much unsolicited, undesired attention in pursuing them sexually/romantically, I don't think it's an "irrational response" to be fearful. That's what the signs are saying. I think that you're …
/r/MensRights11/02/14 05:11 PM
1

Was that the clarification? I would appreciate one, but I don't think I follow what you said there in relation to what you seemed to have said earlier, which is that women in general are less emotionally mature. Specifically, that they are "adult children". Now you're saying you should adjust to individuals on an individual basis, which makes sense but it seems more like a renunciation of your former point than a clarification...
/r/MensRights11/02/14 04:52 PM
1

I mean in any relationship, not just marriage. If that's what your saying. I know you guys don't like marriage as a concept and that's fine, but romantic relationships are a part of life.
/r/MensRights11/02/14 04:49 PM
0

"Faulty" statistics? Care to explain? Also, I'm just trying to talk about this stuff, I never said the words "male privilege".
/r/MensRights11/02/14 04:48 PM
-1

Just realize that they are adult children and treat them as such If you treat all the women like this, you will never wind up with anyone worthwhile. Not only that, but you won't deserve to. This is really stupid advice. Yo, /u/unexpecteditem, ignore this shit and just try treating everyone with respect/sincerity instead, shit'll work out better for you in the end.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:08 PM
0

assume every man has to make every woman feel safe. Feeling emotions and feeling safe are two totally different things. It's really not acceptable to be a threatening presence to anyone, and it's really not that much to ask that people contribute to feelings of security rather than feelings of danger/discomfort/fear.
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:05 PM
1

In terms of being sexually harassed, the streets are definitely more "safe for men" than for women. As a man, I don't really have to worry about getting approached in the same way as a woman does when I'm out walking (i.e. cat-calling/other unsolicited advances), and I can generally walk home alone through a college town late at night without the fear of being sexually assaulted. The risks for men and women in this regard do not really occur at the same degree, and it feels sort of wrong to igno…
/r/MensRights10/02/14 10:01 PM
1

The daily...email? Lol
/r/MensRights09/02/14 01:54 AM
2

I did get it, it was just dumb. He still didn't point out where I said that. His brilliant "parody" was to say the same thing as me without defending his point at all. And it has you "laughing your ass off". Your sense of humor blows, just sayin'. That's probably why no women want to go out with you.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 07:35 PM
1

thank you gentlesire
/r/MensRights08/02/14 06:49 PM
1

I don't think all guys need that advice, just PUAs.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 06:47 PM
2

No, you wouldn't. They'd probably just remind you that it isn't true. Much props to /u/PeterPorky for rising above the circlejerk and doing a great analysis of this bullshit statement.
/r/MensRights08/02/14 05:17 PM
1

Women are people, and they just want to be treated as such. Yes, but social interaction, especially social interaction that may lead to romance, is not that simple. Yes it is. Your failure to understand that is why I'm ending this here.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 02:59 PM
2

Fine.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 02:58 PM
1

Exactly, the advice is to be attractive. Did you even read my comment? I did, I guess I just underestimated how pointless it was. So you're saying that the best way to make women like you is to have them...be attracted to you? Isn't that sort of redundant? And you think that's unfair? Not just that people who are objectively attractive generally do better in the dating pool, but that people choose to date people they are personally attracted to? It's not even as if the guy on the right is a fuck…
/r/MensRights07/02/14 02:20 AM
1

The comic actually has no advice beyond, "be attractive, don't be unattractive" - unless perhaps it's "ask for a dance, maybe she wants to dance" instead of over-analyzing. Haha what? Did you even look at the comic? Lol the whole point is that the guy asks her to dance rather than over-analyzing his interaction with her. That's the whole point of the thought bubble that says "Step one: Identify fellow human being" as opposed to the endless, incomprehensible psychology babble. How did you miss th…
/r/MensRights07/02/14 02:13 AM
1

You and the others are claiming that PUA is the only good dating advice for men. I'm telling you that a lot of it is not very good advice, and that the comic actually has some good advice in these situations: Treat women like fellow humans. Don't worry so fucking much about when you're going to fuck or what you need to do to get there. Just fucking chill out and talk to women like they're people with individual interests and things to say. Most of the non-PUA advice on the internet is actually m…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 07:04 PM
1

Sometimes when a guy addresses a girl as a fellow human being he is successful, but often he is not. Oh no! Are you saying that, sometimes, a girl is a person with free will who doesn't find herself attracted to you, even though you're honest? That is how life works. Sometimes, you don't get the girl. Sometimes you do. Do you think PUA techniques are successful 100% of the time? Of course not. A lot of it has to do with who you are as a person and who the girl is as a person. What are her intere…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 06:51 PM
1

like i said above, the comic doesn't imply anything about being a doormat, unless you consider being frank about your desires and treating women like people to be overtly submissive behaviors. Which they're not. Those are healthy behaviors.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 06:42 PM
0

be doormats and hope for the best Do you think that's what the comic is saying? Because it's not...it just says to treat everyone like they're a person, rather than a machine that can be controlled. There are plenty of places to get dating advice without it being PUA. Just do a google search. Is all of that advice statistically guaranteed to get you laid? Well, no, but that's not how human interaction works. PUA "techniques" frequently devolve into emotional manipulation: I'm sure that you can c…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 06:40 PM
1

Boy, what a counter-point. Are you a master debater?
/r/MensRights06/02/14 06:25 PM
5

You think that men attempting to make themselves attractive to women is 'gross' Literally never said that. Learn how to read, please.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 06:06 AM
5

You really think that PUA is the only "good advice" on how to approach women?
/r/MensRights06/02/14 04:55 AM
6

Um...no it's not? I don't really know how to argue against what doesn't make any fucking sense.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 04:40 AM
21

It's not really attacking men at all, it's attacking people who take "Pick-Up Artistry" to a level where it's purely manipulative. I know that this subreddit goes back and forth on PUAs; personally I find the mindset pretty gross. I guess it's not really an issue to look up dating advice if you're having a tough time finding someone, but the obsessively strategical and pseudo-scientific approach is frankly pretty ridiculous and, yes, even dehumanizing to the "target". You'd be better off just ad…
/r/MensRights06/02/14 12:22 AM
1

have you ever actually heard anyone complain unironically that they were "raped by logic"? You sound like an idiot. Stop being so overdramatic and making yourself look like a joke.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 07:07 PM
-1

That's not a very mature way of approaching activism.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 06:59 PM
1

Women can request female medical staff to examine and wash them men cannot. Um...did anyone else see this? What is this sentence trying to say? That men are at a social disadvantage because they can't specifically ask to be washed by a female nurse?
/r/MensRights21/01/14 06:23 PM
-2

I'm was mostly just trying to show you that two interpretations of the sentence are possible and that we should probably just go with the one that makes infinitely more sense. But it's a heckuva strawman ya got there, dude. Let's see if we can't address that. They think that the 50s went on for a hundred years, and that the Victorian Age was all of ancient history Can you show me any feminist scholar/activist who thinks these things? Feminism is not Creationism: it's a college-educated movement,…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 06:03 PM
4

Of course she'll probably claim you logic raped her or something. She probably will not claim that.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 06:39 AM
1

OP, are you saying that a video like this should not be condoned by society, or that a gender-swapped version should be? There are a number of reasons that the gender-swap of this video (as it exists in my imagination, at least) would probably make me and most people uncomfortable. Then again, this video did not make me uncomfortable; it's really just silly and benign, and as a male I can see why the joke is funny. Am I socially conditioned to think that? Sure, at least partially. But the reason…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 06:23 AM
1

Pro-Tip: if the word "wussification" appears in the report non-ironically, it's a bullshit fucking report.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:41 AM
1

Yay, violence in the commercial mainstream! /s What a weird fucking thing to say, OP.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:36 AM
11

This really is an utter fucking joke of an article. The writer actually opens by saying that America needs more men "willing and able to safeguard family prosperity" like...i can't fucking believe she said this...Walter fucking White, a fictional murderous drug-lord from a popular TV-show. Did she even watch the fucking show? How can you call Walter White "heroic"? How can you claim to understand Breaking Bad and not realize that the Walter-White-as-role model-idea is the exact opposite of the p…
/r/MensRights21/01/14 05:08 AM
-1

I think he/she is talking about men's behavior for the last couple thousands of years, not feminists'. The sentence structure is ambiguous, but I think it's fair to assume that everyone involved in feminism realizes that the movement is just over a century old.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 04:29 AM
0

I think the punishment should be much more severe than just being forced to have sex. You are making absolutely no sense right now. Not because you have some eloquent point that is going or my head, or because me and the other people down-voting you are somehow unable to grasp the cogency of your edginess, but because you sound like an utter fucking lunatic. If you hear "No one ever deserves to be raped" and feel the need to "question" that fundamentally moral idea some more, you have some very …
/r/MensRights15/01/14 05:19 PM
2

I'm not suggesting that women should be raped, but that people who are so morally void that they will destroy another human life for petty reasons be subject to severe punishments. So it seems that, at this point in the conversation, you have all but completely renounced your explicit initial statement that false rape accusers should serve a rape sentence in a men's prison. You're now vaguely saying that the punishment should be "severe". So long as your conceptualization of a "severe" legal pun…
/r/MensRights15/01/14 01:27 AM
0

Promiscuity on its own is not bad behavior. Everyone is entitled to do with their body what they want, whether that means not having sex at all or having sex all the time. Having lots of sex only becomes an issue when you (a) aren't being safe/are ignoring your partners sexual health, (b) you are lying to one/several partners about being exclusive with them, or (c) aren't giving proper consideration to your partner's consent. Those offenses don't have to do with promiscuity, they have to do with…
/r/MensRights14/01/14 06:35 PM
6

Couldn't agree more. As a man myself, I am in full support of confronting some of the unfair and restrictive expectations that affect men and young boys in our current society. What I consistently find coming out of the MRM instead are blatantly violent, bitter, ungrounded, and sexist sentiments like /u/SirSkeptic's, which just an hour ago had a positive vote count when I left my comment. No one deserves to be placed in such a dangerous scenario as the one described, certainly not under the guis…
/r/MensRights14/01/14 04:33 PM
4

At no point during this do we say "X should be raped" Please, just stop. Stop defending a worldview that is so clearly messed-up; just because you are a Men's Rights Activist doesn't mean you have to support/condone the vitriolic things that come from other MRAs. The idea that false-rape accusers deserve to be raped is not a "boogeyman" of my invention, it is the deliberate implication of what /u/SirSkeptic said. And I think you know it. Words have meanings, you can't just twist around something…
/r/MensRights14/01/14 04:14 PM
4

We're not just talking about "women who perjure". We're talking about people who specifically make a fraudulent claim of rape knowing what will happen to their victims. This is what perjury is. You're describing the same crime whether your talking about rape, murder, theft, or any other incident of framing another person; when a witness makes "fraudulent claims" under oath, that's perjury, and malicious intent is directly associated with it. Can the consequences of perjuring a false rape accusat…
/r/MensRights14/01/14 03:51 PM
18

Jesus Christ, what are you even saying?! Under what circumstances would it not be cruel and unusual punishment to put someone in prison with convicts of the opposite gender? What is the implication you are getting at here? That women who perjure deserve to be sexually assaulted/raped by male inmates for 5 to 80 years? What kind of freakish fucking underground-"justice" are you advocating? How do you feel about prison rape when it happens to men? Is it somehow okay all of the sudden that people i…
/r/MensRights14/01/14 06:46 AM
1

If everyone agreed with me life would be boring. (although, I would think I was a lot smarter - on second thought, that's probably not a good thing either). Hahaha. Same here, man.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 10:46 PM
1

I do actually think women are inherently untrustworthy, but I also think men are inherently untrustworthy too. I think we may be fated to always disagree. I identify as a humanist, and you apparently identify as a misanthrope. There are practically infinitudes of evidence backing either of our viewpoints (much of it indistinguishable from being one side or the other!), so it isn't really worth goin' at it over this. Thanks for the response, though. THIS, however, I found too silly to let slip by…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 06:12 PM
1

You're right. I lumped you in with all of the other people in this thread, and I shouldn't have. My bad. I was just getting really frustrated with this whole thread: look through it if you get the chance, because you clearly weren't an original part of it. I'm honestly the only one who used any sources the whole time, and not only did no one respond to the cited points that I made, they repeatedly tried to support the veracity of the phrase "bitches are crazy" by bringing up individual examples …
/r/MensRights09/01/14 05:15 PM
1

I have known two people to try to reverse their vasectomies. Both were somewhat successful. Ah, look. More anecdotal evidence. I know that you acknowledged it on your own, and I appreciate your self-awareness, but seriously, what is up with this thread and never fucking citing anything?? Putting the aversion that this subreddit apparently has towards external sources, I do see your point. It is an operation, and while the success rate is high, risks exist and side effects/failures may occur. How…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 04:17 AM
2

No. No, no, no. "Slut-shaming" is the manifestation of a culture that prioritizes "purity" in women. This concept dates all the way back to the bronze-age; you know in the Bible how the Lord commands that women who are raped have to marry their rapist? The reason this concept exists is because primitive societies considered women to be essentially property and thought that losing their virginity made them worth objectively less. It was a "you break it, you bought it" clause. Our society today is…
/r/MensRights08/01/14 07:37 PM
5

You are exactly right. The reason this shit somehow manages to be a reportable concern is the same reason that Time magazine releases an issue every 3 years complaining that the youngest generation is full of lazy a-holes: it presents an issue that is easy to latch on to ("feminists want to castrate us men, grrr!"), it's easy to "prove" by nitpicking singular incidents/examples and making them seem like they reflect an entire demographic ("From Sweden to Taiwan", wtf? More like "in Sweden and Ta…
/r/MensRights07/01/14 10:15 PM
2

EXACTLY.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 02:26 AM
1

yet... we still wear our seatbelts? I thought you would bring this up. Mainly because it's been brought up before. Again, as I've said over and over in this thread: there is nothing wrong with taking precautions to avoid unintended pregnancies. In fact, I fucking encourage it. Wear a condom, for christ's sake. Get a vasectomy if you want. I don't care. I'm really more concerned about the some of the motivations I see here, which I believe reflect unhealthy opinions as well as some spitefully and…
/r/MensRights07/01/14 01:42 AM
1

That's pretty messed up, man. Especially considering that the fact of the matter is that you are very wrong. Studies suggest that about 4% of rapists commit 75% of rapes, and that approximately 90% of men will never rape anyone in their life. You're reaching your conclusion assuming that for every man there is exists a statistically likelihood that he will commit a rape, which is not true. The vast majority of them don't. It's a logical fallacy very similar to the base rate fallacy, wherein peop…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 09:07 PM
1

In any case, I recommend you read up on some of these issues and not rely on exploiting what I say If you're going to take all of my points and claim that they are "exploiting" you for your inadequate grasp of the English language, then it's not really worth pursuing. I don't have any trouble seeing things from a "male perspective": as a male myself, I rather excel at it. Almost as if it comes naturally. I just happen to disagree with the worldview that places women as a distant and un-relatable…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 08:39 PM
1

Yes it's like Schrodingers rapist, and no it's not a fallacy So you think that treating every man like a potential rapist is a logically sound point of view?
/r/MensRights06/01/14 08:26 PM
2

bitches be crazy sounds more like women can be crazy rather than women are crazy. Thank you for, as you say, "leaving that one alone", because I couldn't possibly disagree with you more on your interpretation of subject-to-adjective equivocation. I completely oppose the false and technically unsound opinion that "be" and "can be" have the same meaning, but I, too, will let that one go. A Vasectomy is a reversible operation I believe. You know what? I just looked it up, and I did not know that va…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 04:36 PM
2

Point is, no matter how much trust we put in women, we still need to wear condoms to protect against pregnancy and STDs. Haha, yeah, of course! That's completely rational. I am in no way arguing against safe sex. As for women becoming pregnant through "fraud" (I assume you mean sperm-jacking or something similar), well, that's a whole other issue. One for another thread! Glad we could come to some common ground in the end of this one, though. EDIT: If you're interested, I'm having a pretty intri…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 12:49 PM
1

Yeeeesh. Looks like I struck a nerve.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:46 AM
1

The first statement you made is pretty ridiculous, but you're saying you didn't want to talk about it, so fine. Lower in the thread, a user named /u/alkyjason made the same point and I responded to him, so if you want you can see why I think "bitches be crazy" is misogynistic there. But seriously, isn't the whole point of that phrase to be sexist? I don't really understand how people think calling women "bitches" and saying they are "crazy" is somehow not sexist. Whatever, though, moving on. You…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:36 AM
1

Hooray! Too bad there's no hope for you not to be a condescending and unlikeable ass. :(
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:10 AM
2

But there are legal repercussions. It isn't illegal to break somebody's trust, but it is illegal to extort. I looked this up just a second ago, but I think you might want to read it. While the independent act of lying about being pregnant is not explicitly illegal (dishonesty, while immoral, does not necessarily break the law on its own, there needs to be money or libel involved), the general consensus here appears to be that a woman can be sued for fraud in the inception or fraud in the inducem…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:00 AM
0

I didn't.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 01:39 AM
5

Jeez dude, calm the fuck down. Maybe people will stop seeming so "oversensitive" to you if you voice your opinions as rational thoughts rather than just calling the people you disagree with "cunts".
/r/MensRights06/01/14 01:01 AM
2

Huh. Thanks for being so reasonable! Personally I wouldn't get one yet because I don't know if down the road I'd want children. I can't imagine having children now, but I'm assuming my attitude will probably change at some point. Good for you, though, if a vasectomy suits you well! If you don't mind me asking: did you already have the operation? At what age did you have it done?
/r/MensRights06/01/14 12:51 AM
-2

Schrodinger's rapist? Yes, that's what I'm comparing it to. Both are logical fallacies. women have a natural biological urge to become mothers Men have a natural biological urge to have sex. Does that mean we're unable to control ourselves like adults and avoid sexually assaulting/harassing women? Of course not! We're humans, not animals. We make decisions that are informed by more than "biological urges" because we are intelligent and evolved enough to do so. So are women. This is evidenced by …
/r/MensRights06/01/14 12:40 AM
3

its quite common actually. my brother is a bartender and all the girls there have their mind set on geting together with a rich guy and dropping the "im pregnant" bomb. boy, that anecdotal evidence, i tell you hwhat. Anyway, it seems like your main point is sound, it's just not relevant to what I'm arguing against. I'm not saying that it's wrong to get a vasectomy (though I hope that you would reveal that to someone you are in a long term relationship with who wants to have children, just so you…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 12:27 AM
-1

Gross.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:17 PM
-3

Okay, whatever.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:11 PM
-3

Yeesh. Do you actually use the phrase "white knight" unironically?
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:09 PM
-6

Hey. Hey. In algebra, x can be used as a variable equal to one value. You used the variable "x" to signify multiple risk percentages that are not even close to equal. If x=.5 (percentage of marriages that end in divorce), then x=/=.00012 (made-up percentage of woman who want to trick their husbands into marriage, I had to make it up because you provided no source). You're not right. If you want to answer the questions I ask you, provide the sources I requested, and clarify your position, I would…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:01 PM
0

Hey, just look at my response lower in the thread to /u/alkyjason. You're both making basically the same point, and I responded to his because I saw it first.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 10:50 PM
0

I guess you're entitled to read it that way, but if you type "Bitches are crazy" into google, you're not going to get level-headed results talking about how women and men are equal and should be accepted for the bad and good in both genders. You're gonna get a whole bunch of blatant, childish sexism. Like, a whole bunch. Plus, I think that making the general statement that you should "Always wrap it up" and following it with "bitches are crazy" implies that the reason to use protection is becaus…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 10:26 PM
-2

Haha yeah, lol @ you providing absolutely no sources to support your backwards theory that all women are out to get you.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 10:14 PM
-1

Yeah. Which is why, to me, all men will always be murderous rapists, because of this story that I found on Google in twenty seconds. Oh, wait, I forgot: that's fucking stupid.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 10:13 PM
-7

Okay, I don't know what other people are thinking of this, but your line of reasoning here seems utterly illogical and scary. Perhaps I'm missing something? Just look at this statement: This holds whether x is the woman baking cookies for and giving them to him, cuckolding him, divorcing him, giving him blow jobs, or try to trick him into marriage with a pregnancy. So you really think that the chances your girlfriend makes you cookies are equivalent to the chances she will fake pregnancy to dece…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 09:40 PM
4

it's actually just a funny thing to say If somebody posts an article about a man domestically abusing his wife, and somebody else's response is, "Yeah, men are crazy", you don't think that reflects a fucked up line of thought? Why is it "funny" to call women bitches and suggest they all do crazy thinks like fake pregnancy? It doesn't really seem like people are taking it as a joke, considering that it's been posted as a serious issue to a Men's Rights forum. Also, the following comment's suggest…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 08:51 PM
-11

But cancer isn't caused by people being cruel to each other! Your statement that "every man is at risk" of a woman he loves ruining his life presupposes that all women are inherently cruel, and that just isn't true. It really is the same thing as saying, "Because date rape happens, every woman is at risk of being raped by her partner." It isn't a productive statement to make, and it fosters unnecessary fear and distrust. There will always be cruel women willing to lie and deceive men like the wo…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 08:00 PM
-5

Every man is at a risk, however slight, of his significant other "entrapping" him. Can you give me some sources backing this up? An across the board statement like that seems like it would require some larger form of evidence or study to prove. Also, I'm not saying that men shouldn't get vasectomies if they want. I'm contradicting what the original poster said, which was that men should get vasectomies because all women are untrustworthy. It's mostly that second part that I'm taking issue with h…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 07:32 PM
1

Maybe what Alphaflight was saying is that generalizing all women as "crazy bitches" because one woman on the internet is a maniac is misogynist? It may be joke, but it's definitely a sexist joke. You know? Also, it doesn't really seem like people are taking it as sarcasm because the top comment beneath it is advocating that men should get vasectomies without their partner's knowledge. Because, apparently, every man is at risk of having his girlfriend entrap him in a marriage he doesn't want. Doe…
/r/MensRights05/01/14 07:20 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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