TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

breakneckridge Archive

View 2 posts and 173 comments by breakneckridge on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

The math in this source is ALL wrong! You can't add together percentages from different groups! If in my left hand I'm holding marbles with 40% of them being yellow, and in my right hand i have marbles with 40% of them being yellow, when i put both handfuls in a bucket it doesn't now have 80% yellow marbles, the combined group still has 40% yellows. If 40% of women do something, and 40% of men do something, then 40% of all people do that thing, not 80%. Plus they didn't show even the basics of t…
/r/MensRights23/05/23 02:47 PM
4

Oh please shut the fuck up with this insane nonsense.
/r/MensRights06/07/22 04:39 AM
1

I'm all for men being allowed to terminate their rights and responsibilities of fatherhood. But that isn't at all what this post specifically says, and a LOT of people on this page are taking it to mean the guy should have some sort of input on whether or not a woman gets an abortion, and that's 100% fucked up.
/r/MensRights20/03/22 09:47 PM
-7

Read the comments on this page, there are a bunch of people saying exactly that.
/r/MensRights20/03/22 09:36 PM
-14

The fuck is wrong with you?! The only person who should be able to decide if a woman is going to keep being pregnant is the woman whose body the pregnancy is in. Seriously what the fuck man. You think the man should be able to force her to continue being pregnant if she doesn't want that in her body?! Get the fuck outta here with that bullshit.
/r/MensRights20/03/22 07:45 PM
-3

Not wearing a mask indoors is just an asshole thing to do.
/r/MensRights26/01/22 12:26 AM
6

I think that in general whatever two consenting adults want to do with each other should always be legal, but this isn't a men's rights issue.
/r/MensRights04/12/21 06:48 AM
148

The right to not have part of your genitals cut off when you're an infant.
/r/MensRights03/12/21 07:22 AM
1

Ombudsman is a good first stop. Google to find out who your schools ombudsman is and contact them. https://www.purchase.edu/offices/ombudsman/
/r/MensRights13/11/21 06:16 PM
30

Not women. This woman.
/r/MensRights14/10/21 02:38 PM
-1

The only label that matters is that he's an asshole and he's fucked up in the head. I know this is much easier said than done, but you should completely stop caring about his opinion. Try to avoid him as much as possible. Stay out of the house as much as possible. Try to find other caring adults who can help guide you as you grow up.
/r/MensRights27/07/21 09:44 PM
1

Re-read what i wrote.
/r/MensRights23/07/21 04:35 AM
1

Firstly, you don't know what "most women" on Twitter are doing. Secondly, that isnt in the content that your headline is supposed to describe. Thirdly, Twitter is a non-representative subset of people. Fourth, it's needlessly antagonistic. Etc. Etc. Etc.
/r/MensRights23/07/21 04:32 AM
1

Why add the dumb "most women on Twitter lose their minds" bullshit?
/r/MensRights23/07/21 04:26 AM
-4

This is a nonsense pile of supposition on supposition on supposition, laid upon assumption after assumption.
/r/MensRights15/07/21 04:56 AM
6

Dude, no.
/r/MensRights09/02/21 07:28 AM
1

I assume you're anti-fascist, and also not AntiFa. Anyway, I really gotta go to bed now. I'll try to respond to replies at some point later.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 10:11 AM
0

You can advocate for men's rights without being a Men's Rights Advocate. Same for women or any other group.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 09:56 AM
2

I feel like the term is pretty self explanatory. I believe in equality for everyone. I believe in equal right for all people.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 09:49 AM
-1

I'm glad you agree that the quoted comment is horrid. It shows good of your character. But the bast majority of people here genuinely want to create a better future. I could believe that many here do want to create a better future. But what many of them actually do is create a worse present and future, regardless of what they're trying to achieve. But it doesn't have to stay that way, which is why I'm here in this thread. If I can help make even one person start thinking about whether or not the…
/r/MensRights07/08/20 08:33 AM
1

I don't belong to any of them, because I don't call myself a feminist. Nor do I call myself an MRA. I'm an equalist. Full stop.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 08:13 AM
-2

That comment shows just how little you know.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 08:12 AM
-9

Sure. Let's look at this recent highly-upvoted post. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/i4ydxq/i_guess_we_arent_suffering_either_when_shit_hits/ First of all, nowhere on the screenshot is anyone saying men aren't suffering. That's interpreting things in the craziest way. There's nothing wrong with having a newsshow segment on the particular troubles that women are facing during Corona. In fact that sounds like a valuable topic to discuss! At the same time, it would be a very legitimate…
/r/MensRights07/08/20 07:51 AM
-11

Once upon a time this sub was much more about pro-men equality, but now it's increasingly anti-women.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 07:17 AM
-1

No, not all of them do.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 07:14 AM
1

Lots of movements start off as one thing, but then evolve and branch out to become different things. Are there people who call themselves feminist and do anti-male things? Absolutely. Are there people who call themselves feminist and are neutral towards men? Absolutely. Are there people who call themselves feminist and do pro-male things? Absolutely.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 06:46 AM
1

I don't discuss things with people who aren't willing or able to have an actual discussion. Have a nice night.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 06:23 AM
-2

My above comment is the correct response to this reply as well.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 06:14 AM
1

Your link disapproves nothing I've said.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 06:08 AM
-12

Nice doubledown on your condescending bullshit. Perfectly illustrating OP's point. You're only hurting your own cause by acting this way.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 06:01 AM
-12

Oh please. Stop with your condescending bullshit.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 05:55 AM
-1

"Feminists" aren't a single group. There's a lot of people who call themselves feminist, but many of them hold extremely different views from one another.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 05:46 AM
-18

Fucking thank you! Yes! I gave up on this subreddit long ago, but I'm glad to see there's at least one other rational person still here.
/r/MensRights07/08/20 05:44 AM
1

Both groups include people pushing toxic ideas. I simply consider myself to be a person who believes in equality. Full stop.
/r/MensRights09/06/20 04:08 AM
-26

Oh please, stfu. This a private business doing what they think is best for their own profits.
/r/MensRights06/06/20 07:42 AM
1

You've got so much hate and anger. I wish you peace of mind brother.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 01:29 PM
0

They are not wrong to do so. Language evolves.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 04:47 AM
-1

More often than not I hear chairperson or chair.
/r/MensRights03/06/20 01:25 AM
0

Whether or not it sounds stupid to you is immaterial. The fact of the matter is that the term "fireman" is a problem at least because there are some female firefighters.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 04:20 PM
1

That's a completely non-response reply.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 04:17 PM
1

There's nothing wrong with removing gendered parts of words that have no inherent gender aspect to them. In fact it's a good thing, it creates more equality. On the other hand if you wanted to decry ungendering efforts being applied unequally, that could be something valid.
/r/MensRights02/06/20 02:31 PM
4

http://reddit.com/r/shadowban
/r/MensRights05/08/15 05:10 AM
4

What fiasco are you referring to?
/r/MensRights26/07/15 04:05 AM
16

Yup, I saw the same sign and thought about posting it here, but I'm lazy whereas OP delivered.
/r/MensRights26/07/15 04:04 AM
39

I'd be okay with whatever the sentence was as long as it's applied equally.
/r/MensRights21/07/15 10:49 AM
0

An ally is an ally.
/r/MensRights07/07/15 05:59 PM
16

In any meaningful regard, age doesn't scale linearly, it's logarithmic. The difference between a 10 year old and a 15 year old is huge. The difference between a 15 year old and a 20 year old is big. The difference between a 20 year old and a 25 year old isn't much. The difference between a 25 year old and a 30 year old is small. The difference between a 30 year old and a 35 year old is essentially no difference at all.
/r/MensRights03/07/15 10:32 PM
11

I read that in the South Park cop voice.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 11:26 PM
0

That's called an AMOG. If you google it you'll find tons of info on how to deal with them. https://www.google.com/search?q=amog
/r/seduction25/05/15 03:48 AM
1

It's called a quarter life crisis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarter-life_crisis
/r/seduction24/05/15 06:04 PM
1

Don't forget the "/s" tag, because there are some people out there who really do say that kind of nonsense.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 01:44 PM
41

Even if her arguments made sense (which they don't), then that would mean everyone else in America would be totally justified in deciding NOT to vote for a woman because they don't like the genitals she has and all that it entails. How do they not see the utter hypocrisy? You can't say it's right to vote for a person because they're female, and then also say it's wrong to vote against a person because they're female. A person's sex/gender is either a legitimate criteria for judging a person on, …
/r/MensRights04/05/15 02:26 PM
2

Fuckin saved.
/r/seduction04/04/15 05:35 PM
4

mirin = admiring
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:47 AM
6

I felt the same way, but after a few clicks I figured it out. The user "spacekatgal" is Brianna Wu, it's her official public account. From Brianna Wu's official user account spacekatgal she posted a comment saying "Is GSX Head of Development and noted Feminist Brianna Wu a terrible person?"
/r/MensRights10/02/15 07:10 AM
5

Why is this downvoted? This is perfectly on topic and relevant in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 11:44 PM
1

Maybe try a new therapist. This is definitely a serious psychological issue and not a problem getting women interested in you, which is what seduction is all about.
/r/seduction03/01/15 10:54 AM
1

Why is this in mensrights?
/r/MensRights27/12/14 01:15 PM
0

Then why not tell the whole group they have to leave?
/r/MensRights16/11/14 05:29 PM
0

Of course i can and I often do, but in some cases I feel that asking for email is better.
/r/seduction12/11/14 05:21 PM
-1

Email is a way that girls feel very safe giving out their contact info. They'll much more readily give out their email address than their phone number.
/r/seduction12/11/14 03:15 PM
-1

Quote from the glossary in the subreddit sidebar: FR- Field Report. This is a written account of what you experienced during an interaction/night, which you then post on seddit (if you want to).
/r/seduction12/11/14 09:48 AM
3

It's more like building up a callus, at first the friction hurts, but if you keep doing it over and over the skin becomes thick and durable, so what used to hurt is now completely painless. And for some people it's more like acquiring a taste for alcohol. At first it's awful, but if you keep at it you start to enjoy the flavors, and soon it tastes delicious instead.
/r/seduction03/10/14 03:27 AM
2

Am I the only one seeing an article in Spanish?
/r/MensRights20/09/14 08:37 PM
156

Not "attempting to produce", it was already "produced". They already took photos of his penis. When police arrested the teen, they photographed his penis against his will They were now trying to get a second set of photos of it erect.
/r/MensRights11/07/14 02:18 AM
-4

I have no idea what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights15/06/14 06:43 PM
6

OP is completely nuts. His voice is autotuned extremely.
/r/seduction31/05/14 12:55 AM
1

Totally, the word date has waaay too much baggage associated with it. If you say that you and a girl should go out to some event together then she'll know exactly what the situation is.
/r/seduction21/04/14 05:57 PM
2

Sounds like you're a social libertarian and fiscal conservative. There are a lot of people in the same group as you.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:32 AM
0

I'm too depressed to read all that right now. Can I get a tl;dr?
/r/seduction31/03/14 09:16 AM
15

Hurdles
/r/MensRights28/03/14 07:46 PM
7

It still hasnt been definitively proven either way. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-ejaculate
/r/seduction24/03/14 04:59 PM
12

Seriously? Its just some random unsourced text with a stolen picture that blatantly lies about what it's a picture of. There's every reason to think its bullshit and there's zero reason to believe it's true unless proven otherwise.
/r/MensRights24/03/14 01:01 AM
18

Because there's no reason to think that anything about this story is true.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 11:59 PM
5

Maybe in the southern US, but I've eaten at many fancy restaurants in the north east and I've never seen this behavior from the wait staff. Though maybe it happened and I simply didn't notice it.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 09:42 PM
9

I've eaten at many upscale restaurants in the north east, and I've never seen females be waited on first. Maybe it's a southern US thing. Or maybe it happened and I simply didn't notice it.
/r/MensRights23/03/14 09:39 PM
0

I did answer his question genius. He needs to read the ultra super page 1 basics. Just read the fucking sidebar.
/r/seduction06/03/14 12:06 PM
-1

You're posting in the wrong sub and you clearly haven't read even the basics before asking questions.
/r/seduction06/03/14 11:59 AM
0

You need to reread the image text.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 04:07 AM
1

For those of us not living in Britain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav
/r/MensRights27/02/14 07:08 PM
3

They are under no obligation to help The OP never suggested that they did. He was just saying it was the right thing to do, the kind thing to do - and he's correct. It's right to help people when you can. It's good for the strong to help the weak, the smart to help the dumb, the rich to help the poor, the expert to help the novice, etc. None of these more-able people are under any obligation to help the less-able people, but it is the right thing to do, the good thing to do.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 09:20 AM
2

Ya know what reveals even more truth than occam's razor? Google. She never denied that she did this, in fact her whole argument was that his sperm was a gift to her so she could do whatever she wanted with it. In fact her actions aren't even a question, its an established court record fact. http://jonathanturley.org/2011/02/01/illinois-court-rules-man-can-sue-over-deceptive-use-of-sperm-by-girlfriend-to-impregnate-herself/ Plus, i have no idea why you imagined that all that extra stuff like a te…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 05:18 PM
2

Thanks. Twitter is so goddamn awful, anytime I go to that site I'm reminded of why I never go to that site.
/r/MensRights19/01/14 07:15 PM
3

I basically never use twitter, so please explain a bit more where to find these reaction tweets. When i click on the link to go to his twitter feed, all i see are his own tweets. Where are the reaction tweets?
/r/MensRights19/01/14 10:14 AM
3

Where are you seeing that?
/r/MensRights19/01/14 02:08 AM
16

Exactly. This is another case where MRAs are increasingly becoming exactly like feminists, just on the other end of the political spectrum. If there are people who want to buy shirts that say "women are bitches" OR "men are idiots", then that's perfectly acceptable on a societal level. Naturally when people do wear these shirts then we're perfectly allowed to mock them and consider them retards, but these shirts don't at all reach the level of deserving moral outrage or societal pressure. And if…
/r/MensRights14/12/13 11:08 PM
-1

You're totally right! There are no female architects! /s
/r/MensRights03/11/13 03:10 PM
1

Eventually very possibly yes, as I described in detail above.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 01:04 AM
0

You fail reading comprehension.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 11:44 PM
1

Wow, what a well-reasoned argument. Clearly you must be right. /s
/r/MensRights10/10/13 11:18 PM
1

That isn't remotely what I said. Not even remotely. It's the difference between shooting a person because you hate their religion Vs. shooting a person because they're currently strangling you to death. In both cases you're shooting someone, but they aren't remotely the same. It's the difference between being the attacker Vs. being the attacked. The attacker and the attacked may perform the same action, but that doesn't mean their same actions represent people doing the same thing at all. We did…
/r/MensRights10/10/13 11:17 PM
2

Yes, in many cases being wrong twice in opposite directions is better than being wrong once in a single direction. And in this situation we're talking about being wrong hundreds of times in the same direction. It's best to be wrong zero times, but the 2nd best alternative is to be wrong in equal amounts towards each side.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 08:39 PM
3

We're not acting like them, we're just playing fair. Tit-for-tat has been shown to be the most successful strategy in simple games like this one. They're saying "Anti-women groups are vile and should be removed", but we're saying "If you're taking down the anti-women groups then you have to take down the anti-men groups too. Alternatively you could keep them all up if you like, but if you're gonna take one side's pages down then you have to take the other side's pages down too. Either way is fai…
/r/MensRights10/10/13 08:34 PM
2

Porn? I'm pretty certain there's no outright porn on youtube. There's semi-nude erotic videos, and there's non-erotic nudity, but I believe there's no nude erotic videos (i.e. porn).
/r/MensRights17/08/13 06:20 AM
1

Please try and act like an adult.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 05:03 AM
0

This isn't gender-skewed sentencing. Certainly not yet anyway, because the other person hasn't even been sentenced yet!
/r/MensRights07/08/13 10:04 PM
-8

This isn't an MR issue. It's fucked up in the extreme, but it isn't a men's rights issue. Even if the john gets a much harsher penalty, which hasn't happened and might never happen, that still wouldn't automatically make this an MR issue. The US "justice" system is very broken. There are MANY cases where several people all participate equally in committing a crime, but the ones who plea bargain first will get lighter sentences than the others in exchange for testifying against them.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:57 AM
6

There's no joke. It's an unveiling of a safehouse for men, which unfortunately is a rare occurrence.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:45 AM
4

Awesome! =D That's way better than reddit karma.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 03:30 PM
11

Reverse sexism would be equality of the sexes. Sexism means one sex being favored and another sex being discriminated against. That's the definition of sexism regardless of which sex is the favored one and which is the one discriminated against. So the reverse of sexism would be equality of the sexes. If you're talking about women being favored and men being discriminated against then that would be reverse misogyny, but there's already a shorter more descriptive word for that situation, which is…
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:54 AM
2

That's why I said plurality, not majority. Majority means more than 50%, plurality means whichever group there is the most of. For example if group A is 40% of the population, and then there are 6 other groups at 10% each, then group A is the plurality group, and all the rest are minority groups. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plurality
/r/MensRights19/05/13 05:09 AM
7

If they aren't the plurality group, then absolutely they are a minority group. That's the definition of the word.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:39 PM
4

YOU'RE ALL FEEDING THE TROLLS! STOP IT!!!* That person gave himself a troll username, all the feminists reacting to it and commenting on it and linking to it are giving attention to the troll just like he wanted, and now all you people here in MR are doing the same. The only thing that trolls want is attention. Stop being fools. Just ignore them and ignore any dust-ups that they create.
/r/MensRights13/08/11 03:34 AM
3

Yes, that's where the phrase "don't drink the koolaid" came from.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 12:44 AM
5

R'amen!
/r/MensRights21/07/11 12:44 AM
0

It's not that you read anything literally, it's that you completely missed and/or ignored about 75% of the definition.
/r/MensRights21/06/11 04:07 AM
0

You went to law school and that's how you read what I wrote? Scary implication for our law schools.
/r/MensRights21/06/11 02:11 AM
2

You're forcing her to keep something in her body that is causing her great pain and discomfort and is directly forcing her to use her reproductive organs against her will. How is it NOT rape? And this would be worse, because this lasts for months and is far more dangerous to her physical health. And regarding your second point, the woman can relieve herself of the burden of parenthood within the first or seconds trimester, just like the man should have the right to do.
/r/MensRights21/06/11 01:20 AM
1

I don't understand what you're asking.
/r/MensRights21/06/11 12:54 AM
-2

#6 - I disagree. "Both parents should have a say in a child's life, be it abortion, adoption, or even what school to go to. Both created it, both have a say." Exactly what "say" should the father have in deciding on the abortion of the child? Are you saying that if she doesn't want to have the kid but he does then she should be forced to continue the pregnancy and give birth to the child?!? That's exactly the same as rape. In some ways that's even worse than rape. Or are you saying that she shou…
/r/MensRights20/06/11 08:18 PM
10

"that's EXACTLY how a woman would view the situation" Dude, you're accusing all women of something.
/r/MensRights19/06/11 09:30 AM
1

The companionship argument is a wash. Neither of you gets or needs to render that service to the other and neither of you has to pay the other for their costs incurred doing it elsewhere. "The entire concept is ridiculous. If the marriage is dissolved, the partners should be on their own." That makes no sense, because marriage is a contract. I'll repeat that again; Marriage is a contract.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 10:26 PM
2

You've gone off the deep end.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 10:12 PM
1

I'm not a woman, nor am I gay. Sorry to shoot down your dreams. P.S. I've already got a job, and I probably work harder than the majority of people in the western world.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 10:05 PM
3

Why do you think I'm talking about YOUR marriage? I put forth a specific scenario where alimony is legally and morally justified and which sounds nothing like the marriage that you had. Maybe you need to reread my comments. I never said that alimony is always legally and morally justified, I said that in some cases there is some amount of alimony that is legally and morally justified.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 09:40 PM
-2

She can never go back in time and regain the YEARS of experience that they both agreed she should sacrifice to support him and his household. Even if she goes back to school, she has still permanently sacrificed a large portion of her earning potential in return for lifetime financial support from him. When they decide to break that marriage contract she loses the lifetime financial support that he promised to her, and even if she goes back to law school she will never ever be able to make anywh…
/r/MensRights09/06/11 07:50 PM
-3

"Alimony, that is legal involuntary servitude, should be abolished." No it isn't, not in the slightest. Alimony is the fulfillment of a contract. When the two people agreed on this marriage situation they set up a contract with each other where they both agreed that he would provide the money income for both of them for the rest of their lives and in exchange she would give up her chance at earning more money in her life while providing him with the emotional and household support that was inten…
/r/MensRights09/06/11 07:44 PM
-5

"Alimony should be rescinded, tossed out." I don't agree with you on this point. I DO think that alimony that gives the ex-souse more than 50% of the income that the earner actually makes in the workforce is ridiculous and should be illegal. But I think that alimony in some cases is legal and justified. Like let's say a young couple get married. Both are well situated on the high-power law school track. Then the couple decide together that they should have more of a traditional marriage, so they…
/r/MensRights09/06/11 05:32 PM
8

Dude, breast size is only about how much fat you have on your chest. Which genitalia you were born with and then had altered relates to way, WAY, WAY more than that. There's a universe of difference.
/r/MensRights09/05/11 06:31 PM
5

I've heard lots of people say that it's an afc move to tell a hot girl that she's hot.
/r/seduction01/05/11 12:34 AM
3

Um, it's not like that at all. Cable-patch based synths actually have very specific signal flow routings, so you CAN'T blame any component for any specific given sound element. No matter how complex the overall patching is, you just need to follow some straightforward methods to trace the cable patch routes and you'd be able to determine exactly which components are responsible for which sounds.
/r/MensRights26/04/11 07:08 AM
-2

Oh please, if doctors get anything from pharmaceutical companies it's a trifling nothing. You don't go through 10 years of school to wind up in a job just so that you decide to not do it the way you think is best just because someone threw a steak dinner on your plate even though you already make a very nice income. Don't be ridiculous. If you regret being on ritalin as a child, then that may be a legitimate complaint, and your particular doctor may've not been very good, but it's crazy to think…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 05:03 AM
2

Well then we're in agreement, which is why I disagreed with your original comment. You do owe someone something if you accept a drink from them. That something is NOT sex, that something is an honest considering of what he has to say and an honest consideration in him as a POSSIBLE mate.
/r/MensRights15/02/11 08:38 PM
32

That's ridiculous, of course it's a trade. Does he go around buying drinks for random guys? Of course not. A guy buys a drink for a girl that he'd like to talk to and get to know better. If you take his drink and walk away then you're being selfish and inconsiderate. It's like the complimentary mint dish near the exit of a nice restaurant. There's no law defining when you can take them or how many you can take, but it's an unwritten social rule that you only take them if you have or are about to…
/r/MensRights15/02/11 10:58 AM
16

"by not masturbating, you're building up testosterone and sexual desire. Then, when you go out, your penis is like "Bro, I'm gonna have to cum at some point, so you better find a girl for me." So, in a very direct way, it leads you to want to approach women, and it causes you to have a more sexual frame." Sorry, but that's bullshit. Yes, not masturbating may increase your testosterone levels, but it's WAY over-simplistic to say that that's the only biochemical effect that not masturbating will c…
/r/seduction10/02/11 04:37 PM
2

I never said that I did or didn't believe that rapes were underreported, I was pointing out how inane quizzle's comment was. And yes, it IS very important to back up major claims with facts (no quotation marks) even when, or possibly ESPECIALLY when you feel that believing something to be true is just "common sense." It was common sense that made eons of humans believe that the sun revolved around the earth. I mean it's as obvious as the nose on your face! We see the sun travel upward from one s…
/r/MensRights26/01/11 04:26 AM
4

You made the claim, you have to back it up with evidence. It's like when a religious person tells an atheist "go ahead, prove to me that God doesn't exist!" Obviously I have no facts to back this up Yes, it's excruciatingly obvious.
/r/MensRights26/01/11 12:36 AM
1

Just thinking out loud here, I think it would be slightly negative if you paid with a gift card in a kind of meek way, however, maybe you could be super upfront about it and use it as a prop to tell a cool story or something. I don't know, I'm just thinking outloud.
/r/seduction23/01/11 06:05 AM
1

1) All political frameworks cater to and foster "militant special interest[s]." 2) Re-read my comment above. It is your opinion that the progressive movement doesn't "substantively add value to our lives," but that is not the opinion of people who identify with the progressive movement.
/r/MensRights06/12/10 03:22 AM
0

Firstly, your comment does not follow from what the OP stated. Secondly, you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. I wouldn't call myself a progressive by most definitions, I'm just pointing out the fallaciousness of your argument. There are only 2 to 5 ish viable political party movements in most democratic countries, and there's no way that any individual person will agree with 100% of the causes of any specific party. So you choose the party affiliation that most closely suits you…
/r/MensRights06/12/10 03:10 AM
1

Haha, no worries.
/r/MensRights18/11/10 08:32 PM
2

Perhaps. And if that's how it played out based on each individual's abilities, then that would be absolutely 100% fair.
/r/MensRights18/11/10 04:35 AM
2

there are well known measurable differences (height, muscle-to-body weight ratio... etc) between black people and white people. Also there is a large volume of data (world records...etc.) that shows black people to be faster and stronger. ... There IS a difference, so we might as well recognize it.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 11:30 PM
2

It would change everything. That 5% of exceptional women who are able to compete with men at the highest levels will finally be free to achieve the same levels of success as the top male athletes have. On top of which, competing with the top-class male athletes would undoubtedly push the women to become better athletes than they ever otherwise would've. Also, the men who are equally as athletic as 95% of women athletes would then finally have the same opportunity to compete in team sports that t…
/r/MensRights17/11/10 11:26 PM
1

"A white person who can compete on a top-level team is an exceptional athlete. Black people are, on average, better athletes; therefore, if you allow that white person's place on the team to be taken by a black person of equal skill, you are replacing an exceptional athlete with a less exceptional one. And that's unfair. Re-read what I just quoted above. ... All I did was replace the word "woman" with "white person," and "man" with "black person." Do you understand what you're saying now?
/r/MensRights17/11/10 11:19 PM
2

"Using your world there would be nearly no white people at the top levels of sport. White people would almost automaticly be religated to the b league with the black people who for some reason could not cut it in the big league thus automatically put in the inferior catigory. This is an insult to the white people who have the ability to shine when compared to other white people. Sure they cannot surpass the top black people, but they are the top white people, and that should be seen and appricat…
/r/MensRights17/11/10 11:10 PM
2

I'm suggesting that there shouldn't be separate girls and boys teams. And if you insist on having more than 1 team per sport, then it shouldn't be segregated by sex, it should be segregated by ability of the individual.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 11:08 PM
1

Um, did you reply to the correct comment?
/r/MensRights17/11/10 11:05 PM
0

The basis for your entire premise is completely flawed. You base your entire argument on the statement that "men and women perform at different levels when it comes to athletic ability" But that's completely untrue! ON AVERAGE men and women perform at different levels when it comes to athletic ability, but there are TONS of women who are biologically more athletically capable than TONS of men. I've said it twice and now I'll say it again: there is no reason to give preferential treatment to athl…
/r/MensRights17/11/10 06:41 PM
1

No, what you've just said is bullshit. You made unsupported claims and then declared that it makes sense because you think that it makes sense. There is absolutely no reason why women with lesser athletic abilities when compared to the the top male athletes should get any different treatment than the men with lesser athletic abilities when compared to the the top male athletes. Absolutely NO reason. And you've provided no argument to the contrary.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 05:46 PM
5

"it isn't fair to the girls because they can't help that men are biologically more athletic." It also isn't fair to MEN who can't help that they are biologically LESS athletic than the top tier of other men's athletic abilities. Not all men are blessed with fast reflexes and a high ratio of muscle to body weight. Why should women get a special league of their own just because on average their biology makes them less able to excel at sports, while at the same time men who have that EXACT SAME bio…
/r/MensRights17/11/10 04:33 PM
1

So... you're saying that marriage makes men insane. Gotcha.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 04:52 AM
2

But that's a super-beta move. If you put yourself in serious danger of getting hurt just to have the chance of possibly getting a womans attention, thats not seduction, that's desperation.
/r/seduction03/09/10 05:01 PM
1

Glad I could help.
/r/seduction21/07/10 07:39 PM
11

If you live in a very big city, this'll cure your problem in a single day. On saturday night, you and a good buddy will go to a very busy street in a hip neighborhood with lots of nightclubs nearby where a zillion people are constantly walking by quickly. Stand in the middle of the block and just blurt out "Hi!" to every woman who walks by (as long as they aren't walking with any guys). None of the girls will stop to chat with you because they're used to dealing with cat calls and they'll be tot…
/r/seduction20/07/10 01:46 PM
13

Those are great words of advice, but they're all sort of amorphous ideas. So here's a couple of concrete tips for beginners. 1) Force yourself to talk to women wherever you see them. The entire goal is to talk to them, don't worry in the slightest about trying to say the right thing, or trying to get their phone number or anything. The only thing you should do is make yourself talk to women just because you want to talk to them, with absolutely no outcome in mind at all. 2) "The 3 second rule." …
/r/seduction17/07/10 03:38 AM
4

Well, I think he's majorly over emphasizing it, but epigentics is about which genes in your DNA are "turned on" and which are "turned off." For example, the genes that are active in a skin cell are different than the genes that are active in a muscle cell, even though both cells contain all the exact same genes. Epigentics is still a very, very young field, but it seems that which genes that get expressed and how much they are expressed will actually change in response to different environmental…
/r/seduction12/07/10 04:00 AM
2

In my travels high and low, I've found an interesting phenomenon with the larger ladies. A significant percentage of larger ladies are very reluctant to let you see or touch their body at all. Some women who are embarrassed about their bodies can be at least as much work as more attractive women, or even harder. Some big women will be easier to get with, but you definitely can't assume that a big gal means an easy gal.
/r/seduction03/07/10 02:48 PM
10

He's just being an idiot. Ignore him.
/r/MensRights23/06/10 06:32 PM
5

3) Do really amazing things for him that show you really know who he is and what he likes. For instance, one of the things that got me to fall for my previous girlfriend was she used an online southpark tool to make a picture of a character that looked like her and one that looked like me in the woods together. 4) Do really amazing things that show your uniqueness. For instance, one of my girlfriends was chinese, and I loved when she'd introduce me to exotic chinese foods that go way beyond what…
/r/seduction21/06/10 07:47 AM
4

Again though, that's not a men's rights issue, it's a custodial-parent's-rights vs non-custodial-parent's-rights issue.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 10:31 PM
2

You are correct, that is indeed basically what I meant.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 10:30 PM
1

This is an interesting story, but I don't see how it's really a men's rights issue, except in the most peripheral of ways.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 02:42 PM
10

I'd worry about micro-tears forming by keeping it in an active motion zone like that.
/r/seduction01/06/10 09:20 PM
63

On the one hand, I totally hear ya, but on the other hand, it's time to stop whining like a boy, and start acting like a man. Sure, men have to do a lot more work to hook up with women the way we want, but women have to fucking bleed out of their genitals for 1 out of every 4 weeks. Men are driven to do dangerously risky things that can lead to huge rewards or total mutilation, while women are driven to want to play host to a fucking parasite that grows in their belly for 9 months. The point is,…
/r/seduction29/05/10 08:43 AM
2

I actually yelled at a bunch of TSA drones at the airport the other day, yelling that "I wish I didn't live in a fuckin paranoid country! If someone wanted to get something through security they easily could! Meanwhile people like me get their shit taken away!" Probably not a smart move for my personal welfare, but dammit, they're really going too far these days. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
/r/MensRights10/02/10 01:26 AM
0

I think that massive amounts of money and fame trumps anti-male bias in the judicial system, so I'm sure he'd be able to get at least partial custody. Heck, if OJ Simpson was able to keep custody even after he was convicted of causing the "wrongful death" of two people, then Tiger Woods will definitely be able to get partial custody of the kids. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_12_98/ai_64910130/
/r/MensRights11/12/09 07:35 PM
-1

FML is not really supposed to be funny.
/r/MensRights07/12/09 01:22 PM
1

I think this has already been happening.
/r/MensRights14/10/09 04:11 PM
1

BUUUULLLSHIIIT “Though women begin their lives more fulfilled than men, as they age, they gradually become less happy,” ... “Men, in contrast, get happier as they get older.” Yeah, and with ever lengthening lifespans, it means women have more and more time to get unhappy, and men have more and more time to attain happiness. I bet if she examined the male and female happiness at a specific age (rather than overall in the total population) then she would find that 20 year old women in 1975 were ju…
/r/MensRights20/09/09 02:06 PM
9

This is just one straw man argument after another. I'm as opposed to militant feminazi crazies as anyone, but it doesn't help us to make these ridiculous arguments against them.
/r/MensRights15/09/09 11:05 AM
1

Fine, if you're gonna separate sports by gender in order to be fair, then we also have to separate sports by race as well. According to what you said, it's not fair for white people to have to compete with black people. Black people completely dominate all sports, so according to you that's unfair against white groups. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n4_v88/ai_16986221/ Obviously there are elements that directly effect a sport, such as weight class in wrestling, and other elements…
/r/MensRights13/09/09 09:03 AM
5

No, I'm not sure that word means what YOU think it means. Fair doesn't mean everyone gets the same amount of everything. Fair means that everyone has the exact same OPPORTUNITY to get everything. It would not be fair if everyone who competes in a race all got gold medals at the end regardless of who finished first. In the exact same way, just because men would win 95 percent of all co-ed races, that doesn't mean it's unfair to women. The women would have the exact same opportunity to win gold me…
/r/MensRights13/09/09 05:01 AM
3

I had to look this one up. prima facie
/r/MensRights11/09/09 08:09 AM
5

I don't own any sports team shirts, but after reading this I feel like buying one and wearing it everywhere just to spite these idiotic zealots.
/r/MensRights10/09/09 05:33 PM
7

I have no idea what you're talking about.
/r/MensRights10/09/09 07:24 AM
1

That is a terribly un-readable website design.
/r/MensRights05/09/09 09:01 AM
0

If you look at the text * INSIDE * his self post, the word "article" is linked to the actual article, and at the bottom of his text he also has a link to a translation of the article. Unless he edited these links in later and weren't present when you posted your comment.
/r/MensRights19/08/09 03:12 AM
4

That is not valid reasoning. By that reasoning, in pre-world war 2 germany you'd be saying "while it's sad that Jews are being separated into segregated living areas, it keeps anti-semites away from them and prevents the Jews from being hurt by anti-semite's attacks."
/r/MensRights19/08/09 02:55 AM
2

The OP's post was very neutral, there were no complaints, just objective facts and anecdotes. Also, physical attractiveness is only partially innate. A significant, though minority, amount of how good a person can look is based on the actions a person could perform to improve (or ruin) their looks.
/r/MensRights18/08/09 11:33 AM
-1

BZZZT! Try again. http://www.justanswer.com/questions/1908h-question-age-consent-nevada They're charging her on the 'no sex in public' law, and the 'teachers can't have sex with their students' clause, but she will almost definitely not actually get convicted of this, because she didn't even work at the school he went to. Neither of these these charges has ANYTHING to do with the guy being under the age of general consent.
/r/MensRights31/07/09 12:33 AM
-2

You're wrong. She isn't even being charged with having sex with a minor, because he isn't a minor. If he was a minor, that would've been the very first charge they hit her with. EDIT: And I never mentioned a single thing about her appearance.
/r/MensRights30/07/09 09:59 PM
6

She wasn't his teacher, she was an assistant librarian at the school. There's absolutely no power imbalance here. And he's 17 for pete's sake. She had no power over him, he's not a child, she's not a child, he wanted it, she wanted it, and they did it. This is most definitely NOT rape. unless you were being sarcastic in your comment. EDIT: Here's a few more details. Calling this situation rape is a disgusting insult to everyone out there who really has been raped. http://www.lvrj.com/news/518556…
/r/MensRights30/07/09 04:47 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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