TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

bunker_man Archive

View 2 posts and 1,025 comments by bunker_man on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,025 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

The left cared about men's issues before the last few decades. There's no rule that it can't change.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/06/26 11:06 AM
1

Hey, I'm doing my part. I'm writing a story where a very tall woman dates shorter men and likes being taller than them. Someone might read this and get inspired by it. Actually there's a funny story. So in my story, it's the future, so people can be bioenhanced to raise their natural strength limits. But it works differently on different people. The mc is someone who it works much better on than normal. So she is a 6 foot 4 woman who is fit and much stronger than most people. But even in this wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 10:34 PM
3

Tbf guys shorter than women are kind of outliers. Unless it is a very tall woman. And often times guys don't want to date taller women either. There was an article before about a woman who was 6'2" explaining that she had dating issues because guys didn't like that she was taller than them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 10:01 PM
6

Tbf the equivalent for women isn't one off either. All the female book reviewers I've seen, regardless of their implied political leanings agree that its a real issue that so many modern stories for women barely even pretend to not just be pornographic wish fulfillment fantasies of an eccentric guy who barely has an inner world besides [obsessed about the protagonist] and [be powerful / important in an interesting way, but not one that takes too much time out of his day somehow]. Where I think t…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 09:58 PM
6

Yeah, well if someone thinks the bottom 80% of men are perpetually single then it seems more like they are much lower down the totem pole than they admit they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 06:27 AM
18

That's not how stats work. Stats show that women on average are very turned off by bisexuality. Better success than terminally online people also doesn't mean much tbf though.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 04:13 AM
1

This thread seems like it crams the actual issue in the last paragraph. Sure, there's plenty of hypocritical guys, but the modern "discourse" about how female porn is bizarre is largely in the context of the societal criticism of male porn. So it is about the perceived hypocrisy. Especially since even a lot of women talk about how this porn is often full of problematic elements. For instance I watched a video the other day by a woman about how a lot of romantasy demeans femininity, but only if w…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 06:41 PM
2

That is closer to accurate. Also, people lower on the curve get too defeatist, thinking that just because most women don't find them attractive that none will. But that isn't how that works. Look at writers. A lot of them got turned down by tens of publishers before being published. You don't need everyone to like you just to be liked by someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:19 AM
3

The idea that only 5% of men are considered attractive at all is nonsense. How would women even watch porn. Not all porn is exclusively slim fit guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 05:13 AM
0

Is this that confusing to you? Presenting as sexy =/= wanting to be harassed by strangers. People are allowed to look, but existing isn't an invitation for someone to act like some random stranger is inviting attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/25 08:00 PM
4

Tbf, he came into office close to two decades ago when it was a very different situation. There wasn't as much of a gender war, and he had a cool guy veneer that seemed friendly and relatable in a way modern democrats don't. He wasn't perfect, but there's no inconsistency in him saying that after his time democrats failed to maintain a good image with younger men.
/r/MensRights23/07/25 02:25 AM
-10

The majority of what? In any given election the amount of people who change sides is fairly small. Most people are fairly static. So its a much smaller group that they need to convince in order to win.
/r/MensRights22/07/25 11:09 PM
19

Both of those can be true at once though? He can both think democrats are obviously better but also think its' democrats' own fault for losing certain demographics.
/r/MensRights22/07/25 10:26 PM
5

That doesnt mean that they actually end up with 80% of women. If we count short term sex partners, guys on average have several too.
/r/ExRedPill22/07/25 07:17 AM
2

Yeah, but you said he is the former...
/r/ExRedPill06/06/25 10:20 PM
1

Eh, you assume you are talking to neurotypicals who are easily learning from context. If someone is legitimately autistic, some autistic people don't totally get that when people say empty platitudes you're supposed to know not to take them super seriously while also pretending that you do take them seriously. This might seem easy and natural of a needle to thread, but if you don't intuitively get social context it can be fairly complicated. "People like confidence so just be yourself" is someth…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 05:45 PM
3

Yeah. There's tons of people complaining about it like it's everywhere when barely anyone even mentions it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/06/25 02:42 AM
3

Its not really just that. Republicans aren't for those things either, but they don't have the same male problem because part of it is an identity and overall social thing.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/05/25 01:23 AM
2

We already know the answer though, people just aren't willing to put it into practice.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/05/25 01:12 AM
4

What exactly do you want Dems to do to reach men in particular? Well it would help if they actually talked about them as a class that could have collective issues. They are fundamentally averse to this for some reason.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/05/25 01:10 AM
3

Honestly I don't think it's specifically female characters, but it's the fact that certain western art styles are less sleek and aesthetic than eastern ones, and people are just more likely to complain about female characters where it's more obvious.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/25 05:39 AM
5

Trump getting elected again did wake up some people to the fact that acting self righteous doesn't actually solve the problem, and that moral victories aren't the same as real ones.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 12:48 AM
3

Its also a .com site which immediately reads as suspicious.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 12:47 AM
2

https://www.psypost.org/porn-viewers-think-highly-women/ Porn use actually correlates to viewing men and women as equals. Also, what do you mean an increasing amount? A lot of porn sites a few years ago explicitly went and removed most porn with explicit rape themes, or rape in the title.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 12:46 AM
1

They're not female supremacists. They just believe in collective punishment that they are allowed to dole out on new generations for the crimes of older ones. So young kids are confused why it's considered okay on the left to treat them badly because of stuff that happened decades ago. They think they are allowed to be mean to random people as revenge until they feel satisfied, and they believe that the point at which this will no longer be allowed is some nebulous time in the future that they w…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/25 12:29 AM
22

The problem is, rhetoric is a decent chunk of what people care about. Wanting to feel seen. The right does this even if they do nothing else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/02/25 08:32 AM
4

People aren't saying Palestinians are all nice people though. They are saying that Israel genociding them is an issue regardless.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/24 05:25 AM
11

The left has never had an easy time admitting that it's not really full of empathetic people like it claims. They still want people to hate. They just need acceptable targets.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/24 05:24 AM
11

I like how lazy people are about it too. "Let's bring 4b to the west. Not anything that it actuslly is though. Just the name, so we can pretend it's radical to not date people who don't agree with us."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/24 05:23 AM
6

It's not that complicated. It's that it's free to be open season against anyone who makes upper middle class white women uncomfortable. So if someone is sexist or even a little awkward suddenly their group can be blamed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/24 05:21 AM
12

In the west it's more or less considered okay to go open season on any group whose existence makes upper middle class white women uncomfortable. Koreans, Indians, autistic people, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/12/24 05:19 AM
8

It comes off like its trying to mock those things but at the same time reaffirms them. Then it offers men nothing but tries to push their insecurities for issues some of which don't even have anything to do with masculinity. Like, tons of progressives are male, how do they fail this badly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/24 07:39 PM
9

Also, are those supposed to look like manly men? Because barely any of them even come close.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/24 10:52 AM
16

Insisting a guy who is over six feet and makes six figures isn't good enough to date is so bizarrely out of touch its insane. How do people think the average guy will react when being told that even the elites aren't good enough for women. And that women are so casual about it too. The text version of this even acted like it was a given guys should pay for meals.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/24 10:38 AM
14

The ones defending it are also men though. Hell, it became legal in the first place because of a male dominated supreme court.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 11:40 PM
1

Objectification isn't good. Not even guys will be satisfied if women only treated them as a hot body. It's more that if you get no attention at all, objectification might seem better than nothing. But it's empty calories. And if it's done by people who can harass you it becomes negative quickly.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/10/24 11:02 PM
1

Women don't like bad boys. They like people who are assertive and have charisma. It just so happens that many people with these things are bad. And bad people who lack these things are less recognized as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/24 04:28 AM
–

Every girl is not taken. Some just don't want to date.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/24 07:27 PM
8

I don't doubt that plenty of women are attacked by men, but comparing wildly different numbers where one is a wild animal interaction that rarely happens with people interactions that do like twice a minute is just bad numbers. Arguing about "how dangerous" it is is meaningless, because the scenario isn't clear enough. What type of bear, how close are they to you, etc. And its honestly stupid that people get caught up in that when the real issue is just pointing out that regardless of how danger…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/05/24 06:50 PM
7

More than one out of every 10000 men rapes though. Or otherwise acts agressive.
/r/ExRedPill03/05/24 06:49 PM
1

That's the same as the racial argument though. Even when adjusting for police stops and so on, police do more violence to men. Much of it when they aren't even doing anything it makes sense to respond to with force.
/r/ExRedPill03/05/24 06:44 PM
1

I mean, it is true though that most police brutality is towards men though, but when people talk about police brutality this aspect isn't treated as a "thing." Being a man is more likely to result in police acting more violent toears you even than being black. And it's specifically black men, not black people in general recieving the most violence.
/r/ExRedPill03/05/24 04:55 PM
1

They said larger portion, not more total. Obviously a bigger group commits more. It does seem like there is a kind of elephant in the room about that though. In that of people are talking about what groups they feel safe around and statistics, then other qualities would likely also come up. It's like that video a few years back where a woman to prove how often woman were harassed filmed her walking in a city to see how long it would take to get 100 catcalls or however many. But the video quickly…
/r/ExRedPill03/05/24 04:53 PM
13

I wouldn't say a small outlier. There's a decent amount of dangerous men. Even if the average one won't do anything, being alone is a valid fear since it's not about the likelihood, but about how big a deal if it happens.
/r/ExRedPill03/05/24 04:17 PM
-7

I mean, people aren't really talking about real numbers when they act like a random person living in the west might not even just kill or rape them, but take them as a long term slave. But that is part of the issue. People are getting lost on the point that people would even bring this up because it expresses how high a certain fear is based on a specific yet arbitrary discussion about how dangerous a specific animal is. Yet talking abut animals in this way is not only useless, but unclear since…
/r/ExRedPill03/05/24 04:15 PM
1

I never said tons of men weren't bad though. Just that men being bad doesn't require making stuff up about bears, and a hypothetical interaction with one.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 10:35 PM
2

Because you're comparing something that is extremely rare with having to hang out with a wild animal for a prolonged period without being attacked? If you compared the chance of rape from a stranger to getting attacked by a wild animal it would be a decent point, but a very specific rare story is not that.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 06:16 PM
0

Okay? But the question is not whether you could make the choice while it's happening. It's that right now you can note that dying badly in 20 minutes isn't as bad as being tortured for five weeks. In the former case there's a good chance you go into shock or pass out from blood loss long before its over anyways.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 06:04 PM
3

A bear is much more likely to though. So that's comparing something plausible to something "technically possible."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 06:03 PM
2

I mean, if someone walked around in bear filled woods alone there'd definitely be a lot of people blaming them. People aren't going to say the animal is at fault for doing what it does if a human chose to be there.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:59 PM
1

I mean, there was that person whose baby got eaten by wild animals and no one believed her. Plenty of people blame people who get attacked by animals.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:58 PM
2

I mean, if its a harmless or mostly harmless bear that poses no threat it's not a particularly interesting question.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:57 PM
1

I mean, not that I doubt a lot of people are terrible, but without context from how female respondents would answer, this isn't clear to what degree it's a male only perspective. Male victims are also under reported, and of women were physically stronger there would likely be even more male victims. (Although many male victims are ironically victims of other men). Article is jumping to acting like this is a specific fact about men, when it could be about people in general, or even people getting…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:55 PM
5

Very few rapists bring the person home with them afterwards, or try to kill them. What can technically happen =/= what is likely to. I suppose part of the issue is that people list things that can happen, but gloss over how likely they are to. Someone being legit killed or enslaved by a random stranger isn't nearly as likely as getting attacked by a bear they are forced to hang out around for a whole day.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:44 PM
6

I mean, I'd rather die in 20 minutes than be tortured for over a month.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:37 PM
2

I mean, I'm not denying that meeting a random guy in the woods could be a scary situation, but what happened to junko isn't exactly indicative of what one lone person in the woods is realistically even vaguely likely to do. If we are counting fringe possibilities, a bear could leave you maimed but alive to slowly die in pain over days, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 05:36 PM
4

Because guys who are equally sexist, but worse with women, try to hide it a little more in the hopes they will do better.
/r/ExRedPill25/04/24 11:37 PM
4

That's the funny part. It seems like this evolved from the idea of a guy who wants to sleep around and then eventually marry a chaste girl two decades younger than him. And the type of guy who wants to be a virgin when they get married trolled themselves into thinking they had the game goals until eventually red pill gurus started catering to those people too. It's a wierd mishmash of incompatible lifestyles the only recurring thread of which is sexism.
/r/ExRedPill08/04/24 11:18 PM
4

Also, somehow they are under the same umbrella as people whose goal is never to commit or get married.
/r/ExRedPill08/04/24 09:29 PM
5

Im honestly confused how tradwife stuff merged with redpill to begin with. In the beginning it was all about telling men to never commit, and to just try to date random women all the time. How did people decide that this is the same thing as... the exact opposite. Women whose only goal is to get married at age 22 aren't exactly compatible with the first goal.
/r/ExRedPill08/04/24 09:27 PM
4

If these things were actually as true as they claim... they wouldn't need to say them. They say them to break down people's self esteem to try to make them compliant.
/r/ExRedPill08/04/24 09:22 PM
0

I don't understand this take. Being single and lonely and having to constantly find new sex partners is not a recipe for a good life unless you are so rich you never have to worry about company.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/24 04:47 AM
1

I mean, if your only options are someone worse than no one then sure. But a lot of people are better than literally no one.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/24 10:28 PM
2

Why can't it be both? It's not a good thing to do, but if you aren't willing to if you have to you'll be alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/24 08:35 PM
24

If it's someone famous enough to have a YouTube channel it has less to do with redpill, and more to do with the fact that money and fame lets people buy stuff. Also, unless they are doing this live they may have done it tons of times before it worked, or even paid someone. If their channel is an actual job then they are trying to make content, not to be authentic.
/r/ExRedPill17/03/24 05:38 PM
5

Ironically, I wouldn't be surprised if poor people had more dating experience than middle class. Albeit probably more likely to end up divorced too.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 02:47 AM
2

This doesn't show that at all. Lesbian being your most common search doesn't mean most porn you look at is lesbian. Because any other search brings up straight porn.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 03:38 AM
3

If they think they will be alone forever they get jealous. That's all.
/r/ExRedPill17/02/24 07:11 PM
14

I think the implication is that the women don't want to marry the beta. The ones who do this settle because they spent too long chasing the top guys and having sex but never ending up with them. But they would rather settle for a guy they aren't attracted to and give him pity sex than be alone once they get too old to chase the top guys. It's all nonsense of course. But that's the logic.
/r/ExRedPill07/02/24 12:41 AM
8

Yeah, hence the issue. The left refuses to and thinks doing so violates moral purity for some reason. And then they get confused why people listen to people who at least pretend to care.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/01/24 06:47 PM
2

That's part of the problem. It's unclear what blue pill is actually supposed to refer to, so it's hard to say if it exists. Rp people act like blue pill somehow both refers to mainstream advice, but also Uber passive male feminists. But those aren't the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 06:10 AM
1

So if you expand the term Redpill so wide that it's meaningless then everyone agrees. That is not an interesting point. Try actual examples and then we can address it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/23 07:35 PM
6

It's just such a bizarre scenario. So he is a wierdo with no social life, but somehow insanely rich. Sure, he can date someone younger, but if his is so wierd chances are they only like him for his money. There's tons of scenarios like this with people way less wealthy and none of them have good relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/23 10:15 PM
1

The core message of almost everything is to improve yourself. But you have to ask what they consider improvement.
/r/ExRedPill24/10/23 03:43 AM
1

The fact that the red pill isn't giving secret harsh truths. It's a mix of stuff everyone knows, incorrect stuff, and the fact that if you have no morals you can hurt other people to get ahead. But that's not a secret either.
/r/ExRedPill19/10/23 08:43 PM
3

You admitted you know women who date bad boys. Presumably those are also the ones who want this.
/r/ExRedPill19/09/23 09:22 PM
9

I mean, itsbecause of the perciebed hypocrisy. Soneoen claiming to be for conservative sexuality dating a guy who flashed underage girls in public, then jerking someone off in a theater sounds like their alleged goals are in bad faith.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/09/23 05:28 AM
51

Something I noticed is that some autistic men seem angry that general dating advice assumes you can read between the lines and so it seems incomprehensible to them. "Just be yourself" doesn't mean you don't have to groom yourself or that you should show people your dragon sketches on a first date. So many people in the red pill seem to think being fit and assertive is some secret knowledge other people don't have. Despite it being stuff everyone knows.
/r/ExRedPill15/09/23 08:32 AM
2

What is the question? Knowing what makes people attractive and that trashy people exist doesn't mean you have to be sexist.
/r/ExRedPill11/09/23 02:29 AM
1

Depends what you mean by struggle. Average people don't struggle in the sense that they can't get dates and will be perpetually single. But they struggle in the sense that it may take them awhile each time they are single to find a serious partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/23 01:18 AM
7

The reason there are a lot of people not having sex isn't because of who is the most desirable though. It is because modern society is isolating people in general. People also have less friends and less social hangouts that aren't their home. So thinking that you can fix dating problems directly is looking in the wrong place.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/23 01:13 AM
1

Yeah. The number alone doesn't say much without an expanded graph showing how long each situation lasted, and when. Or just what portion of their life they did / didn't have regular sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/23 01:10 AM
4

How is that low? That's enough for 1-2 short term relationships and several long ones. (Also, I'm pretty sure the actual number is closer to 7 than 4). Keep in mind that a low number doesn't always mean someone who isn't having sex. Someone who over a 10 year period is in a relationship the whole time may only have sex with 1 person, but someone who can't maintain a relationship longer than a few weeks may have had sex with several even if they spent most of that time not having sex. Number of p…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/23 01:08 AM
5

Originally it wasn't even limited to men. Although it's harder to be one as female, it's not impossible.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 03:39 AM
3

You don't have to be toxic to be fit and assertive... and not everyone who is called toxic is those things. Scrawny nerds are just as toxic, but don't get anything for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 03:38 AM
0

No it hasn't. I think the confusion comes from the fact that it was telling men to do x and y, and the men assumed that these things were meant to be what made them desirable, when those weren't about relationships at all. There is a sense of which it makes sense that some men confused "being an ally" with "being seen as attractive." And the reality hits in that most people don't want to go out of their way to help a lot if there is no reward. So you run into this issue that they didn't really h…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 04:40 PM
2

That guy wouldn't be the average guy then. If we are talking about how to help the lowest on the ladder it's a different convo from the average person's problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 04:32 PM
2

I like how they immediately acted like the only options are getting everything you want or crushing loneliness.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 04:16 PM
0

Yeah, well, people ahould stop letting the rich screw them then? These days women looking for someone with money isn't even just about greed, but about the basic reality of it being dangerous to not have enough stability. This seems like a problem that a lot of would be solved if people realized it's not the dating circle causing it. Look at japan. Both women and men are checking out of dating not because there's no one attractive or they have Hugh standards but because their career dominates th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 04:12 PM
1

If eugenics was common then what is considered normal would shift. Status signifies aren't always about themself in a vacuum.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 04:09 PM
1

Yeah, there is a subset of people who in their goal to fix sexism left a bit of vagueness for what male identity is supposed to be. And they don't offer an obvious guideline for people who are soul searching.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 03:55 PM
1

I mean, a normal person doesn't hear "I like x quality" and assume that it means that as long as you have that quality nothing else matters. It may not be autism, but there's some kind of poor ability to parse information going on.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 03:18 PM
1

This goes back to the point above though about how normal people are less likely to be confused by this though. It goes without saying that if different good qualities exist thst being higher on one gives you more leniency on others. People understood that what is being said isn't that looks don't matter at all, but that top level looks aren't totally necessary because it's only one good quality among many. Plenty of ugly and fat guys aren't single, many of whom also aren't rich. So this isn't s…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 03:01 PM
1

For decades now women have been filling young men’s heads with nonsense, suggesting that all women want is a nice boy who treats them right. What. No one says this. Being attractive and preferably not being destitute are pretty overt ideas conveyed.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 06:49 AM
1

A connection between two things doesn't mean it always happens. Just that it is more likely to. It's not that confusing that some people lash out in general when they feel in a bad place. But not everyone does.
/r/ExRedPill04/02/23 07:43 PM
14

Yeah, a lot of people claim not to tolerate things, but if you stay with them you're tolerating it even if you day they shouldn't do it.
/r/ExRedPill31/10/22 02:27 AM
7

The term red pill was used by the Alt right since before it was even a pick up artist thing. Since their ideologies have overlap, they probably had a common source to begin with.
/r/ExRedPill11/07/22 11:17 PM
3

Those are two different things. You need to have confidence, but you also need something to offer people.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 08:30 PM
4

They are saying that the basis of being in a relationship is having something to offer someone. Someone who doesn't want to have anything to offer someone shouldn't be surprised that people aren't acting like they do
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 08:20 PM
5

Okay, but... you know the amount of women doing this is tiny, right? You are letting them live rent free in your head.
/r/MensRights03/07/22 08:11 AM
32

Also, people pretend not to realize that a decent amount of these interactions that get demonized are people with autism who straight up don't understand normal social interaction, and then people pass it off as being deliberately creepy when it wasn't the intention. Neckbeard as a term is literally a collection of autistic stereotypes, and look how readily they appropriated it as a term for sexist.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/22 09:20 PM
5

I mean, it's not a huge secret as to why. The truth is, modern progressivism has gotten a tone of being very... whiny. While it still cares about real things, it's known for having a lot of people disproportionately not only caring about non-issues, but doing so in a way that comes off more like demanding someone else fix the problem than doing it themself. Your mental image of people deeply involved in it is likely not really go-getters. I remember reading something about how women don't like d…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/06/22 09:31 AM
1

I wouldn't call that opposites. It's a similar worldview, just where one doesn't think you can improve your standing.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/22 06:31 AM
2

Actual nihilism isn't much of anything really. It's not clear it's even possible to consistently believe in it.
/r/ExRedPill25/05/22 06:30 AM
0

You know the sex boycott isn't a real thing, right? Like 3 people did that maybe. Not enough to actually matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/22 02:39 AM
-1

This is desperation. If someone only interacts because desperate for pussy, it's a self fulfilling prophecy on why they are invisible.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/22 02:33 AM
1

Because up until a little over a decade ago there was a firm divide between "jocks" and "nerds." Jocks still played some games, But if someone's identity revolved around doing so a lot, they were generally considered a nerd. Nerds were associated with being in poor shape, and not being particularly attractive. While the divide has started eroding, variants of it still exist. For awhile "neckbeard" just became the new nerd, but with a few details mixed around. While dumb sports people aren't held…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 08:39 PM
0

Define "get laid?" If you mean with zero effort, they'd probably believe you. But the average person is not incapable of ever having sex ag any frequency unless they aren't trying.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/22 08:04 PM
1

Divorce rate is only 50% because of serial marriages. If it's your first time, it's not likely.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/22 02:36 PM
1

Not a Hive mind doesn't mean there isn't an average. There is always an average.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/22 04:59 AM
-3

Anyone who has to ask is probably too deranged to make use of it anyways.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/22 08:48 AM
1

Anyone who thinks this is not the average man. Pretending the average is the top is a coping mechanism.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/22 08:46 AM
2

Yeah, uh... who is going to risk a confrontation with someone they don't know who might be entitled and dangerous? The types of people who won't take a hint are also the types you'd worry can be this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/22 04:31 PM
5

These things aren't necessarily a contradiction. It's fully possible for someone to want something in the abstract, but be turned off by it in person. And this isn't just about gender relations. It's a common thing in general. People often think they want something but then when getting it find that it's distasteful. In the dating world this can be more extreme. People may intellectually want one thing, but it's not what turns them on. A lot of people aren't self aware about this, leading to see…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/22 08:48 PM
1

I'm confused. You think many different professional statisticians who independently arrive at the same answer aren't smart enough to account for people lying despite doing so being their actual job, but your secondhand story you heard from a few people can be trusted 100%?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/22 09:09 PM
1

Because reputable polling and stat companies have studied this, and the answer they give is around 7. 40 as an average is mathematically unfeasible as a serious reading to begin with. It doesn't even make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/22 12:11 PM
1

Okay? None of that changes that 40 is significantly above average though. So if your concern about the possibility of a long term relationship is based on an incorrect number, that that seems like something that should be easy to overcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/22 07:55 PM
1

It's way above average though. It's only really normal in very specific circles.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/22 07:37 PM
3

Pretty much everything trying to sell something parasitic to you will do so by putting a nugget of truth in it. The truth will be something obvious, so that you obviously agree, but they pretend thay only they will tell you this and make up the idea that other people are lying. The red pill does this by saying obvious stuff like that being fit and assertive gets you more attention. Everyone agrees because this is obvious. But then they tell you that everyone else disagrees. They make up imaginar…
/r/ExRedPill01/01/22 11:14 PM
1

modern women seem not to care about that. Women aren't less likely to want kids or marriage than men. This is a wierd rationalization people make up. It's the crushing corporate world that makes them seem too expensive.
/r/ExRedPill05/09/21 12:01 AM
3

Where do you live that good jobs are guaranteed? Getting s tiny slice of unemployment is near nothing.
/r/ExRedPill05/09/21 12:00 AM
2

The job world is way more likely to screw you over with nothing to show for hard work than the dating world. In the dating world once you get relatively fit and dress well and have a good haircut your sucess is near guaranteed. In the job world, you can get shafted for anything.
/r/ExRedPill04/09/21 11:59 PM
0

But nearly everyone can make themself attractive enough to make it just a matter of time though.
/r/ExRedPill04/09/21 11:57 PM
1

Technically the term was made by a girl who didn't intend to mean it that way. But yeah, the term is unfortunate.
/r/ExRedPill04/09/21 11:39 PM
31

There is a wierd paradox of complaining that guys don't share their feelings, while also insisting they need to suck it up because the world caters to them so they must get enough attention already. It's not clear what feelings they are supposed to share if negative ones aren't allowed.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/07/21 08:47 PM
1

Talk to some historians then? Because this lists a few numbers. If that's not enough I can't help you.
/r/PussyPass03/03/21 12:55 PM
1

Where are you going with this? It was still super common historically. Doesn't mean no one was ever against it. Orphanages were created specifically to get people not to do this, and to largely collect the kids who would otherwise be killed.
/r/PussyPass03/03/21 12:16 PM
1

Wait until you find out how drugs are doing despite ostensible laws against them. Kill someone else's kid and you get in trouble. But in the past laws were largely seen as a way to moderate family to family issues. There was no one who actually verified if your kid who you say died was killed.
/r/PussyPass03/03/21 11:59 AM
1

What do you mean the evidence? The fact that in basically every culture it was super common. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide The article doesn't even present it as a controversial perspective. It's simply a historical fact. People only don't know about it if they haven't ever seriously looked into history. Only certain places even really banned it, and evidence suggests it still happened in those places because there wasn't really any means to enforce it. Although it would have been …
/r/PussyPass03/03/21 02:21 AM
1

Basically everywhere?
/r/PussyPass02/03/21 05:02 PM
14

I mean, before relatively recently after birth infanticide was treated more or less like abortion is now. So if this story is from the past, in a non developed area, there's context that is needed to make sense of it.
/r/PussyPass02/03/21 02:22 AM
1

Not that mras aren't often acting in bad faith, but I think that is kind of the point. A lot of male issues are dismissed because feminism often makes it into a contest where due to the stated place of women, male issues shouldn't generally get independent focus, but they should only benefit indirectly from the focus on womens' issues. And the line "it shouldn't be a contest" only ever gets taken out in any issue where males have it worse, but then people go back to treating it like one when foc…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/21 08:42 PM
6

Also there are incel.terms like hypergamy mixed alongside real points.
/r/PussyPass22/12/20 05:43 PM
1

9 years. 3x a week or so averaging the last few months. I'd be too tired to more.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/20 07:50 AM
1

You are legit mentally deranged. I'm in a good relationship and we have both had a good talk and had good sex in the last 24 hours. If you just aren't a scrawny loser you don't have to worry about not being attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/20 07:17 AM
1

The question makes no sense. Why can't someone you have sex with be a buddy? You seem to be assuming an incompatibility, and then using it to argue for itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/20 06:52 AM
0

No, but if someone legitimately thinks that the feelings you are expressing are a coherent perspective, I would probably point out to them that their problem isn't even ideological, but it's clear they have some type of severe mental issues they should get therapy about. Also, my wife has more money than me so if I did get divorced I would be coming out ahead money-wise. Also, you know that child support can apply even if you are single, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/20 12:32 AM
4

Its not a trick word. If you act confused about the meaning, then your problems may be a bit deeper than ones that involve personal lifestyle choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 11:34 PM
4

No, they really did write it awkardly.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 10:29 PM
1

So interacting with people is pointless? Someone you can interact with and have sex with is more efficient. Pretty stupid to assume those can't be combined.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 10:27 PM
1

You know that most people who are young now will live to like 90 right? A full almost half of your life being lonely is a big deal. There's also no reason for it. Even the most atttactive people have to expend more effort to get sex when not in a relationship. Defeatism, and assuming its fundamentally impossible to have a good chance of getting a good one is just silly.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 10:23 PM
16

Someone who can't get anything better than casual sex by age 45 didn't exactly succeed at life. What is the benefit of this supposed to be? Being alone and miserable once you are too old to pull any kind of reasonable attention?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 07:13 PM
17

People need to stop thinking that other people will change just because you wish they did. If someone has flaws you have to be prepared for them being around a long time.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 07:10 PM
6

Who said anything about society? You as an individual will honestly have trouble relating to someone that much younger. If at age 50 your only goal from a relationship is still just sex, you most likely have a sad empty life.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 07:08 PM
25

That much older people often go to gatherings of younger ones, and are often out of place there, feeling bad comparing themselves to younger people.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/20 07:07 PM
5

Those aren't even remotely comparable situations.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/12/20 01:48 PM
2

The irony is that people ignore the fact that one of the reasons that this is the case is because a lot of these women's issues that are brought up are literally at the expense of men's issues, by people who are trying to make it female only.
/r/MensRights27/10/20 06:29 AM
4

People delve into the just World fallacy way too easily.
/r/ExRedPill20/10/20 04:05 AM
1

Not always. Things like that exist because often times people get away with it. If you are in a group of multiple people, one person isn't going to seem like a threat to you even if you aren't especially big. A ton of people only act this way because they know they are in a group.
/r/ExRedPill20/10/20 04:05 AM
2

Their tactics basically exist to get sex without caring if you hurt people in the process. It should be obvious why this won't be helpful for long term relationships where you are trying to get along.
/r/ExRedPill28/09/20 02:40 AM
3

You're basically explaining what the problem is. You saw some bad examples and it led you to get radicalized into thinking that every case was like this. But it's not like anyone is saying that 0 people like this exist. Just that it's not everyone.
/r/ExRedPill06/09/20 03:07 AM
9

Tfw you're nostalgic of the old pua days when harassing women didn't also mean needing to support a white ethnostate.
/r/ExRedPill04/09/20 05:40 AM
3

If you think most women are bad for sjw related reasons you really need to get outside more.
/r/MensRights23/07/20 01:11 AM
7

They are even trying to find out by how much, that's the funny part. They aren't really trying to narrow down the discrepancy, only to provide evidence that it sounds like there's a really big one.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/20 04:11 AM
14

This is honestly embarrassing. They basically admit that they are trying to guess from data they deliberately chose to be incomplete on, and which they deliberately choose to interpret im a way that ignores a large part of the percent.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/20 03:06 AM
17

There was an article from someone who used to work in Academia a while back who basically admitted that they take their standard perspectives as a given, and so everything is interpreted through that lens. And they basically admitted later on that across their career they produced tons of work that was basically nonsense, because they took certain things dogmatically rather than actually supporting them independently. In this case the standard assumption just seems to be that sexism exists so an…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/20 02:27 AM
1

Libertarian detected.
/r/PussyPass14/07/20 09:45 PM
26

Does the judge not realize that tons of pedophiles feel that way about children? Which is kind of the thing being taken issue with.
/r/PussyPass12/07/20 09:32 PM
3

How attractive you are percieved is literally related to game though.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/20 01:49 AM
2

What is an inkwell. I never heard the term before.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/20 12:51 AM
2

I mean, any debate Zone where one of the standard sides is the red pill is not exactly going to be super sane
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/20 12:43 AM
54

That's the thing. It's real that the police and court systems are biased against black people. But everyone tends to gloss over that they are biased for women and against men to an even greater degree. And this isn't to say the former is smaller. It's not black women who are the main people being shot.
/r/PussyPass06/05/20 11:54 PM
-1

Facts that aren't really relevant to the thread though.
/r/PussyPass06/05/20 11:52 PM
1

Sure, but that use doesn't really have much to do with the current one. Its basically chosen at borderline random.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/04/20 08:56 AM
1

Simp is a cringe word. People should use a word that already exists.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/04/20 03:59 AM
2

I don't think that anyone except crazy people think that women are trying to block men from having sex bots. They would be so expensive most wouldn't have them anyways. The only people who think that its "women" trying to prevent this are crazy feminists who think they speak for all women, and crazy red pill type people who think all women are out to only let chad be sexually satisfied.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/20 07:50 AM
1

Yes they do. You realize that sex bots designed to look like men will also exist, and the market would be affected by their purchases right?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/20 07:24 AM
3

I mean, tons of child stars were probably raped and we never hear about it regardless.
/r/MensRights13/03/20 07:53 PM
1

That's not true. There's a lot of subreddits that are filled with low effort posts that clutter out the good ones even though they get downvoted.
/r/MensRights03/03/20 02:08 AM
3

Yes, but it's like a game there. If someone acts completely confused about why their partner treats them like a toy there's usually a huge age Gap, and it's like okay, your answer is right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/20 05:31 PM
7

Have you been to /r/relationship_advice? When there's a huge age gap its normally a shitty relationship. It takes a particular kind of messed up mentality to gloss over the hurdles.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/20 09:47 AM
1

Quite a lot of people don't really want to date someone far wealthier than them. It makes them feel like an extra to someone else's life. For instance, why even work if you are married to someone who makes so much you have no need to. But the feeling of just giving up your job since you have no reason to is likewise dubious. As would the feeling of needing to work but it not really mattering. The truth is that most people end up with people similar to them on many metrics. One is attractiveness.…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/20 08:53 AM
0

That's not what hate is. Not every way to hurt someone is based on hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 09:57 AM
2

I think this is one of the issues. Feminists pay lip service to accepting that sexism is caused by women too or harms men too, but in practice their big picture view is still women and victims and men as perpetrators.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 09:16 AM
1

Yes and no. Traditionalist religious conservatives still want to get married and have sex, but aren't the same thing as people who think they need to have some exceptionally impressive sex life.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 09:14 AM
1

Instead, women fuck the men who actively harm and hurt women and other men. But most incels are legit mentally off people who would still be unstable even if they weren't incels. Hell, didn't you read that one story about someone who felt sorry for a self professed incel and so dated and had sex with them only for them to basically double down since their worldview couldn't adjust?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 09:06 AM
2

Not on purpose, but certain kinds of aggressive assholes are known to get sex easily despite obviously being terrible or even dangerous people. Its half that if you are charismatic a lot of people will overlook your bad qualities, but half that some people actively venerate those qualities. Usually the ones who do aren't regular people, but people from extra trashy circles though.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 09:05 AM
2

I think this is one of the issues. The term feminism is in this ambiguous state since it is both the term used for general equality, but also became tainted by the fact that in most social contexts the more that one identifies with the term more likely the more crazy they are, and is definitely tied to a lot of dubious things. And it is an elephant in the room where you can't really ignore the connotations of the word and that the former is fairly often used as a pipeline to the latter.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 09:01 AM
1

Also, man hating. Where are all these man hating feminists? Even annoying feminist are rarely actually man hating. Its pretty self evident that people are just interpreting generalized criticism of sexism as being out to "get" men. They have problems, but man hating isn't really one of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 08:42 AM
8

Its not about hating men. Its about using shaming tactics to make people compliant with their ideology. Other than in a few rare instances, man haters are mostly a myth.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/20 08:39 AM
6

This post makes no sense. Saying that a term describes a thing so how is it offensive completely glosses over the connotations of words. You can say the same thing two different ways and one be more offensive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/20 06:32 AM
0

A grifter in politics is someone who aligns with something not necessarily because they believe it, but because they are opportunists and they think it can make them money to pretend to. Like a con artist who Sells deliberately shitty works filled with ideological terms they know people will buy.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/20 10:57 PM
1

baby space jesus Like, from 2001?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/20 10:09 PM
1

Okay, but no one said he didn't make money. They said that he is Making it by being an alt right grifter. And he pretends to be the victim when people notice this.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/20 10:07 PM
9

No it doesn't. Socialism is the far left, not the entire left. Social democracy is center left. Mixed economies are center. The terms left and right weren't even invented for socialism and capitalism.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/20 10:05 PM
1

What different ending do you expect? No way he can just survive. He helped kill billions of people. It would be awkward for him to not be in prison. And making rey run off to live in hiding with him would be dubious.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/20 09:21 AM
2

Thry did a study on slut shaming and found Outlet peer-to-peer shaming for sexual activity for young people barely even exists. It turns out that most times people thought it did, it's not really about sexuality at all, just about classism. It's just used as a fancy way for people to call other people trashy. Things only get called slutty when people deemed low status do them.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/20 05:35 AM
2

From what I gather, the vast majority of prostitutes are not a particularly good sexual experience. When you read posts or articles talking about them it normally implies that random ones on the streets will be borderline some of the worst sex you've ever had, and even like expensive high-end escort ones at nice places tend to only be average at best. I wouldn't know, but it makes sense. Someone who is literally doing this all the time for money without having any particular passion behind it pr…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/20 03:50 AM
4

These things are related. Sexuality isn't just some independent thing. feelings of success and value are tied to it. Sex is essentially never just about a physical feeling.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 10:31 PM
1

What do they have to lose? Its not like they are trying to get dates with the reddit account they use for self pity.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 09:50 PM
6

Did you read his Manifesto? I read almost the entire thing. There's no way after reading it that you would think he comes off gay. His obsession with pussy can't be overstated.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 08:39 PM
2

Saying that you are right doesn't add anything to your nonsense comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 07:43 PM
1

Hookers are really a long-term solution, because even if you are just horny the fact that they don't actually care about you is a novelty that's not going to last long. They are also kind of expensive, so it's not like your average person is going to be able to afford to go to them often.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:52 PM
1

He was literally rich though, and not especially unattractive. The only thing making him low status is his mental health issues that prevented him from acting normal. For someone like him you wouldn't even have to be especially charismatic to be considered at least medium status.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:51 PM
1

Saying that outside things can influence your mental state doesn't mean that mental problems don't exist. You may as well say that physical health doesn't exist because outside things can influence it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:48 PM
3

Not going to therapy has nothing to do with pride, what are you talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:47 PM
2

Not just attractiveness. It's the other way around. Anything that is seen as positive is seen as adding to your attractiveness. If you are charismatic it instantly makes life go much better for you. And it also makes you seen as more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:45 PM
0

You think women aren't attracted to guys who are fit anymore? Because you can certainly become more fit. Hell, I'm both lazy and don't know how to exercise, but in the last few years I have gotten significantly more fit. Not perfect, but enough to be noticeable.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:44 PM
2

Venting your frustrations by acting like a retard isn't making things better for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:43 PM
1

How would we know? If you are trying to argue that it is because you are too ugly then put your money where your mouth is and show a picture of yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:42 PM
3

Saying something that's true in a mocking tone to show that you've heard it before doesn't make it not true. Having better hygiene, dressing better, and getting more fit are all things that anyone can do. To believe that women literally care about nothing other than, what, faces? Would be to say that they don't care about how fit a guy is.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:40 PM
6

80% of the male population isn't sitting around sexless. People who say this are people who just don't actually understand female sexuality. Female sexuality is more tied to the idea of a connection and being attracted to what guys do rather than just how they look. So they aren't as likely to say that guys who they know nothing about are attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:39 PM
1

But it's also not something you are actually getting by going to a hooker. Paying some outrageous price for a single instance of bad low-quality sex isn't improving your self-esteem. And it's not really giving you the companionship aspect either.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:37 PM
8

Because not every person with mental issues shoots people?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:36 PM
5

That's the thing. Society never really stopped operating on the Assumption of sex as currency. It still is operating on the assumption that if you are single for too long you are inferior. When people talk about sexual Freedom it is literally never about not criticizing people who engage less. It's just about being mad that some people call other people slutty, even though it has been mostly determined that when people do so to people their own age it has nothing to do with sex, and it's more ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:35 PM
1

Screw Disney though. They forced the last movie to be rushed so that it would come out on time. The story of it is honestly pretty good. It would likely have been a much better movie if they had another six months. I still like it a lot though.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:33 PM
7

No way he was homosexual. The way he talked about other guys made it obvious he was competing against them and barely saw women as sentient or as anything other than a prize. He didn't even act jealous about women acting like it was easier for them to have a relationship. He acted like their entire perspective was meaningless to him, and it was other guys he was jealous of.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/20 06:30 PM
14

I mean, my sister does that, but with omegas. Its a common thing in general. Tons of people think that things they do don't count as things they do as long as they get carried away in the moment. So as long as they don't plan to do something it doesn't count.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/19 06:32 AM
3

Yeah. As a term it doesn't really mean anything if the term encompasses every possible thing that can happen relating to sexism. Just because you can view every trend as part of a bigger whole in a society that leans towards preferencing males doesn't mean that all problems are solved by preferencing females. This is even more true as society shifts and the new paradigms are different from the original state.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 01:30 AM
2

All terms are constructs. Defining patriarchy to encompass every issue doesn't tell us anything interesting, and it doesn't mean that focusing only on women's issues will magically fix Men's ones for free. They can care or not, but if they don't they are part of the problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/12/19 01:24 AM
2

Care =/= dealbreaker.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:40 PM
1

Yes they do. Tons of them do. Especially if it means having to hang out in circles of wealthy people who look down on them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:39 PM
2

I mean, it's definitely a shitstorm. It's just that the old days had different problems too.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:37 PM
2

Sure. But they are two faced. They might claim that they think that women cause this sexism too. But when the chips are down many go back to the idea that its still almost entirely male created and that womens' hand in it doesn't really count. Sure, maybe the academics know better, but you can't expect any better from the people on the streets most likely to call themselves one. The word patriarchy is super silly to use since it calls to mind ancient patrilineal systems that bear very little res…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:35 PM
5

Because putting someone on a pedestal means acting like you are inferior to them and so they feel like they are dating down. What they want is someone who still seems impressive but treats them well. Treating someone special doesn't mean placing them above you.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:13 PM
2

Also how many women are actually marrying a noticably higher class? Fantasizing that someone of a similar class counts as higher doesn't count.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:06 PM
2

You don't even need to be attractive. The average person still has sex with multiple people.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:01 PM
3

Who is saying that guys can't have sex? The average one does have sex with multiple people.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/19 09:00 PM
1

How do you know it's being banned if it hasn't been yet?
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 02:56 AM
3

What.
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 01:46 AM
1

It's always strange when people act like it's literally impossible to get along in relationships, and so it has to be antagonistic.
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 01:44 AM
2

Because they know it's silly. Talking about it in normal settings would make many of them feel silly.
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 01:37 AM
1

That's not what it is. The accusation of beta bux comes from guys marrying people who want to settle down, but considering it a personal offense to them that those people acted crazier when younger. But a lot of people act crazier when younger. Some people really do marry people they like as a person but aren't infinitely attached to. And so people who want to feel desired in that way get offended. It's not like every relationship has no issues. It's just that red pill people are crazy and try f…
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 01:35 AM
2

Beards? Beards are not universally liked. Muscles, sure, but beards seems more like a swing and miss in their part. They aren't wrong that being attractive makes you more attractive. It's just not something only they know. They pretend that only they know this, but this isn't the thing people disagree with. What people disagree with is the weird sexist pseudoscience and the assumption that you should live totally selfishly. Nothing is wrong with saying it's good to stay fit.
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 01:23 AM
3

Didn't someone already have a gamer rage episode that was basically the same thing?
/r/ExRedPill09/11/19 01:18 AM
1

Who thinks liking people for personality isn't real? If you are assertive in the right ways you are seen as more attractive. That's a personality trait. And who thinks being attractive isn't real? No one thins everyone has it the same. The just think it's pointless to complain. Society can't change the appearance you are born with.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/19 01:09 AM
2

Hundreds of years? Before incredibly recently most people were farmers, and your wife would be working in the fields with you. It was only since most people transitioned to other work that the idea of the stay-at-home mom was born.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/19 01:55 AM
3

I mean, its not anyone's first choice, but the people in that position are still receiving the better of the available options. Its not like she did it to spite this particular guy she ended up with. So the idea of comparing them as if they knew eachother the whole time makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/19 08:37 AM
6

As opposed to what? Even if you can get sex semi regularly from somewhere else, its not a replacement for a relationship, especially once you are older. Even the process of using tinder takes more effort than people want to have to use for every time they have sex. And by the time someone is getting to middle age, they have other priorities, especially the fact that they realize that if they don't have children their old age will be lonely and sterile.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/19 08:35 AM
12

What? Why would someone have kids first then go to school? Who wants to go to college at 35 and start a career at 40?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/19 04:57 AM
-3

So your argument is that because you are emotionally insecure I need to word it in a way that doesn't offend your sensibilities even though it's true. I guess that is technically true, because people will react, but all the same.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 07:29 PM
-7

Yes it is? It would be absolute silliness to pretend white people have it as bad as black people.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 06:38 PM
-2

This is where we run into issues. White people, westerners, etc are unambiguously priveleged relative to the alternatives. But male / female is much too close to treat as one sided in modern day. People talk about court systems and police biased against black people when being against males is an even bigger bias of theirs. And that's not to dismiss the former. It just shows how big the discrepancy is.
/r/MensRights09/09/19 06:00 PM
2

Being friends with them would be ideal, but for people who that's impossible, a lot simply have to settle for their partner being someone they interact with. Sounds sad though. But what can you say? Not everyone has an ideal life.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/19 05:56 AM
2

It doesn't kill ambitions if you're wealthy and connected, lol. Definitely not any more than being in prison for it for years in general would.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/19 11:13 PM
1

which alone is worse than 5 years in prison. Not if you're rich? The annoyance of having to be on the list is hardly the same as straight up losing 5 years at prime of life, and the perpetual embarrassment of such a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/19 09:32 PM
3

The point of the idea of rape culture is not that all men rape. Its that enough do that it isn't a one-off problem, and people kind of tolerate it enough that little is done about it. Most people don't rape, but many do know people who either did, or did things like it, and kind of just gloss over it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/19 09:29 PM
1

As little as you can without sacrificing quality. Most people spend way more than hey need.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/19 11:44 AM
3

Knowing that attractive guys get more attention isn't some obscure red pill info. Literally everyone knows this. The red pill just dupes people into thinking that nobody but them knows it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/19 06:36 AM
3

People say he looks like he is trying to look like a hobo. Its not clear why he is even doing this. He has decent money and life position, and he isn't one of those people who doesn't understand dressing well or hygiene. He just randomly decided for some reason that he doesn't care enough to look good anymore about a year ago, and is going for a weird hobo look instead. I can't fault him for having high standards since he is old enough he is looking for a life partner now, and doesn't want to be…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/19 10:39 AM
10

He has a man bun and outrageously high standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/19 08:29 AM
4

If you search hard enough you can probably find subreddits specifically for working out.
/r/ExRedPill22/08/19 04:34 PM
2

Does this person know that these people weren't tricked into thinking this was a purely artistic thing?
/r/MensRights12/08/19 10:16 PM
1

Girls can be virgins too. And some actually prefer that. If they are one themself it can provide room to learn together.
/r/ExRedPill03/08/19 10:44 AM
2

I don't believe it's something you can deny, either based on domestic violence statistics Err... domestic violence statistics show that women are a comparable level of violent. The issue is that men are stronger, which puts women at more risk. Men are, as I've experienced it, really prone to aggressive, manipulative, rapey and otherwise toxic behavior in relationships -- much more so than women. Careful though. This is at large risk for falling into benevolent sexism. Basically an idealized vers…
/r/ExRedPill03/08/19 10:41 AM
1

Girls have autism too. You could see if you can find someone who can relate to it.
/r/ExRedPill03/08/19 09:00 AM
2

Just being attractive doesn't mean its the only reason people like you. Just like putting salt on food doesn't mean that the salt is the only part you like.
/r/ExRedPill03/08/19 09:00 AM
0

Neither are attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/19 10:02 AM
6

What kind of nonsensical perspective is it that thinks that being alpha is when no one wants to fuck you so you have to pay them? Anyone with money can have sex if they really want. Even middle class people can afford prostitutes regularly if they budget for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/19 10:00 AM
6

Correlated =/= 100% of examples.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/19 09:56 AM
9

Plastic straws are raising an issue about a real thing though. Manspreading isn't.
/r/PussyPass23/07/19 08:24 PM
0

Because the cult was giving the same advice I just said right now except that it passed it off as advice only it knew to make it seem more exclusive and added a ton of needless elements like sexism, amoralism, and really bad takes on biology. It's a lot easier to get people to follow you if you repackage things they more or less already know in a way that makes it sound like hidden information they can't get anywhere else so that they feel like nobody but you is going to tell them it. There's Ho…
/r/ExRedPill19/07/19 07:42 PM
0

The advice to do that was never something super difficult ro know in the first place. Work out, focus on learning to be more assertive, go out and be willing to accept rejection, make more friends in general, etc. If it is difficult to put those into practice that's another matter, but joining a weird cult doesn't help.
/r/ExRedPill19/07/19 07:18 PM
1

You can work out and try to be more assertive without being selfish and sexist. https://www.psypost.org/2019/07/couples-experience-more-relationship-problems-when-the-male-partner-is-sexist-54023 The red pill isn't a path to success anyways. It might get you laid, but its not useful long term even if you are an egoist who only cares about personal benefit.
/r/ExRedPill19/07/19 09:19 AM
4

He is much more intellectual than peterson. But you answered your own question. The left has a lowest common denominator too. They love pop-figures.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/19 09:45 AM
1

The fact that people factor in whether they are attracted to someone, or whether they would be dirt poor =/= a bizarre social darwinist understanding of the world where that is all that people care about which somehow means that you should act selfish at all times. Those former things are things everyone knows, but which they pretend only they know, and exaggerate a ton.
/r/ExRedPill07/07/19 07:15 AM
4

That's the problem. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. But the red pill tricks people into thinking that "be fit and confident" is some unique advice that only -it- knows, and that "feminists" are trying to trick you into thinking that girls don't care about body type. If you pass off obvious knowledge as something only you have, and make an identity around it, it can dupe people into signing on for anything. People will often deliberately choose to radicalize themselves because now peopl…
/r/ExRedPill05/07/19 09:54 PM
7

Like basically every movie except the new ghostbusters?
/r/ExRedPill05/07/19 07:47 AM
8

My beliefs: The most contentious, fundamental belief of mine is that women have no sex drive at all. They are just thoroughly uninterested in engaging in sexual intercourse. They are, however, just as capable of feeling romantic attraction, which understandably leads to them pretending to enjoy sex, when in fact, they don't This makes no sense. If it was true then they wouldn't do things like have one night stands. Hell, for that matter they would almost all refuse to have sex more than rarely. …
/r/ExRedPill03/07/19 01:29 AM
1

Is it even an interesting fact? Basically everyone knows that having sex at age 10 isn't an indication of your life going good directions, and neither is being unscrupulous. Both of which can hint that you are being abused. No one who isn't trying to be overly pc is going to tell you that nothing bad can come from sex. What they are saying is that having a lot of sex doesn't inherently lead your life to a bad outcome. None of these things imply that someone should be panicking about dating someo…
/r/ExRedPill02/07/19 02:12 AM
2

If not that it gave the wrong people money, it would be hilarious to buy this for people as a prank gift.
/r/ExRedPill01/07/19 06:42 AM
2

The fact that its passed off as a revelation that you can be selfish at other people's expense for personal gain. This isn't a revelation. Everyone already knew this. But a cult of people pushing you to act on it isn't a good thing. And when your relationship ideals are basically structured around benefits that stem from short term manipulation it won't even go well for you in general. Their tools aren't really for thinking long term.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:52 AM
1

By not deciding that casual sexism is a good stance to have or that you should deliberately screw over other people to get ahead.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:50 AM
4

If you are trying to state fundamental truths about society or biology without anything but personal experiences, what you are saying is literally made up.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:48 AM
1

Yeah, like society does have some imbalances. But you can work on improving those. The red pill decides that the solution is to become sexist as revenge, and not care about being part of those problems.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:47 AM
2

So stuff they made up.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:44 AM
3

Women give sex and men have to earn it. If men are worthy for a short-term fling, they are more "chosen" than a man chosen for a relationship - a man who gets sex without commitment is superior than one who needs to commit or show explicit signs that he wants to commit. Even if it is harder for men to get sex that doesn't make the doing so "better." Its not always better to do harder thing. Being a serial killer who gets away with killing people for years isn't super easy, but its not good eithe…
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:43 AM
1

I think the problem is that the human brain just isn't wired for nuance and complexity, so it won't be intuitive to you unless you deliberately train yourself for it. Its true that people like to be kept excited. But its also true that they want to be partners. Both can exist.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:26 AM
2

The point is not that being fit and assertive don't help. Its that you don't need to be sexist and demeaning in the process. The latter is the equivalent of pointing out you can get money by robbing banks. Sure, you can, but eventually it normally blows up in your face. "Chads" who don't know how to maintain a good relationship because they can't treat the one they are dating as equals become the grizzled dirty divorced depressed 55 year olds eating dinner at the strip club buffet.
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:25 AM
1

I’m a young guy(15) Honestly you are so young you should barely be thinking of relationships at all. Part of the problem is people getting into things when too young to be mature about them. Virtually most women lie about partner count, that sweet innocent woman who acts modest probably has slept around to some degree Why would they do this? People don't do things for no reason. Even if someone lied to a stranger, they wouldn't keep lying to someone they are close to if they knew it wouldn't be …
/r/ExRedPill28/06/19 01:18 AM
16

Earning more =/= them taking half your money though. What's more, living together with someone saves money relative to living alone, which means that even if you earn more, you aren't losing money in that instance.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/19 06:03 AM
2

I don't think people are against gender studies in theory, so much as they think that in practice it is much more ideological than study based. Whether that is true or not is another matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/19 09:50 AM
3

Inbreeding is dangerous, but it obviously isn't more dangerous than physically not being able to reproduce. And you wouldn't necessarily need infinite inbreeding.
/r/PussyPass09/06/19 10:18 PM
1

There's a difference between being wrong and being so wrong that you think that the same trends that exist everywhere are somehow genetic and so unique to one arbitrarily chosen group of people.
/r/PussyPass08/06/19 09:01 PM
2

Being able to do labor better isn't as important to your species continuing to exist as being able to have children. If most of the women of a group died the group would cease to exist. If most of the men died, the remaining ones could impregnate an equal amount as were impregnated previously, and while they would be low on food survival is still a possibility.
/r/PussyPass08/06/19 09:00 PM
28

The idea that women shouldn't be held accountable for things wasn't invented by feminism. It's existed since forever. It's just that modern feminism doesn't realize that it is influenced by these same drives.
/r/PussyPass08/06/19 08:56 PM
1

Lol.
/r/MensRights08/06/19 06:19 AM
1

You're right about how dumb the approach is at least.
/r/MensRights08/06/19 05:31 AM
-2

Something can be illegal without conflating it to a much worse thing.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 10:44 PM
-6

Okay, but you can't conflate things of totally different scales as if they are the same. The equivalent of fgm would be more like cutting off the top two inches of penis, and sewing it shut. You are only hurting the cause of being against circumcision by being the laughingstock who exaggerates how bad it is.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 10:23 PM
-6

Right. But the point is that that isn't true, and saying that just makes you look silly and makes people less likely to take seriously the fact that they are both bad. If you think they are the same than either you have no sense of scale and so shouldn't really be comparing things, or don't really know what is involved.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 08:58 PM
-10

Conflating circumcision with fgm just makes you look borderline insane. Something can be bad without being conflated with something that is ten times worse.
/r/MensRights07/06/19 08:25 PM
1

They never meant that men couldn't be for it, just against it. It's just a word game to artificially cut down the amount of people seen as validly against it, but not for it.
/r/MensRights20/05/19 06:26 PM
2

most of my friends are in serious relationships all girls do is sleep around with alphas If it helps, these two things are self evidently contradictory.
/r/ExRedPill19/05/19 10:10 AM
1

E S Into the trash it goes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/19 08:11 AM
3

That's what makes it extra stupid. At least used insults that refer to something that actually exists rather than a weird fantasy you make up due to not knowing how science works.
/r/MensRights16/04/19 12:19 AM
1

Okay, but I was specifically responding to the comment about income.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/19 04:31 AM
1

Sure, but again, this makes no sense, because 1: if your preference is a random person there is no indication that they are less accessible than the people you can date elsewise, and 2: if its not then your ordinary income isn't going to seem impressive. Pointing out that when younger people might date people they don't see a future with is different from apparently having riches enough to impress only in your thirties.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/19 04:11 AM
3

Okay, but most guys don't do that either. Where are all these guys who replace whoever they are dating with some secret goal of theirs? If it was someone they liked a long time, that girl wouldn't be impressed by his standard income because they would both be getting older so every guy his age is making more money now. And most guys aren't marrying much younger girls just who are hot when they are old on their... middle class salary. This is more like a weird fantasy someone might have, or a jok…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/19 03:23 AM
27

Then they ditch her once they're wealthy enough to afford Stacy. I'm pretty sure that most guys don't get rich enough to replace a normal girl with a trophy wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/19 09:17 AM
2

Go to a therapist. This is batshit.
/r/MGTOW01/02/19 04:59 AM
1

At least it's not projection and a desperate attempt to appropriate the idea of being a free thinker when unreflectively holding lowest common denominator type views.
/r/MensRights29/01/19 08:42 PM
-1

The thing is that it doesn't really make sense that the word was primarily aimed at leftists. Even if they don't think too hard about their ideology and learned it in college that is a lot more self-reflection than the average conservative who was literally raised into their ideology has.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 02:17 AM
-6

Even authoritarian leftists probably have more unique views than conservatives. If anything the unabashed impulsive willingness to assume they are always right as long as they are angry leads to their offhand thoughts being treated as a major view. The entire reason they are always at odds with each other is because many of them consider their own personal views to be objective Universal ones. If they all were the same then they wouldn't end up at odds that often. This is like a case of the pot …
/r/MensRights21/01/19 07:51 PM
-12

Using the word NPC for leftists never made sense in the first place. Many leftists are stupid but it's not exactly a mainstream position which almost by default means that at some point you had to shift ideologies. A group of conservatives following an ideology that literally tells you you shouldn't be thinking for yourself aren't exactly the ones who should be accusing other people of it.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 06:48 PM
5

It's the new version of the word sheeple, but used by the far right.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 06:46 PM
-10

Did you decide this by random? It's weird to use npc as an insult when you are acting more like a tiny mouse in a small human sized robot running over buttons at random. Actually, dang, I made that sound really cool.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 06:45 PM
1

Apa? Of course the apa has nuance. The people without nuance are random people on the internet, or the ones writing extra provocative "journalism." I don't know what you think the apa is actually trying to be against. If you parse qualities, the apa is definitely not going to tell you to not lift, or be assertive or confident. I'm not sure what you think I'm going to trick you into agreeing with, because I also don't think lifting and assertiveness are bad qualities, and pointed out in multiple …
/r/MensRights19/01/19 05:36 AM
1

That's the thing. The idea itself that certain aspects that were glorified in the past either are outdated or were always a bad thing isn't really that bad. And that's obviously a gendered issue because the state of society was obviously heavily shaped by a heavily gendered Dynamic. Being anti gay stems from the idea of there bring specific and strict gender roles you can't violate after all. It's one thing to point out that the way that the left uses an idea is imperfect or has problems of its …
/r/MensRights19/01/19 04:21 AM
1

... clearly they mean in the format they are being pushed rather than as some form of abstract thing that exists in a vacuum.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 03:40 AM
0

I was going to actually respond seriously to your first post but at this point it's obvious that you're a sperg having a meltdown so I don't really feel compelled to.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 02:49 AM
0

I don't know how you are misunderstanding this. Just because anyone is capable of being aggressive doesn't mean that there aren't different paradigms of how people act that aren't pushed for or specific people. Did socially acceptable versions of these things as pushed in different circles are clearly not the same in male and female versions.
/r/MensRights19/01/19 02:47 AM
1

You know that listing what one person thinks doesn't change an overall idea right? No one is denying the fact that there are many people of that slant who are crazy. But even your own link is someone going out of their way to try to accuse all of it as being toxic specifically because that's not what the term already means. Let's look at it this way. If you had to create a term to refer specifically to the negative forms of masculinity but not the positive ones what term would you invent? And ho…
/r/MensRights19/01/19 12:51 AM
1

Are you trying to be stupid on purpose? "Toxic masculinity" is not meant to be read as all masculinity is toxic, nor is that the meaning you would assume if just reading the words with no foreknowledge. It is meant to be read as "toxic version of masculinity." At best you can say that the naming is ambiguous because really stupid people will misinterpret it and it might leave certain people to go overboard but acting like its primary meaning is to demonize the entire thing is not just disingenuo…
/r/MensRights19/01/19 12:44 AM
-1

Toxic masculinity doesn't mean that all bad behaviors are masculine or that all masculine behaviors are bad. It means that there's a common collection of masculine behaviors that are bad. There's nothing wrong with the concept of toxic masculinity at all. Even conservatives disliked variations on it before it got given a name that someone tricked them into thinking was about masculinity as a whole. Conservatives dislike the type of hyper agressive person who has no respect because they see it as…
/r/MensRights18/01/19 08:21 PM
0

What are you even talking about. They didn't say that all these things have a symbiotic connection. Just that they are using a term for a lot of negative ones.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 08:06 PM
-11

This is one of the dumbest articles I ever read. It comes off like its deliberately trying to misunderstand what is being criticized. The apa is not criticizing lifting and assertiveness. Its criticizing the full package of aggression, control and repression that is glorified as part of old style masculinity. There's real thing to complain about that happen to men without making up fake ones that deliberately miss the point on issues that actually make sense.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 04:36 AM
1

I don't think almost anyone is acting like it's more important than food and shelter. It's a pretty nonsensical comparison to act like people are saying it's more important than literally staying Alive.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/19 04:59 PM
3

It is true. People who insist it isn't important are often people who have it and so don't understand what lacking it would be like. Even in modern-day people still reflexively use insults that imply a lack of sex or of sexual prowess or accomplishment as the ultimate insult.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/19 04:54 PM
1

I mean, regardless of the shitty article in this thread that clearly misrepresents it, it doesn't seem like that crazy of a paper. It just seems like it's a really pretentiously worded way to say that people need to not assume that already existing subjective answers are Beyond question to things that have subjective elements.
/r/MensRights24/12/18 01:11 AM
2

No it's more like people lazily assuming there's a specific right answer to things that are subjective that they are taking issue with. They may or may not be wrong but it's not like it's not a real thing that people will lazily assume that whatever answer already exists is perfect and doesn't mean to be questioned.
/r/MensRights24/12/18 01:09 AM
1

While there is plenty of questionable things that they publish this isn't actually an accurate depiction of their ideology. Operating on stereotypes invented by people who never actually studied what they wrote and which don't correspond very well to it is just making you look like the stupid one.
/r/MensRights24/12/18 01:07 AM
5

The problem is that some curtains in philosophy do deliberately make things worded overly complicated for no reason. A large portion of the continent is deliberately like this. It makes people think that most of what they write isn't even good philosophy, but the issue isn't that they aren't writing anything meaningful but rather that they make it overly complicated in a way that isn't necessary just because it's the style of their tradition. And they think it's fundamentally necessary to even t…
/r/MensRights24/12/18 01:02 AM
2

I could immediately tell by reading this article that it was clearly being disingenuous somewhere. People on this subreddit are too gullible.
/r/MensRights24/12/18 12:58 AM
2

That falls under what I said though. They like those dark personality traits because those can imply other good personality traits. But that doesn't mean that they don't like people who have the good versions without the negatives. Narcissism and aggression can correspond with assertiveness, like I said. But the studies that show that they like assertive narcissists don't imply that they don't like regular assertive people... so it would be highly misleading to imply that you have to be an aggre…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/18 03:12 AM
3

The problem with this is women don't want men who don't adhere to these norms. I think you are confusing being strong and assertive with being violent and aggressive. The latter might often include the former, but they aren't the same and many are the latter without being attractive to women that much at all. I'm sure you would agree that given the choose to choose between a fit and strong guy who acts normal versus a scrawny aggressive one who turns aggressive at the drop of a hat and acts like…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/18 11:11 AM
12

Since when do women struggle with online dating? Most seem to easily be able to get sex from tons of areas. The issue is more that so many people will pester them that its stressful to sort through.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/18 01:02 PM
1

I never read those in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/18 07:00 PM
4

Not that I'd want to defend the red pill, but there's tons of motivation for lying about what is attractive to someone. Namely that what is attractive is not always identical to what one's rational mind wants, and so people have different ways to react to this. Some might be attracted to a dominant / submissive paradigm, but not want to be attracted to it, and so even internally mentally obfuscate this so as not to have to consider it such. In part, this is because unless you are consciously thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/18 11:50 AM
7

Wtf is going on in that thread.
/r/PussyPass11/12/18 04:54 PM
3

So because there wasn't any police brutality that's a problem? Now you're making up things to be mad about.
/r/PussyPass06/12/18 01:10 AM
3

Does op think that the police should casually give you beatings even if you aren't resisting arrest at that point?
/r/PussyPass05/12/18 08:42 PM
1

Yeah, wtf is wrong with this sub. No one is getting off easy for literally attempting to kill a police officer.
/r/PussyPass05/12/18 08:42 PM
3

Its literally not a surprise at all. People have more at home to interest them and live at home longer. Not sure what kind of math you are using but not everyone will have an equal amount of sex sneaking around parents as back when they'd have moved out. Many are afraid. Some just think its disrespectful to in parent's house. And for many others, the issue isn't just living at home but that now people hang out at home more. Games and the internet mean that even if you are hanging with friends it…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/18 11:11 AM
3

Getting your foot in the door isn't really the long-term goal. It's better than nothing, but I know someone who was really good at that but was miserable and had a series of failed relationships for a long time. Dating advice is about both and it makes sense that it is. If anything dating advice already still Slants too much towards being sexually attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/18 06:09 PM
50

Anyone who cared what celebrities thought in the first place really just brought whatever happens on to themself.
/r/MensRights15/11/18 12:43 AM
1

Are you having a sperg? You asked and I answered it. Now you're having a meltdown for incomprehensible reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/18 01:20 AM
1

Because their approach is an attempt to actually fix certain problems with unjust imbalances. Certainly they have erroneous ideas on how to do it a lot of the time but that's better than people who just straight-up sit around trying to rationalize obvious problems as okay. Conservatives only have a few positives in comparison with leftists. The only real two are like, admitting sexual morality exists and donating more to charity. But the sexual morality one is barely a positive, since they appro…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/18 10:22 PM
27

That was the point I was making. Left-leaning people basically implying that conservatives are by definition incapable of caring about sexual assault. That's not a good way to get conservatives on your side. Even if it is still ideologically wrong, obviously it's perfectly possible for there to be a paradigm that is still heavily conservative but takes sexual assault more seriously. Solving partisan ideological differences shouldn't be lumped together with solving things everyone should be able …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 08:54 PM
6

Well there's a few reasons. One is the obvious fact that its Peoples Natural inclination to revert to believing in the just World fallacy. If they hear a few cases they respond differently as if they are individual things. But if it is an epidemic then they react more against it because they don't want to have to treat it like a common thing. At the point where it shifts from something they can approach as a unique case to something that is the norm it becomes something their mind reacts against…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 08:51 PM
1

That still makes no sense. You are acting like [not being immoral] is some type of agreement you agreed to when starting dating. That's not what it has to do with, so you are conflating random unrelated things. There's no point using the word "Acceptable" when your argument boils down to ignoring moral concerns entirely, since at that point obviously you no longer care what is acceptable.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 09:14 PM
1

This makes no sense at all. So since anyone has anything better than you at any time you can do anything you want? Why not to threaten to kill people unless people have sex with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 10:20 AM
9

It makes no sense. Do males have no interests or self awareness then? Or make no decisions?
/r/ExRedPill01/10/18 07:48 PM
1

I don't really bother considering number count as its own thing. You have to view it in conjunction with the connotations of those times. I would consider a responsible person with a higher number less "dirty" so to speak than a less responsible one with less. It would all depend on what the actual connotations of these events were. That aside, 19 at age 18 sounds highly dubious.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 10:56 AM
1

It took me awhile to figure out what the bars meant.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 10:55 AM
7

Japan isn't better at all. And if the red pill glorifies Japan it sounds like their goal is to be overworked sexless betas.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/18 10:21 AM
5

The only plausible parts are the information on how working out and being confident makes you more attractive. But who doesn't know this? They take things everyone knows, and surround it in a narrative that allegedly other people totally reject this, to make it seem like truths only they know, and use that to support the more nonsensical parts, and horrible ideology. Anyone can look right if they get you to only look at the things that they say that are right. Its a cult like mentality that says…
/r/ExRedPill05/08/18 01:40 AM
5

Its not hard at all to find information on how to work out and eat well that isn't full of red pill advice. You just search directly for those things, rather than for things with buzzwords that are going to talk about them in a pua context. Or for how to act, anything more generally about confidence. The point is that confidence in general applies to all areas of life. You don't need to look up things that act like the sole goal is pua advice.
/r/ExRedPill29/07/18 11:49 PM
19

First off, the name of the movement is stupid. The blue pill is supposed to be the pill you take to return to the dream world. Why would you willfully associate with that? Its not meant to be literal. Its a joke about being the opposite of the red pill.
/r/ExRedPill15/07/18 05:47 AM
2

Eh. If you are only 18 I really wouldn't worry. You didn't really miss much. It might seem like you did, but you have another decade to be young. So you didn't exactly miss the boat.
/r/ExRedPill07/07/18 12:15 AM
1

Here's a better question. Does it MATTER whether it matters? While there are certainly statistics that imply that it might be tied to a lower chance, anyone whose idea of what they should look at to determine chance of success immediately goes there should just admit they have no clue what they are doing. Even those statistics don't say that its a make or break type thing. Treating someone's past as a "number" is reductive and nonsensical to begin with. What you should be looking at is realistic…
/r/ExRedPill07/07/18 12:14 AM
2

Incels had tons of people openly calling for rape, violence, whatever. redpill only has people subtly do that, more often just glorifying manipulation techniques which while obviously harmful aren't the same level of thing that people immediately take action against. People calling for violence openly = reddit could get in trouble. People insisting that their manipulation tactics aren't abusive = a lot less likely.
/r/ExRedPill07/07/18 12:05 AM
3

Reddit doesn't ban hate communities unless they are overtly there to be one, like /r/coontown. The red pill's stated mission is to be a pick up artist type thing. So the fact that there's a lot of hate there can be passed off as incidental.
/r/ExRedPill29/06/18 08:12 AM
3

More importantly, the entire argument is based on misunderstanding what "toxic masculinity" means. Like sure, it was probably named poorly, but "toxic masculinity" does not mean that all masculinity that exists in the west is toxic. It means that there is an undercurrent of a lot of things considered admirable masculine qualities that are. A guy abandoning his kids is what would probably be considered toxic masculinity in this circumstance, because it could reflect the normally considered mascul…
/r/MensRights28/06/18 11:27 PM
4

People can't really help you unless you say what you are looking for. A philosophy of what?
/r/ExRedPill27/06/18 10:35 PM
2

You are making a lot of assumptions. There's a lot of reasons this doesn't lead to the conclusion you imply. 1: Most people don't really give a shit about what lyrics say. They are more window dressing for a tune. People who actually try to get a message out of music from the lyrics alone are often seen as weird. 2: Not all girls are the same girl. So you can't assume that they all like this. 3: you can like a tune while disagreeing with other stuff in it. Maybe you can say they should boycott i…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/18 06:22 PM
2

If you blink constantly can you do whatever you want? Like, go into the director's office and steal shit?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/18 10:41 PM
2

Anything that lowers utility. Anything that lowers utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/18 11:49 PM
1

/r/shittyaskreddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/18 04:54 PM
3

There are grocery stores in some american malls. Not all of them though. At my close one there's an aldi's, but I think its new. I don't remember it when younger.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 05:24 PM
1

No. They aren't enjoying it all the time. Making sex into a chore would just make you annoyed with sex. Many of those positions are also uncomfortable since they exist for the viewer. And I heard that the places they are filmed in also often smell horrible too. If you like sex you can just... have sex without it being a job.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/17 04:22 AM
1

Not being willing to accept your weaknessess is itself a weakness. If you are in a long term relationship, it is ideally as a team. Team members need to have a good idea of eachother's weaknesses and strengths to know how to work as a unit. The goal isn't to present yourself as "weak," because admitting to weaknesses that already exist isn't to present yourself as weak, but as more honest, emphasizing that despite these exist they are not a burden. Needing to mislead someone implies not being ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/17 05:37 AM
1

I think there was some wide scale study somewhere that found out that slut shaming as people imagine it more or less doesn't actually exist (not counting from old people / uber conservative areas. The kind that is ostensibly common everywhere). What it really is is a disguised way for girls to call other girls trashy / low class / poor. It has very little to do with sex in and of itself.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 06:28 PM
3

Subs like this are a haven for people who think that problems being exaggerated = there is no problem, and any seeming issue is obviously fictitious. Its like some people are trying to be a satirical depiction of the idea that when you're in the privileged group you are blind to the difficulties of not being in it.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 09:12 PM
1

That's a highly overoptimistic assessment of reality.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 09:08 PM
2

The real picture should show an escalator for white people of both sexes, with an obstacle course for black people, but a white girl going up the escalator, who sees a small piece of garbage she can step over in her way to the top and then makes this.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 09:07 PM
1

Saving for later
/r/MensRights04/07/17 11:29 AM
4

buying movies on youtube.
/r/MensRights24/06/17 03:02 PM
6

That's the point people are making. There is no reason whatsoever that the negatives are needed in order to have the positives. The only reason you associate them together is because that's what you happened to run into. Its like if a depressed white person runs into the kkk and they teach them to stand up for themself in honor of the white race. The seemingly good aspects are to prey on the type of people who will fall for the larger negative picture because of the whole larger thing. And can e…
/r/ExRedPill23/06/17 03:14 PM
20

You can learn confidence and assertiveness without obsessing about incorrect understandings of biology and being steeped in casual sexism.
/r/ExRedPill23/06/17 10:30 AM
2

Not understanding what "actually sounding like they really want it instead of just vaguely saying it out of fear to offend / fear of other person / apathy / whatever" means seems like something people can only not understand if they want not to understand. Maybe some people who don't understand nuance and are worried about trying to make absolute rules out of something vague. But either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/17 05:01 PM
7

No its not? It's not a word game or a mystery. It just means don't treat someone technically saying yes who looks like they don't really want to as a yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/17 10:19 AM
1

Plenty of them take issue with men in general having more power. The point is whether the overall assessment is actually accurate to how much most individuals actually have.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/17 01:29 PM
3

"know that a man is not justified by works of the Law, but by faith in Jesus Christ" Protestants pretend that this is about worship, but its not. Its about doing what Jesus says, and not caring about the jewish law.
/r/PussyPass25/03/17 02:34 PM
4

Strictly speaking the new testament says you don't have to follow the old testament.
/r/PussyPass25/03/17 09:44 AM
1

Yes there is. If the point is that Islam is fundamentally worse christianity being the same undermines that. That it may be worse in practice now doesn't matter, since we are asking how it would function in a non poor cappy area.
/r/PussyPass25/03/17 09:44 AM
2

That's because most of them live in a poor place that was fucked over tons if times for various reasons, many of them external. No one seriously believes that second generation ones in the west would still mostly do this instead of just rejecting their parents' "uncool" ways.
/r/PussyPass25/03/17 09:42 AM
1

The issues underlying the pussy pass mentality aren't exclusively left wing though. Some of them come from uber conservative assumptions that they barely have serious agency and so aren't really accountable for anything but that their men should be chivalrous and take the fall for them because they by being the leader are responsible for everything. I know people like this.
/r/PussyPass01/03/17 04:33 PM
5

A few days ago apparently. The better question is why? The absurdity of hijacking a totally different sub just because it has an existent userbase is pretty bizarre.
/r/PussyPass01/03/17 04:21 PM
14

Look at the sidebar. The mods decided that this is now an alt right sub.
/r/PussyPass01/03/17 01:06 PM
7

For no apparent reason the sub is now just a general alt right sub. That's not even a joke. They made an announcement and everything.
/r/PussyPass27/02/17 07:57 AM
1

Scaring someone into not showing something might be bad, but all bad things aren't the same thing.
/r/MensRights17/12/16 06:47 AM
3

Using your logic, I could argue that nothing could ever be banned. Expect perhaps by a government. No? Because people with different relative degrees of power can still ban things for other people. I.E. if reddit bans a subreddit that's a ban because they are preventing other peopel from doing a specific thing. But if the only subreddits that existed were site made and they didn't make a specific one it has different connotations, since they are dealing with their own site rather than specifical…
/r/MensRights17/12/16 06:45 AM
6

Lots of people use lots of words for many reasons. But there's a reason that people don't generally go around getting swastika tattoos in visible places anymore and then insisting its a hindu swastika. Because if something will so obviously mislead so many of the people who hear about it its beyond it being their fault and goes back to being the fault of the one doing it. Bad rationalizations about how other people use the term doesn't change that it'll lead to those things getting lumped togeth…
/r/MensRights17/12/16 06:39 AM
6

People are insisting that some people don't know that on reddit it means pua. Okay. But some people also do. The association will be there. And changing the title couldn't have been that much effort.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 10:05 PM
-1

There are people outside reddit who know the term redpill as associated with that. To say that its a more or less unknown term is misleading. PUA is a more rare term now. People even otuside reddit are referring to those types of people as redpill. I know some people who call them that who don't use reddit.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 10:02 PM
5

She could have liked changed the name though. Movies change name all the time.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 09:58 PM
2

Theredpill is known among quite a few people who don't frequent reddit. And anyone who happens to know about this movie in general probably knows about it itself.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 09:58 PM
-1

I don't know why you are being downvoted. This is absolutely true.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 09:57 PM
1

Someone who gets to decide something deciding not to do something is different from someone actively telling people who want to they can't.
/r/MensRights16/12/16 09:52 PM
3

What does that even mean? It sounds like a vague thing that has no meaning.
/r/MensRights20/10/16 03:42 PM
1

You don't have to join a subreddit filled with crazy assholes to know the amazing apparently previously unknown truth that being fit is attractive. Who are the people this is a mystery to? No bizarre pseudoscience is necessary.
/r/MensRights02/09/16 12:12 AM
1

My post wasn't even that long. How did you not read the whole thing.
/r/MensRights31/08/16 07:15 PM
4

To be fair, there's a reason there's a discrepancy. The state doesn't think people have some fundamental right to erase themselves from the consequences of children. It basically just found a loophole where in one specific case it could pragmatically create that in a way people would be able to make use of, despite the official reason being some other argument that for the most part isn't how most people really see it day to day. The fact that people flip flop in how they approach it is what lea…
/r/MensRights31/08/16 03:50 AM
1

There's a lot of area of interest in between selfishness and selflessness. Since the words imply total focus on self and total focus on others it goes without saying that there's a balanced approach. Selfish doesn't mean caring about yourself at all. It means placing the self so primary that an allowance of apathy to how other people are effected by one's actions comes in. People trying to turn "selfish" into a positive identity that encompasses any self interest whatsoever are generally being d…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/16 11:20 PM
8

I don't get what is even being asked. You don't need an alternative to the pseudoscience and bizarre sexism. You can lift and practice acting confident without being fueled by negative emotions and selfishness.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/16 06:25 AM
3

No? Its not difficult to explain the issue to them that you are not going to stay and keep a bad arrangement.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/16 04:59 AM
1

The red pill is full of sorority girls?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/16 07:41 AM
2

Because they think that its sex positive and anti sexist to ensure that young kids are taught the importance of them.
/r/MensRights07/04/16 06:11 PM
3

Not that I don't think people complaining about a bake sale are overreacting, but "The reality is that people who are not privileged don't get the choice to get upset or not because as soon as they raise their voice it is silenced." This doesn't apply to not being male. It applies to things like not being white (or asian). The idea that sexes are this different in modern day is so wrong it has almost racist connotations to pretend its equivalent to race.
/r/PussyPass03/04/16 06:35 AM
1

That's kind of a meaningless statement. Culture and sexism are the same thing if you're talking about cultural sexism.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 08:38 PM
3

Its some of both, realistically. Either thing will make the sentence smaller than regular by a large margin.
/r/PussyPass01/03/16 03:58 AM
21

Because people think poor violent people are scary, but rich ones are eccentric. Or something.
/r/PussyPass27/02/16 06:40 AM
4

That's literally what I just said. That it may be a correlation rather than a causation.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 01:48 PM
1

These tactics are rarely seen among men because this very quickly leads to a physical confrontation. The automatic response of most men in a debate who get belittled or called names is immediate frustration and anger, and men will often immediately give the woman the free pass and walk away from the debate and 'let her win' whereas if a man were to stick his fingers in his ears and say 'la la la' he would get a punch in the mouth. (an example from childhood, but the tactic remains the same) TIL …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 01:25 PM
3

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/21/more-sexual-partners-unhappy-marriage_n_5698440.html There's definitely evidence that it ties to issues. The issue is whether it causes or merely correlates to them. And of course there's the fact that this is one thing among many, so obsessing disproportionately is not the solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 01:24 PM
2

Well, one potential reason is that if you're reasonably attractive then you could know you're special to them in the sense of being their most attractive partner, rather than someone far less attractive than what they're used to who has to settle.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/15 01:05 AM
2

to hamster Yeah. Do people not realize that using obscure internet group terminology just makes them look crazy and detached from reality?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/15 01:04 AM
1

Well, it can come off more offensive if you know it something they did, but now don't care enough to.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/15 12:56 AM
3

Slut shaming only exists because sluts are pickier than the average woman when it comes to looks(for obvious reasons) so its an exclusive club that only few men get to join. I'm pretty sure this isn't true.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/15 12:38 AM
1

I didn't say it would make them suddenly ripped. But you said they'll be more fat than now. People are already pretty fat now. So anything might be able to help a little bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/15 05:39 PM
2

I don't know about that. Technology might eventually find ways for lazy people to put on less weight.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/15 04:26 PM
1

I have also noticed that lots of women from traditional cultures (Africans, Arabs and Muslim South Asians) seem to want a kind of Alpha Bux archetype Because its odd that they want someone attractive, wealthy, probably smart, and assertive all at once apparently?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/15 04:26 PM
1

Did you just imply that guys being fit isn't something anyone female cares about; only other guys? I'm pretty sure that's not true at all. In the modern world too much of that is sometimes considered synonymous with low intelligence, so the idea might shift, but even so.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/15 04:23 PM
1

Well, in america you definitely see extreme kinds of people like that in real life. Not anywhere near enough to act like you can conflate them with "standard non-redpill dating advice" though.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/15 04:27 PM
17

It is? Is feminist dating advice actually an epidemic? That's not even a stereotype about feminists.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/15 08:15 AM
0

The blue pill was always an anti red pill circlejerk. Its just that by its nature it took on an ideological tone, and so is occasioally used as a synonym for that general area of ideology.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/15 03:58 PM
3

It doesnt matter how ripped yoy are if you have an ugly face or a small dick. Yes it does. You may fare worse than someone with better of those things, but it definitely matters a huge deal.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/15 03:57 PM
3

Do they realize that calling something amoral doesn't make it true, or even a coherent idea? When your best defense of your actions is arbitrarily declaring that morality doesn't apply to them, it probably just means you don't have a real one.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 07:00 PM
2

I don't know about downvotes, but I'll point out that I've gotten banned from subreddits from both sides for pretty trivial reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/15 03:57 AM
2

He's getting to bed a lot more women than that non-promiscuous Something about this seems like it goes without saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 01:40 AM
3

But I don't think this is a common thing for other women. Why? Everyone has their own standards of what they consider promiscuous, but I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't be uncommon for them to not want someone high enough that they would suspect that person would have trouble staying with them or not cheating. A girl actually looking for a long term partner, especially who may have a low partner count herself can easily be hesitant trying seriously with a guy who looks like he has no indication o…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 01:39 AM
1

They're trying to say that people can say no after consenting at first while its going on and still be raped. Its not like that's not a real thing or possibility.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 06:33 AM
1

There is no such thing as objective morality. Understanding this is the single biggest step BPers can make toward understanding RP (though not necessarily agreeing that its a good system). So its literally founded on a position that effectively no one believes other than people who haven't studied ethics in any serious capacity? That's unfortunate.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/15 07:16 AM
1

Not according to any meaningful definition. Definitions of selfish redefined to make this true misses the actual point of the word.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/15 07:15 AM
-9

Okay? But in most of these cases he was probably willfully having unprotected sex with people knowing what the result was going to be, and not caring. I really don't get what math you're doing that implies that they all were having sex with virtuous guys who had no idea at all what the result was going to be.
/r/PussyPass23/05/15 11:22 AM
-8

What does that have to do with anything? This is a problem caused by both parents. In at very least a good slice of cases.
/r/PussyPass23/05/15 11:14 AM
3

How does pointing out a few vague things justify trp? That's like saying that people are emotional for rejecting Christianity because they just don't want to think greed is bad. Its pretty dishonest to imply that no one outside of trp knows that being fat makes someone less attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 01:26 AM
5

Not to defend them, but there's a difference between what people say is pathetic, and what in person they actually react badly to. Ignoring the red pill for a second, you could describe on paper an aggressive entitled guy who isn't smart, or even that interesting, and is kind of a dick versus one who has more reasonable seeming qualities. And while someone might say intellectually that they prefer the second, in person they may have attraction more to the first. I have no clue whether /r/TheRedP…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 07:15 AM
15

I think the problem with this is the fact that no matter how much people say it, there doesn't seem to be much evidence that sexism makes people have less sex. Its just that people who have less sex and are also sexist get their sexism called out more since it is obvious to everyone that they're bitter and entitled. The issue seems to be that people who act confident and sexist are often rewarded rather than punished, so they feel justified continuing to act in ways they see as rewarding them. W…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 06:53 AM
1

Because most of this site is embroiled in the same gender wars this sub is, and it goes without saying that the type of people who like womens' subs more will sway more to the feminist side.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:59 PM
0

I think a sub like that would be funny if one like that and one like this were partnered to actually focus on things that generally went one way or the other for specific cases. But this is reddit of course, so in reality they would both just be ideology whining thinly disguised.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/01/15 10:41 PM
2

From what I hear they did a story that revealed that ultimately its just anti poor. People considered in good social standing aren't judged for having any kind of sex. Poor people are considered a generalized form of trashy even if its very little. And this is what the shaming directs itself at.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/15 12:46 PM
-2

If we're talking about improper semantics, do people even persist over time? The person given that name at birth may be dead, and replaced with something else in a shifting continuum.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 08:51 AM
1

The most efficient money solution for anyone is to marry someone with more money than you and who you know wouldn't try to shaft you out of money.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/15 09:09 AM
2

Some think it may be the other way around. It may not be that more bisexual people get raped, but that being raped may disrupt people's sexuality and make them more likely to end up bisexual.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 04:25 AM
1

^^<sup>theyshouldtryoutgaysex.</sup>
/r/MensRights15/12/14 05:10 AM
1

Which is ironically why the neckbeard stereotype became for some reason the stereotype of all non-feminists. Who knew that a small percentage of people with crippling autism had this much power. Truly [people with autism] must be defeated for they are the end boss of feminism, and obviously have much better lives than anyone female.
/r/MensRights15/12/14 05:09 AM
2

I love how they assume that their stereotype of what it is is something that they can act like all members actually act like.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 11:59 PM
4

What does that have to do with red pill? There are ways to get dates that aren't red pill contrary to what they convince themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/14 10:30 AM
8

Why does level of accomplishment matter in terms of judgement for doing a thing? If its bad for girls to do something it wouldn't magically be good for guys to just because its harder for them. Proving that you can do something that's hard wouldn't change the connotations. If there's nothing wrong with it, and the accomplishment is worthy of praise, then there's nothing wrong with girls for taking advantage of the situation either. Its only pure jealousy that would try to flip it. The fact that …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 05:16 AM
4

More importantly, the type of person doing this whining is generally not in any of those subjects.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 06:42 PM
1

I'm pretty sure that its being used in a mocking tone, to make fun of that they thought it was one.
/r/MensRights16/11/14 09:09 AM
1

Is that like finding Jesus?
/r/ExRedPill14/11/14 01:17 AM
3

>You didn't even take the half green half orange pill.
/r/ExRedPill14/11/14 01:15 AM
1

1: Arguing about who had life worse in 1923 doesn't change what is going on now. People in GENERAL were considered semi-disposable in the past. In part since mortality of children was so high that death was considered just an omnipresent reality of life. Don't get embroiled in an us vs them mentality. Before worrying about who is better treated in any area in general, first focus on treating everyone well in general. 2: While terrible divorces do exist, it is helpful to note that less than half …
/r/ExRedPill14/11/14 01:06 AM
7

...Those mean two different things.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 10:48 AM
2

In case nobody realized, reddit is a place for teenagers to get memes, not a serious ground for debate.
/r/MensRights31/10/14 03:27 AM
3

Is that a serious question? So if you have an unrealistic goal that you want, the fact that you want it justifies doing anything to get it, which might include terrible things, just because it might not be realistic otherwise... and probably isn't anyways, but at least you were a terrible person in the process? Even if things do work, getting results doesn't automatically justify them. Otherwise you could cut out the steps and just legalize sex slavery.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/14 06:32 AM
3

Because something happening half as much means its not happening apparently.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 10:26 PM
1

...Isn't that contradicting the idea that there's not specific things that effectively guarantee sex? Especially since attractiveness is something you can effect with exercise too.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/14 09:48 AM
-2

she can call them out on it as she is a woman herself and they can't just turn around and call her a sexist. You clearly don't know how these people operate. Anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. How or why is slotted in later with terms as applicable.
/r/PussyPass30/09/14 06:05 AM
2

she can call them out on it as she is a woman herself and they can't just turn around and call her a sexist. You clearly don't know how these people operate. Anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. How or why is slotted in later with terms as applicable.
/r/PussyPass30/09/14 06:05 AM
21

This is a false equivalence because Patriarchy and Misogyny are things. I don't even.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 03:47 AM
2

That means exactly what it sounds like. The concept of morals aren't something that certain areas of human interest can arbitrarily not be related to. By definition anything involving two or more humans interacting can involve doing so in detrimental ways. Trying to say otherwise is bizarre. Trying to say otherwise for one of the biggest forms of interactions humans face is just stating erroneous things and hoping that stating them makes people nod along without thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/14 02:34 AM
1

I don't get what that had to do with my post though.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/14 01:19 AM
1

I'm not sure what you mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/14 10:58 PM
2

People realize that calling something amoral doesn't justify things right? There's no such thing as something that's amoral. If we're going to be this ridiculous I could insist that property ownership definitions are amoral, and redefine anything I want to be owned by me.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/14 08:55 AM
3

Primary could literally mean 51%. Something being more likely doesn't make it the only case. Gate-keepers imply that someone doesn't want something at all, not that they want it less.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/14 11:33 PM
1

Does that mean I'm a hyper-alpha, since I didn't have to initiate anything, and I was the one who got to accept or reject the offer?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/14 08:51 AM
0

No he didn't, he asked first.
/r/MensRights24/06/14 07:35 AM
1

I'm honestly not sure why this surprises anyone really. This is one of those things that everyone kind of already knew, but ideologically people who are trying to talk about it being a problem express it as if it was entirely literal, since that's the thing they care the most about.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/14 12:39 PM
1

Because a lot of people consider it offensive to implicitly do so by not preferring people with large partner counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/14 12:36 PM
0

the child has to pay. rekt
/r/MensRights15/06/14 08:42 AM
-1

Why would I bother past one post? I doubt anyone who doesn't already realize it is going to that quickly, and its not like I have some honor bound duty to see it through to the end.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 11:20 PM
-1

This is an excellent example of the problem with your thought processes. Metaphors for relationships are always going to be abut objects. Otherwise they wouldn't be a metaphor. In other words, your are making shit up to be offended by, since there aren't enough real problems that fit the bill. Wow. I'm totally "convinced." You're right, everyone was exaggerating.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 10:44 PM
2

The problem is that they take one idea that is mostly (but not fully) right, but apply it in a situation where its not right at all. For something like race relations between white and black people, white people obviously have so much power that discussing it as a wildly imbalanced situation that needs to be externally fixed makes sense. But... the sexes don't have that. The "high" period of feminism when most people identified as one was the late 60s and early 70s. This is when we were far enou…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 11:09 AM
-2

Why are you even bothering? That ship has sailed long ago. The idea that LMR is something to be overcome rather than actually seriously considered is something only someone who has no understanding of psychology at all would consider not an attitude of rape tolerance. Anyone who actually knows anything about people knows that enough pressure makes people, especially more introverted ones comply with things they don't want, especially when they're worried. That, and of course the fact that someon…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 10:44 AM
1

I really don't understand why that is viewed as terrible. Stop being ridiculous. The things people dislike about the redpill are not those parts. Its the blatant sexism, open declarations that being a terrible person is okay as long as it profits you (presented as if its this amazing enlightened philosophy), and more or less casual rape / pressured sex tolerance. And none of that shit is implicit. Its part of the "official" "thing."
/r/MensRights11/06/14 10:23 PM
4

It's surprising, and I'm not sure why you guys get so much stick. I disagree with a lot of what goes on here too, and don't really post here, and certainly not consider myself a member. But the reason it gets so much stick is mainly existing but not being explicitly pro feminist. that's about it. The people here complain about things many modern feminists do to trash any coherent goals they could have, and more or less that's not allowed, and they are supposed to just sit there and take it. Note…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 10:20 PM
1

That has more to do with people knowing what it is that that will be most insulting to the person they are insulting than with those people thinking that is the worst possible thing there is. Eh, that's a little special pleading. Its not at all true that virgin is a casual insult that nobody uses to demean the state of people. Much of younger society, even for females, but definitely far more for males DOES use it as an insult implicating that virgins are a kind of lesser class of being. And tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/14 11:05 PM
0

Neckbeard is fairly common, I don't know where you've been.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/14 08:54 PM
5

To be fair, people often ARE wrong about their own behavior and feelings. The problem is of course just that other people will be similarly wrong about that person most likely.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/14 08:40 PM
1

It stands to reason that if you're trying to realistically asses whether someone would be good long term potential that you would go by everything you happen to know. If they have a history of 20 relationships that have each lasted no longer than a month and a half, you can take that as a point of information on why this one could hypothetically end the same way. Obviously it gets into hypocrisy when you apply standards that you yourself haven't met, but someone doing something hypocritically =/…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/14 06:33 PM
1

Honestly, I can't say for sure. Yes, in my idealized world there would be none, and even sex would be something that is considered more of an attribute than a thing people "are." But I have to admit that I don't actually know whether that would make people happier. Keep in mind that even people who claim to like not having roles or like "just being themself" are still almost always subtly complying with many kinds of roles that they like because they are one of the many ways people give value to…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/14 05:27 PM
4

I'm not sure why people consider it a point to note that your cultural situation has a huge range of control over your possible actions. The type of people who think that biology somehow makes cultural differences trivial generally aren't the type of people who its even meaningful to pretend are part of the "debate" anyways. The issue is more that its phrased wrong. Everything culture is capable of effecting works on specific biological hardware which the results of aren't quite the same as unde…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/14 05:05 PM
5

I love how the one saying not to get fat was sexual harassment. It might be harassment, but how was it sexual?
/r/MensRights27/04/14 01:38 AM
1

Technically, 100%, because if the slightest thing had gone differently at any point more than a slightly larger period into the past than the oldest people are, everyone on earth would be someone else.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 01:28 AM
1

It's totally not sexist to imply that anyone female can't handle going on living when even the slightest thing happens to them, but also anything that happens to anyone male they have some kind of infinite well of strength to draw from that means if they complain they're a whiny bitch pucci.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 01:26 AM
4

The people who make this also flip out when people point out it's garbage, and act like that means no one cares about molestation. And no matter how many times its explained to them slowly, they fail to grasp that its not calling attention to these things that people dislike. It's HOW they choose to do it. Especially since people who want to raise realistic awareness have to fight against the people who make caring something only crazy extremists do, and try to make it universalist.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 01:23 AM
4

A guy in a smart suit sits next to you on the bus. Using his copy of the Metro for cover, he puts a hand on your thigh and starts to slide it up towards your crotch. Uh... I'm pretty sure that this wouldn't happen every single day.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 01:17 AM
6

"women are more conscious of oppression" If they were, feminism wouldn't be taken more seriously than racial inequality, which has far larger consequences.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 11:18 AM
1

Not only that but it comes across to me as ironically misogynistic. By telling a woman that what she wants is bad and wrong you're basically assuming agency over her sexuality in your quest to be a super politically correct white knight pussy, are you not? What? Saying you don't want to do something isn't controlling other people.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/14 05:20 AM
5

You think people in ideologies are willing to risk the ideology in the name of accuracy?
/r/MensRights14/04/14 02:57 AM
10

We're talking about dating ideologies, not science.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 09:57 PM
0

I think originally the blue pill was just a joke about not being redpill, but its hard to argue that it hasn't taken on an ideological basis, and thus represents a specific thing. Even if said thing is only referred to as bluepill when used in the context of disagreeing with redpill.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 09:53 PM
0

Not that I want to defend the red pill, but its kind of true that certain areas of education are heavily ideological in ways that are kind of biased. So its natural for anyone who disagrees to think that those areas of interest are dubious. That's not necessarily disagreeing with education so much as the people who have a monopoly on it. (Obviously the more extreme someone is, the more they'll think things are biased even which are not.)
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 09:26 PM
6

I can't even begin to point out the errors here, since the nature of you having said it implies you are coming from an angle so alien to how any of this actually realistically works that trying to explain it would only confuse you further.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 11:51 PM
1

I think the problem is that sexuality is such an ideologically charged thing that people are afraid to get involved with it in that way. If they came up with statistics that implied that certain "legal, consensual" things corresponded heavily with any type of bad outcome, they would get blasted to hell from one side. If their same statistics said anything someone wants to find dubious does not, they'd get incinerated from the other. Its being in one of those places where if they do it they're ri…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 10:08 PM
3

I think that they "can" work, but that they're a big risk. A lot of people who might "think" they can make them work may be wrong, and making problems for themselves. Especially at the point they have kids, and damaging a relationship means kids suffering through a divorce. There's a lot of things to consider. There's not much else to say. I could hardly quantify the level of risk without some statistics, and people to study.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 08:29 PM
0

Yeah. All those Europeans scrambling to get america's wild west healthcare.
/r/TheRedPill05/04/14 02:03 PM
3

Honestly, I'd just be glad that they admitted biology exists.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:05 AM
3

Because it wouldn't be that hard to teach things like confidence, and how to not be fat and lazy without the dehumanizing aspects, sexism, avocation of amorality if it helps goals, and more or less casual rape tolerance that goes on there. It's not about whether its biologically right or wrong or works or not. Its that its advocating being a severe jerk, if not worse, and justifying it by saying that it can make things happen. For instance, they more or less hand-wave anything there as "not rape…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/14 01:16 PM
1

This person seems like they might be bisexual, but hate themselves for it, and are looking for someone else to blame.
/r/TheRedPill30/03/14 12:19 AM
1

Modern rock concerts of the type frequented by people who still think they're being rebellious despite supporting the new social order, apparently.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 03:00 PM
31

They aren't saying people decide their orientation. (almost said alignment) They're saying that whatever they're attracted to they can choose to be with, and other people should be fine with it.
/r/MensRights28/03/14 02:46 AM
15

You were REALLY drunk.
/r/MensRights25/03/14 07:55 PM
4

Why do they try to convince you if you have to do it anyways?
/r/MensRights23/03/14 11:58 AM
1

What? These things aren't contradictory. They're ways people approach finding out knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/14 01:16 AM
28

What possible job could you hiring for that values those things in the first place?
/r/TheRedPill22/03/14 07:20 AM
1

Much less when they are not only doing it for self serving reasons, but fully convince themself that that's their good deed of the year. So BOTH aspects that a person has they could be funneling into this, with all the fury of someone who staked everything on this one outcome, lol.
/r/TheRedPill22/03/14 07:19 AM
1

To be fair, she might not know the history, and might have just seen it offhandedly.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 02:15 AM
1

That was too ridiculous. I assume you're trolling now.
/r/TheRedPill11/03/14 07:14 PM
1

I honestly don't know how it is you don't realize your entire issue is being too emotional, and ego problems. Taking it out on other people doesn't change your inner self-hatred. And neither will your poorly cobbled together response about how the idea that that's what it is is "ridiculous."
/r/TheRedPill11/03/14 06:42 AM
6

Can feminism save an image in a readable size?
/r/MensRights08/03/14 09:51 PM
1

The logic is a little questionable if everyone but the most powerful person in any country has to constantly ensure they don't support any non-anarchist laws. This seems like a waste of time done by people who want to be alpha more than by people who actually are. What level of laws is too much, or too little? Is a 35% tax rate alpha, but 40% is suddenly beta?
/r/RedPillWomen03/03/14 06:25 PM
3

I'm starting to wonder whether your IQ is even in the double digits. For starters, most conservatives aren't individualists at all. Just wanting low taxes doesn't automatically make you one. Second, even if you claim to be ideologically individualist, it doesn't mean you actually are a rugged alpha who would benefit from individualism. Go to any libertarian meeting, and you'll find many sniveling hairy guys in ill fitting suits playing with girls' toys. Them ideologically pretending to be indivi…
/r/RedPillWomen03/03/14 06:22 PM
2

If you mean the lack of morality as regards relationships and sex aspect? Far more than want to admit it. Not that the red pill isn't bad, but I think part of the reason people hate it so much is to try to distance it from how they as individuals actually are.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/14 02:55 PM
1

I know. I'm just saying. It's technically not always true that all rightist liberals by modern standards are libertarians. Those words each bear different connotations.
/r/RedPillWomen01/03/14 08:46 PM
1

By serious I think they meant like hours every single day without anything else mixed in.
/r/RedPillWomen28/02/14 10:11 PM
1

You're talking about leftism, not liberalism. They aren't the same thing, leftists just stole the name liberal to seem more pro freedom.
/r/RedPillWomen28/02/14 10:06 PM
2

You realize that there's also the possibility that they are doing it since it forces other people to bend over for one.
/r/RedPillWomen28/02/14 10:00 PM
6

I think you have to be a Alpha to be Conservative. What am I even reading.
/r/RedPillWomen28/02/14 10:00 PM
2

which is in direct contrast to most of the more conservative views espoused in the RP subs. Sexual power, and rampant promiscuity is a conservative ideal, now? I think you're confusing that many people who call themselves liberal are actually leftist. Where as TRP is rightist liberal.
/r/RedPillWomen28/02/14 09:57 PM
1

I wouldn't doubt it. I think that their issue might be that conservatives can still be manly in their mind, even if deluded in another way. But they see democrats as spineless and effeminate.
/r/RedPillWomen28/02/14 09:50 PM
2

arrogantly. To be fair, I think she was implicating that it's an opinion that has nothing to do with you. Of course, that's probably not what it would actually be, but you know.
/r/MensRights24/02/14 11:43 AM
8

The real gif would show a guy with 10 scoops, the girl with 9, and her pushing an unseen black guy out of the way to take his 3, to get 12, then making that gif you're watching now when anyone complains. (She would also claim to be a hero for black rights. Also the metaphor works equally well with a second white guy.)
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:42 AM
-3

That was a petty bitch-slap. If a male did that, the appropriate response would be laughing.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:36 AM
2

Clearly not in that video though.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:36 AM
-1

And that's also why you're not welcome in civilized company.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:31 AM
1

Yeah. Too many people have anger management and "honor" issues. You don't need to be in fights with strangers, friends, or anyone else. Obviously if there's real danger you do what you have to. But encouraging a culture of meaningless violence is not doing anything for the positive views anyone has of... pretty much anything.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:30 AM
7

More importantly they don't see different groups of males. They look at ones with a six pack, working in business school making six figures and how much undeserved respect many people like that disproportionately get, then they make fun of the males wearing silly hats who have no friends, no social weight, and no great opportunities. They ignore that those people are bitter since they are a different group than the ones who have everything, and pretend that they're the same group complaining abo…
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:28 AM
1

Um... the point is reasonable, but the presentation could have stood to be a little better.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:24 AM
7

because trans-people are happy to be trans" Trans people don't want to be trans. They want to be a normal person of the opposite sex. (With rare exceptions?) I don't get who that's sane would deny that.
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 05:13 AM
1

What? The term as a whole is meant to insult people by attaching negative connotations to thinking being straight is standard. Saying something is standard doesn't even mean you think it's better.
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 05:01 AM
13

The problem is that in a relativistic world, they have to redefine normal to mean "correct" when it really just means average.
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 05:01 AM
1

What? Where do you go (or what are you taking) that it's mandatory?
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 04:56 AM
3

You do know that MOST of the terms these people use are bullshit sociological ones, right? Sociology has been more or less owned by the postmodern left for a long time.
/r/TheRedPill20/02/14 04:55 AM
1

Admittedly, the original article didn't make explicitly clear that it was talking only about mutual drunk sex. It talked about random rapes in between, leading to confusion where it's understandable that someone half assumed he was downplaying those cases.
/r/MensRights12/02/14 07:54 AM
1

The irony here is that you could be referring to either or both at once.
/r/TheRedPill12/02/14 06:16 AM
0

That statue is honestly shit anyways.
/r/MensRights06/02/14 11:02 PM
3

I've literally never heard this from anyone, even as a joke. What types of terrible friends do you have?
/r/MensRights06/02/14 11:31 AM
1

what you are saying is there should be more abortions. That argument just has zero political appeal. If that has zero political appeal why do liberals want it totally covered up that the argument for a legal right to one was not an argument for the moral neutrality of one, and their pretty much immediate drop of the "but we still want to make sure there's as few as possible" is not fooling anyone. They literally want it to be considered unspeakable that people might even want to personally try t…
/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:44 AM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade Those things are ultimately the same thing. The privacy is just an extension of nodily autonomy. A re-statement about them not interfering with something they were agreeing with for hypothetical other reasons. The reasons were not fully defined at first, but ultimately came down to being about the autonomy. Either way, my point is that many people seem to forget that this was not a declaration that people inherently have a right to not care about paying f…
/r/MensRights02/02/14 10:32 AM
1

and that the only valid reason for an abortion is that you don't want to physically undergo the pregnancy (as opposed to not wanting/not being ready for children). From a legal standpoint it's true. The law doesn't indicate that forsaking rights to children at your own will are inherent rights in any way, nor that during pregnancy is a time it's allowed. It's based entirely around a right to bodily autonomy. In other words, it was made as a loophole, and people's culture that they generated arou…
/r/MensRights01/02/14 11:11 PM
13

Or don't live in India.
/r/TheRedPill25/01/14 12:28 AM
4

Whoah... and I thought -I- had crazy parents.
/r/TheRedPill23/01/14 12:03 AM
4

Do they even try to prove anything? Mostly they just assume it's true.
/r/TheRedPill22/01/14 08:33 PM
1

Where have you been? In these people's minds those are the only two options. Less of one means more of the other.
/r/TheRedPill22/01/14 08:22 PM
20

That's the point. They legitimately see things as a one dimensional line of where females are relative to males. You're either closing the gap... or you're not. And if you're not, you're part of the problem. Even trying to dismantle ways females have it better for the sake of equality in all areas is anathema to them since they see that as widening the gap.
/r/TheRedPill22/01/14 07:40 PM
16

How is it that all these otherwise seemingly sane people always end up with these radical SOs? Are they so desperate they'll take anything? For me it was fairly reasonable to just sort through and be patient until I found someone good who was not this insane.
/r/TheRedPill22/01/14 07:38 PM
6

But that's the point. When people say "feminism" they're not referring to classical feminism. They're referring to the postmodernists who think they own the term in modern day. (But simultaneously insist that it is all purpose.)
/r/TheRedPill22/01/14 07:35 PM
2

I am a firm believer that for anything to get done MRAs and Feminists need to work together Nah. Both groups need to be discredited. But for the time being, anything that hurts the feminists helps with that.
/r/MensRights20/01/14 01:39 AM
6

...How is something this relevant desperate for a few tens of thousands of dollars of donations?
/r/MensRights09/01/14 07:04 AM
-8

B.But muh bathrooms.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 06:28 AM
3

So what? If it wasn't going to bankrupt you, you could immediately plan for any medical issue the second you need it. Anyone who has the moeny that ensuring no wait times seems ideal to them can simply fly to another country where it is faster.
/r/TheRedPill07/01/14 01:46 AM
1

Some people don't do that on social media.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 12:52 AM
1

I know all those things. That's the problem. It's less of an objective declaration of stance and more of an insult to everyone else. By calling yourself humanist you are implicating that some other people are non-humanists. That is, people whose ideologies operate on blue and orange morality that somehow has nothing to do with human concerns. That's a step beyond even calling it wrong, and moves into the realm of insisting it doesn't even need to be realistically considered since it is non-human…
/r/MensRights02/01/14 04:55 AM
1

Nope. Unless culturally counts.
/r/MensRights02/01/14 04:48 AM
-9

Saying "aspects of socialism" is the same thing as socialism is like saying that liking sunlight is the same as wanting to be on the surface of the sun.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 01:25 PM
-1

...That's not even the definition of patriarchy.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 01:24 PM
0

Humanism is just as bad as feminism in modern day. It's a pretentious title of "identifying with human concerns." Considering that that very clearly means nothing, it therefore means you're projecting a very specific subtle thing into it.
/r/MensRights01/01/14 01:17 PM
4

Shame. Whine all you like. I'm interested in starting as secure of a family in the future as possible. Getting together with someone who (like me. Not being hypocritical) hadn't ever slept with anyone else raised the chances of that tremendously, by any conceivable metric. If other people have different priorities that's their concern. I they have different priorities, but want to erase even the reality that some thigns project better results, then there is an issue.
/r/MensRights12/12/13 10:50 AM
1

Radical feminists think that males have this universal idea that Asians are all submissive and never question anything males say. When in reality it's more like that there's a reasonable chance they're educated, smart, and also have self control.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 09:19 AM
7

To be fair, if someone said this more than a few decades ago, before the stigma was associated with the word feminist they have a point. It's obvious to everyone now that it no longer is used in the classical usage however.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 09:11 AM
3

You got downvoted for saying so. Upvote to put you back at +1.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:14 AM
1

No it's not.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 01:13 AM
0

If there's a fourth wave, it will be the end of days. How much worse can they even get than third wave making open non issues into thigns that need to be punished rigorously?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:21 AM
-1

Of course sex is about power. No one knowledgable in biology or psychology thinks otherwise. The feminist propaganda is saying that RAPE is about power, where as regular sex is a wholly different kind of thing. This is nothing but a form of special pleading that allows them to claim to be against rape by following an imaginary set of precepts, while not being against the reality of the culture it exists in.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:19 AM
2

It depends how well they know eachother.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:15 AM
1

It's like if you made two boiled eggs, but put them on top of your sink and every time your girlfriend came over, she ate one egg before leaving heading north at 45 mph, and you had to trust her when you headed south at 25 mph then after four hours how far apart are you?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:14 AM
1

Also, the nature of trust in every circumstance, is that it's not a virtue to trust random people before they earned it. And part of human nature is accepting that sometimes people do make wrong decisions, and yes, you have to prepare for them.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:11 AM
1

Males are socially expected to barely care about children except, to try to have quality "father-son time." As such, liking anyone else's children is seen as very bizarre.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:08 AM
1

Modern feminists often claim that any claims that feminists acted out of line in any way is a fake straw man apparently created by hollywood (??) to discredit them.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:55 AM
1

Any idea you have is shared with some crazy people. I you think it's not, you just haven't found the right group yet.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:53 AM
1

Lol. This is why no one likes people like you. Even if they're wrong, trying to sensible actually pay attention to the reality of abortion is easily something that we're advanced enough as a society to do by now. You say that them even trying is being a theocracy for no better reason than that you don't like it.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:52 AM
6

Why try to balance it. Just call it vaginaplaining, and throw in a reference to them being on their period at the same time.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 10:28 AM
2

It would probably help if more people in the real world referred to it as that.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 10:27 AM
-3

Yes it is. It's only "not that bad" relative to the fact that the rest of Reddit has people that bad anyways, they just veil it slightly more.
/r/MensRights26/11/13 02:17 AM
0

It is? Celibacy doesn't just mean not getting married, it literally means hordes of their population claims to be totally uninterested in sex. I have a hard time seeing that becoming a huge norm in America without some radical overhaul of priories.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:46 AM
1

The funny thing is that not everyone thinks they hate men. Lots of people have lots of different complaints about them. But they literally can't conceive of anything except a binary, so they perpetuate their own stereotype of everyone thinking they hate men by assuming that's inherently all criticism. To them they clearly don't hate women, so the only other options are being right or hating men. Because everything they do can somehow be summed up in this way.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:40 AM
5

No one, since you have no clue what monopoly means. The fact that modern feminist movements don't generate people who actually want to go into these fields might be something worth considering.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 12:10 PM
9

The people who run for and win office are predominantly male. This is still a red herring though. The people who are in office do not represent their sex. They represent what their voters want. So if majority of voters are female, they still clearly are utilizing more power.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 12:07 PM
6

Apple is progressive? It deliberately tries to prevent people having maximal control over thigns they own.
/r/MensRights17/11/13 12:06 PM
2

that feminism isn't doing much about former, only the latter. Also, this is more or less wrong. Modern feminism is doing little, if anything, for either.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 11:15 AM
1

that feminism also fights for colored rights, LGBT rights, children's rights, men's rights. Isn't this an implicit admission that their definition of feminism is thus not the "classical" one, but merely referring to modern movements?
/r/MensRights16/11/13 11:10 AM
1

I AM honestly baffled how so much humor exists on places like that that seems to have been outdated since 1953. It seems like often humor even feminists would find offensive. Are there really that many like... people with their own unintelligent culture so incoherent that they aren't even smart enough to be on the regular internet?
/r/MensRights16/11/13 10:57 AM
23

In their mind, somehow both at once.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 10:55 AM
1

Lol. It's funny that the4y use MRA as a synonym for dudebro though.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 11:09 AM
1

What even made them think this would work out well for them?
/r/MensRights10/11/13 08:23 PM
0

Okay, but realistically they SHOULD be asking to meet in public if they don't know you. There ARE hordes of rape-esque people on dating sites. Quit being entitled. Even if the average person is not a rapist, if they go on 20 dates they stay safe by ensuring all of them are safe.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 05:47 AM
2

Because if someone admits that one of the few core things that justify their presence is not an actual objective injustice, then it threatens their justification for existing?
/r/MensRights08/11/13 03:29 AM
8

You can be whatever you want. Not an astronaut though. Be reasonable.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 04:36 AM
1

And yet I got tons of downvotes. Really though, it's about how regular people WILL see the term, not how people WISH they would.
/r/MensRights02/11/13 03:42 PM
-3

To be fair, the hordes of guys who run away probably realistically many don't even care if that's the result. And someone who knows that the other parent is simply doing this and not giving a fuck is going to wonder why they should either.
/r/MensRights27/10/13 04:14 AM
-5

Probably get a new name, too. "Mens rights" sounds even worse than feminism.
/r/MensRights26/10/13 07:18 AM
2

but a society whose family planning expert doesn't understand that women like to fuck Not the same amount doesn't = "no." It's more complicated than saying less, but it is different.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 10:12 AM
1

I'm not one of the people here, but the problem is that contemporary feminism isn't actually realistically fighting for any of the real things males are statistically likely to have on their plate. It's fighting what IT THINKS those people SHOULD care about. Usually poorly put together, and ignoring the people who point out it's ignoring the real issues in favor of ones that are secondary at best. I think modern feminism and mens rights both have the same problems.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 10:06 AM
1

To be fair, you can't be too angry, since at least they're admitting self defense exists.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 10:03 AM
2

If someone doesn't start soon you might not be allowed to. Not to sound like someone crotchety and old, but society is at a pivotal place where things people do now will have a significant effect on the future.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 10:00 AM
-1

Or strictly speaking, neither is relevant, since the same type of thigns come up if you write men.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 09:58 AM
1

Who even makes these searches anyways? Also, note how the white one clearly doesn't actually say anything offensive. The last line is something people look up since rabid atheists keep citing it.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 09:56 AM
2

No, no, see. Patriarchy hurts both equally. Thus any hurt for either that exists, we'll only talk about the female half so people get riled up to fight patriarchy. Mo$t 1nd33d.
/r/MensRights22/10/13 09:55 AM
1

This sounds like it's trying to be more lenient than most.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 05:21 AM
81

Any sexist male is a men's rights advocate. Any female who has flaws at all is not a TrueTM feminist.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 02:09 AM
3

B.but the fact that most politicians are male means females get no representation. If females were in charge we'd live in a socialist utopia like they all vote fo... like they would all vote for if they weren't enslaved.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 02:04 AM
5

FUKKIN FAT SHAMER
/r/MensRights15/10/13 05:31 AM
1

Calling them progressive is what they want though. Since as a word they're literally out to get people thinking them = progress.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:55 AM
18

It's really your fault for going to rational wiki in the first place. It's basically conservapedia but for extremist liberal atheists. It's a wiki exclusively designed to give a biased account of things, implying wikipedia is not good enough. What does that tell you?
/r/MensRights14/10/13 02:40 AM
2

Australian Labour party
/r/MensRights14/10/13 02:38 AM
8

Reddit is more full of males. And there is more than one feminism subreddit.
/r/MensRights14/10/13 02:36 AM
1

You do know that how thigns work in the real world is based on scrambling for credibility wherever one can, and not whether one actually has it objectively, right?
/r/MensRights14/10/13 02:34 AM
1

Calling them misandric will not help. You have to take out bigger guns.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 03:23 AM
1

Yeah. I'm honestly not sure how people fail to comprehend that there's a such thing as understanding thigns about people.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 02:35 AM
3

Well, allowing gay people to take back their movement from the iron fist of radical feminists who demand you have one single ideology to be in it would certainly be a good first step. There's little one can indicate is good for an INDIVIDUAL without knowing what said person would want however.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 06:46 AM
2

That's why even despite being very far left economically, I would never call myself a socialist. Despite it having no apparent relevancy to the word in general, it just has a stigma that you can only be one if you have extremist views of that nature. I've begun a quest for alternate terms, but not much has come up.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 05:33 AM
0

Anything that offhandedly uses a neutral word like healthcare, than immediately jumps to abortion is not trying to be very honest.
/r/MensRights09/10/13 02:52 AM
1

The confusing part is that the versions which believe in 20 different genders should by their nature have to admit that female is then the second most privileged one? And so why is the movement for equality called feminism even in that light? Oh, because those things only exist when convenient. They don't apply to the "real world" these people want to interact with apparently.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:58 AM
1

After years of campus discord over abortion, Zionism and white privilege, this new war is taking shape over the claim that men suffer systematic oppression comparable to the social inequalities that gave rise to feminism. Gave rise. Because what happened 100 years ago is directly translatable to what's going on now.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:56 AM
1

Isn't the goal of this supposed to be to prevent people wrongly being declared the parent?
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:44 AM
2

Because they don't actually like multiculturalism. That's more or less an excuse they use to put moral relativism on the table, and criticize dominant cultures. Which they see as white male straight, etc.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:43 AM
2

Well, it's definitely the best option if you're absolutely sure.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:41 AM
1

If you want to know why there are not many females in science, look up postmodernism, poststructuralism, and antipositivism. The three main tools of contemporary feminism. Review whether you think these concepts are pro or anti science.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:34 AM
3

The relationship between the self-described “boss” of the carpenters and those he calls “my workers,” appears to be one of a guild member and apprentices or journeymen. The boss refers to himself as a master craftsman, and says the workers were hired by the royal family to improve the village. Karl Marx described this relationship as one of “oppressor and oppressed,” comparing it to that of “freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, (and) lord and serf.” If I'm to understand this, basically the…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:29 AM
1

That's the problem. They barely care about credit with random people. Only submission.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:27 AM
1

Hell, if anything, if they want to project race on this, people probably lazily associate gorons with black people, and zoras as a wildcard possibly Asians. So if it's against violent desert people, it's presumably more about situation than race.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:27 AM
5

They're not white, males are only born every 100 years or so and then used only for mating. It's literally a feminist fantasy. Feminists don't actually care about racial minorities. That's more or less a trick to get more attention for themselves. Considering that white females with obviously no real dispriveleges are the poster-people of the social justice fight, and they act in ways that despite getting direct attention obviously long term fuck over people's willingness to address the concept,…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:25 AM
2

Also, Ganondorf, the one male one is the bad one, whom the others ultimately reject. If it's racist, then it's sexist in the reverse direction, too.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:23 AM
2

But in ocarina of time, Zelda is also a badass ninja. who clearly had more skill than link. I think the comment was more about the overall zeldas as a whole.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:21 AM
3

Don't forget zelda = triforce of wisdom, link = courage. She's literally supposed to be a smart leader who is in control. He is a kind of bumbling hero who is brave and strong. The only reason that's even seen as sexist in his favor is that he's the one played as. In advance wars, when people play "as" the female commanders sending male-looking fighting troops to their death no one calls that anti-female even though it's fundamentally the same setup.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:19 AM
0

To be fair "how does it help me" is not the reason people are supposed to give to charity. But yeah. Crazy.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:16 AM
1

Better yet, why does anyone? It's because these people are more loud and angry than anyone else, and have cleverly constructed ways to get you to think you're wrong for not complying with them. And can and will try to get you fucked over in said case.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:14 AM
5

The feminist solution: More hookup culture. But somehow pretend alcohol isn't involved. And criticize males involved in hookup culture, while praising females. What could go wrong?
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:10 AM
1

I can't open the link for some reason.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:11 PM
4

While that's true in other cases, there's no actual evidence that they have anything to do with THIS case. So it IS right to question it this time.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:09 PM
3

Apparently the infighting spiraled out of control, and often turned to literal physical fighting.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 03:08 PM
1

Depends how obvious said rape was. In oversexualized frats, the idea of pressured sex, or getting someone drunk to get them to say yes when previously they were saying no are often considered positive. Straight up violent rape obviously wouldn't be most likely though. In criminal cultures / gangs / whatnot rape is probably considered manly though.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 05:44 AM
2

Strictly speaking, it does. Rape of males using alcohol is common, but for people walking on the street the mental possibility of sexual harassment that a female interprets from what could be a lot of males is a bit more severe than the opposite. Due to the average strength difference if nothing else. Doesn't mean they shouldn't add a disclaimer, but... you know.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 05:42 AM
3

Because they can. Most people don't have a strict sense of morals. The first levels of moral development are all around give and take honor systems between an ingroup. So in other words if someone does anything they see themselves as being hurt by they feel immediately like they can use anything at their disposal to right the problem to them. Because they want success, sometimes think they are owed it, and are not going to go down without a fight.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 05:36 AM
5

But that's LITERALLY the basis of the philosophy. The idea that there are no necessarily obvious answers, or if there are they are not important to quantify. It is all about the feelings of the people involved, which they limit to just them using cultural marxist logic.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 05:30 AM
2

"So lemme get this straight. Instead of feminism focusing on getting women to the point where they're on par with men, they need to also get men to the point where they already are? Well, alright then. No problem. Done. " Because society has one dimension.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 05:21 AM
1

It appears to be there for me. Someone added a criticisms section, lol. But I think that needs to be cleaned up a bit, and have citations added.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:05 AM
2

Yes. But in their minds incorrect = what evil white male rulers think, and correct = what white* females know is best. Therefore objectivity = whatever they say, and so all that needs to be created is a principle that makes you know this. *Somehow it has to be white ones, despite the argument being about dis-priveleged groups.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:00 AM
1

I think they vaguely know it's insane, but think that their goals can only be accomplished in this context, and so pushing forward to ensure they don't lose any ground is necessary.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 11:49 PM
1

Feminists keep bringing issues about the third and fourth world, about how women are being treated badly They do? Western feminists barely care about the third world at all, except in ways it occasionally hits home to them, or are cheering on people they see as similar to themself from afar simply because they think it'll evolve into more of them. It's not like they realistically want to focus on these places as a whole.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 11:46 PM
8

That being objective doesn't lead to the ends they want, so they want to redefine objectivity in a way that complies with their principles. That's not even a joke. That's actually what it means.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 10:46 AM
6

Oddly enough, despite the fact that wikipedia is apparently pro feminist enough that the antifeminist page acts like only rampaging sexists are anti-feminist in any capacity, there's apparently STILL hordes of them who think wikipedia is biased against feminism.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 10:45 AM
19

Some random feminist thinks that attempts to be "objective" are made by white men and thus are actually just the subjective whims of white men. And thus thinks that giving dis-privileged people the right to be the new determiners of what is objective, since these people know the dominant outlook AND their own better than the people they think are the current ones who determine the concept, (which is assumed for some reason) would lead to a SUPER form of objectivity, by adding more dimensions to …
/r/MensRights25/09/13 08:32 AM
-3

Realistically though, you shouldn't seduce people while drunk. That doesn't change that the people who go to bars to get drunk and have sex knowing that's what they do can't really deny that it was something they did knowing what they would likely end up doing.
/r/MensRights22/09/13 09:21 AM
15

And it's justified with intersectionality. Even if they have flaws males aren't allowed to point them out since males already have it better. Or something.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 11:59 AM
4

The spark of life is wasted upon this filth. You feel sorry for some guy who caused his own problem? Who says he even deserves to not have the consequences happen to him?
/r/TheRedPill16/09/13 03:00 AM
6

If they could argue logically, they wouldn't need to attempt to shame us into silence. Technically they still would. First thing you learn in speech class is that emotion ALWAYS works better than logic, and anything too complex for people who aren't paying full attention to easily follow they're simply not going to. If logic always won, we'd have discovered the perfect ideology in 100,000 B.C.. But they can't argue logically anyways.
/r/MensRights10/09/13 06:42 AM
1

But the giving tree was about how if you let someone totally abuse you without ever even questioning them or telling them to stop that will somehow end with you being happy since you're helping... even while they continue to hate their life, since no one ever told them that rampant hedonism was incorrect. It is pretty iconic. But I dunno.
/r/MensRights10/09/13 12:25 AM
1

our children will never ever read any Shel Silverstine ...It's really questionable whether they even should be reading any shel silverstein. Lord knows those were not the most kid friendly kids books.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 03:23 PM
3

Dinosaurs were successful for a long time.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 02:34 AM
1

Antipositivism Not EVEN once.
/r/MensRights06/09/13 02:32 AM
1

Not that I don't believe you, but do you have something showing the history of this? I'd like to read about it.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 08:22 PM
5

You're probably only going to get halfassed sympathy here, most likely. I'd go somewhere else if you want some real advice on how to deal with it. It's too late now, but realistically the best thing to do would be not to interact with people before knowing you're on the same page, if you see that it might become a problem in the future.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:49 AM
13

Strictly speaking though, insurance companies don't care about miles driven. If you drive zero miles a month it would make them happiest of all.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:37 AM
-3

Eh? I think plenty of men favor men. But that's not what the poster above you meant. They meant that people all have ingroup biases in GENERAL. It's just that females is oriented more toward sex. Where as males, more likely to be fighting might be race, or other qualities.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:32 AM
6

That is the wrong way to approach this. These people think that even male non-feminist liberals or leftists are part of the oppression. To them conservatives aren't even real. They're a hypothetical force of pure evil. IF you question even liberalism, which they ALREADY think is not good enough, they'll go into full panic mode.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:26 AM
7

On the bright side, at least they usually never stab you to death, since the motion of stabbing reminds them too much of male dominance since swords and spears = penises = male dominance. Their usual attack is to just try to blow out your ears with a supersonic wind attack. But you can retreat before it builds up to high enough levels.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:24 AM
4

Hell, this is the first thing they even tell you in speech class. If it's not true for regular people, why would it be true for people who LITERALLY have an ideology based around distrusting facts, and trusting feelings?
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:23 AM
7

Universally, or to radfems? Modern academic feminism is almost exclusively gender feminism, liberal feminism, or radical feminism. It's basis amounts to females should be able to do whatever they want at all times, and if society doesn't support them it's oppression. (Since they think that this is how males apparently used to or still have it.) Which is essentially a combination of the indulgence of liberalism with the "you need to be supported by the state" of leftism. Both things which are con…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:19 AM
32

first wave feminism The thing that annoys me the most is that these people think that using the same name as people who had legitimate complaints 100 years ago somehow actually makes them fundamentally the same group.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:06 AM
9

Why anyone would even go in thinking that they'd get a good grade in a class designed about complying with an ideology by having a different one is beyond me.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:03 AM
12

Abstractly speaking, it's a pretty good strategy. Except that unlike some other forms of immorally grabbing power, this one makes you live in a constant state of impotent rage since you're surrounded by people who believe your own lies, and think they're on the verge of being put in slave labor camps.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:00 AM
2

For fucks sake, this is not anti-male sexism. This is because literally no one would go if there was not an incentive for females to, and by extension no males.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:18 AM
0

So... there are people insane enough to think faking a miscarriage will make people stay? They do realize that when they fail to produce babby that the person they're tricking will realize there's no incentive for them, right?
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:16 AM
-1

So what? That's more or less true. Spineless guys in fedoras don't go through with rapes as often since they're not aggressive or assertive enough. Testosterone driven guys who get attention, have outrageous egoes, and have dubious intelligence ARE more likely to be rapists. Don't start acting like all people are equal for males just because females do it. Postmodernism is bad enough when THEY do it.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:33 AM
-4

...Why do we keep having India threads. India is a place being female actually comes with real penalties. Unlike the west.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:27 AM
2

M.M.Marx was r.right. I'm n.not being given free shit by these stupid bourgeoisie.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:23 AM
6

They think that as long as the government isn't giving them the remaining 30% of menses incomes that they think they are owed then there's a problem.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:22 AM
10

Also, these people seem to not know for some reason that male and female birth control do the same thing... to the same people. They're literally admitting that they're part of the casual date rape bar scene they hate so much, having sex with people they neither know or can trust, without finding out whether those people even have protection or not.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:19 AM
4

The fact that you don't care doesn't mean no one ever should be allowed to.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 03:01 AM
1

Doonesbury has been extremist leftist shills since time immemorial. Where have you been?
/r/MensRights25/08/13 02:58 AM
2

The correct one would show both hearts by the genitals.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 10:11 AM
1

If only marxist sociology hadn't caught on.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 10:07 AM
4

This is something that people actually want as regards rape. They insist that since people "rarely" get accused of false rape, that people's word when accusing should be taken as fact.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 07:44 PM
15

I said $75,000, not $7500.
/r/TheRedPill16/08/13 01:17 AM
3

What?
/r/TheRedPill15/08/13 10:39 PM
7

Actually, money only brings you more happiness up until $75,000 apparently. After that, the novelties increase exponentially, and your familiarity with them makes them no longer novelties.
/r/TheRedPill15/08/13 10:15 PM
2

B.B.B.but m.my wymynz stydys dygryy.
/r/TheRedPill15/08/13 10:14 PM
3

Nah. Outright dismissal works better.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 07:56 AM
2

I love how through the magic of intersectionality, not only can they fall back on the classical definition, but also they are the core of all human rights issues and thus in charge of them, since (apparently?) sexism is the oldest and most fundamental form of oppression.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 05:56 AM
1

Well obviously. People who are happy ignore negative thigns sine they don't want it to ruin their happiness. People who are depressed focus on them to find some external reason to their depression.* *some generalizations
/r/MensRights11/08/13 01:32 AM
14

Yeah. I hope your optimism doesn't mind being crushed severely.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 01:23 AM
2

...Are they referring to being talented as being physically fit?
/r/MensRights07/08/13 02:52 AM
1

The word facts is in the title. That makes it true forever.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 02:52 AM
1

It does mean that, but the term has many more overarching uses. Ideologically it generally refers to an extreme version of deconstruction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism Kind of like how "surrealism" is an art style, but at the time was also a political movement. Sure, the word is a general thing where as the people being called postmodernists have specific ideologies, but sometimes it is helpful to refer to people by these general characteristics in order to identify which part is b…
/r/MensRights05/08/13 11:06 PM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1pJ8vYxL3Q It's not supposed to, but that doesn't stop people from thinking it should. Not that I like Richard Dawkins, but I can empathize with his frustration of people thinking "muh emotions" should get to be considered an argument that pertains to science. But yes, obviously postmodernists think it applies to science. Ethics and ideology as a whole now has to incorporate psychological factors in order to determine what the actual effects of some things are. W…
/r/MensRights05/08/13 11:39 AM
14

And in theory the universe, except that space travel would probably never exist if postmodernists were actually put in charge of science.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 09:07 PM
1

You can't sue a club for charging what it wants for entry. It's a business that revolves entirely around selling females to males for sex. It can't function without the females. If you don't like it you should stop going. But if you go to this type of place, then ipso facto you approve of their business strategy due to what it provides for you.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:14 PM
3

a business is allowed to sell their product (in this case, females) Fixed that for you.
/r/MensRights02/08/13 01:12 PM
1

That depends WHY their amounts are different. Certainly closer to the second than the first, but not by much.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:25 AM
3

From talking with them, it appears that unlike even regular people who are for abortion, radical feminists don't actually try to defend their position at all. Ideologically they declare that it's something they want, and therefore through a postmodern lens, not complying = siding with white males. (???) Which is something that doing is automatically wrong, until they achieve their idea of equality.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:22 AM
3

That's more or less true, but they will always fall back on "that's what the word means, therefore we absolve ourself from all extremists."
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:17 AM
2

Well, reddit already sways somewhat left. So someone in that setting already deviating to a specific feminist forum is asking for extremism. If you want a good laugh, read the rules section of /r/communism.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:14 AM
1

Postmodernism. Logic and objective reality are too obscure to be trusted to give real value assessments, therefore they should be ignored in favor of identity politics. (Except when agreeing with feminist versions of said politics.)
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:12 AM
1

The trouble is that most people legitimately do not know those are two different things. Radical Feminists especially have an ideology that entirely revolves around thinking they get to decide what is right or not.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:11 AM
3

Step 4: go to r/feminisms Step 5: reply to a topic and present an argument from a standpoint that IS decidedly feminist. Step 6: Get banned, since it's not feminist enough, or they suspect you're male.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:10 AM
2

Basically your total amount of upvotes and downvotes.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:09 AM
2

Because they don't think there SHOULD be discussion of the issues. To them whatever they want is correct.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:08 AM
6

The irony is that having more female siblings also makes males more republican apparently. Don't let radfems hear about that one.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 02:01 AM
2

It's also very low to pretend that real issues in the east are fundamentally the same issues as what privileged white westerners go through because gasp, they're female.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:52 AM
1

protests against prostitution Wait... I can't even keep track of which groups are anti or for prostitution. All over the place there's people saying sex work is "so liberating," and then others against it. Both of which are radical feminist groups, and both of which blames males for the opposite opinion.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:50 AM
2

Well, lets be honest. In a lot of schools, many fraternities do have very rape-like qualities. Sure, it might not be all of them, but that is the stigma, so they do need to ensure they are not perpetuating it.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:45 AM
1

Especially proportional to the "problems" they face.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:37 AM
3

Good for us. More people who aren't straight need to come out and explain that feminists do not speak for them, nor should being female somehow make them qualified to talk about all types of oppression as if they are inherently experts. Because making slightly less than males (usually through your own choice) means you know more than males what it's like to be a poor black male, or something. Maybe if I wore earrings people would suspect how much I like dick more. Nobody believes me otherwise.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:36 AM
1

I find this funny, since that's exactly what happened to me. And before I knew about this, either.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:35 AM
2

I actually agreed with that idea, minus them acting like it should be forced, and also that it should make people agree more with them specifically.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:31 AM
3

You're basing this idea on the idea that most people are sensible enough to know something is ridiculous when they see it. In this case, the only people who will see it are the people who slightly agree already however. (Or of course the people against it.)
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:29 AM
2

I think they're equating this with the fact that uber masculine males are less likely to want that, and so it associates them with being more feminine. So doing that inherently gives them feminine perspective? That, and of course that they just want to do more humiliation play to make them submissive.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:27 AM
3

If you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. Realistically, you shouldn't use the term red pill here though.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:25 AM
1

Which begs the question why the people against it are sitting around whining about it instead of trying to popularize more alternative web sources.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:23 AM
1

That's essentially the sum total of modern Frankfurt influenced Radical feminism. It's apparently "not okay" for a female to go through her life acting normal, getting ahead, and building whatever life she wants for herself unless she has a victim complex while doing it.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:20 AM
0

The pegging thing isn't a bad idea. If not for the fact that they openly phrase it as if it's being forced on them for brainwashing purposes. How people even take Jezebel seriously in this day and age is beyond me, however.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 01:15 AM
3

I also love how she even points out that few of the games are for the most part themselves openly sexist, but that they implicate gender roles that blah blah... ...And then she wears fucking tons of lipstick, and to make it worse, giant hoop earrings. Giant hoop earrings implicitly implicate someone who is not physically active, since those two thigns could not mix. So in the world of who represents the implicit active protagonist, she would not be one. If asked, she would most likely point out …
/r/MensRights26/07/13 10:48 AM
1

Marxist isn't just an insult for anarcho-communists. It covers a wide range of ideological perspective.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 07:35 AM
1

Technically it's aggressor blaming, since anyone who goes to these places indirectly is enjoying the format which happens to include this as part of it. So they are part of the problem.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:46 AM
1

That is literally the reason clubs exist. See how long a single-sex non-gay club stays open. You'd be lucky to have one. One of the most hypocritical aspects of feminism as a whole is their focus on "who is perpetuating rape culture" followed by if one of them wants to go to a business like this then damn well NO ONE better say its dubious in any way to.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 07:30 AM
2

Modern Frankfurt inspired feminism considers itself more or less a zero sum game. As long as they are not yet happy, then they should give up nothing and males should give up plenty. The only things they should give up being of course anything they find distasteful to have in the first place.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:53 AM
5

Or in other words, most people who go to these places implicitly know this transaction is taking place.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 06:49 AM
2

Why do clubs and bars allow this? Because at clubs and bars the females are not the customers; they are the product. So those places don't care how they get there. Only that they do. I do think they were terrible people for doing that, but at a place like that its really to be expected. You don't go to a KKK meeting, and wonder why everyone is racist.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 05:40 AM
2

I love how "upper middle class white female" is an oppressed minority now.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:32 AM
7

...To be fair, you did open with harsh insults. People see that and ignore everything else.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 11:19 AM
2

It means that if only females were allowed to vote on the issue the laws would actually be heavily more restrictive than they are, not the other way around, contrary to what some groups want to tell you.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:50 AM
2

Also, older people tend to be more conservative, (though in younger-older generations this is closer to centrism) so the logic that only females should have a say if you rephrase it in the more sense-making form of "only people who know what it's actually like to be pregnant should have a say" meaning older family age females, the number of supporters would reduce heavily.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:48 AM
1

Yeah. But this is how modern lib-leftist slogans work. They tied it in with modern "feminism" which they more or less hijacked, and all the thigns they want ideologically they associate with all the people they want you to think want them. They rephrase the abortion debate in a way which supersedes the question of the morality of it altogether and turns it into something which ideologically females "should" want as lenient as possible since it gives them more power, which they sorely need to gen…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:45 AM
3

More importantly how does a moral discussion about whether certain thigns are or are not abuses of a privilege implicate that only people with said privilege should be allowed to decide whether it is? That's like saying that only the rich should decide whether their tax rate should be higher than anyone else, or only corporations should decide what environmental standards they have to comply with. It's not exactly the same, but it's the same line of thought, but with anything that admits what is…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:38 AM
3

These people do realize that even ignoring the fact that that's not how moral dilemmas work that being against abortion isn't some weird male attitude? Anti abortion groups are almost exclusively populated by females. A male might say they are or donate money, but actually exclusively working for that specifically of all possible things tends to be done by females, since they feel closer to it. Especially ones who have been pregnant before and feel especially close to it. ...It's like these peop…
/r/MensRights30/06/13 07:33 AM
1

...Why not pretend to make less money while dating.
/r/TheRedPill29/06/13 06:11 AM
2

Okay... but you can't exactly start shooting random people just because.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 11:24 PM
2

It's better in the US. Individual times might have that fly, but its better than the places where you literally know youre getting sued.
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 12:30 AM
2

I'm glad the no true Scotsman fallacy has a tiny note on it that says that feminism does not apply.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 08:59 AM
1

I love how it tallies womens' scores as lower for a test about themself. Because obviously as many people are bigoted against themself as... wat?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 08:56 AM
1

Postmodernism: It's like cancer, except knowledge about it doesn't advance science.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 08:48 AM
0

Microsoft sure was out to look good this time around.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:49 AM
0

I think it was more that far leftism when it had a hard time working in the west through economics converted itself into anti western social structures. And it gained more power the more thigns it could criticize in the west. In the 50s no one was listening, but in the 60s and seventies they had perfected lumping gays, females, minorities, and everyone else into this mass of oppressed to make it look like all of society was in it together against certain people. Straight white males were now at …
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:46 AM
3

Ironically these are the people who are like "you have no right to tell anyone just trying to go out to have fun that self preservation techniques or self control exist." This is in response to pointing out that going to a club* is literally supporting rape culture in the most literal way possible, since clubs literally are there to sell drunk females to males. *That specific type of club obviously.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:38 AM
1

Or you know... she was one of those people so ignorant that she literally thinks of all non white races as interchangeable. Which more or less is the type of person you would expect to make false rape claims in the hope of getting something out of it.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 09:35 AM
9

Also "Equality + a very specific political ideology that they accuse anyone who doesn't comply with of being anti-equality."
/r/MensRights11/06/13 02:09 AM
4

You do know that this is facetious, right? You're making this sub into /r/atheism.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:47 PM
1

I can't really complain though. Up to now, facebook has seemed pretty good with its group deleting patterns. Not perfect, but better than some things might be.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 04:31 AM
6

Or Morgan freeman needs someone to narrate his autobiography.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 03:59 AM
12

They're postmodernists. They literally believe this. Logic can construct arguments that go in certain ways to them, where as emotion being met is how equality is achieved.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 10:56 AM
5

Call yourself egalitarian.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 03:59 PM
0

4x as many downvotes as upvotes.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 03:55 PM
2

People need to stop saying "rape is about power, not sex." It is nothing but a word game designed by postmodernists to not have to accept that sex essentially always is about power. Power takes different forms, but it is always involved.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 11:19 AM
-1

I got up and tried to tell her that I wasn't playing this 'sleeping on the couch in anger' game tonight, and her response was to start swinging on me. What? Not that she's not insane, but right here you did something arrogant that you can imagine a lot of people would probably react harshly to. People feeling like they want some alone time to let anger calm down happens all the time. Telling them they're "not allowed" to do that will make them more angry, not less. Aside from that though... It's…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 11:43 AM
2

Saying that someone's argument as bad does not erase the horde of people who think otherwise. It is best to equip as many people as possible to better express to others why this is.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 11:33 AM
0

Saying 50 just makes it look like you are disagreeing with the valid things that feminist organizations were working on back when there was a huge difference. I would have gone with 20-30, and been lenient with the rest.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 01:55 AM
5

Define "anti-science." No one except odd strains of creationists openly say that science can't tell you things. However most extreme feminist publications and ideals tend to not actually care if their logic disagrees with science though, even if it is pretty blatant. Especially statistics or psychology.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 08:36 PM
5

These people do know that most MEN were not allowed to vote either for most of this time? The problem is they use odd semantics to imply that since most leaders were male that that means that all males implicitly were privileged. Lord, it would be good to be a peasant in 875A.D.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 08:32 PM
0

I love how it is still victim blaming even for someone who is not yet a victim, and an attempt to make them not be one altogether. ...Or blame of any kind. Lord, I loathe postmodernism. These people legitimately believe that their game of words and concepts (and above all, feelings. {but only theirs}) overrides actual objective results which occur in the real world.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 11:26 PM
3

That's not exclusively true. Keep in mind that the majority of rapes are very likely from people who are not crazy psychopaths, but rather regular people who are a bit sex obsessed and so believe in a malleable version of consent. "No, no" is a challenge to them, and "getting someone drunk" is a "good time." The issue is that if they do not see this as rape, saying don't rape won't do very much for them. So their campaign is still ridiculous. Especially since acting like advice for not getting r…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:01 PM
1

Meh. It's not that teaching people how not to be rapists is a bad thing. That's actually a good thing. It's that they think that that exists in a vacuum, is entirely the fault of males, and that females have zero responsibility.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:06 AM
13

Considering that apparently most feminists actively tell people that there's no such thing as "red flags" or "precautions" and that you should just act and whatever happens is out of your control... ...I think they are very literally rape farmers. They actively are sending people out to get raped for... what. So they can give and get sympathy. It's disempowering, pathetic, and insulting to females everywhere.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:02 AM
0

I think it is possible he might have meant in context not overall time periods, but that individual PEOPLE who end up calling it date rape at the time called it exciting, and that the culture has cognitive dissonance over liking things it also disapproves of. But it came off wrong. Not that I have any reason to defend will Ferrel or even care about what he's saying in the first place.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 12:46 AM
1

Makes me think someone should make an account that does all the necessary things to get in just to see what goes on there.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:17 PM
3

Even if it's a joke, it's in incredibly poor taste. People who like that type of joke tend to be the people who have harsh feelings for the people involved in general. And even if it does not go that far, it will certainly be a risk for encouraging dubious attitudes in general.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:17 PM
2

...If no one said that, why is that the majority of the internet?
/r/MensRights21/04/13 04:14 PM
1

Which is honestly just beyond ridiculous by this point. Yes, racial minorities still have it bad and something should be done to improve this. But white females pretending like they are still the privileged class is something racial minorities themselves should find outrageously offensive.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:37 PM
3

To these people this does not count as discrimination. It's literally just trying to get some people ahead.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:36 PM
1

I honestly go to a club where they use those frosted glass chessboards. So that the two sides are just two different shades of white. I don't want to have to consider minorities my opponent. Females and minorities are the ball in the game of patriarchy, not the opposing team.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:29 PM
2

anyone with light skin You mean anyone male with white skin. who does not have any directly viewable indications of complying with her agenda.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:27 PM
1

The irony is that these people believe less than anyone in the equality between races or sexes. Rather than treat everyone like they can have the same degree of intelligence they think redefining "Culturally appropriate" things like "dance" into a form of intelligence is how to declare "equality." Obviously high intelligence is not the only valuable thing in the world. But these modes of action are still outrageously racist and sexist.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:24 PM
2

Are construction workers right? They were saying this thing.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:55 PM
9

thoughts should be closely monitored and watched and controlled, it's the only way to protect freedom thoughts should be closely monitored and watched and controlled, it's the only way to protect freedom should be closely monitored and controlled, protect freedom Controlled Freedom How empowering. Spreading the tale that all females will literally be slaves in any hypothetical world where the government doesn't have it's benevolent arm holding everyone else down.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:53 PM
13

No, no. Something about politicians and STEM majors being male. Because that makes all males privileged in the same way the president being black makes all blacks privileged.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:50 PM
5

Lol. I really hope we move past the "You can't criticize our movement because feminism MEANS equality so you are criticizing EQUALITY" stage of debate sometime soon. I'm not here to discuss semantics. They can call themself a banana for all I care. I'm criticizing the people, not the title.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:48 PM
2

I love people who think privilege is a line from more to less, where one sex automatically as a group has an amount. The most aggressive males who push forward are usually the most privileged, but try being an introverted male versus female. You'll find out pretty quickly that you are not an entity of privilege looking down on the opposite sex.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:41 PM
2

Obviously the only people who need to have self responsibility are the people with the most privilege. Since relative to them everyone else can use the "my bad position made me overreact" excuse.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:37 PM
1

...The issue is not the jokes, but the obvious subtext.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:36 PM
1

You're right to be. I do think that many people here would be just as bad as feminists if they had power. But since they are the group no one listens to, it is helpful to use their things to try to equalize the debate in the public sphere. Obviously the egalitarian movement is the goal however,
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:34 PM
2

Even worse. It's perpetuating the irresponsible attitude that PREVENTATIVES MEASURES DO NOT EXIST.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:32 PM
1

Obviously it is not meant to be 100% serious. But it is perpetuating the "responsible attitudes and self preservation techniques do not exist. Telling rapists (men) not to rape is the only preventative measure" attitudes.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:31 PM
1

This isn't even men these attitudes are harmful to. Convincing females that all self protection measures do not exist is literally sacrificing people who could otherwise be educated to end up raped by people because they don't understand that they have options.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 08:30 PM
4

Photoshop will appear to be insane french that's impossible to use at first. But it's actually pretty simple for most things once you get to know how it works.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 11:29 AM
6

That's terrible. And one of the reasons I stay away from places like that. It's bad enough on the internet, but people who want to start real fights in real life over nothing, sometimes which escalate to physical violence should probably step back and realize that this attitude is not a good thing to have. Even less so when it's over a supposed moral issue. I'd think the most important moral issue is not living in a world where people have to fear not complying with the opinion of whoever has th…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 08:16 PM
-7

Lol.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 07:22 PM
4

Postmodernism happened. Now as long as you have the right qualifications you can create ideological stances based on your feelings mattering more than logic, since feelings are human experience so therefore you are right. And enforce them as if they are now an absolute no one has the right to disagree with.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 10:27 AM
1

I wonder how people think they're going to pull that quick one when they use the word shit in both words.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:18 PM
2

Holy fuck. Being up there must be horrifying. I can't imagine being desensitized enough to just eat on a beam like that.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 10:30 AM
1

Many people who have nothing but casual sex would disagree with you on this point. Also many scientists. The first of those does not matter since someone telling their own story that is not compared with anything is jut based on them. The second is not actually true, for people in the relevant fields. And as for culture, I know definitely how powerful it is. The problem is that you have to work it around what biology makes possible. Not try to hope you can do whatever.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 02:01 AM
3

Why is boiling water capitalized? Would it have been better with just a baseball bat?
/r/MensRights05/04/13 02:09 AM
1

...You do realize that that IS what most people think about you, right? This abstract "sane" person you refer to is a tiny percentage of peopel.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 01:36 AM
1

They hate reddit?
/r/MensRights04/04/13 01:28 AM
1

The effects sex has on people are not just societal. Some of them are biological mechanisms designed to regulate how people interact in groups. They cannot be erased. Certain types of postmodernists want to downplay biology and profess that this is mostly cultural attitudes which controls it. But that is not quite all. Culture isn't magic. It forms around how people are pushed to act.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 09:23 PM
1

but that's what would happen So you're a terrible human being who wants help from other people to continue being terrible. Lord, people like you deserve no sympathy. Apologize to her for being an asshole, and get a better mentality that is not completely selfish. When you're sixty, and not bitter and alone you'll thank me.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 01:47 AM
1

Ageist Teenagers are as responsible as adults. It's bigoted to think otherwise. Children should be able to consent to sex. The unborn should be allowed to own firearms for self defense. People who will exist 500 years in the future should be allowed to retire.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 01:43 AM
1

Yeah. No, not really. It's true that romanticized ideas of it are not ideal for people to have; but thinking it's a thing which any use of has no consequences as long as you decide it doesn't is something only people who don't understand evolutionary psychology or societal theories would say.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 10:01 AM
1

Except for people who end up in a relationship with someone who has a lot more money then them.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 02:28 AM
1

How do feminists who claim to be sex positive think they can create a world where all males are afraid of sex not only with strangers, but even people they're in a relationship with? That wouldn't even be that bad. If not moderated by people still clearly immoral.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:55 AM
2

Also I'm sure if you asked the average male who started work in a factory at age ten seven days a week 12 hours a day whether they wished they could have the female social position instead of staying home a lot probably would have agreed.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:45 AM
1

make the claim that feminism, as an ideology, is inherently misandric. Here's the problem. The etymology of the word implies that their goal is to mostly advance females. Which contextually means at the expense of males. 150 years ago when females were second class citizens the word made sense. Now when they have it almost as good in some ways, and a lot better in others only a deep seated spite or misunderstanding of the issues can really make the word seem to still make sense.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:44 AM
1

Feminists think males have it better and they want to change it. So their only perception of how MRAs must be is that they PRETEND they already have the lack of privilege that they WORRY that they MIGHT have if feminists take charge and are trying to maintain their own privilege by pretending its changing it to keep it the same.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 05:40 AM
2

How this even surprises anyone is beyond me. Only people who don't have to see it think there's a big difference. Abortion providers know very well what they're doing, and a triviality like whether its in or outside does not really matter to them. "For women" is just a way to make them seem like the victims.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 05:15 AM
1

No. If you're implying that I think he does not also have a reasonable knowledge of science, then you're wrong. He is just fine at being a scientist. His books on it are not really superior to anyone else's in the field however. Nor are those alone the basis of his immense current popularity.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 10:00 AM
1

I generally do not save random interviews and quotes to people I do not find appealing, no. I'd be hard pressed to do that for someone I DID find appealing.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:31 AM
1

Um... I was referring more to short term relationships and one night stands. And I was pointing out that it should not be taken advantage of for MORAL reasons. But that it should not be considered rape.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:27 AM
1

...People aren't psychic but they can sense emotions and demeanor. Someone who is resigned and says yes in a way that means they don't really want to but are agreeing anyways is not someone it is good to proceed with. They shouldn't be allowed to consider that rape, but that is another matter altogether.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:25 AM
1

The type of people who say that generally have a very low understanding of science in general. Obviously many people in the psychological field try to use semantics to pull fast ones to come to whatever conclusion they like; but that does not invalidate the ability of people to record certain characteristics in people and associate them with other things they correlate with.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 08:58 AM
1

Well that's what I meant. Obviously if they stay six hours to do a test which should take about one then they're probably slowly trying to text while no one is looking. But I've been in classes before where literally I shit you not out of over twenty people only four had not dropped out by the end. Since the teacher simply did not understand how much time was necessary to do the test. What I mean is that every test should have enough leniency that they're not cutting off slightly slow people who…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 08:55 AM
1

Self identified "Strong Wyyymyyyn" Who go to straight up sex clubs which literally only exist because people want an easier place to get someone to go home with them, but like dancing first... ...and then act like it's not about sex are just beyond me. Grinding up on people while drinking is doing something sensual with lowered inhibitions. Which no matter how much you claim otherwise will result fairly often in horny people. They have harsher standards for males than females at clubs to ensure …
/r/MensRights29/03/13 08:50 AM
2

Feminists actually like "rape culture." They just don't like rape. And they think they can get rid of rape while still keeping the cultures it exists in which they like to frequent.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:48 AM
0

I just don't understand how anyone could consider themself not a terrible human being by pressuring someone into something where they give their entire physical self to you and which can and does come with negative emotions sometimes... ...At a time they are clearly reluctant and will have negative emotions. I'm not exactly perfect, but I tend to make it a "thing" to not use people like they're property and then leave them as a smouldering piece of wreckage; silently shouting for joy to myself t…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:47 AM
2

I don't need to read a whole book that isn't even about it to know what errors come from blind faith or how it can apply to feminism. I'm pretty sure that you mentioning both of those together already gives you all the information everyone who isn't one already knew.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:27 AM
1

That might be one of the stupidest comparisons I've ever seen written down. Yes, for thins which can and do have heavy regret and negative outcomes you should ensure that people are actually okay before going along with it. Not use them against their will if they're too weak willed to disagree with you.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:56 AM
2

there's a small problem with that. People who support him and people who dislike him say that he's saying the same things. So it's not a case of one of them lying, it's a case of different values. But no. I've seen many interviews, and read some of his supposed things. No aspect of him comes off as even remotely reasonable of a person.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:54 AM
-3

Richard Dawkins makes a career on acting like an asshole to impress teenagers and young adults. Nothing to see here.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:31 PM
3

Let's be honest though. Timed tests are kind of bogus.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:29 PM
1

Feminists find it offensive to do studies on non white males, since they don't want the narrative to take into account males they are obviously more privileged then.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:27 PM
1

Pubic hair is one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. And believe me, it's true for males too.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:27 PM
1

...Or who could have predicted that everyone is refusing to believe that it could be true.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:26 PM
1

Which is true. People here denying obvious psychology and biology since they don't like the implications and the fact that it means people can TELL things about them are no better than feminists.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:25 PM
1

The word intelligent is offensive to females who are equal in other ways but don't have intelligence. or something. Libyrated is all that matters.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:23 PM
6

Who said I was in denial?
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:21 PM
3

Males should not in any degree approve of or be allowed to initiate sex. They should however ALWAYS be receptive to advances from females, since otherwise they're sexist for thinking only their own sex drive matters.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:20 PM
1

That one is actually true. The most animalistic low-thinking individuals tend to like very distinct sex characteristics since it makes it easier for them to distinguish the sexes for them on a subconscious level. It's not that liking big boobs makes you sexist; it's that being stupid makes you likely to like big boobs and ALSO be sexist. That doesn't mean you CAN'T like them if you're intelligent or non sexist however. But preferences aren't magic. Certain things do make them tend certain ways.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:19 PM
4

Well, no, because those situations actually exist. What it's ACTUALLY about is feminists wanting to frequent music, club, and bar scenes where those types of situations happen, but refuse to accept that they're supporting something inherently intertwined with what they want to do. So they want to stamp males down so much that they can keep the scene but not have to admit that it's a sex-scene.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:15 PM
10

Science was created by men to dominate nature and women. It needs to be re-envisioned in a fluid state instead of a rigid state. Because something something females who have no knowledge of science would solve an unsolved problem because periods.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:13 PM
1

To be fair not real university degrees in real subjects.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:12 PM
15

It's amusing how people who pretend to be part of the victim class but also for equality have a face like they're devastating opponents.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:11 PM
4

Well to be fair a reluctant yes should not be proceeded on even if it is not rape.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 09:10 PM
3

"Politicians" do not think no one can get pregnant from rape. That was one guy. Who literally everyone else in the world immediately distanced themself from.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:12 AM
1

If it's not even your child, but the court decided you kind of acted like a parent to it you are liable for child support.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:10 AM
2

To be fair the more tv someone watches probably the stupider they are, and so more impulsive and selfish and by extension sexist.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 07:33 AM
6

Slooow down. Saying there is misogyny in video game culture is not "false." There definitely is some. Saying that it is literally irrevocably corrupted by it however is a little far.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 07:57 AM
1

You know, I originally looked at my post, and was wondering why I wrote adequate instead of accurate. And couldn't think of a reason why, but left it anyways.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 07:55 AM
1

for a male power fantasy instead. That's because it's mainly males who play them. However the same qualities apply to both. What is a powerful male for males to imagine is effectively identical to a powerful male females are likely to lust over. This is extra true when in games like final fantasy they also often have some feminine qualities without losing the strength in order to appeal to those types of females. I'm not saying that they're designing these for a female target market. I'm saying …
/r/MensRights19/03/13 07:52 AM
2

Lol. This is harsh but adequate.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 11:08 PM
1

To be fair though male and female sexuality are different enough that there's no real evidence that doing it this way isn't somewhat more appealing to both sides than it at first appears. (even if not fully) The truth is female latent sexuality WANTS males to be in clothes more often as a symbol of power. And it is more subtle and easier to pass off as something different entirely. And females being sexualized have a biological reason they react more negatively about it which when multiplied by …
/r/MensRights17/03/13 11:05 PM
1

People don't dislike fat people solely because of appearance. It shows a certain mentality such that they got themself into the problem in the first place. Not considering it a problem shows another. These are attitudes people find repulsive as well. It's not a good thing, but morbidly obese people who claim society not trying to encourage them to stay the same is 'oppression" are just causing their own problem. Literally, in fact.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 09:23 AM
1

Especially since extra fat in the titty area is less noticeable for them, yet is the main thing males worry about when being fat. It's a far more noticeable place than anywhere else.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 09:22 AM
-2

Apparently only focusing on the negatives is considered fair in feminist circles. They literally think compiling the negatives is all the proof they should need, even when ignoring positives.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 09:15 AM
1

...they'll call sexism on that too. The scarcity of males in that society must be a sex fantasy of males who want them all to themselves.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:56 AM
0

Most of them think by nature of the name of the movement that equality for them = doing things for females.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:53 AM
0

...It's kind of a decent point, but realistically people are not fighting off enemies in dresses. To put one on is to make oneself vulnerable.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:49 AM
1

The video started out not that bad. However... ...Blaming nintendo without mentioning their positives. For two decades (until other M, lol) Samas Aran was the strongest readily identifiable female character pretty much in any fiction. Using the word patriarchy in a serious context. And ignoring entirely the main reason early games all had people kidnap females. In those games there were no text cutscenes. But people still want MOTIVATION. There's only so much you can convey in one five second im…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:44 AM
1

Yeah... this isn't the middle ages anymore. Acting like abortion is a good / desirable thing is only turning centrists away from the liberals they were previously moving closer to. And kind of makes it obvious our concepts of human rights are vastly outdated.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:39 AM
1

I assumed when I read the first line they were using "legitimate rape" to be ironic, but... Note that this is even more balls to the wall insane than the republican who used the comment to imply a distinction between people violently being raped and people who kind of don't want to but go along with it anyways. Not that -I- of all people consider the second of those okay by any means, but... you get the idea.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:32 AM
2

Almost everyone in the world believes a few totally inane things. Anything that contradicts their ideology they would rather believe something stupid than change it.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:02 PM
1

Hmm. I guess it couldn't hurt.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 09:19 PM
1

support of which is gaining ground by the way, not losing That's actually not true. More people identify as against it now than before, but the difference is that said people want there to be exceptions for rape, and THOSE people are growing. As time goes on "no exceptions" or "given out like candy to anyone" are coming to be seen as extreme positions. And no, I understand the feminist movement perfectly. In the last 20-30 years it went from a valid egalitarian movement to a power grab / propaga…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 05:05 PM
1

Extracurricular? Fuck, I don't even know what that means.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 05:00 PM
2

Yeah. Posting things like this essentially seems to imply hurting kids to not have to feel enslaved to females is a good thing. Maybe "make child support more fair."
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:34 AM
7

And also disrespect for females who don't choose to believe they're perpetually a victim. Because "strong" and "empowered" means whining until you get what you want instead of creating it for yourself.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:31 AM
3

The solution is always more feminism. They should have a right to feel EMPOWERED and do what they WANT without CONSEQUENCES HURTING THEM. Males got to do that since forever (probably) so therefore now the state has to fund females to too. Because somehow males still can or something.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:29 AM
2

But judging by their money, I think it's fair to say that multi billionares don't exist in a world where both they have to pay males 100/75 as much as females, but are also trying to get rid of the females. Because they're so sexist they like having less money just on the principle of hiring someone they don't even see that often.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:24 AM
3

Fuck, now I'm annoyed. I'll end school with probably like a 3.0, and being male that's like having no degree at all.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:22 AM
1

especially when huge numbers of us are being laid off, ordered to work fewer hours and having our benefits cut. Do these people even know the economy is a thing? Or do they think that this is all the goal of sexist males trying to get them to be forced to be housewives.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 10:20 AM
1

Abortion isn't a sex issue, it's a "you don't mind violating human rights, but don't want to have to defend yourself with real logic" issue. The fact that you're too insecure to admit what it really is about has nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with the fact that you don't mind being wrong as long as you get what you want. Fortunately more people are slowly being educated and realize abortion shouldn't be allowed. Too bad it's at so slow a rate it'll be a few decades before it matter…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:14 PM
-3

Not that I'm a rabid feminist, but I do think that I would be offended if as a female a guy insisted to pay for everything or most things long term. I would highly suspect that they were not sharp enough to realize that that is a trivial gender role position that no longer makes sense in the modern world. If they thought they had to to appease ME, if they were embarrassed about not complying at first, I wouldn't mind. But I'd lay out why I don't want that.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:19 PM
0

Demeaning insults about how her pathetic whimpering is ruining reality for females everywhere by making them seen as pathetic and unable to accept reality.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:13 PM
4

and won’t have to iron his own shirts. Do these people realize they're describing people who are sixty years old, and a culture which has nothing to do with the people who are growing up or even already fairly old now?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:03 PM
-7

To be honest, you're really a terrible person for trying to push someone into an abortion. You should have just chosen to date better people who would not have tried that instead. And yes, she probably is going to be fucked up mentally. But realistically you telling her you wouldn't help out even if she had it made it obvious from the beginning that you were only in it for yourself, and don't care who gets hurt in the process.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 05:01 PM
1

I would have used a marker instead of a pen.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:56 AM
2

This is why not to be on "sides" which are brand name in politics.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:54 AM
1

Record her saying it, and turn the recording over to a lawyer and the police.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:50 AM
1

If you knew your sister was lying, why didn't you come in to stop it? Unless I read that wrong.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:47 AM
1

This isn't about judging the person, it's about pointing out that if you act in a negative way it hurts your case.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:38 AM
1

If you're lucky, that is.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:29 AM
0

Not that this is a good topic for this thread, but I'm pretty sure a lot of people desperate for money WOULD let it slide if that option gave them substantial money and the other did not.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:25 AM
1

I wonder if she could try to spin that as settling outside of court, lol.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:24 AM
1

Especially since if she goes she will not mention the extortion scheme, but if he goes first he can.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:23 AM
0

Even extremists wouldn't condone it directly. Creating a system where individuals feel the right to take advantage, and others crowd around on their side without evidence is the same thing, however. You could say "I know some white supremacist national socialists who aren't behind things like this, have reasonable arguments, and are all around nice guys" but it doesn't change that the overarching goals are in this general direction. The only type of feminist who is not indirectly part o this is …
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:19 AM
1

Make sure you know the names of everyone who attacked you, and bring up in court that she approved of and was behind this. It will damage her reputation too.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:02 AM
1

You're supposed to respond to that one with "man being heavily taunted at work versus woman being lightly teased at work."
/r/MensRights10/03/13 08:32 AM
1

Nah.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:16 PM
2

Reminds me of the tax code that says you have to list income obtained from thieving goods from people.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 03:02 PM
2

Considering that the bbc exists in a place where you literally go to prison for saying something non-politically-correct in public, it's not surprising that they'd run something like this.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 12:52 AM
1

Except those really shitty ones where all the guns are broken, and they never repair them.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:27 PM
3

Actually caring about children like they're people went out of style when "It's muh relationship. No un has th right 2 judge me" came in.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:25 PM
1

Wait... isn't it redundant to say wearing a mask is illegal when doing something unlawful?
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:21 PM
4

More people need to be taught that radical extreme attitudes only end up making your position unsustainable, even if it popularizes it for awhile.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:18 PM
2

It depends. If the postmodernism hit them full force they probably have no cognitive dissonance saying one group is much better than another and so needs higher standards, but also that each complying with the mid range of the set standards is "equal."
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:17 PM
7

That's one of the best summaries on feminist attitudes of "equality" I've ever seen. As someone who tries to be as stoic as possible, and no doubt would hope to be the same if female, I find it offensive that their standard for females more or less acts like they're pathetic, but this has to be covered up / assumed to be correct for them "just because that's their biology," but somehow not for males. If I was one, I would consider it an outrageous insult.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:16 PM
5

Why would that surprise anyone? They mean something very specific when they say they want to get rid of gender roles, and it absolutely involves males continuing to fulfill the harder obligations.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:12 PM
4

The irony is that this reveals more about their own attitudes than they really want you to know.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:09 PM
4

I'd say that for people serious about getting a good partner more resourced being available to them is a good thing, but this si clearly self-report and going to be heavily biased.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:08 PM
3

They actually admitted that? That's surprising.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:06 PM
14

Did anyone try to explain that even if society is sexist in favor of males, that that and patriarchy are two wildly different things? Patriarchy is a specific familial structure based governing system. And it really does not exist except in some very specific towns in the south.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 08:31 AM
1

Silent hill two has a male looking monster rape a neutral-meybe-femaleish looking monster. Of course, it was meant to be horrifying AND represent someone's sexuality leading them to murder, so... it was hardly downplayed.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:29 AM
2

Furthermore, try having unpopular opinions. You're going to feel more "unsafe" voicing those than you ever will being female and saying things everyone's used to.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:23 AM
1

Or in shortened version, modern female groups often while PRETENDING to be nonchalant want people to go and identify specifically as female in a place where people who are male don't have to specifically identify. Meaning that they're setting themself apart specifically, rather than trying to just be one of the group. But get confused how it turns into sexism.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:22 AM
1

Females do realize that the "rape culture" in games is omega males expressing their frustration at not getting females, right? These aren't the same people who actually go out and push people into sex.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:18 AM
0

Muh definitions about what feminism meaneded 120 years ago. Muh ignoring that the etymology took into account that subjective situation, and as such means different things as time changes. I love people.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:04 AM
-2

most feminists are rational intelligent human beings who understand there are issues men have to face as well. The second part of that is true. Not the first, however. No big unexclusive group EVER is composed of mostly rational intelligent people, much less that one.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:02 AM
49

Strictly speaking, this is all speech classes. It's well known that making people emotionally want to submit does far more than trying to present logic which is most likely above most people's heads. The unfortunate truth is that biology just equipped people to respond to their immediate needs, and second their own long term needs, more than long term benefits for everyone.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:56 AM
0

Because obviously pointing out that some people are these things means you personally are only telling what would stop you. ...wait... thinking people can only understand their own perspective. I think I just cracked the feminist code.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:59 AM
1

It's not for purposes of expressing that the absolute is an extreme idea, but rather pointing out that this is some of the drive for people to go. Ignoring something until it becomes SO obvious there's no longer any doubt is something only the politically correct do.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:56 PM
1

By equivalent I don't mean the same, but rather equivalent proof that being one sex does not give you automatically less shame in that area. Especially since virgin shaming for males applies not only to virgins but often to anyone not CURRENTLY getting enough attention either.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:54 PM
1

I love how when talking about slut shaming in females, no one ever brings up virgin shaming in males. Which you don't need a map to know is a valid equivalent which is VASTLY widespread EVEN if there was no slut shaming in males. Which coincidentally there is. Done by feminists.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 01:15 PM
1

Lol.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:50 PM
1

That's not the only one. Poland too. And other places have varying degrees.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:43 PM
-6

Don't insult tvtropes by comparing it with inane feminazi babble.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:35 PM
6

It's not really being ripped off for other people to choose to give you more than you ask for. Just a bonus for doing it. The people continuing to donate knew what they were doing.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:34 PM
13

Lol. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. It's dismaying having no major public figures who represent you, and kind of having to vaguely cite composites of them, while dismissing other parts of them at the same time. Lord. I don't fucking get people who think crime can be reduced to zero. Is this what they're implying? Or that there's a certain level that once it gets below you no longer need to care, and having the right to defend yourself is no longer necessary.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:32 PM
1

I wonder how much psychology or biology if any they're actually expected to take for this.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:11 PM
2

When people who are "gender studies" experts who have otherwise no psychological or scientific knowledge make these claims it makes me want to get a degree in theology and declare to them that the true issue is them not being a southern baptist, and my degree in exactly that makes me right.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:09 PM
2

The other important thing to gather out of all this is how easy it is for people to never question what they think they know.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:07 PM
2

Well, I think it bears a little bit of sexist connotations. Not enough to get up in arms over, though.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:57 AM
2

...Or any criticism of females at all that does not even include an insult.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:51 AM
-2

Strangely enough, I always assumed asshole was a male-only insult, or at least more oriented for being addressed to one. It seems to bear certain connotations which make it seem like that's how it would be used.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:50 AM
6

I honestly have no clue how people try to pass him off as a modern philosopher. He more or less seemed like an asshole who like everyone accidentally said some correct things from time to time.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:49 AM
3

Lol. I used that exact quote in like three different responses I made in this thread before seeing yours.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:40 AM
2

I love how everyone is ignoring that it's for the sake of the male people going to these places that this is done, not to be anti-male. The males are the customers. The females are the products being sold. Slight exaggeration. But you get the idea.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:39 AM
1

I'm pretty sure if you plan on boycotting music artists, there's probably more relevant things to do it for than this.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:36 AM
3

probably a huge portion of the type of people who go to this type of place? That's true for concerts even. Raves and clubs even mroeso. Some people are exclusively using those places to try to get people.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:35 AM
1

Places like that exist to appeal to people's sexuality. They would go out of business if they did not do whatever they can to get more females to come. There's an interesting saying about how if you are not being charged for it, you are not the customer, you are the thing being sold. It has a similar basis here. Females, while being the customer are ALSO what is being sold to the males they are trying to attract. And if there is not enough, less males will come. If you don't like it, then try to…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:33 AM
0

People who think they're getting a deal are more likely to come. This makes slightly more females and slightly less males come, thus making a better balance presumably.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:27 AM
-3

Not necessarily. People may be much more likely to go if they think they're getting a "deal." Discouraging males and encouraging females by this is the goal then rather than the actual price difference.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:24 AM
0

Belittle their stupidity for thinking the trouble females go through even remotely approaches that of ethnic minorities. Say it's insulting that they use references to ways things no longer are to try to pretend they have it as bad as you.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 09:33 PM
1

You just blew my mind. Literally.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 11:17 PM
1

Point out to them that you're making it just fine in life and they shouldn't project failures which are probably their own or at best they are too incompetent to deviate from the oppressors of onto you. Also, repeatedly emphasize objectivity. Point out the emotional, illogical and childish nature of selfishly only caring about people who resemble you in some way as if that makes them more worthy of help than anyone else. Equate it with nationalism. Dismiss them outright.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 03:32 AM
1

Implying anal sex is crappy. Why sell yourself short.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 02:38 AM
3

Trust me, I know very well that people can and should be more responsible and coherent than they often are. I'm simply pointing out something that could occur.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 06:01 AM
60

You forget the original first one. If willfully she stops taking birth control before even pregnant and has sex with someone who does not know she did she can trap someone into being a parent, and he is forced to pay.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 05:42 PM
1

Those are both true. It's powerful usually males (or even females) using other females as a bargaining chip almost as if they are not the primary people to be treated like actual equals. But I think that it's also important to realize that people taking frustration out is something that happens in more ways than just physical violence. The stigma of hitting females applies, but rage-filled people are still trying to direct it at them. Of course females doing it to males is true too. But again ne…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 03:36 PM
1

And if two are then it's both. People can do all those things without being physically violent you know. The first thing you learn from psychology is that the emotions are still obviously there even when you cannot see them.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 03:32 PM
3

Too many men across the world see too many women as repositories of their rage, frustration, narcissism or simply their will to enact violence. This line is actually true. That's not a specifically sex-based issue, but rather an entitlement and emotionally acting issue that plagues both sexes fairly equally. (But in different ways.)
/r/MensRights22/02/13 08:07 PM
15

men have always been told to not be emotional or act on emotion That's not true at all. Sadness maybe, but men are told to act on anger or desire instead. Which is even more ridiculous. A world where people ACTUALLY did not act on emotion would be preferable.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 03:53 AM
1

And yet feminists hate their closest ally apparently.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 01:09 PM
-1

People still watch jeopardy? Are you forty years old and divorced?
/r/MensRights19/02/13 11:24 AM
2

Most modern traditionalists I've seen are effectively matriarchical, simply because the values they see as traditional are more feminine than masculine, so it is given more to females to pass them on. Doesn't stop ""feminists"" from despising them and telling them they want to erase the right of females to vote, however.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 05:17 PM
0

If you make over six figures what are you worried about? The truth of the matter is that despite her stupidity you have a kid now. Fight for custody once you can. Or use her trick in court to get a reduced payment level. Or just deal with it. Really, you should have thought this out before having sex with someone who would do that.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 11:14 PM
3

Kids come first. Yeah. Because the average feminist is really concerned for children.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 11:09 PM
6

Feminists declare anyone against them as sexist. They see MRM as not only against them, but going the extra mile. To them that makes them the equivalent of PUAs who they see as seeing females as cattle.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 10:52 PM
11

And even if they were traditional at some point, they're definitely not the traditionalist values most people are talking about when they reference traditionalist values.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 10:42 PM
17

I love how these people consider alpha male PUAs who hate kids the same group as traditionalists who like big families.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 10:40 PM
1

But just because the exact wording did not exist before then did not mean the concept did not.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 12:41 PM
7

70 is incorrect. They are likely to be CLEANED more perhaps, but from what I hear from janitors, most bathrooms for females are way more nasty. Psychologically, I believe it's because they are more likely to make a mess when trying to not get themselves dirty, and if one is made more likely to not clean it themselves. Of course, I've never been in one so I do not know.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 12:32 PM
2

Saying it's false in politics effectively ends your career.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 03:06 AM
1

Not always. A lot of the drink buyers are the people who actually get the sex they want. Many of the rest are people who are close, but are not quite there. Some are creepy perverts who WISH they could be friendzoned.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 02:20 AM
2

Eh... I'd give them the benefit of the doubt back then. Late 60s and on is when it most obviously began to cross the line of even vague justifiability.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 01:14 AM
2

...Because deep down they think females are inferior to males, and the equality they seek has nothing to do with equal qualities, but rather giving who they see as inferiors more to achieve "equal" results. If you can sum it up that easily and quickly it is helpful for a lot of confused people who are on the edge.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 07:22 AM
4

...But that's true. They SHOULD watch out for that.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 07:18 AM
2

The problem is that their actions belie their motives. They don't care about people being pushy, having an agenda, being dogmatic, or even having an unfair amount of political power. They just care if an ideology they do not LIKE does those things. And it is easier to address "it's religious and therefore they're wrong which somehow makes us right." than breaking down individual parts. Since that would mean that they'd have to defend their own side as well, rather than acting like it is the auto…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 09:55 AM
2

I hate to break it to you, but most modern ""atheist"" pseudoreligious groups are just feminism and cultural marxism in disguise. The fact that they claim to be anti-religion but act like a religion should have made this obvious to you before now.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 09:10 AM
4

You made a mistake. Several in fact. First, acting violent by throwing a glass proved to her that she's right in her mind. And that's something that can never be undone. Second, the moment she made those threats you should have called the police yourself to explain what happened, and then your child himself would have made it obvious to them by pointing out his version of the story that it is not you causing the problems. If it was just your word against hers that's one thing, but this is someth…
/r/MensRights09/02/13 08:38 AM
2

...And why children are growing up rebellious. It sounds like she's effectively admitting she just wants to sleep around, but somehow blaming this on her husband's sex drive, and saying she should have been doing it for him. Or something.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 02:33 AM
0

Muh semantics. Muh dick.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 12:51 AM
1

You're both wrong.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 02:22 AM
2

Except for the postmodern ridiculousness where it is assumed there's no such thing as right or wrong answers, all that matters is people's feelings which are all equal.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:50 AM
1

It started good, but began to spiral out of control as it went on. It's acting like you have to irrevocably assume she knows what she's doing. I know postmodernists don't think logic exists, but it's not all or nothing on accepting someone's point of view. There's such a thing as critical evaluation, and coming to the maximally best conclusion. 19 acts like there is no equivalent for males. 20 is... what, you can't criticize females at all? and #12 is just stupid. Like I'm going to pretend someo…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:48 AM
18

Um... so did she say the pamphlet was wrong? Because a lot of feminists WILL agree that males get shafted sometimes. Some degree of sanity is necessary to convince anyone.They usually blame this on sexism against females, though.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:40 AM
0

1: They effectively think females are fragile and can only exist in a world where all males are emasculated to the point that females have it better than them. 2: They're indirectly social darwinists. They want a lifestyle that they know the average female cannot keep up with, but blame men for the inadequacies and take no responsibility for themself. (most of them cannot keep up with it either) 3: They think any female who disagrees with them is brainwashed, but all males do so out of hate. In …
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:35 AM
2

Who the fuck has web filters that block anything but viruses, virus threats, and popups anyways?
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:31 AM
2

RationalWiki has been cancer for a long time. What did you expect?
/r/MensRights06/02/13 01:29 AM
-1

That comes off more to be as "rich company beats the shit out of man via robot." Which is even worse.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:01 AM
3

Did you tell HER all this? And get anyone to corroborate your story?
/r/MensRights04/02/13 11:52 PM
1

there is no logic to reason with them. There is no hope in that circumstance. As depressing as it is, that doesn't immediately follow. You can't necessarily reason with them using logic, but you can try using "emotion." Things which they emotionally respond to.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 08:10 PM
0

...Okay. A system of discrimination participated in by all of society is different from humoring a forty year old divorced bitch one time because she probably realized for the fifth time that the drunk loser she found last week in a bar is not irrevocably dedicated to her now. I know that the IDEAS behind what she's doing are inherent, but it's not like this specific action is something that happens often enough that college kids are going to really care enough to whine. The females were probabl…
/r/MensRights02/02/13 08:08 PM
-1

As much as it's not okay, who is going to make a fuss over a bus seat?
/r/MensRights01/02/13 11:56 PM
1

Implying their arguments are even based enough on logic that contradictions mean anything to them.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 11:36 PM
9

"Self made man." A book about a woman who dressed as a man for a year and a half in order to find out the actual differences. She essentially comes out saying it's ridiculous to think that males are far more privileged, since for some positives you also get many negatives. But males are expected to just "man up" about the negatives, where as society still falls for white knight syndrome of taking females problems far more seriously. Which is why those are the only ones allowed to be spoken of no…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 10:15 PM
2

That's what your link brought me to.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 01:09 AM
1

Is this what you meant to link to? ÿØÿà�JFIF�>>>�H�H��ÿÛ�C�  Z!Z"$"$ÿÛ�C>ÿÂ���>"�)>>ÿÄ���>>>>�����������>)ÿÄ�Z>�)>>������������>)ÿÚ� >�)��>ñ����� #4ô3ôⶭÇu‘ ¢º)“[qŽœHµ¨KiÃr,®¥ÈPWIcÖˆBº5!ãP>�>@²°Ë[£dl5U¡ cÙt£<sup>Â@0µ�W0�>�>>Q>ÃTÐ�ED>ÃT>@@1HÄ���������������</sup>��@%’ €ÍµÍ��������������%ŠPÓÔËÔ =<ÝI-Î붭TÔ³¡\Ægw“ áà겇açQ χB ¶¦’$.…
/r/MensRights30/01/13 12:41 AM
0

The fact that still "hooking up" by age thirty is something which is indicative that your life is probably not going to have any kind of fulfilling stability, mostly.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 03:03 AM
16

Are you being rhetorical, or do you actually want a real answer to that?
/r/MensRights28/01/13 11:35 PM
14

What her relationship with her father was.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 11:34 PM
2

IS HE REALLY GOING TO CHANGE THIS TIME? Here's How You'll Know... Anyone who needs a checklist for that should not be the ones doing the checking.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 11:32 PM
2

To be fair, she didn't ask for that amount of money. White knights just gave it to her. Doesn't stop her from being a bitch, though.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 08:15 PM
1

Nuts punches are a common "casual brawl" thing. Not that that makes them acceptable, but something clearly resulting in a hospital visit is a step up from it, and shifts the responsibility of the occurrence slightly.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 11:00 PM
1

Well, you did escalate the situation. So unfortunately, you will probably have to pay. Learn to control your emotions better. And to only associate with other people who also do.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 10:46 PM
1

She's late on her period within a week of having sex? That seems unlikely. Most importantly, calm down. Life goes on. She's probably not pregnant. And a state of worrying causes more harm than harm itself.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 10:42 PM
2

now that the career woman genie is out of the bottle, we should not let it go back in. That's kind of a good point. What feminists used to say was oppression is now a benefit for them. They realize that, faced with the pressure of a high quality career, they will always have the choice to drop all the pressure and become a housewife as a backup plan.It might be strenuous, but there is less pressure. Many obviously would not want to, but the option is there, where as for males it is rarely so. An…
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:34 PM
1

You have to keep in mind that maybe she believes, or maybe some type of event really did happen that because of trauma she's remembering wrong, and in order to get mental closure things that she has to be as ruthless as possible in persecuting whoever she thinks was behind it. If necessary you can go with the "you weren't involved, but do not necessarily doubt that some version of the event may have occurred" route. Anyways, if you rally together anyone who is willing to testify that your drugs …
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:23 PM
1

Well, they kind of have a point. If the recipient chooses to live poorly, and the child suffers by extension they're really purposely indirectly causing a problem for them by not giving them the best abilities to get ahead as they can. Obviously they should not try to steal more than is necessary, or fair, however.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 05:07 PM
2

Would it make it really high? I know you wouldn't ask unless it was really high or really low.
/r/MensRights27/01/13 09:04 AM
3

https://www.google.com/search?q=list+of+female+serial+killers&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a This shows a few, at least.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:51 PM
9

The best part would be their tears of impotent rage as they struggle to explain to you how you killing THEM is still wrong in some intangible way even though right and wrong do not exist.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 05:22 AM
14

Me: I believe in treating all races the same. Feminist: Why do you hate white nationalists so much? The word MEANS equality between races. It doesn't matter if the etymology of it is making additional implications which suspiciously happen to attract extremists of only one race which happens to be the one the name has included in it, because the name implies it is actually for that race, not equality. In an alternate world.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:50 AM
8

I love how they don't even know what the terms mean. They seem to think that patriarchy is the same thing as males having power in general. Even if their twisted minds think males are irrevocably in charge now, the hierarchical patriarchy based on family structure is long since gone. No one submits to family authority more than one level up, and even then usually only when living in their house. No one actually sits around letting old men dominate their life through the family, in the form of a …
/r/MensRights26/01/13 04:48 AM
1

political hostility toward women I love how people obviously concerned with protecting children are reduced to "they are only in it for the women hate." You can say they're wrong, but don't pretend their motives are totally different than they are.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 10:33 PM
1

There's a balance between totally secluded and where other people clearly are listening. When other people are in eyesight but not earsight, or are implied to be close without actually being visible it is a fair balance.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:31 PM
1

They think a divide is good. Divide groups. Belittle "incorrect" group until it submits. It rejoins at the mercy of other. It moves to a new stage where it doesn't even understand existence outside of the new schema. ????. profit.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:29 PM
1

...Also, this is not directly correlated to wealth, since some are to greater degrees even with larger wealth. Not that I'm defending racism. I'm just saying that if we did to race what they're trying to do by sex but only with males as victim) the exact same people doing it would be up in arms.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 07:01 PM
3

The problem is that they're still defining feminist as egalitarian, and as such they can deny responsibility for anyone who is thus noted as extreme. Even if that is most people who use the term. Which is why I think mens' rights should change it's name to something with the actual word egalitarian in it. So one up them.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 06:46 PM
6

Well, I'm going to be honest. It's not something to whine about, but asking someone out in a secluded area which they feel is less of a place they can escape from is not exactly good form. Compare it to guys who look possibly dangerous trying to ask for change on secluded parts of the street. If it's secluded enough, it might set off warning alarms in your mind. They should do it in a place which is more in the open.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 12:39 AM
1

Wait, you didn't notice that until you started looking deliberately?
/r/MensRights24/01/13 02:40 AM
1

Yes there is. There's just not one you can expect to work in all circumstances. Not everyone loves logic, after all.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:36 PM
3

Oh. ...Wow. I wondered why there was so many posts. I didn't even look at the subscribers list.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:34 PM
1

Subservient to their husband and their husband's household (in-laws, cousins, etc) One who has been conditioned to act a certain way (soft spoken, shy, etc) Knowing their place among the hierarchy in the marriage and the husband’s family. In the marriage, the wife and daughter(s) are at the lowest, and the son(s) just right below the husband. Once the husband dies, the eldest son will become the head of the family, making familial decisions. Understanding that the husband, or head of the househo…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:33 PM
5

I do think this movement certainly does have it's own flaws too, but overall I think it's for the best to at least work for for it rather than feminism. The main thing here and which feminists will never understand is that when they refer to the privilege of straight white males... they're not talking about all of them. They're talking about the tiny handful of alpha males who get ahead in life. The groups of fat white males, nerdy losers, introverts, etc... they barely even perceive those peopl…
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:12 PM
0

The mentality of today's women is: they need to grow emotionally before they commit, i.e, they want to fuck 500 guys during their twenties and only when they are in their thirties they want to find a sucker to settle down with. How is that not how today's guys are too? The problem is that that's how a good portion of EVERYONE is. Some deny it, but it's how most act more or less. And they don't realize (because political correctness tells them it's offensive to) that that's hard to turn off on a …
/r/TheRedPill22/01/13 08:47 PM
3

I think weeding them out of the trash who get openly branded as extremists, and creating a real communitarian egalitarian yet freedom-respecting movement would be best. But who knows when or how that will go.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 06:39 AM
1

Lel. That reddit is hilarious as fuck.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 06:21 AM
-3

If you're asking about modern ones, the problem here is you using the word "actually." It's not like it's a surprise, it's something the entire civilized world has been pointing out to them. They may equate the people who shame their attitudes WITH the rapists, but believe me: the biggest ones are totally okay with attitudes which make it easier for them. Those are if anything a minority who is on the edge.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 06:12 AM
3

It comes in part from postmodernism. Some people think that reducing everything to personal values means logic literally not longer has to apply. If they act out more it means their emotional state proves them right, by virtue of their state causing them to even have it. Few people actively admit to this logic. But it is rooted deep in the subconscious of many strains of postmodernism. Which is ironic, since it's not modern at all. It's going back through time to humans' animal past, and barbari…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 06:07 AM
2

The issue is not necessarily the cost but rather that many people are so irresponsible, unintelligent, and lazy that the concept of spending a tiny amount to them makes gambling with none at all seem reasonable, and to hope for the best. Not only that, but to some teenagers tiny amounts of money are still a lot to them, and they are irresponsible enough that they will use them anyways. The people who need this the most are young or poor, and both will use excuses on themself.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 04:49 PM
-1

Did I imply that you implied that? I was just saying what I was thinking.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 04:47 PM
3

Point out to them that near all anti lgbt violence and attitudes (in the west) are directed at males, so you find their dismissal of violence against males in general to be considered relevant akin to being more or less accepting of anti-gay attitudes as a whole simply because it's not convenient to actually address the reality of them. End by calling them narrow minded bigots who have no clue how the world actually works because they're most likely privileged middle class white people who are s…
/r/MensRights21/01/13 10:05 AM
-3

They want everything a certain way, and literally know that their overall feminist position is more emotionally based than logical. This is something that arguing against is difficult / time consuming / and makes them honestly look like bigger aggressors than victims, and so having "feminism" as a good wildcard to pull makes them look like victims again, and so implies people should feel sorry for them / any disagreement makes someone choosing to willfully oppress them. My mind was honestly blow…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 05:18 PM
-1

Also, they ignore that pro life groups are essentially usually vast majority female, since it's really more of a position females would get dedicated to then males. They literally declare that these females are all "honorary men" because "only males would have that position." Ignoring altogether that that's the opposite of how it actually works.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 05:14 PM
12

Or we can just fund free birth control / condoms / vasectomies /finish and produce male birth control too / etc/ for anyone who wants them, widespread, and readily available. The amount of money this would save from not having to pay into welfare makes it essentially free to do so as well. Then anyone who is not using at least two types is choosing to take on themself the responsibility of deciding that the risk was okay to them.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 05:10 PM
-4

Even more cynical is not even being okay with considering it a necessary evil, but literally being so dedicated to it that you no longer even make arguments as to why, but declare that even the idea of inhibitions against doing so need to be eradicated forever. And act like this is so self apparent that it does not need to be explained.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 05:07 PM
1

And that's only if you define anti as literally almost impossible to obtain, or totally impossible. If you define it as "there should be more restrictions and inhibitions than there are currently" the number goes up to at least 3/4, with some estimates being 4/5.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 05:01 PM
0

That's why people are pro life. They're defining the bodily autonomy which they say has bigger ramifications over the one which has lesser ramifications. Arguments against it do not really make sense from that angle.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:54 PM
2

But the answer to whether they should would be no to someone who doesn't think there should be one. If they're trying to get to there, going the opposite direction is not better just since it's equal.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:44 PM
1

Where? Here? Or some other reddit?
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:42 PM
1

...I think one of the real issues here is the clear breaking down of anyone being able to trust partners to actually have a connection with them. I can't imagine marrying someone I had bad enough communication with such that that was even a likely possibility. If he was demanding tests back then, then clearly they've had a terrible connection since time immemorial, but did nothing about it.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:40 PM
2

Well, not all of them have necessarily had something equivalent happen to them. I can tell you that being mugged and threatened with death if I didn't comply certainly didn't do wonders for how I saw black people for awhile, and I had a similar response back then. Of course, my laziness eventually took over again. I don't think it's necessarily one, or even a small handful of individual things. It's not necessarily what happens to someone which makes them lash out. It's that followed by there be…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:13 PM
1

Point out that the logic "can effect in the future" doesn't give someone rights to act like they're already knowledgeable enough on something to have an opinion. So the only real way to phrase her argument would be "females who have already been pregnant." Since that is essentially cutting out most of the young population, you're reducing it to essentially slightly older females. Which if they're trying to use arbitrary logic to result at a pro-choice conclusion, they'd be citing the group which…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 03:37 PM
5

The google search was someone making a mistake. However, tons of content of actual people in real time doing sexist things against men is important, since it lets people who don't understand that there is such a thing realize that if they come here they will constant get new reminders that it happens all the time. Things like abstract arguments are meaningless against people who have an emotional block against the ideas, and if you make them will demand the evidence. If the evidence is already h…
/r/MensRights20/01/13 03:27 PM
1

To be fair, I generally do try not to walk past people in creepy ways when we're walking alone, if possible. Being 6'3" and already knowing what getting mugged is like, I figure that it's common decency to not appear as a possible attacker to anyone you cross in any even remotely secluded area. Which is essentially anyone smaller than you.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 03:23 PM
5

The guy does sound kind of like an incompetent prick. The problem is that feminist shills think that when they are that it's "different."
/r/TheRedPill20/01/13 04:25 AM
1

I love how gays are 1% of the population, but it's more pressing to stop what must be an epidemic of rape of a guy to another guy than it is to stop any rape of any kind being done by females, which clearly doesn't happen.
/r/MensRights20/01/13 04:04 AM
2

Yeah... I was confused when modern liberals act like all conservatives are sexist against females, and was like... wut? Where I'm from conservatism is essentially a matriarchy now.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:19 PM
1

Explain that the etymology of the word implies that there is a vast distinction between males and females, since having "feminine" right in it implies specifically only catering to those needs by a large degree. And that though that was a valid way to do thgins back when the distinction was large, privileged middle class white people are inane in thinking that the high social structures make them a victim in any real sense of the word. Follow, with huge lists of why they are privileged in ways m…
/r/MensRights17/01/13 01:05 PM
2

Also, apparently some feminists are anti male birth control pill secretly, because they want to have all the power in that regard. To be fair this came form a documentary in a poorer country though. You can HOPE it's not also true here.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 12:59 PM
1

Guns don't kill people -- vaginas do? I love when people totally miss the point.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:55 AM
1

Well, to be fair... I think mens' rights group attract sexist men the same way feminist ones attract sexist women. The difference is that the most sexist men are alpha "fuk dem bitchez' types who probably don't come to groups, and theirs is the smaller, so you get a different set of individuals. Yeah, that was like three generalizations. But you get the point.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:54 AM
1

dress like you are a person of power. Act like a person of power. A "feminist" who is more submissive than you will feel humbled at your seemingly greater ability to break gender roles than them. Act even more dismissive than them, calling them outdated. I know you said you like traditionalism, so the first one would be difficult. But it IS a tactic. Wear a bitchin snappy tie. That'll show em, lol.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:49 AM
2

I think it's honestly MUCH better than saying "mensrights" which sounds like an unironic person being the male version of a feminist. ...Unfortunately, egalitarian calls to mind things like tall poppy syndrome. And could stretch further. I'm not sure what the best word would be really.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:43 AM
8

Self made man. It's not about men's rights. It's about a female who impersonated a male for 1.5 years in order to tell the differences. Concludes with. "You're retarded if you think being male makes you infinitely privileged." Still good to read for obvious reasons.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:39 AM
2

Not quite the way you say, but definitely similarly. Females who dedicate their life to pretending to be victimized for things even that they are tricked into doing to themselves is certainly a reasonable group. Or thinking their victim status makes it not worth it. How many is hard to tell.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:35 AM
-1

That's not what troll means.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:31 AM
0

How did you get this far into a marriage with someone before finding any of this out? I ideologically scathe people down to see exactly where they are before even considering going further. And how much further I go is dependent on their level of parallel interests. Sorry for being insulting, but I really believe that this can't have been something you didn't have any indication of leading up all the way to it. Moving on, use facts, statistics, and logic on her. See whether that can't work. Peop…
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:31 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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