TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

butth0lez Archive

View 0 posts and 51 comments by butth0lez on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I’m just
/r/MensRights26/07/25 09:24 PM
5

Got to find a prosecutor willing to do it but id imagine a lot of people would not be okay with it and would protest. If that were to happen hopefully people see that maybe over-prosecution isn't all that awesome.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 09:27 PM
1

Ugly guy method is be really good at salsa.
/r/seduction01/10/16 01:52 AM
-1

Make sure when turning them your down yank their arms off. All girls hate it but most will never tell you.
/r/seduction01/10/16 01:51 AM
1

I'd say learn to dance partner style music at Latin clubs. I'm ugly and fat but people hardly ever turn down an offer to dance from me. Clubs with mostly white people playing top 40 tho...
/r/seduction01/10/16 01:50 AM
1

Given that you cannot be sexist against men due to patriarchy, is there any way you can argue against her usage of mansplaining? I feel like you just need to call it prejudice. Or maybe just use other reasoning I don't actually think this way above, I just feel like you'll better win an argument if you develop a meta argument from within
/r/MensRights12/02/16 01:51 PM
6

Were you considering dating her or just wanted to fuck? Prior to the meet up.
/r/seduction21/03/15 03:42 PM
0

I do this because fuck girls who think I'm not good enough. Makes me want to fuck their mom/sister/dad
/r/seduction08/01/15 03:42 AM
0

If I get my ass kicked it's going go be a freaking PAYDAY for me. Humble the fuck out of someone financially/legally.
/r/seduction25/09/14 12:55 AM
5

I realize you didn't say that but I'm just taking your principle - no amount of money should effect your obligation as a father - to its logical conclusion. That is unless you are arguing that there DOES exist an amount of money that effects your obligation as a father, you filthy men's right activists.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 02:14 PM
5

Exactly. I agree with you. This is why you should you pawn all your belongings and work as a slave - no level of sacrifice can be argued as unreasonable. Because ultimately the father is fully responsible for any situation the mother imposes on him so he should be expected to stay regardless of the conditions.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:29 PM
3

Youre right. Let's take this to its logical conclusion tho - why doesn't the dad give the woman his life savings? It's just a bullshit money thing that's forcing him to pay otherwise hell be sent to jail. Yes its wrong what they are doing but if that would make you split on your kid then how much do you really love them? lol how does I manipulate emotionally?
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:05 PM
1

like iraq and sunnis and shiites.... right??????????????
/r/MensRights06/10/13 04:47 PM
2

If you have a feminist that blames men for all evil Basing all members of a group based on the most extreme members makes no logical sense. I agree with you. Fighting averages joes isnt constructive. Fighting radicals is awesome.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 08:00 PM
5

If you have a feminist that blames men for all evil and cannot see when men are at the receiving thanks to women the I think "BUT WHAT ABOUT MEN" is appropriate.
/r/MensRights29/09/13 06:19 PM
3

Yes yes, its much more constructive to have a pain contest than to actually focus those efforts else where. "Hey this kid is getting married to a lady" "WELL IT HAPPENS TO GIRLS ALL THE TIME" "So that's why you're not going to help? Is that an argument for why we should treat boys just as a bad as girls or how treating a boy like this is good?" Edit: also rapey clothes doesn't exist. Most rapes are done through known people, regardless of what you wear. But I guess there's that 1% thats like "OH…
/r/MensRights29/09/13 03:05 PM
5

Yup "Doing what is convenient for individual partners is never bad - both of you guys are free to choose" even if they adhere to stereotypes. Just like how I like burritos.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 06:06 PM
23

Doing what is convenient for individual partners is never bad - both of you guys are free to choose. The comic is talking about stereotypes.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 04:46 PM
2

its a real problem, like the woman batterer is a also a real problem. we live in a world of real problems.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:38 PM
2

false transitivity?
/r/MensRights06/02/13 08:25 PM
7

She was also acting like an asshole acting to spite him.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:20 PM
18

"That girl! She was just asking to get raped! She was flirting with me! Don't you know when you poke a cat you cant blame it if mauls you?!" EDIT:is a /s really necessary?
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:19 PM
10

Would you have said the same thing if he was unhinged and he punched her in the face? "Oh, its not her fault, but she was definitely asking for it." Bullshit. Youre ignoring that she was acting way out of line to begin with, and probably wouldn't have talked that way also had he been a gangbanger, but that's a moot point, as no one should be acting like her I the first place, from beginning to end.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:17 PM
7

Soo... be a little bitch to someone who throws a tantrum in front of you? He was merely reacting to the spitefulness. Would you say the same thing if the dude was unhinged and punched her face when she bought muffins cause "YOU DONT POKE THE CAT AND THEN BLAME THE CAT." Please. She was a bitch. And anyone like her would have been a bitch man or woman. Let a man treat me like that and I'd act the same way. Everything else I'd purely HER responsibility. Don't victim blame.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:07 PM
43

PLLEEASSE link that source
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:04 PM
0

K replace loser with inept. Schooling is still more signaling than increasing human capital
/r/MensRights13/01/13 06:30 PM
0

You're right but isn't that the same logic? Omg he dropped out, he must be a loser. Generally? Maybe. Today we force people into schooling even if they're failing tho. Why isn't it better for them to gain some expierence instead of waste it in school? Our system doesn't account for that the way it should. Generally speaking, one extra year of expierence pays more than one year of schooling considering costs. generally speaking.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 05:14 PM
0

Expressive values vs actual values. It signals poorly about a person, but when has a signal ever been absolute? Look at bill gates. Exception? Well then it isn't absolute.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 08:34 AM
0

Yes Im talking about scarcity in economics. Its simple supply and demand. Doesn't matter how cheap. All subsidies create shortages/inefficiencies. That is all. capitalist systems everyone gets exactly what they need. capitalism never claims to do this, nor even tries to define needs since all individual values are subjective.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 06:06 AM
1

What is this? 1960? We have enough supplies to treat everyone (who is injured that is...). The water you drink. The electricity you pay. Your cell phone. The IV drip. If all this wasnt scarce, therefore abundant, then you wouldnt need a market to allocate them. You wouldnt pay a dime any of it. Why do we pay? Because theyre scarce, just like nearly almost everything else, from hospital beds to dvds. When everyone who wasnt on birth control is now currently on birth control there wouldnt be a sho…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:03 AM
1

Actually quantities suffer because, like almost everything else, medical supplies are scarce. So no, not everyone gets treatment, unless you build a super efficient drug making machine -- but then in that case you wouldn't need "socialism"
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:46 AM
1

Now and what happens to product quality/quantity when you subsidize its price, all of ethics aside?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:24 PM
0

Why SHOULD it be for free? edit: yes, yes, lone downvoter, feed the hate.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 11:04 PM
11

you can assume the babies williness to live, but not its willingness to function in a religious environment.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 08:29 PM
1

I thought it was clever. Wanted to make a point about how precaution can change certain situations like they change any. and you basically called me a predatory
/r/MensRights17/08/12 06:07 AM
1

Ad hominem? Nice. If you took anything away from our conversation, is that I didn't need to prove my points without diminishing you. Good luck next time kid.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 05:47 AM
1

Wow so you actually think that women need to never get drunk Yes, it is unreasonable to tell women they should never go out drinking. Never said this. you need to make sure they're never drinking to protect the poor men from having a tiny risk of being accused of rape. They can get drunk, but I don't think being drunk excuses you from consenting. I think contracts, like anything else, should be upheld against drunks. This would only serve people to be more cautious about their drinking habits, n…
/r/MensRights17/08/12 02:40 AM
1

So for women, regarding rape, they should just never get drunk anywhere because it's dangerous? No I dont think they should get drunk in dangerous environments. Do you think they should get drunk in dangerous environments? So if women ever get drunk it's their fault if they get raped because any bar or party is a "dangerous area"? It is not their fault. Rape is rape. But if they decide to get drunk in a dangerous area then are putting themselves in a risky situation. No one has the RIGHT to take…
/r/MensRights16/08/12 07:34 PM
1

It's your fault for getting cancer, or being raped, or being in a car accident, or IF THERE IS CONTRIBUTING NEGLIGENCE. Not exactly youre FAULT, but you contributed to your own harm. Of course in your ideal world it sounds like instead of trying to stop people from doing bad things you'd rather people just carried guns around all the time and were constantly vigilant. Never having fun. Never relaxing. Just watching, and waiting. some areas call of this. some areas dont. understanding the real da…
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:45 PM
1

i think that whether you a wear a revealing shirt or not has little effect on your vulnerability. Being drunk is another thing. Drunk people are more vulnerable. Dont want to be vulnerable? Dont be drunk. The end. Of course no one has a RIGHT to harm you, but a person willing to harm you doesn't give a damn about your rights. He only cares if you're vulnerable. Be realistic. (This is why I talk about reasonable precaution. Not telling you to lock yourself in, but having more control of your vuln…
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:15 PM
1

i do not think its their fault, but i do believe there is a reasonable amount of effort everyone can do to be less likely a victim-- for ALL crimes.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:24 AM
1

I think it's better because the burden of proof needs to be great. By default everyone lives free. People will be more realistic to their danger levels and adjust. I think strict liability creates a moral hazard and you need contributing negligence
/r/MensRights15/08/12 09:07 PM
1

I feel like the reason you'd rather that criminals go free than innocents potentially being punished because you know the risk is higher for you in particular to be the innocent punished one than the victim that's ignored. No, its just the difference between type 1 and type 2 errors. I beleive sticking an innocent person in prison for life is worse than letting a criminal go free. I think that's why our justice system has such a high burden for proof. Rape is a horrible crime and I don't believe…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:00 PM
1

I think you can make case for contributory negligence. You'd have to judge it by case by case basis. If you get hit by a drunk driver, then the drunk driver was at fault. If you just ran out into the street like a deer, the drunk driver isnt at full fault. If you have cancer because you smoked... i mean what do you expect... If the girl got raped then no its not her fault. If she got drunk and was RAPED, then thats not her fault as well. If she got drunk and she had SEX, initially what i was tal…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 05:33 PM
1

He shouldn't have drank if he was going to do stuff he didn't want to do.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 04:07 PM
1

thats why i believe contracts should be enforceable against drunks. i believe its negligence, and not enforcing the contract creates moral hazards like these...
/r/MensRights15/08/12 02:56 AM
1

Yes true, but if a person is drunk and unable to consent, how can be responsible? Seem wrong NOT to hold him responsible That's why I believe you have to hold drunk people accountable, including enforcing contracts against them.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:14 PM
2

So does that still hold for when a drunk man has sex with a sober woman- inability to consent?
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:05 PM
3

Some guys get paternal leave, but it's unusual. I like it though.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:30 PM
5

Just questioning the logic. Holding all circumstances the same (no force), how does alcohol alone effect responsibility? Would you say a sober man having sex with a drunk woman is rape ceteris paribus?
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:27 PM
5

What if a drunk guy rapes a sober women. What happens to the consent of the drunk man. What if they just have sex?
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:15 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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