TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

castlecraver Archive

View 1 post and 18 comments by castlecraver 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)
26

castlecraver/r/MensRights19/05/11 09:00 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
5

Remove the bits about assigning gender, and this comment could be about circumcision. Not to belittle the issue at hand, because this is completely abhorrent and we're all justifiably disgusted, but it occurs to me how many folks from outside this sub will hear about this story and never see the parallels.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 06:22 PM
9

I am not particularly angry or resentful of it, I don't feel it's hampered me in any significant way, but I wish I had been able to decide for myself. I feel pretty certain that I would not have chosen to receive an elective circumcision, even if pain was not an issue. I also have a permanent reminder of a religious upbringing that I no longer affiliate or agree with. I have no issue at all with informed adults deciding to alter their body for whatever reason they want, and I think you'll find t…
/r/MensRights03/04/13 02:43 PM
3

I understand and agree, just pointing out how absurd it would get if people went around over-scrutinizing completely normal, benign choices and mutable characteristics as potential risk factors for a rape, which as you rightly point out, aren't even central to the motivation for the crime, usually.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 10:35 PM
3

You might be headed down quite the slippery slope: Being physically attractive probably increases one's chances of being sexually assaulted. That's valuable information. People might reduce their odds of getting raped if they just let themselves go. (/s) Sure, body size and attractiveness aren't quite as mutable as the clothes you're wearing on any particular day, but hey, it's information you could arm people with. They'd have the option to reduce their odds. How's that so different? One might …
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:52 PM
3

You are correct, but whether the rationale is religious or cultural, the point is that it's so incredibly rarely medical in nature. So rarely, in fact, that it's trivially easy to cherry-pick research that tries to identify some spurious post-hoc medical explanation for it's continued routine application on infants. This is where the medical community has really let us down in a way, by continuing to pay lip service to this religious tradition (for example) that would almost certainly not still …
/r/MensRights08/02/13 09:16 PM
0

There are so many big life-altering financial decisions we make, that only the decision-maker has the ultimate responsibility for. Whether to buy a house, a car, which ones, what college to go to and what major to study and how to pay for that all too. How we invest our savings and what possible calamities we prepare for. If I or you or anyone else makes a bad choice with respect to one of these things, we have to mitigate and clean up the mess for our own selves. Unfortunately, due to an inconv…
/r/MensRights27/12/12 02:25 AM
2

seriously, if I got pregnant, I'd be a bitch to unilaterally decide the sperm donor's going to be a daddy and an atm with or without his consent, IMO. I so totally 100% agree. I fully support exploring the concept of "financial abortion" as a possibility for accidental fathers. (whether it's intentional or non-intentional on the part of the mother, as she has fully obligation-absolving options either way as you quite rightly point out.)
/r/MensRights27/12/12 02:02 AM
7

In none of those cases were the items freely and knowingly given to another person by the 'victim.' I'm not talking about grabbing the condom and a turkey baster (that certainly could be theft), I'm talking about consensual sex as in tycol's comment without consent to conceive. I know you didn't mention anything about rape. But calling that specific act theft is definitely wrong too, for pretty much the same reasons. Those reasons mostly being definitions and facts. Also, I didn't downvote shit …
/r/MensRights27/12/12 01:49 AM
7

Well, if it's done through coercion, it might be extortion depending on whether the sex itself was consensual (edit: and other things too). It's definitely not theft when something is freely given, even when its use is misappropriated. The case that comes up often in discussions like this about the oral sex pregnancy is a good example. It's absolutely detestable what happened, but legally, you can't really call it theft. As an aside, the kind of hyperbole that would describe a woman deliberately…
/r/MensRights27/12/12 01:34 AM
45

no. just... no. Rape is a violent act. Unless the sperm is taken by force or coersion, it's not anything like rape. Fraud? probably. Rape? no.
/r/MensRights26/12/12 10:23 PM
3

Rarely, but yes, there have been documented instances.
/r/MensRights26/12/12 10:11 PM
22

You know how many foods are shaped like rape?! THE BEST KINDS!
/r/MensRights19/12/12 06:55 PM
2

It's only a weak argument if one uses a colloquial understanding of "very safe." As we're considering this within the context of a formal medical setting rather than a colloquial one, and discussing medical risks and benefits, we must frame circumcision like any other medical therapy. When therapies are discovered and developed, be they drugs or procedures, they must first be shown to meet a minimum standard of safety. Often newer therapies are compared to the pre-existing ones to determine wher…
/r/MensRights29/11/12 08:52 PM
9

The risk of what? "Risk" isn't some catch-all. Yes, the risk of infections, excessive bleeding, and unintentional tissue damage are comparatively lower if a procedure is performed under more stringent hospital conditions. That's obvious. But the risk of all these things is even lower* if you keep the damned scalpel away from the baby's penis to begin with. That's also obvious. And of course there's the risk of decreased sexual pleasure, scarring, and mental issues that may arise from loss of int…
/r/MensRights29/11/12 02:50 PM
4

Seriously? She'd turn around and run out of the room as soon as she realized her partner was intact? She's would become attracted to a guy, enjoy a satisfactory pre-coital courtship of whatever degree, eventually get all ramped up for sex, ready and willing, but even with everything else working in his favor as a romantic interest and/or sexual partner she'd instantly slam her legs closed as soon as she sees the foreskin? Really?!? If that's true, my thoughts to out to the poor guy who ends up w…
/r/MensRights27/08/12 07:32 PM
34

It's a fine distinction, but this isn't applicable to the OP's situation. In the Wisconsin case, the fee was a broad "activity fee" designed to cover funding for numerous and diverse groups and services. In the OP's case, the fee is a specific line item meant to fund one specific service.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 09:01 PM
1

I hate infant circumcision as much as the next guy, but I wrote a long-ish comment about how I thought it was just another silly joke, how he derided (his own) arcane traditions and standards relating to (un)kosher hot dogs before the "bris", etc and how that was actually the point of the bit. By the time I finished it, I realized that if my circumcision had been botched, I would have probably been a little offended by the "he'll be fine, he'll heal right up" after the mustard sprayed everywhere…
/r/MensRights27/06/12 02:07 PM
33

From the link: In most States with safe haven laws, either parent may surrender his or her baby to a safe haven. In four States, only the mother may relinquish her infant. I'm not great at math, but unless I'm completely missing something, isn't this headline a little misleading?
/r/MensRights16/11/11 05:47 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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