TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

clockwerkman Archive

View 1 post and 57 comments by clockwerkman 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)
0

clockwerkman/r/MensRights03/04/14 12:30 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

If masturbation is a thing that makes you feel like you've lowered your own value, changes your perception of women, or is an excuse to not meet new faces, then NoFap can work. Otherwise, why not enjoy the reduction in chance of prostate cancer?
/r/seduction13/09/15 06:01 AM
5

First, beta/alpha is the biggest piece of bro bullshit I've ever heard. There's fundamentally no such thing, even among wolves (were the concept came from AFAIK). All it boils down to is people who are comfortable with themselves, and those who aren't. Those who are tend to self validate, while those who aren't tend to seek validation from others. See below for how to get around that. Next up, stop calling yourself a pussy, stop saying you're insecure, and stop saying you're a bitch. Real talk t…
/r/seduction17/05/15 06:28 PM
1

exactly :D
/r/seduction11/07/14 04:56 AM
1

I already defended my position. You are making claims about Sarkeesian. You link a video of someone else's opinion. If you make a claim, you need to defend it. Basically, stop making excuses and say your points yourself. Otherwise this will go nowhere.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 06:09 AM
0

to a degree. But there aren't that many jobs that require that. Also, there are a large number of women that are strong enough to do those jobs.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 06:06 AM
0

not sure if trolling.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 06:17 AM
0

"Traditionally this means the man going out and doing the work and the woman taking care of the child, because that's just the way the different sexes evolved." != "the fact that women are biologically capable of carrying and nursing a baby and that men on average have more muscle mass" Though in the interest of being fair, perhaps I made an incorrect assumption. It sounded to me as though you were saying that differences in muscle and baby making capacity had something to do with job preference…
/r/MensRights07/04/14 05:07 AM
0

Your first sentence was the only one with anything accurate in it. The rest is not only wrong, but the second most sexist thing I've heard in this thread.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 04:35 AM
0

See, every time I hear "their nature" I think of stormfront.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 04:11 AM
0

All you read is the same shit over and over. As far as I saw, there were three threads in MensRights. The rest were reposts. Obviously I'm willfully posting this. Under what circumstance would this be under duress?
/r/MensRights07/04/14 04:10 AM
-1

lawl. keep on circlejerking bro. I'm sure some day it will lead to transcendence.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 04:07 AM
1

No, it's not. I'm not the one making claims, and if you ever took a debate class, you'd know that the burden of proof lies on the party making assertions. And no, youtube video's of other people's viewpoints aren't sources.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 04:06 AM
1

fallacies are fallacies. They don't just stop applying because you want them too. The only thing scientifically proven about the difference in brain chemistry (aside from hormones involved in reproduction) is that men tend to be more left brained, where women tend to be more right brained with stronger empathetic capabilities on average. None of those affect skill learning, or job fulfillment. That lies solely on culture.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 04:04 AM
-2

0_0 that's a lot of text. Awesome reply though! The only real points of contention I have are the part about the family courts and Dulith system. I linked to them elsewhere on this thread, but if you want I can dig up some links that show that men are actually treated more favorably in family courts than women are. While true that most custody decisions are made in favor of women, this is because the majority of decisions are either mutual, or no contest. As far as Dulith, while I may disagree w…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 09:53 PM
-2

No, I just don't feel like letting you use someone else to argue for you. If you want to make valid points, I'll debate you. If you want me to watch ten twenty minute long videos like it's my job, I'm not going to.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 09:43 PM
-2

If you say so. I don't think you either know what a freudian slip means, or what modal logic is. LMGTFY. TWICE. None of the things you said have any reference to the links you posted. So have fun convincing anyone else of that. Also, have fun with all of your fallacies. It shows how ignorant you are. Still has nothing to do with what you said it did. I realize you have a short memory, so here's what you said: "Maybe it was the erasing of half a nation's rape victims via a major government agency…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 09:38 PM
-1

looooooooooooooooooooool
/r/MensRights03/04/14 08:58 PM
-2

Implying men don't wanna be care workers? or nurses? It's other men who do the mocking when some men want to go into those fields. So yeah, PATRIARCHY. I'm guessing you don't know what the word culture means. Let me google that for you. I think you don't know what the difference is between groups of people and individuals. LMGTFY. ? Let me repeat myself. Again. VEEERY SLOWLY. In fact, read each word here aloud. T.h.e. P.o.i.n.t. i.s. t.h.a.t. w.o.m.a.n. a.r.e.n.'t. c.h.o.o.s.i.n.g. w.h.a.t. t.h.…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 08:56 PM
-2

because how many women have access to high paying jobs directly affects the number of women in the following generation who apply for that level of job. That's the whole point of gender quotas. As for the congress thing, that's not how statistics works. but whatever.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 08:46 PM
0

If you say career choices, you are automatically disagreeing with egalitarian principals. If you're okay with that, I guess that's as far as the conversation goes.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 08:44 PM
0

Take that up with Socrates. Also, Mens rights can't be a victim. First, it's a group of people, not an individual. Second, criticism != victimization. If that were true, you would be victimizing all feminists. Have fun with that. Aside from the amazons (too easy), name a single culture that has been matriarchal. Name a single example of political dominance by women. How about Religion? The Financial sector? No, no, it's fine I can wait. (protip, google the definition of matriarchy first). none o…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 08:41 PM
-1

First, I want to thank you for being one of the few to be very reasonable in this thread :D It is appreciated. It looks like trying to help women into all of the dangerous and physically challenging jobs. It looks like encouraging women into fortune 500s. It looks like ending the whole "princess" ideology of our daughters that poisons so many. If by disadvantaging men, you mean removing the advantage that men have over women currently, then yes that is my intent. If you mean instead if I advocat…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 07:46 PM
-2

disagreed with both videos. Believe what you want I guess :/
/r/MensRights03/04/14 07:32 PM
-2

In no way is that victim blaming. That would require a victim. Or blame for that matter.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 07:41 AM
-2

Actually, yes we should. Really though, stop with the Straw man/Ad hominem, it's infantile. The issue is that on a cultural level, women are far more the oppressed group then men are. Should we still try and make sure men are treated equally? Absolutely! But it doesn't change the fact that the majority of Mens Rights issues stem from patriarchal ideals. Such as "men can't be raped by women","men can't be assaulted by women", and so on. All of those forms of thinking stem from a belief that men a…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 07:22 AM
-2

Yeesh, where to start.. Okay so for starters, dangerous jobs != well paying jobs. Especially not the best paying jobs, so yes the Wage gap IS a thing. I know this isn't a great source, but here's a list of the most dangerous jobs, and where applicable, their wage. Not one of those breaks $25 an hour. I'd personally throw in coal miner though, which is male dominated, and grosses an average of 80k a year. That being said, totally not enough to skew statistics around wage discrepancy. You got me t…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 07:16 AM
-2

Yeah, well mine has been pretty shit too. Doesn't mean I'm not privileged. Also, if you are gonna Tu Quoque, at least expand on your criticism. I hazard a guess that you have not been cat called while walking down the street, and chances are you have not had to decide whether or not to sleep with someone based off of how likely it would be for others to call you a whore. And in those ways and many more, you are privileged. I said at a cultural level for a reason. Feminism and Male Privilege say …
/r/MensRights03/04/14 06:13 AM
-2

Okay, the first bit is outrageously wrong. If that were the case, knowing anything would be impossible. That's because, according to you, to have evidence of something, you must first accept that thing as true. I'm not sure whether to call that a straw man, or post hoc ergo propter hoc.. second bit is Tu Quoque. Your final premise is by definition, un-egalitarian. If you truly believe men and women are inherently different in a way other than physiologically, I don't know what to say. It seems l…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 06:04 AM
-5

Yes, you are correct. I wholeheartedly believe that in general, women and men possess "the same physical and mental faculties, same aspirations, dreams, wants, needs, and so on". That's part of being egalitarian. And no, I'm saying women going into those fields has nothing to do with their free will. I think you lost track of the argument here. The point is that we in the west have a shit ton of Christian cultural baggage, nothing to do with separation of church and state. Wat? Ok, so I'll admit…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:54 AM
-5

I'm not saying intuitive to you, but to me. Further, the burden of proof is on you since you made the claim. That being said, I'll explain myself. Take "African Americans" for example. The culture we exist in is one where 1 in 9 black men are in prison, and generations of young men are growing up in ghettos. It's not that the "system" is directly oppressing anyone, but that the culture has not shifted. It's harder for them to rise up socio-economic status, largely due to circumstances out of the…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:36 AM
-4

Straw men are examples that don't exist. In other words, misinterpreting an opposing argument so as to defeat it more easily. Her examples are straight from video games, and they show a negative overuse of tropes. Namely those that dis-empower female characters. The Krystal one is a great example. Meaning she is committing no fallacy. Look, I don't agree with her fully, and I'm not asking you to either. All I'm saying is that she isn't a man hating "feminazi".
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:29 AM
-4

your consistent use of fallacies (ad hominem this time) makes Mens Rights look bad.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 05:25 AM
-3

I don't think anything I've suggested requires anything classifiable as an ideological bent. You're misinterpreting my point. It's not feminism and black people, it's women and black people. If that's your stance, then whatever I guess. Just don't claim to have backed it up.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:12 AM
-2

Dude, begging the question much?
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:08 AM
-2

Checked out the links. The last is dead, and the other two are not primary sources. that being said, I'll still give them a read.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:07 AM
-4

If you have something other people don't, and that something is desirable, you are by definition privileged. If you agree injustice is done at a cultural level towards women, then you admit you have privilege. To tear down male privilege is to remove the injustice.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:05 AM
-4

raw data is the only thing that CAN prove a hypothesis. What else would? the best I can say to that is try and see it from your opponents perspective. They legitimately believe this to be a civil rights issue. As an exercise, replace every mention of women and feminism with black people. I'm not saying it makes my argument right, but I hope it at leasts stops you from viewing this as oppression Olympics.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:01 AM
-3

I'm ignoring it because it isn't relevant. How much "research" was done or wasn't done doesn't matter, because as I said her examples bear the weight of the argument, not any data from a study.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:57 AM
-2

If you truly believe that women (who if you are egalitarian have equal capacities to men) just choose lower paying jobs because that's what women do... I don't even know how to respond to that. Hows about 1700 years of christian political authority? or the fact that pretty much every single president in US history has been christian (if in name only)? As far as the egalitarian bit, you are incorrect. Egalitarianism assumes that men and women (physiology aside) are equal in as much as men and oth…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:54 AM
-1

meh. I did, just not in this comment train. It was a link to the census bureau, and a reference to how many women by percent are in congress (18%). I'll check those out. Like I said, I'm not gonna comment on that, as I have no data to back me up either way. The point is that ideologies are self representative. A single suicide bomber does not mean all muslims are suicide bombers, same as how one crazy feminist does not make all feminists crazy. If you want, boil down my entire argument to pointi…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:46 AM
-2

If you say so man. I don't think there's really any point in continuing this conversation :/ Though if you think that statistics hold no meaning, any sociological discussion should hold no meaning for you either, so why are you in Mens Rights in the first place?
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:39 AM
-4

I honestly didn't finish the article. It sounded angry and tirade-y, and since it can't even make its first point successfully I lost interest. I do like debate, however I strongly disagree that its pointless. Don't see how it's dishonest though. Anyway, have a good night
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:35 AM
-4

I've been gaming since before I could walk :P I've seen that video before though, and think she makes some really good points. Her examples aren't wrong and those take most of the weight of her argument, so I'm content. Honestly don't care about the art thing. Shit happens. Her being or not being a nice person has nothing to do with the quality of her arguments.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:32 AM
5

to quote the Tao, "The Master sees things as they are, without trying to control them. She lets them go their own way, and resides at the center of the circle."
/r/seduction03/04/14 02:28 AM
-4

That's kind of the whole point. Yes, that is how people should be treated. The fact that women often aren't is why you are privileged. You are privileged to be treated the way you should be treated. Also the political stuff.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:26 AM
-2

if you say an argument is insipid or stupid and nothing else, you are by default using ad hominem logic. I don't really care though, so debate that all you want. I already cited statistics, if you want to ignore them so be it. Not even sure what you mean by that. It's rather easy to fix a lot of that legally. For example, change the way elections are funded to limit the effect of bankrolling candidates, allow women in combat military positions, and enforce laws already in effect preventing sexis…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:24 AM
-3

You aren't wrong. That being said if you truly believe that both sexes possess equal capacity and opportunity, then you should see a comparable result set. Not equal perhaps, but not very different either, else either the capacity for success or the opportunities weren't equal. Linked census data kinda says it man.. I don't know what you mean by circumstantial evidence either. As far as sourcing goes, if you want google the members of congress and count the female reps and senators for yourself.…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:14 AM
-3

I have seen no such narrative in modern feminism. To be sure, some extremists spout such nonsense. But the answer to extremism is not more extremism. Haven't read much of Jezebel or Solanas to be honest. From what I have read of Sarkeesian though, I agree with pretty much all of it. I haven't heard anything toxic from her. If you read my full post, you would have noticed that that was precisely my point. Also, nothing involving Mens Rights or Feminism involve science. Well, maybe statistics gath…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 02:03 AM
-5

That's the white privilege :P But I'm glad you feel empowered :D
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:57 AM
-3

Statistics can very easily apply to you. For example, you are about 30% more likely to get a seat in congress than a women. I posted the census stats a little earlier, but that comes from women being 51% of the population, but only have 18% congressional representation. Look, none of those statistics are meant to say that you are a bad person, or that men are bad. It's to say there is a difference, and it favors men. That being said, my point is that by "favoring" men, it hurts men more than it …
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:56 AM
-4

I looked into NOW, as well as the sites you linked me. First, I will share the original statement of purpose of NOW. "The purpose of NOW is to take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men." Sounds pretty egalitarian to me. Further, after reading into the Michigan NOW newsletter, all of your arguments are invalid. The point NOW is making is not that men shoul…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:50 AM
-3

A breakdown in communication is the breakdown of reason itself.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:39 AM
-3

Women do not make the same amount as men. Do not make adjustments. Those adjustments are what continues to make everything unequal. All the cultural baggage of women and education aside, all dangers, education, and hours should be split equally from an egalitarian viewpoint. Perhaps rights is the wrong word. It's a battle against the traditional christian values that dis-empower women. A great example of this is the old lock and key metaphor. Basically, it says "a key that can open any lock is g…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:37 AM
0

An argument that attacks your opponent directly holds no weight. Dude, the patriarchy totally is a thing. Name one female US president. Or any other head of state for that matter. I'm not saying that all men are empowered politically, but to pretend that women are equally represented politically is ignoring almost all of recorded history. No one ever said Male or Female Privilege is a thing that can be tackled legally. At least not all at once anyway. It's a product of culture, which you and I a…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 01:17 AM
19

It's not about putting them on a pedestal dude. You want her to be YOUR queen. Meaning you're the king. It's all about empowering your partner, and having his/her back. I suppose the easiest way to explain it is by scale. If you come across as willing to give up all the power, it shows that you are weak with little confidence. On the opposite end of the spectrum however, if you project a sense that you will take all the power, it shows a different weakness. It shows that you have either trust is…
/r/seduction03/04/14 01:00 AM
-2

Some crazy talking about feminsim != definition of feminism. Same way as how some crazy saying all women are whores != mens rights.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 12:02 AM
2

fuck that. He's the true definition of an omega male.
/r/seduction28/12/12 04:11 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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