TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

coherentsheaf Archive

View 2 posts and 210 comments by coherentsheaf 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)
21

Intactivismcoherentsheaf/r/MensRights11/08/15 07:45 PM
1

coherentsheaf/r/MensRights19/08/15 10:25 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

in that case it was a problem with both, ... What? Try to reflect a little about your views on the world. When someone lies to someone else the porblem is not with the person lied to.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 06:20 AM
1

In the short run depending on composition of society they might be. But in the long run they are extremely unuseful. Else there would be far more than 1% of clinical psychopaths - it would actually be an adaptive strategy. Overall when psychopaths get more common people learn to detect them and not to be a sucker. Then psychopaths suffer severe disadvatages because they cannot send honest signals of cooperation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/16 06:13 AM
5

You see this much more often in men than in women, which is why women initiate most of the divorces. Unless women are less emotionaly taxing or more easily emotionally taxed. These hypotheses cannot be ruled out prima facie.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/16 02:28 PM
1

Bipolar specifically - yes . But in general the corelation is negative: Smart people are more sane than the general population: http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=481989
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/16 03:42 PM
0

It certainly is possible to have an IQ over 160; there are tests that can measure that high. I know. Though few too. However, once you get into that range specific numbers are less meaningful, which is what he meant. No no no that is wrong. The best we can say the differences further out the scale quite meaningful when it comes to predicting real world accomplishment, with the smartest individuals having the most massive impact on scientific and creative ventures. You can read about this here
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/16 12:05 AM
3

Stanford-Binet Intelligence scale Ok, reading wikipedia gives me: "Since the inception of the Stanford–Binet, it has been revised several times. Currently, the test is in its fifth edition, which is called the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition, or SB5. According to the publisher's website, "The SB5 was normed on a stratified random sample of 4,800 individuals that matches the 2000 U.S. Census"." With a normal distribution 4800 individuals should not be enough to norm towards 160 …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/16 11:49 PM
1

No high intelligence does not correlate with mental illness afaik. YOu are free to post sources.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/16 11:38 PM
4

Like, giving a number is not even useful, pick one over 160. Oh what test did you use to determine that? In my home country there are no tests with a ceiling high enough to establish 160 for example, and afaik there are only a few procedures in the world going out that far. I provisionally call bullshit on numbers above 150, given that you need pretty well constructed tools to measure more.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/16 07:38 PM
1

No it does not.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/16 07:35 PM
1

I never claimed otherwise. I disputed your absurd claim that the relative frequency of such individuals is high, which you made in a discussion regarding wheter one can avoid abusive people by looking out for anti social behavior. You can protect yourself by avoiding anti socials, though of course this protection will not be perfect. However this protection will likely be better than anything we can achieve by resocialisation of males or other such nonsense since anti social behavior has a stron…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 12:01 PM
1

You dont understand what the word correlated means.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 02:49 AM
1

Correlation is the covariance of two random variables divided by their respective standard deviation. In linear relationships it is measured as pearson correlation coeficient. The most natural interpretation is that increasing one variable by a standard deviation, the best estimate for the other variable increases by the correlation coefficient times a standard deviation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 10:40 PM
1

Well I am not a native but I understand correlation very well, given Idk I am an actual mathematician.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 12:01 PM
1

If you understood the words used, you would know that your sentence makes no sense. Bye.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 11:39 AM
1

Other people who are mostly wrong about everything as well (I have a very poor opinion of most social science), like Strauss or Koss, but at least not crazy enough to believe anti social behaviors are uncorrelated.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 11:30 AM
1

No, it is not, since there are researchers on the topic who have substantial publication records and many citations. The guy you mentioned however? No.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 10:48 AM
1

Google scholar reveals a marginal publication record in the peer reviewed literature with negligible citation numbers, despite him having written a lot of books. Just as I expected.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 11:11 AM
1

That sound completely wrong. Anti social behaviors are usually correlated.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 01:57 AM
1

Of course. How in the world would that be a satisfying response to the assertion: Men and women are different.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/16 10:01 PM
1

What do you believe the difference to be? I dont see it http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/humanity
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/16 01:58 AM
1

What does that mean? I think no sane persons doubts that women are human.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/16 12:09 AM
1

(1) is ambiguous. I agree that there are some traits for which women and man have overlapping bell curves with different means. However, I think men and women have the same fundamental psychology, and most traits are far more similar to height (different means, but there are a lot of short men and tall women) than grip strength (basically all men have more grip strength than basically all women). If you take several traits at once, Iguess clusters become much more pronounced. 7ft tall woman stil…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/16 10:32 PM
1

Yes and no. What the hell is the no? Rejection of literally all the evidence?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/16 10:30 PM
1

Coming up with good measures to quantify innovation on your own. Number of scientific research papers. Sex ratio of winners of international student competitions. Google corrections for "she invented".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 01:55 PM
1

No. It is just one quite telling metric. There are others as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 06:58 AM
1

I think I am on the verge of banning you from the internet until you have read a biology book.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 02:09 AM
1

I havent read much by Kanazawa but I read Rushton abusing heritability estimates. It was dreadful, dont people have wikipedia or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 08:15 PM
1

Point was,I am not an evolutionary psychologist, but could name several people in evo psyche from the top of my head who are not feminists. I cannot do that in social psychology and my state of knowledge about the fields is comparable. It is like evolutionary biology: There are not many christians there. I suspect on some level, religions and biology dont mix.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 10:44 AM
1

These are private companies, dedicated to the bottom line, and answerable to shareholders rather than ethics boards. The above was about state institutions. Could it be that pure maths ability has less bearing on doing a good job than other factors, such as the ability to work with others, (network, liase , collaborate...) and communicate their ideas? SAT is a better predictor of job performance than any other single measure. It even beats out socioeconomic success when it comes to predicting li…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 10:37 AM
1

No, because of massive empirical studies suggesting hiring bias in favor of women in STEM and this despite them having substantially lower SAT math scores on average. You know, the things one can actually verify as opposed to anecdotes on the internet by people who might or might not have split off from my mammal lineage hundreds of millions of years ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 04:09 AM
1

I assume you are not a scientist let alone a psychologist. That is not a good argument. Laymen outpredict social scientists in a lot of forecasting experiments, per "Superforecasting", suggesting a deeper understanding based on gut feeling than a lot of field assumptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:35 AM
1

Sure though all guys would and the less inhibited ones would win out genetically, not the incels of today. I suspect incels do better in cultures of arranged marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:31 AM
3

So this is just so BASIC and not the way scientists think that I can't even address it. We're so far past even pitting nature against nurture. I completely disagree with this sentiment. We can pit them against each other when it comes to explaining observed variances in populations. Spoiler, in several very important traits, like e.g. IQ, nature wins and this is why people do not really want to talk about that topic anymore. Nature is red in tooth and claw after all. PS, you realize that every S…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:27 AM
4

As someone in population genetics, I would like to ask: What do you mean? Our mind is a product of biology, our culture is a product of our biology as well. If you believe there are some deep elements to human nature that are not products of biology, I am struggling how else they could arise in a materialist framework.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:18 AM
2

Genetic effects dominate.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:11 AM
2

EvoPsych is essentially the worst kind of "empirical" science (psychology) Psychology is head and above over the other social sciences when it comes to producing subfields with a track record of delivering. The IQ testing people and the behavioral geneticists have impressive predictive power and replicability.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:10 AM
1

I really like your flair. incel men of long ago were warriors/soldiers who fucked prostitutes or raped women. I am not completely convinced that is the case. For all I know the rape etcetera would be more frequent with sociopathic individuals, who likely are not incel today.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:02 AM
1

None of the things you mentions demonstrate entitlement. They show frustration, maybe anger, but that does not mean that frustration and anger are necessarily caused by entitlement.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 06:30 PM
2

Well I follow that definition of feminism and virtually all the people I know who identify as a feminist follow that definition. By that definition I would be a feminist as well, I identify as anti feminist however, which makes it wuite amusing. The thing is that no major feminist organization shares your believes, nor do feminist academics. You can of course be an oddball and use non descriptive definitions like Warren Farrel and Cristina Hoff Summers do, but I would advice against it as it onl…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 11:54 PM
1

That is the dictionary definition. In practice feminism is a loose collection of political and academic movements, whose short term goal ragarding the representation of women in STEM etc typically is affirmative action.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 06:56 PM
1

One study on twins doesn't mean that upbringing has no effect.. If you think there is only one study establishing the relatively large influence of genes and the relatively small influence of shared environment on violent criminal behavior, you are wrong. A few examples: https://genepi.qimr.edu.au/contents/publications/staff/CV179_OCR.pdf http://www.socialbehavior.uzh.ch/teaching/semsocialneurosciencews07/Viding_2004NYAS.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matt_Delisi/publication/277959883_…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 03:02 PM
1

Elliot Rodgers didnt live at his parents place. So when you said I was delusional, you were completely wrong and you concede that?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 01:58 PM
5

What she says is clearly an anti feminist position, that is why I asked.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 01:57 PM
1

For example: For six of eight composites, significant shared environmental effects, accounting for 14–22% of the variance, were observed for these same-sex sibling pairs. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2858574/ So for a wide variety of traits we have 14-22% of the variance explained by shared environment, which as a classification consists of much more than just parenting but also shooling etc. NOw what about criminality in particular? . Genetic factors, but not the common environme…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 01:27 PM
1

Nope. The influence of all shared environment (includes parenting and schooling etc) accounts for less than half of the variance in almost all traits but when it comes to criiminal behavior its explanatory power is even less. There have been quite a few studies in behavioral genetics on this.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 12:23 PM
1

Parenting has little influence on behavioral differences.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 09:52 AM
2

Do you identify as a feminist?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 09:46 AM
1

I used to believe that while there is some biological baseline, culture explains most of the difference we see. I think that this is very unlikely to be true. I used to consider myself a feminist. I now believe that feminism is wrong about most of its empirical predictions and its policy proposals are massively flawed as a consequence.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/15 09:33 AM
3

I think this is largely incorrect. The amount of selfcontrol will be correlated with incentives.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/15 10:44 AM
1

Well, for all I know some gay men leer. They are rare though so it would not be ovious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/15 11:48 PM
4

You would be surprised.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/15 11:47 PM
12

Bigfoot believers have won the philosophy battle. Places like skeptics conventions are proof.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/15 10:23 PM
1

Feminism seems to correlate with so called WEIRD cultures. Not sure what the cause of WEIRD cultures is though.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/15 09:31 PM
1

AFAIK in places where its allowed, women nevertheless dont do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/15 09:26 PM
7

If only there wasn't a massive empirical literature showing male sexuality to be more visual. See this papers introduction for a short overview: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gregory_Strauss/publication/6171622_Sex_differences_in_visual_attention_to_erotic_and_non-erotic_stimuli/links/54cae3730cf2c70ce5243bf7.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/15 09:25 PM
4

That is possible, given that recently violence rates dropped.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 06:34 PM
-2

Armed fight maybe. I know no man over twenty who never had an unarmed one.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 06:08 PM
-2

Very unlikely that propensity to freeze is equal. Evolutionary pressures are really different there.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/15 06:06 PM
1

He also cites paleontological evidence for this, IIRC. But I will check it out.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 02:20 AM
1

You have a reference for that? (I read "better angels", though I did not double check it until i found a mistake recently, regarding the an lushan revolt)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 01:38 AM
1

Unlikely. The apriori estimate of percentile for Harvard professor + MIT professor are likely substantially higher than the a priori estimates for smart guy on the internet. At least as long as the Harvard guy is not in Gender studies and the smart guy does nothing verifiably smart, like proving number theoretic conjectures.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/15 01:04 AM
2

Go to a male doctor ;)
/r/MensRights26/08/15 11:05 AM
1

Prominent among the signs that you are as stupid as Jason Thibeault: You believe those are accurate descriptions of MRAs.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 09:10 PM
1

How would you react to a common custom where 18yo would do this to become a man?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 07:28 PM
1

Yeah, my problem is a little like: Even when it is on adults, if you had a custom that demands people to cut off their hands, I would argue it is a stupid custom, their body, their choice and all.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 12:40 AM
2

It says adolescence.
/r/MensRights11/08/15 09:15 PM
1

Also, I'm a guy who's gotten a 150 on an IQ test, and I feel that the system isn't a great measurement of intelligence, rather education. What kind of IQ test? What was the SD? Anyway what you feel it measures is irrelevant. The general intelligence factor g seems to be a universal predictor for cognitive ability, no matter what kind of test you use, and is best measured with IQ. Your claim that this is primarily influenced by education goes heavily against the heritability estimates by people a…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 08:30 PM
1

That is not the only thing. Males score higher on average as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 04:10 PM
1

Do animals love each other when they reproduce ? Some monogamous species most probably.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 04:01 PM
5

Well this ratio is irrelevant if you want to measure total innovation.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 01:16 PM
1

Curie did not invent nuclear energy. Or much of anything. She just was among the first experiment with radioactivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 05:50 AM
5

Female innovation is rarer, about 5.5% of patents are by females. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733312002594
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 05:49 AM
1

This gap alone explains a boatload and it is much greater than it seems at the tails, assuming all else being equal in distribution. The fact that men are more spread out does not even enter into this, but they are. If you look at the extremes of performance you have pure sausage fests: https://www.imo-official.org/hall.aspx?column=awards&order=desc&gender=show&block=1&nameform=western This is not only explained by males being more spread out, but also by them having a higher average intelligenc…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 05:42 AM
2

No. You remarked that the difference in means is small, 3 points and then said the real difference is in variance. The difference in variance and mean are about equally important
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/15 05:11 AM
3

On the average very mariganly by 3 points. in reality it more complicated. A small difference at the mean can lead to great differences at the tails. Suppose men have 3 IQ points more on average and both have equal variance. 3 standard deviations out the ratio of males to females would be 2:1 and standard deviations out it would be 3:1
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 11:10 PM
1

I am ambivalent toward alimony, spliting of assets is in many cases fair and necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 10:50 PM
1

Everything the couple owned and did not bring into the marriage previously.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 10:41 PM
2

maintainance of objects means that those retain their value. These objects can be distributed.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 09:12 PM
6

Typically after marriage people are entitled to a split of the properties the couple jointly accumulated.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 08:35 PM
11

How would that value be evaluated monetarily? By getting a substantial part of the shared assets?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 07:16 PM
9

Domestic labor performed by a spouse has no economic value, Do you actually believe this? We should stop paying maintainance guys, they dont have economic value. The fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/15 07:03 PM
1

What is your 7th favorite flavor of ice cream?
/r/MensRights11/01/15 12:07 PM
2

And they justify prudenes with protecting people, especially women. Feminsts are not very different. The rhetoric is not identical but this does not change the fact that modern feminsm has some very conservative elements.
/r/MensRights04/07/14 09:01 PM
1

And your addendum: it is neither good nor bad--it is merely something that has positive and negative consequences ditto Do you have a preferred mode of government if not democracy?
/r/MensRights25/06/14 10:56 PM
3

I agree with this. This person tried to fuck you up. Do not try to contact her it is a bad idea.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 11:49 AM
8

The study still exists: http://washingtondv.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/American_Journal_of_Public_Health_May_2007_Vol_97_No_5.pdf I think the title is sensationalistic, harvard simply changed its website.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 01:00 PM
1

on an unrelated note, Ogi Ogas, the author is crazy fast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOXVbkJ-fn8
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:59 PM
4

One man who didn't take these sexist seating policies sitting down was Mirko Fischer. The Luxembourg businessman was travelling with his pregnant wife in 2010, when British Airways forced him to move to another seat in case he abused the child next to him. Fischer successfully sued BA for sex discrimination and donated his winnings to child protection charities. Epic win.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 11:08 AM
2

Oh it just goes to the sexists that think so. I guess most people here are fine.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 09:02 AM
3

I do not really understand why this is downvoted. There is ample research that cognitive abilities deplete during use. I do not think it is a stretch that compassion is one of them.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 08:53 AM
6

inding examples of empathy failure from men, on the other hand, is incredibly easy - just talk to as many women about their experiences as women on the internet as you need, until you detect a pattern. There are several things here: Your metric of asking women online is useless since it does not tell you anything about how many men do such things but only how many women are on the receiving end. Further I am almost willing to bet I got more abuse in my history playing competitive games than most…
/r/MensRights30/04/14 05:55 PM
5

We would need to massively rewire all human brains - probably with help of a transhuman intelligence (like an A.I. or a human uplift). Much of social constructionims won't help as many of our expectations are likely rooted in our own biology and will probably promote the idiotic tribalism we see from social conservatives like many 3rd wave feminists or the religious right. For now equal legal rights and responsibilities is probably the best we can do.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 02:18 PM
2

If all humans have utility functions in which the weight of wellfare and happiness of individuals is independent from their gender.
/r/MensRights28/04/14 01:04 PM
10

Yeah like the gender reversed variant of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hmlPtRu1SQ But not meant as a joke.
/r/MensRights23/04/14 04:04 PM
6

Love how the links in this link assert that the women used talent... what passes for talent today...
/r/MensRights23/04/14 11:47 AM
1

There are many places were empathy is a vitally important quality, if you i.e. want to have a healthy and fulfilling personal life or want to negotiate with someone. But this is not the topic at hand.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 08:56 PM
0

This is a very insightful comment. Assuming Kant to be right then the important fact is free and open discourse. In times were this discourse would take place in public spheres, free speech laws as we have them are importat. But if such discourse at large shifts into private areas, then it is the moral duty of individuals in control of such areas to allow dissent. TLDR, Free speech is more than a legal concept, but an ethical one, with wider applications.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 04:04 PM
1

My take: No, you are not legally mandated to host dissent. It just usually makes you an asshole if you don't. For example /r/mr could ban feminists voicing their dissent, but I am very glad they do not. No, you are not legally forbidden to protest speech you do not like. In most cases it would be wiser to listen - you could learn something after all. People who try to shut others down often are assholes. Overall xkcd conflation between legal and moral issues is quite childish.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 12:47 PM
1

You appear to have mistaken this "class" for any part of your education. ftfy
/r/MensRights20/04/14 02:30 PM
1

Generalities exist. To claim there are no exceptions is bigotry. To claim everyone is an exception is stupidity. Well said!
/r/MensRights20/04/14 06:45 AM
2

Intelligence in the context of psychometric testing is often defined as the ability to solve abstract problems. Empathy, while an important property does not seem to be related . In general this discussion is not about men outperforming women - it is about a top percentage of men doing it because of greater variance in male performance. To claim this is the same as men outperforming women is to commit the apex fallacy. This fact is important in a variety of social issues, chief among which is th…
/r/MensRights19/04/14 11:01 PM
2

How is this in any way relevant to mathematical talent?
/r/MensRights19/04/14 08:48 PM
24

The ratio is only about 7 000 to 1. Easily explained by the fact that womyn are better combatants, shitlord!
/r/MensRights19/04/14 07:16 AM
2

Can someone with a twiteraccount tweet this at thunderf00t? I am sure this will get his attention.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 11:48 AM
0

Yes that is correct. But how much evidence is there that such a thing is actually happening, especially given the fact that we have a strong explanation for pay differences stemming from different choices of respective groups. Examples where men were discriminated against and payed more at the same time can also be explained by choices of groups. E.g. Look at this infographic: http://vudlab.com/simpsons/
/r/MensRights04/04/14 09:51 AM
-1

My comments here are regarding the gender pay gap. I do not know enough on other kinds of discrimination or supposed discrimination. I am somewhat at a loss reading this. You correctly identify that different genders have different preferences in job acquisition. It is quite obvious that such differences will lead to differences lead to differences in payment if the prefered jobs have dfferences in properties that affects payment, such as being risky or having flexible work hours. You then go on…
/r/MensRights04/04/14 08:36 AM
1

??? You asked why it matters, not how it relates to men's rights. If you are exposing female recruits to lethal risk so that they do not have to shave their head it is certainly something that matters. However given that conscription for men is mandatory and attacks with chemical agents unlikely it matters in so far as young men are forced to shave their heads (Not that bad compared to the fact that they are being forced to work under harsh condition for trivial rewards. I earned 350€ in a moth …
/r/MensRights02/04/14 04:55 AM
1

I the austrian military they told me it was so that the abc protective mask closes without fault.
/r/MensRights01/04/14 05:44 PM
0

Yeah but not everywhere. But it is a moot point since this right is relatively unsubstantial and as you say even with the choice women mostly decide against it.
/r/MensRights31/03/14 09:10 PM
6

Name one legal or institutional RIGHT that men have that women do not have. In some places the right to go bare chested. Not really substantial but it is pretty much the best I could come up with in western societies.
/r/MensRights30/03/14 02:56 PM
5

Of course I acknowledge it. It is a thing that happens. But again why it's not focused on is that only 3% of rapes are men. That other 97% is female. One in 5 females have been raped. 1.3 million women are raped each year (average). And in 31 states a rapist can sue for visitation rights if the woman becomes impregnated from the rape and has the baby Your numbers on male rape prevalence are wrong. In 2010 the number of cases of forced envelopment (read: rape) of males was eual to that rapes on w…
/r/MensRights30/03/14 01:00 PM
6

By this I guess you mean both male? Not necessarily. Domestic violence occurs in lesbian relationships: http://www.adfvc.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/Gay_Lesbian.pdf
/r/MensRights30/03/14 12:56 PM
2

A further key dichotomy underpinning Reece’s critique and upon which she relies for much of her indictment of the mythical status of rape myths is that between truth and falsity. In her discussion of rape myth methodology, Reece acknowledges that the conception of ‘myth’ deployed by rape researchers is not one which turns on the truth or falsity of the myth in question (Reece 2013a, 453). This is not true of early iterations of rape myth discourse. Burt, for example, defined rape myths as ‘preju…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 06:13 AM
2

Maybe you wanna read a few other comments, like this one: And if you're here for the first time and you want to know what we're not doing when we're not promoting unequal pay (no, see the FAQ), shutting down planned parenthood clinics (we're not), feeding our turtles (they're cute), dating women from Venezuela (they're great), or being lampooned on SNL (hey there, feminist body shaming, how are you?), check out the following action opportunities. Action Opportunity: Please Investigate Apparent A…
/r/MensRights09/03/14 09:49 PM
7

Note that perseverance is also integral to solve hard math problems.
/r/MensRights04/03/14 04:31 PM
8

What exactly did your teachers disagree with? Anyway good talk!
/r/MensRights28/01/14 01:31 AM
6

The formulation "wind from the vulva" made me laugh. I can understand the humor.
/r/MensRights19/01/14 02:28 PM
3

Hitlerally
/r/MensRights16/01/14 05:24 PM
1

Its not run by Myers, but by Ed Brayton. Both are first class douchebags though.
/r/MensRights16/01/14 01:45 AM
1

Scheisse FTFY
/r/MensRights08/01/14 11:53 AM
1

You should read the conversations on duel servers in chivalry.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 11:44 AM
2

Trol username is troll username.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 02:23 AM
2

People looking at other people in public. That's the terrible tradgedy they are informing us about. This.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 04:28 PM
0

I understood your point, but your formulation bugged me.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 11:19 PM
1

Nonsense. I know non academics who are very flexible.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 02:34 PM
1

My internet privilege is even higher than my internet iq.
/r/MensRights13/12/13 09:48 PM
4

Upvoted for concept of "borg we"
/r/MensRights13/12/13 09:43 PM
3

Shunning or attacking us.
/r/MensRights11/12/13 12:09 AM
1

Exactly. Positive actions are to be rewarded and idiocy and malice should be punished within the realms of social interaction.
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:09 AM
14

You have to start with FULL STOP. It is the most powerful weapon in your arsenal.
/r/MensRights05/12/13 07:05 PM
1

Yeah and Vikings were white heterosexual males. This just proves the point /s
/r/MensRights01/12/13 09:14 PM
1

They paid the women less by 25% not give you more, in order to force them into prostitutino and other form of PATRIARCHAL slavery.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 02:04 PM
4

For everybody wondering why it is racist: For the most part, sponsored activities (day-long silences, sponge-throwing, public waxing) depend on the extreme, the outrageous, the ridiculous. Friends and family are, apparently, only willing to part with money to witness something odd, humorous or downright unpleasant. So what message does Movember convey to those whose moustaches are more-or-less permanent features? With large numbers of minority-ethnic men—for instance Kurds, Indians, Mexicans—spo…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 01:59 PM
5

THE PATRIARCHY preys on them and prevents them from going all out.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 03:49 AM
3

Dammit, I love birds.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 03:44 AM
1

Sure. Sry should have been more clear: In general cloning is not the same as parthenogenesis, in the case of the whiptail lizard the offspring are indeed clones.
/r/MensRights28/11/13 10:33 PM
1

Parthenogenesis is not cloning. The offspring is haploid (edit: not in all sepecies, but in some)
/r/MensRights28/11/13 03:02 PM
1

While not a movie character Tony Soprano was a fat guy. But other than that I have a hard time thinking of fat serious protagonists.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 11:18 PM
1

That wuld certainly e amusing to see.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 07:15 PM
1

Oh they would. I recently had a lengthy debate with soe feminist wheter gww is a misogynist. It was among the more stupid things.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 06:25 PM
2

The irony is strong in this one.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 08:22 AM
1

I know. In the context of crime it does.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:24 PM
1

Ys in a colloquial sense you were raped. The context makes it cofusing. It is not that important in the end so have a nic day.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:44 PM
0

Because the stale lexicon is powerful as it is. We dont need to invent a in the best case confusing in the worst case batshit insane ideological dictionary.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:35 PM
1

The word rape, regardless of what women's studies 'instructs' us, has a long historical association with violent plundering, seizure, robbery, extortion, abduction, taking I agree. But in the context of crime int he modern world it has a very specifi meaning, namely sex without consent. This does not mean that the word has no history. But conflating all meanings new and old makes this discussion impossible.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:34 PM
2

Yes I know that. The answer is not copying them but exposing them. This is a dishonest tatic and you lose crediblity when you do this shit.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:07 PM
1

I diagree. It is probably worse than rape. Thsi does not mean we should start conflate the two.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:06 PM
1

...
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:36 PM
1

Because people will argue about such shit. The mrm will look worse for it.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:35 PM
2

You must be new to this whole debating thing then. The moment people start new definition or start claiming they mean something else with their words the debate all too often devolves into chaos
/r/MensRights21/11/13 08:34 PM
0

Nope it is not.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:33 PM
2

It is decisive because it muddles up debate and allows debaters to use extremely dishonest tactics. It is decisive because people walk away confused.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:32 PM
2

So what? It does not change the fact that rape has a formal definition and that changing this terminology only causes cofusions and areas to attack.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:08 PM
1

The word root is often completely irrelevant.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 07:07 PM
2

The word rape has the formal meaning of having ex with someone without their consent. Accusing someone falsely, while having wide ranging and quite probably worse consequences does not meet this definition. Framing it as rape is an unnecessarily devisive reversal of terminology.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 05:54 PM
9

I disagree with framig false accusations as form of rape.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:45 PM
2

I disagree with many notions formulated there.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 10:43 AM
3

Yeah and stuff like plagues etc. are because She was forced to do it by THE PATRIARCHY.
/r/MensRights21/11/13 03:13 AM
1

I would probably take it as a compliment. The again I dont obsess about the physical differeces in strength others display.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:39 PM
2

Google Gale Dines.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 07:17 PM
1

Eve if this were the case, it would be a complete nonsequitur.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:36 PM
1

You asked a question, I answered it with more than a single word. It's not a "rhetorical trick". You made a formally correct aswer that completely dodged the central issue indicated by my question. This is a rhetorical trick.
/r/MensRights12/11/13 02:31 AM
1

Ok, do you consider visits at the urologist/gynecologist degrading? The answer with the blood test is just a very cheap rhetorical trick as it is trivial to amend the example.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 09:36 PM
4

Do you consider prostate exams degrading? Should we publish articles detailing how horrible it is to have your prostate examined?
/r/MensRights11/11/13 12:12 AM
6

So the slap is wrong because it is too weak and therefore reinforces THE PATRIARCHY, not because unprovoked violence is morally indefensible? What does the author think should happen? Should there be maimed males to reinforce the proper place of our female masters?
/r/MensRights10/11/13 11:40 PM
1

I changed it know. Just as a question: Why was the formulation problematic (pun intended ;))?
/r/MensRights10/11/13 12:49 AM
4

Because a lot of their answers made no sense ad they did not know enough abut the topic.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 12:47 AM
3

If you claim any sort of expertise in these areas then not knowing about these statistic is enough to discredit you. A random person on the street does not carry the same onus. Coherency is also quite important, a lot of the answers these people gave were extremely facepalmworthy.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 12:45 AM
1

This should ot be necessary. The key cncept, sex against consent is easy enough to understand.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:09 PM
13

There is evidence that the percentile level of attractiveness for women to not be perceived as revolting or undesireable is much lower than fr men. Just look at Okcupid attractiveness ratings: Most men have very low ratings, whereas this is not true for women. So, while it is probably very bad for a woman to be perceived as hideous, a lot more men are perceived as such. Edit: changed formulation a bit.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 02:50 PM
3

Well the ancient tradeoff between dishonesty and complete incompetence. One cannot be maliciously incompetent, i guess.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 01:52 AM
3

How would you call them? They have not heard of the statistics in question, were completely unprepared and barely coherent. Maybe idiot is the technical term.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 01:49 AM
17

"The entire Lord of the Rings trilogy, all Star Wars movies, The Social Network, Pulp Fiction and all but one of the Harry Potter movies fail this test," said Ellen Tejle Says more about the test than about the movies.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 09:58 PM
5

Why do you think the bechdel test is insignificant? I have explained it in my first post. Doesn't it point towards women being underrepresented as active, important participants in movie plots? Nope. It shows that narrative conventions are such that women do not talk with each other much. And is that not a bad thing? So is bad hair.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 04:09 PM
5

I see it as simply drawing attention to the problem. I doubt many people are going to skip watching a movie because it didn't pass the bechdel test. Giving it an official rating probably has such effects. I would love to draw attention to all kinds of double standards. Who said it has to be exclusive? Looking to "fix" one thing does not in any way mean you have to ignore or be blind to other things. I agree. But I also will not give official ratings to the haircuts of individual garbage collecto…
/r/MensRights06/11/13 03:32 PM
4

Drawing attention to it by giving out ratings based on it is a clear way of trying to lower the popularity of certain pieces of art based on this ridiculous standard. This may or may not be called trying to enforce it if you want to quibble about definition. As for insinuations that I have not read it: Where did I come up with the notion of a test: Either by reading article or the headline. The mr headline here does not contain anything about tests and the headline of the article does not explai…
/r/MensRights06/11/13 02:28 PM
9

Are you seriously saying you wouldn't see a problem with this? Yes. There are many possible tests I could devise, some of them will favor males others females. It is very unlikely that we will ever be able to stamp narrative conventions that differentiate between genders and trying to enforce such nonsense only stifles expression and art.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 02:06 PM
55

This is extremely annoying. If you look at many of the most critically and commercially successful movies, they all fail this test. However this does not mean that these movies are misogynistc, most of them have strong female leads that are independent and intelligent. What this suggests to me is that the test used is a very bad metric.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 12:00 PM
2

It's a social blender for every men in age to serve, and you'll create bonds with people that you'd never met otherwise because they don't belong to your racial group, social class, or language sphere, military service helps create national fraternity and we need it more than ever in our societies that are questioning their identity. In my experience there were little connections but lots of open hostility in an uncaring climate, which can nly be described as a colossal waste of my time. I think…
/r/MensRights30/10/13 12:50 PM
6

And I am not ready yet to die in war etcetera. What is oes even supposed to mean.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 12:48 PM
2

I am from austria, same phenomenon. Thats 6 months I dont get back.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 12:47 PM
1

OMG this is beyond good and evil....
/r/MensRights25/10/13 01:14 AM
2

I got men cannot be trusted as well.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 06:48 PM
0

I agree. I am cautious. Enough sociopaths out there and a LOT of them are women. Does not mean AWALT.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 10:51 PM
1

there are both douchebag men and women
/r/MensRights18/10/13 02:51 PM
17

Thats just silly. Women as a group lack the power to give meaningful consent. It is always rape.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 11:26 PM
0

What? That men and woman are both oppressed by certain gender roles? Conscription and violent death are primarily male domains. Men are being victimized at similar rates to woman sexually and at higher rates violently. Men control less wealth than females do. They can be legally mutilated in the entire world when they are babies (Circumcision). In summary men have to deal with a lot of shit and are victims of societal gender roles. 3rd wave feminism consistently missportrays these circumstances …
/r/MensRights13/10/13 09:25 PM
1

Because when you're discussing, say, rape victims or domestic abuse victims, or the assault on women in politics, it makes so much sense to talk about the actions that women do to put themselves in those situtations. Extreme /S Feminists are explicitly trying to steer the conversation over to the actions of perpetrators, not victims, because our culture tends to focus on the actions of the victims as somehow justifying whatever happened to them - I'm sure you've heard the frankly idiotic metapho…
/r/MensRights13/10/13 12:16 PM
1

Dude, feminism is a progressive movement. Reactionary is the opposite >of that. Not at all. 3rd wave feminism has many hallmarks of traditionalism: Women are typically seen as victims that are acted upon, whereas men are actors. Feminism is a conservative/reactionary movement.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 02:03 AM
1

I know the question is rhetorical, nevertheless I feel like spelling the answer out: No!
/r/MensRights01/10/13 12:32 AM
15

There is no evidence that men can be described as privileged, nor should you believe that men fucked over by the system chose to do so.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 10:34 AM
8

a compliment on someone’s looks is not communication, it’s sex Specifically rape.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 12:56 AM
4

First world problems.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 03:40 PM
8

It is kinda like quidditch - no matter how good the rest of the team it is all about Harry Potter.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 01:26 AM
1

Currently I could not do the mens requirement even with much more training, but the female is in reach... guess I will sue them to get in, after all I am clearly marine material /s
/r/MensRights29/08/13 01:23 AM
10

But then they would again be justified in existing because they would have been raped and therefore they were not raped and they would not be justified..... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Logic is rape.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:44 PM
1

I just was blocked for commenting under this video. Pretty pathetic.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 08:33 PM
0

You forgot the 'to me'.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 05:40 PM
2

Also all feelings that support feminism are obviously true.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:09 PM
2

If with most you mean the majority, then you are right. If you mean that there are comparatively much less female rapists you are wrong.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 11:52 AM
2

Where is suicide on that list? Where is forced military service?
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:19 AM
1

I agree that the interpretation of the study as 80% female perpetrator rests on two assertions: 1, male and female perpetrators commit offenses at equal rates. 2, the percentage of victimisation during the last 12 months is the same as for the life time data. On the other hand: The 12 month data is a lot more reliable thna the life time data as there are studies about the fact that men fail to report abuse in such studies to an disproportional amount if the abuse happened a long time ago.* Edit:…
/r/MensRights25/08/13 07:42 PM
6

All knowledge is provisional, therefore any findings that contradict feminism are wrong.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 06:53 PM
5

I am against this practice. I would also be against the practice of removing the tip of the nose of small children.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 09:07 PM
2

thanks
/r/MensRights22/08/13 10:20 AM
11

racism is rape
/r/MensRights21/08/13 11:41 PM
1

Communism?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 09:59 PM
1

yeah, because real people could have said the same.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 07:58 PM
1

Do yu have a link for this?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 03:16 PM
9

It is worse. It is literally holocaust.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 11:27 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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