TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

crocodile7 Archive

View 0 posts and 162 comments by crocodile7 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

Why? I agree with your sentiment, but think you phrased it wrong. Kids are not more important, but harming them is far less justified in a war. Logic of war is brutal. If my country or village were under attack, I'd rather we lose a bunch of kids than an important general... or even just a bunch of well-placed experienced soldiers, if the situation were precarious. On the flip side, killing the general is justified (since he's key to the war effort), whereas killing kids does not bring any benef…
/r/MensRights23/09/11 08:02 AM
2

if the other party might otherwise be in a position to remove/destroy evidence or your property. I think this is the only exception. Make sure police collects any relevant physical evidence, if there's threat of it being removed or tampered with. Other than that, you don't benefit much from talking now instead of after consulting a lawyer.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 05:24 AM
3

You give up your DNA with every blood or urine sample, or even a single hair strand. There should be laws to prevent gathering and abuse of DNA information. You'll never be able to actually prevent the gov't from knowing it. Cost may be a limiting issue at the moment, but it'll go down radically in a few years.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 05:18 AM
24

Not in the USA...
/r/seduction19/09/11 02:46 AM
1

Also, losing the fairly decent job he had almost immediately... he's not getting it back.
/r/MensRights19/09/11 12:56 AM
2

It depends on how much potential you see in them. Two meetings are sufficient time to gain a strong interest in someone. If you were already in a relationship, you can make an argument that it makes absolutely no sense to endure so much effort / inconvenience on seeing them... since they'd understand the difficulty and you could meet another time. If you combine these the two arguments, then it's never appropriate... and that seems wrong.
/r/seduction19/07/11 07:39 AM
3

True, but we have more appropriate euphemisms for that, like "being a leader".
/r/seduction13/06/11 02:40 AM
2

Anything making you happy is worth pursuing. However, for the purpose of discussion on methods, an HB9 is generally harder to get than an HB4 (and may require a somewhat different game, if only to contain your excitement). That's all, doesn't mean an HB9 would make you any happier.
/r/seduction11/06/11 01:33 AM
3

She replied (which is better than where you've been before). Unless you've been completely disqualified earlier, she is likely stewing inside, but trying to appear indifferent. What did you expect her to do -- suddenly beg you to reconsider? The final judgement on whether the reply works or not will be based on her future attitude, not this one immediate response.
/r/seduction28/05/11 05:58 PM
11

Consistency is overrated. Doing one thing (strong kino) while saying another (let's just be friends) can be a good game technique.
/r/seduction26/05/11 11:49 AM
16

Exactly. The line is firmly in the "funny but impractical" category.
/r/seduction14/05/11 05:01 AM
9

Are these videos real or staged? Sound is too good for amateur live filming. The only way they'd get this sort of sound quality is by wearing good wireless microphones (which generally cost $150-$500 per piece). It also seems they used several cameras (though I'm not sure about that). If the video is not staged... their approach is brutally direct. It might work, but did they leave out 20++ failures before they hooked up with the girls who went for it? From an educational point of view, the fail…
/r/seduction27/04/11 10:06 PM
3

On the positive side, you do have few hundred million more to choose from...
/r/seduction26/04/11 05:14 PM
3

I think your question would be more applicable to countries where most young people don't speak English or speak it at a very limited level (e.g. China, Japan or South America). In Germany, you'll do just fine with English. Another interesting take is game when you speak the language to a limited degree (e.g. well enough for a goal-oriented exchange, but not sufficient for a casual conversation). On the good side, limited language ability gives both sides more leeway -- if there's general good v…
/r/seduction26/04/11 07:29 AM
1

You ought to tell her "HerName, I think this is a beginning of a beautiful friendship."
/r/seduction25/04/11 07:02 AM
3

Don't make a mistake of using your ego self-esteem as an excuse not to approach girls. You don't need to have sex with them (if you're waiting for the right one), just talk, socialize, get them to the point where they want to sleep with you. Using "she's not good enough" as an excuse to withdraw sets you up for failure when and if you do meet the good one.
/r/seduction25/04/11 06:30 AM
1

It's a matter of definition. You'd hardly find anyone who's good at game being labelled "introvert". A "former introvert" at worst.
/r/seduction23/04/11 12:31 PM
3

It's really hard to have a balanced relationship where both sides care and contribute equally. In my experience, it always gets out of whack, with one side caring more (and putting in more effort) while the other is caring less and getting more out of it. Once the imbalance gets rolling, it sort of snowballs until the breaking point, unless the "caring more" side knows consciously pulls back and has the skill and determination to manipulate the balance (against their instincts).
/r/seduction15/04/11 04:14 PM
3

How would that he smart? If he spent half of their marital assets, wouldn't his wife be entitled to the remaining 25% (i.e. half of what is left)?
/r/MensRights09/04/11 06:33 AM
7

Exactly. If the wife spent all that money shopping (plus got into credit card debt), it would be a non-issue and not the least bit newsworthy. Is giving it to charity somehow worse?
/r/MensRights09/04/11 06:25 AM
16

Having to work for your money (instead of inheriting it) is indeed terrifying to some people.
/r/MensRights09/04/11 06:24 AM
-7

a more attractive guy attracts more women And a faster car gets you to your destination faster. Did you figure this out all by yourself?
/r/seduction07/04/11 05:26 PM
1

Good point, the distinction between economic and social liberalism is important. However, I think the social part is about maximizing freedom. It often comes down to valuing positive liberty (ability to control your life and maximize general well-being) over negative liberty (freedom from interference from the gov't) when the two conflict. Ideally, we'd optimize for both, but in practice they are sometimes incompatible, though not nearly as much as some influential forces try to make them out to…
/r/MensRights04/04/11 09:45 PM
3

There are multiple areas at stake, so both you and @AimlessArrow are correct. Gender and racial quality have become something we take for granted. Nobody is trying to push for segregation and banning female suffrage. Gay right are slightly behind, but almost established as well, apart from the red-herring marriage issue. Consistent move to the left, surely, but that debate is mostly closed (except for fringe issues). Move to left. Social assistance (welfare for the poor, unemployment benefits, m…
/r/MensRights04/04/11 12:04 PM
1

war veterans coming back from WWII do qualify That's what I said...
/r/MensRights04/04/11 04:03 AM
1

Of course, individuals should have that choice. You will find that, in aggregate average, woman would make different choices than men. Note that during WWII, individual choice was not exactly highest priority.
/r/MensRights03/04/11 05:06 PM
3

By "solidarity" logic, men really do owe their souls to women, because women get paid less money than men. I do not see that solidarity leads that far. Solidarity applies to people or social groups who are significantly disadvantaged and subject to hardship (war veterans coming back from WWII do qualify). It does not apply to your neighbor whose salary is 70% of yours (and whose household/family is incidentally same as yours).
/r/MensRights03/04/11 05:03 PM
2

For what it's worth, I think the only response to a woman spewing irrational accusations is staying perfectly calm and ignoring her, while showing a mild amount of sympathy for her plight. It's wrong to respond directly to this, just say something like "you seem a bit upset today, let's talk in a few days after you're felling better". If she cares, she'll be back to talk to you. If she doesn't, there isn't much you can do, being accommodating to her whims will not make her respect or love you mo…
/r/seduction27/03/11 06:46 PM
1

Some people are naturally outgoing and don't need much of an additional push to make approaches. It looks like you're lucky to be in that category. Refraining from fapping probably does not make interactions better (at least not consistently). It does, however, make most guys significantly more motivated to go out and approach women.
/r/seduction22/03/11 05:18 PM
1

They're all jerkoffs.
/r/seduction22/03/11 05:15 PM
21

Doesn't work in Asia, I know every stranger's eye color already :(
/r/seduction21/03/11 03:29 AM
3

Depends on the culture. Most of the U.S. is at the "keep to yourself at all times" end of the scale.
/r/seduction21/03/11 03:25 AM
8

It's not all in your head, lot of it is in your glands as well. Hormone levels matter quite a bit when it comes to mood / assertiveness etc.
/r/seduction16/03/11 05:31 AM
11

Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Unless you're paying her by the act.
/r/seduction16/03/11 05:29 AM
5

Not to disagree with you, but this is a regular staff page, not the listing the emergency personnel specifically. Given that most non-essential personnel can be evacuated, the page you linked is not relevant.
/r/MensRights16/03/11 04:55 AM
1

His accomplishments notwithstanding, if somebody asked me to quickly find an illustrative photo or video of a douchebag, I'd start by typing "Mystery" into Google. He has the superficial cocky all-style-no-substance look and demeanor which is so easy to hate.
/r/seduction15/03/11 09:03 PM
1

Kino is 1-10 scale for an expert. For an average PUA practitioner, the scale is possibly far more crude (e.g. none, then 1-3), and binary in an early stage. Some people lack the well-honed social antennae, which makes it near impossible to distinguish the small variations.
/r/seduction13/03/11 07:01 PM
8

How do I get out of quicksand? Keep flapping your hands.
/r/seduction04/03/11 09:50 AM
-1

Most people are scarcely above average even at things they do best. Not everyone is good at something, unless you broaden the definition to point of being meaningless.
/r/seduction03/03/11 05:58 AM
16

The homely guy you posted would get laid easily with 20-something women if he dressed in Armani suits and owned a yacht. The women in question... would not. Aesthetically speaking, old men are no more attractive than old women... but there are other important aspects in partner choice. From a biological standpoint, fertility matters, and men are able to have offspring well into old age while women stop drop off sharply at 40. Differences in partner preference between men and women are real exist…
/r/MensRights28/02/11 08:17 PM
5

Once you're done with all the beer, would you please reconsider your answer?
/r/MensRights28/02/11 08:11 PM
4

An average animal pack is on the order of 10 individuals (maybe up to 50, but probably no more). Even there, multiple males are reproducing, it's just that the alpha has considerably more offspring then others.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 06:08 AM
8

Depends on how you define society. Ottoman sultans were generally fathers of most (or even all) children within the palace walls, often dozens of them. Eunuchs would tend to their harem, and the palace is the size of a small town. This is by no means an unique example when it comes to people with power. all other males willingly support You understood this wrong. Most other males in an animal pack are mortal enemies of the alpha, and wait for their turn to strike when the alpha gets too old or w…
/r/MensRights27/02/11 05:22 AM
2

Why? The concept is a useful distinction in most social hierarchies of animals. Male reproductive strategy is generally to take more risk for a shot at numerous offspring. Some succeed at this (alphas), some do not, and fail to reproduce. Technically, I guess any male who reproduces is not a beta... historically, majority of the men who ever lived produced no offspring, while some (e.g. Genghis Khan) were extremely prolific.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 05:10 AM
1

You're correct about the deterrent value. However, I think people who advocate this rule are looking at it from a retribution / fairness perspective. The two are distinct -- for false crime reporting, effective deterrent can be achieved with a fairly low sentence (lower than potential damage), while in other cases a punishment higher than damage caused is needed (e.g. for theft, paying back double the original amount if caught would be ineffective).
/r/MensRights27/02/11 04:35 AM
5

anyone who falsely accuses another person of a crime should face the same punishment Sounds appealing in an "eye for an eye" way, but does not withstand serious scrutiny. Does falsely accusing someone of murder really warrant the death penalty? What should the standard of proof be? What if a person is genuinely confused? Would this deter crime reporting?
/r/MensRights26/02/11 08:03 AM
2

[Google book] WTF? How is that a valid source name, or relevant at all? You may well say [A book], or [Written word] without loss of specificity.
/r/MensRights25/02/11 06:40 AM
-3

He did not say that he enjoys having it more than he'd enjoy a non-circumcised one. I have a friend who enjoys evenings at the park in his wheelchair.
/r/MensRights23/02/11 04:12 PM
8

That's gross, but it's defamation, not child abuse. Tasteless and objectionable != illegal.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 07:55 AM
1

I stand corrected. It is certainly possible (and even common) to trust someone who is not trustworthy.
/r/MensRights08/02/11 07:56 AM
-1

It is a sign of distrust. It's insurance against treachery and greed of the less well-off party to the marriage. If you really trust someone, you don't need to insure against those traits. It's certainly a good idea to mitigate an unequal contract. Given how legally sensitive marriage is, a person who was fully worthy of trust and had your interests in mind would probably suggest the prenup themselves, despite the fact that it does not benefit them.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 04:56 PM
2

The system that makes such an outrageous claim possible is the result of radical feminism. Under any rational legal system, such a claim would be laughed out of court. It is irrelevant whether the woman in question can even pronounce the word "feminism". Most likely she is a completely non-ideological golddigger.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 04:50 PM
2

Generally true, but with 4 (four) kids, I'd cut her some slack. Also, for some people traditional roles work out well.
/r/MensRights06/02/11 04:43 PM
5

Exactly. Even if most of the women in these cases were legitimately fed up with their circumstances, the fact that they never tried to communicate and resolves it shows their complete lack of commitment to making the marriage work.
/r/MensRights05/02/11 02:45 PM
2

Good points. Hiding income already is already a crime (under the tax code). It makes no sense to consider it only in the context of child support, although there should be provisions for those convicted of hiding income / tax evasion to pay adjusted child support, along with other penalties. Intentionally going homeless... does that happen, except in case of mentally unstable? If a woman has children with a guy who's crazy to that degree, that's just too bad. If necessary, the state ought to ste…
/r/MensRights05/02/11 02:13 PM
1

what if a father purposely takes a low paying job to avoid supporting his children because he is angry? He should have the freedom to adjust his lifestyle. Frankly, very few people would lose a well-paying job they like just out of spite... but they might quit a job which makes them feel miserable for a lower paying one. Unless they have the legal status of a slave, they must be allowed to do so. Child support should be percentage of income subject to a minimum (50% of food+clothing+shelter) and…
/r/MensRights05/02/11 02:02 PM
1

Equality by reference or by value? Some of us distinguish the two.
/r/MensRights05/02/11 01:53 PM
2

That's almost as much as workers get paid in China. Maybe we found a way to remain competitive. We already have the world's highest per-capita prison population, but I guess we'll need to push it further.
/r/MensRights05/02/11 01:51 PM
3

Good advice. If anything a church is the type of organization which could help the OP out with this... They probably have both the legal clout and presumed moral authority necessary to make a difference. They question is whether they care to intervene in practice, or just offer spiritual guidance.
/r/MensRights05/02/11 01:19 PM
2

A theist or atheist?
/r/MensRights05/02/11 01:18 PM
11

Of course, it's common sense not to say things like that directly, people get offended. However, when do a non-trivial amount of directed learning and practice to achieve a certain class of goals, and then put a substantial effort into achieving such a goal, and that goal is getting a woman to sleep with you... then, in all honesty, you did "get her to sleep with you". She wouldn't have done it if you just approached her (while being the AFC that most of us were) and asked right off the bat.
/r/seduction30/01/11 08:39 PM
-4

He meant Saudi Arabia. Come on, give the guy a break, the two are practically identical --both are small insignificant primitive countries somewhere in Asia, far from U.S. and both are evil. /s
/r/MensRights29/01/11 01:49 AM
6

This. Analogous to the fact that identical approach will be labeled creepy if the woman is not attracted to you, and charming if she is.
/r/seduction28/01/11 01:17 PM
1

Assuming sufficient competition in the market That's one huge assumption to make for the health insurance industry, given how much lobbying and regulation is involved.
/r/MensRights22/01/11 01:29 AM
3

Market works both from the supply side (i.e. considering the costs of the supplier), but also the demand side (i.e. what the consumer is willing or able to pay). On the demand side, insurance industry would happily charge a different premium between two customers with equivalent risk profile if one is able to pay more than the other. This is not corruption, other companies does it (airline seats being one non-controversial example). Like any private company, they're under obligation to maximize …
/r/MensRights20/01/11 08:38 PM
2

Men are not interested in being a provider. They are interested in getting something they don't have, a warm, caring, attentive and overall pleasant partner. Somebody who's complementary, who doesn't poke them with their rough edges. Career woman often fail at above, and blame the men for wanting "to be providers".
/r/MensRights19/01/11 06:22 AM
3

You definitely took the faux alpha attitude too far. She offered you two alternate times, and you rejected both. Instead of coming across as in control and high value, it's possible that you came across as an impatient brat ("But moooom, I want it nooooow..."). As for her "busy tomorrow" switch, she's just trying to save face after your rejection.
/r/seduction15/01/11 07:02 AM
1

Best answer, cutting through the emotional muck to the essence of the problem. Divorce should be considered as a legal took in achieving above two goals. It may be bring significant financial damage -- it usually does, for the man... but then long-term financial damage of being together may amount to more.
/r/MensRights09/01/11 06:50 AM
5

Was she blatantly and repeatedly lying for material gain, or trying to hide a character weakness out of shame and fear the partner would leave her. Both are obviously bad, and must be dealt with. However, the difference is one between greed and love. Very far apart, and must be clearly distinguished.
/r/MensRights09/01/11 06:44 AM
0

I don't see why the father couldn't have the right to opt out of child support within some limited time window. To make things equitable, the window should be few months long, roughly equal to the time the mother has to decide if she wants to carry or terminate the pregnancy. To equalize the burden, perhaps a reasonable one-off payment should be required by the father in order to opt out (to compensate for fair share of the medical costs and discomfort of either abortion or pregnancy itself). Th…
/r/MensRights28/12/10 06:49 AM
1

Paternity test is fair, but it is a zero-sum game. Allowing it will take away considerable resources from mothers who are getting child support from men who did not father the children. Those women lose the amount X, those men win the same amount back. Zero sum, unless you assign value to trifles such as fairness.
/r/MensRights28/12/10 05:20 AM
0

The root of the problem is not that it's legal for a woman to stop birth control without telling the man. That is deceitful, but ought to be legal. The problem is down the chain, that the man is forced to take responsibility and pay huge sums for the child he did not want (and perhaps did not even father). That's the law which ought to be changed. both partner's rights are better protected It's a zero-sum game in many ways. If party A is unjustly forced to hand over large amount of resources to …
/r/MensRights28/12/10 05:14 AM
1

Isn't it already the case that court provides the defendant with a free lawyer in a criminal case if he cannot afford one? Of course, that free lawyer is usually worth just about as much as the defendant is paying them.
/r/MensRights28/12/10 05:00 AM
1

Just alimony / child support these days, as far as I know... it used to be much broader.
/r/MensRights25/12/10 03:59 AM
5

Communism was a great movement too... until that Lenin guy came along and spoiled the Party. /s Seriously, there was nothing wrong at all in fighting for workers rights in times when 12-14h days were a norm, people got thrown to prison for debts, and young teenagers were wasting away in factories and mines.
/r/MensRights24/12/10 10:57 AM
5

On an unrelated note, suicide was proven extremely effective at preventing the onset and eliminating mortality attributed to all diseases :P
/r/MensRights22/12/10 09:37 AM
2

You can get most of these without any sexual intercourse whatsoever... but probability is much reduced. There's no 100% foolproof solution.
/r/MensRights22/12/10 09:35 AM
4

Senator Dwrg, throw in the mandatory paternity DNA testing, and I'll support your bill.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 04:08 PM
5

Condoms are expensive? Compared to what? The pill generally costs $15-$50/mo, and unless you have sex over 2 times every single day, condoms cost less. Of course, there are other downsides.
/r/MensRights16/12/10 04:03 PM
2

an unfaithful man may abandon a woman, leaving her raise her offspring by herself Not necessarily. If the man is sexually frustrated and cannot be satisfied at home, having an occasional temporary fling outside may make him less inclined to leave the wife and children. I'm not pulling this out of my backside, I actually heard it from several women (not in the U.S., of course). Women tend to be more worried about emotional than sexual infidelity.
/r/MensRights15/12/10 02:02 PM
2

as long as your sexual partner is clean from STDs, there shouldn't be any issues with how many sexual partners they've had It is an indication of their character, but only if differences are order-of-magnitude (e.g. 5 vs. 20, not 5 vs 2). It does show the degree of impulsiveness, self-control, decision making, motivation, long vs. short term thinking. Of course, two impulsive, live-for-today individuals may be a great match for each other. I agree they aren't necessarily worse people because of …
/r/MensRights15/12/10 01:53 PM
1

The issue has been muddled by the sexual revolution. Not many men would refuse having sex with a woman who is inappropriately dressed, or who had had numerous partners before. Generally, in hopes of getting laid, men would avoid rubbing things in, even if they disliked them. However, when it comes to a decision to marry, those negatives would certainly matter (if they had a choice).
/r/MensRights15/12/10 01:43 PM
1

Which disease requires treatment before being properly diagnosed? Transmission rates are very far from 100% for these (more like 1% for HIV, up to ~30% for some other STDs). If they're so worried, they could just take a suitable antibiotic (whether she has the STD or not, she can't be sure no matter what Assange now has or doesn't), and be done with it. The excuse is complete bollocks (technical term).
/r/MensRights09/12/10 01:42 PM
2

Yes, but if she's scared she got something asymptomatic from Assange, how does testing him make any difference?
/r/MensRights09/12/10 08:41 AM
14

Warning: this advice depends on the culture you're in. In America, generally guys would do woefully little for their male friends. In many other places (e.g. Southern or Eastern Europe), they'll be way more helpful to a male friend than to a woman.
/r/seduction02/12/10 06:06 PM
2

If there is a true national emergency, a war like WWII, the government has to have mechanisms for appropriate defense. Since there's nuclear deterrent, I doubt this would ever happen. Given the experience in Vietnam, government will think hard before calling the draft for optional wars in far away places, not directly related to security of U.S. homeland or key allies.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 10:32 PM
1

IANAL, but if you have proof of him making these threats, he can get convicted for assault (just for the threat, if they do it that's battery), in addition to rape. If he can get off on weakly related character grounds (honorable military service), a substantiated assault charge would help you convict him of rape on same grounds. I have a feeling there is just about zero proof in your case (both for rape and assault) and that it's your word against his. That's unfortunate and it doesn't help you…
/r/MensRights01/12/10 10:21 PM
6

There are two widespread legal approaches to inheritance. Respect the deceased's wishes, as expressed in the will. Ensure fairness by splitting assets equitably according to some formula (with a very minor role for deceased's directives). First approach is more popular in Anglo-Saxon countries, the second one in most of Continental Europe. In France, I wouldn't bat an eyelid at this type of court decision, but in Canada, it does break with traditions.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 10:57 AM
2

Where's that huge increase in crime rate in China? I'm not seeing it (beyond what would be expected from ultra-fast urbanization / development). Maybe in the future, but then you can't say "just look at".
/r/MensRights30/11/10 08:30 PM
4

It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
/r/MensRights30/11/10 06:21 AM
10

Stealing food from your own house? I'm guilty as charged. Time to raid the fridge. Unless it's beluga caviar they're saving up for the wedding anniversary, it doesn't seem like a transgression to me.
/r/MensRights30/11/10 06:21 AM
1

I agree it's fucked up. You'd be surprised how many marriages are. A wrong and a right don't make a right either, but sticking for that right may cost the guy a fortune (50+% of his assets in case of a divorce, substantial sum in case of raising an extra child).
/r/MensRights29/11/10 10:37 PM
1

Yes, people generally judge actions based on possible consequences. Making up a fake excuse to make a friend not feel bad that you can't meet them is not the same as making up a fake excuse that sends someone to prison. Both are equally a fake excuse, and could be done using similar words. Your care example is correct -- cars are indeed much more dangerous to others than bikes. That's why state requires people to pass a driving test, but not a cycling test. What's your point? I think we're talki…
/r/MensRights29/11/10 10:33 PM
-1

Avoiding the question is not the same as lying. If he says "maybe one of us has a problem", it's a true statement.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:57 AM
-4

What if that's the norm in their relationship? What if the wife engages in such practices regularly? Would a policy of 100% honesty still be the best?
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:51 AM
-3

In an ideal world, yes. Unfortunately, most marriages are strained and unbalanced. The partners jostle for control, with the wife having a huge legal advantage in case of the nuclear option (divorce). In such a situation omitting the entire truth may be just the smart thing to do. If the guy's wife is systematically taking advantage of him (as many do), I'd not blame him for getting back in this way. Not an ideal marriage, but how many are?
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:50 AM
1

You can't force people who act on an impulse with no foresight to do proper planning and think about he long term. They will jump through bureaucratic hoops and behave in exactly the same way as they normally would.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:47 AM
1

In an ideal world, this is true. In a society where making your wife angry means you're out 50% of your assets + alimony + child support + lawyer fees... I'd use the words strategic thinking rather than deception. If they were unable to have a child at all, that would be different, but for missing out on the second child, stakes are lower.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:44 AM
-3

Not even close. Getting off birth control is forcing someone to pay an unexpected bill for $500k-$1 mil, when you made a promise you will not. Not informing the partner of infertility (after the first child) is like taking someone for a joyride on Sunday knowing you won't reach the store before closing hour (but let's try anyway). It's still pleasant, and costs them nothing (except time), they just don't get to do the expected task in the end.
/r/MensRights29/11/10 08:41 AM
1

Manpower means something entirely different. My first association is with low-wage manual labor.
/r/MensRights25/11/10 07:42 PM
1

No idea what the girls on dating sites think. Don't get discouraged. I knew two White girls in college (both hot, blonde Eastern Europeans) who had long-term Chinese BFs. Both guys were quiet types, smart and slightly nerdy. Physically, they were clean cut, slightly overweight, but tall above average. Sample of 2, for whatever it's worth.
/r/seduction18/11/10 05:35 PM
1

Cultural differences. The reseach that suggests posting the pic you have does not apply to a the group of girls who's interested in you. You need to optimize for your target audience. To be honest, first impression based on your pic is that you're a construction worker and an alcoholic. Of course this is wrong, but it counts. Asian girls don't dig wild, half-naked drunkards much as white girls do. Clean-cut, professional-looking guys have an advantage with that group, especially if they're 1st o…
/r/seduction18/11/10 10:58 AM
1

I fully agree a girl in that case would deserve a put-down (tit for tat). Some arrogance is called for. However, the line "I'm not interested in sleeping with you yet" is such a blatantly obvious sour grapes comeback that it doesn't actually show confidence or restore control.
/r/seduction15/11/10 05:55 PM
5

Does being such an obvious pompous asshole actually work? Sure, it feels good to be one, but does it yield real-world results? Unless she's colossally insecure, she know you're interested in sleeping with her, and she'll call out your bluff in no time.
/r/seduction15/11/10 04:39 PM
1

American living in SE Asia. No need for PUA where I am now. Actually, most expat guys spend more time rejecting offers than chasing them. Going for increasing quality is still a welcome challenge. Almost feels like being a woman. Weird, before I came here, I'd have to work my ass off to get what's almost effortless here.
/r/seduction11/11/10 08:35 PM
5

It's China, not the U.S. They don't have the religion of victimhood. If anything, they're willing to put up with more crap from officials than you can even imagine.
/r/MensRights11/11/10 04:08 PM
2

I'm not convinced.
/r/MensRights11/11/10 04:05 PM
1

Good observation. However, harder work by no means translates to higher pay (even at the same general level of qualifications). I'm sure construction work is way harder than selling train tickets, being an office clerk or an investment banker (even if you count efforts on education when measuring hard). Wages are about market supply & demand. No equivalencies implying same pay can be made between different jobs. Only compare apples with apples (e.g. an entry level car saleswoman with an entry le…
/r/MensRights11/11/10 05:19 AM
2

Why did I read this "Crush your date"?
/r/seduction11/11/10 05:13 AM
1

It's best to either avoid the while she's sick, or at least keep it brief and casual. On one hand, it's good to show some compassion. Explicitly avoiding her when she's sick (especially the "i don't want to catch it" excuse), would signal you're self-centered and apprehensive. On the other hand, you don't want to seem needy and appear to be latching onto an opportunity to show you care too much and become an instant best-only-close friend-in-need-is-a-friend-indeed. No pampering, just stop by to…
/r/seduction09/11/10 11:56 AM
7

DNA testing can cut both ways. Why would a man automatically accept a child as his, and be obliged to pay child support, just on the woman's say-so that the child is his? Even in a stable relationship, she could have easily cheated. If we discard DNA testing as a tool, why wouldn't the man's say-so ("child is not mine") be sufficient to get him out of all paternal obligations? The author is counting on the man's sense of honor and duty to pay for an unverified claim. I think it's only fair that:…
/r/MensRights09/11/10 08:29 AM
5

They are just as impulsive as they age, but can no longer get away with it as often.
/r/MensRights07/11/10 07:08 PM
1

The canonical answer is "because he can". Same as to why women leech off existing relationships even while looking onwards.
/r/MensRights07/11/10 08:52 AM
0

Not universal. In Thailand university terms are May-September and then November-March. Malaysia January-May and June-November. Philippines June-March. In general, countries with harsh winters and temperate summers have a long summer break. Spring break is not very common (I think most countries don't have it).
/r/MensRights07/11/10 08:50 AM
4

In tropical climates (where most of Earth's population lives) they certainly don't. Ramadan is in August this year, Songkran is in April, Chinese New Year/Tet is in February.
/r/MensRights07/11/10 02:56 AM
4

It's all about incentives. Why does a dog lick his balls?
/r/MensRights07/11/10 02:18 AM
4

It would be weird if breaking up before Christmas applied to Buddhists or Muslims... or spring break for that matter.
/r/MensRights07/11/10 02:17 AM
1

Why is being an alpha male so important? It makes attracting and keeping women easier in the initial stages of a relationship. When you're playing the field and trying to score, then the alpha male behavior helps. In a LTR of 2 years, individual characteristics and compatibility are more important. How acceptable is it to judge women based on their sex appeal? Are PUAs out purely for meaningless sex, or do they actually take a girl's personality into account? Before you meet a woman, she has no …
/r/seduction06/11/10 04:53 PM
5

Nothing wrong with a female urologist. I'm generally uncomfortable showing my schwong to strangers, male or female.
/r/MensRights01/11/10 07:45 AM
1

My barber is bald.
/r/MensRights01/11/10 07:43 AM
3

Women are extremely adept at getting men to fight their battles. Men are less good at that.
/r/MensRights30/10/10 03:56 AM
2

From an evolutionary perspective, that's a rather big benefit.
/r/MensRights17/10/10 12:36 PM
5

Word choice does matter. Feminism is associated with many positive developments, equal voting rights, equality under the law, equal educational opportunities. It is hard to repurpose the positive word to evoke the negative aspects.
/r/MensRights10/10/10 12:49 PM
10

I think misandrists (analogous to misogynysts) or female chauvinists is a better name.
/r/MensRights10/10/10 12:46 PM
4

In my view the article is mostly bollocks. "Men believe that they will all get a woman with the looks of a model and the abil i ties of a porn star, and they do not want to set tle for any thing less. " Really? Not at all. I'd be happy with an average-looking Western girl if she was caring and not bitchy and would marry one if it weren't for her legal right to 50% of my assets + alimony on a whim. In other words, if you're likely to get a crappy deal with how you're treated in a relationship, sh…
/r/MensRights06/10/10 04:53 AM
1

Good point, incentives at work. I'd love to see some statistics on this.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 06:43 PM
2

Your advice is sound. Moreover, it does not conflict with not getting married at all.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 08:07 AM
1

The second guy has no responsibility towards a guy he does not even know. The wife does. However, the second guy has it coming, if she did it once, she'll do it again to him.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 07:56 AM
1

Crap! The next door neighbor in my duplex is a real hag. Same roof, and we're sharing a wall too. Not sure what her name was, but I guess I'll find out from divorce papers.
/r/MensRights29/09/10 07:51 AM
3

This is an obvious abuse of police authority. He had every right to come in civilian clothes and have a chat with boy's parents. Sex between two 14 year olds is not a criminal matter, but I can see how a parent would freak out about something like that and like to prevent it. Boy's parents take a small part of the blame -- if I were them, no way I'd let the cop in without a warrant. I do hope they sue him for what he's worth.
/r/MensRights28/09/10 05:00 AM
7

Your breast cancer analogy is slightly awkward, considering it affects about as many people as prostate cancer, with far more money spent fighting it. However, in backwards Central Asian countries, girls are disadvantaged, so money spent helping them does have more impact.
/r/MensRights27/09/10 08:00 PM
1

I see your point. However, if one distrusts the system so much, switching DNA samples or just faking the results (without doing the test, to save money) is easier to do and a less serious transgression than switching babies. In case of such mistrust, doing 2 tests at independent labs is required.
/r/MensRights21/09/10 11:07 AM
0

You are entirely correct. It would be in the best interest of both the child and the mother. If the mother stoops down to cuckoldry, it's obvious that biological father is unavailable to devote resources to his offspring. By the same token, taking high quality newborns from poor parents and giving them to rich couples also benefits the child. On the first glance, it sounds outrageous, but actually more fair than cuckoldry, since the poor parents do not have to bear the cost of raising the child …
/r/MensRights20/09/10 12:01 PM
2

Wow, only 2.3x more expensive than it should be. By U.S. standards, that's a pretty good deal!
/r/MensRights20/09/10 11:53 AM
1

Why would anybody do father-child-mother? Identity of the mother is generally indisputable, or am I missing something?
/r/MensRights20/09/10 11:52 AM
1

Brochure image bias seems irrelevant. Look at it from the demand side. Women prefer to see women using the facilities. Men have the preference for seeing women in swimsuits. Overall, number of people of either gender who care much for pictures of men swimming is not very high.
/r/MensRights19/09/10 08:32 PM
1

People who are even considering marriage must be comfortable enough with each other not to need to tiptoe around trivial matters. They should be able to take a bit of teasing with humor too. "Do I look fat in this?" "You betcha. It doesn't matter what you wear, but how much you eat, honey." Being tactical should be left for large issues, but being nice to each other (without slobbering or flattery) should be practiced every day. Brown-nosing your wife doesn't work in the long term. It makes a ma…
/r/MensRights19/09/10 08:27 PM
2

128 forcible rapes at Harvard? One would think there would be more of an uproar about this, especially since the country's elite is victimized. It means 1.2% of female Harvard students are forcibly raped (during their 4 years there)!? Don't know what the stats for female prisons are, but I would assume those are safer. Is this based on actual convictions or something else? Edit: Cambridge, MA gets ~10 rapes/year, according to their own police statistics. That's where Harvard is. Numbers on the d…
/r/MensRights18/09/10 05:01 AM
1

True, it should be called what it is, "having sex with a minor". Age difference must also be taken into account, otherwise it's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:54 AM
2

"Older than college age"? There is no way he is a professor, staff or a grad student?
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:50 AM
8

The problem is, circumstances change. You can't easily judge how somebody will behave under pressure, how they will treat you once their priorities shift, and how biological/hormonal changes will affect their "character". If anything is certain in marriage is that there will be moments of pressure, priorities certainly will change over time, and change in underlying biological basis (children, aging, menopause) is inevitable. For example, at 30 after 5 years of dating you and your wife may be wo…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 08:29 PM
4

Three women for every man. I fully agree that would be ideal... for us guys.
/r/MensRights10/09/10 08:37 AM
1

Infanticide is not really a problem in Japan. In 19th century it was.
/r/MensRights10/09/10 08:36 AM
4

I think it's more accurate to say that investigation found that they could not prove he had the money. If you have cash in an anonymous bank vault somewhere, who can prove you have it? Even if he did have the money, keeping him in jail is outrageous. That's not the way debts are enforced in this day and age... except in cases of alimony.
/r/MensRights10/09/10 08:30 AM
5

Nothing new here. It's called the oldest profession for a reason.
/r/MensRights09/09/10 06:14 AM
1

A good lawyer can easily argue both points, and courts are known to be biased. I'm by no means saying that a prenup is useless, I would surely get one. Just pointing out that it is not nearly foolproof. Better to avoid getting married altogether if at all possible.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 07:44 PM
6

AFAIK, Thailand does not extradite for child support (not a signatory to Hague Treaty). Renewing the passport is a more difficult issue, U.S. embassy could refuse to do it.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 08:47 AM
6

... and be aware that prenuptial agreements are in no way foolproof and can be overturned (some jurisdictions are worse than others).
/r/MensRights06/09/10 08:40 AM
3

Briefly, yes. The only way is for you to move to a country with better laws, if you can make a living there.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 05:55 AM
19

Know what... if he has any savings, leaving the country may not be such a bad idea. What other solution does he have on his mind? He can't be on the run forever. There are nice sunny places in SE Asia (e.g. Thailand, Vietnam or Malaysia) where a buck can still go a long way (and employment opportunities exist). You can still visit him.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 05:38 AM
8

Yup, it's a wording issue. Wonder what how a parking spot reserved for this candy maker's employees would be marked? http://www.badrecordcovers.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/negro.jpg
/r/MensRights05/09/10 08:02 AM
7

Assaulted by a woman? Meh, grow a pair. Assaulted by a man? The bastard should hang.
/r/MensRights05/09/10 08:00 AM
1

As far as we know, she has some texts/chats. That is not the same as catching someone in infidelity red-handed. Not sure if he lives in a jurisdiction where infidelity matters in a divorce -- in many it does not. If he does, however, apologizing is wrong. Offer redress if you want, but never admit guilt. That's what lawyers usually advise.
/r/MensRights01/09/10 05:15 AM
1

Apologizing is morally right, but depending on your jurisdiction it may not be legally prudent.
/r/MensRights31/08/10 10:14 PM
1

Why is that a choice? What prevents him from both trying to save his marriage, and at the same time setting up defenses to prepare for the worst? He has to decide if marriage is worth saving. Preparing for divorce is certainly prudent, even if he hopes it won't happen.
/r/MensRights31/08/10 10:12 PM
15

Briefly, it's better to have a prenup than not to have it, but it's best not to get married at all.
/r/MensRights31/08/10 10:07 PM
7

... and we will not rest until exactly half of babysitters are male... and half of our prisons are filled with women... oh, wait!
/r/MensRights31/08/10 10:04 PM
3

Then, how did it happen that Nadja Benaissa infected the guy? Was he just plain unlucky, or did she really have sex with 1000+ men (or at least 100+, assuming some bad luck)? I heard the transmission rates are different for various types of the virus (type A vs type E etc.). The study you mention may be specific to one type.
/r/MensRights31/08/10 10:02 PM
1

But then... alleged victims would not have an incentive to report the alleged rapes. There would be no damage to the alleged rapist without going through the shame and pain of court process and proving a crime beyond reasonable doubt. /s
/r/MensRights30/08/10 08:32 AM
2

Nothing quite like an old-fashioned extortion threat to lighten the mood.
/r/MensRights30/08/10 08:31 AM
3

It doesn't lessen transmission TO WOMEN. Did anybody ever argue it did? Circumcision in no way reduces the amount of bodily fluids exchanged. It removes the areas receptive to HIV, in men, not so surprisingly. Male circumcision, anyway.
/r/MensRights30/08/10 08:24 AM
1

What's monstrous? Getting piss-drunk, having a shag, then changing your mind in the morning and ruining some random fellow's life? Personal responsibility does count for something. If I get piss drunk and go for a walk around Harlem at 2 am flashing jewelry and money, of course I don't deserve to be robbed, but I can't be entirely blameless either.
/r/MensRights30/08/10 08:22 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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