TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

daemin Archive

View 2 posts and 79 comments by daemin on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Indeed. Especially when they come along and claim to have developed a new first-order logic with a unique model, and I have to demonstrate to them that their claim runs a foul of the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem, only to find they don't even fucking understand something as trivial as the compactness theorem! Its like... who the hell did they study logic under that would skip over basic crap like this?
/r/MarriedRedPill14/05/15 11:21 PM
0

That the supreme court upheld it has, literally, nothing to do with the problem I'm pointing to. Frankly, it's even worse reasoning to say that this particular example of male oppression is so egregious that it outweighs the sum total of all female oppression. Can we not engage in stupid fucking oppression Olympics, trying to lay claim to which gender is worse fucking off? It's fucking stupid, pointless, and counter productive, and the only people who benefit from all the various groups bickerin…
/r/MensRights05/04/15 02:06 AM
-20

Down voted for the snark in the title, and the fact that it is trivially fallacious reasoning. That there exists a situation in which women are favored is not proof that women are not, on balance, disadvantaged compared to men, and engaging in such shitty, sophomoric argumentation is why this sub has a bad reputation.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 02:23 PM
5

When a man and a women get married, it's more likely that the women will sacrifice her career for the man's, such as following him to other than vice versa. Hence, it can be explained as not being a result of the labor market, but a result of social pressure.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 11:20 PM
20

We can make observation less subjective by analyzing perception itself. We can make observation less subjective by subjectively analyzing our observations of observations?
/r/MensRights15/03/14 03:37 PM
5

Technically speaking, those aren't "their own" police force; they are, in fact, state police.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 03:52 AM
1

They're calling for YouTube to enforce it's own guidelines. You can argue that it's censorship, or a dumb policy all you want, but you cannot rationally deny that it's a double standard to leave the uncensored version of the video and remove the feminist parody because it contains "nudity" when what it shows it even considered nude in society at large.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 03:14 PM
0

For example, poking someone with your finger is assault. The nomenclature is getting blurred (because of things like sexual assault), but most jurisdictions in the U.S. consider assault to be the threat of violence and battery to be the infliction of harm.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 11:04 AM
1

The problem with the "hundreds of millions" bit is that you are taking at face value the claim of the regimes in question to be the thing that they are claiming, which is questionable, at best. Look at the modern world: everyone claims to be a democracy, when no one truly is; the best we have is democratic republics. Look at China's behavior in the 80's and 90's. We could hold them up as an example and say "Democracies violate fundamental rights of their citizen! Democracies are bad!" and that w…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:47 AM
9

I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS decision explicitly states that separate is inherently unequal. That is, even if they were separate but had identical facilities, the mere fact that they were segregated would imply that one was inferior.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 12:26 AM
2

Because some people are uncomfortable changing, sleeping, etc... in front of people of the opposite gender. Some people are uncomfortable doing it front of the same gender. Why is it that female locker rooms have shower stalls and male locker rooms have gang showers? I fucking hate that shit.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:07 PM
16

Assault is threatening harm. Battery is the act of inflicting harm. Hence, assault and battery. Two separate crimes. So to be guilty of assault you just have to engender a situation where a reasonable would think you are threatening them with violence. Note that I'm not stating any opinion as to whether or not assault happened in this instance.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 04:04 PM
2

far less replaceable If they were far less replaceable, the salary would go up. Simple economics, supply and demand. IT professionals are not in short supply. I am talking equal or more education, Doctors need a BS (4 years), most enter already having an MS (2 years), medical school for their MD (4 years), and a residency requirement (4 years). So a doctor has at least 12 years, possibly 14 years, of just education. Then you add on job experience, area of specialty, etc. What IT professional has…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 02:50 PM
7

Once tried to comment in SRS, immediately banned benned. FTFY.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 07:13 PM
2

The biggest reasons to get married in the US: Family visitation rights in a hospital (when I was hospitalized for back surgery, my wife was allowed in at any time, no questions asked). Ability to make next-of-kin medical decisions if you are incapacitated, or file wrongful death claims. Tax free property transfer (both before and after death). Sharing insurance. Spousal privilege in court (This covers two rights. The first is a privileged communication. You can use spousal privilege to prevent a…
/r/MensRights22/01/13 07:12 PM
-3

"We're" is a contraction for "we are." "Were" is the plural form of "was."
/r/MensRights12/10/12 11:29 PM
2

I'm sad that I had to get this deep in the thread to find this comment.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 05:04 PM
1

A request for anecdotal data: do you find attractiveness to be transitive? That is, if you find A more attractive than B, and B more attractive than C, do you always find A more attractive than C? I suspect that the answer is general no, but I've no data to back it up.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 10:15 PM
1

I'm wary of putting too much import in this, because its implicitly assuming that attractiveness is transitive. That is, if someone rates A as more attractive than B, and B more attractive than C, then they must rate A as more attractive than C. I'm not sure that holds. If it doesn't hold, than the very notion of a scale of attractiveness is suspect.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 10:12 PM
2

Um... I think he means that the women, just like the vast majority of men, thought it over and concluded that the increased pay isn't sufficient compensation for the risk.
/r/MensRights05/06/12 10:03 PM
2

Lets not forget that when the mother conceived this child she was apparently in a relationship with another adult. Its interesting you think that dating someone means parental obligations attach to you, but calling yourself "dad," talking to the child and sending gifts doesn't. So which is it? Do parental come along with relationships or do they not? Too, its disingenuous to qualify your statement with here. While I agree that in this case, awarding support (which, keep in mind, has't happened y…
/r/MensRights15/04/12 01:34 PM
1

At 18, the kid is legally an adult and can support himself. People are adults at 18 only in a very limited sense. We still prevent them from drinking, charge them more for insurance, and force insurance companies to cover them on their parents insurance while they are in college. Note that the ruling says he has to pay until kid is 21 and out of college.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 01:10 PM
10

Yes. The sense of outrage that's fueling the circlejerk, resulting from a lack of understanding of the law.
/r/MensRights15/04/12 01:08 PM
2

Based on the article it seems pretty clear that he had no desire to have any legal responsibility for the child, and what is more that that sentiment was mutual with the mother What gets me again and again about this discussion is the inconsistency inherent between this point and circumcision. The legal rights in question adhere to the child not the woman. The woman cannot waive away the rights of the child because they are not her rights. People get up in arms about circumcision, saying that th…
/r/MensRights15/04/12 01:06 PM
3

How much philosophy and logic have you studied? On your own, or under someones direction? If at a university, to what level? Was your department analytic or continental? What was their sub-focus?
/r/MensRights31/03/12 12:04 AM
4

Philosophical skepticism.
/r/MensRights31/03/12 12:00 AM
6

These are not comparable to slurs or hate against marginalized groups The issue I have with sentiment is... what are you going to do when you've won? It's probably going to be the case at that point that it is social acceptable to direct vitriol and "shitposts" at "cisgendered white males", and it will probably continue to be after the conditions you claim make it ok at the moment are long gone. Then we have to start another round of this same bullshit to get rid of that crap. That is completely…
/r/MensRights08/02/12 02:37 PM
6

SRS in 3... 2...
/r/MensRights28/12/11 01:53 AM
1

Women can't defend themselves physically as well as the majority of men can. Judging by the majority of the fight videos on YouTube, the majority of men have no clue how to defend themselves either.
/r/MensRights24/09/11 03:39 AM
2

I N C E P T I O N...?
/r/MensRights02/09/11 02:51 AM
3

Who ever denied it supplied it?
/r/MensRights15/08/11 11:40 AM
10

I like this guy's lack of style.
/r/MensRights24/02/11 05:40 PM
3

That article is barely coherent.
/r/MensRights17/11/10 05:08 PM
1

If you flip a coin a bunch of times there is a higher probability that over the run you saw at least one head. But the chance that the next flip shows a head is always 50%. What he said was: You should know that, after 10 years, with normal use of solely condoms, -- not perfect use, normal, that is, how people normally use them -- there's ~80% probability of getting pregnant. Which is like saying "After flipping all tails 100 times, there is an 80% chance of getting heads" which is the gamblers …
/r/MensRights31/10/10 12:56 PM
3

The problem is the way you phrased this: You should know that, after 10 years, with normal use of solely condoms, -- not perfect use, normal, that is, how people normally use them -- there's ~80% probability of getting pregnant. What you meant to say is "After 10 years, there is an 80% chance that you got her pregnant in that period." But what you said sounds like is "In the 10th year there is an 80% chance of getting pregnant." The first one is correct, the second is a gamblers fallacy.
/r/MensRights31/10/10 12:54 PM
-3

Lol what? Gamblers fallacy much? If there is a 15% chance of failure on a condom per year, than its 15% every year. It doesn't get more likely that one will fail now because none of the previous ones did. Independent events, you know... Also, how many condoms a year are you talking about? 1? 200? Is there a 15% chance of each condom failing, or just a 15% chance it will fail regardless of how many you used?
/r/MensRights31/10/10 03:21 AM
28

Because rapists', thieves' and murderers' bodies are twisted by their innate evilness. So when you see someone who looks evil, you know that they are evil. Its a widely believed fact.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 02:50 PM
24

I would have told her to stop preceding me.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 12:44 PM
-8

I laughed and said "oh, for fuck's sake!" and got in my car. I hope she realized she overreacted. Probably not; in her mind, she probably came really close to being raped and murdered -_- Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't actually out to get you.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 12:40 PM
18

Ok so something I've always wondered about is, why, in male changing rooms, is there no privacy? They are always just a giant fucking room with some benches. I get more privacy taken a piss where i just have to unzip my pants than I do in a changing room. Is it to make penis size comparisons easier and mandatory or what?
/r/MensRights21/10/10 08:27 PM
2

More and more men are realizing that marriage, cohabitation and kids with the modern woman is not a necessity and in fact can be a recipe for disaster. Thinking it is a "necessity" is, frankly, part of the problem. Its simple. If you are such a gimped person that your happiness is entirely dependent one one person, than no one should ever hitch themselves to you; its a horrible thing to make one person the sole executor of your happiness. I could live without my wife, and she could live without …
/r/MensRights29/09/10 01:39 AM
2

True story: My wife, who is a grad student there, was TA'ing a class. Just before spring break, she found her first instance of plagiarism in an essay. She reported it to the professor and Academic Affairs, and was worried about what he would do when classes resumed after spring break. Well, she got a response back from Judicial affairs, saying he had been banned from campus. She googled his name, and discovered that, during the Spring Break Madness, he got into a fight with 3 police officers...…
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:36 AM
1

Then you should know that there's nothing to do in Storrs but rape and pillage...
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:31 AM
1

THIS. IS. SPPPAAARRRTTAAA!! Sorry, couldn't resist.
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:31 AM
3

UCONN is in the middle of nowhere... literally. You have to drive over 30 minutes to get... well anywhere. Everyone who lives in the area is associated with the University in one capacity or another.
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:29 AM
1

I get the impression that he walked toward her, getting too close (see below), she ran away, then he reversed his direction and went back the way he came from. Article: A male approached a female from the opposite direction and came up within several feet of her personal space. The female turned around and left the area. The male walked away in the opposite direction. Ok, so the first "opposite direction" makes no sense; opposite to what? The second one implies opposite to the direction the fema…
/r/MensRights18/09/10 04:20 AM
3

I spelled it just fine. It just wasn't the word I intended to use.
/r/MensRights05/08/10 03:15 AM
3

Ask your mother. She knows all about it.
/r/MensRights04/08/10 08:05 PM
-1

I yell at them for making me loose the game yet again. They just look at me all confused and walk away.
/r/MensRights04/08/10 03:32 PM
0

Your rephrasing makes it sound like she really did do it. Try again.
/r/MensRights15/04/10 10:58 PM
3

I still regret not forcing her to use it on her kids, but that seems a bit too creepy. It wouldn't have been creepy at all.
/r/MensRights01/03/10 08:48 PM
3

... and there are many cases where something has gone wrong (though, admit, on a percentage basis they are very small) Take it easy on them, will ya? Its bad enough they got a botched circumcision, and now you're telling them they have a small dick? Have you no sympathy?
/r/MensRights02/02/10 09:10 PM
-1

Most woman I know have been sexually assaulted. I think that this statistic is going to start going down, though. Its getting kinda hard to defend myself against all those charges and civil lawsuits. I just don't have the heart to keep up with it anymore, mores the pity.
/r/MensRights21/12/09 06:47 PM
-1

No no no. You're getting it all wrong. Look at the first line: If a rape is reported, there is a 50% chance of an arrest Where as you are talking as if it said this: 50% of rape reports result in an arrest You see? They are talking about reported rapes, not rape reports! Duh!
/r/MensRights19/12/09 03:18 AM
-3

The vast majority(90%-95%) of women are not 'lying bitches'. You over look the possibility that those 90%-95% of woman are very good lying bitches...
/r/MensRights09/12/09 09:06 PM
2

what evidence is there that any assault on him occurred? Did you miss the part where she smashed the drivers side window of a car he was sitting in? I'm pretty sure that that counts as, at the least, attempted assault. When you consider the damage flying glass could have have done to his face or eyes, it seems perfectly reasonable to consider it attempted battery.
/r/MensRights09/12/09 08:43 PM
-2

I went through a rough patch, once. The stupid bitch hadn't kept up with her shaving, and the stubble was really bad.
/r/MensRights18/11/09 08:14 PM
-3

Only in certain un-enlightened countries. In more civilized places, such as Saudi Arabia, we keep them under control.
/r/MensRights17/11/09 01:50 PM
1

Apparently she doesn't understand the concept of "try before you buy".
/r/MensRights09/11/09 07:40 PM
0

That is so fucking retarded, I can't think of an appropriate response, other than whaa?
/r/MensRights07/11/09 03:24 AM
1

Bet I don't get the same benefits if I take 5 years off to fuck cheap hookers in Brazil. I think you could make a pretty good argument that fucking cheap hookers in Brazil is compensation enough...
/r/MensRights30/10/09 05:47 PM
2

I'm sure he did something to deserve it. Maybe he raped one them... copped a feel... oggled them... He is a man, after all. If he isn't guilty yet, he's bound to be eventually.
/r/MensRights20/10/09 04:29 PM
3

but what im sure everyone in this blog knows is There is no glass, it’s just air that shimmers in a funny way because of all the manliness going on above it. That is goddamn hysterical.
/r/MensRights06/10/09 07:55 PM
1

<golf clap>
/r/MensRights24/09/09 05:50 PM
8

Crazy feminists acts like a crazy feminist. Nothing to see here...
/r/MensRights09/09/09 07:49 PM
10

Wait, those picture are of women? Holy shit...
/r/MensRights19/08/09 05:55 PM
8

Good. I never feel safe sitting next to children. I'm always afraid they are going to molest me.
/r/MensRights19/08/09 12:28 PM
4

Women can abort, based solely on what they want. Women can adopt, based solely on what they want. Women can keep the child and allow as much visitation as an unfair child custody/child support court system will make them. Using the same court system, women can collect "child support" from whatever man is sucker enough to trust their declarations of paternity. and Totally irrelevant. The only thing those MINIMAL risks would earn a woman is a right to not go through those risks. They already have …
/r/MensRights12/08/09 09:15 PM
4

Woman have all the biological reproductive risks, men have no biological reproductive risks. I agree that we need to bring them more in line, but the woman has more say simply because she has more at risk.
/r/MensRights12/08/09 07:26 PM
2

MY WANG MY PRECIOUS WANG! Fucking hysterical.
/r/MensRights07/07/09 12:42 PM
6

Octomom is a freak occurrence, far from the norm. The only reason she can even feed 8 kids is that modern society makes it far easier to procure food for them then it would've been even 100 years ago. And my comment had nothing to do with legal matters, it was justifying the top posters "basic biology" comment.
/r/MensRights01/07/09 11:38 AM
1

It makes perfect sense. The limiting factor on population growth is the number of woman, not the number of men. One man can impregnate the whole village, but woman are limited to one kid a year. Hence, from a biological perspective, woman are more valuable than men.
/r/MensRights01/07/09 11:17 AM
1

I see allot of articles talking about guys being left behind, etc., but I don't see anyone putting the blame where it belongs: on guys. If you look back at the history of gender relations in the US, you see a pattern that perfectly explains the whole "guys falling behind" in the present. Nurses used to be primarily men. Women were deemed unsuitable to be nurses, as they couldn't handle the trauma of seeing all the blood and gore. When woman started taking nursing jobs, the perception of it shift…
/r/MensRights26/06/09 01:49 PM
7

I'm sorry, but I'm with the ACLU on this one. Think about this for a moment. Do you REALLY want a legal precedent set where the government can compel you express a certain statement?
/r/MensRights09/04/09 10:55 PM
2

Acctualy, nursing and secretarial jobs were "traditonaly" male jobs. Its been in the last 50 years that they have become female jobs. For secretaries, it was viewed as a great job for a man new to the work force or company, as it put him in close contact with the boss and all the people the boss worked with. In essence, it was an apprenticeship. This is why the cabinet level positions int he executive branch are called "secretaries." Its used in an older sense of the word. When woman started to …
/r/MensRights01/03/09 11:05 PM
-1

First of all, your guarantee of freedom of speech is a constraint on the government, not other people. Its assumed other people don't have the ability to compel or prevent you from saying things. Second of all, freedom of association, one of those OTHER rights guaranteed by the first amendment along with speech, dictates that you get to control who you associate with. In cyberspace, that means getting to decide who can post on you blog, just like in real life it lets you decide who gets to stand…
/r/MensRights01/03/09 11:00 PM
0

Look. Being a parent and being a father are two different things. We are talking here about someone who raises these kids for 15 fucking years. If he such a heartless bastard that he can just completely drop any feelings that he has for them after that long, then he should be shot. He acted as the father, he is the father. Do i think the woman should have to pay in a civil suit? Definitely. But its some cold shit to turn your back on someone who you've raised as your own for that long.
/r/MensRights08/01/09 06:11 PM
-1

Damn, apparently I missed out.
/r/MensRights04/01/09 03:02 PM
2

It shouldn't take a genius to see that there is a serious problem with the idea that gender is entirely a social construct. We see sex based behavior differences in creatures that are not complex enough to have culture. I don't have a long list handy, but consult any wild life book and it will explain how males of the species behave and how females behave. Now, binary sex is present all the way down through the tree of life, even among plants. From this, we can infer that it showed up pretty dam…
/r/MensRights19/08/08 04:32 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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