TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

dreddriver Archive

View 0 posts and 15 comments by dreddriver 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)
11

1) The summons specifically mentioned "Manspreading". Which makes it a crime that can only be pointed to one gender. They weren't arrested for "taking up two seats". 2) It was 12:11am when they got the ticket. The train wasn't busy. 3) I hate taking up space as much as the next person but why should the charge purposefully apply to only men?
/r/MensRights28/05/15 07:52 PM
1

Amen. I've never showed up at an interview less than an hour early. I don't go inside until 10 minutes before but being early allows you to re-group when you arrive and make sure nothing stands in your way. I work for a .com right now and ties are 'not allowed'. I still wore a suit to the interview and now that I'm a hiring manager I see suits every time as well.
/r/MensRights17/04/15 08:23 PM
1

You know that we are free to make our own conclusions based on available evidence even if she isn't prosecuted right? Prosecution isn't the only thing that determines a crime. She can be found guilty in civil court also. And if she damages his image in anyway he can do that. She's one name drop away from civil charges. All in all, just because the DA won't charge doesn't mean that we can't decide for ourselves that she lied based on the provided evidence. If there is more evidence provided in th…
/r/MensRights05/09/14 05:54 PM
1

Actually men with guns don't decide who to prosecute. The DA does. Police take information and create reports. But it is their job to screen cases for the DA. Yes, and if there is no evidence it never goes to court. I'm making my judgement because there is evidence that she is doing this for attention. There is no evidence that she was raped. Her behaviour, actions, testimony all do nothing but hurt her case. If there was a crime committed then you still have to provide evidence - and the burden…
/r/MensRights05/09/14 05:47 PM
1

I don't think you understand. The legal system is not based on emotions or what could be. It's based on evidence. Something that you refuse to provide. And most of what you say are quips - do you have anything real to contribute? Meanwhile, why don't you keep researching your "Some women are too stupid to know what rape is" theory.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 04:38 PM
1

So no rebuttal? Got it. Thanks for playing.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 04:32 PM
2

Im assuming she is a false accuser because she presented evidence and it was dismissed. You're acting like there is no evidence either way - there is. due to lack of evidence or some other unseemly unrelated behaviour on her part? what the hell does that even mean?lol The point is, we don't know. Actually, we do. The police said she was lying. If the police don't believe it then why would I? But how do we know she is not just really stupid and doesn't understand what is and isn't rape? haha and …
/r/MensRights05/09/14 04:28 PM
3

I'm not conducting a witch hunt. I didn't go looking for her. She went to the police. She decided to do this 'art' project. She is the reason I know about the entire case. She is responsible for her own notoriety. I just brought up the conclusions that the police made. And by the way - due process is the literal reason we don't actually have witch hunts.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 02:39 PM
4

no evidence + story with holes in it + no prosecution = innocent As in, all suspects are innocent until proven guilty. He wasn't proven guilty so that means..... Also, I don't think trier is a word.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 11:14 AM
3

You understand that none of that proves what she said was true right? She's threatening to RUIN HIS LIFE with no proof and a story that doesn't make sense.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 11:12 AM
11

He was found to be innocent because her story didn't match up and there was no proof. He was tested against the system and came out innocent. She went to the police and they deemed that she was lying because her story didn't match up, she waited an uncharacteristically long time to try and create charges, and she had no proof. You're asking me to prove that it was a false claim - the police did that for us. Meanwhile, you offer no proof other than a highly subjective statement.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:15 PM
8

But it means that there was no proof and her story didn't sit well with police. Who, in turn, decided not to prosecute. No evidence and a crappy statement doesn't mean her claim was true either. If anything it kind of leans to her conspiring with the two other women. What she is asking is for him to be punished OUTSIDE the law. Which cannot be condoned. It's not the schools job to dish out justice.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:09 PM
3

And what does that prove? So the majority of people said (73%) that they thought the police would take them serious. And 75% thought they wouldn't get treated with hostility.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 11:05 PM
8

She did go to the cops - who concluded that she was lying. The mattress stunt just proves that she is out for attention. http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/5/19/why-college-rapevictimsdonatgotothepolice.html
/r/MensRights04/09/14 07:02 PM
22

The investigation was conducted. He was found innocent. There was no recourse for her false claim. At this point it's just a stunt she's pulling for attention. I don't have to withhold my judgement anymore - the facts came out.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 06:54 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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