TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

eulerup Archive

View 1 posts and 104 comments by eulerup 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)
50

eulerup/r/MensRights09/10/13 04:43 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

What? The point of "the pink tax" is that women's products are more expensive than men's. One counterexample of one firm for one product does not invalidate the whole premise. Unless someone is making an argument that something always/never happens, anecdotal evidence does not stand up to proper research. This applies beyond the pink tax. I actually didn't have an opinion on it going into this, and don't really now, but the quality of argument against it, in the video and in the comments here wa…
/r/MensRights24/04/18 01:32 AM
1

I meant a princess vs a firetruck, not Walmart store brand vs Gucci. Come on.
/r/MensRights24/04/18 01:28 AM
1

You're right that I was placing too much weight in that study. That said, the video is itself misleading and does not make at all compelling arguments for the case it was trying to make. Thanks for an actual civil discussion.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 08:16 PM
1

Edit edit: Just to make sure I get what you're saying here. With their methodology, they found an 8% average, yet somehow it's 42% female products are more, 40% equal, and 18% male products are more. Interesting extrapolation of data we have here. That's not what I'm saying. On pages 7-12 of the study, they provide tables for each category of item they analyzed. They summed the total cost of the items and compared women vs men. (This is not a perfect comparison, but as the saying goes "good enou…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 08:11 PM
1

RE Edit: target may not be charging different prices but amazon is. walmart actually goes the other way. I agree the 1994 study is out of date. I hope you're right and this has disappeared in the last 2.5 years. I'm not about to go replicate an entire study on my Monday afternoon, but hopefully, more research on consumer pricing comes out. There were hundreds of items in that study, and finding one that's now priced the same doesn't necessarily invalidate the whole thing. When shopping I've anec…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 08:06 PM
1

I agreed the video has issues. The 24-year-old study is different than the one I am repeatedly pointing to. I find no issues with the NYC.gov study, which I think pretty clearly shows a sex difference in prices. Do you disagree? Edit: You realize your source here links to the exact same study that uses the same figure from the same study "ax the pink tax" is from, right? You basically just went in a full circle to get to the same study. It was one of the studies, yes. I should have been more exp…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 07:48 PM
1

I linked to the NYC study in many of my arguements. If you actually look at it, you'll see that when they say "similar" they mean a pink scooter is a different price than a blue scooter. If you reject the premise that's (potentially) evidence for discriminatory pricing based on sex, I'm not sure how this is a good faith argument. The NYC study you linked to actually does provide figures, just not aggregated across product categories. In most cases, the average women's product was 7-8% more expen…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 07:30 PM
1

How do you know the cure time is the same for each color paint? How do you know the exact paint specs/clear coat/heated curing? How do you know the lighter color doesn't need more applications? How do you know there isn't a higher demand for the pink version thus driving the higher price? When presented with evidence that items targeted at women have systemical higher prices than items targeted at men, you are the one whose immediate reaction is to think of every possible explanation that could …
/r/MensRights23/04/18 07:23 PM
1

No, because, shocker, women doing the same shopping as you have to do the exact same thing. You're making arguments even you know are bullshit. In a different example in the study, identical scooters (other than that the boys' version was red and the girls' was pink) were sold for 30% more in the girls' version. Certainly, there would be a social cost to the kid for just "picking the different product", no?
/r/MensRights23/04/18 07:07 PM
1

Until men are doubling their personal care shopping time by looking through the women's section as well, I'll consider it unequal.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 07:01 PM
1

She claims the source as one of her own, too. She repeatedly talks about how it says "SIMILAR" and then (unfoundedly) makes the assertion that they were comparing fancy women's products to "basic" men's products because women care and men don't. However, that's not at all what the study was doing. As far as I can tell, the argument in the video breaks down to: This is an ad that's playing on my site that's making misleading claims Here in one of their own sources is "proof" that the claims they'…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 06:54 PM
1

There were many examples of products that were identical other than color/ branding that are priced higher in "girl" colors/ interests than "boy" colors/ interests. At the end of the study, they actually do list all of the items they compared and many of them have identical names. Here's an example from the study, since you won't click on the pdf. Since they are different colors/ patterns, the items are not the same. However, by any reasonable standard, this would be a fair comparison.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 06:30 PM
1

Yes, but it's women paying the cost for sexist pricing.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:26 PM
1

Did you see the study I linked to?
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:16 PM
1

I wouldn't change your beliefs based on this video. Her "debunking" consisted of selectively quoting a study in a misleading way, and appealing to sexist stereotypes of both men and women.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 02:56 PM
1

That's what many women do. Sometimes the products are shelved in different sections, and it takes extra time/ effort to shop the other section.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 02:50 PM
-11

You post comes off as if you believe that all feminists are the same. I hope that's not the case.
/r/MensRights03/05/14 12:50 PM
2

1% of the population gets an accidental pregnancy every 5 years Birth control failure rates are more in line with 1% whoopsie babies per year, so 1% of the population ever 2 years. Without access to birth control, it is safe to assume that the pregnancy rate is higher than that, and really, it's the difference that matters. Furthermore, your assumption that birth control is $100/ month is ridiculous. It's more on the order of $50, or as little as $10. Compared to your analysis, the rate of pregn…
/r/MensRights12/11/13 02:00 AM
3

Besides money - intellectual curiosity, a driven personality, the need to feel like they've accomplished something with their lives. Y'know generally anything a normal person would look for in a partner.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 11:11 PM
15

How about controlling for other variables that show up on men's profiles? I'd imagine this would look much different if education levels were included.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:20 PM
1

Two wrongs don't make a right. Saying that she should be put in jail is the epitome of everything wrong with this subreddit.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:25 AM
1

Any woman with a goddamn head on her shoulders knows this is bullshit. Complaining about this is like pretending that all men believe that rape is "a gift from god" or some bullshit.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 01:50 AM
2

It was the "need" that turned me off- chances are that's what did it for /u/wankedinspace too/
/r/MensRights05/01/13 03:30 PM
2

Yes, but not in a way that is detrimental to his career.
/r/MensRights23/10/12 11:22 AM
3

The presumption has always been that in a dual income household, it will always be the woman that has to prioritize family over work. I'm not saying that is right or wrong, but I'm guessing that using that as the operating assumption has a lot to do with the wage gap.
/r/MensRights23/10/12 02:57 AM
50

Uhh, their website says: Today, women earn about 80 cents on the dollar compared to men — a gap that results in the loss of about $380,000 over a woman's career. For African-American women and Latinas, the pay gap is even greater. source
/r/MensRights23/10/12 02:54 AM
9

Really, you don't give a flying fuck if you go on a date with a woman who has no money, college plans or friends? Is a dead fish in bead? Was emotionally abusive because it's "that time of the month"? If all of those things are OK with you or anyone else then you/ they seriously re-evaluate your dating standards.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 03:44 AM
3

The point I was making was that it's also socially acceptable for men to pressure women into sex, or for women to have sex with men because they "should" or because their married or because the man bought them a few drinks or whatever other reasons society uses. This isn't an issue that's specific to men, nor do I believe it's one that men suffer from any more than women. Maybe differently, but not more.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 09:34 PM
-14

And you think women aren't?
/r/MensRights22/08/12 07:54 PM
1

Unwarranted is the very common "you aren't my type" creep shaming where some women won't get off their high horse. So what's a woman to do when a guy she's not interested in makes an advance? What if she says no and he continues to pursue? And no again? Or doesn't text him back? Or doesn't try to contact him in any way? Women making a big deal about a guy they're not interested in hitting on them: stupid/sexist. Women making a big deal about a guy who won't fucking take no for an answer: perfect…
/r/MensRights21/06/12 08:08 PM
2

You pretend like men don't do the exact same damn thing.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 12:13 PM
14

40% is not exaggerating! Keep in mind that the people who actually get a paternity test are not a representative sample of the population. There's some more discussion above, but it seems like the number is closer to 1-2% (still higher than I expected.)
/r/MensRights06/06/12 02:00 PM
4

He also made some really fucking stupid choices after he was discriminated against.
/r/MensRights21/04/12 03:05 PM
1

Because that's how all couples make decisions. If that's how you honestly think these things work, I pity you.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 02:27 AM
1

"itd be pretty fucking sweet" Exactly. Itd be sweet. Its not necessary. and choosing to do so is the lazier, less difficult choice, so you should not receive increased alimony for doing so in the case of a divorce. I was stating it'd be "pretty fucking sweet" from the working parent's perspective. I'm just saying it'd be nice to come home from work in the evening and not have to cook dinner or do laundry or go grocery shopping because my spouse, who's also taking care of the kids, has already do…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 06:40 PM
1

What if the dad doesn't want to spend a lot of his outside-of-work time taking care of the kids and would rather just have the mother do all the kid things? What do they do for the 8 hours when kids are at school? Cook, clean, take care of household things. As a very single living on my own person, it'd be pretty fucking sweet not to have those things to worry about when I came home after work, so I could spend time with (potential future-me's) family. If one parent is making enough income to su…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 05:10 PM
2

It's a lot harder to get a job in your field after not working for 15 years than it is out of college or if you've been recently employed.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:11 PM
1

Because you were lazy and wasted your education you deserve more? You fucking obviously don't have kids. My guess is it is a joint decision for most mothers to stay home with their kids.
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:10 PM
2

Maybe they, when the baby was born, decided that it would be best for her to be a housemom. Maybe dad thought it was better for the kid than being a latchkey kid or spending inordinate amounts of time in daycare. In order for that to happen, someone had to give up their career. Apparently wifey made the most sense, but she figured giving up her career would be OK since she had an agreement with her husband that he'd be around to keep the family's income stable. A person does lose standing in the…
/r/MensRights11/03/12 04:07 PM
2

The difference is that there wasn't an "empowering and positive" message in the rest of the post, and it very much still got upvoted. There are a lot of reasonable posts in this sub, but you guys have a tendency to make asses of yourselves on occasion and that leads to getting discredited. It's frustrating for me, as a female, to realize there is a legitimate cause that gets covered by all this bullshit. Of course, I think my views are perfectly rational, but they get downvoted more often than n…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 04:04 AM
3

It doesn't matter why it was upvoted. (Though I think you're right.) The point is that statements that blatantly stereotype and attack women can and do get upvoted in this subreddit and it takes away the credibility that the sub could and should have.
/r/MensRights05/03/12 03:46 AM
0

You said: Strawman, no one here attacks women without suffering downvotes, you are conflating "feminist" with "woman" they are not one and the same. and We don't state stereotypical things about female or generalize an entire sex. I gave an example of people doing just that on /r/mr, but it "doesn't count"? Here's another. I'm curious to see what reasoning you have for this not counting. What you said was the logical equivalent of "there are no green unicorns." I come and show you a green unicor…
/r/MensRights05/03/12 03:45 AM
-5

We don't state stereotypical things about female or generalize an entire sex. We do point out and call out double standards that are applied to the two genders in Law, Society, Education, Medical research and Social funding. Really? Screenshot in case the downvote brigade comes. I honestly think that Ayatollah Khomeini was less insane than modern Western Women. Ayatollah Kohmei, the guy who said "A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate vag…
/r/MensRights04/03/12 07:31 PM
7

benefited men over women The point is putting men and women on equal terms.
/r/MensRights03/03/12 04:18 PM
-1

So you "earn" the right to be sexist ("If not all women are like that, prove it") by spending your time and money to promote equity. Got it.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 04:41 AM
0

'preciate the levelheadedness. Alanna said it better than I could.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 01:29 AM
-1

Sometimes I want to punch the /r/mensrights view of feminism in the face. In true form, feminists want the same things that /r/mensrights claims to want. That was a shitty source to cite, I know, but regardless, the change in definition very much helped men. I'm not sure where you're getting that "against men" was just a footnote... I just wanted to say thanks for the rational response :) P.S. Freaking love those books.
/r/MensRights23/02/12 01:28 AM
-3

Because two wrongs make a right. "Any feminist organization's teachings" Feminism n. the policy, practice or advocacy of political, economic, and social equality for women. I checked around their website. Not a whole lot (ok, I couldn't find any, maybe you can help me out!) of man hate going on. http://feminist.org/ Recent feminist sponsored change: The old definition, adopted over 80 years ago, had been extensively criticized for leading to widespread underreporting of rape. Defined as "the car…
/r/MensRights22/02/12 05:37 PM
0

I still don't see why it's OK for men to make statements like If women stopped abusing the victim card I am sure they would find that guys would be more open to including them in non-work related discussions. As a result all the issues about them feeling unwelcome would go away. There are men who it would be a bad idea to have in on certain discussions, just as there are women. I doubt there would really be a problem if men judged women the same way they do other men and treated us as equals.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 05:09 PM
3

And I will repeat my question to you, Why am I responsible for someone else's actions just because we have the same gender? You are saying I should take personal responsibility for another woman's actions? Please. I don't rape young boys or claim false rape or get men fired for making eye contact. How do you not see that blaming the "good women" for not properly controlling the bad women is the same type of sexism that leads to people being uncomfortable with men playing with their kids because …
/r/MensRights22/02/12 04:11 PM
-8

Why am I more responsible for another person's actions than you are? Look, you're talking to someone who worked in a workplace that was the fucking capital of sexual harassment. 3.5 years and 1 person I know filed a sexual harassment case. For a guy sending her a picture of his dick on a cell phone after she had both told him she wasn't interested and expressed that she had a boyfriend. (Employee cell numbers were posted on the wall in the back, she didn't give him her number.)
/r/MensRights22/02/12 01:49 PM
-24

You know what they say about a few bad apples. Fuck off and stop blaming it on the entire gender.
/r/MensRights22/02/12 01:40 PM
1

This!
/r/MensRights03/01/12 01:25 PM
5

Ugh, fixing cars is a skill that I would love to have. Must obtain house and garage and car-fixing skills. [f]
/r/MensRights03/01/12 04:27 AM
1

It is harder to draw lines between different races than it is between the sexes. (Though I do realize that there are cases of ambiguity there, just much less frequent.) I do not see anything inherently wrong with doing so, but it would be difficult to implement. You're not complaining about "good student" discounts discriminating against stupid people, are you?
/r/MensRights27/11/11 10:23 PM
0

I don't know how to be any more clear than a screenshot. You win epic troll.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 09:10 PM
1

I should add that I mis-typed earlier. When I said "Men have statistically significantly higher claim rates than women," I should have said "Men have statistically higher loss costs than women." -that is frequencyseverity for a male policyholder is higher than frequencyseverity for a female policyholder. "Claim rates" is wrong because it implies just frequency, when in fact it's the generally higher severity that causes the difference in premium.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 08:15 PM
1

Here, I'll try to make it simpler. There's no new info in this post. The question we are trying to answer is: Why should men pay more for car insurance? Because they have higher loss costs See comment here for source So?? Just because they have higher loss costs doesn't mean that they should have to pay more for insurance! How do we know it's the men who are at fault? Actually most states follow tort liability source, which means that insurance companies pay according to each party's degree of f…
/r/MensRights27/11/11 08:10 PM
1

Probably true.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 08:03 PM
1

You moved the goal posts. See here about tort liability.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 01:01 PM
0

Ever heard of tort liability? Not the best source, but in most states, insurance companies pay according to each party’s degree of fault. "Claims" would include damages paid to other parties through that policy, and not include claims paid out by other parties' insurers. Also, we are not talking number of claims, we're talking aggregate amount of damage.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 12:58 PM
2

I didn't say reddit was being misogynist or sexist or anything else. All I said was that it is not a hostile environment for men. That doesn't make it misogynist.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 12:55 PM
2

Not once in this thread has it been said that men cause more accidents than women. Read what I wrote. Really, read it rather than automatically assuming it's wrong because it's from the same person as before. You ask for a citation of men having more claims than women, you say that's wrong because that's not what you asked for, when in fact it's exactly what you asked for. Furthermore, we're not arguing about the frequency of claims, or even the "number of accidents caused by men," but rather th…
/r/MensRights27/11/11 03:42 AM
1

What's funny is that's not what I said. What I said was Men have statistically significantly higher claim rates than women so before you tell me to "try to pay attention" maybe you should do the same.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 03:38 AM
1

If it's so easy, why don't you do it? The fact is that claims are made to insurance companies, not the government, and for pretty obvious reasons, insurers aren't to keen to put their claims/ loss data out there.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 03:18 AM
2

I didn't cite insurance rates, I cited insurance claims, as in the money the insurance company pays out edit: insurance pays claim amount less deductible. We know insurance rates are skewed. Rates or claims? If you read "rates" then you read what you wanted to read and maybe you should actually look at the page. If you meant claims, then I need a source for claims being 'skewed'.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 03:17 AM
3

Where do you think rates come from? The Geiko Gecko's asshole?
/r/MensRights27/11/11 02:08 AM
0

Ugh, the webpage is showing up intermittently for me. Try this link. If not, here's a screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/X7amv.png . Look at the very bottom of the page, bullet #1. I'm frustrated because this is something I consider to be fairly common knowledge and common sense, and it's a pain in the ass to find legitimate sources for. Furthermore, the tone in your posts is really condescending.
/r/MensRights27/11/11 02:05 AM
1

... see my other reply to your post. Because you're being a dick.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 10:55 PM
3

here "Separate analyses by sex and age show higher loss costs for male drivers and for youthful drivers. In fact, young males have considerably higher accident frequencies than adult males have, but the age disparity is much smaller for females."
/r/MensRights26/11/11 10:32 PM
2

here "Separate analyses by sex and age show higher loss costs for male drivers and for youthful drivers. In fact, young males have considerably higher accident frequencies than adult males have, but the age disparity is much smaller for females."
/r/MensRights26/11/11 10:31 PM
-2

nope. you can believe whatever the fuck you want... .from what i've gathered, this is that men have the same claim rates as women, but the big scary insurance industry, regulators, and everyone else is out to get you because woe is me i have a penis.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 10:14 PM
1

because insurance companies totally go around advertising their experience to their competitors.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 09:03 PM
3

You're right. This NYT article is pretty pro-"women paying more than men is sexist." I think it would be in everyone's best interest if women were charged proportionately for healthcare as men are for car insurance.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 06:36 PM
1

so the reason men should pay the same amount for insurance is...
/r/MensRights26/11/11 06:34 PM
2

That is a tough question. It depends what you mean by 'equal.' Clearly men and women have some characteristics that are different. For example, men are naturally stronger than women. Women live longer than men. One sex may be more inclined toward certain abilities than the other, but that doesn't mean that the other sex shouldn't be given opportunities in that field. However, to me 'opportunities' does not mean favorable treatment- it means equal treatment. I have NO DESIRE to get a job more eas…
/r/MensRights26/11/11 06:33 PM
1

I'm an actuary but not longer in P&C insurance..... I can say that there is a good deal of regulation that goes into justifying rate changes for insurance products, so it's not as if the insurance companies are setting rates willy-nilly.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 06:27 PM
2

No, women should pay more for things like life annuities.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 05:30 PM
4

Totally agreed. twoX likes to circlejerk about how reddit hates women but I just. don't. get. it.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 04:24 PM
18

... Reddit is not a hostile environment for men. MR is much more a problem IRL than on reddit. Just look at the front page.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 04:16 PM
2

Seriously? Men have statistically significantly higher claim rates than women. If sex were not a factor in rate determination, women would be subsidizing men's claims.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 04:08 PM
12

As a women, the notion that men are worth less than women is just baffling.
/r/MensRights10/11/11 03:40 AM
1

Ah, I hadn't considered that. Good point. I'm not sure paternity tests are so far removed from tests used in labs for other things we wouldn't have developed them anyway, though.
/r/MensRights19/10/11 12:54 PM
1

Clearly we just found a potential use for paternity tests... why not keep them around?
/r/MensRights19/10/11 03:53 AM
1

I am assuming a 100% success rate. If it were anything other than 100% it would be a disaster to figure out. Though, I'm confused by DNA testing for infidelity may not be available. Why would that be the case?
/r/MensRights18/10/11 10:38 PM
2

What contraception? I was assuming the method in the title was 100% effective. The automatic answer, I'm sure, is the pill. However, there are women who, for various reasons, don't take the pill. For example, I turn into a raging bitch and don't plan on taking it soon. But, at the same time, making a guy wear a condom (which y'all aren't too fond of) is basically telling him you dont trust him.
/r/MensRights17/10/11 12:44 AM
10

What happens when a male impregnates a female against her will?
/r/MensRights16/10/11 05:16 PM
-1

I still try to use the book def'n of feminism when talking about whether it's a good thing or not. Feminism is inherently progressive because it gives half the species the opportunity to make progress in whatever field they want, rather than being assigned to menial tasks based on their gender.
/r/MensRights07/04/11 03:45 AM
-3

Because I am just as capable as a lot of men, and sticking me in a kitchen to make sandwiches will not further society.
/r/MensRights06/04/11 04:46 PM
0

As I said, the laws need to be changed. I don't see shitty laws as a reason to hate women, though. Those who don't join the fight I wouldn't call feminists. Sadly, a lot of people who call themselves feminists will fall into that camp.
/r/MensRights06/04/11 04:42 PM
-1

I find it hard to believe that there really would be NO retribution for a woman. Even if it's not legal, I sure as hell would look down on someone who I'd considered a friend for pulling anything close to that shit. It's amazing the stuff that people will put up with. A guy who I used to work with (who's really good friends with a lot of people I still do work with) knocked his girl up a few years ago, and they had the kid. He cheats on her constantly, did a year in jail for violating a stupid p…
/r/MensRights06/04/11 04:27 PM
1

You are correct. However, I got from curious's tone that he was pretty convinced that all women were capable of doing this, and that a good portion would, given the right chance. I really don't think I could, and I think most women are not as willy-nillly about this as you think they are.
/r/MensRights06/04/11 04:10 PM
1

bwah, had to urban dictionary it. The entry there is deliciously sexist
/r/MensRights06/04/11 04:07 PM
1

The power an average woman has is much bigger then anything any man ever had. Bullshit. It's pretty obvious that getting pushed over the limit once in a lifetime is more than enough. Actually, I'm a little offended by that statement. Nothing personal about you, but if a man rapes a woman, even once, it's too much. Most men here discovered that they were raped already. That once they said "no" to their girl friend or wife and she still proceeded with sexual activities. You think that doesn't happ…
/r/MensRights06/04/11 03:28 PM
6

Any woman in America knows that all she has to do to turn the tables is dial 911 and make up whatever story she wants. Not only will she be believed, but she will likely benefit very handsomely from the system as it prepares to steamroll the chum. As a female: Just because we can doesn't mean we will. I don't see myself ever being in a position where I would do that to a man, much less a man I supposedly (had) loved. Yet I'm lumped in with the small portion of bitches who would do this. That isn…
/r/MensRights06/04/11 02:35 PM
3

Eh, I've got better things to do this morning than feed the trolls.
/r/MensRights23/03/11 03:21 PM
7

That sounds like the viewpoint of someone who's for equal rights.
/r/MensRights23/03/11 02:39 PM
6

How about we just help each other when we need help? Is that so hard to ask? If I see someone struggling to get a door and I don't have anything more important to do, I'll help, regardless of their gender. Maybe there are more things that a guy can get without my help, so I'll help them less often, but I don't think that that would make me a sexist.
/r/MensRights23/03/11 02:36 PM
6

Not gunna lie, I clicked and had a brief freakout moment. I actually know who that chick is. (Furthermore, she's a redditor...) What I got out of it was that, however much she said she wanted equality, the reality wasn't all flowers and bunnies, and that's going to take some getting used to.
/r/MensRights23/03/11 02:27 PM
1

Sometimes shit breaks, It's good to be the one who can fix it or whatever. Also, picking people up. And lifting things. And moving things. Not exactly spectacular feats, but useful nonetheless.
/r/MensRights27/12/10 01:14 AM
2

I've kinda made it a point to make myself the person who can do anything at my job. It's nice.
/r/MensRights17/12/10 10:05 PM
1

Dude. Don't do it. It can't and won't fix anything. I'm sure she was trying to do what was best for you, and as others have mentioned, she was probably told that circumcision had a lot of benefits.
/r/MensRights26/11/10 04:07 AM
2

lol somehow reminds me of wes from the bachelorette (sorry, mensrights, for even going there here)
/r/MensRights31/10/10 10:59 PM
7

wait, what? How the fuck can anyone claim they want equality and then state that something that is BLATANTLY equal (men and women receiving the same treatment) is wrong. What the hell is wrong with you that you think this is OK? (female here, because apparently you differentiate how you treat people based on gender.)
/r/MensRights31/10/10 04:13 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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