TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

felzix Archive

View 0 posts and 150 comments by felzix 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)
2

Just an anecdote: The only one I can recall is my brother's baby's mother because she got in a fight with another woman and that time didn't just whoop her.
/r/MensRights11/11/11 06:47 PM
–

I'm sorry, the beautiful irony in my post has to come out. Not all multicellular biological organisms are animals.
/r/MensRights08/11/11 10:34 PM
2

Gah, that sucks. I was hoping you got pissed off and did some legitimate trolling. I can relate to that; my presence on /mr is ultimately because I get fiercely emotional about some of the topics discussed here. I'm sorry for misusing ally and generally being abrasive. Thanks for your appreciation. I can't think of anything to say that doesn't sound lame or patronizing but it helps me that you think we can reach common ground. In the interest of advancing that I'm going to read some less charged…
/r/MensRights04/11/11 05:12 AM
0

Awesome! I'm looking forward to them.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 04:38 AM
1

I'm sorry about my tone. I'm a pretty bad writer and actually never considered my tone -- a sign of how bad a writer I am. After these few weeks I think I've pinpointed the core problem causing our disagreement. When I talk about sex I am using the most widely used meaning as much as possible and where that is not precise enough, the definition of sex as it affects me. You are either doing exactly the same thing or you are using a difference basic definition. Either way we both have to be explic…
/r/MensRights04/11/11 03:21 AM
–

Would you consider writing an essay? Elizer Yudkowsky wrote many well-tied-in blog posts to get around akrasia, to great effect. Since a sufficiently impacting book is too time-consuming, a smaller project might work. Since you don't have the akrasia problem you can write more -- so an essay makes sense.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 01:44 AM
1

For what it's worth, I don't see anything wrong with what you said. It would be an interesting project and getting funding in a patriarchal society would be very difficult. I don't think it would be very easy but I don't know a lot about genetic engineering, either. It would actually be hard to get funding in most societies, though, because it would be a horror.
/r/MensRights02/11/11 12:30 AM
3

People keep saying "gender". If they mean to conflate gender and sex or meant sex, they need to say that.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 05:58 AM
1

I'm working off of this list that actively defending a trans person's rights is one aspect of being an ally, which is supporting them. I missed some of the points when reading that and now realize I don't meet the criteria, so I apologize for mislabeling myself. I maintain that I do meet most of the points, though, including the misgendering ones.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 03:14 AM
–

Seriously, go fuck yourself. This is all I get when I try to be honest with people. If you think I'm wrong change my mind. Demonizing me doesn't do jack shit to fix things. I keep trying to understand why I'm wrong and no one tries to help me.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 02:11 AM
2

I don't think nigger and kike are really analogous but they bring up a good point. If woman/female were framed as an issue of discrimination instead of definition then I'd not be arguing like I am. When someone just says that a word means one thing but by definition doesn't then of course I say they're wrong. If someone says that a word's meaning should differ then if I agree or disagree on that should. It honestly never occurred to me that anyone cared that much about what the word "woman" mean…
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:51 AM
–

I'm talking about the meaning of words. It just so happens than "female human" is exactly the same thing as "woman". That is, "woman" is a symbol for "female human". Someone writing something on wikipedia doesn't make it true. I've gotten in this stupid, stupid argument on here before but the gist is that words are defined by consensus. There's a reason "hacker" can mean "someone who breaks into systems" even though that's not what it originally meant. If the trans community wants to redefine wh…
/r/MensRights13/10/11 12:05 AM
–

wom·an noun /ˈwo͝omən/ women, plural An adult human female I like the distinction, though. Hopefully it catches on.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 11:33 PM
–

Wait, so if I say I would fight to keep trans people from being beaten, I don't support them?
/r/MensRights12/10/11 11:08 PM
8

Uh, why? As it stands, it looks like people mostly disagree with him. I think it's a good thing most people who vote here find homosexuality acceptable. I suppose technically one can argue that anything non-hetero-normative is perverse by virtue of being unusual but deviancy is usually used to mean unacceptable instead of unusual.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 11:06 PM
–

Brute is probably trolling: link. I really don't know with him though.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 10:56 PM
–

From what I can gather about what constitutes a trans ally, I am a trans ally. I think what makes you hate me is that you think I don't use the right pronoun for you, or think you have no right to use whatever pronoun you want. That isn't true. edit: I reread the definition and I've got to say I fucked up. I'm definitely not an ally though not because of transphobia.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 10:53 PM
-1

Aside from the issues with calling it "misgendering", I never claimed it to be. It's one act of support I'm not giving them because that's not how I see them. I encourage them to effect the popular conception of them but my beliefs aren't going to be changed without their underlying assumptions being changed... and teefs isn't willing to learn enough about me to do anything like challenging my deeper-held beliefs. The other things I mentioned are acts of support, though. I'm sorry if it's not th…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 10:44 PM
–

Oh... actually I do consider them to occupy their chosen gender but not their chosen sex. Support isn't just agreeing with someone or fulfilling their greatest wishes, though. I say I support trans people because I support their rights and seek to end violence and discrimination against them. I know I'm not a very good ally of trans people but I'll fight for them as much as I would any other person.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 07:55 PM
–

You seem to believe you are the final word on truth. You want people to accept your interpretation of reality without getting a say... right?
/r/MensRights12/10/11 07:32 PM
–

The fuck... they marked you as "an actual pedophile". I assumed SRS were just misguided but now I see that they are just juvenile.
/r/MensRights12/10/11 07:27 PM
–

From what I can tell, most of /mr supports trans people but doesn't want to have sex with them. It might be from fear but it's not from hate. They don't consider transwomen to be women but they do consider them to be people. If you've watched Battlestar Galactica, the apt analogy is that Cylons aren't humans but they are people. I actually agree that transwomen aren't women. For me that actually occupy the third/fourth sex. I don't think I'd care very much if I slept with one but I don't blame s…
/r/MensRights12/10/11 06:42 PM
1

I know at least one guy who prefers stupid women because they are stupid. He's actually a great guy in a lot of ways but he's not a good companion for most women.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 01:18 AM
1

You do by violently opposing anyone who tries to take them from you. edit: I should say opposing with willingness to do so violently.
/r/MensRights10/10/11 10:10 PM
–

The only chance the MRM has to avoid the pitfalls of feminism is to become a purely rational movement. This doesn't mean it lacks passion but it does mean that all of our beliefs have to be empirically grounded and logically sound. I'm being a bit hyperbolic for rhetorical effect because I see an amazing opportunity here. The MRM has many legitimate issues and no wide acceptance of any false theories like Patriarchy. Without an unbiased focus on truth, misogynists will distort the MRM until it's…
/r/MensRights09/10/11 09:27 PM
–

That article is terrible but the one it's sourcing looks fine: link.
/r/MensRights09/10/11 08:02 PM
–

You might want to just skip to my conclusion since I wrote a lot again :P . I am not saying to give them a free pass. I'm actually trying to get away from them having a free pass. If someone is too drunk to consent to sex then they clearly can't "consent" to raping... but the definition of "too drunk to consent" most often used actually leaves one with plenty of ability to rape. I don't think this inconsistency is obvious most of the time because the male is the default rapist when both people a…
/r/MensRights08/10/11 09:18 AM
1

Thanks, I will.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 04:17 AM
2

I think we entirely agree. I'm just siding on the the side of racism because the author doesn't make their actual beliefs clear and mentioning the girl's race doesn't contribute to their thesis.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 01:24 AM
0

If that's all victim blaming is then victim blaming is a good thing because it can prevent future rapes by giving good advice. That is not what people actually mean when they talk about victim blaming, though, because victim blaming is negative and preventing rape is positive. The contention over victim blaming is people not thinking about how causality and blame differ. A rapist is to blame for rape but both the rapist and victim caused the rape because they both made decisions that ultimately …
/r/MensRights08/10/11 01:19 AM
–

Punish the perp and educate the victim. The problem with droid's comment is that the context is of it being socially acceptable to molest men and he said to not get stupid drunk because other people are assholes. That means he said that the OP stupid drunk is why it's ok for women to molest men.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 12:52 AM
1

Uh, people don't get orangereds when you reply to yourself.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 12:44 AM
–

I disagree. I believe that violent rape exists today. I doubt you meant to say that but that is what you wrote so I'm responding to it.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 12:40 AM
–

The problem is that statements like that also come from the belief that Mexicanness causes teenage pregnancy, which is racist and a confusion of causality and correlation. There wasn't a context to make the distinction... or a reason to even mention that, so I assume it's racist. However, the author could just be awkward so I wouldn't go off on him without knowing otherwise.
/r/MensRights08/10/11 12:16 AM
–

I wrote a lot and probably not a lot that really directly responds to what you are arguing. I'm still working on articulating my beliefs about alcohol and sex so please excuse my mistakes but please tell me what they are, if you care to. That study looks good from what I can see. If they compare it to numbers where the word "rape" is mentioned and it's much lower then it shows a clear need to educate men on what constitutes rape. That isn't saying anything about female sexual assault, though. An…
/r/MensRights08/10/11 12:01 AM
–

This tendency is the main issue I want to address in sex and gender discourse. It seems that most beliefs are produced by first coming up with a conclusion then finding data that supports it. This is the opposite of rationally attaining beliefs. Without rationality truth is a crapshoot.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 10:16 PM
–

I support rational social formation. I don't think patriarchy is the right social formation for most peoples today though I'm not sure it ever was. Useful economic activity is becoming more and more robotic, making it so that gender differences in labor are less important. It's important to guide human activity by raising children well and giving adults guidance and avenues of expression (economic and otherwise). It's also necessary to restrict human activity when necessary to deal with murder, …
/r/MensRights07/10/11 10:05 PM
–

I got offended at the racism, myself.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 09:47 PM
1

There's a lot of "God did it" in there.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 09:27 PM
2

For sure. Applied to porn is misguided though because guys virtually never develop romantic interest in women in porn.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 04:09 AM
2

I second this. It'll hone your reason to actually get these points across to people who want to disbelieve you but aren't zealous.
/r/MensRights07/10/11 04:05 AM
–

Which is equivalent to saying that one should never drink and fuck because once you drink, you can't tell.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 10:46 PM
4

Proving your statement is going to be hard. You should stick to reasonable arguments.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 06:58 PM
–

No there is not a big visible difference. I've been around both enough to know I can't tell.
/r/MensRights06/10/11 06:54 PM
–

I don't think the idea of privilege has anything to do with oppression. Feminists actually say that privilege is a good thing, just not if men have all the good privileges. If privilege is tied with oppression then I have to agree with you on all or most all accounts though. Nothing on that list looked like oppression to me. On another note, one thing that never fails to surprise me is that a critical argument in favor of male privilege is its invisibility to males. That female privilege must be…
/r/MensRights02/10/11 03:09 AM
3

The gist is that though I believe most feminists believe in equality and try to actualize it, feminist beliefs are inherently flawed when applied to non-patriarchal societies such as the United States. My main argument against patriarchy theory's application in the US is the lack of evidence. Without evidence for a belief I am disinclined to hold it. I don't know if you believe we live in a patriarchy or not (or even if you live in the US, for that matter). If you don't then you might be better …
/r/MensRights02/10/11 02:51 AM
–

I've been interpreting privilege as often manifesting from roles (gender and otherwise). For instance, a career-minded male has the privilege of having an easier time finding a woman who will accept that while a family-raising-minded woman has the privilege of having an easier time finding a man who will accept that. Both are privileges but they balance out. The problem with such privileges is that their absence doesn't always fit those with them, like stay-at-home dads and career women. Do you …
/r/MensRights02/10/11 02:08 AM
–

traviskwright has been downvoted by this subreddit throughout this thread.
/r/MensRights02/10/11 12:38 AM
0

You are technically correct (the best kind, aye). I think her wording isn't well-thought-out enough to argue that finely. Especially since the prior context was overseas deployment, where her argument holds up fine (though I do disagree anyway).
/r/MensRights01/10/11 09:19 PM
1

You get a crazy amount of shit despite how entirely reasonable you are. Wow.
/r/MensRights01/10/11 08:10 AM
1

Wouldn't that be late into a pregnancy to abort anyway?
/r/MensRights01/10/11 08:02 AM
1

It really isn't survival of the fittest. More like survival of the fit-enough.
/r/MensRights01/10/11 07:58 AM
1

Is that even possible? The best I've come up with is to disagree when people get hyperbolic or outright sexist.
/r/MensRights01/10/11 07:51 AM
–

Some pagans use a similar system for marriage. None of the legal advantages a government bestows on a couple, though.
/r/MensRights01/10/11 12:52 AM
0

If chemical sterilization is anything like the Pill, men could just stop taking it when they are back home, father a child, and leave again.
/r/MensRights01/10/11 12:36 AM
1

Do they actually use BMI?
/r/MensRights01/10/11 12:32 AM
–

Why couldn't you put your facts and your misogyny in different posts?
/r/MensRights01/10/11 12:26 AM
2

Is there proof that AnnArchist did that?
/r/MensRights30/09/11 12:39 AM
1

Ah, ok. This thread started when I stated that 100% objective certainty is not possible. When you asked me if I meant SUBjective, I assumed you were arguing for the existence of 100% objective certainty, which precludes that unicorns could exist.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 08:53 PM
1

Oh, you have a good point. I don't think you should be spamming, though.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 08:43 PM
–

I've thought about this more and I went about this all the wrong way. My real question is, what method are you using to arrive at "100" when calculating certainty? I'm assuming Bayes Theorem, of which the scientific method is a subset.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 08:12 PM
–

Because it's September?
/r/MensRights29/09/11 06:47 PM
–

You wrote female, though.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 06:43 PM
–

What are you saying, then? You didn't try to clarify. Are you saying that if something lacks evidence of existing then no matter what new information you gain, that thing cannot be shown to exist? That seems to be the gist of your argument that the Matrix cannot be because there's no evidence of it.
/r/MensRights29/09/11 05:09 AM
1

I do accept the existence of an objective reality. We are disagreeing on the semantics.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 07:34 AM
–

What I am describing is realism. I'm saying that beliefs only rough map to reality. I'm getting its definition from wikipedia: Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality and that every new observation brings us closer to understanding reality.[1] In its Kantian sense, realism is contrasted with idealism. In a contemporary sense, realism is contrasted with anti-realism, primarily in the philosophy of science. According to this, if you claim 100% cert…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 06:36 AM
–

There's a chance that's just a fever dream of yours, making it possible that none of that happened. It's improbable but improbabilities is not impossibility.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 03:59 AM
–

I am saying that the fact of an experience means that experience happened but does not mean it corresponded to a particular objective event. Our minds are models of reality, not the fact of reality. Which is what you're saying but you're misunderstanding me. On to objective reality: Is there anything that could disprove that I can die from drowning? My earlier example of the Matrix fits this criteria, thereby making the universe of possibilities regarding my drown-ability not homogeneous. It's m…
/r/MensRights28/09/11 03:57 AM
–

100% certainty isn't really possible. There's always the possibility that you e.g. live in the Matrix. Even if the possibility is so small as to not be worth thinking about when making decisions, its existence still keeps objective knowledge from being 100% certain. On the other hand, subjective knowledge has 100% certainty. It just doesn't translate into objective knowledge very well.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 09:20 PM
1

I thought you would have said humans or people? Most people don't say "men" when talking about humans in general.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:35 PM
–

We actually can never be 100% certain of anything objective.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:20 PM
2

The author is either ignorant of how reddit works or a troll. That thread was about promoting controversial beliefs. The better reddit works, the more that highly-ranked comments can be taken out of context to be indicative of how redditors in general feel.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 08:04 PM
–

OP should have linked to that. It's all good.
/r/MensRights25/09/11 03:05 AM
–

The basic problem is detachment from reality. That's really what anti-science and anti-intellectualism are. It's not necessarily that the Right is more detached from reality it's that their rhetoric plays on their detachment from reality. For someone trying to choose the more intelligent party, the Democrats paint themselves as their best choice. The practical differences between them and the Republicans aren't that great but that's what a two-party system produces. The Left in general, not the …
/r/MensRights25/09/11 03:01 AM
–

For the quantity and complexity of the ideas she writes, she's fairly concise. I'd definitely use "clear" instead though.
/r/MensRights25/09/11 02:48 AM
2

I can't think of any feminist belief that is pro-man without being primarily pro-woman. This blindness makes egalitarian or mens' rights necessary because feminism is just not geared to help men if they don't have to.
/r/MensRights25/09/11 02:34 AM
–

Average height for an american woman is 5'6".
/r/MensRights24/09/11 07:16 PM
8

It's difficult to gauge how drunk someone is. If drunkenness precludes consent then the line between consensual sex and rape is invisible.
/r/MensRights24/09/11 07:33 AM
4

I see this issue as a confusion of blame and causality. Blame are entirely made-up because they don't correspond to real phenomena. That's why there are gray areas like drunkenness, insanity, and the age of consent. However, they're also crucial because intent, actions, etc that are used to decide blame are needed to punish bad actions. Punishment deters most people so it's useful. For example, a rapist is to blame and the raped is not. Causality is a much more basic concept and doesn't distingu…
/r/MensRights23/09/11 09:41 PM
2

Dammit, don't ask for downvotes.
/r/MensRights22/09/11 12:17 AM
3

I interpreted ads's point as being that feminists don't seem to care about it when women eye younger men but care when men eye younger women.
/r/MensRights21/09/11 08:39 PM
1

The way I rationalized slavery was that some of the founding fathers demanded it and others gave in because unity was too important. Specifically slaves counting as 3/5 of a person for determining representatives being a compromise between slaves fully counting and not counting at all. I did get this education in a state close enough to slave-holding states that it partially defined itself as being abolitionist, so my teachers are more likely to be wrong than more impartial people.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:54 AM
1

PETA is being entirely sensible by killing animals. They're not even hypocritical because of it. http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2009/03/30/Why-We-Euthanize.aspx?c=euthanasiag0309&gclid=CKfJsJ2oq6sCFUkbQgodfwND8Q. I have no idea about what PETA protests so they might be hypocritical if they are protesting pounds simply for existing or something. There's a lot of factors that have to be known to really judge because PETA's specific beliefs about animal rights are so far from being unde…
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:41 AM
–

PETA is being realistic. If they could give homes to every animal they would. That's actually impossible so they do the next best thing -- kill them humanely. As odd as it sounds, PETA is not hypocritical from using euthanasia. http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2009/03/30/Why-We-Euthanize.aspx?c=euthanasiag0309&gclid=CKfJsJ2oq6sCFUkbQgodfwND8Q
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:38 AM
1

My understanding is that PETA will take virtually any animal. Since there are no-kill shelters and no-kill shelters don't take unadopable animals, PETA gets a lot of unadoptable animals.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:35 AM
–

It's in the story. I'm not sure what its role is though. Probably biblical allusion but I don't know enough about Christianity or Mormonism to really say.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 07:04 AM
–

How would that work out legally speaking? It's clearly self-defense against three people, one of whom is armed. Normally using lethal force is considered too much but in the case of pushing someone to their death maybe it could be ruled that the options were kill or be killed.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:57 AM
–

That's pretty fucked up. You might want to read the Alvin Maker series by Orson Scott Card. The protagonist gets into the same situation as you (same motivation by the girl, too) but is cleared of charges. He's also magic so that's fun. Sorry I can't offer shares experience or advice.
/r/MensRights20/09/11 06:45 AM
1

My friend got me help by saying blatantly false things and acting like a dick. Could help you next time if you want to try something else.
/r/MensRights18/09/11 08:28 PM
6

I'm not proud of it but when pretty drunk myself I've ridden in cars with black out drunk drivers. The only sign of their intoxication to me was them telling me they were that drunk.
/r/MensRights18/09/11 08:14 PM
–

It is offensive but what you're describing is exactly the problem I had as a child and the main reason I have an emotional reaction to feminism.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 10:21 PM
–

It's not, not no. I wouldn't correct you except that you made that mistake twice.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 09:52 PM
1

Oh, she was fine. Weird though. Oddly my mom would fit in here better than my dad.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 09:36 PM
–

Long pork, my mom used to say.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 09:28 PM
–

It doesn't change totals but does change the numbers of upvotes and downvotes.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 09:26 PM
–

The feminist beliefs I've gleaned from radical feminism do include the notion that m->f trans people hurt feminism. IIRC the reasoning is that they experienced male privilege growing up. The majority of the feminists I know don't think this way.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 03:56 AM
3

I upvoted for your content but I wanted to say I upvoted you for correct use of the word chauvinist. In high school I got in a small argument with a feminist (didn't know it then, actually) because she thought it was a strictly male thing.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 03:53 AM
7

umadbros is a troll account...
/r/MensRights12/09/11 07:36 PM
–

If you're just having casual sex then I don't see a problem with not disclosing transness. Neither party owes the other anything other than safety. If you weren't just being rhetorical then I basically agree with you. Relationships of whatever breed are different, though. If you have sex as part of a relationship's progression then not disclosing transness or determining that the other person doesn't care is wrong. If they would react violently then break up with them and maybe get a restraining…
/r/MensRights12/09/11 12:09 AM
–

Why is it called Obamacare?
/r/MensRights11/09/11 11:05 PM
–

Um, wouldn't sexing someone who would cause your death be pretty stupid anyway?
/r/MensRights11/09/11 11:03 PM
–

I assume the MRM contains a lot of anti-marriage advocates because they were screwed in a divorce. It makes sense since they're going to be most passionate about keeping others like them from being similarly screwed.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 09:08 PM
–

That would be institutionalized rape.
/r/MensRights05/09/11 07:44 PM
–

You aren't sexist for thinking the sexes different. You are sexist for thinking one is innately better than the other.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 09:05 PM
0

The problem I have with this situation is that men are discouraged from working with young children due to the demonization of male sexuality. There aren't good options for men who want to work with young children instead of administering those who do. This is a case of female privilege that's due entirely to a loss of privilege from males. I don't think there's male privilege with respect to getting administration jobs but if there is then I think the optimal solution is to remove both privileg…
/r/MensRights03/09/11 02:28 AM
–

You're right, you know. What Demonspawn said is sexist if it wasn't a joke.
/r/MensRights03/09/11 01:47 AM
2

You make good points but technically you are talking about sex, not gender. To respond to your point, weapon use drastically reduces the violent potential difference between the sexes. If taser ownership were widespread then the difference would be negligible. In the absence of armament then it does make sense to have some protections to reduce the situations where women can be overpowered by men. It doesn't make sense to treat overpowering differently after the fact, though. Punishing one sex f…
/r/MensRights02/09/11 09:24 AM
1

Ah, then we're in agreement.
/r/MensRights31/08/11 12:42 AM
–

You seemed to imply that if the sexes were reversed it would be terrible but in this case it's fine. From what I remember as a kid, 14 year old girls are about as interested in sex as 14 year old boys. I don't know how actually having sex would affect them but I don't see any reason that it would differ significantly between the sexes. I do see a difference between the genders. The girls would be shamed and the boys would be exalted. You don't seem to be talking about gender though.
/r/MensRights30/08/11 09:33 PM
2

See name :(
/r/MensRights30/08/11 09:21 PM
–

I don't, but females do develop sooner than males. If you want to give special treatment, it could be argued that a 20 year old male banging two 14 year old females is less wrong than a 20 year old female banging two 14 year old males. This is actually the case in some states in the US (Iowa and SC) where the age of consent for females is 14 but 16 for males.
/r/MensRights30/08/11 09:17 PM
7

And if they realize they don't only want one thing they may think they're broken.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 09:33 PM
0

Just some radical feminists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatist_feminism#Lesbian_separatism
/r/MensRights25/08/11 12:12 AM
3

Sorry, I meant why did they write that article, not why did you link it here. I might be missing a lot of context because I rarely read Jezebel.
/r/MensRights23/08/11 08:16 PM
–

What was the purpose of that article? Is it just a statement of the results of a survey? At the end it shows "Men Shouldn't Be Overlooked as Victims of Partner Violence [Psychiatry Online]" but that could just be a context-aware ad...
/r/MensRights23/08/11 07:34 PM
1

s/exceptable/acceptable/
/r/MensRights23/08/11 07:32 PM
1

Marriage doesn't give women by default all the power, but it allows bad women to take it if they want to. Power is about choice. If marriage gives a bad woman total power then it gives all women total power.
/r/MensRights22/08/11 11:40 PM
3

I think most people who call others creepy don't understand how cruel a title that is.
/r/MensRights22/08/11 11:19 PM
1

I have a friend who is a radical separatist feminist. We actually agree on every point we discussed that had to do with our ultimate goals for society. We completely disagree on how to get from here to there, though.
/r/MensRights20/08/11 10:31 PM
–

Looks like it's 182: http://www42.statcan.gc.ca/smr08/2006/smr08_012_2006-eng.htm
/r/MensRights20/08/11 09:29 PM
1

If he doesn't get karma for it and presents it coherently, does it matter how he presents it?
/r/MensRights15/08/11 09:50 PM
1

There's a long drama about r/anarchism and mods.
/r/MensRights05/08/11 10:16 PM
3

But that post contains obvious falsehoods.
/r/MensRights05/08/11 01:21 AM
1

It isn't a red herring because I wasn't rebuking anything you said.
/r/MensRights03/08/11 08:21 AM
1

When you say "These women, who have no [...]", you are saying that all women matching your previously stated constraint have no redeeming qualities. Your constraint is women valued for their looks instead of their brains. Therefore you are stating that women valued for their looks instead of their brains have no redeeming qualities other than their looks. I apologize for using "misogyny". I have no reason to believe that you hate women just that you stereotype them unconsciously or don't particu…
/r/MensRights02/08/11 08:04 AM
1

I've seen a few examples of small non-governmental entities operating this way. The largest I'm aware of is Mandragon Corporation.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 04:46 AM
1

These women, who have no redeeming qualities other than their looks can get free things, services and a man to financially support them into their old age without doing anything. You are implying than beautiful women are always stupid. You should write: Women who have no redeeming qualities other than their looks can get free things, services and a man to financially support them into their old age without doing anything. This revision will point out a clear instance of female privilege instead …
/r/MensRights02/08/11 02:50 AM
1

Genitalia aside, iirc a lot of the explanations for filthiness were that women didn't want to touch the seats so they hovered, making them worse.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 02:43 AM
1

I'm not well-versed on the names of different political alignments but I consider myself a socialist. I believe in some form of democracy but I'm not sure on the specifics since culture is a huge factor in the fairness and effectiveness of a democracy. Ideally a democracy would result in a technocracy with checks against power abuse but I don't know if humans can sustain a culture that would allow that.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 02:31 AM
–

Socialist does NOT necessarily mean heavy taxes or heavy government control. A socialist nation can just be one where the means of production have to be owned by those who actually use them instead of a capitalist who just finances them. It's a matter of how property rights are handled and doesn't need to be anything else.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 02:28 AM
7

But not here he wouldn't.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 12:19 AM
8

Holy crap that actually worked.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 12:17 AM
1

There is a great deal of opinion on that piece. Not exactly rational.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 07:22 AM
1

I haven't seen more open-mindedness outside of a rationalist group as I have within. Which groups are you speaking about?
/r/MensRights19/07/11 07:04 AM
-1

The pro-choice item you mentioned is misleading. That list has enough crazy to not need any hyperbole. Though, reading over it, I think there's a lot of context missing from that list. A lot of those items are way too vague.
/r/MensRights19/05/11 02:47 AM
–

You should have used "effect", not "affect". I only point this out because of how rare it is to get that wrong in this direction. /gn
/r/MensRights19/05/11 02:25 AM
1

As far as I can tell, there's a split in feminism between those who care about well-off white women issues (due to ignorance, I guess) and those who are about the problems women face worldwide. The former wouldn't care much about what happens in Mexico.
/r/MensRights23/04/11 02:55 PM
2

From that transcript, I gathered that the OP didn't understand the rationale behind the pay gap so she assumed ENTP was wrong.
/r/MensRights23/04/11 02:45 PM
1

In gym class the teacher made all the boys sit on the floor while she took the girls elsewhere, as a punishment for moving around a bunch. She didn't discriminate based on behavior since she put me on the floor too and I hadn't moved. That she was willing to let me specifically avoid punishment because some girls vouched for me didn't make me feel better... I shouldn't require a voucher for good conduct when the girls didn't. I suppose what furthered my knowledge was learning more about white gu…
/r/MensRights07/04/11 02:01 AM
–

This hits home for me though I think I absorbed my conditioning from teachers and television instead of my parents since they rarely if ever spoke to me about gender.
/r/MensRights07/04/11 01:55 AM
1

In my experience men and women are equally likely to hold a door open for me. I work in San Francisco.
/r/MensRights07/04/11 12:23 AM
3

I don't know why you are being downvoted for asking for a source since any rational discussion should have some empirical backing. That being said, there are way more women's shelters than men's shelters. As for asking for help, I've read that but I don't have any good reason to believe it.
/r/MensRights07/04/11 12:08 AM
–

You should include why you think being a feminist isn't the same as "fighting for equal rights for women". I'm fairly certain izzish doesn't know the difference since the ostensible purpose of feminism is indeed equal rights for men and women.
/r/MensRights06/04/11 11:27 PM
1

Most of the women I've talked to about this aren't aware that women are treated differently and believe they shouldn't be. The issue is pretty much subconscious for most people.
/r/MensRights15/02/11 09:22 PM
–

I just want you to know thats I'm downvoting you for use of ad hominem.
/r/MensRights22/06/10 09:34 PM
7

Holy crap you're right.
/r/MensRights08/05/09 05:40 PM
–

Note that it's a pdf in the title, please.
/r/MensRights23/04/09 08:03 PM
–

It doesn't look like a fact to me. It looks like you asserted something without proof.
/r/MensRights21/04/09 01:09 AM
–

textual search?
/r/MensRights06/04/09 09:31 PM
-1

sounds like you're blinded by cynicism
/r/MensRights17/02/09 08:52 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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