TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

girlsoftheinternet Archive

View 1 posts and 36 comments by girlsoftheinternet 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)
0

girlsoftheinternet/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:07 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-39

Sorry to say that the OP is saying the opposite of this, that it is anti-feminist to criticise another woman’s choices.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy06/04/21 09:09 PM
2

I haven’t seen the drawing but I know what you mean 😆
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy26/01/21 09:10 PM
6

If men didn’t lie so relentlessly to women three wouldn’t feel the the need for some solid indication of his commitment and seriousness either. Congratulations shitheads, you played yourselves.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy26/01/21 05:57 PM
11

Yes! I’ve been using the word ‘equitable’ rather than equal for years. Nobody seems to get it.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy26/01/21 05:31 PM
65

It seems to be far harder for a guy to actually treat a woman with respect than it is for them to throw money around and perform empty gestures, and then they pretend we ‘just want their money’ because otherwise they would have to look themselves in the mirror and accept that the problem comes from them being unable to treat women like human beings. What they actually mean is we advocate not being treated like an object or a commodity, how very dare we? Fuck them all. It’s a reversal, always wit…
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy26/01/21 05:24 PM
35

They don’t care about men’s issues. They just don’t want women to make any progress towards liberation. They’re just trying to shut us up by guilt-tripping us, cynically using the societal standard that women put everybody else’s needs before their own.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy16/01/21 09:44 AM
89

Or don’t finance human trafficking
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy09/09/20 10:47 AM
4

What a repulsive way to make that point.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy29/07/20 07:52 AM
17

There’s several comments there comparing it to action films in terms of being a harmful exaggeration of normal life/an escape. What a completely disingenuous comparison. Porn isn’t watched for entertainment, they are literally watching it as a stimulus for climax. It’s straightforward addiction conditioning with the tolerance and subsequent escalation involved in that. The commenters making that comparison are either in total denial about their addiction and what it is doing to them or they know…
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy02/12/19 05:22 PM
3

Schwyzer helped write the code of conduct as part of his punishment for sleeping with his students. TRUE FACT.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 02:38 AM
1

so every child should be tested, but the child should be told and not the parents (except in cases where it is important for the early health of the child, like for certain genetic disorders)?
/r/MensRights13/05/12 10:03 PM
1

oh wow, you're actually serious.....I honestly don't know what to say to that. EDIT: Still waiting for you to provide evidence of my supposed misdeeds
/r/MensRights12/05/12 07:40 PM
0

The court-admissible one is 359 dollars.
/r/MensRights12/05/12 04:35 PM
-1

please tell me where I tried to shut down any discussion. Please point me to a comment where I minimized the impact of paternity fraud. I merely posted an article that indeed shows the rates are lower than typically quoted. "one of the only men's spaces that isn't regulated by women"- what a ridiculous comment. And I haven't given any opinions so you don't actually have any idea what my opinions are on this topic. All those comments you just ascribed to me? Completely constructed by you looking …
/r/MensRights12/05/12 03:39 PM
-1

our military budget? really? but....you're not American?
/r/MensRights12/05/12 02:41 AM
-1

well, yes. Your anecdote clearly trumps all the stats I just presented. Well done you.
/r/MensRights12/05/12 02:15 AM
0

I don't think there is a cat's chance of passing legislation to make a mandatory test the responsibility of the mother. Also, source on the cost?
/r/MensRights12/05/12 02:12 AM
2

You are right. He asked the probability that one of them wasn't his though. I was answering based on the probability that a given kid would not be his. If you take the 2 children as a compound event then yes I am wrong for that too. Should be 42%. I guess I wasn't thinking about his children as a compound event.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 10:12 PM
1

um...no I'm not. I posted below practical and financial reasons why it isn't going to happen. I am not giving any unsourced or opinion-based comment here. Way to show YOUR bias. My point was that his claim was unsourced and I pointed you to peer-reviewed scientific literature discrediting it.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 09:03 PM
0

ok that was inaccurate, but so was his assertion. And it certainly true that this essay (edit: book, what is the difference, the claim is still unsourced) is a commonly cited source among MRA. Anything about the actual points in my post?
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:53 PM
1

polite question: why the down votes? I think it is clear from my comments that my only interest is in conveying information. I have been polite, used many sources to back my claims up and have used statistical concepts to demonstrate the conclusions. There are no partisan comments in any of my posts.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:39 PM
2

Are the statistics being massaged in any way? What is inaccurate about what he is saying? Seriously, seeing as you referenced an unsourced essay by an MRA and then ignored my post showing why his assertion was incorrect using articles in peer-reviewed journals, and ignored the bit where I pointed out how statistics work, I am getting the feeling that YOU are being disingenuous. The level of proof you require appears to be far higher for things that you disagree with or don't want to believe than…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:29 PM
2

I think you probably realize that basing confidence on statistics on confidence would be a posteriori assessment that does not then magically up the base rate of paternity fraud.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:17 PM
0

Let's consider just the cost of doing this for a second. Lower bound for paternity test from a reputable lab = $400 American Pregnancy Association. Number of babies born in the US each year: 4,130,665 CDC figures from 2009 cost = over $1.6 billion dollars per year. Plus 310,490 is the best figure I could find for the number of paternity tests currently performed every year (although it is from 2001 and that number about doubled between 1991 and 2001) so the capacity to perform that many tests is…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 08:07 PM
0

Where did I get mad? I was pointing out his credentials and lack of partisanship to answer your point about it being used in political ways. It isn't, it is an article about science in a science magazine. Also, of course it doesn't prove it. It just strongly suggests it. It is more much consistent with my interpretation than yours. We ARE talking about statistics here, after all.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:57 PM
1

This is an article from a scientific blog by a well-respected blogger on statistical genetics (among other stats related things) who is not associated with any gender-based activism group as far as I am aware. It tries to answer the question of how likely false paternity is. The answer is lower than the commonly accepted 10% figure. That is the entire point of this article. And the entire point of my posting it. I posted it here because this is a common discussion topic among MRAs. That is it re…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:47 PM
1

actually it doesn't mean 60% at all. If they are independent events then the figure is still 30%. Although I do realize you are being facetious. The confidence variable is obviously related to how likely you think it is that the mother of your kids have unprotected sex with another man at the time of conception.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:37 PM
1

God help you if you went with 30% because you would be displaying an atrocious understanding of statistics. As would you be with the unsubstantiated 10% number. Again, I have no vested interest in adjusting this figure down. I think paternity fraud is a BAD THING. I'm just presenting the facts. Razib Khan (male author of the blog post) knows his shit and has no ties to any gender-based activism as far as I am aware. He blogs for an online science magazine, which is where my post came from.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:27 PM
1

Obviously the ideal figure is 0. I'm merely dealing in evidence and statistical trends here. I'm calculating (in a hand-wavy way) that the average is more like 4% maximum in the US and your risk varies substantially based on covarying demographic factors.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:17 PM
0

in answer to your link Your first point seems to be negated by the fact that high confidence in paternity is associated with higher probability of actually being the biological father in the data presented.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:11 PM
2

Among the samples for the US when there is high paternal confidence, the Michigan sample of black testees has a substantially higher figure (10.1%) than the other samples (around 2%). This sample is predominantly black (a low proportion of the population of the US). We must also take into consideration the base rates of high vs low paternal confidence in the population, which I don't actually know but I think a good guess is that things are quite skewed towards higher confidence (happy to be cor…
/r/MensRights11/05/12 07:01 PM
0

Thank you for acknowledging and correcting your misunderstanding. Appreciated.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:48 PM
1

I've heard the 10% figure frequently bandied about, including by MRAs that frequent r/feminism and r/AskFeminists. It seems to be widely accepted as the actual figure.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:45 PM
-1

I just titled my post with the original blog post title.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:35 PM
1

I'm not arguing anything. I just thought you would appreciate a well-sourced blog post by a geneticist on the subject.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:30 PM
-3

That is very negative: I have never insulted you in that fashion. Secondly, did you even read before commenting. I posted less than 3 minutes before you commented. Plus if that is a valid argument, where the hell do your figures come from?
/r/MensRights11/05/12 06:11 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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