TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

gorgias1 Archive

View 0 posts and 49 comments by gorgias1 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)
1

I am not the best person to ask. I personally would respond with one of the following: "Do I look like a flying baby with penchant for archery to you?" or "It would need to be quid quo pro if you wanted a favor like that."
/r/seduction22/10/14 06:20 PM
1

There are men who like hot guys...
/r/seduction22/10/14 06:08 PM
3

Maybe she is asking for a friend of hers.
/r/seduction22/10/14 05:55 PM
1

Yeah, OP has it backwards.
/r/seduction12/11/13 03:33 PM
2

This site has a lot of good information.
/r/seduction07/11/13 07:52 PM
3

In interpreting the slogan, I always inferred that the following premises were being used: 1) that rape culture exists; 2) that rape culture is perpetuated by primarily men's attitudes towards women; 3) that a man's relevant attitudes towards women is frequently or more likely to be learned from another man rather than from a woman or spontaneously coming into existence; and 4) that if the relevant attitudes of men towards women that perpetuate rape culture were to cease to exist, it would for t…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:10 PM
1

What I have always felt to be a very important part of this issue in regard to comparing the circumcision practices against one gender to that of the other of one gender is how imminent the danger is. *1. Genital mutilation is a cultural phenomena. *2. Agreement in our culture that female genital mutilation is unacceptable is ubiquitous. *3. Agreement in our culture that female genital mutilation is more severe than male genital mutilation is near ubiquitous if not entirely. *4. Female genital m…
/r/MensRights28/02/12 04:20 PM
2

This really needs to be understood.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 05:20 PM
1

Nice find, thanks!
/r/MensRights27/09/11 09:51 PM
1

Caveat: I realize more and more that our discussion may be pointless or at least hopelessly frustrated by the fact that family law is strictly delegated to the individual state and that I can only speak about the one state I have taken the bar in. I try to qualify my statements that are state specific when I can, but it become difficult to discuss because I do not know what every other state does and I am guessing you do not either, unless I have the fortune of discussing this with someone who h…
/r/MensRights27/09/11 06:37 PM
1

I was well aware of this. You might like "The Psychology of Judging" by Jerome Frank.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 03:27 PM
1

as if there was a law that outlined exactly what should happen they would have to put the discrimination in writing. Do you have any idea how ridiculously complicated it would be for state legislatures to outline a law that accounted for every possible contingent factor in a divorce and or custody case? It is simply not feasible. Why would the legislature be able to write the work without incorporating their own collective bias? How long every year would they be arguing about what is unfairly bi…
/r/MensRights27/09/11 03:25 PM
0

you are mostly wrong ?? You contradicted nothing I wrote. Was what you saw with your own eyes an actual criminal prosecution or was it a penalty for contempt imposed by a judge in a civil case? Contempt is the first method of enforcement. "Too fucking bad," sounds a lot more like a contempt situation. I believe maximum constitutionally permissible imprisonment for contempt is six months, but even then it supposed to be limited to acting as leverage to get someone to do something, not as a punish…
/r/MensRights27/09/11 03:26 AM
1

Inability to pay is an affirmative defense that will get a defendant acquitted in my state. I have not spent the time to research whether this is true in the others. I will not be doing it. Your point may be perfectly valid in some or even all other states.
/r/MensRights27/09/11 12:49 AM
0

This is not your typical crime. The person suffering the injury knows who caused it and the court can convict on their uncorroborated testimony alone. Although perhaps an anomaly, I would think that increasing severity of punishment would be particularly effective at increasing the deterrence in a crime such as this. Also in general, I would like to know whether the study you have read controls the variant of socioeconomic status.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 10:08 PM
-1

It's simple. You are grossly oversimplifying the issue at hand. You make a lot of unqualified conclusory statements. I infer from this that you merely wish to preach at me rather than discuss with me. I'll give it a go, although I respond to you with great hesitation. I apologize if I have misjudged you. I mean no disrespect. First, you have to ask yourself why so-called "family" law is operated through court order. I may not understand your first position. I have been staring at it for some tim…
/r/MensRights26/09/11 09:33 PM
2

Once MRM gets more of a foothold I expect this to eventually apply to jailing in child support cases as well. I hope you are correct, but I foresee a few hurdles in the way. First, how else do you enforce the order? Solely through garnishment? If you are convinced this will work, the remaining points are moot and need not be considered. Second, in my state at least (Texas), inability to pay is an affirmative defense. I will assume this is the case in other states as well, and if it is not, I wou…
/r/MensRights26/09/11 05:30 PM
12

While the statutes regarding family codes were written with the interest of the child in mind, the criminal codes were written with deterrence in mind. While the child in this case will almost certainly never receive a dime in support if the father is jailed, the punishment may deter others from not paying. Of course, there are plenty of situations where this will be bullshit and pointless, but that is kind of how the criminal justice system works across the board.
/r/MensRights26/09/11 03:59 PM
1

You stand on... what? I stand on my memory of facts? I recount them to the best of my ability despite that the probable conclusion they will likely yield does not coincide with the way I think things should be. This is adding to a conversation. If you want to do the legal research and explain to me that I am wrong, I will give you an appreciative high five. I would like to be wrong about this. The authors are clearly not worrying about the size and shape of the box.. I disagree with your stateme…
/r/MensRights02/09/11 06:19 PM
1

I just think you're missing the forest for the trees. I do think the new policy is "wrong." I do not think the policy violates the due process clause of the fifth amendment, which is the central argument of the article to my recollection. The fact that a lot of social policy craps on men does not make the argument the author makes any better. My integrity demands that I denounce arguments that I find unsound even when argument advocates my same ends.
/r/MensRights02/09/11 01:51 AM
1

I think what your missing here is that a wrong was done and someone lost property, liberty and potentially their life.... I do not believe that I missed the hypothetical injustice at all. I asserted that the wrong that probably will occur is not in violation of the due process requirements of the 5th amendment (or the 14th). ...but you and many like you just can't see it as a serious problem... I do see it as a problem. However, my dislike for it has no bearing on the facts of the situation. The…
/r/MensRights01/09/11 08:43 PM
1

The author of the article appears to be making a legal argument. I contend that his argument is not sound for the the aforementioned reasons. Instead you're going, "Ho ho ho, look at these fools who don't know as much as me, they sure are dumb if they think their justice is some kind of an "important interest."" My apologies if I offended you. This was not my intent. I attempted to use facts to dispute the author. My disdain for what is happening on college campuses does not change my belief of …
/r/MensRights01/09/11 08:36 PM
0

I did not discount this. My assertion is that the continued attendance would not be legally considered a property interest for which "due process" is required, or in other words, it would not be considered a property interest of such importance so that what constitutes "due process" in this context would necessarily include anything more than a hearing (with or without the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses). I agree it seems ridiculously shitty if you imagine yourself in the shoes of an…
/r/MensRights31/08/11 01:09 PM
0

While I agree that the new laws are worrisome, I disagree with the article. I certainly could be mistaken, as the US law is rather complicated, but I do not believe the 5th amendment has been interpreted as such that upholding "due process of law" precludes use of the preponderance standard in non-criminal cases in which no life, liberty, or property (this means imprisonment, constitutional right, or legally acknowledged property interest) is at stake. A student probably does not have a constitu…
/r/MensRights30/08/11 11:01 PM
4

Equity demands that a male rape victim would have the same option to sever parental rights and obligations the same way a female rape victim does: putting the child up for adoption.
/r/MensRights16/08/11 02:05 PM
3

Texas. Prenups will get voided only if they were such that one spouse was so unaware of what was being bargained over as to make such an agreement by the other spouse unconscionable. If all assets are disclosed, there will be no foul.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 02:01 PM
6

Family law is governed by state law for the most part. This is not how it is handled in my state.
/r/MensRights02/08/11 01:58 AM
1

I got the impression that the women also formally complained of being raped; not only could she not give consent due to her incapacity, but she also affirmatively asserted that she did not consent.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 09:14 PM
1

Right on the nose. =(
/r/MensRights08/07/11 03:16 PM
1

Generally, you have a privilege to not produce testimony that would be self incriminating. It must be invoked or it is waived.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 10:13 PM
7

First off, the fifth amendment privilege against self incrimination has been judicially determined to be limited to the scope of that which is communicative or testimonial. We hold that the privilege [against self incrimination] protects an accused only from being compelled to testify against himself, or otherwise provide the State with evidence of a testimonial or communicative nature,FN5 and that the withdrawal of blood and use of the analysis in question in this case did not involve compulsio…
/r/MensRights07/07/11 10:04 PM
9

A combination of finger pointing and inability to empathize with the other group may be the culprit. When making subjective evaluations of the relative harms and benefits a certain policy might yield, I think a lot of people have a tendency to emphasize the magnitude of the potential harms they might actually have to face relative to the harms that some faceless individual will suffer. Also, the two groups might have subtly diverging presuppositions on the way the world (or society) is or should…
/r/MensRights03/07/11 07:25 PM
5

I agree. I am failing to see how a reader could reasonably infer that Scott wished to administer capital punishment on those who are merely accused of the crime of rape.
/r/MensRights23/06/11 10:34 PM
2

I would look into the reasons behind statutory rape laws. When you look at criminal codes, you need to ask, "what behavior is this law trying to deter?" While the text of many (most? all?) statutory rape laws are now gender neutral, the true purpose of the statute is not one of gender neutrality. I believe the behavior the laws seek to deter is that which could cause the pregnancy in a young woman who cannot support a child (the burden thus falling upon the state). A draconian alternative along …
/r/MensRights15/06/11 01:57 PM
10

The withholding of sex by either party for a period over 12 months is grounds for at-fault divorce! (It's filed under desertion.) So yeah- go ahead- hate away. I do not mean to embarrass or condemn, but I would point out that marriage laws are by state in the USA. As such, this specific line of reasoning is not sound in some parts of the country.
/r/MensRights20/05/11 04:48 PM
1

Rules and law are characterized to be "masculine" in the new wave feminism that likes to drop the word "phallocentrisim." Yes, justice stemming from law is phallogocentric. I cannot help but believe whoever made the indictment incorrectly understands that to necessarily be a bad thing.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 04:32 PM
-1

While surely men do have a strong interest, surely you can recognize that women have that exact same interest plus a dignitary interest in having control of their bodies. There are two people, one with a greater interest. If there is a vote, the lesser interest will effectively never matter. I have thought about this for some time in the past and have never been able to come up with a better system that properly respects the interests of all parties.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 03:05 PM
1

It is per statute in the applicable state family code. Some states have it. Some states do not.
/r/MensRights18/04/11 05:17 PM
2

The topics are such that attempts to get to the truth of the matter might be seen as attempts to justify rape. What I have read on this matter does not purport to confirm the whole rape victim being "wetter than September" notion. Rather, the testing noted that there was increased blood flow the genitals of women who were watching pornographic rape scenes. While this could be indication that rape victims perhaps have physiological reaction akin to arousal, there were two popular schools of thoug…
/r/MensRights15/04/11 04:52 PM
4

I would concede a touch on this one. It seems to me that activist groups are not particularly objective (fair) minded because of a (sub)conscious selfish bias and/or an inability to either understand/foresee or properly evaluate the consequences of their own advancement.
/r/MensRights13/04/11 03:22 PM
3

At common law, rape was sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, who is not his wife, without her consent.
/r/MensRights11/04/11 04:49 PM
0

I do not see any support for your position. You have the burden of proof. A movement does not need to advance all parties equally for it to be advancing all parties in some way. The fact that it did not advance all parties equally does not necessarily mean that some parties were the stepping blocks of others.
/r/MensRights05/04/11 08:35 PM
0

The assumption (implicit premise) of the "Thanks, Feminism" argument is that it would be an issue that the pentagon would give a higher degree of substantial recognition if not for the success (or failures?) of feminist advocacy efforts. I do not think this this assumption can be reasonably maintained to the level needed to justify any sort of ire directed at feminist advocacy groups. I would tend to interpret the "problem" as being that the military has historically ignored (male) victimization…
/r/MensRights04/04/11 04:00 PM
1

Big Vagina.
/r/MensRights22/02/11 08:03 AM
1

That our society effectively accepts it as a normative. It is not particularly harmful in the medical sense (as opposed to constitutional rights), it is inadvertent, and it is a practice that our society actively prescribes.
/r/MensRights18/02/11 12:20 AM
6

A couple years ago, my torts professor said that you will not succeed in a malpractice claim if the hospital mistakenly circumcised your baby. This bothered me greatly. I am curious as to whether the assault and battery allegations will fare any better.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 03:57 PM
1

Fair enough. I suppose even giving her the benefit of the doubt leaves her position (that there is some good) as merely wishful thinking, at best.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 12:14 AM
1

Our justice system requires accusations. If we had to determine innocence before we could accuse, then we would be twiddling our thumbs. Is she referring to the pain of having their feelings hurt by being accused of anything they had not really done or is she referring to the pain that accompanies the stigma that follows the accusation of rape in our society? I agree that if she were referencing the second it would be disgusting. I was just trying to imagine a context in which the speaker is not…
/r/MensRights15/02/11 08:52 PM
-1

I think what she describes is probably a "good," but it is grossly insufficient to mitigate the harm suffered. Maybe the context for what she said was not properly conveyed?
/r/MensRights14/02/11 05:38 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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