TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

graffic Archive

View 8 posts and 65 comments by graffic on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

TL;DR No MOAR gender wars please.
/r/MensRights27/11/15 06:52 AM
1

I guess you need to argue better why a gender diversity makes a better team in engineering. I'd like to hear what you had in mind when you said it. There is one study talking about collective intelligence and women. Women add value because they have more Emotional Intelligence. But at the same time there is another study saying that when you measure Emotional Intelligence in men and men know they're being measured they perform worst than women. When men are measured without their knowledge they …
/r/MensRights14/10/14 06:49 PM
3

"He shouldn't have cussed at her in public like that." So a woman attacks a man, the man shouldn't respond. That's why the post was in "TwoXChromosomes". Chivalry never dies.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 12:21 PM
22

You deserve a downvote because: You victimize yourself like a feminist. "To hell with all the downvotes" Your sexism I: "I'm all for treating women like ladies" women are people, men are people. Don't give special advantages because... ladies. Your sexism II: "I would never strike a woman" would you ever strike a man? Anyway, upvoted :)
/r/MensRights18/07/14 03:28 PM
1

The stereotype is stereotypical... circular definition for the win #not
/r/MensRights03/07/14 06:30 PM
3

The video focus on how when you insult a boy, the one hurted is the girl. I say a boy because young people are the one more malleable when they're attacked like that. An adult usually has learned to ignore it. How many times LikeAGirl is directed to boys to undermine their image? How many times it is directed to undermine girls? Isn't comparing women to men and men to women a way to try undermine the other sex image of themselves? IMHO that is the problem: LikeAGirl is used against boys to under…
/r/MensRights03/07/14 06:00 PM
3

Touching anybody is invading their personal space. It is considered an assault IIRC. The person being touched can be harassed or not. Although I believe it depends on the feelings of the person being touched, and not on the person touching. Why? In the end the person touched is the one receiving the pressure, the intimidation, the attack. That person knows better what is an attack/assault for her. Do you consider what I've just done to you an assault? There you have your harassment. Is it sexual…
/r/MensRights01/07/14 10:45 AM
1

It is true, nothing in this story is about 'patriarchy'. I was applying a form of rhetoric called Irony: "emphasize one's meaning by the deliberate use of language which states the opposite of the truth"
/r/MensRights17/06/14 07:20 AM
1

Source for Norway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_service#Norway It sems might need an update. Anyway, from a reuters article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/14/us-norway-women-conscription-idUSBRE95D0NB20130614 "In theory, it is possible (women would have to serve against their will), just as it can happen to men," Gustavsen said. "But in practice, the armed forces recruit the most motivated young people." So it seems that more than mandatory, now women also have to fill forms to…
/r/MensRights17/06/14 07:15 AM
1

"men are usually the ones in favor of war" <-- prove it. I remember the feminist/suffragettes story of shaming men for not going to war. Thus "some" men and women are in favor of war. We apply some gender roles there and men will become cannon fodder while women will take care of the rest (including shaming men). In 2014, the most recent close-to-war events are in Syria and Ukraine. The Syrian problem, pictures talk: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/syria-chemical-weapons-bashar-al-assad-un-ru…
/r/MensRights17/06/14 07:04 AM
-68

Patriarchy hurts men too. Edit: Warning! Irony
/r/MensRights16/06/14 07:55 PM
2

In an actual war everybody will be called to help. As I posted above: In Greece teachers were drafted to avoid a strike: http://www.teachersolidarity.com/blog/greek-opposition-leader-supports-teacher-strikes.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 06:49 PM
3

At first I thought I confused mandatory military service with other thing. But in the previous post you stated "countries where military service is mandatory for women.". So let me filter the list for "mandatory military service" China: No, it doesn't have mandatory military service for women (and for men). "At present, military conscription only exists in theory and has done so since the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949. " Eritrea: I cannot compare the final year of their…
/r/MensRights16/06/14 06:48 PM
5

Don't know about US laws, so thank you for the link :) AFAIK there is only one country: Israel. Where women are treated as equals and, as men, they do mandatory military service (Kudos for their equality). I haven't found a country where mandatory military service is for women though. If found, I'd apply the same principles of equality: or we all do it, or nobody should do it. That was the point I was trying to explain.
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:50 PM
6

Help men then (help men too). Defend men against bigotry in your daily life in the same way you defend women. Thanks in advance for your help :)
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:26 PM
11

True. But the imbalances in the law do not benefit men or women, they support gender roles. Karen will say that even if women and men were forced to do things they didn't want, usually men paid a higher price (with their lives). That's why in 2014 in a divorce almost for sure children will go with the mother. Years ago that was the gender role, and still today men and women are forced onto it in the law. Let me agree with Arakin on his thoughts about feminism trying to solve the wrong problem. W…
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:22 PM
9

Besides the real problems men face right now and no feminist will talk about. There is an issue "in the air" called gynocentrism. You will find that Karen has really strong thoughts on how much gynocentric is our society. So strong to point that even gender roles benefit more women than men. (Reference to Karen videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat/videos ) Yeah, she denounces something affecting men, but it affects women because the world sees them as "fragile people" that need "c…
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:09 PM
2

It doesn't. That is the interesting part. "How can you say that feminism hates men if our goals are these amazing things" Perhaps something is missing from the description.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 05:04 PM
1

You're skipping the context. In fact there are worst out of context sentences in AVFM posts. Even there are posts that are outrageous till you read the last line. What do you find radical in that article? The "women begging to get raped" without a context? You might want to read about some sexual fantasies here: http://judgybitch.com/2014/03/07/is-womens-sexuality-profoundly-narcissistic-that-would-explain-a-lot/ and there is a book about it "What Do Women Want: Adventures in the Science of Fema…
/r/MensRights09/06/14 01:52 PM
2

The core value of feminism is patriarchy. Therefore you won't find anyone agreeing with the core values of feminism. Another issue is what they say they want to obtain: equality. Bombing Irak was about democracy. I see similarities in that broken logic.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 04:30 PM
1

So struggles with no proofs. You deserve a bunch of negative votes on that. Also you change subject instead of answering the question. If this is the kind of dialog you want. Thanks but no.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 08:53 AM
1

For those asking about Greece. That country has a really traditional culture and really church "oriented". Don't know if there is any relation on how a traditionalist culture makes men angry towards women and women just Ok with men.
/r/MensRights02/06/14 11:36 AM
5

Dead and Aggression threats for the next conference in Detroit. Being shouted, laughed at (RedHead anyone?) Being bullied (Cafe conference, fire alarm). Humiliated through being accused of being rapists, child molesters, sexists.... That is a good step. Before that, our claims were just ignored and we didn't raise any voice. I guess they call it awareness. Small associations for equality and/or men's human rights are starting and are being more public and less scared (In some podcasts in the las…
/r/MensRights31/05/14 09:19 AM
0

Feminists appeal to the dictionary. Predictable. “Have you ever actually looked up the word feminist in a dictionary? It means equality between the sexes. It is not about hating men. This is very simple and you would know if you actually looked it up” – http://gynocentrism.com/2014/05/24/refuting-the-appeal-to-dictionary/
/r/MensRights31/05/14 09:05 AM
3

Have a different opinion is harassment? You might be a feminist...
/r/MensRights31/05/14 08:05 AM
2

screenshot?
/r/MensRights31/05/14 08:03 AM
5

.#YesAllWomen are afraid of... wait a minute...
/r/MensRights31/05/14 07:54 AM
12

I'm repeating myself. There was a nice answer given by Karen. Let me summarize it: why do feel attached to the word feminist? There are other words like egalitarian, humanist. It symbolizes a lot of things and not all of them are good. Of course not all feminist are like that. Although mainstream, academic, scholar, movement feminism... any feminist that matters, are going to have those bad things. You have the power to call yourself feminist and give those people moral permission to keep doing …
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:35 PM
2

I knew one feminist that seemed to support MRM: "Cathy Young". But the support came with the condition of supporting the idea of patriarchy. And the summary is here: (Oh, yes, a voice for men) http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/cant-we-all-just-get-along/ Discussing those issues is naturally going to include pointing out the abuse itself, which in turn means pointing the finger at its female perpetrators and their feminist defenders. It will also naturally include challenging popular opinion o…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 06:31 PM
1

Sooner or later they will get their screenshot out of any context.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 03:24 PM
3

There is no unit of pain. That is a myth: http://factsfromfiction.blogspot.gr/2012/05/human-body-handles-45-dels-units-of.html It is true that giving birth is a painful experience. That is why women's bodies produce drugs to deal with it. This also creates a bond between the baby and the mom. http://sarahbuckley.com/pain-in-labour-your-hormones-are-your-helpers
/r/MensRights30/05/14 03:03 PM
3

Really bad examples: Whites in South Africa were racists (a really bad thing if you didn't know). It is true that it wasn't the only problem. Germans weren't gassed. Nazis were killed because they were the enemy during war. Nazis that didn't die continued ruling the country. Only some of theme were judged in Nuremberg. Killing the Nazi wasn't the only problem. (Fascism is a really bad thing just in case you didn't know). But men are not a really bad thing, not even a bad thing, not even a thing.…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:56 PM
1

People who eat bread: 95% of armed robberies. 100% of aggravated assaults 99% stalkers 98% Domestic violence perpetrators. 100% of rape committed by bread eaters. 99% murders In the last 30 years, 61 of the last 62 mass shooters did eat bread. It is a fallacy "Post hoc": If it rains I pick my umbrella. I picked my umbrella, so it will rain. Note that in that slide no fallacy is being made. But I'm pretty sure that it is used to build it during the class time. Nobody build that fallacy directly, …
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:39 PM
7

No, you don't speak for all of us. Don't be a feminist :P
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:35 PM
6

All feminists that matter are like that. Usually those who don't follow the patriarchy theory are bullied and kicked out (see Erin Prizzey). Feminism as a word is rotten. Are you a feminist who doesn't follow the Patriarchy theory?
/r/MensRights30/05/14 02:23 PM
13

I'm pretty sure the actual stated 'goal of feminists' is to support legal and social equality. No, feminism is based in the patriarchy theory. That is why it has its own name. It could have been: egalitarian or humanism. But introducing patriarchy and the oppressor/oppressed logic gave it its own name. And yet, here's a post that specifically vilifies "feminists and other detractors of the men's rights movement ("They")" and specifically labels "their" movement as one meant to quash men's rights…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 01:07 PM
2

Two days ago I was sent this quote: "It takes much more energy to fight bullshit than to create it". MensRighs focus its energy on the bullshit created against men. The name itself might clear any doubt about where is the energy given. I'm sorry to disagree that this reddit should be a significant discussion about other problems. That you will see mentioned and commented too, but without being a significant part of it, due to the focus/topic of the reddit. I really like things like the Canadian …
/r/MensRights30/05/14 01:01 PM
8

Of course women have the right to say they feel scared. Who doesn't have that right? Using 7 deads to do so can be disgusting. Pointing fingers to a specific gender can be bigotry. Using 7 deads to point the finger can be even more disgusting. Ignoring that the same problem, therefore the same could be shouted, is suffered from other people looks like playing the Victim instead of looking at the problem. Ignoring also other problems or "What you will never see linked to a #YesAllWomen social war…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 12:36 PM
3

Wrong! Of those sharing the same sex (and only those).
/r/MensRights30/05/14 12:28 PM
5

Really bad translation. Don't they teach you feminism in the school these days? In the old good days.... Translation: Other genders do nothing bad to women, and if they do it doesn't deserve a note/fight/comment. Sexism, misogyny, harassment, assault and violence exists because man. You cannot whine about sexism. I'm the one that can whine because I'm the victim. Only men deserve attention for ruining things (no other gender do, or if they do it doesn't deserve a note/fight/comment). You deal wi…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 12:22 PM
3

When you use a gendered term as an insult or in a derogatory way, you're normalising marginalisation of the gender via the term used. So because an derogatory adjective can only be used in a subset of genders, It is derogatory for those genders. Therefore asshole that can be used by all genders it is derogatory to all genders. Working with your definition, how is skin colour a trait but gender not? The word nigger disrespects the race. It doesn't mean: "Your indian haircut is ugly" or "you're an…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 11:35 AM
4

One less friend.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 01:43 AM
1

The article has a point: discussing "not all men" doesn't add anything to the discussion because you are discussing a "straw man" fallacy. If you hear "those rapists men!" and you interrupt with "not all men", You're saying: yes, men are rapists but not all of them. Or perhaps "yes, those are rapists but not me". You're accepting what the other person is saying and just rejecting a small part. Of course "not all <whatever>" nobody can say the opposite, and there you have your straw man. You're d…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:23 AM
1

Yes, twitter is a way to contact someone. A conversation? Ok. A meaningful conversation?, I see it difficult (using my previous experiences there). Due to the lack of context (no space to add it) I've seen many conversations end up in a "shit storm".
/r/MensRights23/05/14 10:03 AM
1

This is an interesting article that redefines feminism. Things I consider interesting points: There is no mention of patriarchy or privilege It is a manifesto like site, so it pushes a "new brand". I believe we will see that site referenced a lot more. It looks like a definition of Humanism instead of the feminism "we used to know". Because it defines feminism as humanism, without patriarchy and privilege. It might be a good step forwards. Still the manifesto feels focused on "men bad"/"oppresse…
/r/MensRights23/05/14 07:32 AM
1

They're redefining feminism and putting a new brand on it (simple website manifesto-like). This means that they will push hard on the new definition and use it a lot. Therefore I believe it is good for everybody to know that a "new definition" exists. And also invite to draw conclusions from that post. But I might be wrong on that one. In HN there are a lot of comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7784868 And some "small" ad hominem attacks to MRAs. So it seemed important to share here.
/r/MensRights23/05/14 07:20 AM
2

And here is an example on how "Irony" can explain things better than any other comment :P
/r/MensRights23/05/14 07:15 AM
1

Talking about "image" means talking about showing something different that we really are. Politicians keep an "image" because they're different than they appear to be: "image" just sound fake. If we're not able to communicate our message, that is another problem. MRA are usually anti-patriarchy-theory, and feminism is based in the patriarchy theory. Thus a feminist will see an MRA as trying to demolish the bases of their ideology and movement.
/r/MensRights22/05/14 09:19 PM
2

It was bad for everybody as "companies" were trying to squeeze the last drop of sweat of everybody including children. What a human being could handle was the limit. Good days for business people. I would not dare to compare. It was shit for everybody. And it is very sad to read about child labor in factories (Do it for the children! argument sorry). If you want to compare the limits of women, children and men ... You can do it for biological reasons/studies?. It might help to explain why men we…
/r/MensRights19/05/14 08:47 AM
3

Remember that you won't change their mind, so the best is not to put your energy on that but on making them speak. Do it in a public space where more people can see the discussion Record it. Do it for the people watching the debate. Make them speak to prove their point. It might feel they're "slamming". Don't worry you might reveal to those listening the stupidity of what they say. The last point is the most important one. You're in a public debate with people that won't change their mind, but p…
/r/MensRights18/05/14 12:47 PM
2

I'd like to know about the base of the decision. It was one person sayings against the other? Where there messages saying explicitly that? Does anybody have any more information?
/r/MensRights17/05/14 06:25 AM
1

Fallacy of the undistributed middle, a non sequitur one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)#Fallacy_of_the_undistributed_middle
/r/MensRights17/05/14 06:05 AM
0

Besides the internal race and sexual minorities disagreements. It seems the core of feminism is Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 05:52 AM
3

You're alive then :)
/r/MensRights15/05/14 05:52 AM
2

The question should be: "why?" Why there is that %? What does that mean in the area of CEOs? What does it mean in other areas? Like in the army, police, mines. Try to have a discussion about the statistics, because by themselves they mean nothing.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 06:08 PM
13

There was a nice answer given by Karen. Let me summarize it: why do feel attached to the word feminist? There are other words like egalitarian, humanist. It symbolizes a lot of things and not all of them are good. Of course not all feminist are like that. Although mainstream, academic, scholar, movement feminism... any feminist that matters, are going to have those bad things. You have the power to call yourself feminist and give those people moral permission to keep doing what they do. Feminism…
/r/MensRights14/05/14 05:56 PM
1

This is a nice article where someone seems to open their mind and share with us why they're feminists and what does feminism means to them. I believe it is a good idea to take a look at it and find the strong and weak points.
/r/MensRights14/05/14 05:27 PM
2

Trolling doesn't help. It feels like you come here hiding and/or looking for reinforcements.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 03:24 PM
6

Correlation doesn't imply causation. The title is deceiving. The text is also behind a paywall. Difficult to see what are the reasons. Anyway, there should be a "why" this happens, and the goal should be tackle that problem instead of ignoring it and look for "stable families". Stable families could have also the same problem, and ignoring it won't help anyone.
/r/MensRights04/05/14 06:04 PM
4

The answer to those graphs is "why". No more statistics. Why there are more men in __ industry? Why mostly men are sent to die at war? Why do you think it is male dominated fall upon men? Why woman "dominate" child rearing? Be careful with the angle the other person is applying. "Child rearing" does fall upon "woman" / Child rearing is women dominated. The in industry is male dominated / The industry does fall upon men
/r/MensRights02/05/14 08:33 AM
5

Some form of agreement. Outdated and not working nowadays. So it should be updated. You want to call it patriarchy and relate it only to men. You might be missing half of the agreement. And if you miss half of the reasons for that outdated agreement, you might create imbalances in newer ones. In the moment that the word "patriarchy" appears in the conversation, it is not about gender equality anymore, or about problems that one specific sex can have. But about blaming men for that. Patriarchy is…
/r/MensRights02/05/14 08:09 AM
1

I guess the point there is not in the "all <something>" but what you can find after that. So now we dance the "not all <something>" dance while the important arguments/idea get through uncommented. Take the "TIME" article as an opportunity to see how to handle better things you might not agree with.
/r/MensRights02/05/14 06:31 AM
1

Saying "not all men" or not "all women" doesn't help the conversation. You might believe the other part is lying about something and your first reaction is to defend: "that is BS! <insert not all men sentence>" As you can see it doesn't explain why it is BS or a lie. And you're accepting that it is not BS for "the other men". Thus agreeing with the entire contents. You might be "saving yourself" but throwing the BS to others. You might have expressed your anger about the BS you've just read but …
/r/MensRights02/05/14 06:08 AM
0

Could it be that only women can use their sexuality? Although men and women can use their status.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 08:50 PM
1

Great article about freelancing. I must say the author couldn't have described the problems better and with really good writing. Although there is a small point I dislike: " If you are a young man and a freelancer, you are a budding entrepreneur. If you are a young woman and a freelancer, are you sure you know what you’re doing?" So young men never have problems and young women problems are because they're women. It cannot be that your customer is an as***** and it doesn't matter if you're male …
/r/MensRights30/04/14 08:20 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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