TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

hindusach Archive

View 5 posts and 64 comments by hindusach 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)
1

It goes 'both' ways about 97% of the time in favor of women and about 3% of the time in favor men, if that's what you mean by both ways. Sure, there are the guys that get great settlements, but they are the exception to the rule.
/r/MensRights13/03/19 01:39 AM
1

When did asians ever benefit from affirmative action? Fun fact, most asians only gained the right to vote in the 1940s with the passage of luce-celler act. Asians were also denied the right to join professional organizations and own land in certain states. There's been practically nothing done for asians as compared to other minority groups.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 11:22 PM
1

There's no tangible benefit to certifying your business as 'minority owned'. I own a business and am asian. Literally, would not increase my revenue by one dollar if I did the certification. ​ Very different from say affirmative action, where there is a tangible benefit to marking yourself as a certain minority.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 11:16 PM
21

I think it's a great thing for everyone opposed to affirmative action that the asian groups are suing harvard.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 04:21 AM
7

What business stuff? There are no business grants for being asian or south asian.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 04:20 AM
1

No, “84% of fathers aren’t the custodial parent” sounds a lot less severe than “lose custody”, which is worded to ramp up the victim complex. It doesn't matter how it 'sounds'. If you live with your children and you no longer do, it is correct to say that you 'lost custody' of them. This is where the meaning of words matter. You apparently didn't understand (and still don't understand) what the word custody means in the US. That’s bullshit. I’ve literally been involved in a case representing an …
/r/MensRights22/01/19 01:49 AM
2

That's awesome, thanks!
/r/MensRights21/01/19 07:45 PM
1

Shared custody studies being better for children is typically 50% shared custody.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 07:44 PM
1

I just googled this, and at least what came up for my search was that Maine does not have a law defaulting to 50/50. Can you link please?
/r/MensRights21/01/19 07:01 PM
2

You haven't cited any evidence at all.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 06:50 PM
2

“Men lose custody in 84% of cases” implies, at worst, no contact with the children, which is different from “Men are not the custodial parent in 84% of cases”. You understand that "not being the custodial parent in 84% of cases" means the exact same thing as "losing custody in 84% of cases" if the father previously lived with his children right... ? Losing custody does not imply no contact, that's simply a lack of understanding of US law on your own part. Next, a lot of that was about unmarried …
/r/MensRights21/01/19 06:49 PM
2

If you actually read my post, you would know that I did not conflate 84% primary custody with sole custody. Specifically I talked about the breakdowns of custody situations here (among other places): Most family lawyers will advise mediation, and the opening bid starts with mothers having primary custody. These guys are trying to negotiation for a 60/40 or 70/30 split instead of an 80/20. ​
/r/MensRights21/01/19 06:01 PM
–

Only a few American states have started 50-50 by default. To my knowledge, though I am not 100% up on the latest, no states have this by default. In colorado they proposed a bill that would do this but the feminist organizations went nuts. In maryland they also proposed something similar, and all the female lawmakers actually staged a walkout so they they couldn't reach quorum. If I'm wrong, that would be great to hear.... which states default to 50/50 if so? EDIT: Pleased to learn that Kentucky…
/r/MensRights21/01/19 03:56 PM
–

No, the quote literally says “Men lose custody in 84% of cases“, which is incorrect. How is it incorrect to say "Men lose custody in 84% of cases" when women have primary custodial status in 84% of cases? If these men were living with their children prior to the split, they lost custody. Why in the world would this be incorrect? 40% of the children may be born to unmarried couples, but that doesn’t mean 40% of fathers aren’t on birth certificates. It is entirely up to the mother to decide if she…
/r/MensRights21/01/19 03:51 PM
–

I’ve googled this and not found a source backing it up. There’s no way 84% of men “lose custody” - i.e., have no visitation time with their kids after divorce. He never said that they have 'no visitation time' with kids. He said that the women are awarded primary custody 84% of the time. This is true. The breakdown is roughly 85% mother as primary custodian, 10% joint custody, 5% father as primary custodian. the children may spend time with the mother 60% of the time, and the farther 40% of the …
/r/MensRights21/01/19 01:59 PM
4

Thank you for linking this. This needs to be upvoted more! We can link articles and comment all day on this sub, but one comment on official policy changes counts far more.
/r/MensRights20/01/19 08:34 AM
1

It's a quote straight from the nytimes article that I linked to. I would use it and link the article somewhere.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 07:58 PM
1

Every single behavior they show in the commercial are anti-male stereotypes. The boys bullying a smaller boy. The guy gawking at the woman's butt and moving his hands to grope her. The man in the board room who interrupts the woman and speaks for her. What the commercial is saying, is that this is the typical behavior of most men,'do better'. Now let's imagine a Muslim shaming equivalent... We could take all of the worst examples, that are not actually representative of Islam, throw them in a co…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 06:44 PM
1

To characterize an entire group buy the actions of a few is bigotry. We wouldn't air an anti Muslim commercial, telling Muslims to 'do better', not sure why you think an anti male commercial saying the same thing is ok. I guess instead of argue with a valid point, it's easier to just attack the person you disagree with. Speaking of stupid... why are you on a male rights sub, getting alarmed about what products men use at home?
/r/MensRights15/01/19 05:36 PM
1

I'm not using their products because I don't believe in rewarding bigotry. Substitute 'muslim' for man and re-imagine this commercial telling all Muslims to be good people and that Muslims owe it to one another to call out radical shariah law. The commercial is propaganda and seeks to convince it's viewers that men are inherently bad.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 05:21 PM
1

Does anyone in this sub have experience with art of shaving straight razors? Or Schick? Serious question, I want some alternatives to gillette.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 07:45 AM
1

More than just putting one's life at risk, because the job *requires* you to be able to carry 90+lbs of gear up the stairs of a high rise building. There are just not that many women who can pass the physical requirements necessary for the job.
/r/MensRights22/12/18 07:21 PM
1

Source on 4 boys from original notes: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/holes-in-christine-blasey-fords-testimony-cast-doubt-that-brett-kavanaugh-was-her-assailant ​ ​
/r/MensRights01/10/18 04:31 AM
1

If Kavanaugh is not confirmed, and the Democrats are rewarded for this, waves of male politicians will face completely false sexual assault charges. It will happen at state and local levels, it will happen bc these men simply don't agree with the feminist wing of the democratic party. It will happen to men in the democratic primaries. Hell yes, this is one of the most important issues that will affect men over the next 30 years. Regarding Trump -- Kavanaugh believes a sitting president can't be …
/r/MensRights30/09/18 11:21 PM
1

This is a *coordinated character assassination*. Kavanaugh doesn't even know this woman. Her original statement to her psychologist in 2012 cites 4 boys (not 2!) who carried out the assault and neither Kavanaugh or Judge were even mentioned. She has refused to release this statement bc it would obviously contradict everything she has said. Feinstein hand picked her lawyer. The Dems have covered all her legal bills. She has raised $175k from a gofundme account. In the new version of her story, sh…
/r/MensRights30/09/18 11:13 PM
1

I agree so much with this. Didn't even care about his nomination one way or another until this submarine surfaced and launch a torpedo at him. Now I'm a vocal supporter of his nomination. The Democrats simply cannot be rewarded for this tactic.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 04:11 AM
1

Actually every alleged witness including Ford's friend Leland Keyser has no recollection of any such event. ​ For Ford's account to be accurate -- Kavanaugh, PJ, Judge, AND Leland Keyser would all have to be lying or forgetful or some permutation of that. ​ This accusation is complete garbage.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 03:59 AM
1

That alternate reality would also have at least one of the 4 alleged witnesses say that the gathering even took place. For Ford to be accurate, Kavanaugh, Judge, PJ and Leland Keyser would all have to be either lying or have completely forgotten the incident. And in the case of Leland Keyser who was her best friend, Keyser stated that she never even met Kavanaugh. So she would have to be either lying to cover for him, or have forgotten not only the event but also ever meeting him or his friends.…
/r/MensRights30/09/18 03:54 AM
1

The notes are completely inconsistent with her testimony. She cites 4 boys (not 3!) who assaulted her. Mark Judge and Kavanaugh not named in notes.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 03:50 AM
0

Sure, and let's reward this false allegation by denying a man who has worked 30 years this vote, and allowing the dems to delay past midterm election all the way to 2020 in an effort to keep the seat open. You know what happens when you reward this tactic? They do it more. False accusations against ANY man who runs for office.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 03:49 AM
1

Lawyers were hand selected by Feinstein and are completely covered by Democratic Party.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 03:47 AM
1

Yup, and a gofundme campaign for $175k. And her lawyer hand selected by Feinstein, legal bills completely covered. Lots to lose.
/r/MensRights30/09/18 03:46 AM
3

The mods of r/MensRights need to sticky a thread at the very top, requesting help from the community to setup a site OFF of reddit, with similar functionality. Ppl would develop it for free...
/r/MensRights28/09/18 08:29 AM
10

Dude! Please put it in the wiki or on the sidebar, and PROMOTE IT EVERY WEEK. Maybe some most redditors wouldn't post, but I gladly would. If you can even get 10k of the subscribers here to regularly post off reddit, you will get a critical mass! Plz, plz don't give up on this initiative, this sub reddit will get killed at some point and soon.
/r/MensRights28/09/18 05:14 AM
4

So a hugely important follow up question... how does r/MensRights organize off of reddit? Bc even if they don't quarantine or act THIS particular year, they may well in the future... Can any tech savvy internet ppl weigh in? Can mods weigh in? Serious question.
/r/MensRights28/09/18 05:10 AM
2

That;s terrible. Keep focusing on you. Your life continues even if she did this bs.
/r/MensRights25/09/18 06:27 AM
1

It's only bc a huge group of feminists went crazy when they originally published it. They got the original editor who allowed its publication fired. I think the essay itself is pretty good.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 07:33 PM
10

Incidentally, Ian Buruma, the editor of the New York Review, was fired basically for publishing this essay.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 03:38 AM
5

That's a good point. If someone were falsely accused in an employment setting and it went to the Supreme Court, you know there would be sympathy from at least one of the judges.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 06:37 PM
2

The 65 women knew him contemporaneously while he was in high school. Will edit title of post to clarify that.
/r/MensRights15/09/18 06:35 PM
1

Why I felt this was worth posting: The person who wrote this letter remains anonymous, however Kavanaugh and other high school classmate of his were publicly named. The person who wrote the letter allegedly requested that the letter not be publicized. Senator Diane Feinstein publicized it anyway in the 11th hour before a committee vote to decide if Kavanaugh's confirmation should continue to the Senate floor for a vote. Kavanaugh and his high school friend both categorically deny the allegations…
/r/MensRights15/09/18 12:50 AM
4

2% of GDP is written into the original treaty of the 1940s. The commitment to get there after 25 years is a cop out, bc we have called them on failing to do their part of the bargain. The US could easily have a safety net if we spent less on defense, that was exactly my point. I don't see how that's not directly related to Germany failing to meet their own treaty obligations. Our troops man Germany's eastern border.
/r/MensRights10/09/18 04:02 PM
1

Uh, excuse me... Germany, the largest member in the block spends 1.2% of GDP on defense. The bare minimum is 2%. Germany is a country with a net trade surplus and a relatively low share of debt to gdp. In other words, they are rich and there is no excuse for this. ​ If the US spend 1.2% of GDP on defense, we would literally save more than 500 billion per year. It would cover things like socialized medicine. ​ Why doesn't the US spend 1.2% per year? B/c we would pull out of Europe, S Korea, the M…
/r/MensRights10/09/18 04:27 AM
2

No, the 175,000 pages were released almost one month before the hearing. The democrats kept making more document requests, and some of those documents were only released the night before the hearing. The documents that were further released related to Kavanaugh's time as White House Counsel, none of them had to do with the wealth of information they already had available regarding his past opinions, speeches, interpretations, etc. The initial document was more detailed than anything any other su…
/r/MensRights07/09/18 08:39 PM
9

The documents argument is a complete sham. I watched 4 hours of the hearing. More documentation has been provided regarding his opinions, speeches, emails, etc than any other judge in the history of the supreme court vetting process. Chuck Grassley cited this in reply to the opening objections, I think something like 175,000 pages of information were released. Far more that for Sotomayer, or Kagan, as a point of comparison. Also regarding why documents were kept confidential -- Kavanaugh was adv…
/r/MensRights07/09/18 10:51 AM
27

He could have easily come up with answers, and would have in a private conversation. He was avoiding saying anything in the least bit controversial because he needs every single republican vote to win the seat. He was just being very, very careful. Also, if you see the full hearing, Kamala Harris kept interrupting him. He would start to answer a question, and within 3 seconds, almost every single time, for 15 minutes straight, she would interrupt him, often rudely and lead him to some 'gotcha' p…
/r/MensRights07/09/18 10:43 AM
9

Death Penalty. I mean I guess someone could argue that it has been applied against both men and women, but I think something like 97% of all capital executions are men.
/r/MensRights07/09/18 10:39 AM
18

She cheated on Bourdain. Widely speculated that he killed himself shortly after seeing her pictures with a reporter in Rome (Hugo Clement).
/r/MensRights20/08/18 05:04 AM
1

In a normal situation yes. Bennett was 6 when he first started appearing in movies with her. In emails / written communication back and forth, they referred to each other as 'mother and son'. He was 17 -- possibly first sexual experience. He'd known her as a trusted mother figure since he was 6. Think about that.
/r/MensRights20/08/18 05:01 AM
1

This woman was absolutely toxic to every man she touched. While I have little sympathy for Harvey Weinstein, she clearly was just using him to climb the ladder and turned on him when it was expedient. She used this poor kid Bennett -- who was 6 when he first met her. She used Anthony Bourdain. Let's give a name to this -- toxic femininity.
/r/MensRights20/08/18 05:00 AM
1

Love the dune reference
/r/MensRights17/08/18 09:14 AM
2

My favorite quote from the author, "Feminism is not gender tribalism."
/r/MensRights16/08/18 08:40 PM
2

Could not agree more. NYTimes, Boston Globe, Washington Post -- have all become the Breitbart of the Left. NYTimes was especially disconcerting for me, have been reading them for the last 15 years, and in the last 2 they've gone completely off the rails.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 07:46 AM
16

Wasn't she convicted of murder? Are you kidding me?! EDIT: She was convicted of negligent homicide. If she had been convicted of murder, she wouldn't have been allowed to claim anything. Still incredibly fucked.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 07:38 AM
4

This is insanity. How about having Child Custody Quotas to increase diversity of parental custody? Makes about as much sense.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 07:16 AM
6

This was the top comment in the NYTIMES, I'm glad mainstream ppl are seeing this as hypocritical. "The letter defending Ronell is terrifying in its use and display of raw power to influence, to intimidate and to silence. The signatories to the letter represent the Who's Who in the field of literary theory, chairpersons and decision makers in hiring and tenure. The equivalent of such a letter in the #MeToo movement would be, unimaginably, a letter in support of Weinstein signed by every studio he…
/r/MensRights14/08/18 10:11 PM
23

What got me about this was not the professor herself (she clearly doesn't have the capacity for self reflection, not even her getting a slap on the wrist by the university -- it was that the other pre-eminent feminists who read the brief, and just assumed that it didn't matter because a man was the victim. There's such ridiculous groupthink happening, feels like people (men and women both) have lost their capacity for simple moral reasoning.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 08:19 AM
2

glad she is your ex. why was she arguing with you about you do or don't like? That's not even a weird feminist thing, that's just stupid.
/r/MensRights14/08/18 08:09 AM
2

how do you do that?
/r/MensRights14/08/18 07:30 AM
1

You know that posts from RT.com are funded by the Russian Gov't... whether true or not, recognize that the people posting this have a specific intent in mind that may not be about men's rights at all.
/r/MensRights10/03/18 08:06 PM
1

This is genius.
/r/MensRights03/02/18 07:09 AM
2

Great point.
/r/MensRights21/01/18 12:51 AM
1

Dude had "28 offences in the past, including domestic violence, indecent assault, theft and burglary." This is why he got slammed. Honestly, seems like a total shitbag of a human being. I'm ok with him getting 7 years. Sure, mom should have gotten more, but this guy was no saint.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 04:19 AM
1

I actually think they would have still attacked him. They would have said something like, "it's different when a woman experiences non-consensual touch -- you can never understand".
/r/MensRights19/12/17 04:26 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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