TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

iamplasma Archive

View 0 posts and 18 comments by iamplasma 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)
4

Well, this is now speaking at a point where the person has been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. So the Court is now proceeding on the basis he isn't innocent.
/r/MensRights24/04/17 11:42 PM
12

In the same way that this sentence was justified once we had all the info, for all we know the food stamps sentence was justified too. This guy obviously wanted to make as sensational a comparison as possible, and so would plainly not mention any aggravating factors in that sentence.
/r/MensRights09/01/16 08:58 AM
4

That's how the Soviet Union was able to invade the Ukraine without any actions being taken. Huh? The Soviet Union never invaded Ukraine. (Do you mean Russia? The Soviet Union hasn't existed in almost 25 years.)
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:52 PM
1

Well, the "spirit of the law" (as well as the letter) as far as the federal government is concerned is most definitely that the feds have no business regulating ages of consent. I agree that Rome and Juliet laws are appropriate, but making demands that they be implemented in entirely improper ways helps nobody.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 11:23 PM
2

How is it a federal issue? The federal enumerated powers do not include ages of consent.
/r/MensRights09/07/14 09:30 PM
2

Yes, but what if they're being discriminated against because they no longer have those parts? In that case they're clearly not being discriminated against because of their birth sex, they're being discriminated against because of something else, which is probably more aptly described under the heading "gender" than "sex".
/r/MensRights28/05/11 03:01 PM
2

I think part of the point is that it helps capture transexuals and the like, whereas "sex" isn't so clear in such a case.
/r/MensRights28/05/11 12:46 PM
2

In India? I really don't think he cares who sits on the US supreme court.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 05:12 PM
2

How is she going to ruin anyone else's life? She's known to the authorities for having this problem, so I think it safe to say there's not going to be any witchhunt of the next guy she accuses (if anyone). It also appears she may be married, so her husband may be able to supervise her now her problem is fully apparent. However much you may have an understandable desire for retribution, this is a sick woman, not an evil one. You don't just lock up people over crazy ravings, it has to be used as a…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 10:31 PM
1

Punishment is for people who have knowingly committed an act that amounts to a criminal offence. The finding here was that, because of her mental illness, she believed her accusations were true. What does it achieve to punish her under those circumstances? Unless you're proposing that insanity defences be abolished for all crimes, why shouldn't it be available to a woman in this case? (I concede this likely wasn't an insanity defence for technical purposes, but rather a lack of a mental element,…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 09:04 PM
1

Umm... you haven't really made an argument, just dropped a link and left, so I have no idea what to say.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 08:56 PM
2

I'm saying in the context of things like rape accusations - that the accused's identity should be protected because there really are crazy women who will just accuse wildly. Heck, I'm going to agree with you right there. I wouldn't even need to go to the "because some women are crazy" step, or say that the punishment or non-punishment of this accuser is an issue. There are also women who make calculated malicious accusations, and women who are simply honestly incorrect in their accusations (eg i…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 08:47 PM
3

Because "crazy" is no excuse for men who are vilified in rape cases; in fact, men with diminished mental abilities end up in jail more times than not because they don't have the wherewithal to properly defend themselves from the charges. Insanity is a legal defence to any crime, including rape, and so it should be. If there are practical problems in that prosecutors or judges are unwilling to believe insanity defences, then that's a problem that should be addressed. In the interest of gender equ…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 08:41 PM
2

Why is it impossible for a crazy person to have an elaborate delusion? It sounds entirely plausible to me, even if I'm not an expert in the area (and it would appear the people who were experts thought it plausible too). If a woman is making implausible stories against 20 people, she's obviously not doing it for any benefit to herself, or as part of any other remotely rational plan, since if she were sane she'd realise she would be called out for sure. It seems far more plausible to me that some…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 08:12 PM
3

I'm not really sure I understand your argument. Some men and some women are fucking nuts, as in suffering of a mental disorder, and they need to be treated appropriately. It's not a weakening of my anti-murder stance if I think a crazy person who kills another as a result of their disorder should receive treatment rather than imprisonment. The only difference here is that because her delusions pose no apparent ongoing threat to others (especially now the police know about her), there's no need t…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 08:04 PM
-4

Should she? If this is the extent of her disorder, and she is otherwise capable of living a normal life without posing a danger to others, how does it benefit anyone to lock her up? Trying to deal with her in the community costs everyone far less and has an infinitely better prospect of her eventually being cured.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 08:01 PM
7

To be fair, it appears she's not spending any time behind bars because she was found to basically be nuts. People who try to frame men for rapes deserve whatever they get, but it looks like this woman wasn't trying to do that, she was so out of it that she didn't know what she was doing.
/r/MensRights13/01/11 03:44 PM
1

The general rule (at least in my jurisdiction) is that the defence has no obligation to show its hand at all, with the sole exception of alibi defences.
/r/MensRights07/07/10 11:27 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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