TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

j1mb0 Archive

View 0 posts and 52 comments by j1mb0 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

Ok. I mean at least that’s consistent. I don’t agree that either parent should be able to unilaterally decide to forfeit their rights and sever their responsibility, but if that’s what you think, then we’ll have to agree to disagree. I mainly take issue with the more common proposal to afford a specific, new legal right to fathers only, under the guise of “equality”, as if an abortion and a “paper abortion” are the same thing.
/r/MensRights15/06/19 01:02 AM
0

ok thanks bro, out of arguments so retreating to ad hominem, thanks for conceding.
/r/MensRights15/06/19 12:49 AM
1

abortion =/= “paper abortion” catch up bro
/r/MensRights15/06/19 12:39 AM
1

??? A person with a uterus has a right to abort a fetus in that uterus, a person without one neither does nor does nor have that right. I think you are the one who is misunderstanding.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 11:31 PM
0

Discrimination on the basis of sex is just as illegal as discrimination on the basis of gender. Men are perfectly entitled to abortions. For example, transmen. However, the right to an abortion is implicit in the right to control ones own body. A person without a uterus does not have the right to have an abortion, but they also don’t not have that right: it’s completely incompatible. A person with a penis has the right to a vasectomy, a person without a penis neither does nor does not have that …
/r/MensRights14/06/19 10:50 PM
0

jfc dude, you need to relax and deal with your misogyny. Consenting to sex is consenting to supporting any child that is produced from that. Please describe by what legal framework you would change that. The choice to have an abortion is not wholly and only the same as the choice to sever parental responsibility. The choice to have an abortion also does not result in a child which needs to be supported. The right to an abortion is implicit within the right to bodily autonomy, a right which men a…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 10:40 PM
0

I’m trying to get you to say that you would create a specific legal process and legal form that could only be signed by men, which is de facto preposterous and unconstitutional, but I guess you won’t say that, despite it being the only possible way for your proposed example to work. Unless! Unless you’re saying that you would also allow for that exact same paper to be signed by a pregnant woman, in which case, please stop arguing with me. If that’s what you’re saying, which in some instances it …
/r/MensRights14/06/19 10:29 PM
1

I wholeheartedly, with every fiber of my being, could not agree with you more about that final sentence. Of course that is what should be. All I have been trying to argue for, this entire time, is radical and total equality. I think that neither gender should have the right to opt out, unilaterally, against the wishes of the other. If a child exists, and either parents wants to care for it, and they have not both agreed to put it up for adoption, both should be financially responsible for it. Th…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 10:09 PM
0

What you’re describing already exists and as such is functionally meaningless: if both people discuss and agree to a set of rights and responsibilities before having sex, then that is what will happen. I don’t understand what is new that you’re trying to propose. This situation does not require laws and such for the kinds of people who have the forethought to have such discussions and plans before having sex, it’s for the kinds of situations where no such conversation or prior agreement exists.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 09:59 PM
1

Describe how this would work from a legal standpoint, in terms of actual specific actions that would be taken. An abortion is not exactly and entirely equal to a “paper abortion”.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 09:27 PM
0

Ok, a nice big wall of text that does not answer my question. How would you implement this from a legal standpoint? Would there be a form? Your suggestion that this all just work out in discussions is laughable.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 09:07 PM
0

Ah, but there is a slightly nuanced difference: an abortion does not result in a child which needs to be supported. When a child exists both parents either equally share responsibility, or come to a different agreement that they both consent to.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:57 PM
1

That seems like a very cumbersome legal framework to verify and implement, especially right before you’re about to fuck.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:44 PM
0

Eh, you must not be reading all the same ones that I am then. Abortion is not germane to this discussion and the continued impulse to bring it up belies a misunderstanding of the issue at a fundamental level. The framing of this in oppositional terms again, belies an undercurrent of sexism. When a child is born, and even in situations where the father is paying child support, the mother isn’t just getting a free ride, she is paying for and supporting the child as well!
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:37 PM
2

The decision to have an abortion is not only and entirely the same as such a decision as proposed in the OP, and a specific legal right could not be afforded to only half of people with the basis that other half has “a form of this” right. I would disagree that we should create such a legal right for everyone, but if that’s what you think, then we’ll have to agree to disagree. The thing I mostly take issue with is the more common assertion that a so-called “paper abortion” is an equal decision t…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:30 PM
1

... and the additional pressure on women to undergo an abortion knowing that the father has forfeited any responsibility. There were several /r/UnpopularOpinion posts about this that were highly upvoted pretty recently.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:26 PM
1

... and the additional pressure on women to undergo an abortion knowing that the father has forfeited any responsibility. There were several /r/UnpopularOpinion posts about this that were highly upvoted pretty recently.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:26 PM
1

Ok, let’s start over. What’s your understanding of the proposition in the OP and how would you implement it, vis a vis actual literal new decisions and options that would be afforded to both fathers and mothers. It’s possible I’m misunderstanding you in a way that’s my fault, but it’s also equally possible that you are at fault or that we share fault.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:22 PM
2

An abortion is not exactly, wholly, and only the same as what is being described in the OP though. Creating a new legal framework and a new legal option for fathers and saying “mothers have the right to an abortion so they don’t also need this new right” is where the problem arises
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:19 PM
1

Based on my experience arguing this, I absolutely disagree with your last sentence! I agree that the child support system is broken and unequal and should be fixed, I just don’t see why people’s response to that is to create a new and distinct legal framework rather than fixing the ones we have. I also, personally, don’t think I it’s great to afford to both parties the option to unilaterally sever responsibility, but at the very least, affording it to both is consistent and would not be unequal …
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:18 PM
1

Based on my experience arguing this, I absolutely disagree with your last sentence! I agree that the child support system is broken and unequal and should be fixed, I just don’t see why people’s response to that is to create a new and distinct legal framework rather than fixing the ones we have. I also, personally, don’t think I it’s great to afford to both parties the option to unilaterally sever responsibility, but at the very least, affording it to both is consistent and would not be unequal …
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:16 PM
2

no, that’s what you’re arguing for lol
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:13 PM
0

The right to an abortion, and the decision to have one is not wholly and only the exact same as the decision to sever parental rights. I understand and agree with the problems about child support, but overall still believe it should exist. What the fuck? Why would I deny them that right? If fathers sever responsibility then they are not involved in any way. It's then the womans choice whether she goes through with pregnancy and motherhood. So how would you implement the proposition in the OP? A …
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:13 PM
1

I’m arguing with a bunch of people here and I’m not bothering to track usernames. If you continued to argue with me after I said “I disagree but at least your consistent” then that’s the cause of the confusion; I don’t have any reason to argue with you if that’s the case. If not... not sure what the confusion is.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 08:07 PM
0

Lying about birth control in either direction is tantamount to rape and obviously victims of rape should not have any responsibility to a child created from that (unless they opt-in) and anyone who has committed rape should not have parental rights to a child created from that. Calling my point of view “retarded” is a great look into your level of maturity though!
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:53 PM
1

Men can leave children at safe harbor locations as well, given that the point is they are anonymous, and if the mother is not in the picture a father should be able to put a child up for adoption.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:51 PM
1

It wouldn’t be. They can not agree to do so, by giving their child up for adoption. I don’t think it’s a good idea for one to be able to sever their rights and responsibilities without the consent of the other. I definitely don’t think it would be legal to afford such a right to only fathers, as implied by the OP.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:50 PM
0

14th amendment, equal protection under the laws.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:46 PM
0

It requires two people to create a child, they both share rights and responsibilities to it.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:45 PM
1

How is the right to sign a sheet of paper forfeiting rights and responsibilities not an additional legal right?
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:43 PM
1

Ok, and in a perfect world the reverse should be true as well. That it’s not is reason to try to change that, not to create some additional, unequal, legal framework. Obviously there are more logistical difficulties with the reverse situation given the nature of pregnancy.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:41 PM
-1

I think neither should be able to unilaterally forfeit responsibility to the other. If you think both should be able to, I disagree. If you think only one should be able to, that’s immoral and legally unworkable (unconstitutional).
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:33 PM
1

Ok. I disagree, I don’t think we should be creating new legal rights for people to individually opt out of parenthood, but my problems with the idea stem more from the typical proposal that it be an additional legal right afforded to only half of people.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:31 PM
1

Absolutely. What gave you the idea that this wasn't the case? The OP, your statements, every other argument I’ve gotten into about this. But fair enough; I disagree. I don’t think either person should be able to unilaterally opt out of parental responsibility for a child that is brought into the world. I agree that there are substantial problems with the system of child support in this country, but I believe that if either side wants to care for and keep the child, as in, they both don’t agree t…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:29 PM
0

are there more single mothers or single fathers out there?
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:24 PM
2

a trans man who is legally a man and becomes pregnant would have the full right to an abortion as well. The right to an abortion flows from the right to control ones body and is not simply the right to become or not become a parent. I will disagree with you if you think that both people involved in becoming a parent should have the right to unilaterally choose to sever their rights and responsibility for raising that child against the wishes of the other half, but if that’s what you think at lea…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 07:09 PM
-2

If your implication was that situation 2 was a unilateral decision by the man, is not situation 3 also unilateral? My reading was perhaps not what you intended, but was that those situations were agreed upon by both parties. If what you are proposing is giving fathers the right to unilaterally sever responsibility for a child which would exist, please explain how you would deny that same right to women? Would a man not have the right to sue a deadbeat mother for child support for a child that he…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 06:59 PM
-6

The situation becomes problematic when one half wants a child, and the other does not. Should a man not be able to sue a deadbeat mother for child support, for a child that he wants and she does not? Should she be able to simply sign a document, against his wishes, signing away parental rights and responsibility, thereby unilaterally placing the entirety of the financial burden on the father? That is the situation described in the OP. Any two people can come to any agreement and arrangement betw…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 06:39 PM
-1

Right. What you are describing in those three situations is already sufficient and fair; there is no need for an additional, unilateral, legal right.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 06:35 PM
-2

Both of which are options also open to men who find themselves responsible for children they do not want, without creating some additional legal process/right.
/r/MensRights14/06/19 06:33 PM
-13

Anyone who is responsible for a child can put them up for adoption, not sure what your confusion is? The situation described in the OP would result in children being born to mothers who want to keep the child who are then solely responsible for that child (which, if we’re being honest, is what happens more than the reverse as it is) and have no recourse to seek child support from the other person responsible for creating that child. My question is, should the reverse be acceptable as well? Shoul…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 06:28 PM
-19

You can’t give a right to a “paper abortion” to people on the basis of gender. Would women also have this right? Would a woman be able to unilaterally say “I also do not want to consent to supporting a child for 18 years but will not/cannot have an abortion, I forfeit all parental rights and am free of responsibility” in exactly the same way that this is suggesting that men should be able to? The decision about whether or not to have an abortion is not only and wholly identical to the decision t…
/r/MensRights14/06/19 06:17 PM
1

Well, only slightly. And I was referring to high-profile divorce, wherein the marriage is usually made for money, and therefore the divorce is about golddigging as much money as possible, and in those cases it would be more biased towards whoever entered the relationship as the rich and/or talented one. What I was saying was I couldn't think of any examples of obscenely rich women marrying and then divorcing trophy husbands. I'd be willing to bet they end up worse off for the divorce than they s…
/r/MensRights23/12/09 04:20 AM
1

I'd see it the same way, but for the woman, if she were the rich one. Well, actually, I guess perhaps it would still end more biased against men, but I can't think of any examples of obscenely rich women being divorced by their trophy husbands and losing half their fortune.
/r/MensRights23/12/09 04:09 AM
6

Bull shit. And I don't see why this is a Men's Right issue; if a billionaire woman married some guy and then they got divorced, that man shouldn't be entitled to anything more than he started with, which is exactly what Elin should be left with after divorcing Tiger. She did nothing to earn any of his money, and fuck her if she thinks she deserves any of it. Fuck the so-called need for her to maintain the lifestyle she was accustomed to, he gave her that lifestyle, if she wants to divorce him, a…
/r/MensRights23/12/09 01:38 AM
3

This is also probably not true, as are most of the stories on sites like that. Focus on real stories and serious issues, otherwise you just look like you're whining.
/r/MensRights07/12/09 04:59 PM
2

I don't even know how to respond to this. What are you even trying to show us first of all, and what are you trying to prove?
/r/MensRights28/10/09 01:05 AM
2

Yeah. The chances of a point blank headshot resulting in death are equivalent to the chances of being raped after being falsely accused of being raped. Good analogy. And what "idiotic logic" did I use that would indicate anything of what you said to be true? And to refute whatever twisted logic you're using, someone who attempts to shoot someone in the head and misses, will still go to jail, but for a shorter sentence, because trying to kill someone, while very bad, isn't as bad as actually succ…
/r/MensRights30/09/09 07:56 PM
2

You're using what I said is more traumatizing as part of the threat of what I said is less traumatizing. No shit going to jail and being raped is worse than just being raped. But just being falsely accused of rape doesn't automatically get you raped. And, reading the replies to this just shows me why this subreddit is just a huge circle-jerk. Yes, being accused of rape is probably a horrible experience, but any logical person wouldn't possibly try to make the argument that it's worse than actual…
/r/MensRights29/09/09 10:32 PM
-3

I seriously doubt the claim that "being falsely accused of rape is as traumatic as being raped."
/r/MensRights29/09/09 07:53 PM
0

Obvious troll is obvious. Or just a fucking lunatic.
/r/MensRights10/09/09 10:27 PM
12

Are you fucking kidding me? If three drunken men beat the shit out of a woman they'd be behind bars for years.
/r/MensRights20/08/09 12:08 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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