TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

leprendun Archive

View 0 posts and 100 comments by leprendun 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)
2

I don't see a problem with them usually, although I rarely participate in them. The baby shower one is the only really annoying one--both parents are having the baby, not just the mother! As a gay man, I've been invited to many baby showers and have learned to ask if I'm the only man invited. If so, then I tell the host right then that I won't be there. I am not an honorary female!
/r/MensRights05/06/13 06:24 PM
1

For all the same reasons sports benefit men: increased physical activity, team-building, etc.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 05:01 PM
4

OK, but I'm not sure what this has to do with baginton's conspiracy-theory rant.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:59 PM
-4

You're right; at least, I haven't went and looked for evidence to support that, and the numbers could support your claim just as well. Regardless, I think the outcome has been positive, although it's clear the law needs revising.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:57 PM
-1

That's why I said we should lobby for improvement of the law rather than repeal. It is fairly clear that women were discouraged, both socially and fanancially from participating in sports, before the implementation of Title IX. That more women are now playing is a good thing. Let's keep that aspect, but remedy the law's downfalls.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:38 PM
2

The reason it isn't easy is not because of the law, but because of people's sexism. Administrators don't want to allow girls on teams because they worry about parents' complaints, boys don't want to wrestle against girls because it makes them uncomfortable. And I would like to point out that you still haven't offered a single case in which such a lawsuit occurred.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:35 PM
5

Totally agree with this.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:33 PM
14

you are frothing at the mouth a bit.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:20 PM
1

And I think you don't have a good idea of how the law works. It is clearly illegal. But we can argue about our expectations all day--we'll see what happens when a decision is reached. Again, do you have any actual evidence of cases like this occurring? Because it sounds to me that you're just making up hypothetical. The law has been in place for 40 years now, there should be something, if the problem actually exists anywhere other than your imagination.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:19 PM
2

Fair enough points! I think most girls my age could have bested me at nearly any sport, though :P I still think that if there is not enough interest from other girls to form a female-only team, then you're just stuck with your other option, which is to try out for the men's team. If you're not good enough, then I think you should just be out of luck. It sucks, but I don't think the boy's team should be eliminated because of one girl. I still passionately defend girl's right to try out for the bo…
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:17 PM
17

To be fair, that is still about 10 percent higher than the number of women who had jobs in 2010, at about 56 percent.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:12 PM
14

and this is exactly why, despite its problems, Title IX is a good thing. Without it, this boy would have no case. With it, he is likely to win his lawsuit against the school.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:06 PM
1

What the hell does this have to do with MR?
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:04 PM
2

The parents are more than welcome to sue. They will lose, because there is nothing illegal about co-ed wrestling. Following your logic, what's next? Refusing gays to participate because of sexual harassment worries? Necessary does not mean equal. Your point that a girls' wrestling team with 2 players must get as much money as a 40-member boy's' team remains grossly wrong.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 04:02 PM
6

I don't see that as a problem with the law, but rather with your ability level at the time and your parents' choice. Wouldn't the sport have been just as dangerous with many freshmen boys?
/r/MensRights07/05/12 03:59 PM
3

There certainly was a problem, and Title IX seems to have succeeded in improvements in women's sports. Is the law perfect? Nope. But it's better than nothing at all. MRAs should lobby for improvement of the law rather than outright repeal. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_IX#Impact): Advocates of Title IX's current interpretation cite increases in female athletic participation, and attribute those increases to Title IX. One study, completed in 2006, pointed to a large increase …
/r/MensRights07/05/12 03:56 PM
4

I don't believe your "you get a sexual harassment suit a week." According to whom? How is allowing girls to join boys' teams sexual harassment? And your second point is just plain wrong. From the Department of Education's own guidelines: "Unequal aggregate expenditures for members of each sex or unequal expenditures for male and female teams if a recipient operates or sponsors separate teams will not constitute noncompliance with this section, but the Assistant Secretary [of Education for Civil …
/r/MensRights07/05/12 03:50 PM
1

I have no idea what you're talking about. As far as I know, there's no separate but equal clause in Title IX. Could you clarify?
/r/MensRights07/05/12 02:17 PM
5

Couldn't women just be allowed to join men's teams? Then they would not have to close and would still be in compliance with the law.
/r/MensRights07/05/12 01:19 PM
1

Here is a good summary of the wage gap issue, with links to sources: http://mediamatters.org/research/201205020006 The important bit is closer to the end. After controlling for variables, the wage gap between women and men drops to 4 to 7 percent of the wage--or 96 to 93 cents to the dollar, a far cry from 77 cents. So yes, women seem to make less than men, and it is probably due to sexism. It's not fair and should perhaps be addressed, but it is not anywhere close to as big an issue as many hav…
/r/MensRights07/05/12 10:48 AM
58

Link to the news story: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3352895/Day-of-the-dad-paedophilia-hysteria-leaves-men-afraid-to-help.html
/r/MensRights06/05/12 01:35 AM
0

Exhibit A, folks.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 01:03 AM
3

This is certainly true in some situations, such as employment and politics. But in other arenas (family court, primary education) actual, peer-reviewed research shows that women have an advantage over men.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:41 AM
5

what about a poor black male versus a rich white woman? Privilege is not as clear-cut as you make it out to be. Everyone belongs to a wide variety of social groups, each of which has its own kind of privilege in certain environments and circumstances.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:29 AM
2

I'm glad it was helpful. It is frustrating because privilege can be a legitimate, useful way to talk about issues of identity. It has unfortunately been completely distorted by some amateur social scientists to the extent that it is no longer a tool for inquiry and analysis, but of censorship.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 12:27 AM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 08:37 PM
30

The privilege defense drives me totally batshit insane because it's usually used incorrectly, as a means to silence the opinions of others. I have a doctorate in the social sciences and have done lots of work with identity, and I can tell you with certainty that most who throw out "male privilege" are using the term incorrectly. No actual researcher thinks that an identity has privilege in all situations; it's entirely contextual, and each individual is made up of a complicated web of privileges…
/r/MensRights05/05/12 05:54 PM
4

ha, love it.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:35 AM
2

My sister twirled baton fairly competitively when I was growing up, and I was dragged to competitions all over the country. I hated it! But the rare male twirlers at the competitions were often really good, probably because they had more to prove.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 11:44 PM
5

Where is your evidence that these are feminists? They are researchers, presenting evidence from a peer-reviewed research study. You may not agree with their conclusions, but presenting evidence is hardly whining. Argue against their methodology, or the interpretation of their data if you think their conclusions are wrong. But making up unfounded accusations and calling research "whining" is childish.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 07:31 PM
7

"One of the stages of dealing with bitter pain involves lashing out emotionally for awhile, and our movement is about championing for men who are having their lives ruined. Think about where a comment is coming from next time you're offended. Misogyny is a default answer for detractors of MRAs, and it's usually wrong." This is true, but we should still call out those who turn to anti-women, possibly misogynist remarks out of anger. Lashing out is less productive to our movement than taking that …
/r/MensRights04/05/12 07:28 PM
1

All excellent points, thank you.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 07:25 PM
3

Spot on.
/r/MensRights04/05/12 07:20 PM
17

I'm taking a cake-decoration class right now. I suck at it, but am having fun!
/r/MensRights04/05/12 07:18 PM
2

amen to that. Good on you for this post.
/r/MensRights03/05/12 05:07 AM
-4

have at it then.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 07:47 PM
-1

ah, concern troll, what a stupid phrase. Ignored the rest of your post after that.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 07:39 PM
3

according to...? You? Glad you're so important as to direct the morals for the entire world.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 07:05 PM
0

I never suggested as much. I said misogyny, and I meant misogyny. The claims of some feminists should be fought because their facts are just plain wrong, not because they are women.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:28 PM
-2

Doctors are not usually researchers. Doctors are not interested in the nuances and complexities of actual research findings, but in patient health (and that is how it should be). But as a result, doctors are not above simplifying in order to better care for patients. It is much easier to tell women "Don't drink while breastfeeding" than "It is a complex topic that needs more study, but research at this point suggests that a moderate amount of alcohol is not indicative of infant developmental del…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:17 PM
1

Some fair points and ones I didn't consider. But do you have the actual evidence this is the case? I'm tired of looking up all these citations! I never suggested that females have an innate advantage when it comes to verbal abilities. The 3rd study I cited says that the differences between sexes is slight, but also says that there has not been that much research on the issue, in comparison to math. If you want to find a feminine bias in the types of studies done (verbal vs. math), well, you migh…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:14 PM
2

This is right a thousand times over.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:08 PM
1

Break it out! Research is AWESOME! :P
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:03 PM
-4

La Leche League is as far from a reputable source as one could get (you will see they cite sources almost exclusively published by their own organization!). The peer reviewed evidence is sketchy, since there are obvious ethical issues in administering controlled trials. But what's there indicates that the risks of one serving of alcohol is small, if not non-existent. It also estimates that nearly 50 percent of breastfeeding women drink some alcohol.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:57 PM
1

Sorry, I must have automatic access to the articles: Gender, culture, and mathematics performance Janet S. Hydea,1 and Janet E. Mertzb Abstract Using contemporary data from the U.S. and other nations, we address 3 questions: Do gender differences in mathematics performance exist in the general population? Do gender differences exist among the mathematically talented? Do females exist who possess profound mathematical talent? In regard to the first question, contemporary data indicate that girls …
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:54 PM
1

You are citing a blog. Peer reviewed research generally supports my initial claim, although there is not an absolute consensus. A sampling of recent scholarly, peer-reviewed articles: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/22/8801.short http://www.springerlink.com/content/b80gg14u47076312/ http://www.springerlink.com/content/h334803jm6607l74/fulltext.html
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:33 PM
1

Well, when you use intellectual as an insult, it says volumes about the quality of your arguments.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:24 PM
-12

Yeah, except one beer is not going to hurt the child, not even a little bit. Seriously, if the alcohol helps relax the mother, then the kid actually benefits.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:17 PM
1

I've never heard the term, thanks for sharing it.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:17 PM
8

And "caring for the house" also meant much less parenting than we see nowadays. Kids went off and did their own thing, often watched by older kids. They also worked, especially during harvest.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:16 PM
1

I see you have the intellectual higher ground.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:12 PM
1

I agree with you, and am trying my best to call out bullshit when I see it. I am dismayed to see MRAs employing the same dirty tactics and false accusations that some feminists do. It is predictable, that a troll posted a fake article earlier pushing just the right buttons and a handful of commenters immediately jumped to "stupid bitch" and other such insults. How disappointing.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:09 PM
2

I am male. I think you are an asshole. Scum like you aren't worthy to call themselves an advocate men's rights.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:05 PM
3

except 70 percent of firefighters are volunteers and don't get paid anything... http://www.nfpa.org/categoryList.asp?categoryID=955&URL=Research/Fire%20statistics/The%20U.S.%20fire%20service&cookie_test=1
/r/MensRights02/05/12 05:03 PM
1

so in other words, you have no evidence, just your own, singular experiences. Great job.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 04:56 PM
0

I agree with all of this, other than the stupid meme.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 04:53 PM
2

Good points, we need both. I am sure this is not the last time we will have this disagreement though! :P
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:22 PM
7

If any partner of mine tried to avoid diaper duty and late-night feedings, I would kick him to the curb in a heartbeat. One of the few advantages of being gay is that I don't have to contend with all those outdated gender stereotypes in my own relationships (in the outside world is a completely different story!). Thanks for the well-wishes! We are hoping we get matched soon, as I am so tired of waiting.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:17 PM
2

Well, you play dirty, a time-honored tactic. I can't argue that it doesn't get results, but I just hope it doesn't backfire. I am a researcher and just can't stomach misinformation!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:15 PM
-1

According to whom? I support diversity, and that means men AND women.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:12 PM
0

Well, then it seems we agree on goals but disagree on tactics. That makes you naive (I prefer idealistic!), but that makes you a hypocrite! I can't take critiques of feminism seriously when they make the same assumptions and false claims that feminists do!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:08 PM
14

I am sure it's a factor, but I think it also stems from women's role in carrying and breastfeeding the child. Although women may certainly have a leg up when it comes to bonding, they certainly don't have the monopoly on it. More men really should step up when it comes to equal roles in parenting and housework, but many women make that impossible. Many years of stereotypes to fight against!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:03 PM
-4

I think both ideas are worthy goals, but we can do it without labeling all women (even all feminists) as "evil bitches"--in other words, without using the tactics of fake evidence and undeserved defamation used by the worst of the so-called feminists. Let's be better than that.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:00 PM
106

Exclusion of men from parenting decisions is so prevalent in American society as to be practically ubiquitous. I am a gay man currently in the middle of the adoption process with my husband, and we have struggled to find parenting resources actually directed to men. Parenting blogs and forums are sickeningly focused on "mommies," and often dismiss men as impediments to parents rather than co-equals. Most parenting books are equally bad. Sometimes it's not even blatant sexism, but just an annoyin…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:55 PM
-5

regardless.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:48 PM
2

That actually sounds awesome, thanks for clarifying.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:43 PM
1

evidence?
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:41 PM
-2

Again, this is not even a men's rights issues. Stop spamming with all these useless links.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:28 PM
1

I have to say, I am not new to MRA, but I am newish to this subreddit. I am somewhat dismayed at the blatant and outright misogyny that occurs here from a good number of the commenters. Men and women should be on the same side; just because a small number of women are a bit anti-men, doesn't mean that we should respond in kind.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:05 PM
15

What is your point? Planned Parenthood offers numerous reproductive health services for men. It is not only a women's organization. And even if it were, you have to admit that women biologically have more issues when it comes to reproductive health than men do, considering they are the ones who actually bear children. A list of Planned Parenthood's services for men: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/men-4285.htm And really, stop spamming all the useless, barely relevant links this m…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:01 PM
1

Well, he certainly knew what buttons to push, I'll give him that!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 01:02 PM
8

OK, this is most likely a fake. Compare to this real news article. The picture is the same, and many of the phrases as well. Someone clearly photoshopped this article from the earlier one. Way to jump to outrage without actually checking the evidence, people. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16303577
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:54 PM
1

I see what you're saying. Thanks for clarifying.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:49 PM
2

Do you have an actual link? Because I am not finding this story anywhere, nor any results for the researcher. I'm calling fake until the source is provided.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:46 PM
16

I think that playing the "oppression Olympics," i.e., worrying about who is oppressed more, misses the point and is counterproductive. It's much better to acknowledge that both sexes are discriminated against in different aspects of their lives, and we should work to end that. As we're men, we will obviously focus on those aspects that affect us directly; women do the same thing. But theoretically (although often not in actual practice), women's rights and men's rights movements are working towa…
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:38 PM
2

You're right, thanks for pointing that out! I still think that contextualizing in the post itself would be helpful, but having the FAQ answer there is definitely useful.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:19 PM
4

Let's hope the courts sort this out, but the process is so painfully slow and definitely slanted toward women. The sooner he gets a competent lawyer the better.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:14 PM
28

An excellent, fair article. People need to realize that men are also discriminated against, albeit in different ways than women are. True concern for equality means ending all discrimination that is based on gender stereotypes, not only those that effect men or only effect women.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:12 PM
4

I see what you're saying, and agree to an extent, although I also think that some of the links are really pushing it. Perhaps we as a community should do a better job of contextualizing links we post, including a couple short sentences on why the link was posted and how it relates to men's rights.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:03 PM
2

I think it a bad idea to make the same mistakes that some feminists do. We should try to be better than that, to bring attention to our issues with facts rather than inflammatory lies.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 12:02 PM
9

Maybe I missed it, but doesn't he have a legal right to see his daughter? Although family court is usually horrible when it comes to fathers' rights, they are usually guaranteed at least some visitation. Maybe it's complicated because he is not a citizen?
/r/MensRights02/05/12 11:52 AM
-7

Agreed, there's plenty of problems now without worrying on those that happened 2 decades ago.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 10:13 AM
2

You're right that it doesn't sound equal. I still think the concept is a good one and would ultimately be beneficial to men as well, although the implementation is obviously flawed in this case.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 10:11 AM
8

I think you're an idiot.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 10:07 AM
2

I also don't see what this has to do with Men's Rights. You're grasping at straws.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:57 AM
1

wouldn't this benefit men as well?
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:56 AM
1

Yes, but most research suggests that men do better, on average, at math due to social and cultural reasons rather than an innate biological one (although there is by no means a scientific consensus on this claim). If women were encouraged in math and science fields the same way that men are, these differences in ability would reduce considerably, if not disappear entirely.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 09:54 AM
1

accurate being the key word, as in, backed by actual evidence gathered by credentialed researchers.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:32 AM
5

indeed, posting both types of posters is wrong, but they differ by orders of magnitude!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 03:27 AM
1

Very true!
/r/MensRights02/05/12 02:09 AM
7

ugh, that's revolting.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 01:03 AM
2

Uh, social work usually requires a Master's degree. Many math/science jobs only require a bachelor's.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 11:56 PM
1

Fair enough. Both parties are awful when it comes to men's rights, although in very, very different ways.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 08:42 PM
1

Additionally, they are a mouthpiece for right-wing conservative groups. Hardly a reputable source.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 06:12 PM
0

What a shallow article. While I oppose quotas for females in these fields, bias and workplace hostility against women are rampant in these fields and should be addressed. Women are not somehow biologically less capable of doing math and science!
/r/MensRights01/05/12 06:01 PM
4

Nope. I'm not saying that women are discriminated against in ALL aspects of the workplace, or that men are NEVER discriminated against. Both men and women are discriminated against in different ways in the workplace because of their sex. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that, and we should work to eliminate sex-based discrimination for all. I've seen workplace discrimination in my own workplace setting (higher education) too many times to count, although it is usually of the passive, tho…
/r/MensRights01/05/12 04:03 PM
1

I have been pointing out factual rebuttals to those who have been posting the interview on facebook. While discrimination against females in the workplace certainly exists, particularly in some fields, this 77% meme grossly oversimplifies the situation.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 03:30 PM
1

Personally, I don't consider myself either one. I am for gender equality for both sexes. Both sides have their points, and both sides also have their rabid wackos.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 03:22 PM
3

I don't see how this is a men's right issue. Surely, it forbids women from soliciting prostitutes as well. And sorry, "pent-up sexuality" is no excuse for rape.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 03:14 PM
2

Republicans/Conservatives are just as bad. Do you really think they would support fathers taking on traditionally female roles?!
/r/MensRights01/05/12 03:12 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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