TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

marathon664 Archive

View 2 posts and 116 comments by marathon664 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)
2

It's because the "here's a thing that makes me angry" posting is candy for upvotes and the sub ends up being like /r/MensRights. This is a good place for discussion about actual issues, not random women who will think dumb thoughts about men not holding the door. It's lowest common denominator posting because basically 100% of people here will agree with it and it's substanceless.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/08/24 02:33 AM
5

I feel that I explained it pretty thoroughly already, but: The Straights are once again not okay, I fear. Using "The Straights" here just serves to make fun of and belittle a real issue impacting straight men because they are not a population group worthy of having their issues heard. Consider this exchange: "Gay people don't feel safe in schools!" "The Queers are once again not okay, I fear." This sounds pretty thoughtless and dismissive in this example, no? The only difference is that the stra…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/04/24 03:56 PM
6

Saying it like that reads like you're wielding intersectionality as a tool to discredit real problems because they're primarily impacting a majority group. It isn't a sensitive or thoughtful way to talk about problems. A group of male advocates, in particular, won't appreciate that line of thinking, as it is sometimes used by feminists to downplay and disregard mens issues.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/04/24 03:01 PM
11

I feel you, brother. Everything you say resonates with me and my experience, and it is insanely messed up that it takes any amount of "convincing" to get people to understand just how awful the practice is. I can definitely recommend restoration, it helped me get closer to what I should have had from birth, but I understand if that isn't the path you wish to take.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/11/23 12:23 AM
20

Yup. Try talking to any feminist about the issue of circumcision and it becomes painfully obvious that this is true.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/11/23 10:33 PM
2

Read the fucking article, brainlet. WHY MEN’S HEALTH? During the 20th Century, a lifespan gender gap grew in the United States, peaking at over seven years less life expectancy for men than for women. In the early 21st Century, the lifespan gender gap shrank to less than five years, proving that premature death of men is not inevitable. More recently, the lifespan gender gap has grown back to nearly six years due to factors such as disproportionately high “Deaths of Despair” among men from suici…
/r/MensRights11/06/23 12:06 AM
19

It might have been better phrased to ask if it was used any way other than what you stated as fact.
/r/MensRights30/05/23 02:23 AM
6

That women didn't deserve rights, unironically.
/r/MensRights26/03/23 07:05 AM
4

I hope you're right :)
/r/MensRights25/03/23 10:51 PM
1

It was upvoted (with the controversial mark but still) when I replied. Based on a lot of sentiments here, I don't think its as unpopular as we might hope. There is a lot of negative stereotyping going on in this sub.
/r/MensRights25/03/23 10:23 PM
24

Get this fucking 1700s clown ass take out of here. Pathetic.
/r/MensRights25/03/23 07:01 PM
45

Because positing that FGM is worse than circumcision is exactly why it's still so hard to convince people that they're both the same thing and both are wrong. Infant genital mutiliation is infant genital mutilation. Even calling it circumcision instead of MGM is a subtle way of communicating that FGM is worse. Yes, there are versions of FGM that exceed the typical circumcision in barbarity, but the vast majority (>80%) of FGM performed is a pinprick, which is less invasive than circumcision by f…
/r/MensRights07/01/23 12:21 AM
1

Never forget that this is the platform republicans operate on. Republicans created the unfair child support laws as a way to reduce taxes, republicans are the ones getting men killed in pointless wars to sustain the military industrial complex, and gutting our healthcare system for profits.
/r/MensRights02/09/22 06:17 PM
1

What an absurd strawman. Very few people see it as contraception, and those people existing isn't a justification to negate the other 99.999% that use it as a last resource.
/r/MensRights26/08/22 09:22 PM
3

MGTOW is a routinely hateful and sexist group. If they were really "going their own way" they wouldn't spend all their free time making strawman memes about how all women are awful. It takes no more than a very cursory glance to see it.
/r/MensRights10/08/22 12:36 AM
1

I'm not arguing that it isn't a real phenomenon, I'm saying anecdotes don't establish trends. This dude's girlfriend not handling his emotions and a couple shit humans making tiktoks doesn't mean you should never date women again. It isn't up to me to provide data to disprove your claim made without data. Read up on Hitchens's razor. Also, I'm not being condescending. The confirmation bias examples was a joke to illustrate how that line of thinking is not correct by showing how fallacious it is …
/r/MensRights03/08/22 05:20 PM
0

I have a math degree, and my qualm with this isn't that the phenomenon doesn't happen, but that his bad experience with one woman and other anecdotes in this thread is not evidence in any way of a trend/average experience. I could offer up my anecdote of my phenomenal, caring fiancée that truly cherishes and appreciates me, both when I am supportive and need to be supported, but once again, anecdotes don't imply trends, and certainly nothing to justify a reductive sweeping generalization.
/r/MensRights03/08/22 05:14 AM
0

That's the definition of confirmation bias. A thread about a guy that doesn't think it's worth dating women attracts commenters that don't think it's worth dating women. In other news, 97% of people at comicon like superheros, and 93% of people at restaurants are hungry. Stay tuned to find out the shocking reasons at 11!
/r/MensRights03/08/22 12:16 AM
2

No, your woman can't handle an emotional you. It isn't a reasonable generalization to all women, and it's not true.
/r/MensRights02/08/22 07:26 PM
2

The fact is that circumcision would qualify as FGM type 1A by the WHO standards if nothing was changed but the sex of the person it was done on: https://web.archive.org/web/20140114180518/http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/overview/en/ That is enough of an equivalence to get people to change their frame of mind of circumcision as a semi controversial medical procedure to infant genital mutilation, which is wrong. They are the same thing, which is infant genital mutilation. It is cr…
/r/MensRights17/07/22 03:54 AM
1

Therefore this sub should support unrestricted abortion so that kids don't have to grow up with single moms.
/r/MensRights06/07/22 04:00 PM
1

Hey, don't be an asshole. People who haven't had to think about circumcision can take a lot of time to be educated and convinced about it after a lifetime of feminist conditioning.
/r/MensRights06/07/22 03:57 PM
1

The very concept of a paper abortion is predicated on unrestricted access for women to have actual abortions. Unrestricted abortions a required first step for the discussion of paper abortions.
/r/MensRights06/07/22 03:41 PM
1

The pro choice post is sitting at 66% upvoted, which makes it one of the third most controversial post of the past year. The women can go suck it post is 65% (second most controversial post of the year), so you can pretty much assume that its about 50/50 on this sub. It's pathetic that it's remotely close to an even split. It paints MRAs as more happy to be smug at other losing their rights (and directly harming their own rights in the process) than concerned over people losing rights. /r/LeftWi…
/r/MensRights06/07/22 01:12 AM
4

FGM can be more serious than circumcision, but most often it is not. The vast majority of FGM is a pinprick, which removes no tissue, which I dunno about you, but sounds a lot better than a circumcision. This isn't just oppression olympics, it is crucial to show the truth that circumcision is comparable to a clitoral de-hooding, which is one of the more severe types of FGM. Framing it that way can convince people that circumcision deserves to be banned as FGM is.
/r/MensRights06/07/22 01:09 AM
1

Abortion rights benefit men. The very concept of a paper abortion is predicated on unrestricted access for women to have actual abortions. Being schadenfreude doesn't excuse it from also shooting your own opportunity for rights in the kneecap.
/r/MensRights05/07/22 11:40 PM
-1

Basically everything in this: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/vka2iu/all_women_that_said_no_uterus_no_opinion_and_are/ And some more for fun: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/vjplxl/roe_vs_wade_has_been_overturned_if_we_truly/idkfsvh/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/vjplxl/roe_vs_wade_has_been_overturned_if_we_truly/idk9q27/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/vjplxl/roe_vs_wade_has_been_overturned_if_we_truly/idkhen3/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MensR…
/r/MensRights05/07/22 09:58 PM
-8

Yeah many people here were celebrating. It was and still is the majority opinion.
/r/MensRights05/07/22 08:56 PM
1

Biological life isn't the important criteria. We don't have laws protecting people from killing spiders or taking antibiotics or nutting into a sock, even though all of those destroy life. Fetal viability is the much more logical criteria, when the fetus can survive without the mother, which hits just barely possible at 23 weeks, and around 95% probability at more like 30.
/r/MensRights25/06/22 01:57 AM
8

Someone gets to tell him about our prison system!
/r/MensRights25/06/22 01:52 AM
1

That's completely not the same statement as what you said before. Every in group cares more about their rights than any out group would, always, so this isn't the zinger that you think it is.
/r/MensRights24/06/22 08:06 PM
1

Completely valid points, but I still think the vast majority of commenters in this sub didn't actually read the article.
/r/MensRights08/06/22 01:59 PM
4

Fair, wouldn't want smoke to start pouring out of your ears thinking too hard. I mean, that's two whole sentences.
/r/MensRights07/06/22 08:50 PM
11

Come on people, read the article. While there is no penalty for missing the target, companies that do achieve it will win public praise. This would increase pressure to comply, the parliament's liberal Renew faction said after the final round of negotiations with EU member states. It's just political theater.
/r/MensRights07/06/22 08:40 PM
4

Ad hominem, fallacious argument that doesn't address anything I've said. My point doesn't change in validity if someone else says it.
/r/MensRights07/06/22 08:36 PM
2

What does abortions, being single, or getting mental health treatment/medication have to do with this? Those are all entirely in the purview of someone's basic rights.
/r/MensRights07/06/22 08:27 PM
3

People here love to call out cognitive dissonance in others but never internalize any of the morals theyre projecting.
/r/MensRights27/04/22 09:10 PM
16

That's unfortunately not how the majority of people think.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/04/22 08:07 PM
17

Sometimes people in this sub are seeing red too often to see obvious sarcasm.
/r/MensRights28/03/22 05:14 AM
8

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/newsreleases/2022/march/non-hormonal-pill-could-soon-expand-mens-birth-control-options.html
/r/MensRights24/03/22 04:18 AM
31

Opportunity
/r/MensRights05/03/22 06:26 PM
5

This shit is gonna get us banned man
/r/MensRights12/12/21 09:16 PM
1

this is awful but the last one made me laugh
/r/MensRights30/11/21 04:13 PM
1

He was trying to not so subtly imply that it was the jews.
/r/MensRights12/11/21 05:03 PM
6

The original thread is pretty disgusting. Had to scroll way too far to see anyone pointing out that its basically grooming since the guy had been working for her for years. Are there any other subreddits for sex/sexual health discussion that are more male-centric or egalitarian?
/r/MensRights26/05/21 07:45 PM
1

I believe thet announced that they were going to start them in September 2020, but I don't think we have any progress updates.
/r/MensRights30/04/21 10:45 PM
3

Check our /r/foreskin_restoration. It isn't going to be exactly what was taken, but it can be a lot better. I've been doing it for a year now and it has massively improved many areas for me.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:50 AM
2

No one is saying you can't enjoy sex. You're only familiar with what you already have. That doesn't negate the biological truth about the nerves and role of the foreskin in sex. I also didn't think anything about it until I learned more about those things. No one is trying to say you're any less of a man or that you can't enjoy sex. They're saying that it should be your right to choose what happens to your body.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:49 AM
2

Feeling helpless and violated because you don't have bodily autonomy, major loss of sensation, pain during sex from the increased friction, hurting sexual partners from the increased friction (yes no matter how much lube is used, this can still be a large issue), the head of the penis becoming keratinized and numb, more unwanted erections from stimulation to the head, infection from an unnecessary surgery performed on an infant, botched circumcision causing the skin to rip when the penis gets er…
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:46 AM
3

Foregen is vaporware, unfortunately. They have no real funding aside from donations from people, and they haven't made any significant progress in several years. Not to mention, clinical trials have not been even hinted at starting.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:36 AM
3

True. It is a good thing, and I myself have been doing it for over a year. But I worry that calling it "restoration" further cements the idea that circumcision is minor, by implying that it is fully reversible. It's good to give people hope, but in the same message people will use the existence of restoration to justify circumcising infants.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:31 AM
7

Fuck you man. Not only are the studies that were used to justify those statistics completely invalid due egregious biases, such as the HIV study to giving out condoms and condom usage education to the circumcised group and not factoring the time that the men were unable to have sex due to being in recovery from the procedure from their overall infection rate. But also you're just uneducated about the function of the foreskin, its nerves, and its protective role for the glans. It sucks to know th…
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:27 AM
4

Yes, it is 100% worth doing, but as some people that were circumcised as adults and then restored will tell you, it is nothing close to what it was originally. It's making the most of what you got.
/r/MensRights28/04/21 12:21 AM
14

Seeing this makes me conflicted. I'm myself over a year into the process and seeing dramatic improvements, but I worry that people see the name "restoration" and think that you actually get a foreskin back and therefore it's okay to circumcise infants. Foreskin restoration makes things better, and I strongly think that anyone that is circumcised would benefit from it, but I really think that people don't understand the irreversible damage that circumcision causes to begin with, and thinking it's…
/r/MensRights27/04/21 06:38 PM
4

Steroid creams treat around 87% of phimosis cases. Don't, for the love of god, get circumcised. I would do anything to not be.
/r/MensRights27/04/21 06:33 PM
6

You're wrong on literally every topic, not to mention the whole point of mensrights is to listen to men and not be dismissive of their problems like society in general is. I'm glad you don't have any problems with your circumcision, but nobody elected you to be the one voice of the male experience. Stop trying to invalidate others so that you don't have to feel bad about your own genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights27/04/21 06:32 PM
4

Do you know what consent is? To tell someone they can't have preferences is to try and invalidate their consent. Full stop.
/r/MensRights03/04/21 12:50 AM
27

People don't have to date anyone for any reason. I wouldn't date a religious person ever, even though there are fine religious people, because I don't want to. You don't have to date football players for any reason, too. They don't have to date gender studies students.
/r/MensRights01/04/21 09:21 PM
-2

There was a narrow range of years where men had the right and women didn't and that was the historical point that the name became popularized. Being drafted is a gendered issue, and so is not having the right to vote.
/r/MensRights13/03/21 05:38 AM
0

Because it has nothing to do with the origins of the term "feminism". Me being against the draft doesn't mean I think that feminism is sexist because of the name. Are you actually going to read beyond the first three words of what I wrote?
/r/MensRights13/03/21 05:34 AM
-2

I'm fully aware, but pathetic "rebuttals" of feminism like "iT wOuLdN't Be CalLeD fEmInIsM iF iT wAs AbOuT eQuAlItY" are just ammunition for current feminists to look at the movement and dismiss it as a bunch of contemptible misogynists with no real talking points that can't even spell. Hold yourself to a higher standard than those that you criticize. If you actually want to convince people to listen, call out other MRAs for their dumb shit the same way we keep asking feminists to.
/r/MensRights13/03/21 04:01 AM
5

Jeez, this is a bad look. They kept the name from when the movement started and women didn't have equal legal rights in areas such as voting, because it had significant recognition. Also, if everything was true to its name, the Patriot act would be about helping American citizens, and the People's Democratic Republic of Korea wouldn't be a dictatorship. Also, it's supremacy.
/r/MensRights12/03/21 04:59 PM
1

Jesus christ, what the shit is going on? When did a group of "left-wing" individuals start supporting people calling homosexuality eugenics? I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince someone that that's wrong. They clearly didn't use logic to work themselves into that stance, and no amount of me writing reddit comments is going to logic them out of it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/10/20 05:25 PM
1

What the fuck is wrong with you?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/10/20 03:29 PM
3

Yeah, I've seen that moderators don't want to do anything to combat it. It's a really huge shame, I don't know of any sub that genuinely strives for gender equality other than /r/intactivism (although it has a limited scope, they still regularly talk and post about FGM and are unilaterally against both FGM and MGM).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/20 09:22 PM
-1

I really like it when people ignore everything I say, and then make up something, pretend I said that, and mock how stupid it sounds. Very convincing argument you have there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/20 08:49 PM
1

If you have a study that says that, then link it, and hopefully the OP will cite that instead.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/09/20 02:00 AM
2

The study says that. The next panels treat it as generally applicable to all men and all women, which has not been shown by that study.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/20 08:23 PM
2

You're totally missing the point. It isn't about how many men or women are in each party. Politicians are not representative of all people. It's the same as saying that men make more than women by comparing the average salaries of pro football players, or that women make more than men by comparing the earnings of pornstars. The way politicians interact with social media, and the way social media interacts with politicians, is not something you can generalize to all people. Shoddy statistics are …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/20 07:09 PM
3

It doesn't matter which way the data isn't uniformly distributed, it isn't a representative sample and this is poor statistics. We aren't all politicians, and generalizing as such isn't remotely close to reasonable. We bash on feminists all the time for making up statistics as bad as this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/20 06:40 PM
1

Politicians aren't a representative sample of men and women online. You can't claim men get more online abuse than women by comparing just politicians, as they aren't uniformly distributed across parties, among other things.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/20 05:25 PM
2

That sub is pretty darn toxic and woman hating. Generalizing groups based on the actions of some of them isn't only shitty but factually incorrect. Don't date someone that self describes as a feminist and genuinely cares about men's issues when you mention them. There are plenty of good women. Also, if the whole point is men not being concerned with women, why is every single post about how much they can't stand women or how stupid and vapid a woman is? Edit: They're also a bunch of Trump suppor…
/r/MensRights02/08/20 02:36 AM
1

One thing I would say to you is that you shouldn't dwell on the wasted two years. Leaving yourself wallowing in self pity won't only be unproductive, but it will leech into and damage your future. If you view the failed time as a learning experience, then you didn't waste any of it and you can move forward with more knowledge.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 08:30 PM
1

I couldn't have said it better myself.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 06:36 PM
-2

I just said it in the other comment: toxic personality traits that are more often found in men than women, such as being quick to aggression/violence, shitting on other people that they see as competition, hiding from emotions, lack of respect to people that they see as "weaker", etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 04:20 PM
0

I'm saying that toxic masculinity is a flavor of toxicity that is more common in men than in women, which does exist. Similarly, there exists toxic feminity, which in my opinion is more focused on manipulation, pretending to be a damsel in distress, egocentrism, shitting on others for being smarter or prettier, etc.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 04:13 PM
0

I don't really agree. I can definitely point to many guys I've known that are quick to aggression, super focused on machismo, think emotions are weakness, and those are traits which I think shitty men display more than shitty women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/05/20 04:05 PM
2

I'm glad and aware that there exists pockets of MRAs who don't hate women, but as they increase in size, they pick up more Trump supporters, and it starts to go downhill. This is a general trend, and I'm sure there are exceptions.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/20 11:16 PM
0

That doesn't change the fact that the composition of the community includes far too many women-haters.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/20 07:40 PM
2

There's also something which I know will be less popular to discuss in this subreddit, but seems to be undeniably true: There is simply too much overlap with misogynists and MRAs. Anywhere outside of this small 1.5k user subreddit that has anything to do with men's rights ends up being a woman-hating angry shithole. I don't exactly know what to do about that problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/05/20 02:19 AM
1

LGBT scholarships and diversity hires and college acceptance, plus the fact that MTF trans enjoy the social benefits of being a woman if they pass.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/04/20 04:27 AM
2

I don't think that is true. There are advantages and disadvantages to belonging to any group. It's worse to be white on a job or college application compared to any other group that isn't white or asian, even though there are many advantages in other areas as a result of being white.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 09:06 PM
4

Which is why we should strive to do better, not make the same mistakes with the opposite group substituted in.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 05:06 PM
0

I agree, but this isn't a case of absolutes, and we don't have to make the same shitty arguments as feminists and ignore reality.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 05:04 PM
7

Privilege isn't unilateral. Men can be favored in some aspects and disfavored in others, because there are many aspects to privilege.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/04/20 04:41 PM
1

I misread the study and thought it was a meta analysis. You're correct.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/03/20 05:06 AM
1

You're clearly right, I misread the study and thought it was a meta analysis of applications of women and men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 10:53 PM
0

Yes. Did you read any of what I said? The correlation is present. There is no experiment here. We therefore cannot determine why men get callbacks less. I suspect it is the same conclusion everyone else here is drawing, but without an experiment to test against the null hypothesis that men and women are equally likely to receive callbacks at the same rate, we don't know if the reason is being a woman or some factor that is correlated with being a woman.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 05:39 PM
3

I don't think you're reading what I said. I didn't say they used cherry picked data, I think that there is some causal factor, and we don't know what it is from looking at observational statistics, which I gave two examples of in my first paragraph. I think that what they observed is absolutely true. That doesn't mean that we can conclude that women are more likely to get callbacks because they are women. Experimentation and comparison against a null hypothesis would tell us if this is the case.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 05:28 PM
0

EDIT: I was clearly wrong about this, I thought that this was a meta analysis of applications, not an experiment. It does demonstrate causality. I'm leaving up what I said as it is in general true of observational statistics. Observational statistics do not demonstrate causality. It is the same as how the 14 49 statistic doesn't mean that black people are more violent than white people because they are black, because this doesn't control for other factors, or how the 80:20 split in CS/Eng/IT doe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 04:36 PM
20

Approx 2/3 female 1/3 male as of about a year ago per their survey.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/03/20 11:56 PM
13

Feminists that align with egalitarian values and have actual concerns and empathy about men's issues but choose to label themselves as feminists are all good by me. Labels are just indicators of values. If you're going to date someone, you should try and figure out their values before taking actions purely on labels.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/03/20 12:03 AM
2

I use a merkur long handle personally, which fits nicer in my 20cm hands.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/03/20 12:03 AM
10

Get a safety razor for $15 and 100 blades for $8. The blades will last you about 2 years, making it about .33 cents a month. It's unbelievably inexpensive, a better and less irritating shave, and a lot less wasteful.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/02/20 04:49 PM
1

Was it worth it in the long run? /s
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/02/20 05:16 AM
3

I agree, I was pointing out the flawed logic of the guy above me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/02/20 08:59 PM
5

There are a lot of situations where you can't just leave without heavy account penalties and being an asshole to your squad; but in scenarios like that they could have compromised by saying that if she got the cold items he could get the rest when he finished the game. Both of them were being shitty.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/02/20 03:09 PM
7

I'm not really looking for men that think their lives would be better without women, I'm looking for people that strive towards general equality and understanding.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/02/20 07:25 PM
1

I'm subbed to both but looks like I should be subbed to /r/lostredditors
/r/PussyPassDenied21/01/19 05:45 AM
-1

Any sub look this goes this way without strict moderation, and big o dick mustaka doesn't give enough fucks to weed out the posts that don't fit
/r/PussyPassDenied01/09/18 05:01 AM
4

What on Earth does this have to do with ppd? This sub is going downhill.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/09/18 04:42 AM
1

How is that a shit article? It goes into questioning why racial insults are still okay if they're at white people. Is that invalid, or even liberal? And no, I don't watch Colbert. He got tacky and shitty. And yeah, CNN and MSNBC suck for factual reporting.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/08/18 12:31 AM
3

NPR is pretty factual, but right wingers can't seem to accept that facts have a centrist or slightly liberal slant, so they say it is biased.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/08/18 09:33 PM
8

no, it's just that people quoting the content in the comments is stupid we all just watched it
/r/PussyPassDenied12/06/18 08:48 PM
3

can we have a mbw style sub nuke followed by approved content only so that it doesn't devolve into a sexist echo chamber from what it once was?
/r/PussyPassDenied12/05/18 03:52 AM
1

This might be the most logical, well grounded and stated thing I've ever seen on this subreddit. Kudos.
/r/MensRights07/05/18 04:24 AM
-3

The world is not made of absolute truths and falsehoods. My statement of her not talking for anyone else doesn't mean no one else subscribed to the same lifestyle, but that in no way are all women like that just because of her and others actions.
/r/PussyPassDenied01/05/18 01:27 PM
-6

Her actions do not speak for anyone else. Quit generalizing, you know that men would also take this type of opportunity if offered to them.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/04/18 09:32 PM
3

Where can I get one o dem shiny flares like you, oh wise one?
/r/PussyPassDenied03/01/18 04:17 AM
1

Yeah. But it'd be different if they were commenting on a direct story and the authors comments on their experiences, but this just encourages prejudging people for their sex. There is so much more to relationships than women stealing money and kids and forcing the husband into alcoholism.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 11:20 PM
5

Yes. The practice is wrong, not which group you target. You dont get a free pass to act "as shitty as other people". That just brings justification to their biased viewpoints.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 04:39 PM
1

see my comment and third reply for potentially some of what he was thinking :)
/r/MensRights18/04/17 04:12 PM
6

I don't disagree with anything you've said, except that it isnt fictional. It is literally a comic, that is made to represent the worst case scenario of marriage in a gynocentric society. It is varying levels of applicable to some people in this sub, and that is good that it struck a chord with them. But for some others who are saying stuff like "Too true", or "pretty much", it just perpetuates the idea that women are all cheating soulless bitches out to steal your money and seed, and the whole …
/r/MensRights18/04/17 04:11 PM
-8

Yeah, it is about that. But creating a fictional case to prove a point is strawmanning, regardless of who it is pointed towards.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 04:00 AM
8

*him, if op can be believed on any of this.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 10:39 PM
14

I love to lurk this sub, but goddamn that is some serious strawmanning. I can't tell if/how satirical it is, or whether you guys are taking it as such, but this makes a lot of assumptions. Unhealthy relationships aren't to blame on a single gender, and it isn't only women that want to be married and have kids.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 10:33 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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