TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

morris198 Archive

View 1 posts and 77 comments by morris198 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)
1

morris198/r/seduction20/11/11 05:55 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
8

I really set her off when I told her the notion of equality was nonsense given sexual dimorphism. Sexual dimorphism only poo-poos the notion that all fields are guaranteed to see a homogeneous distribution of the sexes due to equality of aptitude/potential. We absolutely must continue to strive to maintain equality of opportunity. Obviously no one is truly equal (even within the same sex, naturally), but everyone must be treated as equal under the law and provided the same opportunity to thrive …
/r/TheRedPill25/03/13 07:54 PM
7

I think the point is, sexism against men isn't actually considered sexism by these people.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 03:59 AM
5

There was an episode of House that had a young cancer patient ask the resident heart-throb doctor if he would be her first kiss (particularly 'cos she was worried she didn't have much time left for it to happen on its own). He originally balked at the idea but eventually honored her request with a peck and it was actually really sweet. And, while some of the other characters behaved in the typical manner when they found out, acting as if such a thing was a lewd affront to decency, it was actuall…
/r/MensRights26/09/12 06:11 PM
15

It makes me think of the ridiculous atheist-turned-Christian stories. Not that I'm blasting Christianity here -- it could be true, but that's not the issue -- it's that, 'cos religion is based on faith, rather than evidence, if someone leaves religion for atheism based on logic and rational thinking (which tend to be the vast, vast number of cases), it's highly unlikely that the same person will abandon this preference for empirical knowledge to go back to being utterly reliant on faith. Same si…
/r/MensRights18/08/12 09:36 PM
1

Also, a 16 year old is above the age of consent in Mississippi, so age-based statutory rape charges wouldn't be appropriate if the teacher were male, either. All of that typically goes out the window if there's a position of authority in play -- a student who's 16 or 17 in a state where sixteen is the age of consent would absolutely be classified as a statutory rape victim if the consensual sex is with a teacher.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 02:14 AM
0

Could be worse: just look at half of the mod team in r/AntiSRS.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 10:25 PM
3

"How dare you tell a woman how to raise her child!" Most feminists.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 07:08 PM
0

They don't. Shitty reporters and feminists who get a hold of the data do.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 07:06 PM
2

Yeah, but it's not like the feminists playing Schrodinger's rapist give two shits about male victims of rape. So, in their eyes, it only matters who victimizes women.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 05:23 AM
2

Well, technically, I imagine crime statistics would "prove" that more men rape of women than... well, other women raping women, I guess. However, I imagine the ratio of legitimately potential offender (given the dreadful fact that something like a third of black men end up in prison at some point in their lives) to innocent is significantly less in favor of the feminists' position.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 04:45 AM
6

PZ Myers is such a dickhole. I've lost all respect for him and his little clique of SRS-esque harpies.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 12:46 AM
10

... conservative man with his gun who is paranoid about blacks... the feminist woman afraid of rape... I'd call that a rather brilliant analogy. I will be citing this myself.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 12:19 AM
1

... with a Shit Reddit Says subreddit, a platform for "bullying the bullies." That should be the stake through their heart. Despite society's fascination with vigilanteism, bullying has become a bogeyman. SRS claims to bully for righteous reasons... but what group doesn't? I mean, Fundamentalist Christians consider homosexuality to be immoral in the eyes of God so, by SRS logic, homosexuals should be bullied.
/r/MensRights07/06/12 07:46 PM
2

Ah. So, it's not like it's necessarily a common (or more common) practice in and around the Balkans? Just a family thing? Interesting. And bollocks on age: you're a lot better spoken than vast swaths of Reddit, regardless of how much older they might be.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:30 PM
-1

There's a difference between a "white knight" and simply being a good, upstanding, community-conscious individual.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:22 PM
3

May I ask what culture you are? I'm unfamiliar with any that don't adopt the father's surname, and I'd like to educate myself.
/r/MensRights06/05/12 07:00 PM
8

What was it? Like, 2002 or 2003, when Maddox would post straight-shooting, take-no-prisoners (and incredibly funny) truth nuggets like this all the time. I miss those days. Not that he's a paragon of maturity or anything, but beneath dick jokes and whatnot, there were usually some very poignant points to be made. Frankly, it's nice to see something from him, again. If there's one thing that can be said about Maddox, it's that he's guaranteed to be unapologetic about the truth.
/r/MensRights08/04/12 08:06 PM
1

Shit. How could I have forgotten those three. Those are much better examples... but definitely leaves me worried that my theories are less conspiratorial and more, well, actively happening.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 03:50 AM
3

I imagine you're just poking a little fun there, but that does bring up an interesting issue: the efforts by certain varieties of feminism to "infect" other philosophies with their ideology... ... case-in-point: I'm atheist and -- while I'm definitely for equal rights between the genders and same-sex marriage -- I find it really irritating when many vocal factions within the atheist community insist that my non-belief compels me to actively advocate for feminism and LGBT while simultaneously con…
/r/MensRights31/03/12 04:48 AM
7

Wait, did I miss something? How is it saying that that's what all feminism is? When the Westboro Baptist Church is condemned, it's done so as representative of the evils and bigotry that religion is capable of... not to suggest that all religion is like that. There are feminists very much like the one in the comic and they should be mocked and condemned. And maybe I'm not reading between the lines correctly, but I don't see where the comic said, "This is what all feminists believe."
/r/MensRights30/03/12 10:57 PM
23

While perhaps it exaggerates a little for comedic effect and, while it does not (and cannot) represent all of feminism, you're wrong if you think there aren't women out there who effectively mirror the antagonist in this comic.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 10:35 PM
2

Your comment appears to be highly controversial, with almost a dozen upvotes and downvotes. Is there a reason what you've said is really offensive or wrong? Any chance a detractor could add an explanation as to why the comment should be dismissed?
/r/MensRights19/03/12 12:20 AM
12

Eh, he's probably religious, or has a religious friend or family member. I mean, we believe strongly in Men's Rights -- if someone were to dismiss our concerns on the subject in even a friendly manner, I think we'd probably find it a tad disagreeable. And, while I tend to advocate for r/atheism, it can be a less-than-friendly place when it comes to the beliefs of others.
/r/MensRights17/03/12 09:32 PM
39

Well, when you stomp around acting like a know-it-all smart ass who completely misses the point while tossing insults and criticisms around... yeah, you might get downvoted.
/r/MensRights05/03/12 10:14 PM
0

To conflate the sexual-exploitation of a 5-year-old to a sexual-relationship with a 17-year-old means that you're either the absolute lowest form of troll, or an incredibly disturbed individual. Your self-proclaimed righteousness is such a mockery of moral behavior, I wouldn't know where to begin besides recommending therapy.
/r/MensRights19/02/12 02:49 AM
1

No. I'm not defending or attacking any manner of picture posting -- I'm inquiring about your apparent assertion that an individual with sexual inclinations toward post-pubescent, 17-year-old minors are automatically "pedophile apologists" and morally indistinguishable from those who would consider relations with a 5-year-old.
/r/MensRights18/02/12 09:42 PM
1

It's funny because children cannot consent to sex with adults so it doesn't change anything by going to a dictionary definition like this is somehow different and an excusable thing. Have you tried not being a pedophile apologist? Don't change the topic -- I'm not talking about posting pictures. I'm talking about the issue of consent. You know, the topic about which you wrote and I replied? Where you appeared to suggest that a so-called ephebophilia whose preference included teenagers wholly leg…
/r/MensRights18/02/12 05:29 PM
1

So you literally see no difference between sex with a 5-year-old and sex with a 17-year-old? And how do you rectify your position if the sex with our hypothetical 17-year-old took place in Connecticut, where the age of consent is 16 or, say, Germany where it's 14. Are all states and countries with consent ages less than eighteen pedophilic in nature?
/r/MensRights18/02/12 08:49 AM
3

Is there an archive of them somewhere and any of them in particular you could recommend?
/r/MensRights18/02/12 08:33 AM
0

Wait, are you really saying there isn't an ethical distinction between the someone lusts for and potentially acts upon sexual urges for a 5-year-old, and someone who does the same with a 17-year-old in a state where eighteen is the age of consent? If someone argues that a 17-year-old ought to be able to make sexual decisions when it comes to his/her partners, are you really labeling that person a pedophile apologist?
/r/MensRights18/02/12 08:16 AM
1

Any chance we could start copy-pasting obnoxious blog posts into a comment? I'd be happy to join in deconstructing their rubbish, but I really hate giving gender-baiting authors website hits.
/r/MensRights09/02/12 02:29 AM
0

He's like a little weasel.
/r/seduction09/02/12 12:15 AM
6

Apple chick? Edit: ... no, seriously, who is this Apple chick that's being discussed? Did I miss a popular post that explained it?
/r/MensRights28/01/12 05:23 AM
1

While I appreciate what you're saying, I'm not sure how "normal" one could call the Playboy models seeing as how the magazine began its reign with Marilyn Monroe! Obviously, preferences have changed, but I cannot help but feel that placing the lion's share of the blame at the feet of pornographic media (which you see in many feminist camps) borders on the ridiculous.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 11:43 PM
3

I find it very interesting that, while I assume you accept that society drives Playboy rather than Playboy driving society when it comes to "slender, youthful women," or full, perky breasts, you appear to assume the opposite with regard to other factors like, say, a preference for "tidy labia." As someone who grew up prior to the internet, pornography (especially anything more than topless pictures) was difficult to come by in my youth. Yet, without the influence of outside media, I always found…
/r/MensRights20/11/11 06:51 PM
14

Does anyone know any more of these "Red Pill Questions?" I find the idea of them fascinating. Whether they're thought-provoking social queries, or laser-guided zingers aimed at female-entitlement, I'd like to learn more.
/r/MensRights20/11/11 06:09 PM
1

I like how you imply being anti feminist is the same as being a woman hater. How. F.ucking. Cute. You're not a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem you castrated female approval seeking dog. Same team, Farva.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 08:06 AM
3

/not a lawyer, but... Doesn't this establish precedent? If a reverse case comes to court, can't this ruling be cited in order to get a male defendant a similar sentence -- as in probation rather than imprisonment?
/r/MensRights15/11/11 11:53 PM
2

Just to play Devil's Advocate, I'm going to assume that he meant that boys could enjoy strictly statutory rape that would be otherwise considered consensual if he were not underage. ... if he meant anything other than this, then... what the fuck?!
/r/MensRights15/11/11 11:48 PM
2

Well, that's why the citation's source is so important and typically demanded of questionable assertions. Obviously it's not always demanded and, in cases where an unverified claim would support the person's biases and prejudices, it's usually let slide... but, at that point, you might as well completely fabricate the quote in the first place. In situations like this, unless you're completely out-numbered by a hostile audience, demanding the non-existent, or unsupported (in the case of a troll o…
/r/MensRights15/11/11 07:58 PM
3

As long as they're downvoted like he is, it really shouldn't be a problem. Personally, I think it's proof that the community can be taken seriously: here's an example of the he-man woman-hating of which we're accused, and it has been utterly buried by our community. In fact, it's evidence that one could cite as proof that we aren't like that.
/r/MensRights15/11/11 07:12 PM
1

I'm happy that you saw the connection. It was rather subtle, but that was precisely my intent in re-writing a bonus for women as a penalty for men.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 05:56 PM
14

Nah, just dock 10% from the boys' scores since, apparently, they were given an unfair advantage by being born with a mathematically-inclined penis.
/r/MensRights12/11/11 07:17 PM
5

I thought women already did better at the SAT? Isn't female enrollment in universities at a historic all-time high? There should be a term for individuals like Mr. Soares who pander like this and feed people excuses for their underachievement. When will people take responsibility for themselves? As an aside, and because there is no way I want to buy his book and fund his shenanigans, does anyone have any idea how SAT questions can be sexist or racially-biased? It isn't like all women (or any non…
/r/MensRights12/11/11 07:13 PM
4

I hate asking for sources, since it automatically makes it sound like I don't believe you. But, if examples of it are being found in South Africa when it's sought out (rather than ignored), do you have some citations? I seriously want to eat crow on this, because having proper arguments and the citations to back it up means that, later, I can serve a big plateful of crow to others. If you mean, in general, it's found when it's sought, well... I dunno, I see the situation in South Africa as being…
/r/MensRights10/11/11 06:53 PM
5

Do you suspect there is a lot of female-on-male sexual violence in South Africa to ignore? Personally, I have no fucking clue, which is why I ask. And it's not like the science behind transmission rates is sexist, is it? I mean, I really don't want to sound like a concern troll, because 99% of the time I'm absolutely on board, but... I dunno, I don't feel as passionate about this instance. Then again, like I said, the motivations here are largely based on the distorted feminist agenda and, perha…
/r/MensRights10/11/11 06:28 PM
5

Not to be that guy, and please, please correct me if I'm wrong, but given that this is about South Africa -- and, while it's absolutely true that women can rape men and I'm completely dedicated to correcting those who deny it -- isn't the massive, overwhelming problem of man-on-woman rape (and the use of systematic rape as tool of terrorism in neighboring states), coupled with AIDS transmission being twice to almost ten-times more likely man-to-woman, than woman-to-man, doesn't it maybe lend a l…
/r/MensRights10/11/11 05:42 PM
1

I'm usually a snob when it comes to academia and feel society really ought to defer to intellectuals more than it does... but, shit, that reverence needs to be for proper intellectuals. Professors like the one you cite make me wonder what the fuck is up with our universities for them to be awarding doctorates to and hiring from people so divorced from reality.
/r/MensRights01/11/11 11:38 PM
1

Honest question: Isn't it more typical for this sort of thing to come from the Left? At least in the U.S. I cannot imagine many (or any) of the hardcore feminists, who promote men solely as abusers and women as the abused, voting Republican. I would have assumed it was the same in the U.K.
/r/MensRights23/10/11 01:27 AM
2

In their defense, they do tend to die during childbirth and due to pregnancy complications more often. ;-)
/r/MensRights22/10/11 08:58 PM
11

Dude, when the claim is that women "don't start wars," and someone cites a hundred examples to the contrary, even if you legitimately shoot down 99 of those examples, the one remaining disproves the claim.
/r/MensRights04/10/11 05:45 PM
4

It's a legal definition for which there exists laws and consequences. I can agree that determining the age at which an individual is legally capable of making decisions of a sexual nature is relative to a ridiculous degree, but the fact remains that a 16-year-old is a minor according to the law. The relationship could be a win-win situation for the adult and minor, it could literally be a victimless crime, and perhaps the laws should be re-written... but, until they are, disparity in enforcing t…
/r/MensRights14/09/11 06:35 PM
1

You're absolutely right -- to a point. There are many who, upon hearing any wrong committed by a woman, assume that a man is responsible for her poor behavior. I used to fall into that trap myself. I'm a tad older and a lot wiser these days. However, prejudices rarely blossom out of nothingness. And, given the near constant attitude of entitlement demonstrated by many pro-athletes, their access to female fans, and the frequent cases of sexual misconduct at both the professional and collegiate le…
/r/MensRights12/08/11 05:42 PM
1

My first thought was, "Well, was he trying to rape her?" I mean, I am a huge advocate for equal sentencing and all (and that it doesn't exist that way already is outrageous), but an awful lot of pro-athletes tend to fuck up any strides we've made in Men's Rights with their behavior.
/r/MensRights12/08/11 07:33 AM
1

Actually, in many ways, I agree with some of your other arguments against the atheist community. While anyone can be immoral, atheists will give believers (particularly priests and other spiritual leaders) an especially hard time about it because the majority of theists claim a moral superiority due to their beliefs. Meanwhile, anyone can be irrational, but given the association that many atheists make between atheism and critical thinking, it only makes sense that believers ought to be allowed …
/r/MensRights09/07/11 04:42 PM
4

I object. While there are a minority in r/atheism and the skeptical movement who are Watson apologists (the feminists, the far-far left, and white knights) they are just that: a minority. The vast majority of threads on this topic have "Dawkins is right," and "I'm with Dawkins," as the top comments, over and over again. In fact, if you look through the various comments for the various submissions on the subject, the apologists are all the same handful of incredibly vocal people. Not that merely …
/r/MensRights09/07/11 08:02 AM
3

... imagine her as a prosecutor. Or a lawyer for the defense. Either way it's clear she's willing to pervert justice -- whether it'd be jailing the innocent, or freeing the guilty.
/r/MensRights22/06/11 05:50 AM
4

Such arbitrary and non-quantifiable traits as those tend to be awarded to women as the booby prize since physical superiority (as demonstrated by the Olympics) and intellectual superiority (as demonstrated by the history of invention and Nobel prizes) tends to be squarely the realm of men.
/r/MensRights20/06/11 05:35 PM
4

I really don't think I'd read too much into it -- after all, chances are the company simply wants to avoid the inevitable accusations of racism if they were to imply blacks commit a disproportionate number of crimes. A white man is always the politically correct punching bag for any negative role.
/r/MensRights11/06/11 06:29 PM
1

Tell me, what does any of that have to do with bleeding-hearts or the overly optimistic? Bleeding-heart is not synonymous with liberal -- sometimes the two intersect, but disagreeing with a political Pollyanna does not make me some Randian Republican Neo-Con.
/r/MensRights19/05/11 12:00 AM
1

Well, yeah. That's precisely the problem. And it's made worse by vocal members of the feminist movement that cite the injustices of the past as a reason why, when those injustices are now thrust upon men, women shouldn't be bothered and, rather, should remind men that they deserve it. Edit: ... for myself, I prefer the label of advocate for gender equality.
/r/MensRights18/05/11 10:29 PM
1

Right, because that would be totally sustainable. ... that is, without a doubt, the perfect answer to just about every statement made by bleeding-hearts or the overly optimistic.
/r/MensRights18/05/11 08:20 PM
2

You know, this comment comes across as awfully offensive... but what's really unfortunate about it is that, far too often, it's true.
/r/MensRights18/05/11 08:12 PM
3

I was just teasing your redundancy. If a concept is misandric, of course it would be against men since it's not as if it could be leveled against women. I happily saved all your well-articulated comments, though. Just thought I'd bust your balls a tad in what would hopefully be interpreted in a friendly way!
/r/MensRights18/05/11 08:08 PM
1

... ideology which by itself is misandric against males. As opposed to misandric against non-males? /sunglasses
/r/MensRights18/05/11 07:54 PM
5

Fuck yeah. If I consider myself a democrat and President Obama and his cabinet start up internment camps for, I dunno, Pakistanis, I will either work to see him removed from power, universally stricken from the label of democrat, or I will shed what has become a disgraceful title myself! People cling to the feminist term as if it's the only thing holding the movement for gender equality together -- regardless of how much mud and muck it has accumulated.
/r/MensRights18/05/11 07:45 PM
7

You may laugh but, frankly, I do have a problem with egalitarianism. Harrison Bergeron may be a straw man, but it also represents a slippery slope. People are different, have different capabilities, and will never, ever be truly equal in all ways -- nor should they be treated as such. My preferred term would be advocate for gender equality. It may not have a sexy word to piggyback on to, but I can tell you one thing: it will never be misunderstood.
/r/MensRights18/05/11 07:38 PM
1

What goes around comes around. I didn't say revenge... I fully agree with the issue of egos inhibiting proper discussion and, while we're working toward the same goal, let's not split hairs: "... what goes around, comes around," might as well be a more polite and socially-acceptable way of saying, "... I'm going to get you, sucka!" Isn't there an applicable quote out there that goes something like: the formerly repressed make for the worst oppressors?
/r/MensRights18/05/11 07:25 PM
0

Men basically told early feminists to go fuck themselves when they wanted to vote and get paid decent wages. What goes around comes around. Wait, and what? Women are having their revenge, now? Eye for an eye and all that? What happened to correcting the mistakes of the past, rather than overcompensating and victimizing modern men for the sins of their fathers? While I see this as a case of same team, Farva! one must never excuse or engage in apologetics for the injustices that affect someone tod…
/r/MensRights18/05/11 05:54 PM
0

Other studies from Africa conclude condoms lead to impotence, and virgins cure AIDS. Possibly the one positive result of male circumcision is that we have reams of evidence that it substantially reduces transmission.
/r/MensRights22/01/11 11:16 PM
2

"Another less controversial, if delicate, issue of sex has also emerged: the clear admission by fervent women's sports supporters that boys are indeed stronger and faster." Yeah, welcome to the real world -- you know, the one where Olympic sports are segregated based on gender because men physically out-perform women in almost every way. I do not understand how many feminists believe social equality somehow trumps physiological differences.
/r/MensRights05/12/10 11:08 PM
2

And he's got ball-balls to stay strong, wear a skirt, and play a kick-ass game.
/r/MensRights05/12/10 10:56 PM
3

Ha! Just imagine a "Girl Grinder" plaque for the bloke that has the most brutal tackles against female players on a co-ed football field? Just the conception of such a thing would be enough to force the resignation of coaches and coordinators.
/r/MensRights05/12/10 10:53 PM
1

It's already been posted there a handful of times over the last week or two.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 02:03 AM
4

My interpretation of it is that you got major deductions for not engaging with her when she was in your room. Not to mention you said your room was clean while everywhere else was a mess and you took her out of your clean room, into that mess. Plus, I'm not sure if it's a major faux pas in the game of seduction, but you could have said something along the lines of, "I'll watch movies with the guys, later -- tonight I'd rather be in here with you." I've had a first date back in my room where thin…
/r/seduction25/07/10 06:38 PM
4

It's a lot more hit or miss than that -- take for instance a pair of white girl friends of mine: similar education, personalities, and level of attractiveness... and while one of them has dated numerous black men, the other finds herself not attracted to them at all. Everyone has different tastes and there's no way to snap your fingers and be attracted to someone or some one you're not. So, all things being equal, it adds a lot more variance into the dating lives of black men: either sexualized …
/r/seduction09/05/10 06:19 PM
2

Emo Phillips.
/r/seduction05/03/10 06:59 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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