TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

mostlydisposeable Archive

View 0 posts and 109 comments by mostlydisposeable 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

If we want to get pedantic, Trevithick was only 31 when he built the first locomotive...
/r/MensRights02/05/24 07:46 AM
45

Dick move from the UN, but honestly I don't mind it. Most Sanitation workers are men. The toilet + sewer is the most important medical innovation of all time. It's saved hundreds of millions of lives. Sanitation is the overlooked yet equally important half of water infrastructure. Just like mens issues are the equally important yet irrationally derided counterpart to womens issues. It's kind of fitting, I'll wear the proverbial badge with pride.
/r/MensRights03/03/24 11:41 AM
1

*Being Urbanised makes peoper have fewer children. Based on a Forbes analysis of more than 700 U.S. billionaires, however, he’s wrong in his assumption. These ultra-rich have an average of 2.3 children, above the recent 1.93 average for average Americans [1]
/r/MensRights15/10/23 02:07 PM
15

unrealistic expectations of educated women (largely caused by hypergamy). This is a nitpick, but strictly speaking "wanting a mate more educated/attractive/affluent than you" is just (the defintion of) hypergamy. It's not caused by hypergamy.
/r/MensRights03/05/23 05:34 PM
4

I feel as though part of the reason trans-men are "discussed" less is that trans-phobics/skeptics view them as "basically still women" and therefore not fundamentally threatening and dangerous in the same way men and transwomen are. When arguing against trans-women a terf says "They's taking mah bathroom and grooming mah kids", but they can't accept that what they see as a women (even a misguided one) is so much of a danger. Since a substaintial portion of online trans-activisim is more about "d…
/r/MensRights03/05/23 04:40 PM
1

Literally "stop having fun"
/r/MensRights01/05/23 10:37 AM
5

*ought to sadly not always the case.
/r/MensRights22/04/23 08:41 AM
2

A lot of folks have "called BS" based on intution or personal expereince, and validly so. To put it in more formal terms though: there's a glaring methodological issue with the study mentioned. Men were surveryed, asked if they did any kind of nofap, and what their expereince with anxiety, self-esteem, shame, ED, etc... was. Of course: The only men doing nofap are the ones who feel they have a problem, and thus are self-selecting for the things the article claims nofap is responsible for. Weathe…
/r/MensRights04/03/23 05:19 PM
7

What you're describing there is basically just a healthy relationship, they exist yes.
/r/MensRights17/02/23 05:20 PM
5

The daily mail is being well... the daily mail. You can look at the bill as it stands right now here. There is no gender-specific language, but that doesn't necessarily mean the bill is any good. My suspicion based on previous parliamentary attempts to tackle the internet is that it's basically unworkable, but I don't really have the lawyer-brain to know.
/r/MensRights04/02/23 04:02 PM
1

It does matter, just because only one sperm is technically required to fertilize one egg, doesn't mean it actually works out that way. A lot of sperm are simply lost in the process (they are blind & trying to hit one cell in an entire uterus), a lot are just defective (I.e. No head, No tail, swim in endless circles etc...) In practice if a couple is struggling to get pregnant it's very often down to low sperm counts. "IVF for everybody!", though it would work, is prohibitively expensive however.…
/r/MensRights30/01/23 05:56 PM
4

If there aren't enough to take care of the elders, they'll die faster, meaning less population left mate, you've got to work on your fucking optics lmao.
/r/MensRights30/01/23 05:46 PM
0

in fairness, where on the internet does anyone actually read the article?
/r/MensRights20/01/23 09:46 PM
1

I mean, it's the daily mail, it's pretty famous for its "headline first" approach to journalism.
/r/MensRights18/01/23 12:47 PM
8

Hungary has a wildly corrupt government, I'd be 0% surprised if this was an entirely uncosted program just designed to appeal to their nationalist base and keep them in power. Let the next lot deal with the debt.
/r/MensRights11/01/23 01:20 PM
1

While I can understand your apprehension, I'm not sure I agree with it. Think of the flipside: the child does help pay for the state, and thus probably your pension. This is especially true in countries with sub-replacement birthrates (i.e. most of the western world) 18 years of child benefits + education probably doesn't amount to much compared to the 60+ years that kid is going to be a taxpayer. It's not even like you need to wait 18 years for the benefits either, the demographic future of a c…
/r/MensRights10/01/23 05:56 PM
2

(that would be a "child of a bastard" in this case bastard child i.e. child of unwed parents is correct, albeit quite rude, terminology)
/r/MensRights10/01/23 05:51 PM
-1

Are you saying this because you genuinely believe that Andrew Tate would never do anything like that, or are you saying this just because the feminists don't want you to?
/r/MensRights05/01/23 10:16 AM
2

I think probably we wouldn't get as much of it if places like r/incels & r/mgtow weren't banned. As it is people that want to say "women bad" always come here because there's nowhere else.
/r/MensRights04/01/23 03:31 PM
3

in which case, "treat it the same as everything else" would still result in a lot of post deletions under rule 1. Altough, to be honest half the posts on this sub already come under rule 1...
/r/MensRights04/01/23 01:17 PM
-1

I agree Habeus Corpus is important, but this isn't a typical "sexual assualt allegation from 1998" he said/she said situation. His house was raided by Romanian poilce, I would be really surprised if he winds up getting aquitted.
/r/MensRights04/01/23 01:12 PM
2

There is no reason to hate Andrew Tate He's been arrested for human trafficking? Literally what the fuck are you on about. What does "beating the system" look like to you?
/r/MensRights04/01/23 12:20 PM
31

eh, a few red flags are good to have... it's when the list is longer than my arm you need to start watching out.
/r/MensRights01/01/23 12:57 PM
29

I think you should find a write up about this from a medical professional or reputable source instead of just posting these vague musings. Give 'em what they want: this was published by imperial college london. Try to be polite and phrase things in terminology friendly to mainstream discourse, the fertility crisis is an issue of pollution, bodily autonomy etc... you have concerns/fears about it, but aren't blaming anybody. After that you'll get one of two respones: "Alright, let's talk about it"…
/r/MensRights30/12/22 05:40 PM
1

as an Englishman I've always made sure to call them "Yankee" (espacily if they're from the south)
/r/MensRights22/12/22 04:55 PM
1

I mean this does go both ways, fine motor skills are better among women, hence why they've been dominant in textiles all way from modern bangladesh to medieval england.
/r/MensRights16/12/22 04:09 PM
0

Like I said, I have no issue with men getting accurate tests of their own accord, but that's not what you're going to get if tests are merely a legal hurdle the government makes you jump before you can be a parent.
/r/MensRights12/12/22 08:30 PM
-1

A man getting a DNA test is probably doing so because he's got reasons of his own to suspect false parentage, meaning the proportion of genuine parents doing it will be smaller, and thus the number of false negatives smaller compared to the total. It's equivalent (at least mathematically) to cancer screenings, if you screen everybody you can cause more damage by treating false negatives, if you only screen people who come in with suspicious symptoms the two 'flawed tests' become one relatively g…
/r/MensRights12/12/22 07:27 PM
-7

No, if for no other reason than that *in practice* DNA tests aren't 100% effective as they theoretically ought to be, because the people administrating them aren't (similar to how covid vaccines were 95% effective in clinical trials, but turnout out to be far less so in practice). This would go doubly for "lowest bidder mass roleout government program" DNA tests. Assuming a failure rate of even 5% (which I think is conservative) would mean you'd cast doubt on as many true fathers as false onces.…
/r/MensRights12/12/22 05:28 PM
4

I get that this is easily the most trivial consequence of hightism, but it does I think illustrate it's existance: nobody likes playing as Dwarves or Halflings. Despite them having as big a presence in Tolkein as Elves. In world of warcraft Dwarves and Gnomes are the least popular "Alliance" Races, Goblins the least popular "Horde" race, all by a significant margin*. Dark Elves and Blood elves are the 2nd and 1st most popular races for their factions respectively. You can find the same phenomino…
/r/MensRights12/12/22 05:17 PM
2

If you want to look at the human development index, which measures health, education and standard of living (measured by log(GDP/PPP)) then it's 21st, and by far the largest (by population) in the top 40. Of the 20 countries above it, none are "socialist" except in the "government does stuff" way.
/r/MensRights24/11/22 11:34 AM
1

(globally that is) we're still a majority in Europe and a plurality In the USA.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 06:34 PM
11

I would expect that medically necessary circumcisions will be treated differently from purely elective ones (not that anything would surprise me with this government), that's the impression I got from the article anyway... That being said, this is still not good news. Circumcision is far from the only procedure on the chopping block, the article also mentions: Liposuction Tummy Tucks Operations for congenital breast asymmetry and enlarged breast tissue in men. Imagining for lower back pain Tonsi…
/r/MensRights10/11/22 09:09 AM
15

I'm not really sure this news is uplifting, it might reduce the number of circumcisions, but I could equally see it pushing circumscision out of the hospital. I'm pretty sure most circumscisions in the UK are for religious reasons, so will get done regardless. While I'm not in favour of babies getting circumcised, I'd much rather it be done under the watchful eye of medical professionals than by your local rabbi. Plus circumscision is just one of a long list of procedures that might no longer be…
/r/MensRights10/11/22 09:08 AM
3

Murder-suicide, the mother also took pills, just didn't die from it since she's a full-grown adult and got medical treatment.
/r/MensRights03/11/22 02:16 PM
4

Agreed, altough the ratio is 70/30 towards men, though that's not the whole story. Women will also be further diluted in the areas of journalism likely to get you killed, being more concentrated in lifestyle/celebrity etc... If I had to guess, journacidal dictators are probably relatively equal opportunity (not sexist either way), and the 9-to-1 split is just reflective of the proportions of journalists in danger-zones, but without knowing thoose proportions that pure speculation on my part.
/r/MensRights03/11/22 02:10 PM
1

It's absolutely worth a try, medication too if you can get it, best of luck to you.
/r/MensRights03/11/22 01:51 PM
2

I mean, at least in that second paragraph they're acknowledging the moral weight of the other half of humanity. "We're not supporting women because they're the only ones we care about, but because their the glue holding society together." To some extent it's even true to my experiences, most of the "community leader types" I've known have been women. The problem is it's completely backwards logic, women aren't intrinsically ready & willing to become the village grandma, anymore than men are intr…
/r/MensRights02/11/22 12:13 PM
5

Plenty of us do, It's just that suicidal thoughts are so much more complicated than "bottled up feelings." Talking it through with a friend can certainly help, but that doesn't gaurentee it will, nor that it'll help enough. It also comes with a social cost. Nobody wants to be the downer on a fun evening, nobody wants to worry thoose that care about them, no one wants to lose a friend because "they aren't interested in drama" For the minority of men that don't/can't, there's a lot of reasons. May…
/r/MensRights02/11/22 11:44 AM
18

What in the blackpill-bullshit-tarnation is this shit?
/r/MensRights26/10/22 03:05 PM
0

yes. She's wrong to ask it, absolutely, but the hospital ought to try and accomodate that if they can.
/r/MensRights22/10/22 07:31 AM
1

As a general rule I'd agree with you, but the patient in question had literally just been sexually assaulted, given how potentially traumatic that can be cradling the patients feelings, even if those feelings are illfounded, is probably the right thing to do.
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:36 PM
2

y'know gayistan, the democratic republic of lesbos, the United yas-queensdom. "the axis of woke" as they are known by geopolitical experts.
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:20 PM
1

Not all redditors are american you know...
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:18 PM
8

Not really, the US military is deliberately designed to be nuke-resistant. Bases are spread out literally across the world, command centres are buried in mountains and plans are in place to convert all major civillian industry at a moments notice. It'd quite literally take over thousand of nukes to destroy the US capacity to fight, and the only institution on earth capable of deploying thousands of nukes stealthily is the US military.
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:18 PM
2

I mean, Thatcher was our longest serving post-war prime minister, Theresa May (whilst still awful) was the pretty easily the best of this last batch of tory PM's.
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:12 PM
1

looks You have seen lizz truss right?
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:10 PM
6

(it's the babylon bee, it is satire)
/r/MensRights21/10/22 09:06 PM
9

I mean, kinda sad "Equal opportunity dehumanisation" has become our bar.
/r/MensRights17/10/22 11:28 PM
3

I'm super glad that the cranks still don't know how to use hyperlinks, makes them easy to spot.
/r/MensRights09/10/22 08:12 PM
4

The article doesn't suggest a "remedy", just points out the problem. I'd argue though that they imply one here: significant audience reach, the lack of moderation, and the customization in gaming platforms “make gaming spaces more prone to being exploited by extremists.” I.e. The ideal solution is to moderate, limit player freedom-of-expression (I.e. Choices of pre-set skins rather than custom costume makers etc...), etc... It's quite a dreary vision for the future of gaming -but more than that-…
/r/MensRights09/10/22 08:10 PM
2

It's true, but a lot of men also get turned on by feet, shoulders, thighs, calves etc... If we were to set our standards for legal modesty based on "visual appeal" we'd probably have to go all the way back to ankle-length skirts and loose blouses It's not like if we did 'free the nipple' women would suddenly go around topless all the time. The underlying culture would remain the same, so it'd mostly be taken advantage of by breastfeeding mothers and the occasional promiscuous woman at a rave.
/r/MensRights07/10/22 09:52 AM
6

Why do we consider womens breasts a 'private part' though?
/r/MensRights07/10/22 08:21 AM
1

That's absolutely part of it, but that's a self fulfilling prophecy, were it not for the massive gender imbalance, men wouldn't have to spend months grinding away at the app, there's still a hole for explanations for the 'seed' of the imbalance.
/r/MensRights05/10/22 09:00 PM
5

I mean, this is the a problem with dating apps and (possibly) why far fewer women use them as opposed to men, the only thing you can really find out from someones tindr profile is how they look, with maybe a tiny glimpse into their personality. It's not surprising "nice, unattractive" men aren't going to be doing well on dating apps beacuse there's little/no opportunity for them to display that.
/r/MensRights05/10/22 10:57 AM
34

Possibly you're just meeting/looking at people your age more than people of all ages, Obesity increases with age, from ~20% at 18 to almost 45% at 50.
/r/MensRights05/10/22 10:52 AM
0

(a number I derived from other research combined with insights from cognitive sciences) So... Pulled out of your ass? Treating the study as gospel, I'm pretty sure we'd reach your number even only counting rapists amoung university students, and assuming other men aren't doing any rapes whatsoever. 6.4% * 3% = 0.19%
/r/MensRights04/10/22 07:26 AM
2

So, the exact feminist critism isn't "all men are rapists" it's "all men are [potential] rapists". Sure you've never gone out of your way to organise a gang-rape, but if a slightly drunk woman came up to you on a long cold night and said "Can you help me, I'm lost and my phone is out of charge." how do you know you'd do the honourable thing? It's still a dumb critism, I'm pretty sure most men aren't going to turn into salivating monsters the first chance they get, it's dumb in a slightly more se…
/r/MensRights03/10/22 10:11 AM
6

I mean Even in hunter gatherer soceities you'll spend the first five or so years of your life as a pure dependant, humans just aren't useful until they can speak, control their limbs, eat hot chip and lie.
/r/MensRights03/10/22 10:01 AM
7

I mean, if she can save up a couple million in a vanguard account before then she'll be laughing all the way to the bank. Plus I think you'd be surprised. The average Findom "customer" is a deeply lonely middleaged man with a good stream of income and a psychology that would seem really strange to you or I. He'll care more about the para-social bonds he has with these woman than he will for mere-attractiveness, which probably means little to him after decades upon decades of porn use. There are …
/r/MensRights03/10/22 09:56 AM
9

To be clear, the study doesn't actually say "Incels aren't victims" it specifically talks about: The intersection between autism and incelibacy. The intersection and poverty and incelibacy. That incels neither skew white nor right wing. The fact only a minority of users on online forums prepetuate hate-speech (and of thoose a vanishing minority again go on the commit acts of violence), yet incels are painted by that brush. - and is broadly pretty incel-sympathetic (at least, compared to what you…
/r/MensRights29/09/22 11:13 AM
1

I mean, it depends where you are (law varies), but here in the UK it's illegal to solicit "in a street or a public place". There a difference between advertisments (which you kind of opt-in for by using the relevant service) and literally going up to people in the street and bothering them.
/r/MensRights28/09/22 11:39 AM
0

You don't gotta wear high-heels and knickers to identify as non-binary
/r/MensRights27/09/22 12:26 PM
24

Americans be like: 😖🤚 - Teaching your kids to wash their Penis properly 🥰👉 - Getting the knife out
/r/MensRights24/09/22 04:00 PM
2

I would be understanding, since I think that argument comes from a genuine sense of sympathy. It can't hurt to point out though that If one believes: Patriarchy can hurt men (I.e. Toxic masculinity). Women can interalise and perpetuate Patriachy (I.e. Internalized misogyny). Then Partriachy neither exclusively bennefits, Nor stems from men. What then is the point in calling it partriachy, a specifically gendered term?
/r/MensRights24/09/22 03:48 PM
1

Because Reddit will never do anything to protect women. Hence of course why r/incel, r/mgtow, r/antisimp, r/Braincels, r/incel2 + a dozen more were banned. Don't get me wrong, a lot of thoose places were toxic cesspits, but reddit hardly has a history of defending dens of inceldom.
/r/MensRights22/09/22 09:56 AM
71

True, but I feel like any Feminist worth their krait is going to say "That's because of the precautions women take." That all the pepper-spray, travelling in groups, staying indoors at night, is what keeps them safe. Whilst we men (being fools of course) just walk into active gang-wars for shits and giggles.
/r/MensRights22/09/22 09:38 AM
3

So, I guess the headline is technically correct, but I feel like "throwing a couple shoes at a 6' active soldier during an argument" is pretty far down the domestic violence gradient. Bad? Absolutely, still forgivable though. As to the royals covering things up, they'd probably hide the fact the Queens shits if they could, no surprises there.
/r/MensRights11/09/22 03:55 PM
1

I mean, I'd bet good money she isn't (straight)
/r/MensRights11/09/22 03:47 PM
10

I mean, I don't think that's the moral of the story, the moral is "Being a white knight can get you killed." Depending on who you are and who you're dying for, you might well be ok with that. Just don't 'white knight' as a dating technique, or because "that's just what you're expected to do".
/r/MensRights11/09/22 03:34 PM
9

The abstract (for thoose too lazy to click links): While both men and women can, and do, use violence against each other, men’s violence against women is far more common, less justified, and more destructive than women’s violence against men. One of the reasons for this asymmetry is that men do not fear retaliation for violence against women, whereas women do fear retaliation for their use of violence against men. The distribution of violence between the genders, then, is suboptimal. Society wou…
/r/MensRights11/09/22 03:30 PM
1

India, which apparantly scores 123rd on the 'gender inequality index' (USA scores 46th) has already had two female presidents! Even we here in TERF island have had three female prime ministers (and four queen regnents) The issue is not the intrinsic sexism of the american voter, it's that between the two party system, EC and the deep deep pockets of political lobbyers Americans rarely even get a cannidate they'd want to vote for in the first place.
/r/MensRights09/09/22 12:37 AM
1

While talking about the third R. is banned you can buy a copy of moustache mans struggle pretty easily you know..? Talking about it isn't banned. It might feel that way because most social media platforms fiercely try to eradicate any mention of it but it's very much legal to talk about. Another example might be "Industrial society and it's future" which you can get a free PDF of online, theese days your movement really has to do a lot of violence before it's getting censored by the state.
/r/MensRights09/09/22 12:12 AM
2

I think scott adams said that as a joke before, but I don't think it could reasonably be true. Biggest expenses are almost always necessities. I.e. Food, Rent, Transport, Heat, Insurance...
/r/MensRights08/09/22 11:02 AM
1

You expect this sub to have actually watched the show? Black Elf in interacial relationship, not gunna go down well with a good 35% of the sub.
/r/MensRights07/09/22 11:55 AM
1

I feel it's worth noting the cabinet does have white men in it, just not in the four most important positions.
/r/MensRights07/09/22 11:44 AM
2

I mean, I believe in mertiocracy, but we'd be absolutely kidding ourselves to think that the tory partys selectrion process has ever been particularly meritocratic.
/r/MensRights07/09/22 11:42 AM
1

... he resigned due to a vote of no confidence and three years of scandals?
/r/MensRights07/09/22 11:42 AM
2

Yep, the Tory party is still mostly old white guys, it's just that their governments have been such schambles for so long they've already gone through all the high-profile white guys.
/r/MensRights07/09/22 11:37 AM
2

Clearly, but the law isn't in place to punish the inner essence of pedophillia, it's put in place to protect children. Actual pedos are more than welcome to operate in society so long as they understand their desires are wrong and do not endanger children .
/r/MensRights31/08/22 04:40 PM
1

Pretty sure the law in most countries is still that the adult has a responsibility to ensure they aren't deceived by a child. I get that it seems harsh, but I think it does make sense to be particularly stringent when it comes to pedophillia.
/r/MensRights31/08/22 08:07 AM
4

So while I absolutely agree women have the majority of the votes, I think your analysis is slightly reductive. Last election cycle, how many people were saying "I'm crying out for a cannidate I'd actually want to vote for!"? Reducing political power down to democratic power ignores all the layers of bullshit between the voice of the people and the actual laws passed. Things like who has the money and connections to run for office, which parties Jerry-mander best, the difficulty of making a funct…
/r/MensRights29/08/22 07:41 AM
0

Fuckin' crikey mate do you want to rephrase that?
/r/MensRights19/08/22 04:23 PM
1

In fairness online dating is perhaps the worst area for this sort of disparity, being as it is an absolute cesspit.
/r/MensRights21/06/22 10:03 AM
6

We don't eat more proportionately, but men have a daily calorie requirement of 2,500 to womens 2,000. Or in otherwords: every man who can afford food will be eating ~20% more than every woman who can. This is just because men are larger and have higher metabolisms, and isn't something I (or any sane person) would blame men for, just as sane people don't blame women for needing sanitary pads. (although actually, doing the math 'male excess calories' will only account for a little over 2% of globa…
/r/MensRights12/06/22 09:30 PM
6

You really shouldn't be getting downvoted for this, loads of women absolutely do upcycle + rewear + buy from charity shops. The problem is only takes one 20-something with 50 handbags and a $1000 zara addiction to counter act dozens of those responsible women. The solution is not "Let's debate which gender is worse for a whole century" it's to cost carbon into the market, and it always has been.
/r/MensRights12/06/22 07:05 PM
6

Miles/Kilometers is unitless yes I am fun at parties
/r/MensRights12/06/22 06:53 PM
11

Fast fashion contributes almost 10% to globabl GHG emissions (& 20% to global waste water prodcution) and I would guess is about 80% female dominated? (maybe I'm just being sexist there IDK) Road transport (of which 80% is cars) contributes 12%, so to balance out fast fashion men would need to make up 83% of drivers. That being said, I suspect men probably do contribute more to global emissions: We eat more, we have to, that's how biology works. Since agriculture is about 20% of emissions, that'…
/r/MensRights12/06/22 06:49 PM
3

Fast fashion contributes almost 10% to globabl GHG emissions (& 20% to global waste water prodcution) and I would guess is about 80% female dominated? (maybe I'm just being sexist there IDK) Road transport (of which 80% is cars) contributes 12%, so to balance out fast fashion men would need to make up 83% of drivers. That being said, I suspect men probably do contribute more to global emissions: We eat more, we have to, that's how biology works. Since agriculture is about 20% of emissions, that'…
/r/MensRights12/06/22 06:47 PM
-1

You make some good points, but I would like to point out the difference in health expectancy (the age at which people are likely to stop being healthy) is much smaller than the difference in life expectancy, only about 0.9 years (for the United States) compared to about 5.3 (USA again) I get that that statitistic could be called into question (Men are less likely to seek medical attention, so might have underrepresented health issues compared to women), but it's the best one I've got so I'm stic…
/r/MensRights03/06/22 01:50 PM
1

I absolutely know what you mean yeah, whenever extreme/unpopular groups choose to champion an issue it's suddenly off the table, because obviously we want to stop "the bad guys" right? It makes real progress really quite difficult.
/r/MensRights03/06/22 02:52 AM
2

My point is that article is blaming the nature of the police response on the social changes caused by modern feminism. It draws a direct link between the disparagment of the idea of 'toxic masculinity' and this specific failure of law enforcement. That is at best merely unscientific, and at worst it's capitalising on a national tragedy to push a culture war agenda. I completely agree on your last point, it is not a specifically male duty to be heroic when the need arises. I do have other issues …
/r/MensRights03/06/22 02:09 AM
3

The headline is one thing, but you guys might want to read the article, it makes specific reference to the recent Uvalde shooting, and the police officers who delayed in critical moments when they could've saved lives. These were not random citizens who had the opportunity to leap into action but didn't (indeed such people were very much still there in that case) these were professionals who train for this specific situation, and receive pay and praise in part because of the danger they're expec…
/r/MensRights03/06/22 01:37 AM
3

Because people hate naunce, they have in their brain room for: "normal man able to integrate into society" and "dangerous incel who no woman must want" and very little categorisation space inbetween. I'd like to imagine for a lot of thoose people if they had to actually sit down in a coffee shop have an honest converstaion with you for 10 minuites their attitude would be at least a little softer, on the internet though? Good luck!
/r/MensRights03/06/22 01:27 AM
7

If the statement is "more [Woman + Children] than [Adult Men]" he would be correct, espacily during the early industrial revolution. Though the bread-winning husband and house-keeping wife was the ideal in the industrial revolution, it was only really a reality in the middle classes (which were much smaller back then). For the struggling masses it was as it's always been, everyone has to throw in their bit.
/r/MensRights30/05/22 11:23 PM
2

Machines were absolutely more dangerous yeah, but also there was simply no consideration given to worker safety (much like sweatshops today) for example it was common practice to lock your workers in the factory to prevent them taking smoke breaks, of course that's problematic when a fire breaks out... Or for another example: shift lengths. The eight hour shift isn't just, nice it also allows you to keep alert, but industrialists much prefered squeezing as much labour as possible out of their wo…
/r/MensRights30/05/22 11:12 PM
-1

Fact: This is an urban legend that is still taken seriously by activist law professors and harassment workshoppers. The Oxford English Dictionary has more than twenty citations for phrase “rule of thumb” (the earliest from 1692), but not a single mention of beatings, sticks, or husbands and wives. So it's definately not the etymological origin of the phrase, but wikipedia does mention two cases in which this rule was actually used in courts, one in Misissippi, one in North Carolina. There is in …
/r/MensRights30/05/22 10:42 AM
1

To clarify, I do think the act in question is sex, just not really sexual assualt. Still think it's rude though.
/r/MensRights28/05/22 09:58 AM
2

Doesn't surprise me at all to be honest, before the industrial revolution the rare women that ended up in major positions of power tended to be thoose with a special ruthless or ambitious streak.
/r/MensRights28/05/22 03:07 AM
1

You don't need to defend the act, just the persons right not to get arrested for it. There's probably all manner of things you think are morally wrong but still shouldn't be illegal. In my case it would be things like cheating on your girlfriend, excessive drinking or liking the star-wars sequels.
/r/MensRights28/05/22 02:49 AM
1

Note: my opinion is that everybody should disclose being trans from the very beginning, man or woman, which way it goes, doesn't matter. However not disclosing it should not be a crime per se. I absolutely agree, after-all being trans is not the fulcrum about which human existance pivots, if not disclosing ones transness counted as "sex under false pretences" why should we stop there? Should it be criminal to have sex without first disclosing your marital status? Your number of previous partners…
/r/MensRights28/05/22 02:43 AM
1

I mean, that's literally the root of the "gay-panic defense".
/r/MensRights28/05/22 02:24 AM
1

Absolutely yeah, I'm not denying there's definately some hypocracy there, I was just disagreeing with the specific example you used. I am starting to see a little bit more push-back on female gropers (at least on reddit, I don't really have a real social-life) which is nice.
/r/MensRights24/05/22 01:25 PM
-1

I think this is a bad example personally, sexual assualt is about intent, not the specific part being grabbed. If a foot fetishist came up to you and started massaging your feet I think we could all agree that would be classed as sexual assult right? There's obviously a difference though, most people attracted to women find breasts attractive, only some people find feet attractive, hence why we don't consider socks essential for modesty at the beach.
/r/MensRights24/05/22 11:58 AM
0

actual cavemen found this attractive, so I don't really think you have a leg to stand on (at least specifically related to obesity). Sexual attractiveness is not the be all and end all of beauty, I don't want to fuck the effiel tower or the white cliffs of dover, similarly it's possible to think a woman utterly beautiful, without your mind jumping to badonk-a-honk So what?
/r/MensRights20/05/22 06:50 PM
-5

Only if you conflate beauty and health, which you don't need to do. I might find my imaginary girlfriends sneezes adorable, doesn't mean I'd want her to have a cold. Also worth noting that appearances aren't perfectly connected to health (like normal-weight-obestity for instance). It is the case for most people, but there are plenty of people for whom "a healthy weight" looks like "obese" on others.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 03:47 PM
0

So I absolutely agree that he's entitled to his opinion, but I'm not nessecarily sure why he has to give it unsolicited? (beyond being a professional culture warrior.) I've found plenty of women unattractive over the years, but I've never felt the need to go "not beautiful". He's not being sexist, but he's still being rude.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 03:32 PM
2

Honestly I don't think there is really any tendancy for overweight women/short men to be more abrasive than average, but if they aren't polite it's way more likely to be associated with/blamed on their body. Confirmation bias, essentially. If you think you've been wronged by a conventionally attractive person you're not going to say "they were a beautiful asshat" you're going to say "they were a total asshat" but otherwise it's much more satisfying to the lizard brain to call them a "fat bitch" …
/r/MensRights17/05/22 01:44 PM
3

I'd disagree on discovery, both Saru and Pike are strong male characters, Pike more in the "traditional male" role, Saru in a more unconventional role but still an admirable character. I mean It's still a bad show, just for different reasons.
/r/MensRights11/05/22 04:29 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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