TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

nevyan-chail Archive

View 1 post and 207 comments by nevyan-chail 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)
34

nevyan-chail/r/MensRights18/12/12 07:40 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

This piece is utter dross (yes, I know it's old). I'd be very happy to see a male pill brought out and I don't relate to any of the views this woman has expressed in this article. Anything that helps even the responsibility of pregnancy prevention is all good in my book. (I may have been shadow banned so not sure if this will show up)
/r/MensRights10/09/14 08:06 PM
2

it's Radiohead. And "love", not "us".
/r/MensRights10/07/13 09:10 AM
1

This shows such a fundamental lack of understanding I don't know where to start. Anyhow, if you want to waste your own time, fine. You can't dictate that others have to waste theirs, however.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 12:06 PM
2

Erin Pizzey is a woman, the OP is looking for men.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 01:26 PM
-2

I'd quite like to see it too. Though what the girl looks like is irrelevant, unless you are trying to start some kind of witch-hunt. (referring to your other comment)
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:16 PM
-2

Plenty of men get away with misogynistic stuff all the time, there's no point trying to claim they don't. (And yes, Aerik will probably get a good laugh out of this. Who can blame him?)
/r/MensRights14/02/13 11:45 AM
0

If you feel it warrants a serious answer then by all means do so. I'd still argue it gives it more attention that it deserves.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 11:35 AM
-2

Waiting for what? It's been pointed out that Femitheist is a troll many times. If you're going to keep falling for it...
/r/MensRights14/02/13 10:12 AM
5

And here's the girlfriend one... http://static.neatoshop.com/images/product/59/2059/Grow-A-Girlfriend_8027-l.jpg?v=8027 So what?
/r/MensRights14/02/13 10:02 AM
2

Not DV, but Misery?
/r/MensRights13/02/13 01:29 AM
1

Sometimes it is medically necessary, but it's better to wait until it's necessary than just lop it off regardless. imo. Didn't realise til I joined reddit how common it is. Don't think I've ever seen an uncut one irl.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 01:03 PM
5

Women have always worked. Different jobs were open to them at different times. Over time these have changed, some jobs opening up and some closing off. Women used to work down the mines alongside men before it became an exclusively male occupation. They were considered incapable of being teachers, now they dominate in primary schools. Jobs became female dominated simply because they were jobs that were open to women. If you need money, you'll work wherever you can get a job. If only certain jobs…
/r/MensRights08/02/13 12:51 PM
4

The female equivalent of loser, is loser. It's gender neutral.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 11:52 AM
1

ok, sorry for the quotepost but it's easier to address your points... ...But in the middle class west there isnt any excuse... But it seems the MRA is arguing for a change to the law to allow financial abortion (if I've interpreted correctly) and laws should be for all, not just as a way of punishing middle class women. It doesn't take much imagination to see how it would disproportionally affect those who fall outside that demographic. This is a womans body and if she chooses to engage in somet…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 10:32 AM
1

The two are not comparable by a long shot. What Atkin said is provably false, there's no room for personal interpretation. And I don't think it's a bigoted statement in and of itself, it's just an biological falsehood. The fact he was trying to use it against women is what makes him bigoted. And you are trying to compare criminals to victims of war. Who suffers most can be open to personal interpretation and isn't a black and white issue despite your efforts to simplify it to such. This is all o…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 09:23 AM
1

Why not? Do they think its immoral? Many people are able to realise that life isn't black and white and trying to impose simplistic absolute rules on chaotic reality is both childish and futile. Many have considered the grey areas and decided that while they themselves could never have one, they don't have the right to take away that choice for others. This is just one view, mind, and every feminist will have their own view, because they are all individual people. Not sure what you mean by have …
/r/MensRights04/02/13 02:44 PM
1

The person who took the time to respond to you wasn't bigoted and hurling the accusation at everyone who doesn't immediately fall in line with you makes you look petty. Or just send the brigade to bury them, that seems to be very effective.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:35 AM
3

I would say that's mostly only for the most egregious examples (imo). Stuff that's comparable to this is rarely met with outrage. tbh my main gripe with it would be bad humour and lazy thinking, and I could apply that to soooo many things.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 09:13 PM
5

but there aren't double standards. There's plenty of merchandise like this that goes the other way. But I agree it's not worth getting pissed off over.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 09:03 PM
1

Yep, and I wouldn't complain too much about these either. Products like these are invaluable for identifying wankers from a safe distance.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 07:32 PM
-3

did you even read to the end of the title? there's little possibility of a baby.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 04:31 PM
1

heheh, really? ok, here's some more country songs for you to fret over. Mama Get A Hammer (There's A Fly On Daddy's Head). I Still Miss You Baby, But My Aim's Gettin' Better. I Wouldn't Take Her To A Dawg Fight, Cause I'm Afraid She'd Win. seriously, pull yourself together.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 04:01 PM
6

Could it be possible that you didn't notice them because they don't affect you?
/r/MensRights03/02/13 03:41 PM
1

There are feminists who support the ideals of pro-choice but would never have an abortion themselves. They recognise the right to bodily autonomy, it say's nothing about their personal feelings towards abortion. The quote you used says pressure, not sure why you talk about forcing. I'm not new to MR but I'm getting rather put off by the constant blanketing of feminists as evil. It's not productive and comes off as a bit tinfoil-hat-ish. Especially when there is some overlap of the goals of femin…
/r/MensRights03/02/13 03:00 PM
-5

I understood. You were trying to say that because feminists argue for the right to choose, then it's fine to pressure women into abortions and that all women should be okay with having an abortion. Then you added the ridiculous "btw feminists should think is fantastic because then the abusive man wont be there to harm her." ending. There's nothing of worth to seriously consider.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 02:41 PM
-3

Nope, pro-choice is pretty self-explanatory. The point is bodily autonomy, each women makes the decision over what happens to her body according to her own conscience. The twisting and snark shows there's no point engaging with you further.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 01:54 PM
3

Many feminists are pro-choice. Meaning it's for the individual to decide, not that women should be pressured to have abortions that go against their personal conscience. I feel you misrepresented the pro-choice position. That said, I don't think the situation can be exactly reversed, as the man can't get pregnant, so there are different factors that come into play when you try to reverse it.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 01:38 PM
4

There's no way of giving him rights in this situation that doesn't impinge on her right to bodily autonomy. It a sad situation as there doesn't seem to be a way to make both parties happy, but he can't force her to carry a pregnancy to term, nor should he have the right to.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 12:36 PM
5

Your first comment was/is upvoted, as is the comment agreeing with you. Yet you can't know she definitely cheated any more than he can know she didn't. You had good intentions but ultimately people will make up their own minds and sometimes just need a bit of time and space to work it out. Que sera sera.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:58 AM
3

yeah, you're probably better dealing directly with the actual store.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:47 AM
8

I think most people agreed with your assessment, but you started getting downvotes when you tried to push the matter after the boyfriend said he was sure she hadn't cheated. <shrug> you can't force your opinion on him, just state it and let him do what he will with it.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:37 AM
2

mate, do your own research. We don't even have those here. Though there's a handy contact link on that website. You could sent an e-mail.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 10:12 AM
2

Then complain to the manager. Though I doubt that it hasn't got some products that are sexist towards women.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 09:59 AM
17

I doubt you'd have to go to the bother, there's plenty of products that are sexist towards women if you want to buy them to 'even the score'. Though wouldn't it be best not to contribute to either market?
/r/MensRights03/02/13 09:49 AM
1

Seems like they were just trying to be helpful and give interpretations, and have a civil discussion. You were unnecessarily hostile and rude which turned away someone who was otherwise willing to engage with you.
/r/MensRights03/02/13 09:27 AM
3

lol. Heard this in Rimmer's voice. Up the ziggurat, lickety-split!
/r/MensRights03/02/13 09:15 AM
5

Not sure how this is related to the article. I assume married women also walk around on their own with iphones so are just as likely to be targeted. And the heritage site clearly has an agenda.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 01:00 PM
1

In the uk it's just "cunt". It's gender neutral and can vary in meaning from "the worst person imaginable" to "that person standing over there", depending on which pub you frequent.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 11:40 AM
12

I think kupfernikel was referring to whoever drew on the poster, at least that's how I read it.
/r/MensRights02/02/13 10:47 AM
5

She's quoting what someone said to her, as an example of attitudes that she is trying to combat. Says so in the first sentence.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 08:13 PM
1

No. You're still a fugitive from the obvious. Keep going, you've almost persuaded me to start campaigning for mandatory foreskin removal.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 06:01 PM
-1

lol, you're an idiot and are far more of a threat to yourself than I could ever be.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:50 PM
-1

I already have. Take it or leave it (or just call me stupid again). (shrug)
/r/MensRights11/01/13 02:05 AM
1

Due to the nature of the position, only female candidates will be considered. Unless you have more info regarding this bit, it's impossible to tell.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 01:54 AM
-1

Between the false assumptions and ad hominems that was quite a post. How can i threaten your rights as a free american man? Actually, why should I care at all about the USA? There's a whole world out here.
/r/MensRights11/01/13 12:00 AM
1

the jelly?
/r/MensRights10/01/13 11:19 PM
0

No. Dumbass.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 11:04 PM
-4

heh, ok, as you are so much fun claim that feminists who do things like support VAWA or lobby to increase protections for women are straw feminists. Nope, your characterization of feminists as people with a victim complex, hanging around idly waiting for men to do stuff for them and demand to have "benevolent sexism" in law, policies and media is a strawfeminist. She also claimed that kyriarchy isn't patriarchy with a bunch of other stuff added... Nope, I explained how it took other forms of opp…
/r/MensRights10/01/13 10:33 PM
-1

How do you live with yourself, supporting doxxing, advocating denial of justice to rape victims, abandoning children, condoning violence and harassing those that disagree with you?
/r/MensRights10/01/13 09:17 PM
1

I guess. I kinda had a picture of a person who presents as male (and seen by others as male) turning up then flashing the credentials when challenged. I must have misinterpreted "identify" though.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 09:00 PM
4

It's not consistent with my experience either, but for every bizarre stance you can imagine, someone somewhere will hold it. Just didn't think that stance would work at the club door.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 08:50 PM
0

?! The whole point of kyriarchy is that it recognises context, so no it doesn't argue that a poor white man has more privilege than a wealthy black woman. And understanding that race is a factor that interacts with other forms of privilege isn't racist. Not sure how you came to either conclusion.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 08:23 PM
1

you're privileged enough to have access to the internet, implying you are not penniless, and your comment shows you've had access to education. Another privilege. Are you trying to say all MRA's lack any kind of privilege, because that is ridiculous. Or is it just male privilege you'd like to ignore?
/r/MensRights10/01/13 08:12 PM
-4

Nice misrepresentation. Still, I'm flattered to have had such an effect on you.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 07:55 PM
2

Ah. Then I can't really muster an opinion as I'm as confused as you.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 07:13 PM
2

So what happened in the end? If he presents as male, then he would have to pay or not get in as per the club rules. I don't think it would be in his power to make the club let him in for free.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 07:03 PM
0

I was making an analysis based on my bias and what I want to be true. FTFY
/r/MensRights10/01/13 06:42 PM
-5

I mirrored your comment to show the flaws in it. Too subtle for you? I'm not sure how stating that there isn't any real evidence either way shows I'm unwilling to even CONSIDER his side. I was pointing out how you jumped to conclusions.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 06:22 PM
-3

Really? It sounds to me like he was being an obnoxious, disruptive know-it-all and, for the benefit of the education of those students that were there to learn, the teacher decided to ask him to leave. In other words, he was being a total dick. (there's no real evidence either way but the fact you jumped to the conclusion you did is very telling)
/r/MensRights10/01/13 05:40 PM
-2

the presumption of innocence offends her in rape cases, It's this, you see. You take something that is a basic fact eg. feminists lobby for rape reform, then impose a ridiculous interpretation on it and sneak in ad hominems. And the assumptions you make about the people you are talking to makes any real dialogue impossible. This is my last reply as I see no benefit to engaging with your dishonest snideness further. Laters, ciao, sayonara etc etc
/r/MensRights10/01/13 05:17 PM
-4

no, I see women as people that have agency in a world where things can happen to them. (Same as I see men) The rest of your post is, I'm sure, a great argument against whichever straw feminist you have in mind but it struck no chord with me. I'm sure I'll have a great day thank you. You too.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:29 PM
-3

Well I can't vouch for every use of kyriarchy that others may have used, or seen used (or mis-used). I can only really speak for myself, my understanding of it and how I apply it. I think it's a good tool that encompasses far more than 'patriarchy' does. I would like to see it used more (and applied wholly, not just as another way of saying patriarchy).
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:17 PM
-5

You can't complain about attacks while making unfounded accusations yourself. And I don't think you understand the concept of objectification.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 04:07 PM
-7

Yes, I'm aware you're a female MRA and I've read some of your blog and the female privilege checklist. I feel no need to return to it. What you call female privilege often, to me, would fall under benevolent sexism (which I'm sure we could argue about all day long). Why don't more male MRA's acknowledge their male privilege, I wonder? Taken overall, male privilege dwarfs what you would call female privilege. So, no I don't think there's much more to say.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 03:51 PM
-9

All things being equal, the man would be privileged over the woman. I stand by that because there's no way you can seriously deny it. I'm not going to deny this one particular facet of privilege because it would be dishonest to do so, and ultimately would hold back true understanding of our current society. I acknowledge the privilege I have and try to understand the way it can influence and inform my opinions, as do most other feminists. Why do MRA's have such problem recognising their individu…
/r/MensRights10/01/13 03:25 PM
-5

Social justice is self explanatory and I didn't say it's only a concern for women. It's pointless conversing with someone who goes off their favourite rhetoric even though it bears no relation to what's been said. As this is your favoured MO I'll leave you to it.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 03:10 PM
-4

I was assigning the already established label. Unless he's out to try and take personal credit for theories that already exist, it shouldn't matter.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 02:48 PM
-4

What? The theory of kyriarchy is all about context and intersectionality. The whole point is that no-one is uniformly anything. It recognises the myriad ways in which people both have and lack privilege. The kindergarten comment is particularly ironic give the level of understanding you just displayed.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 02:26 PM
-4

I don't think that people who try to discredit theories without properly understanding them first can ever be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 02:14 PM
-5

Here's a good explanation of how it's used in a social justice context. http://www.deeplyproblematic.com/2010/08/why-i-use-that-word-that-i-use.html
/r/MensRights10/01/13 02:02 PM
-8

I'd agree with that, as long as it allows room for the idea that sometimes it is due to one group of people oppressing another.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 01:50 PM
-9

A nice try at attempting to contribute some truth? Thanks. Well, hope springs eternal.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 01:30 PM
-13

What you are describing is kyriarchy. Not sure how you can believe in it without realising that patriarchy is a thread of it. But then I think this post is bull anyway.
/r/MensRights10/01/13 01:19 PM
2

1 woman cannot discredit women as a whole unless you view them as a homogenous mass lacking individual humanity, which would be a personal failing on the part of the judger, not women.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:55 AM
1

huh?
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:43 AM
1

Then use an example that can't be so easily dismissed. This is a troll and the reaction you have will be a waste. this post is an only an excuse for a quick circle jerk. (which is great as long as you can see it for what it is)
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:50 AM
1

No, you're allowed to post there if you follow demmians rules. These are myriad, and subject to change due to weather, mood, wind direction and the number of sundays in the month. Rein in the 'feminist cunts' and 'feminazis' and you should be alright. If you're worried, chuck in a quick diatribe against srs and that should swing it.
/r/MensRights30/12/12 12:12 AM
5

I appreciate that you're trying but seriously, it's an obvious troll and not a good springboard for worthwhile discussion.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 08:20 PM
2

lol, no it isn't
/r/MensRights29/12/12 07:52 PM
8

They'd split up and she doesn't want a baby. What would telling him accomplish?
/r/MensRights29/12/12 04:35 PM
1

Downvoting doesn't prove them wrong. If you want to prove them wrong put forward a reasoned argument.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 11:08 AM
-5

Screeching feminists? Really? You can't expect people to take you seriously if you can't keep your bigotry in check.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 09:30 AM
4

She's someone willing to play the evil, ignorant woman stereotype so beloved of the Daily Mail. Whose dumber? The woman prepared to spout crap for a woman-hating rag, or the idiots who believe it hook, line and sinker (again) then make ridiculous calls to have her kids taken away? A parody, but not too far from the truth: http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/
/r/MensRights14/12/12 10:29 AM
-3

It didn't strike me that way, but I quite like manboobz.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 02:47 PM
2

lol, can't believe I missed that.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 02:11 PM
1

The shirts could be humorous with the intention of raising awareness, rather than just a rather useless declaration of love of knackers.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 02:01 PM
1

I think Smashcaps was being sarcastic, but I'm not sure how true his claim that men don't get help is. I would have thought though that this thread would be a good spring board to actually raising awareness and funds for male cancers, but it seems the OP just wanted to complain that someone else hadn't already done it. Bit of a shame really.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 01:51 PM
1

3 videos. An argument could be made that if you push 1 of them over linking to all three, you are also not showing the entire issue.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 12:38 PM
2

The post links to manboobz which links to 3 videos. I think that gives people a chance to decide for themselves.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 11:43 AM
4

Yep. These things usually start as a grass roots type thing. With many here still being in college/university there's access to quite a large audience. All you need (once you've got the basic materials) is for people to give up a bit of time to make them and awareness will start to spread. Hopefully it would grow from there.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 01:14 AM
3

That could be a very good idea, but wouldn't any money raised be better off going straight to charity? Unless you could be sure that using the money to make things would generate more profit in the long term. You'd need someone who was good at figures.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 01:04 AM
1

I wasn't talking on behalf of srs, but I see I've lost you to your own bigotry. I'll bow out now.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 12:29 AM
14

Boobs get the most attention because they're everywhere and used to sell everything (cos all men lurve boobs hur hur). It's the one benefit to constant objectification. Why not make some yourself to sell and donate the money? Not trying to be clever, there's probably loads of creative people on this sub who'd like to help. It's probably just a case of getting the ball rolling. I could see it really taking off.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 12:19 AM
1

I didn't suggest AVFM were trolls, my point was they aren't. I'm being very clear. You can claim there are some trolls that make you look like a hate site, but you can't dismiss the non-trolls that are given validation by this site that are also making you look like a hate site. You are not being perceived as a hate site just because of a few trolls. (whether they be from srs or anywhere else)
/r/MensRights11/12/12 12:00 AM
2

yup. There'll be threads on the mums sites all about this too. Hat's off to them, they can troll many sections of the populace (often polar opposite sections) with just one article.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 11:21 PM
2

They do kinda have any excuse. Money. I mean, I'm sure you could cook up any kind of rubbish about any subject - and if you are prepared to put on a show for a public audience the daily mail will pay you for it, provided you fit their narrative. They're more shameless than genuinely misinformed or idiots.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 11:08 PM
1

Really? OK. You made a claim of false trolling which would account for this sub being perceived as a hate site. I pointed out people who aren't trolls who could also account for this site being perceived as a hate site.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 10:49 PM
3

apparently not.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 10:39 PM
6

I don't take the piss out of people's spelling and I rein in my inner grammar nazi, but this always gets to me. Humanism is a long established movement that has nothing to do with social justice, it's already a movement in it's own right yet people unthinkingly spout "feminism? no, humanism" and then seem really pleased with themselves. If you don't like feminism and want something more inclusive then egalitarian(ism) is the word you want. Not that this rant was directed at you, sorry, you were …
/r/MensRights10/12/12 10:26 PM
0

All the papers sports sections are dominated by men, as are most sports programmes and end of new's sports reports. What's so wrong with focussing on women for 1 week on Breakfast so that more women might be encouraged to take part? Not dominating everything doesn't mean you've been discriminated against.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 10:05 PM
12

1) history 2) humanism is already taken.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 09:34 PM
9

You didn't say real either. There was no qualification whatsoever and you were rightly called out. Get over it.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 08:39 PM
1

http://www.digyourowngrave.com/mitchell-webb-nazi-ss-skulls/
/r/MensRights10/12/12 08:27 PM
7

There was nothing in your quote about fake-egalitarians or fake-feminists. "if feminism actually is an egalitarian movement it would focus on the victims of both genders." This is clearly doubting the validity of feminisms egalitarian aspect which is clearly stated as against the rules. I have no love for Demmian but he's absolutely right in this instance. Follow the rules or get banned. Simple.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 06:29 PM
-1

Can't disagree. (And I'm aware that everyone has their own definition of nuts :))
/r/MensRights10/12/12 04:47 PM
-8

I haven't seen any I agree with, and find the prose to be purple, at best.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 04:36 PM
-4

I define hate to mean hate. Your assumption that I mean something else just so you can go on a rant is another tactic that does not behoove those that use it. And your assertions that others believe what they believe because they are dim and swallow whatever they've been told yet you are above them is arrogant in the extreme. You are underestimating people that disagree with you and unlikely to win anyone round with your attitude.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 02:48 PM
-6

True, but they often can claim in defence that they aren't expecting to be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 01:16 PM
-7

I've seen many hateful posts, both upvoted and downvoted, and a lot of unnecessary vitriol towards groups that don't deserve it. Also twisting facts, hyperbole and venom when employing a bit of civility would work much better. (to be fair, I have also seen reasonable and civil posters so I'm not dismissing all posters here as hateful misogynists)
/r/MensRights10/12/12 01:05 PM
-8

I'm aware of the false-trolling, but you can't claim that AVFM are just trolls. They are linked in the sidebar and articles are often posted and upvoted. I did notice a bit more calling out of their behaviour in the recent thread about the protester, which was good but the fact they're seen as any way legitimate reflects badly on the whole movement. It's up to you to whether or not you care about what the SPLC calls you, I didn't post the OP. (shrug) People won't find you (general you) misogynis…
/r/MensRights10/12/12 12:53 PM
-10

The hate and hostility in this sub is there for everyone to see.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 11:41 AM
-7

I think they said it wasn't a hate group, which is fair, you'd need to be an actual movement to be labelled that. But they have you on their misogyny list as a woman hating site.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 09:44 AM
7

The UK uses miles.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 02:39 PM
0

The examples in your OP pretty much describes the local guide troops activities, and I wouldn't call the girl guides manly.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 11:28 AM
1

lol, ok. You keep finding your "truth" in the daily mail, and I'll continue to lol at your ignorance and bigotry.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 09:13 AM
2

Yeah, I don't blame you for refusing to waste your time. I do think there should be more calling out of blatant woman-hating but there's nothing I disagree with in your post and appreciate you taking the time to write it. Thanks.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 10:39 PM
-1

Hi, it became obvious that reasonable discourse with ross2012 was impossible due to his spewing of well, shit basically. So I lowered myself to a similar but more subtle reply basically for my own amusement. If you are interested in equality and you are hoping for the MRM to deliver then I would suggest that leaving posters like Ross2012 to what they're doing is a mistake. This is the face of the MRM that people see and can point to and dismiss it as a hate movement. I believe you are genuinely …
/r/MensRights21/11/12 10:09 PM
-1

lol nope, but keep the hate flowing, it ensures the MRM stays mockery-worthy and shunned by intelligent beings.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 09:21 PM
-7

yeah, maybe I should get a penny every time someone pulls the Misogyny Card card. Might make calling out misogyny a bit more worth it.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 09:07 PM
-7

Are you referring to the lollypop lady that helped you cross to school this morning? Cos she's supposed to loiter. The women I've seen today have all been productive and hardworking, and managed not to plunge us into recession. ahem.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 08:54 PM
-1

from my first comment on this thread, "Look up her article on how all women are jealous of her stunning good looks and all want to steal her total catch of a husband if you want a real laugh." Yes, I suspect it's a tall tale.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 08:28 PM
-7

What an idiotic assertion.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 08:19 PM
2

I'm sure she did have a company, but has delusions as to what went wrong. The same as she has delusions that she doesn't get on with other women because they are all jealous of her. She get's 'called out' on all of her articles, but they aren't published on the Mail website.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 08:13 PM
-6

Ok. Your perception that women are shit the workplace is very much to do with you. It has no basis in reality and in your desperation to prove your preconceived ideas you've grabbed a laughable source that will only discredit you. lol.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 08:06 PM
10

Because it assures her a career at the Daily Mail and she got well known very quickly due to her previous similar articles. The DM prints it because it guarantees page views from outraged mobs from sites like Mumsnet etc.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 08:00 PM
-13

No, you haven't got it straight, but I should have expected that. So to recap, you hate women so much that you will gladly believe anything that backs up your hatred? Sounds like classic misogynist behaviour to me.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 07:32 PM
-3

Samantha Brick is the Mail's pet troll who is wheeled out every so often to slag off other women. Apparently even Liz Jones has too much self-respect and talent to have to write tripe like this in order to get work. That should tell you something. Look up her article on how all women are jealous of her stunning good looks and all want to steal her total catch of a husband if you want a real laugh. btw what is MR obsession with the Mail? It's hardly a reputable source.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 07:16 PM
2

"Facebook posts must be done w/ screenshot & blanked names.?" I don't see how that's relevant
/r/MensRights21/11/12 06:34 PM
1

"Links to other subreddits must be >24h old or have more than 30k subscribers."
/r/MensRights21/11/12 06:32 PM
0

What is the benefit of making up a scenario instead of discussing the scenario that actually happened?
/r/MensRights21/11/12 02:38 PM
0

And what I'm saying is that they avoid tokenism and allow those whose merit has been overlooked a chance. But I don't think we are going to get anywhere with this discussion beyond a futile back 'n' forth "uh-huh" "nu-uh".
/r/MensRights21/11/12 02:20 PM
-4

So the goalposts have now been moved from incapable to less competent?
/r/MensRights21/11/12 02:10 PM
-1

The comment I responded to used male and female as an example so that's what I was referring to.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 02:07 PM
-2

They are a kick start. You don't need a 50/50 split to start to change the culture of the company but you do need a large enough % to avoid tokenism. 30% is usually seen as enough to start effecting change.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:50 PM
3

It's irrelevant to the pressure to fit into the male ideal as "Experts stress the findings do not mean muscle building makes you live longer." This is just stating biological findings. The pressure to fit in comes from elsewhere.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:44 PM
-7

No-one is going to hire someone incapable of doing the job. And companies that are diverse do better.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:39 PM
0

I'm not aware of any quota that expects 50/50.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:38 PM
-7

You also have to neutralize existing discrimination. Quotas are a (temporary) way to kick start that. Comparing quotas to genocide? really?
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:37 PM
4

Do you have family or friends you could talk to? You're entitled to feel sorrow and loss but eventually you'll have to accept that it wasn't meant to be and move on. It would maybe have helped if you and your gf had talked about this before any situation arose, good advice for the future but I know it's not much help right now. Good luck for the future and I'm sure you'll make a great dad when your time comes. Don't hit the bottle, that won't help at all. but bud always makes things better
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:26 PM
-12

No. Are you going to spew your ignorant privilege now?
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:15 PM
-10

No, the assumption that poorly qualified people are being hired to fill quotas, as opposed to qualified people who would normally be discriminated against in favour of mediocre white males is offensive. The main objections I see made seem to stem from the fact that they actually work to change things.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:14 PM
-6

But we don't have a true meritocracy yet, and quotas are a step towards achieving that and halting the bias towards white men.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 01:03 PM
-16

Quotas are used to help level the playing field. You aren't being treated as less valuable, though you may no longer be automatically treated as more valuable. A certain percentage having to meet a quota still leaves the majority of jobs that can be filled by white men should the employer choose to do so. Harsh to say but maybe you just weren't good enough and that's not the fault of minorities.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 12:24 PM
5

Yes they do.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 12:12 PM
0

This is drivel. Feminists aren't bogeymen, they're normal women, some of whom have very happy partnerships and kids with men who don't feel the need to own or possess them. This is not the disaster that this article makes it out to be. And the sex act is not about men possessing women, that's a disgusting notion and trying to push ideas like only make it easier to dismiss MRsters as misogynists.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 12:07 PM
1

There's ~10,000 more men signed up than women, that's probably why. Typical Daily Mail fare though - claims that it's dominated by Oxford women when it's dominated by men and the sly dig at Cambridge women for being "prudes."
/r/MensRights21/11/12 11:51 AM
5

Yes they do. Every single time.
/r/MensRights20/11/12 11:15 AM
-1

Clear. Ok.
/r/MensRights17/11/12 01:40 AM
0

Is this an admission that feminists have a sense of humour? Or a demonstration that MRA's dont?
/r/MensRights17/11/12 01:25 AM
0

lol
/r/MensRights16/11/12 05:00 PM
1

ok. I vote for partner robots to be a main priority.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 04:02 PM
1

I've better things to do that write shit like the OP. But I always have a spare minute to LOL at those who bite. Eta ; did you just use the word Creepy and edit it out? lol, but that's misandry isn't it?
/r/MensRights16/11/12 03:26 PM
0

Diatribes like this are exactly the response they want. I'd be really pleased with myself if I were him/her. Push the button, get a load of cliched, sexist insults and ad hominems, use to prove what everyone knows. MRA's = bad tempered, bitter misogynists.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 03:15 PM
1

I'd take it up with Donald Glover if I were you.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 03:59 PM
-22

Seems like a logical and rational article to me. And very well written too. I can find no fault with this.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:45 PM
8

I don't get it. So he killed himself in May, then posted about it in October?
/r/MensRights15/11/12 12:41 PM
-2

Boo!
/r/MensRights15/11/12 08:52 AM
3

lol, you lot never cease to crease me up.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:42 AM
2

Yes. That what makes me a feminist.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:25 AM
-21

"Why don't women have crazy men stories? I don't really hear them. And then I realized, it's because if you got a crazy boyfriend, you're going to die. Just something about men, the second they realize they're crazy, it's like, 'Time to kill everything I love.' " - Donald Glover
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:23 AM
2

but... I am a feminist.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 01:16 AM
2

That's fascinating, cats have always been feminine (uk), to me and dogs masculine. Boats are she, but "old Father Time", and mankind as feminine is very interesting when compared to the uk equivalent.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 12:41 AM
-12

lol. You lot Some of you lot are gullible as fuck.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 12:18 AM
2

Thanks for the reply, that's very interesting. I find it odd how different languages gender different things.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 12:11 AM
2

really? so why hen then? (not hostile, interested in language) Is Den/det like 'they', where you can avoid using he/she?
/r/MensRights15/11/12 12:00 AM
8

Irrelevant tangent ahead: Hen is a scottish way of referring to women. I remember feeling very grown up when I graduated from lassie to hen.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 11:49 PM
2

citation neede..... no, I've not been sucked that far into reddit yet. I'll take your word for it.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 10:23 PM
2

woah, that's not sexy. No-one really wants hi-definition in the bedroom. ETA: and I can really see that making him nervous.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 10:12 PM
1

Lighting you say? OK, when my SO gives me odd looks when I approach him with the lounge lamps I'll say "it's cool, I read it on reddit!" Cheers for the tips. heheh
/r/MensRights14/11/12 10:03 PM
0

I'd agree with this. Politeness and good manners - from everybody, to everybody. Bad manners are unbecoming and we should all strive for, and expect, better.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 09:59 PM
2

subbed. btw which one is you?
/r/MensRights14/11/12 09:52 PM
4

dicks or GTFO
/r/MensRights14/11/12 09:45 PM
3

I always liked treatsmenlikewomen but this is funny too. Now you all have an almost real Feminist of your Dreams to argue with.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 09:37 PM
6

lol
/r/MensRights14/11/12 08:48 PM
2

So MRA's do go around looking for things to be offended by? Ironic as that's the accusation usually levelled at feminists.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 08:38 PM
1

oh yeah. Thanks!
/r/MensRights12/11/12 11:52 PM
1

Actually sex robots are integral to our plot to overthrow the patriarchy and establish a matriarchal utopia. Using the weapons of distraction, exhaustion, inducing of heart attacks and crippling performance anxiety we intend to take our rightful throne. Resistance is futile.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 11:46 PM
0

Really? there's violence against women in many many movies. Also men play many more different characters than women. The hero is usually a man, the baddie is usually a man, most of hollywood is composed of men doing things and women on the sidelines. There's the bechdel test, and the smurfett principle yet no corresponding tests, as they aren't needed. And what my comment says about me is that I have a grasp on reality and know empty histrionics when I see it.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 11:31 PM
1

lol. Best parody ever.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 10:23 PM
-1

Taking someone's sandwich is equally damaging as sexual assault? There is no equivalence here and the fact that his go to thought involved sexual assault to even things up is very worrying.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 02:20 PM
6

Assuming the whole thing isn't a troll, what makes you think it's a false rape charge? What was described in the OP is clearly rape.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 01:47 PM
-1

I don't see her grabbing his crotch in the ad so why make a comment like this.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 12:36 PM
2

Flinging 'misandry' around at every minor perceived slight makes you look irrational and too excitable to be taken seriously.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 12:30 PM
-1

lol. Brd is the wrd, and it rustles your jimmies.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 10:03 AM
4

You're upvoted because the place is overrun with MRAs and SRDers who invade, upvote anti-feminist posts and downvote anything vaguely feminist.
/r/MensRights11/11/12 11:40 AM
4

Really? You have nothing recent to be outraged about? This is very old news.
/r/MensRights11/11/12 02:13 AM
1

lol
/r/MensRights11/11/12 02:12 AM
13

If you want a sub like that then create one.
/r/MensRights11/11/12 02:05 AM
4

You can criticize, you'll just have to do it here. Different subs have different rules and it's the mods that get to decide.
/r/MensRights11/11/12 01:24 AM
12

He was banned for breaking the rules. Demmian is a mensrights supporter, if he's banned an MRA then they deserved it. He doesn't ban MRA's if he can possibly help it.
/r/MensRights11/11/12 01:18 AM
-2

They're too busy working the dirty, underpaid, unappreciated jobs that men think are beneath them. Don't diss them, they'll be the ones looking after you when the whole of society shuns you for being too old and useless.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 12:13 AM
-1

Then I'll go with the second one in this context and say that no, it's not misandry.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 02:43 PM
1

So 'guys' in this instant equals male? But when someone addresses a mixed group as 'guys' it's gender neutral and women's existence isn't being erased? Is 'guys' gender neutral or not?
/r/MensRights09/11/12 02:30 PM
2

Well, you have a far more optimistic view of youtube users than I do. I think this advice would be more beneficial in face to face conversations but arguing over the net is often futile. I agree she should keep reporting.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 12:00 AM
2

I don't think that would be very effective on youtube. Stating that she may not have uploaded them herself is just as likely to meet a chorus of "she's clearly an attention whore" "why did she film it if she didn't want it to be public" "if you make videos you should expect them to make it onto the net" and other such knee jerk dismissals. Youtube is rather like reddit in that respect.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 10:40 PM
3

I don't think you fucked up. I would be grateful for you looking out for me if you were my friend. I think your only mistake was continuing to reply - it's pretty obvious he didn't like being called out so got defensive and started flinging insults. Getting drawn into that is a waste of your time, say your piece then leave him to it. Good on you for looking out for your friend.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 05:51 PM
1

No, they weren't. And even if they were, you still used paedophile incorrectly.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 03:51 PM
0

Everyone agrees it's wrong now. You can't change history, you can only learn from it. But you cannot learn from it if you don't understand it in context. Understanding it and conveying that understanding isn't justifying it. eta: the downvoter behind the grassy knoll = me.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 03:48 PM
1

No-one was justifying it happening today. Show me where anyone says "it's fine for present day clergy to abuse kids". They were explaining the context in which it happened back then. This not condoning it, that's just showing a basic working knowledge of history. And it's still wrong to call someone who disagrees with you a paedophile.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 02:35 PM
0

You're wrong not to place the situation in the context of the time. And you're wrong to call someone who disagrees with you a paedophile.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 02:14 PM
0

Whenever it allows misogyny to run rampant, it loses. I didn't report the post, afaik the mods decided off their own backs that it just wasn't cricket.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 01:59 PM
-1

Not going to bother arguing with you. The post was removed, as it should have been.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 01:17 PM
-5

Hateful article. Giving space to ignorant, spiteful and emotional rants like this is why mras get called misogynists.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 12:37 AM
19

The mail article says nothing about her sexually harassing him. It claims she made threatening calls.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 02:22 PM
3

The number of women suffering heart disease is rising, this is worth raising awareness of as many women would dismiss it as a male disease and not something to be concerned about. Just as a campaign to raise awareness of male breast cancer is worthy. Even though far fewer men than women are at risk, it's beneficial to make men aware of their own chance of risk. And I assume you wouldn't be calling it sexist. I think you are looking for things to be offended by.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 02:12 PM
0

I don't agree but that's a dead end - the fact is as long as there is a child that needs support, the majority of people will think that those who are responsible for it's creation should contribute to it's upkeep, rather than everybody else shell out. Men know that pregnancy can lead to a baby, don't want a baby? then exercise your rights to wear a condom or refrain from PIV sex, and choose partners who want the same things as you.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 06:26 PM
-2

So taxpayers who don't want kids and acted responsibly so didn't end up with them (or have kids already and are currently paying towards their upbringing) should pay for those that showed no such responsibility and don't want to face the consequences? I can't see many people backing that.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 04:41 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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