TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

omniamutantir Archive

View 1 post and 33 comments by omniamutantir 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)
0

omniamutantir/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:03 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Please don't lump feminists together. That's a generalization all the same as the way that whoever has been targeting you is generalizing MRA's. Feminism is not inherently bad nor inherently opposed to the MRM. It wasn't until radical second-wave feminism that some feminists began taking it too far and lumping men together and labeling them all as chauvinistic pigs or whatever. But it was only some feminists. Not all feminists believe that way, and anyone that has legitimately studied all the wa…
/r/MensRights22/11/12 03:27 AM
1

Are there proposed solutions other than scaling back?
/r/MensRights13/11/12 01:00 AM
3

Why should it not be tolerated and, ideally, regulated?
/r/MensRights13/11/12 12:03 AM
6

Because women were often seen as incompetent or incapable, seen as homemakers, etc, so they've only just started to break into the STEM fields; and the ones who got into them early were ridiculed from both sides. Men thought they should stay home and other women thought they were nerdy and less attractive socially. The social stigmas on women prevented them from making those choices freely. So although they may 'choose' to go into a social science, that choice is affected by how society treats m…
/r/MensRights05/06/12 02:51 PM
-1

Perhaps this allows misandric feminism to operate but that isn't the fault of the feminist, and therein lies the logical fault. Disallow misandric feminism and the problem is solved; or counteract misandric feminism. Not all of feminism. And yes, I read most of that. I'm finishing it up now.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 09:24 PM
-2

So since this person defined oppression as requiring death or torture, etc, the legal denying of the right to vote, serve in office, serve in the military, etc, etc, isn't a form of oppression? By denying them the legal rights that men had (namely voting and serving in office) they had no way (other than men) to do anything about this oppression, much like peasants have no way to overthrow a tyrannical king save for a physical revolution. Much like suffrage marches, etc. I disagree that oppressi…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 09:21 PM
0

so mad bro.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 09:18 PM
-1

Let us turn from the past, then, and work on the present. That seems like a simple enough solution. All your points are extremely relevant and correct. However, we live in a world where gender roles are not (seemingly) necessary for survival. Shouldn't the inequality on both sides be eliminated? Also, for clarification. I'm not denying that men have been oppressed in the past for various reasons or disagreeing with the claim that they should be spoken for and their problems heard. I just think t…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 09:17 PM
-1

Haven't many women and/or feminists fought for the right to be in the military? So it seems. They weren't allowed to be in the military because of male oppression. They fought first for the right to vote and then for the right to be in the military. There is, however, no Selective Service for women to my knowledge. That's a battle to be fought, though. I don't think many are ignoring it. Abortion is also a tricky subject. Saying that a child is 50/50 governed by their parents is tricky as well. …
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:58 PM
0

A middle ground does not have to be unprecedented or quiet. It can be an extreme shake-up. Demanding equality for African-Americans was definitely a radical idea. However, the execution of said idea and the ideologies behind it were not a form of extremism. However, your latter points are interesting, and definitely valid. If extreme, radical feminists are the ones making the changes, that is what should be fought against; not feminism as an idea or the people who practice it moderately. Even if…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:36 PM
0

I think those are important points. However, was the point of the movement itself racism towards caucasians? No. Affirmative action was also not the goal of the movement, but rather a product of the movement which may or may not be independent of it. I'm not sure. So you agree that balance is better? That's where I become confused. I understand an organization with a focus group. Or a movement with a focus group. But I've seen this create so much hatred and bitterness towards women and feminism …
/r/MensRights09/09/11 08:25 PM
6

I understand and agree with you and I'm sorry that others can't see it.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:46 PM
2

Would you rather feminism never happened and women were treated as less than men? Because that would make you a misogynist, and misogyny is just as bad as misandry. I don't understand how you are missing the difference between radical feminism, and regular feminism, even though I've explained it several times.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:43 PM
5

I'm making comparisons of traits and requirements of traits for said subject of comparisons to be those particular subjects. That is logic. That is not thinking it is logic. edit: Also, here's some basic logic for you. You cannot draw "All A's are B," from "Some A's are B." Period. End of story. That is a simple axiom. It is logical truth. That is what I am saying, and that is what you are denying. Therefore you are wrong.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:41 PM
1

wha...? I am not a feminist. If anything it's third wave feminism which is quite brilliant but rather limited. I classify myself as an (and the ideas I've been proposing are) egalitarian and humanist. You should look up what those words mean.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 07:41 PM
0

So, basically: "I said I'mma do this so I'mma do this and I dun cur whether it's right or not..." ...right? Also: AVfM regards feminists, manginas, white knights and other agents of misandry as a social malignancy. What the hell. What the fucking fuck. You are offensive, ill-mannered, immature, and crazy. Let me explain something to you. Feminism. Feminism is not bad. Feminism is a good thing. It brought equality to women where they had none. The problem, here, is some people taking it too far b…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 12:59 PM
9

Just because you obtain some form of success doesn't mean your argument is logically sound.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 12:57 PM
8

Obviously people can't read usernames.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:31 AM
15

So, basically: Actually, the point on my website, which is my intellectual property, is whatever I say the point is. Period. mirite? I don't think you understand how logic works. You have categories of people, in this scenario. All of these people share something in common; not only are they breaking the law, but they are ruining other people's lives to better their own by abusing a flawed and biased system. The blogger and the tag of bigot do not meet your criteria.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:30 AM
-1

It doesn't matter whether I try to convince you or not. You have your mind made up. Anyway, let me try again. Male-centric services are wrong for the same reasons that female-centric services are wrong. Promoting MORE of a gender bias and divide is not going to bring the gender gap closer, it is going to drive it apart. I'm not sure how you don't see that. My apologies if that sounds rude, but I really don't understand how that is obvious. As for this: Actually, the point on my website, which is…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 03:28 AM
17

I had wondered about the 'bigot' tag as well. I don't think that lines up with the rest of the site's purpose and is the least official and ethical tag. I see the sentiment but I think it's unwarranted. Perhaps she is a 'feminist bigot' but she is NOT a false rape accuser, etc etc. You can't be tried in court and put into a sex offender registry for being a bigot.
/r/MensRights09/09/11 02:32 AM
8

Any service to women will only add to the imbalance against men. wat. NO. THE POINT IS EGALITARIAN AND HUMANISTIC EQUALITY. Not villainizing women, because that's just as wrong as villainizing men. I'm not saying the information presented is biased. I'm saying a few aesthetic things about the site are. Never did I suggest you add men to the registry to make it relevant to women (or gay men). What I suggested was that the aesthetic presentation of the site be a little more objective. That picture…
/r/MensRights09/09/11 02:29 AM
-1

Your focus can be men's rights, but if the movement is focused solely on that to the extreme of leaving out any fights for women, then you are no better than feminism. If the problem with feminism is that it leaves out men, then it can be concluded that a problem with whatever this is is that it leaves out women. I understand having a focus group, but moving from one extreme to another doesn't solve anything.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 11:37 PM
4

I don't think changing appearance to appear less biased isn't 'losing' in any sense of the word. If anything, it's winning simply because you're rising above the bigotry of bias and false generalizations. Sensationalism only gets you press, which may or may not be good. It doesn't actually do what this is all about it - removing bias and promoting equality in the justice system on both sides.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 09:50 PM
-1

I didn't mean the actual information of "so and so is X or Y," I meant that the portrayal of the site itself (i.e. the picture in the top-left corner; one of the first things you see being decent-sized photos of women who've falsely accused someone, etc etc) has subliminal generalizations, and isn't that exactly what we're trying to avoid? Sure, make the information public and make it clear these women are doing wrong and that there are many more doing the same thing and getting away with it, bu…
/r/MensRights08/09/11 09:48 PM
3

I like the idea but I believe the portrayal should be a bit more unbiased. I think the presentation of the information is very biased and gives off bad generalizations, which is what we're trying to avoid, right? However, I believe having this information available in such a public fashion is a very good idea.
/r/MensRights08/09/11 09:07 PM
2

Unfortunately, yes. :( Feminism in theory is still that way; feminism in practice is not.
/r/MensRights09/06/11 01:56 PM
13

True feminism should be about equality for all, not victimizing women and blaming men for everything. Men in the past and in the present are to blame for many things, but so are women. Why can't people accept reality rather than try to skew it one way or another to fit their ideas?
/r/MensRights08/06/11 07:23 PM
3

Terminal disease in an advanced stage =/= full-time job. Most parents have full-time jobs and the kids go to school. A terminal disease is a 24/7 job, especially in the advanced stage. Also, if the children stayed with her, the likelihood of her dying are very great, and I would venture to guess it would be in their best interest to move now and have more time to get accustomed to a new location, new people, and a new life, rather than have them watch their mother die and THEN be moved.
/r/MensRights13/05/11 06:43 PM
2

From my own personal experience in growing up with a disabled/ill parent, I would agree with the psychologists' claim. I think it would have been healthier for me to not develop the anger, bitterness, resentment, etc, and to not miss out on normal child growth because of the resulting situations due to the disability. Also, it would have been much easier financially.
/r/MensRights13/05/11 06:39 PM
-9

Of course I read it. He is implying, however, is that the reason for slutwalks is not to bring awareness to this plague of victim-blaming, but to suggest that certain attires increase the chance of a woman being raped. "Central to the controversy, of course, is the question of whether or not a woman’s attire actually contributes to her chances of being raped." That is not, in fact, central to the controversy at all. What is central to the controversy is that police officials and law officials ar…
/r/MensRights07/05/11 03:06 AM
-7

This is a completely biased, stupid argument that misses the entire point of slut walks. It's not about whether 'dressing like as slut' makes you more likely to get raped. It's about whether men have the right to sexually assault and violate a woman simply because she was scantily clad. The answer is fucking no. I'm all for equal rights (that includes men's rights and non-discrimination towards them, especially since I'm male), but no one has the right to sexually assault ANYONE, regardless of s…
/r/MensRights07/05/11 02:28 AM
18

"If society prepares a soldier to overcome his resistance to killing and places him in an environment in which he will kill, then that society has an obligation to deal with the psychological repercussions." Favourite quote from the paper.
/r/MensRights26/04/11 12:39 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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