TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ordinaryrendition Archive

View 1 posts and 118 comments by ordinaryrendition on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
5

Yes he does. It's a joke.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 10:35 PM
-3

We are not discussing what "people for the most part" are or are not saying. We are discussing Trump's use of a metaphor.
/r/MensRights22/09/16 05:16 PM
-3

I never misunderstood your point, man. I'm saying you're oversimplifying the problem here, and you really do have to look at the harms to see why it's so bad. Their argument here clearly looks at comparing and contrasting the harms. She does a bad job of evaluating the harms against men, but she's correctly boiled down the argument to what it should be about.
/r/MensRights22/09/16 04:31 PM
-10

Why, exactly? She actually makes a good argument here. You can't just falsely claim that both forms of "objectification" (person -> skittle/M&M) are equally bad unless you explore why objectifying them this way is bad. The end results (or outcomes) are different (people left to find a way to survive in a war zone vs. men feel like rapists/kangaroo courts/etc.). All are pretty bad, but leaving people to die is significantly worse. I don't agree with her argument in that it's not bad enough that s…
/r/MensRights22/09/16 04:17 PM
10

What does the number of adherents of religions have to do with how ethical the practice is?
/r/MensRights05/07/16 05:39 AM
-5

What the fuck, this is all conjecture. Jesus, I feel like I spend more time on this subreddit trying to clean up the verbal diarrhea from people like you who take what may start as a reasonable idea and jump straight to absolutes than I do discussing the ideas themselves.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 11:04 PM
2

"Victim offender reversal" isn't really a thing. This is the actual definition of projection, where someone with a certain trait projects those traits onto others. She is dealing with her abuse by interpreting his actions as abuse
/r/MensRights13/03/16 12:29 AM
6

Shit-stain was an adjective for the post, not for the person. Not name calling
/r/MensRights13/06/15 02:38 PM
8

Why would you add this shit-stain of an addendum to the well told story above? Don't try to make this about metaphors to other things. Talk about the issue itself, or you're just going to resort to name calling.
/r/MensRights13/06/15 01:13 PM
1

Maybe you should smile more
/r/MensRights07/05/15 10:08 PM
11

How often is this a thing? I've literally never noticed any gender-based difference in door holding in either myself or people who hold doors for me. And I walk through a lot of doors, so my sample size isn't small or anything. Is this what we're fighting for here?
/r/MensRights07/05/15 02:46 PM
5

What about the males who have never touched a computer and then decide they want to go into comp sci? And turn out to be awesome programmers. This is extremely common today. This is conjecture, and probably just wrong (in terms of trends). Your best programmers are nerds, and were nerds before school. Most 14-15 year old boys "playing on computers" aren't fucking programming This it likely true today, but today's graduates are just the beginning of the trend where boys and girls were all over co…
/r/MensRights02/05/15 03:42 PM
11

Holy shit this is pathetic, hahaha
/r/MensRights23/02/15 07:55 PM
5

I'm willing to bet that a very high majority of women HOLY SHIT, you're literally saying "so I'm 100% making this up, but here" You're NOT helping.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 01:21 AM
0

Exactly, doesn't everyone know that a single case is DEFINITIVE PROOF of such a statement? And they say you and I are stupid, /u/IlleFacitFinem. We'll show them, buddy.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 10:14 PM
0

This subreddit uses WAY too many absolutes. Are you willing to defend that 0% of this subreddit's visitors could not be described as misogynist? It only takes one aberrant case for this whole group to come under fire. Another example of this subreddit's abuse of absolutes is in describing feminism as some sort of homogeneous group. How many people describing themselves as feminists would align themselves with people like Mary Daly? It's not many. So why do you choose to argue against the Mary Da…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 08:36 PM
-1

So if a man goes around killing women and frequented /r/MensRights do others get to paint it as an effect of visiting this subreddit or would this subreddit distance itself from that individual? Because when you try to say that this subreddit didn't enable them to commit crimes, they'll tell you "no true Scotsman" too. We need to be more careful with our words on this subreddit. You know we are being watched, so don't say shit just to be inflammatory and evoke emotions.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 07:12 PM
1

I don't know if they do or not! For the sake of being reasonable, let's say they don't raise a storm about anti-male shirts. Is it their obligation to? I think the answer is no, and here is why: So, I am a Sikh. I believe all people should be treated equally. After 9/11, Sikhs were beaten and harassed regularly for looking different and wearing turbans. Make no mistake, Muslims were too. If I believe nobody should have had to go through those beatings and harassment, am I wrong for having put my…
/r/MensRights15/11/14 09:04 PM
0

Let's give some credit where credit is due. I don't see any posts about this man circulating /r/Feminism. Let's keep this one reasonable and not blow the implications out of proportion.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 08:12 PM
2

This is not a good post. Please don't argue a strawman and generalize feminists into a single category/mindset. This isn't going to be productive in getting our message heard. You're not making a good point at all. Just to be clear, the post above yours is good. Yours is shit.
/r/MensRights15/11/14 08:09 PM
1

Some, but very little, of the core of the story of the last two links has to do with respecting males and taking the rape of men seriously and much, much more to do with the sensational aspect of the story: Billionaire husband (separated from the accused) NFL Cheerleader Accused is a woman whose job is defined by her looks (if it was an unattractive woman, would the story be as tantalizing?) Element of pedophilia Son of the accused hooked them up
/r/MensRights07/11/14 05:30 PM
0

Yeah, and this movement is not achieving much. The PR isn't great and the rhetoric game is not being won. These are fundamental to true change in starting to approach issues fairly.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 03:40 PM
-4

Replying to self: Also, the language used by this subreddit and the generalizations made really makes it hard to agree with your ideas. I agree with a decent chunk of what's posted here, but damn if you don't make me feel like an asshole for doing so more than the feminists do.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 03:35 AM
12

Yeah but instead of drowning out the narrative by creating our own, you look reactionary to their framework. It's as good as buying into it, because now you imply their framework is default and you are "alternative." Good luck winning an argument under those circumstances. See also: why Democrats keep losing. They play on the GOP's terms and keep having to play defense instead of constructing their own fair narrative.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 03:32 AM
1

Inside of a store is not the legally protected "public" space you're referring to.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 11:23 PM
1

Yes he did. He is pointing out the inanity of the post, and hopefully driving change so that such material does not hit the front page in the future.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 10:07 PM
0

Dude, I don't know where you're from, but if you knew what India was like, you'd know a video of solidarity for women is not white knighting. I'm an Indian living in the US, and India is fucked up. We have real problems in the US, yes, but I think we can generally agree that there are injustices against both genders here. In India, it's so lopsided against women that it's ridiculous. These videos are actually helping evolve a culture that's been so entrenched in rape apologists and a "boys will …
/r/MensRights11/08/14 10:01 PM
3

I was in favor of most of the above until your comment. That's pretty fucked up dude.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 02:58 AM
1

I think this is actually the second best way of going about this. The best way would have been to word it slightly differently, saying "I am neither supporting nor condemning male circumcision by uploading this video" to say that he/she may have an opinion, but is uploading the video without commentary so that he/she may serve as an unbiased (as much as one can be) educator.
/r/MensRights25/07/14 07:35 PM
4

It's not that large of a group. The most radical minority tends to be loudest, so let's not overstate the problem. We need to be partnering with the reasonable end of their movement to make positive change instead of giving into a verbal pissing contest with their radicals, who are a non-powerful, mainly internet presence.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 09:27 PM
1

This is totally important information that needs to be in the original post.
/r/MensRights18/08/13 06:55 AM
2

Though I have zero affiliation with anyone involved in that film, I didn't want to link to a kickstarter page which could have implied some conflict of interest on my part. Is there a better way to have done this?
/r/MensRights11/08/13 08:08 PM
1

So would you prefer if it had phrases spoken by women about the "male archetype" that some women impose on men as well?
/r/MensRights11/08/13 08:06 PM
2

I didn't think it was an attack on maleness, but rather about the lack of choice of each male in how maleness is characterized. How did you come to the conclusion that it said anything was "wrong with men?"
/r/MensRights11/08/13 08:05 PM
2

Note: this is just a trailer/synopsis, not the actual documentary. Probably should have put that in the title.
/r/MensRights11/08/13 07:01 PM
6

I don't like it, and I believe there should be a consequence for cases like this, but there is a decent rationale for how it has come to be right now. It can and should evolve further, but my thoughts are this: In cases of condom use, both parties are consenting to sex with a condom. The woman can instantly demand and verify its use before each instance of sex. In cases of pill use, the man can ask if she's on the pill. She says yes. She should be accountable for use during this instance of sex.…
/r/MensRights12/07/13 06:01 AM
1

Look at a ruler and tell me you wouldn't be okay with that.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:06 PM
2

I think it was a joke where you were supposed to respond with "haha that would teach them but man I would totally never do that."
/r/MensRights11/07/13 06:03 PM
23

Can we stop these stupid quips? The fact that we don't have many feminists here commenting just means we're saying this shit to each other. Nobody's learning from your comment. It really reminds me of those "professor gets owned by student and by the way that student was Einstein" copypastas. Let's talk about the issue at the level of the issue instead of throwing around these smug phrases. You're doing the entire movement a disservice when you say this shit, because you're making it harder for …
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:31 PM
4

This is a strong point. The fact that there is an extra step separating the autonomy from the result (work -> money -> supporting child) doesn't exclude it from being bodily autonomy.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 03:28 PM
9

Come on... OP begins the title with "Seriously," and the most upvoted comment is sarcasm. Can we respect the purpose of the post please? Real discussion.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:25 PM
1

Does that have any lasting value after a corset is taken off?
/r/MensRights05/05/13 07:28 PM
1

Just want to reiterate that I'm for absolving racially informed affirmative action in favor of socioeconomically informed policy. I'm definitely not advocating for racial/gender/economic quotas for job placement or for compensation. I said it as a good question to ask, and I just explained that there was a problem, but I'm not really proposing any proper solution. Also, everyone has a right to be resentful but I am just of the opinion that it's better to understand the logic behind actions taken…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 09:26 PM
1

See: "distance traveled" argument in other comment
/r/MensRights30/04/13 06:01 PM
1

I'm going to have to inform you that your inference that I am jealous or resentful of anyone is quite wrong. I was a well off Asian kid (still am, I guess), so I get to be discriminated against in both cases. However, I'm all for it. If someone raised as privileged as I was is turning out hardly better than someone who overcame a lot of hardship, the distance traveled (which many top colleges value) by the rich kid is MUCH less than the disadvantaged one. The point is not to discriminate based o…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 06:00 PM
-2

The truly smart kids living in poverty will be successful. Data does not support your statement. The situation I outlined is one of a smart poor kid who even knows how to seek our resources, but physically cannot obtain them. So colleges shouldn't accept more qualified, and wealthier kids because they've are less qualified kids living in poverty? That's a good question. I am not a huge fan of current affirmative action, and I hate that it's more heavily race-based instead of socioeconomically ba…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:13 PM
0

Isn't that exactly when we have unequal opportunity? Minorities who are over-represented in harsher socioeconomic statuses can't gain the same access to resources richer families use to make their kids succeed. Even when kids are clever enough to try and obtain access, barriers they face are social pressures (academic excellence isn't super prized in the hood) or even geographical (that hospital volunteering gig someone really wanted isn't available to a kid because the bus routes don't go near …
/r/MensRights30/04/13 01:21 PM
4

Well my comment also illustrated the problem with determining whether equalizing some metric is changing outcome or opportunity. How can we decide whether college acceptance rates matter if we don't know whether to call it outcome or opportunity?
/r/MensRights30/04/13 05:12 AM
5

It's so difficult to define "outcome" though, because we can't measure success by a single metric. Is acceptance to a certain college an outcome or opportunity? Is landing a labor position outcome or opportunity? Is achieving equal income outcome or opportunity?
/r/MensRights30/04/13 04:48 AM
1

We might have to use the heimlick maneuver.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:34 AM
33

Because tautology is tautology.
/r/MensRights07/04/13 01:32 AM
3

I think it'll make more sense if you look at the plot. I believe answers will be in the most recent trailer for why he can't just claw-punch everything.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 04:46 PM
13

checked my ass "yup, it's still there"
/r/MensRights06/03/13 04:37 PM
16

I think this is a case where you could take the advice given in the image and associate yourself with different women, nobody it's forcing you to deal with that if it's so bad.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 11:48 PM
7

Yeah, I'm not sure why many things get so oversimplified to the point of being zero-sum.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 07:12 PM
15

Are you implying that people suggesting that physical appearance should dictate your career choice is okay?
/r/MensRights13/01/13 05:15 PM
64

Just because people are tortured and murdered doesn't mean I'm not allowed to say "ow!" when I stub my toe.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 06:34 AM
13

If you'll allow me to put my pedantry hat on for a moment, let me clarify what I think is okay and not. Just because he has an erection, doesn't mean he wants to f``k I find the above to be just fine. Just because he has an erection, doesn't mean he wants to f``k you I find the above to be just fine. Just because he has an erection, doesn't mean he wants to f``k you I find the above to be problematic because it implies that an erection means he does want to fuck, just not necessarily you. The mi…
/r/MensRights05/12/12 08:38 PM
10

No it's not, because an erection doesn't indicate willingness to fuck at all.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 06:59 PM
68

This reads more like "HEY GUYS LOOK AT MY AWESOME COMEBACK LOL RITE????"
/r/MensRights10/11/12 10:17 PM
18

uhm excuse me check your privilege
/r/MensRights17/09/12 04:04 AM
10

Source? Just for my knowledge
/r/MensRights10/09/12 12:51 AM
7

I forgot, but I did get this very polite PM as a result from the commenter.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 08:37 AM
3

stupid
/r/MensRights06/08/12 03:19 AM
11

NEVER Absolute ALWAYS Absolute almost always unsupported they make sure generalization Conclusion: GTFO
/r/MensRights24/07/12 02:18 AM
47

But hey, if her name's not on the lease, she has no obligation to pay. Of course, when it's breakup time, guess who has to leave?
/r/MensRights22/07/12 07:09 AM
2

Good luck with that.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 05:47 AM
6

Which then has no applicability to this post...seeing as how these two seemed like they were 11-12
/r/MensRights05/07/12 07:36 PM
2

For the sake of argument, let's just say this is true (I think it is but I don't have the source). Then this adjustment should have been mentioned in Jahonay's post.
/r/MensRights29/06/12 06:22 AM
1

How are you sure that the income you display is such a huge factor in getting messages? Are you sure you're not just attractive? Or, would you be willing to document your messages/day for the last however long you've had that income, then switch to 50-70k and see if it changes significantly? I think you have to change it back and forth a few times for the claim to be valid (multiple trials).
/r/MensRights23/06/12 06:18 PM
13

Are we not noticing that the female friend is asking about the gay, not the teacher he's refusing to hook up with?
/r/MensRights08/06/12 10:51 PM
3

You'd have to use the same exact writing and only throw out instances where you get called out for the copy/paste. Also, your first two posts, you think the second one is better written, but the first one is much less aggressive. An example of this is using "your consideration" vs "my wants." "My wants" makes it seem like you're saying feminism took a turn towards selfishness (and doesn't limit itself to just how women perceive jokes, etc.), while "your consideration" makes it seem like feminism…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 10:22 PM
2

I don't have an answer for you.
/r/MensRights24/05/12 12:04 AM
10

As far as I can see, this is misogynist. "Examining the relationship of these aspects reveals a common pattern of dysfunctional behavior typified by women deprived of male authority. Instead of respecting the male leadership role, women in feminist societies are conditioned to ignore necessary gender limitations." WTF
/r/MensRights23/05/12 08:38 PM
4

A timeless question, up there with "How can she slap?"
/r/MensRights01/05/12 02:41 AM
2

Then she better be paying half till it's up.
/r/MensRights17/04/12 07:39 AM
9

This is kind of a weird situation. I think both are wrong here. The media have a story to make, so they (apparently incorrectly) assume that anybody would love to be saved by Ryan Gosling in a romance story type of way. Making assumptions means taking a risk about a person in the story. The media got called on it this time. However, the woman's use of "cast in any sort of boring supporting female role" is wrong as well, as it sensationalizes being a person in a news story as some sort of "castin…
/r/MensRights06/04/12 05:28 AM
55

It's this thought process that contributes to statistics that support throwing inordinate amounts of money towards defending women against harassment, because men won't report it.
/r/MensRights01/04/12 11:01 PM
5

How about you go knock some sense into your brother. He'll thank you for salvaging precious years with your dad.
/r/MensRights06/02/12 08:19 AM
1

So, Mr. Scholl's
/r/MensRights04/02/12 05:24 AM
6

You're assuming that the brain has already failed and succumbed to belief in unverifiable things. Once that's happened, any belief or influence on the psyche is just a product of that weakness. "Reality is not negotiable" is a step before your all-pervading belief. That is, "does god exist and can I prove it beyond a reasonable doubt?" comes before how it affects you matters at all.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 06:27 AM
10

I'm sorry if this offends you, but: I hold the personal philosophy that a belief in something makes it real, therefore the various "gods" are real. is an indefensible position. It really sounds like some made up shit. You need to understand that reality is not negotiable.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 05:31 AM
0

not wanting a 3 some with 2 overly drunk girls Now I'll respect your right to not want a threesome, but I do not respect you for turning that down! But seriously, story.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 07:28 AM
-8

In this picture, Ali looks like a relative of Denzel Washington. And that's a great thing.
/r/MensRights19/12/11 12:34 AM
10

So, because some things that should be called drugs haven't been classified as such we shouldn't classify weed as a drug either? How about we keep the wrong to a minimum, call weed a drug, and work towards calling those other things drugs too? I'm also really not sure what those other things could be, but the logic behind not calling weed a drug because other things aren't is just terrible.
/r/MensRights14/12/11 01:55 AM
11

Except that it is. It's fine to do it. It's fine to like it. But don't lie about what it is or is not.
/r/MensRights14/12/11 01:39 AM
3

My sexual preference is right now or get out of the car.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 04:58 PM
8

I don't understand. Is she feeling guilty for being happy? Why? Parents are allowed to prefer a gender...especially after having multiple children of the other gender.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 02:20 PM
13

No, it's not like choosing to drink and drive. Drinking and driving is not inherently innocuous. A better analogy is crossing a street to get to a party (a voluntary action like sex). You can take every precaution to do it safely, but choosing to cross a street doesn't mean you're the responsible party for having been hit by a car because "you're taking on the risk" by crossing the street. Sex by itself is innocuous. Crossing streets itself is innocuous. You can protect yourself to an extent in …
/r/MensRights21/10/11 06:08 AM
22

Consent to sex is not consent to become a parent.
/r/MensRights21/10/11 05:16 AM
7

The judge was wrong to not grant the restraining order, but I'm not sure that a restraining order would stop someone who was willing to kill.
/r/MensRights15/10/11 07:43 PM
5

How about as concise as can be while remaining comprehensive (managing all angles) on an issue.
/r/MensRights25/09/11 03:43 AM
8

My guess is that cleavage has the same effect on most straight males.
/r/MensRights10/08/11 11:20 PM
2

Outliers don't buck trends. "The results are most consistent with the direct hypothesis. That is, intelligence may work as a protective factor against divorce: More intelligent people may be better adept at resolving problems in marriage and preventing its dissolution" From this paper: http://jfi.sagepub.com.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/content/27/12/1723.short In short, smarter people get fewer divorces. That doesn't mean you're dumb if you get a divorce.
/r/MensRights05/08/11 02:30 AM
3

And more of a well worded verbalization of something we find to be intuitive.
/r/MensRights15/07/11 03:05 PM
1

My guess is that since Men's Rights is a movement that's sprung up as a direct result of the overreach of the feminist movement, most men's rights issues in the forefront have focused on the interaction between men and women. However, given your concerns, it may be time to evolve as a movement. Welcome.
/r/MensRights24/06/11 03:33 AM
1

My favorite part is how she updates with the information that the real father is dead as if some of the responders were out of line.
/r/MensRights16/05/11 04:28 PM
1

I'm not saying there's a fine line, but I think there are levels of heinousness in lies told. Low levels include a false minor detail in a story that makes a girl like you more (I think we can agree on that). But I think the heinousness of the lie between wealth and genetic makeup is significant enough that the line of informed consent lies somewhere between them. The following is my opinion alone, but I think it's valid: There's a big difference between a manmade construct that defines a person…
/r/MensRights08/05/11 09:05 PM
-1

The difference is that in the case of money, that's an attribute of the man that allows the woman to make a value judgement, while lying about genital history affects whether the man is actually attracted to that person at all, given his openness to vaugeness in gender. Basically, money affects the value of the person, while the gender affects whether one is even capable of being physically attracted to a person.
/r/MensRights08/05/11 05:20 PM
15

"Before women lament the lack of “good” men, they should consider that maybe the “good” ones don’t want them any more than they want the guy who spends his time screaming into an Xbox headset." I think this was phrased well by Katt Williams: "if you are 25 and still complaining about the men in your life ... you need to figure what is wrong with your pussy that keeps attracting aint shit niggas."
/r/MensRights06/03/11 03:47 AM
1

Her parents must be huge trolls.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 03:35 PM
7

A lot of people are arguing about the definition of alpha and beta. The alpha/beta distinction the author makes that alpha males either have confidence or put an investment into being attractive to females. It seems that those males who are deemed alpha, in numbers that cannot occur by mere chance, are generally not the ones changing the world. It's not that you can only be one or the other, because there are gradients of traits like confidence and other "attractive characteristics." The male wh…
/r/MensRights27/02/11 02:52 AM
4

No, she specifically gives the case of alpha doctors, which fall under the former category you describe.
/r/MensRights27/02/11 02:43 AM
2

Sikh here. I don't know what happened here, but all of the behaviors other than kissing "on the mouth" are normal. I don't know if that's true though.
/r/MensRights19/01/11 07:40 PM
1

In many Asian families, the greatest joy is seeing the success of your offspring. In the families I've seen, at least, the compounding effect is wanting to see your kids go even further beyond what you did. Thus, when an Asian child is made to learn instruments and do math and be good at anything they try (due to persistence) and becomes a success, he/she wants to propagate that success to his/her offspring as well and make them go even further. Innate self-motivation, in my opinion, is bullshit…
/r/MensRights10/01/11 10:20 PM
1

I don't think you saw the picture. It's not "nice" after the picture.
/r/MensRights04/01/11 04:38 PM
2

This is an anecdote and cannot be extrapolated to show a trend. How many times have you tried entering these kinds of discussions?
/r/MensRights19/12/10 07:08 PM
1

But how often are we endowed with the serendipity of video evidence?
/r/MensRights18/12/10 01:25 AM
0

see response to failbus.
/r/MensRights18/12/10 01:15 AM
0

I wasn't being serious. The only way you could be sure she was lying is if they never had sex in the first place... and then we have to take into account whether she just misidentified the person or not. Basically, this will never work.
/r/MensRights18/12/10 01:14 AM
1

Wait, question. Does this mean all innocent verdicts land the accuser in jail?
/r/MensRights17/12/10 10:51 PM
10

YELL LOUDLY
/r/MensRights16/12/10 07:51 AM
15

There's a better alternative to both these scenarios. I am all about equality, but something irks me about a man (I'm a man) being able to force a woman to go through a pregnancy. I propose this: Woman gets pregnant Man has to be informed of the pregnancy a reasonable time (to be determined) before it becomes illegal to perform an abortion, or he is not liable for child support. Man has to legally consent to having the child in order to be bound to pay child support. If man doesn't consent, woma…
/r/MensRights16/12/10 07:35 AM
0

Also avoid saying bitches & hoes. OP's thesis just fell apart.
/r/MensRights16/11/10 04:21 AM
1

This would be nice, but if the woman has had multiple partners in close proximity, how can we mandate finding all the candidates, require testing them, and then declare paternity? I think it would be okay for cases where the supposed dad is already in the hospital, but in cases where the dad is unknown (or a choice of one among many), I don't know how effective mandatory testing would be.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 03:08 AM
57

Disregard this female Acquire logic
/r/MensRights09/11/10 02:27 AM
2

Addendum: A woman is required to legally declare possible fathers to the child during that "abortion possible" period or waives the right to child support from the real father, who could not have signed a letter rejecting financial obligation if he didn't know the mother was having the baby. That way there's no showing up at the father's doorstep after the "abortion possible" period and being like "yo this baby is yours but you don't have time to reject responsibility for the baby so this thing …
/r/MensRights05/11/10 03:25 AM
3

Congratulations! You can now be certified as qualified in your profession! Best day of your life!
/r/MensRights01/11/10 04:16 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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