TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

philip1201 Archive

View 0 posts and 44 comments by philip1201 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)
-16

I'm not reading how it's Lovato's fault - from the tweet it sounds like the prostitute decided to assault the guy of her own accord.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 06:37 PM
9

Also the strain on your vascular system, early death, loss of physical endurance, strength, range of motion, etc., medical costs, health insurance costs, physical unattractiveness, greater problems with personal hygiene, etc.
/r/MensRights08/10/17 01:34 PM
5

It just means parasites aren't necessarily bad.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:07 AM
3

Technically, money isn't a nutrient. Legally, child support is due to the child and the woman in this scenario is merely the child's legal guardian, demanding and allocating the money on its behalf.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:00 AM
1

No taxation without representation, if you will?
/r/MensRights05/05/17 09:51 AM
1

There are actual gender differences, though. On average, women get a more friendly attitude from customers, and men are more capable of physical exercise. So why not give the waitress who pulls in 10% more revenue/customers a higher wage than the waiter who does 10% more work?
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 11:03 AM
11

You can't abolish child support without putting something else in its place, though. Otherwise parenthood becomes an even more dangerous proposition and more single parents would end up in financial ruin. If you can't expect an absent (biological) parent to pay into the child's life, the government would have to step in, to the tune of tens of billions of dollars per year. Absent parents should still, IMO, pay some. It's still your genetic payload that is being raised, so there should be some ev…
/r/MensRights01/01/17 09:38 AM
3

When he's asleep, yes.
/r/MensRights18/08/16 03:38 PM
11

Not sure if the six years is bad or the seventy-five. American sentencing tends to be a lot harder than is optimal for reducing actual crime (assuming a constant budget for the justice system), for men at least.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 08:07 AM
2

He could also be blackout drunk, another common tradition among salarymen.
/r/MensRights24/01/16 01:16 PM
17

In fairness, male politicians wouldn't think twice about using as potent an excuse as "misogyny", if they had one. The problems are that people still fall for that, and that politicians have no honor, neither of which is a failing of female politicians specifically.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 03:04 PM
0

No, zabby and holocauster were talking about female-perpetrated rape.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:21 PM
1

It could be interpreted as the guy speaking.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:30 AM
2

I didn't. By "statistically worse" I just meant that it looked like that based on first impressions of the data with no attempt at an explanation. Edited my comment appropriately.
/r/MensRights20/04/15 11:52 AM
69

Point of order: there is no separate male tournament. Women are free to compete in the normal chess tourneys. They just statistically do worse. edit: apparently at least 80% of the difference in ability may be explained by difference in population size. 96% of you buy the article's assumption that people aren't any more likely to become professional players if they could be best of the world (female with a potential ELO of 2700) than if they would be in the top 100 (male with potential ELO of 27…
/r/MensRights20/04/15 08:16 AM
0

Didn't read the title/10
/r/MensRights14/04/15 11:41 PM
2

There's a difference between "always is rape" and "should always be considered rape in a court of law" or even "should always be considered rape in the court of public opinion". There are 14 year olds mature enough to do any adult thing, and there certainly are a lot of 14 year olds more mature than the bottom 30% of 18 year olds. The hard cutoff exists because it reduces true rapes by a significant amount and improves true rape catch rate, at the cost of a number of now-impossible relationship,…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 11:42 PM
1

It's more of a correction: The protagonist is Samus, and Metroids are a common enemy type.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 11:31 PM
2

That's when you do it in public. Most of reddit just goes on not knowing the ongoing censorship.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 07:47 PM
1

Atheism is in a pretty unique spot, though. They're unified by nothing but their disapproval of religion, and especially in the US where there are relatively many first generation atheists, many only came to reject religion because they didn't hate constant debates. edit: Actually, /r/atheism does delete comments and ban people: I accidentally ran into this case on the frontpage. is still unethical if you value free speech This is bullshit. Nobody is required to listen to you or give you a pedes…
/r/MensRights29/09/14 06:58 PM
1

My analogy didn't conserve the accuracy of the theories, it conserved perspective and social standing. Feminists are just as certain of feminism as physicists are of quantum mechanics. My point is that quantum physicists would be justified in banning people from their subreddit without putting any mental effort into considering their viewpoint at that time, merely because of their certainty. Now, to keep a claim to the truth, they should have places for open discussion, and acknowledge that how …
/r/MensRights29/09/14 06:51 AM
1

I love that concept, that you can ignore any and all criticism simply by claiming somebody is "derailing" the conversation. I prefer to think of it as adding another layer to the conversation, You've got to consider it from their position though. For them, feminism isn't uncertain or doubtful. It's got more academic weight behind it than quantum mechanics, for chrissakes. Now suppose that on /r/quantum, thousands of people regularly reply on every thread completely misinterpreting common quantum…
/r/MensRights28/09/14 07:46 PM
3

American conservatives seem to do just fine; complaining about the threats of liberal culture to masculinity is par for the course on FOX.
/r/MensRights07/08/14 11:51 AM
6

Seriously? He's a politician. He isn't supposed to sound smart, he's supposed to get the Democrats votes in the next election. And with Hillary Clinton being the probable next candidate, rallying women to the Democrats is a highly effective strategy. "Vote Hillary, because women are better and you're better."
/r/MensRights24/06/14 11:54 AM
5

Two of those four "real and possibly fake accounts" I actually saw on my search and dismissed as fake, and they've been suspended or removed. One appears legit and the last one is also deleted. All in all, it seems like less than 40 women were fooled into joining in (probably between four and ten), but the outrage reached the international media. I don't think ignoring that handful counts as "revising history", nor that it's that successful a Turing test (which, typically, is based on the percen…
/r/MensRights20/06/14 10:44 PM
29

It lacks evidence on the claims on how widely it was adopted by actual feminists. Twitter feminists might have done a very impressive job at cleaning up, but so far the only definite feminists I've seen supporting hashtag was @DaniellaHerzog and @querencia__. Opposed to that, I can find literally thousands of tweets saying the hashtag is ridiculous, from men and women, to the point I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that the the hashtag was trending solely because of the outrage. The only …
/r/MensRights20/06/14 01:25 PM
4

It was a comedy called "Lysistrata".
/r/MensRights12/06/14 09:47 PM
1

The "onus" is not on the challenger: there should be a clear log of all the prior evidence which (if well-designed) puts most of the effort in the hands of the challenger, but the amount of evidence required to sway one away from the null hypothesis does not change based on who "challenges" and who "defends". Using character as an argument risks a negative halo effect; you might (start) accept(ing) horror stories about feminism based on too flimsy evidence (or while failing to account for the st…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 09:26 PM
1

Thanks for the reply. I am not a member of this sub, and subscription wouldn't immediately give me access to "common knowledge". Don't hesitate to point to what to you might seem an obvious source of the required information, and please be patient with me. Now, as for the NOW, again there is the distinction between father's rights and "father's rights", the latter being the movement. NOW honestly believes fathers are already (more-than-)fairly represented (I think), so they seek to discredit wha…
/r/MensRights10/06/14 02:43 PM
3

You have to understand that in their minds, that probably still is a battle for equality. They believe their victim complex. So they say others are stupid for saying feminism doesn't support equality. That is radically different from explicitly opposing equality, and it suggests a completely different way of opposing them. One based on facts and arguments rather than morals and emotions (often outrage): calmly demonstrate reality until you prove an inconsistency, and only if they make the wrong …
/r/MensRights09/06/14 07:55 PM
5

[citation needed] on the male ejaculation part
/r/MensRights09/06/14 11:35 AM
-15

Bad title: they "can embrace her point of view even as they disagree with it[, and think she] needs to educate herself" for saying feminism doesn't want men and women to be equal. Please, don't misrepresent your opponents. At the very least, you're giving them more ammunition and undecided people will see it as an indicator that your worldview is twisted.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 11:34 AM
4

I think it's unfair to call people who say the same things as (extremist) feminists "white knights" just because they're male. The subtext is that they're thinking with their dicks, rather than honestly holding a wrong opinion. Demonising your opponents makes you worse at predicting them, convincing them, understanding them arguing with them, or at very least being seen as reasonable by undecided parties. I haven't noticed an increase, but I haven't been round long enough. It would make sense, s…
/r/MensRights09/06/14 11:13 AM
4

It happens quite often, actually. See /r/undelete .
/r/MensRights09/06/14 01:10 AM
2

Not every feminist who isn't sexist against men needs to be famous. The fifth-most popular post on this subreddit is a quote by the far more commended and far more popular Doris Lessing.
/r/MensRights09/06/14 12:23 AM
25

Link.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 11:20 PM
1

Generally, people do not offer citations because they believe, want to believe, or want to give the impression that the inference is obvious. For example, you don't post any examples because you assume it's obvious what kind of conversation you're talking about. The facts depend on the situation. For example: a while ago I read about a man who complained that when he cried in class as a boy, he was ridiculed by girls for being unmanly. The negative consequences include his future lack of emotion…
/r/MensRights05/06/14 09:37 AM
8

The American justice system has way too harsh sentencing, courtesy of the for-profit prison lobby and "tough-on-crime" politicians with no regard for what actually works to reduce crime. 2% of the American male population is currently incarcerated. If the US ever switches to a sentencing system which values reducing crime rather than getting sweet revenge and massive profits, male sentences will get a lot shorter.
/r/MensRights05/06/14 09:04 AM
1

Look, you're not looking very credible here. You dodge a question about what country you're from, which makes little sense from an anonymity perspective, but tons of sense if you don't know a European country where your story would make legal sense. Unless you post your country of origin, I'm going to call bullshit on this one. And I must say, I'm disappointed in MRA's ability to be skeptical.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 11:18 PM
1

So do I, sometimes. Just imagine all the shit we would get done.
/r/MensRights31/05/14 12:07 AM
1

Unfortunately, I think fashion is a more likely option in this case. They don't fear our words, they fear what their peers would think of them if they were convinced. They can't allow themselves to believe something that would have them thrown out of their community.
/r/MensRights30/05/14 11:59 PM
1

Togas are very impractical, require one arm to constantly keep it in place, quickly get dirty, and are large and heavy enough to be used as the sail of a one-man boat. They were a symbol of status because wearing them properly was hard enough that it showed you could spend a lot of time on looking good.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 02:35 PM
-16

A reminder of reddiquette for people who downvoted Squidfist: don't use downvotes to say you disagree. Upvote people you agree with, write comments if they don't raise counterarguments you consider relevant, but don't render somebody's post invisible just because they're stupid.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 06:55 PM
3

NAFALT. Also, [...] An adjective is not an argument, and just because you heard something before doesn't mean it's wrong.
/r/MensRights02/09/13 02:13 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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