TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

pincher_martin Archive

View 0 posts and 59 comments by pincher_martin 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)
2

Yes, if he claims victimhood and penetration occurs it is considered a rape. It does not say that he must be penetrated. You have to read the "new" definition pretty imaginatively to come to that conclusion. You're saying that, in the scenario I gave, since it involved penetration, the male would be considered a victim, even though he was not the one being penetrated. But that is clearly not how the definition functions grammatically. The new summary definition of rape is: "Penetration, no matte…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 04:24 PM
2

So yeah, they are trying to help. It looks more like they were trying to erase the gendered language of the definition, while preserving its gendered content. Consider the scenario of a woman forcing a man to have vaginal sex without his consent. Under the "new" FBI definition, was he raped? No, because neither his anus nor mouth was penetrated. Therefore, under the FBI's definition, men who are forced to have sex against their will are not necessarily considered victims of rape, and this outcom…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:44 PM
36

Wow. They did not want to hear what Milo had to say.
/r/MensRights02/07/15 03:37 PM
2

I could be missing something, but doesn't the pew study require respondents to interpret and label their own experiences? For example, they ask respondents if they have been sexually harassed, without breaking that definition into specific behaviors. Thus, a man and woman who experience very similar types of harassment might report them differently, because the woman will be more likely to self-diagnose it as "sexual harassment" while the man will self-diagnose it as "efforts to embarrass" or so…
/r/MensRights22/06/15 09:14 PM
6

You gonna be alright? You seem a little worked up. When was the last time a random woman came up to you in public and told you how nice your ass looks, or catcalled, or whistled at you. It's been a while. But like I said, I think sexual harassment takes different forms when aimed at men. In fact, you yourself have just demonstrated one of these forms… I guess you've never had girlfriends? No female companions to tell you the sexual harassment they get on just about a daily basis? Get outside guy…
/r/MensRights22/06/15 08:45 PM
5

So as far as I can tell, this study has literally nothing to say about the issue I brought up, because it asks respondents to interpret and define their own experiences, and as I argued, sexual harassment against men is less likely to be reported and remembered as such. Basically, I said that women will report and remember sexual harassment as sexual harassment, while men will not. And as refutation, you provided a study showing that women self-report higher rates of sexual harassment. You see h…
/r/MensRights22/06/15 08:18 PM
5

I'm simply arguing that sexual harassment online takes different forms when aimed at men or women, but that only one of these forms (the kind aimed at women) is reported and remembered as sexual harassment. I never pretended to know the relative frequency men and women experience this harassment. But you seem to have that answer, so please, share your empirical data.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 08:05 PM
1

And of course this attitude will continue indefinitely, even as girls far surpass boys in every level of education, kindergarten through college.
/r/MensRights22/06/15 07:57 PM
2

In my own experience, guys get sexually harassed all the time, it's just usually deflected in some way. "I'm gonna fuck you" comes off as gay when aimed at a man, and thus undermines the force of the insult, but "I'm gonna fuck your sister" does the trick. When aimed at a woman, the harasser can just leave it as "I'm gonna fuck you" while still accomplishing the goal of getting under the target's skin. These two instances of harassment ("I'm gonna fuck your sister" directed at a man, and "I'm go…
/r/MensRights22/06/15 07:44 PM
35

…Or almost any other major civilization in recorded history
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:14 AM
3

Advising someone to lock their door is not the same thing as blaming them if they get robbed.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 05:50 PM
7

A child's foreskin is not supposed to entirely retract. How does his foreskin produce blood in his urine?
/r/MensRights26/05/15 06:40 AM
10

Meanwhile, how much is she willing to do for a man to earn sex from him? I'm gonna guess: nothing.
/r/MensRights25/05/15 07:37 PM
11

This was posted up all around my college today. Nice to be reminded that my sexuality is innately violent and predatory. Thank God somebody reminded me not to rape anyone.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 09:15 PM
58

Babies often go into shock during the procedure. I'm not saying that's definitely what happened, but no crying =/= no pain or trauma. Edit: Van Howe reported that, ‘Newborn males respond to circumcision with a marked reduction in oxygenation during the procedure, a cortisol surge, decreased wakefulness, increased vagal tone, and less interactions with their environment following the procedure . . .’ (1996: 431). Rhinehart (1999) in a report of clinical cases noted that the only response availabl…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 02:18 PM
7

I don't see how anything I said is even remotely offensive. I even said that I'm happy for you. I simply pointed out that other men are not satisfied with the decision their parents made on their behalf.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 04:09 AM
23

Good. You're lucky. Because many men don't share your satisfaction, and feel that their body was permanently and negatively altered without their consent. Which is why circumcision should be a decision left to the man in question when he is old enough to give informed consent.
/r/MensRights21/04/15 02:24 AM
5

Why is your wife so obsessed with her own son's penis?
/r/MensRights10/04/15 09:27 PM
25

That's Hillary-ous.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 02:25 PM
5

And look around. Look at the destruction they have wrought. For what? So is your ideal world a return to the traditional model, where men work and women stay at home? Or can we somehow get to a place where men and women are free to balance work and home-life however they see fit?
/r/MensRights09/04/15 02:23 PM
11

Hypothetically, black-only water fountains will be just as good as white-only water fountains.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 02:20 PM
8

Sorry, friend, but you're incorrect. Please take this opportunity to learn about the most highly innervated organ of the human body, the male foreskin.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 10:43 PM
17

They will repeat, in several different combinations of words, that "nobody can prove that something horrific didn't happen to Jackie that night." And then they will assert the need for greater attention to college women's sexual vulnerability, citing long-debunked statistics. The simple fact that this made-up story "resonated with so many young women's experiences and perceptions" completely overshadows the fact that the rolling stone published a false rape accusation which lead to real-world in…
/r/MensRights24/03/15 02:57 AM
7

At least they're starting to phrase their statistics in a less misleading way. A previous ad said "heart disease affects 1 in 3 women," which I think is intentionally ambiguous. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with raising awareness about women's risk of heart disease and stroke, especially if there is a cultural assumption that only men suffer from these things. At the same time, if the campaign wants to imply that women suffering from these issues deserve special consideration in terms of…
/r/MensRights12/02/15 02:39 PM
7

Yeah, this idea that the clitoris is analogous to the penis or the head of the penis comes up a lot in circumcision discussions too. Just because the penis and clitoris develop from the same pre-fetal structure doesn't mean that they continue as functional parallels after birth. The clitoris is important for sexual pleasure. The penis is important for sexual pleasure, ejaculation, urination and preventing urination, lubrication, and intercourse. And, as you mentioned, major veins run through the…
/r/MensRights08/02/15 11:51 PM
36

Seriously. With the amount of advertising I've seen for "Go Red," I'm assuming it's a multi-million dollar campaign. Yet they can't even state a simple statistic properly. Either that, or they're fully aware that their phrasing is completely misleading, but use it anyway to shock people into believing that heart disease is a women's issue.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 05:30 PM
69

I'm ashamed on behalf of my fellow females There is no reason for you to be ashamed. You're not responsible for their actions or beliefs. Let's leave the philosophy of collective-guilt to the feminists.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 01:37 AM
17

Aside from the clearly one-sided gender bias of this comic (although at least there is a mention of male vulnerability) there are a few things I actually appreciate about the content. Unlike most feminists' incoherent drivel about affirmative consent and rape, this comic has at least some level of clarity and nuance. The comic actually lists two criteria for consensual sex: 1) If she is "going for it" at least as much as you, or 2) If she is physically passive but verbally acknowledges her conse…
/r/MensRights28/01/15 06:59 PM
20

That's the most important part of the video. Of course the boys didn't slap the girls, because they're decent children. But the reasons the boys gave are very problematic, and reveal a pattern of discriminatory upbringing. "Because she's a girl." "Because I'm a man." These answers don't indicate that these boys believe girls are their equals. Just the opposite. They indicate that these boys view women as uniquely exempt from any form of violence in a way that men are not. That women are inherent…
/r/MensRights07/01/15 01:08 AM
32

It's a great film, and the acting is phenomenal. It's just so damn hard to watch because the whole time you keep thinking, "My god, this could happen to anybody, even me. My god, this DOES happen to people, all the time." There is not an unrealistic scene in the whole movie.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 03:41 PM
22

Having to hear creepy guys say "hey beautiful" when you're walking down the street. Not being able to play as a female lead character in every video game (not that I actually like video games or anything). Being called "bossy" as a child. Not having enough room on a crowded subway because men sit with their legs apart! Being the primary victim of war, by losing your husband, your father or your son. Being sexually objectified on scientists' shirts, a clear and intentional message that you are no…
/r/MensRights27/12/14 07:46 PM
5

Yeah, I guess that's a solution in one sense, but at the end of the day I just want to play the game I've been eagerly waiting for since the first one came out.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 04:27 AM
21

This is infuriating. Anita Sarkeesian wields her manufactured victimhood to manipulate the base protective instincts of those around her, for her own monetary gain. Now she has cried her way into the development of one of the most highly anticipated games in the last several years, with absolutely no experience in gaming development. She has stated on camera that she does not enjoy playing video games. What benefit could she possibly provide to the development of Mirror's Edge 2, other than cons…
/r/MensRights09/12/14 12:23 AM
3

Only 15% are circumcised in Washington? Wow, things must have changed a lot in the last 20 years or so. I live in the Seattle area, and I am the only one of my friends who is not circumcised. I got singled out and foreskin-shamed in the junior high locker room. So this is surprising news to me.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 04:16 PM
21

It's excellent that you're satisfied with your genitals and your sexual pleasure. I hope nobody intends to say you should feel otherwise. However, you have to acknowledge that lots of other circumcised men do not share your satisfaction, and they truly wish they had not been circumcised. So, for the purposes of this debate, let's remove ourselves from the subjectivity of personal experience, because there are a range of opposing but valid experiences. The fact of the matter is, the foreskin is n…
/r/MensRights02/12/14 06:02 PM
9

As Warren Farrell has said: A man's weakness is his facade of strength, and a woman's strength is her facade of weakness.
/r/MensRights29/11/14 06:37 PM
25

Nice. Good job insulting and alienating your allies.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 05:51 PM
8

As you can see in this thread, /u/HALALsnackbar and I had a brief exchange. He challenged my assertion that the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis, among other things. I responded to him carefully, but my response got buried, and I thought the information I provided might be helpful and didn't want people to miss it. So here is what I wrote: Here are a handful of sources to get you started: The foreskin protects the glans penis. From a Presentation at The Second International Sympo…
/r/MensRights17/11/14 06:28 PM
6

Here are a handful of sources to get you started: The foreskin protects the glans penis. From a Presentation at The Second International Symposium on Circumcision, San Francisco, California, April 30-May 3, 1991: The foreskin covers the elongated shaft of the penis during erection; at other times it protects the sensitive glans penis. The foreskin contains many minute muscle fibers which give it tone. It covers the glans snugly, and helps to prevent the glans from developing a thick, many layere…
/r/MensRights17/11/14 06:05 PM
3

Nothing... except facilitate intercourse and provide more stimulation than any other part of the penis.
/r/MensRights17/11/14 04:29 PM
2

Feminist logic.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 07:50 PM
4

Thank you for adding some genuine balance to the discussion.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 03:07 PM
17

Jokes are always morally neutral. They are either successful or unsuccessful, but never right or wrong.
/r/MensRights01/08/14 07:12 PM
6

From what I understand, the racial diversity of mass shooters is essentially proportional to the racial diversity of the larger society. Most mass shooters in North America are white because most people in North America are white. If I'm not mistaken, the only racial demographic with a disproportionately high number of mass shooters is asian. I could be wrong about this though.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 09:29 PM
1

Do you predict that men's rights will become one of the defining conversations of the 21st century, much like women's rights were in the 20th century? Or do you think the public will continue to ignore men's issues, allowing feminist ideology to gain an ever-tighter grip on the cultural zeitgeist? Or do you expect a more subtle shift in public opinion toward the recognition of men's issues? How do you, as individuals, conceptualize your roles in the MRM, in light of your predictions for the move…
/r/MensRights12/06/14 08:11 PM
2

but as time went on, the numbers of raped men steadily rose until it finally equaled the numbers of raped women in 2010. So the number of female rapes remained stable while the number of male rapes quadrupled in a few decades? This seems very hard to believe. And isn't it just as likely, under your hypothesis, that the number of male rapes remained stable while the number of female rapes dropped by roughly 75%?
/r/MensRights11/06/14 05:24 AM
12

Found it. A 1996 study published by the Department of Justice: "Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial." Every year since 1989, in about 25 percent of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI where results could be obtained (primarily by State and local law enforcement), the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing. Specifically, FBI officials report that out of roughly 10,000 sexual assault case…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 04:56 AM
3

According to the FBI, 20% of the DNA tests they do for rape cases show that the DNA does not belong to the accused man. Could you give a source for this? I'd like to check it out. Edit: found it.
/r/MensRights11/06/14 04:32 AM
2

That's very surprising to me. Especially since I could come to that conclusion from examining the data of a study very much interested in showing the opposite: "Nearly 1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men in the U.S. have been raped at some time in their lives."
/r/MensRights11/06/14 02:58 AM
6

Yeah, that was one of my guesses. I remember hearing that, possibly from /u/typhonblue. I just have a hard time believing that it could cause such a stark contrast between male and female reports of their own victimization. And, knowing about some of the other methodological problems with the NISVS, I wondered if the discrepency could be attributed, at least in part, to faults in the survey's methodology. But if your hypothesis is actually the primary factor, then this suggests that men and wome…
/r/MensRights11/06/14 02:33 AM
10

No way. Even though mothers are statistically more likely to not pay their child support.
/r/MensRights06/06/14 07:18 PM
2

It would just be really helpful if, when feminists claim this sub is similar to /r/TheRedPill, there was some definitive source to dismantle that claim. Like something on the sidebar, which states explicitly why this sub is disconnected from that one. Obviously this solution has its problems, since this is an open forum and free speech is highly valued. But something like that would be helpful for efficiency and clarity.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 09:10 PM
2

Yeah, I think this is the underlying opinion of most subscribers to this sub. This is just the first time I've seen it explained so unambiguously. So thanks for that.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:51 PM
2

Okay, yeah. That seems like a reasonable position. As someone new to this discourse, one of my biggest areas of confusion is why those outside the men's rights movement have such a distorted view of what its goals and concerns are, even though men's rights activists seem to make that reasonably explicit. (Other than the fact that outsiders don't bother to come here themselves, at least not with an open mind.) I wonder if the men's rights movement can do anything to more accurately represent itse…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:47 PM
3

That's a fair point.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:30 PM
4

I get that MRA's are clearly not PUA's. I get that there is virtually no overlap. I have also come to understand that the men's rights movement is certainly not based on misogynistic premises, and its advocates are truly not misogynists. They want genuine equality. At the same time, I disagree that misogyny is nearly meaningless. MRA's are right to point out that female victimhood has been exaggerated, fabricated and exploited, while male victimhood has been ignored or actively hidden by feminis…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 07:27 PM
5

I haven't been active here very long, so maybe I just haven't witnessed it. I get the sense that the MRA's here don't want their group to be conflated with PUA forums, especially in light of all the accusations since the Eliot Rodger shooting. At the same time, however, I haven't seen anyone state explicitly that PUA's are misogynistic, and therefore opposed to the goals of the MRM. I've seen a lot of "The MRM and PUA forums are different things," but not a lot of "I oppose PUA forums on the bas…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:53 PM
3

Maybe MRAs should be more vocal about distancing themselves from these groups.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 06:31 PM
20

Furthermore: "Elliot Rodger, an active MRA, shot and killed at least 7 young women..." In reality, he killed 2 women, and 4 men.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 07:32 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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