TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

praetor Archive

View 0 posts and 50 comments by praetor 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

That's a possibility, and worth discussing. However, those who continue to misuse this terrible statistic are just burning their own credibility. If there is still a gap, then use the correct numbers and not this dishonest one. I won't try to have a serious discussion with people who refuse to start the conversation with honesty.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 09:40 PM
16

What's usually called Calculus 1-3 I disagree. I don't think Calculus is the most useful general math course. It is very much required for engineering degrees, but as a general math course I think the #1 priority should be Statistics. It's shocking how poor people understand statistics and how much good a single formal course in it would do for people.
/r/MensRights04/10/12 04:45 PM
-1

It is. Unless you are actually coerced into it each life decision you make is your own. You take responsibility for it. You may discuss it with your partner but the final decision to give up your career is yours. It's your career, your life, your decision. If you want to go down that road why don't we have each person tally up the financial impact of every single sacrifice they make during a marriage?
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:43 PM
2

come to that decision together While you may discuss it together, each person makes choices for themselves and themselves alone. If they are OK with giving up their career because they think it is best for each other then that is still a choice that person has made and it is their responsibility. If you need alimony, it needs to be short-term. 1-2 years. The amount of time it would take a reasonable person to start supporting themselves. Lifetime alimony is really awful.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:39 PM
1

Never trust any projections "over x years" from either side. It's a stupid way of doing accounting and it almost always means someone is hiding something. If you were mislead by the original 10 year projections that sucks, but this is just the same crap from the other side.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 08:30 PM
3

The entire point of that retarded article is that the cost of the health care bill is higher than expected, thus creating this transgenerational bill. BS. The cost of the bill did not increase. When the original estimate came out it was from the present forward 10 years, thus including several years when the full provisions of the bill were not implemented. Now, we are closer to the full bill kicking in and projections starting now include more of those years and thus a higher cost. But at no po…
/r/MensRights26/08/12 03:45 PM
14

The NFL, television networks, and sponsors are free to do whatever they want, with or without a conviction. However, it is pretty hypocritical considering all the other offenses players have been convicted of and continue to be supported by these same organizations.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 03:45 AM
4

child should be able to enjoy the same standard of living as he/she did before the divorce What if the parents never lived together or split up before the child was born? At that point there would be no standard of living to base it on because it never happened. And yet the formula doesn't change, does it? It's because that reasoning is an excuse.
/r/MensRights29/05/12 03:38 AM
1

Wouldn't that violate Equal Protection by providing benefits to one person but not another based solely on sex?
/r/MensRights08/05/12 04:36 AM
6

Privilege doesn't always work to the direct advantage Are you somehow trying to suggest that being forced into battle to die confers some sort of indirect advantage?
/r/MensRights24/01/12 01:05 AM
0

Most institutions are non-profits. So the extra money that comes from sports can actually help the rest of the university offer better services to students. The better issue with sports isn't the money involved, it's how money "energy" goes into it. If the institution expends its energy and attention on sports then the education part can be left out. From a purely monetary standpoint a big sports team at a college is a good thing.
/r/MensRights19/01/12 06:22 PM
2

The way custody ruling work and the practical fact that they are so biased against men is intricately intertwined into this issue. You can't just dismiss it and break these two things apart. Do you think it isn't related that it's all men who have been imprisoned for this and that women are overwhelmingly awarded custody in any disputes?
/r/MensRights08/01/12 04:19 PM
2

Umm, the same way we enforce the duty to pay any other debts. People don't go to jail for not paying mortgages, or car payments, or lawsuit damages, or payments on furniture, or credit card interest, or anything else at all. It doesn't matter if the person is poor or not, but I suspect that almost every man jailed for this has been poor. That makes even less sense since once in prison they lose even the possibility of earning the money to pay the debt.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 04:14 PM
6

"tribalism" more completely describes what we are seeing. That can include race - because race is a common and easy basis for a tribe - or class, or ethnicity, or religion. It's so fluid now and yet that phenomenon continues to pop up.
/r/MensRights03/01/12 04:24 AM
1

They are usually very forgettable because they are so flimsy. How many articles are written about the "death of PC gaming" which does nothing more than to drive traffic to the site. We end up forgetting about them quickly because they don't say anything useful or interesting. Kotaku is hit or miss because of its format it is a content monster. It needs huge amounts of content to keep it running and so sometimes you get this nerd bait, sometimes you get actually decent journalism, but mostly you …
/r/MensRights28/12/11 05:22 AM
2

You've never seen a ridiculous article on Kotaku written solely to provoke the nerd masses? Technically when it's about this subject matter it is called "nerd-bait." An article is published that is purposely inflammatory - and usually with little backing it up - designed solely to drive traffic by getting nerds angry, reading the article, and posting comments about how wrong the article is.
/r/MensRights27/12/11 03:17 PM
4

It would be funny if you made jokes about herman cain. What isn't so funny is if you hatefully and spitefully attack cain's supporters directly, which is what that subreddit does. It links to comments and then mocks and ridicules the specific person. Not only comments in SRS but replies to the original comment, downvote brigades, and hateful horrible private messages as well. Where exactly is the humor there?
/r/MensRights26/12/11 04:38 AM
1

Consider it a political satire of sorts, rather than direct misandry Are you psychic or something? How do you know its satire? Something has to be deliberately satirical to be satire. You know for sure that all of these people are doing what they do jokingly? Seems like a outrageously bold claim on your part. You can't just "consider" something satire when it isn't. I'm sure black africans would have loved to "consider" aparteid a satirical look at racism and then it vanishes but unfortunately i…
/r/MensRights26/12/11 03:38 AM
18

It's what I've ended up calling an "outrage factory." Essentially outrage ends up being an addicting emotion and they search it out and eventually when they've exhausted all the sources for outrage they begin manufacturing it. Anything they can find gets twisted to suit their need for more inflammatory material. I used to think blogs (like jezebel or kotaku or any of those gawker sites) did it purely to drive traffic but with a community like SRS it becomes clear that some people actually thrive…
/r/MensRights26/12/11 03:27 AM
1

You are describing what we call "special forces" which are the elite who not only are very good but also desire to be elite. That means they are both qualified and volunteer to become our Army Rangers or Navy Seals or the British SAS. Even though the majority of what they do is not publicized I get the strong impression that most of the action that happens is done by special forces units.
/r/MensRights28/11/11 09:15 PM
1

You are describing one of the 3 levels of a militarized society: the citizen army. A citizen army is one where the citizenry must take part. You are 100% correct that it is a very good thing for a democracy because it forces military decisions to matter to everyone. The 2nd kind is a professional army where soldiers volunteer and are paid with money and/or benefits. This is bad for exactly the reason you said: poor men (almost entirely men here) take on this risk because it is an enticing way pu…
/r/MensRights28/11/11 04:43 AM
1

Is sportsmanship really sportsmanship if it enforced by rules? It doesn't really matter if someone is being sporting on the field anymore because now they have to be to avoid penalties. When did sports become less about physical and tactical contests and more about feelings and behavior?
/r/MensRights06/11/11 05:43 AM
3

Yes I have been around people blacking out before. I'm surprised you haven't had this experience before. You might be having a conversation with them and they seem incredibly lucid, but the next day they won't remember anything about it. They may even do very memorable things and function with an amazingly high level of competence without remembering it later. This is definitely something that happens. It is helped out by your own perception being off from also drinking. Which again brings up th…
/r/MensRights18/09/11 07:16 PM
4

Blackout drunks often appear quite sober to everyone else. Especially if everyone else has also been drinking. Do you think she should have been charged as well? If he was at all drunk that night then it's only fair, right?
/r/MensRights18/09/11 05:44 PM
8

It's $500. It isn't super cheap but if you've got a nice house with a pool and have to fight your wife that hard to spend $500 that's just sad.
/r/MensRights10/09/11 04:59 PM
1

You are making no sense. You are assuming he's guilty but the only reason you know anything might have happened is because she accused him. But then you even admit that she is completely untrustworthy and yet continue to believe the initial accusation. Not only do we not know what happened but now we can't know what happened. In such circumstances continuing to assume guilt makes no sense at all.
/r/MensRights23/08/11 10:48 PM
2

I would never marry... I would never date... I actually enjoy... Sounds like stating preferences to me. I think your zeal for being outraged got the better of you here.
/r/MensRights23/08/11 10:43 PM
2

No one is entitled to a standard a living. If your standard of living can go up, then it can go down. If you lose your job you need to adjust your life. Why can't adjustments be made when you lose a marriage too?
/r/MensRights31/07/11 07:44 PM
12

You just described what people would think of as the most creepy behavior. "Watch the kid from a distance" is exactly what gets the police called on men constantly. That's what the fear is.
/r/MensRights29/07/11 03:51 PM
5

Why can't he keep the money and use it to take care of his kids? Why does it have to be paid to the mother? Why isn't the money put in a trust that is used only for child care? This is not a case of "caring for his kids" but rather an assumption that the mother is somehow entitled to the money.
/r/MensRights29/07/11 03:49 PM
1

"Peaceful" intolerance I think is important. It means being skeptical, questioning, and ridiculing beliefs. Beliefs should pass a certain level of skepticism before being accepted. That skepticism I think leads to more understanding as opposed to blind acceptance.
/r/MensRights08/07/11 11:16 PM
1

No because he sees tolerance as a problem in and of itself. Tolerance is what gives rise to extremism. Moderate members of any community provide natural cover to extreme elements. When those extreme elements are willing to commit terrible violence the stakes in the name of "tolerance" are raised. The good news is Dawkin's form of intolerance is the nice kind. He advocates the use of speech to argue and ridicule a belief system. The bad form of intolerance is where you get killed for your beliefs…
/r/MensRights08/07/11 08:39 PM
1

Nope. I can't believe how many people are certain they know what Dawkins says and uses these falsehoods against him. He says you are an idiot for believing in God because he very likely does not exist. He never says he certainly doesn't, definitely doesn't, or is proven to not exist. Only that he is so unlikely to exist that you might as well believe in any other myth or legend as believe in God.
/r/MensRights08/07/11 08:33 PM
1

So we agree then: it was gratuitously important!
/r/MensRights07/07/11 07:21 PM
2

That was slightly extreme but at the same time it showed something really critical about Baelish's character. Not only was he able to talk telling us about his thoughts, but his complete nonchalant demeanor spoke volumes about him. He runs whorehouses, but it becomes incredibly clear in that scene that his lust is far stronger for power than women.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 06:36 PM
1

Or maybe they are just following the style of the books, where nudity and sex were prevalent. Nudity is an important aspect in the storytelling. In the context of each scene it usually says something important.
/r/MensRights07/07/11 05:52 PM
5

Do you automatically assume ... or do you assume That's not how you approach criminal matters at all, either way. Don't assume one way or another. In fact I try hard to be completely passive until an actual verdict occurs. I think if more people cared about the conviction and not the accusation we'd be better off in this country. I think it's very smart that a lot of european countries hide the identities of both accuser and accused until after the trial.
/r/MensRights06/06/11 05:43 PM
4

Classic double standard. When it comes to everything you can think of we are not supposed to treat women as if they are more natural child raisers. Right? In the workplace, for instance, we aren't supposed to assume women will be the ones to stay home and care for the children. But, when it comes to custody, we are supposed to accept the assumption that women are more suited to raising children and so get favored. It's like the fucking twilight zone sometimes how blatant it is.
/r/MensRights31/05/11 11:16 PM
5

Was that about the article or is the author just butthurt about Obama winning the election? I couldn't tell.
/r/MensRights28/05/11 02:32 AM
3

Anyway, it is not weakness when men cry, but strength. It's neither. Crying is a physiological response some people have. It implies neither strength nor weakness. It is a bodily function. Your suggestion implies that men who don't cry are therefore weak. You shouldn't be shamed for crying, but don't at the same time don't delude yourself into thinking that somehow crying makes you a better person.
/r/MensRights13/05/11 06:01 PM
1

The finding begs the question: Why the disparity? From the first link. Sorry, because it's just such a small thing but motherfuck fucking fuck fuck. I hate when people do this.
/r/MensRights01/05/11 04:47 AM
1

Is "need" the right word? Who "needs" it? This bothers me. We don't want to force women out of those fields and make them unhappy, but if more happily choose something else (like biology for instance) then who are the ones "needing" the change?
/r/MensRights24/04/11 03:09 PM
1

No, you won't. I've been to Denmark and while they are perfectly happy and respectful to a visiting American on business they are not so welcoming to an someone half-assing his integration into their society. The Scandinavian countries are notoriously difficult societies to break into as an outsider. It isn't so much hostile as passive but firm resistance. If you want to truly live there, instead of being a super-long-term tourist, you need to learn the language.
/r/MensRights24/04/11 03:31 AM
1

Can you imagine the shit-storm if a male guard "took advantage" of their position in this way at a women's prison?
/r/MensRights23/03/11 05:54 PM
0

The porn industry is actually hugely empowering to women. Some of them even gasp like their jobs not just for the money!
/r/MensRights08/12/10 03:56 AM
9

Well, there'd have to be a trial actually convicting the person of lying. It wouldn't be the sort of thing where the conviction of the accused fails so immediately send the accuser away. And the defense making a claim of lying during the accused's trial wouldn't really do anything at the accuser's trial if there is one. I mean there's already a punishment for lying. The suggestion is simply increasing the punishment, not making it easier to convict the accuser.
/r/MensRights08/12/10 03:45 AM
2

Wait what? I need some citations for that. You're telling me that the people of Ancient Greece didn't feel what we would consider patriotic for their homes? So a Spartan was in no way loyal to the concept of Sparta and willing to fight and die for it? Athenians didn't have any pride for being from Athens?
/r/MensRights13/10/10 03:51 PM
10

Well it's funny but in some ways my biggest frustration is how stupidly tight-assed America is about sexuality. Show any genitals, let alone actual sex acts, and suddenly it's corrupting and shameful. It's no wonder children grow into adults that are completely ashamed of their sexuality. They are taught to be. It's really a big disservice to people.
/r/MensRights07/09/10 06:35 PM
4

Very little was done. "Exposing" priests? Oh no, wouldn't want to get too heavy-handed with our justice there. How many of these priests and the administrators who covered for them have been charged? Convicted? Our sadly uneven sense of justice demonstrates exactly why we cannot be trusted to be "world police."
/r/MensRights07/09/10 05:41 PM
3

It was more open than that. Sex was pleasurable with boys, girls, women, wives... Whatever. I think they were able to sexualize people at any age of any gender.
/r/MensRights07/09/10 05:35 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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