TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

randomrealitycheck Archive

View 0 posts and 54 comments by randomrealitycheck 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

and punishment for her? Nah. None. Whatsoever. There certainly won't be any ramifications if you don't press charges. And if this woman is in a home for troubled teens, you need to stay the hell away from her and anyone like her. Glad to here the arrest isn't going anywhere.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 07:27 PM
1

Are you fucking kidding me? Someone who supposedly understands the legal system told you to come over here and discuss the details of a case where you might be prosecuted? Man, if I were you, I would delete this thread and pray to god that the prosecution or any lawyer who might represent this woman never finds it. Oh and good luck, you certainly don't need to be put through this kind of shit.
/r/MensRights19/06/12 07:17 PM
1

If you haven't gotten explicit consent to take a man's semen you have committed theft of semen. Buddy, if you let (or encourage) anyone to take it out of your dick, you gave consent. Try making any other argument to the court and see how far that gets you. You've made your choice and should the man wish to do so he is justified in murdering you. I love the fact you chose the term "murder" to use - it shows that subconsciously you understand that this is exactly what you're doing. I certainly wou…
/r/MensRights04/11/11 03:56 PM
1

take a man's semen Right, she came up behind you when you weren't looking (or were watching TV) and swiped it from you without you noticing. Trolls - turning Men's Rights into the laughing stock Reddit is now seeing you as.
/r/MensRights04/11/11 03:04 PM
2

I am honored that my English makes you think I come from the land of the free, actually no, but anyway "federal charges in your near future" means nothing here. Here in the land of the free, your right to say anything you may wish is still guaranteed - as long as you understand that my right to say what I wish about your opinions enjoys that same right. What I meant, and I keep repeating it for years now, is that women are immature. Good for you, keep repeating it. If nothing else it should keep…
/r/MensRights29/09/11 11:24 AM
7

I do not hate women Well, son, from where I sit you sure don't love them the way I do. I just think we Westerners have deluded ourselves to believe that women are adults. I'm not sure you're doing a lot to convince anyone that we men are adults - but that's me. Women are children. Damn, there are probably federal charges in your near future if what you believe is real.
/r/MensRights28/09/11 09:54 PM
6

He forgot to add that women are only here to pleasure us, children are the reward we give them. I did it right, didn't I?
/r/MensRights28/09/11 01:38 PM
1

Let's back this down and keep it focused. I have provided several examples where the government has constitutionally curtailed your free speech. In a courtroom. Language inciting a riot. Calling in a false police report. Verbal harassment leading to disturbing the peace. I maintain that in each of the above examples the test that you applied " "speak words, someone who makes no material threats, someone who does not touch you, someone who does not injure you, someone who does not block your way,…
/r/MensRights13/09/11 04:59 PM
1

You really don't understand civil tort. The government facilitates the redress of grievances. The government does not impose its own will. It's the same as the difference between taxes and mortgage payments. The government provides a way for your bank to foreclose on your house if you don't pay. But that's not the same police power that will be brought to bear if you don't pay your taxes. This is a bullshit argument. This is government enforced restriction on free speech - no matter how you try …
/r/MensRights13/09/11 04:14 PM
2

lol. It's a fundamental difference. It's hilarious that you don't get it. What you don't seem to understand is that what you think is a fundamental difference is still a government imposed restriction of free speech. The law was created by the government, enforced by the government, tried in a government court and the findings of that court are carried out by the government. One of us is missing the bigger picture and I am going to guess that the best way forward might be for us to agree to disa…
/r/MensRights13/09/11 02:51 PM
1

"As long as someone does not physically touch you, actually threaten you, block your way, or deprive you your property" Then someone can walk up to you and your family on the street and say whatever they want? I don't think so. I have a right to walk down the street without having some asshole invade my peace and quiet. In this case the government is justified in charging anyone who would do so with disturbing the peace. Libel and slander are civil torts. Those are irrelevant to this discussion.…
/r/MensRights13/09/11 01:58 PM
1

You're completely missing my point. There are already legal restrictions on free speech, good ones that I am against having removed. What I asked you originally, before you sidetracked this discussion into the land of shoe bombers and slippery slopes, is where do you believe that line should be drawn? Do you need me to clarify that question or will you address my question, keeping to the context it was asked in, when you get to work?
/r/MensRights13/09/11 12:25 PM
3

Honestly, that anyone would even ask question scares the living shit out of me. Really? So you believe that I have the right to come into your house and threaten your children (to use an absurd example)? Maybe you might want to reconsider your beliefs. I would much rather live in a world filling with assholes that scream at me constantly, than live in a world where the government makes rules about what I can and cannot say. The government already has that power and I back it to the extent they d…
/r/MensRights13/09/11 12:10 PM
4

Okay, as one man to another, let me ask you a few questions. At what point does your right to free speech end? Do you believe you can say anything without repercussions? From my experience (and this is not casting dispersions on you or any other participants in the Men's Rights group) some men are complete assholes, I know several and I am willing to bet you do too. So, were do you draw that line? At what point do you stand up and defend anyone's right to go through life without being harassed b…
/r/MensRights13/09/11 08:40 AM
1

Why the hell was this even prosecuted? This has nothing to do with it being a woman or a man - it's freaking UTAH that's the problem here.
/r/MensRights29/08/11 01:11 AM
2

My original points are that we can't throw innocent until proven guilty out the window and that having a biased stance implies women are less able than men. I am afraid that you live in a world that has either passed us all by or never really existed. The phrase "innocent until proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" is not how our courts actually function, if you were under that delusion. Now, let me be clear on this - I would like to see that foundation put back under our judiciary and firmly…
/r/MensRights16/08/11 11:28 PM
1

Man, you put a lot of work in here, this should be interesting. (I am going to try to edit this only for brevity, hopefully without changing the context.) says that women are assigned responsibility. I believe that the law does not absolve women from responsibility nor does it impose the presumption of guilt upon them. Did I interpret your statement correctly? I know your reasoning, which you never made clear to her... One of the things I try to do is not repeat myself too many times. If someone…
/r/MensRights16/08/11 10:43 PM
0

Okay. Okay. I'm arguing with a man... And we're done here.
/r/MensRights16/08/11 08:44 PM
1

Why, thank you.
/r/MensRights16/08/11 05:22 PM
2

I guess at the end of the day, I agree with you, I just think we ought to try loosening the reins instead of tightening them. I believe that you have the right attitude but for the life of me I don't know how to implement it. I see your perspective, and it's logically consistent and structurally valid. I think we've reached the end of the diatribe however because, while you make sense, and the law agrees with you, I have to disagree. I may be living in a fantasy world, but I think it's a damned …
/r/MensRights16/08/11 04:56 PM
1

Damn, now that you reminded me, as a liberal, I have a duty to feel bad about this forever - or something. I'll have to check at the next meeting when all of us liberals get together, discuss how we can be even more lazy (man, I am exhausted from all that work) while we feverishly work at plotting our plans to ruin this country. Christ, that reminds me, I need to take the latte down to the welfare office so I can bring Volvos to the next liberal meeting for everybody to sip.
/r/MensRights16/08/11 04:31 PM
1

Then I know a LOT of women who are guilty of rape and sexual assault. Including me. You seem to be misunderstanding my point, I am not arguing that women don't engage in this behavior, I know better from quite satisfying personal experience and am all in favor of it - societal values be damned. What I am saying is that I can find no way for court of law to set standards that base any case brought before them to accommodate that set of circumstances. In another time, defense lawyers used to say t…
/r/MensRights16/08/11 12:08 PM
1

I didn't go for brevity, and after all the time I spent drafting this, I don't want to shorten it, sorry. No worries, but I am going to trim for readability and I hope you don't mind. I wasn't sure of this, but wanted you to know that your language can and will be construed as such. Now, that's a very interesting observation and explains why I am catching the hell I am here. At the same time, if I am misusing terminology that has been predefined here due to the fact that I am new to this place, …
/r/MensRights16/08/11 10:54 AM
1

Heh heh I wouldn't suggest you do so. It can be like sticking your fingers in something very pungent... and then wondering why no one wants to shake your hand afterward. Ain't that the truth! On a different note, thanks for ruining my breakfast. Now if you will excuse me, I have to go throw out this plate of food here. ;-)
/r/MensRights16/08/11 09:22 AM
0

As there is nothing in your reply that isn't covered in the many other replies I have posted, I am only going to address one point. I said, Jesus, come on out and tell us all who you feel about drugging a woman with Roofies! You replied, This insinuates that I'm hiding my true feelings about drugging women with roofies (despite the fact that I've been discussing individuals voluntarily drinking alcohol, not one individual drugging the other against their will). And, just to clarify: of course I …
/r/MensRights16/08/11 09:01 AM
1

The decision to have sex should be mutual, not unilateral. This is the case whether we are talking about one person forcing sex on a non-consenting person (which is rape, and therefore a "should not"), or whether we are talking about two people consenting to have sex. Agreed. The problem is that assuming a man wants to sleep with me, and assuming I want to sleep with him, he should not feel compelled by law to say no simply because I might be the "kind of crazy woman who will scream rape the nex…
/r/MensRights16/08/11 08:48 AM
1

Upvote for sane discussion, first off. Why thank you. I would like to point that there is at least one other person in thread who will argue that point... But the hidden premise(s) you have are: Okay... that the rapist will be a man Yes that the woman is always truthful Again yes - for that particular scenario. The simplest way to expose these types of things are to do role reversals. For instance, a woman and a man get drunk. The woman sleeps with the man. Later, the man claims rape, and the wo…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 11:45 PM
-1

What in the hell are you going on about now? Okay, this is what I'm thinking, either you're a troll or you're putting me on. Either way, I'm about ready to ignore you - something that I make a point to never do. Now, giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that I said something that sent you over the edge, is there a way that we can start over, preferably without the drama? If not, I will let you take the last word in this discussion - no matter how many times you decide to do so.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 10:44 PM
0

Let's try this again. You do not get to make the decision to sleep with me. I am married, monogamous, and will say no. In the same way, each individual in that scenario I posted will also have to decide for himself if he would like to sleep with you. He may choose not to sleep with you because he suspects that you are the kind of crazy woman who will scream rape the next morning - even though I doubt that you are. Stop being an ass, I am not the guy that you want me to be - speaking of projectio…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 10:40 PM
-1

I know. Expecting women to be responsible for themselves IS crazy, isn't it? No, it isn't. Too bad, I was really hoping that you were getting it. One more time. The law has nothing to say about you thinking for yourself or your responsibility - NOTHING AT ALL. I know you'd really like to but it doesn't. Sorry. Any time you'd like to begin a conversation that isn't stoked to the gills with hyperbole, just say the word and I'll start addressing you as though you were an adult.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 10:13 PM
2

I really beg to differ. And I think it matters, because in a situation with 2 people performing the same crime, at the same time, if one is to be held responsible and not the other based only on the sex of the person, I think that's obvious sexism, and deplorable. I don't even know how to respond to that. Technically, neither of them are breaking the law and both of them are I suppose. Let's back this entire discussion up for a minute because some of the stuff being said here has gone completely…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 10:08 PM
0

There are several tangents in this thread. At no point am I going to touch that sexist topic. Nope, no way.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 09:31 PM
-2

I'm crazy because I feel women should be held as accountable, drunk or sober, for their decisions as a man? Seriously? I'm crazy because I believe the definition of personal and sexual autonomy requires one to have a sense of personal responsibility and accountability in that regard? No, you're crazy because you are completely misunderstanding the situation and going off on a tangent that makes zero sense. The law does indeed treat me like a child. It tells me my decisions are not trustworthy, a…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 09:30 PM
1

I am editing this (hopefully) for brevity. I hope you don't feel that I altered the context. If you do feel that the context was changed, it was unintentional. I had this response almost completed when I accidentally clicked a link and then closed the tab, so I apologize if this response is poorly written, as I am currently raging at myself. If you use Firefox, I would recommend installing lazarus. It has prevented me from punching a wall on more than one occasion. Still, I couldn't help but chu…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 08:17 PM
0

Ah, that makes more sense, in context.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 07:23 PM
1

You missed my point. Your, and the argument of the law, is that it's the other person's responsibility to not have sex in the case that the partner is intoxicated. So, even if that's true, then in that case where sex occurs between two drunk people, then: The man raped the woman, and simultaneously, the woman raped the man. Actually, you missed the point. We men are seen as the responsible party and I don't have a problem with that. In no way does that prevent women from being responsible, and i…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 06:56 PM
-3

Actually, I have a vagina, not a penis. So I am not, in fact, the responsible one. Good for you! I'm a big proponent of all of those things that you have. And I find the law as it stands now so insulting of my personhood, so dismissive of my agency and my ability to decide what I will and will not do, that it makes my blood boil. It's the equivalent of saying, "Awww...she's just a stupid little woman, she didn't know any better. It's not her fault," if I'd shit on your floor. The law does no suc…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 06:27 PM
-3

Is it so hard for you to believe a woman could find this attitude objectionable that you assume, despite my user name, that I must be a man? No, I think you're stark staring mad - and I honestly don't care what sex you are, in this context. The law neither gives you any of those options nor does it treat you like a child. The law made the decision that one sex had to be the one who would be responsible. They chose men because it is understood that men are generally larger, stronger and capable o…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 06:20 PM
-3

The law is not a trump card in a discussion on ethics. Ethics? You want to discuss whether it is ethical to sleep with a woman that you know is drunk and then tell me it's okay because you are drunk? Is this a new definition of ethics that I was previously unaware of? See my previous point re sexism. Thanks, no, I don't need to. Did you not call me a rapist ... No, I didn't Jesus, come on out and tell us all who you feel about drugging a woman with Roofies! Be a man and explain that this is perf…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 06:07 PM
-2

you're wrong. Tell it to the judge. I didn't make the law but I do believe that it is about as good as it is going to get in today's society. I can't see arguing about this any more, you believe the law is bad and I honestly don't care. I look at this as we live in a society that sets rules - both codified into law and societal constructs - and both of those sets of rules say that you are to be the responsible one. It's just the way it is.
/r/MensRights15/08/11 05:34 PM
-2

No. We let her off the hook for HER decision instead. That's right. It is the man's responsibility, you know this is the case and if you don't live up to it it is your fault. Because she's apparently incapable of being held responsible for her own actions or decisions. What are you saying, exactly? That women have the morality, reasoning abilities and agency of toddlers? "Take advantage"? She could climb onto his lap and mount herself on him, and still call it rape in the morning, and still have…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 05:31 PM
-5

The problem comes when our technology and laws are not up to the challenge of determining who is a rapist and who is a false accuser of rape, and there are plenty of both to go around. Until we are wearing neural implants that show both intoxication level and mental intent / consent, we're going to have to lay down rules, like all the human societies before us. My argument is that the law that disallows consent in the case of mutual intoxication is immoral. You are misinterpreting my point. You …
/r/MensRights15/08/11 05:06 PM
-1

The points you make are valid, based on the point of view of law. That's actually justification enough right there for why it will likely be perceived as rape for a drunk man to have sex with a drunk woman. And there are people who are here to challenge those points, some with very sharp arguments. That's a rather good criteria: Am I doing something that is punishable as a crime under existing law? If so, it doesn't matter whether it is reverse sexism or not. But juries, and judges too, usually …
/r/MensRights15/08/11 04:37 PM
-2

The law doesn't take decision-making capability into account. Actually, this is the reasoning behind the laws. Laws do not necessarily take reasoning into account with the exception of case like premeditated murder versus involuntary manslaughter. Statutory rape and bestiality are strict liability crimes: if they happen, you are guilty. But, case history shows that where a mentally disabled person is tricked by a minor, the only one liable is the mentally handicapped person, who arguably lacks t…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 04:35 PM
-5

Do you honestly believe that, because a woman is drunk, she's no longer responsible for her actions? Actually, I not only believe that to be true but the courts do too. Given that the law will arrest you, try you, and if found guilty, put you in jail for a damn long time, I would suggest that the smart thing to do is never, EVER, sleep with a woman who is intoxicated. And that, as they used to say back in the 70s, is the bottom line. If two people get drunk and consented to fuck, it's not rape. …
/r/MensRights15/08/11 03:44 PM
-7

You're insane. Sure, that might even be true - but it doesn't have anything to do with the points that I made. Getting a girl drunk to where she can't consent and sleeping with her = rape Getting drunk together and having sex if you both consent = not rape Getting drunk together and having sex if she doesn't consent = rape You think that the word is black and white, don't you? Damn, that's pretty simplistic. For anyone who is male and disagreeing, think of it this way: You're an asshole. Well, I…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 03:11 PM
-2

This is how I feel concerning the continuing war. I'm sorry, and I would care about how you feel, exactly why again? You posted in support for the OP but you want he discussion to end? Do you have any idea how schizophrenic that sounds?
/r/MensRights15/08/11 02:55 PM
-3

Okay, let's take a close look at your point. This bullshit is part of the problem on both sides. Don't you realize how silly this subreddit war is? But then we have this opinion you posted a bit earlier. Thanks for making this non-sensational and reasonable argument. Even though it's an explicit response to feminists (which has become the real bane of this subreddit), it had some really valuable content. Does the term "Hoist by one's own petard" mean anything to you? Just stop it. After you, dea…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 02:00 PM
-9

...thanks for proving my point. Do you honestly believe that because the man was drunk that lets him off? That's proving your point? Tell that one to the judge and see how far it gets you. You see, your honor, I was drunk at the time so you can't find me guilty. Stop it right now, you're embarrassing the both of us. As far as this line, In the future, it might be in your best interests to actually read what someone wrote, before responding to it and claiming they're a rapist. I never said or imp…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 01:53 PM
2

Jesus, I'm sorry you spent that much time writing that pile of rationalization in an attempt to counter a line that is basically a throwaway. Why would you do this? Are you trying to justify that some assholes would take advantage of a person who is not fully capable of making a decision due to being intoxicated? Jesus, come on out and tell us all who you feel about drugging a woman with Roofies! Be a man and explain that this is perfectly fine because the woman didn't say she liked chocolate to…
/r/MensRights15/08/11 01:14 PM
5

My pleasure. You will note that a few people downvoted my response - so there is some disagreement as to whether or not what I posted is crap.
/r/MensRights07/08/11 04:07 PM
27

Lead the conversation, set the tone and ignore distractions. In this case, addressing the idiot who moved the topic to "How dare he have an opinion..." was a bad move. This is not the point of the discussion. You wanted to talk about cooking, he want to insult you. When you let the discussion become about you, instead of your feelings about overdone steak, you were no longer in a discussion that you wanted to have. Finally, be polite, use humor and don't let them get to you.
/r/MensRights07/08/11 11:12 AM
2

No! A hit piece from the Weekly Standard. How much did they say the Iraq war was going to cost? Credibility - you only get one chance to blow it - and the Weekly Standard is working on a record of consistently blowing any credibility they may have ever once had.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 10:25 PM
1

Damn, this site seems credible, look at the most popular stories they're pushing: Popular Posts Michele Bachmann: hot photos from her vacation on the beach Sarah Palin photos: not as hot as Michele Bachmann A secular case against gay marriage A secular case against abortion rights Hey buddy, I'm a guy and you're making us all look like jackasses.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 10:13 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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