TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

rationalinquisition Archive

View 0 posts and 67 comments by rationalinquisition 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)
9

Doesn't matter. Big brother and sister is watching you. Yes but big brother and sister don't call potential employers and tell them you were binge drinking on a Tuesday six years go. Anything is possible. Possible =/= believable.
/r/MensRights02/10/19 07:19 PM
19

Social media yes, sure I've heard of that. That's why you keep your shit locked up private and/or heavily curated. But calling your school to ask if someone has ever accused you of anything? It's just not believable.
/r/MensRights02/10/19 07:14 PM
51

What employer calls your university to ask if there have been accusations against you? This doesn't make sense to me at all.
/r/MensRights02/10/19 07:07 PM
1

Seems fine to me then. As long as this is an initiative that purpose is to achieve gender equality and is applied fairly to all genders I don't have a problem with it.
/r/MensRights25/09/19 06:17 AM
1

What if you had a female dominated industry that opened recruitment exclusively to men? Would that be allowed?
/r/MensRights24/09/19 09:16 PM
37

My Joe Rogan experience ended because he wore me out. He never shuts up. He talks and talks and talks. He doesn’t seem to grasp that not every thought inside his brain needs to be said out loud. He runs a TALK SHOW. Of course he's going to talk on his TALK SHOW.
/r/MensRights22/08/19 05:20 PM
-1

It depends. If he had done it while she was attacking him, the video recording would likely be enough to cover him in self defense, provided he only hit her once in retaliation. Any other time and yes, he would have rightfully been arrested for assault or battery, depending on the state.
/r/MensRights12/08/19 04:57 PM
5

Horrible company and not just for this. There was a big thread awhile back about how they post job recruitment ads, demand work samples, and then use the work samples while ghosting the applicants.
/r/MensRights19/06/19 04:45 PM
2

Personally I think legal parenthood rights should be an entirely separate matter from biology. Legally, both parents get an equal right to be the parents of the child. Either parent can revoke that right and all responsibilities associated with it. If they do so, they give up all responsibility for child support, all visitation rights, and all right to make any decisions for the child. If both parents give up their rights, the child is put into foster care. If both parents keep their rights but …
/r/MensRights20/05/19 07:44 PM
6

Could I get the source for this please? So I can reference later.
/r/MensRights24/04/19 03:25 PM
0

I'm not convinced. You have to be a satire account. Especially with the subtle things like using "divulged" instead of "diverged"
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 05:43 PM
0

Are you fucking with me? Because this is pushing it even for Poe's law. I'm sure the whole growing shredded golden calves on a treadmill thing had to have pushed me past the Poe's law threshold. So you must be fucking with me.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 05:27 PM
0

Your flag flies high for the false idol you have been deceived into worshipping. The deceit has tricked you into thinking that you work outside of the very system that has pushed your face into the pie of self-deception. You think you move with purpose, but really you run on the treadmill of self-conceit while you accomplish nothing other than to grow the shredded golden calves that you worship so fervently. Your very existence serves as a warning of the limitations of independence to those who …
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 05:19 PM
1

Assuming I have no agency for my community? Of course you don't! You hang from the buttress at the center of the Tower of Babylon, convinced you stand upon the pinnacle, leaning out over the lands below convinced you are in control. But you don't realize that you haven't even climbed to the summit, and even if you were to make that realization, the only end result is that the foundations of your disbelief would come crashing down around you. Grow up and see the light outside of the cave! You wou…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 04:59 PM
1

Hey man you do you, just don't blow anything up or shoot anybody.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 04:53 PM
1

Do yourself a favor and get out from underneath the corrupt mold of society before you attempt to define a legal jurisdiction of your own. Sorry, but I'm not at all interested in discussing sovereign citizenship or whatever this is. My original post was to speak to the reasonableness of the woman presented in the context of the society in which she is a participant, not to judge her by a set of heretofore undefined standards, or to discuss the merit of societal standards at large.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 04:40 PM
2

While you can create contracts that cover most situations that a marriage would cover, you also lose a lot of tax shields if you do it that way. So, it's ridiculous to state something so easily reproduced I would argue that it's not easily reproduced at all. You are going to have to draft up many small, individual contracts to cover the broad range of what marital laws already cover. From a legal standpoint, it's much easier to just get married and to draft a prenup instead to modify the marital…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 04:29 PM
-1

I think expecting your partner to make a long-term commitment without marriage is a reasonable expectation. Marriage protects the wife legally in important ways. If, for instance, there is a problem with the husband's will, if the two are married most of the estate will default to the spouse intestate. But if they are not, she wouldn't get anything. While that might not be a big deal a year after the marriage, what about after 10? Most states do not have common law marriage. If the husband is wo…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/04/19 03:13 PM
2

Translation: I'm mostly looking to get high, and I'm currently too broke to do so, and if you are also looking to get high and too broke to do so, then I am going to keep looking until I find someone who has drugs.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen07/03/19 07:57 PM
2

This is my opinion on the matter as well. People are attracted to who they are attracted to, and nobody is obligated to be with someone they aren't attracted to. That being said, the fact that she can only be attracted to a dominant man and she lost her attraction over this means she should probably seek therapy.
/r/MensRights15/02/19 10:26 PM
3

While that's all well and good, attempting to debate the subject with most people just makes them dig in their heels. Which is fine, if you don't really want to sway them. But if you want to change their minds, I've found that the personal anecdote tends to be pretty effective. I like to tell a story about a guy I know who got completely screwed over by the legal system. See, I know this guy who was going through a divorce. Him and his wife had been separated for about a year, and all that was l…
/r/MensRights05/02/19 09:48 PM
1

I know sending photos OF someone under 18 is a crime, I just wasn't sure if sending photos TO someone at 17 is a crime. I know it is for kids under 16 is for sure.
/r/MensRights29/01/19 10:40 PM
0

Is a 22 year old sending a 17 year old photos even a crime?
/r/MensRights29/01/19 06:56 PM
16

If he had responded immediately to the initial assault I would say she was 100% at fault and it was self-defense, but since she had stopped attacking him when he started hitting her they both committed separate assaults, so they are both toxic.
/r/PussyPassDenied04/01/19 08:35 PM
16

Male viewers spend 44% more time on the site than female viewers. The top 5 youtubers are Pewdie, Mr. Perfect, Whindres Nunes, El Rubius, and Fernanfloo. Of those, 3 are gaming channels and 1 is a sports channel. It's pretty self-explanatory. There is a greater demand for content related to male-dominated hobbies because there are more men on the site than women. As they are male-dominated hobbies, men are more likely to providing that content. There is no conspiracy or sexism. Edit: Just becaus…
/r/MensRights10/12/18 07:36 PM
1

It helps that the coordinated campaigns by actual hate groups to associate themselves with the movement seem to have largely died down as well. Although I'm worried that may kick up again going into the midterms.
/r/MensRights18/10/18 05:01 PM
1

I used to be a Liberal. Never again. Not until the rot and the evil has been purged. If you change your opinion on the ideal proper extent and nature of government involvement in an economy because elected politicians accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, then your opinions on economics have not been rationally developed.
/r/MensRights02/10/18 07:43 PM
11

I wonder if you could turn around and sue her for damages. Her illegal actions caused him damages in the amount of his child support payments. So he writes her a check, and then she rights him a check for the same amount, and that's that.
/r/MensRights24/09/18 07:52 PM
1

Maybe off topic but why would they call it manterrupting instead of menterrupting?
/r/MensRights18/09/18 08:58 PM
1

They are more harmful to society as well. Recidivism goes up with longer prison sentences, and the concurrent increased impact on the crime rate from our current sentencing far exceeds the reduction to the crime rate from the deterrent effect. It also increases the costs of housing prisoners, which means more taxes. The only people who benefit from sentences as long as we currently have are the people who run the prisons. Also, you speak very strangely. I don't know why but for some reason the w…
/r/MensRights06/09/18 02:18 PM
2

I think extreme prison sentences is more harmful and a bigger civil rights violation.
/r/MensRights04/09/18 05:53 PM
2

Deterrence follows a standard curve with respect to sentence length, and the sentences we have now are so many standard deviations from the mean that the deterrent effect of the last few standard deviations of additional sentencing is practicably non-existent. At the same time, recidivism increases with sentencing length, and follows a more linear trajectory of increased recidivism with longer sentences. So actually, if we were to reduce the length of our current sentences, we would see an overa…
/r/MensRights30/08/18 01:19 AM
7

Video of her singing & dancing for convenience
/r/MensRights29/08/18 09:34 PM
1

I mean, I do think it's too harsh. I think most sentencing in the US is too harsh. Rather than giving women harsher sentences to find parity, I want to see men get more lenient sentencing.
/r/MensRights29/08/18 06:49 PM
2

Actually in America unfortunately the burden does fall on the accused I'm not sure about the rest of America, but in reference to the United States, this statement is completely false. The US has a presumption of innocence. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_v._United_States if they can’t enter it in as evidence the accuser must simply enter their own current statement and then the accused must reciprocate and so on What "it" are you referring to? It's not clear what you are trying to say…
/r/MensRights19/07/18 02:27 AM
1

How could it be proven that the accuser gave 'explicit' consent for that entire encounter? The new laws don't shift the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. They just change the definition of consent to require explicit consent instead of implicit consent. The burden would still be on the accuser to prove that consent was not obtained. At least in countries with a presumption of innocence.
/r/MensRights18/07/18 09:17 PM
1

Not necessarily. Even with a presumption of innocence the law could be permissible so long as the burden of proof remains on the accuser to prove that consent was not obtained. If this law comes to the US and someone asks you if you obtained explicit consent always either say yes or plead the 5th. It would be actually be best if everybody always plead the 5th when asked no matter if explicit consent was obtained or not. A gentleman never kisses without pleading the 5th. Edit: Actually that would…
/r/MensRights18/07/18 09:15 PM
1

Rape isn't a crime in Montana. It's referred to as sexual intercourse without consent there.
/r/MensRights26/06/18 06:54 PM
2

Whenever I try to look at Ceddit the place where the comments should be is just blank. Same with removeddit. Do you happen to know why this might be?
/r/MensRights06/04/18 09:01 PM
6

Wouldn't it be feminism-> masculism? If it's menism it should be womanism.
/r/MensRights08/03/18 03:42 PM
4

Anti-social personality disorder.
/r/PussyPass24/07/17 04:37 AM
10

AKA She-bagging
/r/MensRights11/05/17 05:57 AM
3

A lot of people in here are saying that you are not a feminist for this view. Feminism and egalitarianism are not mutually exclusive. There are different types of feminism, and a lot of people here seem to have mistakenly associated feminism with misandry simply because there are a minority of feminists who are also misandrists and are currently very vocal. Please be aware not everyone in this sub shares that viewpoint.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/02/17 11:28 PM
4

The way I think about it, affirmative action should only apply to people who have structural barriers to receiving an education" The scholarship isn't just for men, it gives preference to men who are underprivileged and want to practice in rural areas. So these are people who are underprivileged and who can't access female-only scholarships .... that seems like a structural barrier to me.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/02/17 11:20 PM
1

I think it has to do with penetration being required for rape in some places. Since the woman cannot penetrate the man without sticking a finger up his bum or something only the man can rape.
/r/MensRights12/01/17 08:31 PM
2

And you don't have enough to go in front of a court, It isn't expensive to get in front of a judge. If a person needed to, they could just go down to the courthouse and pick up one of their template petitions for modification of child support and fill it out themselves. Probably do a little research on google first to make sure they at least know the basics of how child support is calculated in their state. All told its usually only about a hundred dollars at most as long as you don't use a lawy…
/r/MensRights04/01/17 03:32 PM
3

Most child support calculations will take into account things like daycare and insurance. If you have actually been ordered to pay for school supplies and clothing, etc. then that should also have been taken into account in the calculation. If you have not received a court order to pay for those things and you are paying for them anyway you should stop as it is the responsibility of the custodial parent to take care of the day-to-day necessities like that. You only actually have to supply those …
/r/MensRights03/01/17 11:23 PM
21

Most courts will have free basic forms you can fill out for this type of stuff. Just have to document all of your expenses and then pay a filing fee. If you don't have representation the courts will usually forgive you if you make mistakes and help you work it out, but the big thing is just getting the issue in front of the judge in the first place. IANAL, but I used to be a family law paralegal.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 09:42 PM
163

So now I get to bit all his clothes doctor and every thing else because she won't spend a dime on him . You might file for a modificaiton of child support. You are not the primary caregiver and you are paying for things like clothing and doctor's bills which are supposed to be paid for by the mother. You can prove that you are paying for things the mother is supposed to, therefore you have a strong case that child support should be modified in your favor to reflect your additional contributions.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 05:16 PM
4

/r/titlegore
/r/MensRights07/12/16 02:57 AM
2

…. Is an independent body and must make a decision based solely on the evidence before it. It cannot be swayed by emotion or public opinion. After the preliminary injunction, this Court was deluged with emails resulting from an organized campaign to influence the outcome. These tactics, while perhaps appropriate and effective in influencing legislators or officials in the executive branch, have no place in the judicial process. This is basic civics, and one would think students and others affili…
/r/MensRights04/10/16 03:56 PM
32

“It’s disturbing and troubling to see Title IX invoked in this manner,” said Lisa Schwartzman" HAHAHA Schadenfreude
/r/MensRights01/08/16 08:17 PM
4

If I attended that school I would have just used the lounge and claimed to identify as a woman every time someone complained.
/r/MensRights01/08/16 08:12 PM
-3

The reason is different depending on the type of spousal support you are referring to. If you are referring to lump-sum non-modifiable spousal support, it is because that support is treated as a real asset that was effectively acquired by the person entitled to it at the separation, but that is transferred over a long period of time. In this case, making payments to creditors instead of paying your spousal support would be akin to using your former spouses assets to underwrite a loan to yourself…
/r/MensRights28/07/16 11:48 PM
-10

I agree that ex-wive's (or ex-husband's) spousal support payments should have priority on future earnings over other creditors, just like child support payments do. Also, you are drawing a lot of assumptions about her beliefs from what was a fairly limited statement.
/r/MensRights28/07/16 09:36 PM
2

17 and 24 really isn't that big of an age difference. If it was 18 and 24 and they weren't in a student/teacher relationship, it would seem pretty normal.
/r/MensRights28/07/16 09:12 PM
7

That's what OP seems to be implying, which is patently ridiculous. I don't know why so many people seem to be unable to distinguish disbelief from non-belief.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 09:36 PM
1

No, its very common actually. I used to work in an area of law related enough to this that I was around cases.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 02:18 PM
3

Plea bargains like this are common in rape cases with children this young, for both men and women. Basically what it boils down to is that there usually isn't enough physical evidence to convict in this type of case due to the nature of the offense (more often there will be evidence with men in the form of semen, but even then it isn't all that common). Due to the emotional response that this type of accusation illicits in a jury, there is a higher than usual likelihood that the jury will convic…
/r/MensRights27/07/16 11:28 AM
2

I hope this judge loses friends and loved ones who are disgusted by his statements. Shameful.
/r/MensRights27/07/16 11:17 AM
0

*3rd/4th wave feminist version of equality. 2nd wave feminists, and their modern successors (see Christina Hoff Sommers) actually are about equality.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/05/16 07:31 PM
1

However he would have to pay to pursue legal action against her. I don't know about the UK, but in the US the father is assumed to have timeshare rights unless the mother can provide a reason why he shouldn't have them. Even if the father was broke, he could represent himself well enough to get SOME visitation, barring something like a felony conviction or proof of drug abuse, child abuse, etc. And there are, to my knowledge, no penalties for a mother who has custody disobeying any court orders …
/r/MensRights07/03/16 06:49 AM
2

What country is this where the mother can just unilaterally ban the father from the child's life?
/r/MensRights07/03/16 04:19 AM
6

I always thought that a man should be able to sign a waver within the first trimester of the pregnancy that says he doesn't want to have the baby. By signing the waver, he absolves himself of all rights and obligations as a parent of the child. If the mother doesn't inform the father within enough time for him to sign the waver, he is automatically absolved of all obligations as the parent of the child, but can still choose to accept both the rights and obligations when he finds out. This would …
/r/MensRights08/02/16 11:02 AM
-1

Thanks for the sanity. I agree with the judge, I don't think that accidentally killing someone should result in ruining a second life. To the people in other parts of the thread who posted links to guys getting harsher penalties for the same thing: I don't agree with their sentences, but that doesn't change the fact that I don't think this woman deserved a harsher sentence.
/r/MensRights09/01/16 08:47 AM
4

I used to be a paralegal for a family law firm. Following this woman's advice is a great way to waste all the marital assets so neither party gets anything when all is said and done.
/r/MensRights16/07/15 10:06 PM
2

I think people can logically prefer whatever the fuck they want to. But if they then get mad at other people's preferences then they are being hypocritical.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/05/15 09:10 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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