TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ravia Archive

View 1 post and 67 comments by ravia 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)
0

ravia/r/MensRights16/06/12 06:48 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-7

Pretty good bead.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 03:06 AM
-3

I'm not from /r/againstmensrights (I was banned for some reason I don't know). I'm for men's rights but hold that affirming women's rights goes right along with that. It is therefore a de rigueur necessity to be able to affirm a fairly obvious feminist issue, such as the odd placement of "kill" in the title for this picture post, and how that does play into a deeply objectifying attitude of violence towards women. Remember, this ad could also be of three men, and read "marry, fuck, or castrate".…
/r/MensRights22/12/12 10:57 PM
3

This is nice but it's naive. Men's and women's rights are both important (and shouldn't be taken as antagonstic or in some state of war) because like it or not you, man or woman or in between, are caught in political forces, even if you are not wholly reducible to these.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 12:05 PM
1

I haven't figured out the issues people have with SRS, actually. MR is pretty sane, as far as I can tell. AMR is reactionary and likes its straw men...and of course the occasional genuine MR prick.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:50 AM
5

Why exactly 18? That's just stupid. In fact, I think the whole panic people have over this issue is creepy as hell and very simplistic about things. I think in France this wouldn't raise an eyebrow. There's something wrong with this excess of categorization. Ultimately it reduces complex human circumstances to a kind of football goal line thing, a crudely imposed demarcation. It's funny how you add "or age of consent wherever". The whole thing is a stupid mess, no offense meant. I find the peopl…
/r/MensRights26/09/12 06:37 PM
0

Very swift...
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:54 PM
-1

I'm having a hard time buying that. In some cases, yes, that's about what might happen. But think about it: no pushing off, and no language at all, no "no" or "please, I don't want to", etc.? On the other hand, the critical issue wold seem to be that s/he changed her mind, however s/he got it across. but it still more or less has to be gotten across, doesn't it?
/r/MensRights22/08/12 06:21 PM
-6

When she "changed her mind"? How about "when she said she changed her mind"...
/r/MensRights22/08/12 05:48 PM
-1

She's messed up, but the host's a monster.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:44 PM
1

Here, look at this fucking headline on reddit: In Illinois, having sex with a 17-year old is legal, but photographing it isn't (nydailynew... So it's legal with a 17 year old. Many who are here are indeed great grandchildren of people who married at rather young ages. Others were molested. Others had sexual play at age 13 with a 10 year old that cold put them on an offenders' registry for life or something. 17. What about 14? 13? I'm not advocating it, but just how, exactly, does it turn from "l…
/r/MensRights24/06/12 08:20 PM
1

Such protracted, totalized violence is barbaric and wrong. He shows no indications of even had bad will towards the children. His victims appear to be functioning; I am not seeing stories of their immense suffering, only proclamations from others that they are ruined, destroyed people. This is a sexual anomoly that emerged in the case of what was apparently a maladjusted individual who became overly affectionate and inappropriately sexual. Holocaust-level violence is what you are calling for, "i…
/r/MensRights24/06/12 08:13 PM
1

What is the insanity by which you proclaim that their lives were ruined? What has been ruined is your idea of them being innocent of any sexual contact with an adult. You're immediately deciding, for them, that their lives are ruined. In a way, you're just saying the are ruined. It's crazy and wrong to say that. Shall we go find his victims, pull them out of their jobs and lives, take away all the have, prevent them from thinking any loving thoughts to their families, so they can be properly rui…
/r/MensRights24/06/12 08:06 PM
0

Is that the case? That's what I'm not seeing. It doesn't actually seem like it matters to you whether it is the case or not. Do you really care about "lifetimes of suffering"? In fact, it almost seems like you are saying that his victims are better off dead. Why and how is it a lifetime of punishment? How is it punishment? You mean suffering, I think. And is it? Must it be? Frankly, it looks like it is something that could be minimized, which seems to jibe with some things someone posted about h…
/r/MensRights24/06/12 07:55 PM
-3

Yeah, good point. That I"ll listen to. It doesn't look like it was predominantly rape on that order, and I do believe in gradations of rape, but when the kid is calling for help, that's pretty bad, I agree. I actually still don't think he looks like a monster for all of that.
/r/MensRights24/06/12 04:14 AM
-1

That's the question. I knew a family friend, a girl who I would baby sit along with her little brothers. She was a great kid. The mom was emotionally a bit abusive to her, but the girl took it well because the mom was so constantly sorry for this odd flaw she had about this. But meanwhile, it turns out the dad molested her regularly. I guess -- and I realize this sounds awful -- it effectively held the family together. The girl grew up, had kids, as far as I know she's high functioning. Meanwhil…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 07:24 PM
0

You're going way too far in equating these people with "mass murderers". Are those boys traumatized like survivors of mass murder? You can't be serious. And is Sandusky some kind of mass murderer? But I am sure of one thing: where it comes to actually and willfully trying to cause pain on others, on others in front of children, and ultimately as well to children, you are much closer to that than a Sandusky type. And I refer in this regard to precisely this kind of pointed, "depth trauma" you att…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 07:04 PM
-1

I'm only about real trauma. Any you want to mention. Calling me a cunt doesn't make something traumatic. It may be a real sign that something in you is pushing hard against what you take to be someone ignoring a deep wound, or knowledge of a deep wound, that is, a real understanding of trauma you may have. And it may not. A lot of the trauma reporting I see on this issue appears to be false and trumped up, created by secondary reaction. What makes something traumatic is what rips. Rips. Tears. J…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 06:24 PM
-2

Sure it does. I would say it matters enormously. Indeed, from the standpoint of intent, I continue to believe that the most egregious violence lies on the part of some anti-pedophiles, and a pretty rare sub-group of pedophiles. And so what if "it" is "with them" for their whole lives? You make it much worse than it is by viewing it as this horrendous abomination, rather than what it is: an confusing anomaly from an eccentric, probably trapped homosexual who was a bit of a kid inside, certainly q…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 06:15 PM
0

I would say I wish that anyone who suffered real trauma gets real justice in the form of remorse from the one causing the trauma. Much of this issue is surrounded by artificial trauma, and some real trauma, a great deal of meaningless revenge and so forth. When I see people talk about this issue, I know in my heart that many, if not most, don't know what real childhood trauma is, or care about it much. I find this whole to be a travesty. Sorry if you find this offensive. If you do find it offens…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 03:56 PM
-8

Were the boys really so seriously traumatized? I think the world should apologize to Sandusky and pedophile priests for being so stupid and not understanding these outlying human circumstances. He doesn't appear to have had malicious intent at all. He shouldn't have entered those relations with them, but the way this stuff is taken is a travesty.
/r/MensRights23/06/12 03:53 PM
0

There are different kinds of power. I can't explain it very easily I guess. Some of it has to do with extension across circumstances. So some of what I say looks like bloatware, but it can run a lot of programs, so to speak. I appreciate your reply as what you said, a friendly suggestion. I really wish I could explain why I put things the way I do: not to make excuses for a lack of work in simplifying things or editing, but just why and how it is already in a kind of most efficient form. That wo…
/r/MensRights17/06/12 06:13 PM
1

That was not my proposition. Are you going to keep this up?
/r/MensRights16/06/12 10:20 PM
0

Yeah, I've been sorting it out, but I've not engaged the more direct polemos between MR and AMR or even read it much. I know there are a lot of hard feelings. Can't we all just get along? Hah. I'm turning into either Rodney King or Reginald Denny (see, King was black, Denny white, both unwilling placers in a larger conflagration, etc......), in micro of course. I really don't have a fire burning right in the heart of "men's rights" as such, but as concerns nonviolence in various ways, so this sh…
/r/MensRights16/06/12 09:35 PM
1

When I can. Some of us were ground up so fully by the man machine early on that we don't have the means by to say much in the optimal ways. My particular art, in part, is to take tacks, so to speak, that address this matter, as I am able. You might see me at 10 o'clock on the horizon, or at 3. Who knows. It's funny how polemical some of these responses are. I'm reading yours as polemical.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 09:20 PM
-3

I think calling my comment meaningless goes too far and is quite polemical. I said what I think. You may not see the meaning, value or necessity in it. You may be wrong. It took me no effort to compose the response. To do the thinking that led up to it did take some effort and continues to do so. For the concept of "emergent primacy" alone, it is worth its space in pixels.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 09:16 PM
2

Now there should be good critique of MR. Everything deserves to enjoy the benefit of critique. Well, decent critique.
/r/MensRights16/06/12 07:26 PM
0

Ah, why did I sub to that in the first place? Your discernment here strikes me as rather good, since I am implying that I've somehow grown tired of their commentary, but was keen on the idea in the first place, which you hold pretty suspect. Like I've "come to the other side" and finally realized what you think one should have seen all along: that the AMR people are rabid, hopelessly biased, polemical, etc. I see your point. I'm not exactly coming from that position, however. I really am quite e…
/r/MensRights16/06/12 07:25 PM
-13

The women were too violent. He had a point, but he was too violent; repeated blows could have killed. The woman who screamed may have saved their lives. She screamed because she knew she was potentially witnessing a killing. Trayvon Martin was probably too violent. He potentially had a point to the degree that he genuinely felt threatened, but he was probably too violent. George Zimmerman screamed because he knew he was potentially being killed. Repeatedly smashing the head into the pavement cou…
/r/MensRights13/05/12 10:34 PM
0

I actually didn't expect to say this, but it just occurred to me anyhow. That parent was an idiot. But if you see a small child in a truly dangerous situation, you just have to see to it that they make their way home or to parents/police anyhow. I know it sucks, but you just should anyhow. You did the right thing and I hope you would again. Or enlist a nearby female to help. Actually come to think of it I did just that one time: in an area close to where a young child had been raped, I saw a 7 y…
/r/MensRights06/05/12 08:34 PM
-1

Some therapeutics have focused on the locus of control for rape victims, in the internal/unstable quadrant. I.e., the decisions the victim makes can be controlled by her (or him) and they are unstable (they can be changed). This means a kind of "blaming", but not obviously for the rape itself, but for getting into a vulnerable situation. This therapy has been among the most effective in helping to heal trauma by helping the victim feel less threateend by a future attack. The mensrights issue on …
/r/MensRights26/04/12 04:12 PM
3

Definite got a bad ass here.
/r/MensRights14/04/12 03:26 PM
2

There are many scenarios that are possible.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 04:11 PM
11

Actually a good point.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 04:07 PM
1

Satyagrahaha.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 04:07 PM
2

I think downvote brigaders should be systematically upvoted.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 04:06 PM
2

I think part of the question is whther they are using words sytematically. At that point it's another animal. Say several people get together back channel and start a posse, sort of like how the anti-mens-rights people operate at times. In some circumstances, such a procedure, commonly known as conspiracy, has a different form. While it is true it can not be addressed very easily, it is simply of a different kind than just "a person using words". It is a mode of social violence that can be quite…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 04:05 PM
5

Very fine words: "You're limiting your imagination". I'm really surpised that someone jumped right in with this rather obvious point. I can't conjecture easily about combining the use of words with legal action, and don't have a strong opinion either way, but the point is that this "imagination" part is quite important, and stevoutin's imagination is very much just in service of his point. He apparently doesn't realize that other situations can obtain. Imagine one has witnessed the death of a lo…
/r/MensRights12/04/12 03:55 PM
3

What is interesting is that you trot out a scenario. It is an interesting scenario. There are many such scenarios that are possible. Some of these detract from your point, although the one you use bolsters it. What about those other scenarios?
/r/MensRights12/04/12 03:52 PM
-1

That's pretty much BS. If a community wants to target an individual enough, they can do trauma that is quite serious and well beyond the bounds of any reasonable expectation that the person should be able to "take it". Smoking should be banned, BTW. What a fucking stupid example you used.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 03:50 PM
1

I wouldn't elevate that to an axiom. In any case, I just mean rejoinders, responses, corrections, etc.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 07:47 AM
1

There out to be a sub for those interested to do so, and want to do the work involved, to send replies to stuff like this with counter facts.
/r/MensRights25/03/12 08:38 PM
2

He's fighting a good fight. There are a lot of issues that really call for this kind of "next stage" rubric. Advocating for men's rights in a society that has been, in some ways, very male dominated. But those who have taken up the issue see clearly that it is not a simple matter of a late emergence, a "but note as well" addendum to feminism. The same goes for most other really big movements. I don't want to sound racist, but along with the always important issue of oppression of minorities come…
/r/MensRights14/02/12 04:41 PM
1

Violence and "manliness" tend to go together in certain ways. The violent treatment of men, especially in this strange form of "collateral damage" doesn't get recognized adequately, because it's somehow considered just what "comes with the territory" of being a man.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 08:53 PM
1

It's collateral damage, baby.
/r/MensRights03/02/12 08:17 PM
12

The /r/againstmensrights people think that there should be no place whatsoever for this kind of basic issue. And you should listen to them because they are righteous!
/r/MensRights03/02/12 12:09 AM
12

Hey it's collateral damage, baby!
/r/MensRights14/01/12 08:51 PM
1

I think this is coming mainly from the military culture/mindset that they are aggressively promoting. It makes the soldiers better soldiers in their "Army of One", but...at a price. That they don't make this rather obvious connection is part in parcel with the sorts of things they are incompetent to do in terms of "nation building" and, ultimately, peace-keeping as well.
/r/MensRights24/11/11 01:22 PM
1

Whew! You were a good one! But he's a bad one. Good thing you didn't do that. Now he's gonna get what he deserves. Kinda sad but at least you were ok. But that that 6 year old. Gotta nip 'em in the bud. Probably better to just....oh well you know what I was going to say...
/r/MensRights19/11/11 08:17 AM
1

This is as good a case as any for the often dismissed idea that to perpetuate this by punishing the parent really does do just that: perpetuate. This guy smacks down and "beats" daily in and through the court system. And all it affirms is crocodile tears (if even there was a wrong in the first place, of course): one cries because one is beat, not because one is in relation to some original harm. In fact, it's one of the surest ways to magnify the distance between any original harm and the perpet…
/r/MensRights02/11/11 07:46 AM
1

It was something of an apology; they were mainly working in a cartoonish register of caricature in the original joking, but of course it was a hideous, permanent mutilation of a human being. They don't really seem to appreciate that. I don't know why. I think there's something wrong there, not that others here don't think the same.
/r/MensRights20/07/11 07:33 PM
1

You're pretty serious.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 05:26 PM
1

It's funny but your formulation sort of puts that all too correctly, maybe without the article: "This is <> war. It's been waged for 40 years and has caused countless casualties in the lives of men, women, and children alike"
/r/MensRights10/07/11 01:40 PM
1

Not really fair and too polemical, and counter-productive. I realize that there is real and even at times horrific excess, but if you frankly should pepper your MR discourse with some recognition along the lines of, "I'm feminist when it comes to husbands murdering their wives, etc., but..." rather than just turning into an all-out war thing. James Thurber showed that this is just comical...
/r/MensRights10/07/11 12:16 PM
1

I don't think you should troll feminists. "They" have strong issues as well.
/r/MensRights10/07/11 11:45 AM
1

Fuck that. Keep 'em on their toes or they'll go south in short order.
/r/MensRights09/07/11 04:51 PM
2

Upvote for sarcasm. You need the help!
/r/MensRights09/07/11 12:35 PM
1

If you think this is about "moral relativism", you're way off. It is anything but that. What is ruling is retributivism and superficial justice held in place by systematic thoughtlessness and moralism.
/r/MensRights09/07/11 12:34 PM
1

The sad thing is it actually can be pretty decent. The main thing is when there is something that is really good, it's not developed and extended. The general forms of alternative sentencing, Restorative Justice and Victim-Offender Mediation are also considerably better. They could easily go south, too, just like any forced intervention. But the fact that tthey aren't looked into and implemented more tells you everything about society in general.
/r/MensRights09/07/11 12:33 PM
1

Basically this tells you something about society in general. A guy once told me about how he was going to do prison time for tagging. He was worried about getting raped. I barely knew him but I told him, in all seriousness, that if he were subject to rape and couldn't stop it, get protective custody, etc., to get word to me and I would fast outside the prison, as in a serious fast. I can't understand why more family members and don't do this for people on the inside who are subjected to rape and…
/r/MensRights09/07/11 12:30 PM
1

Maybe a new phrase is in order: cryably wrong.
/r/MensRights09/07/11 12:26 PM
0

Stupid! Stupid minds!
/r/MensRights02/07/11 06:04 PM
5

This is the kind of anti-feminism that sullies this issue, asshole.
/r/MensRights02/07/11 01:41 PM
4

It's not a racist point, oddly enough, but it could be.
/r/MensRights02/07/11 01:41 PM
4

I'm not a "men's rights activist" as such, but I'm interested in it. I am generally interested in nonviolence and a kind of philosophy. I look at what i call "second stage violence", which is different from "first stage violence", which is a more obvious kind of violence. Like, classic S1 violence would be a brutal prison like Attica, an S2 would be a more "up to date prison" that sops up all that mess with "better" institutional practices, yet...oddly enough may, by virtue of that very "improve…
/r/MensRights20/06/11 07:55 PM
0

I think semantics in philosophical contexts differs a bit from semantics in a non-philosophical ones. This finds a parallel in the difference between definitions and essences, the former paralleling non-philosophical, the latter paralleling philosophical. I think thought has to be freed up and active for this kind of issue in general. This means entering essences. Philosophy, or some of it, is able to clear up and open up essential definition as such. Terms that end in "-ness" are the hallmark o…
/r/MensRights14/06/11 04:22 PM
1

However, a skeptic will object that eliminating global power structures just allows local power structures to flourish, and the latter are often more oppressive than the former. Instead of a state, you have local strongmen, warlords, and gang leaders. You have the rule of force instead of the rule of law. That's why I advocate not anarchism but "enarchism", which employs a different operator, the "en-", to signify an employment from a certain place of freedom, albeit a mixed freedom. Based on bo…
/r/MensRights13/06/11 05:35 PM
0

I posted this on /r/Anarchism Perhaps one reason is that the concept of anarchy itself really doesn't have an automatic cache content regarding gender oppression. I know, I know "anarchism is anti-oppression". This really isn't true. It is being made to do double duty for anti-oppression (more generally: nonviolence, since other forms of violence are possible besides oppression as such) in a due modern/postmodern form. The anarchism that makes traditionalists (?) flee in terror is indeed somethi…
/r/MensRights13/06/11 05:29 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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