TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

rocknmebaby Archive

View 3 posts and 57 comments by rocknmebaby on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

What if the woman wants an abortion but the man doesn't?
/r/MensRights09/01/14 07:51 PM
1

I was simply trying to gain a greater understanding what of you were saying. But since you are being an ass about it, I guess I'll never know.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 07:42 AM
0

because they are graded more leniently Women have an easier time getting a job. Women are not expected to take personal responsibility for their problems and failures. Do you have sources or explanations for these? They almost seem almost too generalized to have any merit.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 06:08 AM
1

Are you trying to prove that men are smarter than women because, on this unlabeled graph with no source, more women favor Romney and Santorum and more men favor Paul, all with a margin of less than 5%?
/r/MensRights08/01/12 10:55 PM
3

It's common knowledge that girls who cry get more attention and compassion than boys who cry. I agree with this. But I don't think that the average person would laugh at a little boy crying.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 09:56 PM
5

Yes, I'm sure the out of 7.5 billion people there would be at least one person to do that. You could say that about anything. My point is that the video isn't a gender issue. I'm not really why the rudeness is needed.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 09:06 PM
4

How do you know? Did you talk to her? Neither of us know what the woman would have done, but based on the situation you described, it seems like she was focusing on the "cuteness" of the situation, thus ignoring or not realizing the baby's unhappiness. What makes you think that the woman was only laughing because the baby was a boy? I agree it's horrible that the woman would find so much pleasure in anyone's displeasure like that, but I don't believe the gender of the baby had anything to do wit…
/r/MensRights08/01/12 08:57 PM
5

Someone who would laugh at that would laugh at a girl in that situation too.
/r/MensRights08/01/12 08:30 PM
1

I think they portray both men and women in a negative light. Men are shown as lazy and stupid, and women are shown as shrewd and demanding.
/r/MensRights01/01/12 06:46 AM
2

Michigan
/r/MensRights27/12/11 03:13 AM
3

Probably traditionally, but I think it's more split now.
/r/MensRights27/12/11 02:50 AM
7

The only one that I could debate against is this one: 2) People are likely to assist me when I must perform a physically arduous task. As a woman, I find that people always assume I need help lifting/carrying something and it's annoying. I mean, if I'm obviously struggling the help is nice, but sometimes I won't have even attempted to pick up something light and it's expected that I'll need help.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 11:20 PM
1

Agreed. I don't think a woman should ever coax a man into fathering her a baby. I just didn't understand what you meant by your arguments that men don't have those options.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 12:40 AM
1

By saying men don't have those options do you mean that they don't have the option, to say, request that someone carrying their child go the routes of abortion/abandonment/abortion? I'm not arguing that men should have to pay child support. I'm agree with you on that. What I'm arguing is not all women who have children have them because they want to. Sometimes those things just happen. What happens financially afterwards is a different story.
/r/MensRights26/12/11 12:03 AM
1

I'm arguing people who have babies just so they can receive child support and welfare. And I don't think most people's drive to reproduce is big enough to jump through all the hoops to do so. And if we are talking about a human's drive to reproduce, how come apparently only women are doing this? Why isn't their a problem with men poking holes in condoms to satisfy their need for a baby?
/r/MensRights24/12/11 12:33 AM
1

Maybe I'm too optimistic and see too much good in everyone, but I don't think so many people are going to do something that unethical, especially at the expense of having a baby.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 11:28 PM
1

Not true? Under what circumstances? Adoption? Miscarriages? There are no restrictions on getting in a car and driving across state/county lines. True, however that requires time to be taken off work, which most women who are the in the position to get an abortion can't do. And that doesn't include a 3-day "waiting period" necessary in many states.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 11:13 PM
0

If you don't end a pregnancy, you're going to end up with a baby eventually and you are going to have to raise it. And my resources I don't just mean money. Abortion clinics are not easy to come by in a lot of areas and in many states there are many restrictions witch make abortion even more difficult to obtain. But there's not restrictions on getting a job and going to the grocery store down the street.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 11:02 PM
1

100% in a year and a month is hard to believe. Why were only 20 babies born in 18 months?
/r/MensRights23/12/11 10:57 PM
1

I was thinking someone who has done more research on the subject might have better sources. If you think you're so smart, why don't you contribute something relevant to the conversation?
/r/MensRights23/12/11 10:54 PM
1

Planned Parenthood is definitely not anywhere. In the US, there are many states where abortion is illegal and not available. In other, more conservative states, they can be few and far between. For instance in South Dakota, there is only one clinic in the 380,000 square miles, and it's on the border. Many states also have laws banning minors from obtaining abortions and having three day "waiting limits" where you must go through counseling. Most women who are in a position to get an abortion are…
/r/MensRights23/12/11 10:52 PM
2

And you think that many women would go through that much trouble to be responsible for multiple children just for some government assistance? Just because something is possible doesn't mean everyone does it. I'm not denying that this ever happens, I'm sure it does. But I think it's a bit insulting to assume that poor, young women are predetermined to do something as unethical as this.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 10:44 PM
1

The consensus here seems to be that it happens more often than not. I think that's ludicrous to believe. I'm sure it happens on occasion though.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 10:40 PM
1

I never said it never happens. But the general consensus in this thread has been that it happens more often than not, which I doubt.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 01:43 AM
0

Yes, many single mothers are on welfare, medicare, child support, whatever. My point is that they didn't have children for the purpose of being on these services. They are on these services because they had kids. I'm not an advocate of government assistance, but it's ludicrous to assume that poor, young women have children just to receive child support.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 01:19 AM
-6

Some times women don't have the resources available to them to end their unwanted pregnancies. So they end up raising them themselves. I don't think there's some subconscious thought to get pregnant just to receive child support.
/r/MensRights23/12/11 01:15 AM
-5

So you think that all accidental pregnancies end in abortion or adoption?
/r/MensRights22/12/11 11:50 PM
-4

Is this a serious question? Haven't you ever heard of someone conceiving a kid they didn't plan on having? Why does the country have anything to do with it?
/r/MensRights22/12/11 11:42 PM
0

That doesn't answer my question. I'm aware of the rate of single mothers. What I'm asking for is the rate of single mothers who have children for the purpose of taking advantage of the child support system.
/r/MensRights22/12/11 11:37 PM
5

I still don't have a source. Which magazine? Was the sample of all women in the UK or just women who read that specific magazine? Have there been any more studies on this?
/r/MensRights22/12/11 11:21 PM
-4

Source? I highly doubt that most single mothers purposely had kids.
/r/MensRights22/12/11 10:21 PM
6

the percentage of scum is far, far smaller, but the incentive structure makes having children outside of a stable relationship a more favorable option for women than the added responsibility of obligations to a man. So are you saying single mothers are choosing to have children by themselves instead of waiting until they are in a stable relationship?
/r/MensRights22/12/11 09:48 PM
1

Is using a liver from a murdered person supporting murder?
/r/MensRights22/12/11 09:25 PM
0

Did you read what I wrote? Or do you just assume that anyone who disagrees with any part of any article with anything to do with circumcision is an immoral, evil being who loves to mutilate babies?
/r/MensRights22/12/11 01:13 AM
1

They obviously aren't donated by the four year old. But they are donated by the parents and/or hospital. I'm not saying removing foreskins is right, I'm just saying these labs aren't actively circumcising for this purpose.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 08:26 PM
3

What else should they do with the organs? Put them back in the bodies? Throw them away?
/r/MensRights21/12/11 03:15 PM
9

I'm not denying circumcision, of any gender or species, is wrong, but the facility is not circumcising themselves, they are just using foreskins that are donated. If someone cuts off my finger, and it's sent to a lab for research, cutting my finger off was obviously a bad thing, but the lab itself isn't doing anything wrong.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 02:50 PM
1

Check the sidebar under: "Short list of the challenges faced by males." There's a good list of what you're looking for with some links.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 02:39 PM
2

Oh, thanks for the reminder! I'm just going to walk over to the capital and change all the laws this instant. Then I'm going to wave my magic stick and change the expectations of society.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 02:28 PM
26

The link isn't working right for me so I can't read the article, but are the parents giving consent to this? If yes, it seems to be more of a Youth Rights issue. As, under the law, parents have say over their kids until they are 18. I'm also assuming that the laboratory is using already circumcised foreskins. It's not any different than using a liver that's been removed from a body. Circumcision is an issue, but I don't think this means that "it's official, boys now have less worth than animals.…
/r/MensRights21/12/11 02:13 PM
3

As a woman, I never understood this. If a woman is all over a man, the man is supposed to feel as if it's a compliment and go along with it. If a man is all over a woman, he's creepy and abusive. No one should be able to act like this. Double standards exist both ways, and unfortunately not enough people realize it yet.
/r/MensRights21/12/11 01:59 PM
1

I never said the situation I described just happened to women. It just made sense to use women in the context of what I was replaying too. No one should have to raise or be responsible a child they didn't agree to have.
/r/MensRights26/11/11 06:27 AM
0

Are we just arguing semantics here? Would you say that feminists harm men but women's rights advocates don't? Some pro-male groups (for lack of better words) do seek to harm women. This MRM doesn't. Just like some pro-female groups seek to harm men, and others don't.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 08:00 PM
1

If your point is that the majority of self identified feminists are not true feminists but rather a bunch of selfish liars. I never said that. Some are, but the majority are not.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 07:58 PM
1

Did I ever say that restricting men's rights in the name of women's rights is okay? No. Yes, some people think that way. I'm not denying that. All I'm asking for is a more balanced view. Not all people are as educated on gender issues as we are, and it would help to add something about how anti-male feminists are not the entire women's rights movement.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 07:57 PM
1

The first link doesn't work, and I don't see how the 2nd on contradicts my point. almost all studies that have compared men and women find about equal rates of self-defense. Finally, it was painful for mc as feminist to writc this commentary. I have done so for two reasons. First, I am also a scientist and, for this issue, my scientific commitments overrode my feminist commitments. I believe that the safety and well being of women requires efforts to end violence by women The author is saying th…
/r/MensRights25/11/11 06:29 PM
0

But at this point, the mistakes of Penn State a few people are too great. The people who are responsible for this do not make up the entire university.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 06:19 PM
0

My point is those "feminists" who deny men, create VAWA, etc. aren't true feminists. They aren't looking for equal rights, they are looking for more ways to benefit themselves, and are just using gender as an excuse. No they don't support the laws denying men of rights when they raped. We recognize rape as a universal issue, not solely a women's issue. There is also a group on campus solely dedicated to raising awareness on sexual assault and rape, but I am not very familiar with them because I …
/r/MensRights25/11/11 06:18 PM
2

No, not at all. I also think it's BS that women can't fight in combat (in the US, don't know about other jurisdictions). I think a woman should be able to play on the football team, and if she gets hurt by being tacked by a 250 lb. linebacker. It's not anyone's fault, that's just the consequence of playing contact sports.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 06:07 PM
1

I have a problem with these laws too, but it is not at the fault of feminism. The people advocating these biased rape, domestic violence, etc. laws are not true feminists, they are selfish people who don't want any negative consequences for their actions. They are the equivalent of people who advocate for a male-dominated patriarchy.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 06:00 PM
1

Thank you, this is the kind of response I was hoping for. I don't call myself a feminist because I don't want to be associated with the negative connotations. I'm just trying to relay the fact that it is not as simple as feminism = bad, which you seem to understand.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 05:57 PM
0

Feminism isn't doing anything to discriminate against anyone. Feminism isn't about making men pay more child support or saying women aren't capable of rape. The people making those claims are just crazy, selfish people. Also, I'm not "complaining," I'm trying to create an adult discussion, but you would just rather condescend me and accuse me of things I don't do. I do stand up for my beliefs. I am a member of a very active women's rights group on my college campus with people who call themselve…
/r/MensRights25/11/11 05:53 PM
2

So the issue is with semantics. Many people here see feminists as "bad" and women's rights advocates as "good"? If there was a movement called Masculinism that was similar to Feminism (but different than Men's Rights) would that essentially be the same thing?
/r/MensRights25/11/11 05:41 PM
1

Explain?
/r/MensRights25/11/11 05:34 PM
6

I think in this case your statement in true, but shouldn't apply to all situations. If a man slips off a condom during sex and gets a woman pregnant against her will/knowledge, he shouldn't be able to say "You body; your responsibility." I know you probably aren't trying to say that, but I'm just throwing it out there.
/r/MensRights25/11/11 04:23 PM
1

What does any other sport have to do with this? Why should the soccer, track, golf, gymnastics, etc. team be penalized?
/r/MensRights25/11/11 04:13 PM
1

I'm sure that not 100% of the university was more upset about losing the coach. Should say, the tennis team, be penalized for the huge sympathy of the football team?
/r/MensRights25/11/11 04:12 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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