TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

rooktakesqueen Archive

View 1 posts and 89 comments by rooktakesqueen 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)
2

I know what a thought experiment is. Point being, the old "cars are rushing toward A and B and you only have time to save one of them" is a bit more straightforward.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 09:42 PM
1

This is getting further and further removed from reality (why can't they split meals? is skipping one meal going to literally cause immediate death? how did we get in this position? how am I making this decision, how did they get to be more malnourished than me if I would generally feed the kids first? is there nobody who would give me food to prevent a child starving to death? is there nobody with excess food I can steal even?) but I'll play along. If I were forced to make such a decision, my c…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 08:39 PM
2

...I didn't ask that question. I didn't ask to choose one of child or step-child, I asked to choose two of self, child, and step-child. /u/yo_radical_one agreed with my answer to that one, then reframed it in terms of choosing between the two children and gave his approach and I gave mine. If one child is hungrier, pick that one. Else, if one child is younger, pick that one. Else, flip a coin I guess? (The thought experiment seems to assume splitting a meal isn't an option.)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 06:06 PM
5

Glad you take responsibility for your errors so readily.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 05:48 PM
2

Sure. Like for example if one of the children is in daycare and had lunch there, and the other child isn't and hasn't eaten since yesterday, I'd probably feed the child that hasn't eaten since yesterday.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 05:39 PM
7

Well, I'm the person OP was talking to in the other thread, who you accused of "feminine imperative." I figured my flair would make it clear that I'm a dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 05:35 PM
7

Uh huh. Feminine imperative. Totally.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 04:58 PM
1

Nope. I'd like to think one of the reasons she loves me is my integrity and genuineness. I would certainly defend her from anything that got too personal, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 04:50 PM
1

If you just wouldn't put yourself in that position, that's perfectly fine. I read it not as "I wouldn't marry a woman with kids because I couldn't act as a responsible parent to them" but rather "I might marry a woman with kids, I just wouldn't participate in raising them." I'm friends and family to too many step-children whose step-parents treated them like utter garbage to take that lightly, and with too many others whose step-parents or adoptive parents treated them exactly like they would a …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 04:44 PM
0

Support her, yes. Agree that she's in the right, no. And she knows to expect that, and I expect the same. Thankfully we rarely have serious disagreements, so it's not often tested.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 04:36 PM
3

Cool. I'd go with the hungrier child, personally. Or if everyone's equally hungry, the younger one. You're equally both children's guardian and parent, even if you're not equally the sperm donor to both.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 04:11 PM
0

Hi! Since the original thread was about the poster's own step-child, not a random dude on the street, let's turn it around: You, your biological child, and your step-child are all hungry. You have enough money to feed two people. Who do you feed? If you say "me and my child, and my step-child can go to hell" then I maintain my characterization of your position: awful.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 04:02 PM
1

What double standard? If you want a woman who will cook and clean and fuck on demand, and if Jane Doe wants a man who will bring home a paycheck and buy her jewelry and basically be her sugar daddy in exchange for those things, you're both equally entitled to those standards. And those standards are equally outdated and actively harmful for either of you finding a partner to make you happy. One-income households aren't exactly the norm any more because they're impractical for most incomes. Now t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/15 03:52 AM
1

...Go ahead and re-read the first sentence of my post?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 10:34 PM
1

Perhaps you didn't, but one of the links you held up as an example did. I'd find it if I could still see the post. It was a charming example that also said something derogatory about a desire to "save the negroes" or somesuch.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 10:21 PM
1

The fact is, you can't really express these wants in a relationship with a woman because hten you might as well be oppressing her. Its a relationship ending fight in my experience. Why shouldn't it be, if you clearly want different things from the relationship? There are women out there who absolutely want nothing more than to be a good wife and mother. And I wish the two of you the best of luck finding each other and then acting out your own lifelong rerun of Leave It to Beaver. When people acc…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 10:15 PM
1

Ah, but you left out the part about wanting a wife who will cook, clean, fuck on demand, and have absolutely nothing else in her life. That she should, in fact, not have any ambitions greater than learning how to give better blowjobs. I'd find the actual quote but the links are gone along with this post.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 10:02 PM
2

I think I missed the memo where crucifixion became a thing again. Unless by "crucified" you mean "people calling you names you don't like."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 03:48 PM
2

You're allowed to want what you want. We're allowed to call you an insufferable regressive Neanderthal for it. If you can find a woman who wants to be this for you, more power to you. It's going to be very hard, because most people don't actually want to be treated like a slave in a 24/7 relationship, but hey... Some do! Overall you're drawing a false equivalence here. We're not saying anyone is wrong to have standards. But not all standards are equivalent. Expecting your wife to cook, clean, pu…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 03:43 PM
1

Sure! But there are many more intrinsic needs in the human psyche. And you know, some people approach self improvement as a means to achieve those needs directly. Yet you seem to believe these activities are limited to a means toward getting you laid: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2wreex/do_bpers_unknowingly_measure_men_by_the_same/cotpvta None of this seems very consistent. Is sex the only true need-fulfilling activity?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 04:59 PM
0

Everything worth doing is a means to an end. So sex, too, is a means to an end? Of course people want to get laid. So sex is an end in itself?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 01:48 PM
0

So it's not about self improvement, it's about getting laid. Self improvement is but a means to an end.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 01:25 AM
5

So in other words, it isn't about getting fit or motivated or any of that stuff. It's about the RP philosophy on gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/15 05:52 PM
5

a single sub that has effective motivation, an active community, and resources for all of those things /r/fitness /r/GetMotivated /r/books
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/15 03:43 PM
0

We're not telling you to be a decent person to attract women. We're just telling you to be a decent person. Full stop. If you'll only consider being a decent person in order to attract women... Then you're not one.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 04:30 PM
10

Step one: stop viewing sex as a "conquest." Sex is a mutually enjoyable activity for two or more consenting adults. This step is key, because it's what allows you to get past the block that many RPers have around having sex with people who are not conventionally attractive or who have had many partners in the past. If sex isn't about "conquering" and securing your social legacy, it's just a very pleasant pastime, why have these hangups at all? Once you've gotten past this, your dating field just…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/15 02:05 PM
1

You describe yourself as "violent, rude, and uncaring." Those are not descriptions of emotional states, rather are behaviors. But those behaviors do correspond to emotions and moods: violence stems from anger, rudeness stems from resentment or disdain, uncaring stems from apathy or depression or isolation. When you are angry, you are not happy. When you are resentful, you are not happy. These are mutually exclusive states. If you are habitually in emotional states that preclude happiness--so hab…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 08:41 PM
2

Perhaps being true to myself means being violent, rude and uncaring and that me suppressing those parts of my personality made me have a less rewarding life? Is your advice to someone like me to still be myself? Unless you're a sociopath, human beings just aren't wired that way out the gate. If your default state toward your fellow human beings is anger, resentment, and apathy, then I'd implore you to seek professional therapy, because that's a fucking awful way to live your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 06:38 PM
2

I'm not sure how "be nice and be yourself" are in any way similar to self-castration. I'm also not sure what rewards I promised, aside from the intrinsic one of being a better person for it. When you take stock of yourself, of your life, of your interests and activities and hobbies... Do you really judge everything solely on how much pussy you'll get out of it? Does that not feel a bit... empty, to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 06:21 PM
1

Let's examine the three ways we can take that! Both parts are true The first part is untrue: "you'll attract more women" The second part is untrue: "being nice and being yourself are only worth doing if they help you score with chicks" Not sure this went where you intended to take it. Something something pedestal.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 06:10 PM
3

We're all familiar with the common gripe from TRP and other struggling dudes that blame their plight on ~feminists~ and BP shills telling them to "just be nice" or "just be yourself" in order to attract women. Gonna step in just for this one since I seem to be seeing it a lot: Don't "be nice" or "be yourself" in order to attract women. If you're doing it to attract women, you're giving up the game at the start. You're trying to be genuine for an ungenuine reason. Be nice and be yourself for your…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 04:20 PM
1

Instead of just linking the entire speech, can you explain why you think it says feminism is a sexual strategy?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 02:50 PM
1

You can get personal satisfaction from being kind. But if you're only kind to others because you expect some kind of direct quid pro quo, that doesn't actually make you a nice person. There's a huge difference between "being nice to somebody you like" and "being nice so that person will date/fuck you."
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/15 01:48 PM
1

To respond to your edit: So this chick rejected and lied to you, and you later went to her wedding? That whole story just made me feel sad. She rejected me, yes. Did she lie to me? I don't know. Maybe she just changed her mind and decided this particular guy was worth the (very real) extra risk that comes with dating someone you work with. Does that make him better than me? No, it makes him perhaps a better fit for her. (And he is. They have a lot more in common.) Or maybe she told me a little w…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 11:25 PM
1

Oh, don't get me wrong. It's absolutely possible for assholes to have success with women. Point is, it's also possible for non-assholes to have success with women. Which is antithetical to RP philosophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 09:02 PM
2

Guys who are attracted to a girl and act nice and gentlemanly because they think that's how they are supposed to act, because their mothers, romantic movies, the media and society all tell them that's what they are supposed to do when they like someone? Again: don't be nice to get into somebody's pants. Be nice because it's the proper way to treat people. Or, if you don't think that being nice is the proper way to treat people... At the very least have the honesty not to be nice to anyone! And y…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 08:56 PM
2

There's a difference between a guy who is nice, and a "nice guy." To wit: if you believe there is any amount of "niceness" you can put into a relationship that entitles you to sex, you are not nice. You are a "nice guy." If you are only kind and respectful for the purpose of attracting women, you are not nice. You are a "nice guy." If you complain about women going for "bad boys" instead of "nice guys," by which you really mean that woman went for him instead of you, and how dare she! then you a…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 08:23 PM
2

Please, the emphasis is definitely on the latter. Which as you'll note I crossed out in my response. You're right, confidence and dominance are not the same thing. And being casually domineering isn't the same as confidence or dominance. Yep, go ahead. Take the easy cop-out. A die-hard feminist that used to have a male body is parroting something most men have been telling feminists. But no, let's ignore it, that's much easier. Third option: I am a man and, roughly around when that article was w…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 07:54 PM
2

No, not even close to true. Some men are, particularly low-testosterone men, but a very large percentage of men would rather have a woman that was pleasant and submissive. Solipsism 101. Why do you assume "strong, confident" and "pleasant, submissive" are mutually exclusive? I assure you they're not. People who actually prefer partners who have low self esteem are predators. Most men are not predators. You must have forgotten this post earlier. Transgendered feminist chides women for spouting th…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 07:17 PM
3

I don't think it's all her fault, hypothetibro does. Or else he wouldn't be in the "anger" stage of taking the red pill, right? A well-adjusted person would evaluate the situation and say, "OK, this relationship didn't work. What went wrong? How much of it was things she did, how much of it was things I did? How can I prevent these same breakdowns from happening in my future relationships, or recognize fundamental incompatibilities before getting too invested?" At the very least, if he's going t…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 04:00 PM
4

What I'm hearing from your hypothetical scenario is: she cheated on him after he spent years taking her for granted, and so that's 100% her fault, nay, her gender's fault. Way to take responsibility, hypothetibro.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 03:26 PM
4

Almost all women will be attracted to a strong, confident, take-charge man Almost all women people will be attracted to a strong, confident, take-charge man person Confidence is pretty universally sexy, and that's not a gendered thing. Confidence does not, however, require a "take-charge" attitude. In fact, someone who is "take-charge" or pushy or aggressive can often come off as insecure rather than confident. Almost all women, even the strong and empowered ones, enjoy being 'chased' and enjoy …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/15 03:18 PM
2

It also brings you warm fuzzies. Or have you never done an anonymous act of kindness? And I dunno what an objective definition of "good" is, but "altruism gives me warm fuzzies" seems pretty close.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/15 05:33 AM
3

I'm generally a fan of people. We can do some horrible shit, but most of us are good on balance.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/15 05:30 AM
8

So you got frustrated when the mods didn't mod their sub as heavy as say...../r/TheRedPill Right. I don't find anything wrong with the level of moderation on TRP. As abhorrent as I find what is allowed to stay versus what is removed, it's a matter of kind, not degree.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/15 10:17 PM
5

You'd be surprised how unlikely you are to be banned in /r/Feminism. You have to try really hard. Lots of us abandoned that place because the moderation was way too hands-off when the whole place was regularly flooded with MRAs. Granted, that was several years ago and I haven't been back since to check on it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/15 09:34 PM
7

Same reason anybody gets upset over such a thing: they think their right to free speech creates an obligation for other people to listen to them wherever and whenever. People who are right about gender politics can still be wrong about other things. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/15 09:30 PM
15

Not gonna change your view, it's already correct. Every subreddit has the right to manage their userbase in the way they see fit.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/15 08:31 PM
4

Some of the cherries they picked were odd, too. "I like a guy who's dirty, used-up, looks like he just came off a 3-day coke binge" ... that's "dark triad"??
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/14 05:45 AM
4

Fair enough, but I've had plenty of conservatives tell me things like "a conservative is a liberal who grows up." Hell, in this thread, even.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 10:47 PM
5

relative anemic growth of breadwinner moms Almost as if married women with children make a lot less money than married men with children? Young, college-educated, professional women today are starting to reach economic parity in some cities, but those same women are waiting longer to marry and have children. It may be some time before we see this. In any case, there's been a significant growth in single mothers, a growth in women out-earning men in marriages, and an increase of almost five times…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 10:44 PM
5

Please find me a feminist book or text or essay or basically anything that teaches girls they should aspire to marry the perfect man with high social status. That's 100% the abject opposite of what feminism has been teaching since the 60s. "Your ambitions in life should be your own, and not be yoked to cultural expectations of your gender" and "you can have it all!" are not equivalent statements.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 10:17 PM
3

In the current poll, similar shares of men (62%) and women (63%) reject the notion that it’s best for a marriage if the husband out-earns his wife. And solid majorities of younger and middle-aged adults express the same view. Adults ages 65 and older are somewhat more conflicted about this. Among that age group, some 37% agree that it’s better for a marriage if the husband earns more money than his wife, and 51% disagree. College graduates are among the least likely to agree that it’s better for…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 10:14 PM
6

Ah, the Telegraph, that bastion of informed journalism. It's certainly true that by percentages, men and women are granted divorces on grounds of adultery at about the same rate. And yet "unreasonable behaviour" claims have skyrocketed and 54% of women granted a divorce are for this reason versus only 36% of men. Why has "unreasonable behaviour" gone up while "adultery" has gone down? Well: The possible expense and difficulty in having to prove the infidelity of a spouse is likely to be one of t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 10:03 PM
6

Feminism has been teaching girls they should aspire to marry the perfect man with high social status? Really?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 09:37 PM
5

Yeah, but generally that's because the beliefs of the mainstream shift out from under them, not because they grow more conservative over time. See that Pew poll.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 09:32 PM
5

women have been conditioned since childhood to expect the perfect man, a big home, a great career, a great family, high social status You're taking something that's true of a minority of women and applying it to every woman categorically. Most women do not expect to be Disney princesses in adulthood.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 08:58 PM
2

It seems implausible that this reliable trend that has always happened in every generation ever (everyone more liberal over time, children more liberal than their parents) will suddenly reverse in the next 10 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 08:55 PM
8

"learn to respect women and expect to be an equal partner in the relationship" -> "put up with that shit"?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 08:21 PM
2

Noteworthy is the second page that show that the majority believe the breadwinning moms trend has made it more difficult for marriages to succeed. A supermajority (74%, almost 3 quarters), which is sure to include women themselves, believe that it has made it harder to raise children successfully. Noteworthy is how that survey is not of millennials, but of all adults. To quote the study you linked: There are significant differences of opinion across age groups. Young adults (those ages 18-29) ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 07:57 PM
5

a generation of men unable to fit the role as provider Women are less and less wanting their partner to fit this role. Among the younger generation, gender roles are being discarded more and more: http://www.npr.org/2014/11/30/363345372/for-these-millennials-gender-norms-have-gone-out-of-style http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2012/0524/As-Millennials-reject-gender-roles-but-embrace-marriage-they-re-changing-society http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/21/gender-millennial…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 05:21 PM
8

You'll see a continuation of the current trends: young people marrying later or not at all, and having fewer children, later in life. "Hookup culture" will still exist because that's based entirely on carnal desires that are not affected by career or circumstance, but you'll likely see more serial monogamy longer in life: partners coming together and cohabiting for several years before breaking apart and moving on. As women are more and more free to choose a partner based on qualities they want,…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/14 05:11 PM
6

It loosely describes the characteristics of feminist thinkers, writers, and critics from roughly the late 1980s to today, as a contrast to the "first-wave" from the 19th century to the mid 20th, and the "second-wave" that characterized the 1960s to 1980s, but is still somewhat active today. In contrast to the second-wave that came before it, the third-wave is notably more sex-positive, less politically radical, and more focused on multiple intersecting axes of oppression (including but not limit…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:49 PM
5

third wave You keep using that phrase, I do not think it means what you think it means.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:39 PM
1

Sounds to me what she wants is to find a set of goalposts y'all can't move.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 12:38 PM
2

Yo; I'm a feminist and this is fucked up. I don't live in California so my vote doesn't matter, but if I did he would have lost it.
/r/MensRights20/09/14 07:34 PM
5

http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/adios-man-o-sphere/ I dunno, I read through that whole thing and I'm no closer to understanding what his actual disagreements with anyone he calls out are. In most cases it seems he's just criticizing the other groups for political infighting and doing no activism (ironically demonstrating political infighting that achieves no activism). He doesn't even suggest any ideological differences with PUAs: They are comprised mostly of men who bear the deepest afflictions…
/r/MensRights03/06/14 09:27 PM
2

Dude it's literally the first link on the sidebar in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights03/06/14 09:08 PM
3

The law of large numbers applies to a random independent variable. Number of sexual assaults per unit time is chaotic and dependent on a number of complex interrelated causes, surely, but it isn't random.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 07:34 PM
5

I would want to see the stats for 2010; if you look at Vancouver over the 2009-2011 period, it would look like sexual assaults were down only 1.2%, and if you looked at 2008-2011, it would look like sexual assaults were up 12.2%. This disguises the fact that assaults increased significantly in two of those years and decreased significantly in one. But yes, clearly Edmonton is not having the same success as Vancouver.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 04:15 PM
17

http://vancouver.ca/police/Planning/StatsDistrict/2011/2010-2011YTD.pdf 2010 sexual assaults: 560. 2011 sexual assaults: 505. Change: -9.8%. You can certainly argue "correlation not causation," but the data's correct. Edit: By the way, sexual assaults were up 9.6% in 2010 and before that up 13.6% in 2009. You can find more here. It does appear there was a dramatic reversal of the trend in 2011. They're doing another poster campaign in 2013, so there might be more or less support after that.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 01:39 PM
3

There won’t be a male birth control pill 404. What will “the male pill” change? Nothing in this article suggests the pill should be opposed. Viewpoint: Let them have the remote not the pill MJ Deschamps, style blogger, can't find any place where she claims to be a feminist. Women 'doubt men will take pill' Refers to the same study as OP. States: "In order to increase confidence in effective implementation, a variety of presentations of the male pill should be made available in line with individu…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 11:31 PM
6

If your hatred of that person is inexorably tied to their sex, then your hatred is sexist in nature. You don't need to be conscious of the fact that "this person belongs to hated group X, therefore I wish death upon the person." It's much more likely to take the form of an unconscious bias: wishing death upon a person who is a member of hated group X for an offense that would only merit non-homicidal anger if the person were of group Y or Z. I sincerely doubt AnnArchist would have gone so far as…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 05:07 PM
11

You must recognize at some level that there's a difference between criticizing somebody, and hoping for their murder. One of these things is a product of disagreement, the other of hatred.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 04:26 PM
9

they still occur. I can't count the numbers of times I've thought about ramming some idiot into a canal while driving; I've yet to kill anyone. I am totally serious here: please visit a mental health professional. That is not a normal or common reaction to anger. I'm glad you have it under control enough not to act on it, but it's still pathological. As I said though, this is completely irrelevant to whether that statement is sexist or not—and it isn't. In response to an openly gay judge who has…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 01:09 PM
25

Wishing people would dead is one of the most basic reactions when one is angry. NO IT ISN'T, SEE A DOCTOR.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 12:45 PM
6

It would be cherry picking if I visited a bunch of threads, read a bunch of posts, and picked out only those that matched what I was trying to show. I didn't need to cherry pick, because every post in the first thread did so. Do you think if I visited more threads on that site, I've see anything different?
/r/MensRights08/07/12 01:52 PM
2

I found these comments the other day by: searching "mgtow" on Google, visiting the second link (first one with discussion boards), visiting what looked to be the most active forum, and reading the very top post on the page at the time. These forums are linked from every major site for the movement. The thread has over 300 likes. There are zero dissenting voices. This was the first and last thread I visited on that site. I didn't even have to cherry pick, I included almost every post from the thr…
/r/MensRights08/07/12 02:49 AM
-1

Does that make the linked comments more acceptable by non-association?
/r/MensRights08/07/12 02:39 AM
-4

I'm fine with using words as you mean them in your subreddit, which is why I abandoned this particular argument. I'm more interested in the linked quotes, which should be misogynistic by anybody's standards.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 02:07 AM
-6

I won't bother arguing semantics over sexism versus misogyny here, but would you at least agree that these comments are, in no uncertain terms, misogynistic?
/r/MensRights08/07/12 01:34 AM
-5

so you feel more men than not share the sentiment expressed in the pic? most men feel women are ONLY good for their looks? most men are derogatory? No, but it doesn't need to be a majority to be a problem. Just needs to be a significant enough minority. you also feel this poor behavior is unique to men and women at large don't behave in similiar ways? In my experience, I don't think hatred of men by women is nearly as common as hatred of women by men, and even if it were, I don't think women wou…
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:50 AM
2

this is only an issue if you feel this particular thread represents a greater societal trend. do you? Yes. Edit: Also I will disagree with your claim that misogyny and hatred of women are precisely the same, by example. "Women are less intelligent than men" is misogyny. "Women are meant to stay in the kitchen and raise kids" is misogyny. "Women are all lying, spermjacking, golddigging bitches" is hatred of women, bone-deep.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:35 AM
-2

Men Going Their Own Way.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:26 AM
2

It's the misogyny and outright hatred of women expressed in these comments that I'm suggesting we are "up against," and I question your notion that the mindset displayed here is at all limited to a few assholes in an internet forum. They're not alone, and even if they were, their interactions with women are not limited only to those they date or marry.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:22 AM
-4

Taken from: http://www.mgtowforums.com/forums/mens-general-discussion/9674-you-know-youre-mghow-when.html
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:17 AM
-3

Taken from: http://www.mgtowforums.com/forums/mens-general-discussion/9674-you-know-youre-mghow-when.html
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:17 AM
-2

Because the website I pulled this from (mgtowforums.com) is the second Google hit for "mgtow" and the first that's not a blog with limited authorship, i.e. a forum where the whole movement can participate. The first Google hit (mengoingtheirownway.blogspot.com) links to this one on its front page.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 12:07 AM
-1

Yes. But I worded the question to allow people to respond to them separately if they like.
/r/MensRights07/07/12 11:47 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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