TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

sethdar1012 Archive

View 5 posts and 49 comments by sethdar1012 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)
3

I don't think this is an issue. It's potentially funny because you read it as "he irresponsibly didn't use a condom when she wanted him to, or somesuch situation", and you read it like that because it's the only interpretation that makes it funny. Pretty standard comeuppance humor.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 01:22 AM
7

I think they are purposely keeping it a separate category, and with good reasons: They don't have to release a report saying an equal number of men and women were raped in the past 12 months. I'm pretty sure heads would roll at the CDC if they came outright and said it since it's not something most people/the government wants to hear. Having it under a separate category lets them build up this data without tipping their hand. They can explicitly track it. Keeping it in a separate category lets t…
/r/MensRights07/04/13 05:31 AM
2

It's very uncommon, but I believe it is possible for two white people to have a black child (recessive genes and stuff). So it's definitely worth getting the paternity test (unless she confesses) to make sure he doesn't make an epic mistake.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 10:52 PM
4

Unless I'm reading this wrong, they didn't include forced to penetrate as rape. So yah, it's not really surprising they found so few male victims and female perpetrators.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 06:03 PM
1

Ok, lets take this from step 1: http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf I am not looking at any numbers in this survey other than the following: Women's 12 month estimated number of victims of rape (all types) Men's 12 month estimated number of victims of made to penetrate I am not looking at any lifetime prevalence numbers, nor am I looking at any numbers for male rape. Go to page 18 of the report, Table 2.1, Lifetime and 12 Month Prevalence of Sexual Violence - US Wome…
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:25 AM
1

I will lay out my argument more clearly: "made to penetrate" is fundamentally the same as "rape" as both are non-consensual sex. In the 12 months prior to this survey, approximately the same number of men (1.267 million) and women (1.270 million) were raped (including made to penetrate). 80% of the men made to penetrate reported a female perpetrator. Therefore, the idea that the vast majority of rape victims are female, and vast majority of rape perpetrators are male is challenged and should be …
/r/MensRights07/03/13 07:12 PM
2

I was sleepy last night so I didn't take the time to point out exactly where in the report I'm getting these numbers from: Page 19, Table 2.2 Lifetime and 12 Month Prevalence of Sexual Violence for Men: 12 Month Made to Penetrate = 1.267 million Page 18, Table 2.1 Lifetime and 12 Month Prevalence of Sexual Violence for Women: 12 Month Rape = 1.270 million Page 84, Discussion (middle column of text, about half way through the bottom paragraph): "Being made to penetrate is a form of sexual victimi…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 05:55 PM
-3

The 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey - the first survey to explicitly ask men about sexual violence - found that in 2009 the number of women raped, and men forced to penetrate (rape under a different name) are equal. Around 80% of men forced to penetrate reported a female perpetrator. Assumptions that women are the vast majority of rape victims and men the vast majority of perpetrators are questionable in light of this evidence. I'm skeptical that men are sometimes prote…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:54 AM
1

Although your friend is clearly willfully ignorant of reality, she does raise a point which is important to understand: most women really do feel threatened by day to day life in a way most men don't. The fact that being a man in day to day life is probably equally or more dangerous doesn't change how society (and/or biology if you're into evo-psych) has taught most women to feel constantly threatened.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 02:43 AM
6

I believe that's the highest value that a legitimate study on fraudulent rape accusations ever found. Essentially, it's the upper bound of the fraudulent rape accusation rate.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 03:32 AM
4

If that's better than or as good as the ratio for convictions for other crimes, than yes. In other words, if the law respects due process and the presumption of innocence I don't see anything wrong with it.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 04:59 PM
7

I recently had a conversation with a mixed company of friends discussing the rights of the accused in rape trials. I was glad to hear that all of my friends (starting with the men) understood and agreed with how important due process and the presumption of innocence is. People won't understand if you start talking about how feminism has contributed to problems like this, but they will usually understand that the problem exists.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 05:35 AM
2

I don't claim to be a psychologist, but it sounds to me like your father has a substance addiction problem.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 07:13 PM
1

I'm pretty sure beating someone to death in a fit of rage is second degree murder, not manslaughter.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 05:52 PM
2

In theory we have the same goals. In practice, feminism doesn't fight for men directly, and occasionally fights against them. In practice, men's rights spends a lot of time fighting the idea that women are morally superior to men, and that feminism actually does anything to help men. From my perspective for reconciliation to occur I would say feminism on aggregate would need to make a few statements (I would ask on askfeminists what they would demand from the MRM): In practice, feminism is not i…
/r/MensRights11/12/12 04:28 AM
4

We've been trying to eliminate the problems of traditional masculinity for 40 years by focusing shame and derision on men. Maybe it's time to take a look at the facts and realize that we've only been looking at half the problem.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 04:57 PM
8

Certainly this is the attitude among many, but not all. Beat a friendly dog enough and he will turn against you. Once an MRA has been insulted, belittled, mocked, and derided enough by feminists and society, they tend to turn against feminism too. There are among us the patient who still believe in feminism, but the actions of some feminists (radical feminists and politically active feminism in particular) have poisoned the well for the large masses of moderate feminists. Such is human nature I'…
/r/MensRights03/12/12 03:25 AM
5

I like this. Any feminist who says men have issues which are important and work to address them is a friend of mine. I don't really care if they believe in some feminist theory I don't, as long as they take effective steps towards solving men's issues.
/r/MensRights03/12/12 03:18 AM
2

I think when men's rights are impeded upon, it is due to the same system that gets in the way of women's rights. Correct. However, when women's rights are impeded by this system they have politically active feminism to campaign for them. Politically active feminism sometimes campaigns against efforts to combat discrimination against men, or often simply does nothing. Philosophically feminism may be about equality, but in practice it almost exclusively campaigns for women. I think men and women a…
/r/MensRights01/12/12 09:00 PM
2

From a feminist standpoint patriarchy means: a system in which the majority of institutional power (ie. political positions, business ownership, etc...) and personal economic wealth is held by men. The term patriarchy makes no claims as to other aspects of a patriarchal system. Pretty straightforward and accurate for the US. All the other things people say about patriarchy (it causes rape culture, enforces gender roles, etc...) are actually part of Patriarchy theory. Patriarchy theory is a nebul…
/r/MensRights30/11/12 05:50 PM
3

I think most peoples issue with the feminist narrative on nice guys is the assumption that MOST nice guys are in the "passive-aggressive" category. All nice guys are being vilified based on the actions of very small percentage.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 10:27 PM
0

Simple solution: Legal parental surrender (LPS) is allowed, but the woman can have the man sign a form surrendering his right to exercise LPS. Woman who know they are not ok with abortion/adoption have men sign the form before sex. Or if you are really unhappy with the idea of women ever having to deal with an unfortunate situation, reverse the idea: If the man gets the woman to sign the form before sex, he has the right to LPS. It's not a great solution, but it's a hell of a lot better than the…
/r/MensRights02/11/12 09:17 PM
2

I would say that when the mother doesn't know who the father is one of two things should happen: The mother knows the father is one of X men: all X men are notified that they may be the father, each chooses to exercise LPS or not. When the child is born the father is determined genetically, one of the men volunteers to be the father (assuming he didn't exercise LPS), or no father is put on the birth certificate. The mother doesn't know at all who the father is: no father is placed on the birth c…
/r/MensRights30/10/12 07:11 PM
3

I think the problem most reasonable people (ie. not radfems) really have with legal parental surrender is that they think it will violate either the right's of the mother to bodily integrity, or the child's right to a good life. Most of them KNOW that parental rights are not equal, they just don't see any way around it (and obviously they aren't going to violate anyone else's rights over the rights of a man).
/r/MensRights30/10/12 03:14 PM
2

I would say there should be a legal form the woman could get the man to sign stating he waives his right to legal parental surrender if he has sex with her. Then its up to him whether he is willing to risk having sex (with or without protection) with her.
/r/MensRights30/10/12 03:12 PM
4

Legal parental surrender doesn't violate any of these guiding principals; children with responsible parent(s) will still grow up in a good home (unless you think adoption doesn't qualify as a good home?). None of the best interests includes "must get financial support from unwilling father".
/r/MensRights30/10/12 03:09 PM
1

I agree completely, I just called it legal paternal surrender because that's the name for the idea that gets thrown around the most. I will edit my post to include this :)
/r/MensRights30/10/12 02:58 PM
17

Legal paternal surrender should be allowed within the same time frame as an abortion, and the man must pay half the cost of the abortion. If the woman chooses to carry to term anyways, the man must pay half of the delivery cost. Any extra demands on the man is unethical. I'm curious as to why you find the idea of full responsibility for the pregnancy being on the woman when the man doesn't want the child (minus him paying half of the abortion cost, he should have to do that) unfair? She has 100%…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 09:36 PM
1

I think as long as they are both ok with the flirting no one (who's reasonable) would really care. Now if one party takes offence at the flirting, that's a whole different. and probably misandric, kettle of fish :)
/r/MensRights23/10/12 11:23 PM
19

I would respond with the following (or something more witty similar to it): A MAN'S POEM I want a woman who will love me for who I am unconditionally until the day I die. A WOMAN"S POEM I want a man who buys me lots of expensive gifts, is deaf and blind so I can cheat on him with many men, and will die soon so I can inherit all his wealth. Hurtful and inaccurate gender stereotypes are just that: hurtful and inaccurate. Please think about what lines don't need to be crossed for humor, the world a…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 12:42 AM
1

Sorry I made my post too long, I will summarize my main point: men going to fight/die in war is privilege in the same sense that women mainly being housewives is privilege. I fully support nontraditional gender roles. Hell, I'd like to be a stay at home dad. But I draw a line when things men were expected to do are privilege, and the things women were expected to do are oppression. I apologize if I gave you the impression I think men and women's rights are a 0 sum game, they obviously aren't. I …
/r/MensRights18/10/12 03:48 AM
1

I think you are misrepresenting what movies fall into which category. The appropriate male counterpart of romcoms (which a lot of guys like btw) would be guy comedies (think dumb and dumber, which some women do like). That's why these two genres have become unlikely bedfellows in movies like This Means War in an increasingly common and popular genre I like to call romcoms-in-dumbguycomedy-clothing. More to the point, romcoms tend to gross far more than dumb guy comedies. Your contention that mov…
/r/MensRights18/10/12 03:08 AM
3

Unless you have sources for your assertion that "there are so few women with IQ's higher than their bra sizes that many of them truly have no value intelectually", you really shouldn't throw around such inflammatory statements.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:13 AM
8

Other than his overestimation of the amount of oppression women faced/face, seems like a reasonable guy.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:08 AM
9

I can understand her discomfort: imagine you are wearing some kind of spandex type suit, and a bunch of women are standing around trying to guess the size of your penis. I'd certainly be like WTF, you can't do that. Then again, I also wouldn't think it was a big deal either. I wonder what proportion of her outrage is inherent, and what proportion is because she's socially conditioned to be outraged by such things?
/r/MensRights18/10/12 02:05 AM
17

This actually makes perfect sense (it's not fair, just makes sense). Women do more housework, men do more paid work. After a divorce women still gain part of the benefits of the mans extra paid work (marital assets, alimony, child support), men lose all of the woman's extra housework. Combine this with women generally receiving favorable divorce settlements, especially in the most important aspect of physical child custody, and you have a perfect recipe for women initiating more divorces.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:55 AM
2

Hmmm this is a good point, many of those men probably wanted to go fight and risk death. However, many men didn't and had to anyways. In addition, many of those men who "wanted to" probably actually didn't, it was simply easier to than to challenge gender norms. It's plain wrong that women who wanted to weren't allowed to serve (from a gender equality standpoint). It's the same as talking about gender norms traditionally placing women as stay at home moms. There were probably many women who hone…
/r/MensRights17/10/12 11:33 PM
2

So they are just redefining misogyny to be the same as sexism against women? Seems kind of pointless to me to take a word with a unique meaning (hatred of women), and change it to mean the same as another word. This is actually an improvement if Feminists keep calling people misogynists, because it's far less insulting now. Now they can only call you sexist (which they already did), but they can't say you hate women anymore, because they redefined the word that means that :)
/r/MensRights17/10/12 09:50 PM
2

Askfeminism is actually pretty good as long as you do the following: don't let them know you are an MRA right off the bat. Acknowledge that their point of view may be legitimate, or failing that don't insult them. Source everything you say, or say that you are relating an anecdote. Always quantify your generalizations, say "many women" or "most men" rather than just "women" or "men". It's not that different than MR, you just have to understand that you need to persuade these people to listen to …
/r/MensRights17/10/12 07:41 PM
6

Threads regarding direct sexism against men also exist on this subreddit. This thread happens to be about a common (in my experience at least) view that men are largely responsible for many of the legitimate issues equity feminism combats. This viewpoint is not substantively supported and is based on ideological arguments, but increases the male stereotype of hyperagency. Male hyperagency is a significant hindrance for mens rights (and women's rights/feminism). The circlejerkyness comes up becau…
/r/MensRights17/10/12 07:33 PM
0

Because historically speaking it was men's fault, although it was necessary. Due to biological and environmental factors (read the outside world is dangerous and only women make babies), men developed codes of behavior which valued and reinforced the qualities needed to go out to fight/work and die. Women had no need for such codes (indeed it would have been counterproductive to population maintenance), and therefore did not develop the qualities men valued in coworkers in the fight/work and die…
/r/MensRights17/10/12 06:03 PM
2

I don't know if you came up with the word "automagically", but you win for introducing me to it :)
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:25 AM
6

Hahaha, so even if you are the King of Saudi Arabia, you are very disprivileged just because you live in the Middle East. Someone should warn the current king about his disprivileged state, I bet he would reward them with some of his BILLIONS of dollars and near despotic political power lol. Seriously though, this gave me a good laugh. Especially the caption for social autism: it's a freebee? Why would you WANT a freebee to be disprivileged? I'm going to assume the chart is a very wry bit of sat…
/r/MensRights16/10/12 04:23 AM
1

I don't think early human societies had an explicit policy or ideology of gynocentrism. Rather I think that gynocentrism is the natural outcome of societal self-preservation among early humans. Wouldn't the best strategy of self-preservation of early society be gynocentrism? Although it was not a conscious policy, gynocentrism dictates that women are inherently valuable because of their ability to birth and nurture children to maturity. Therefore, the issues and needs of women are effectively th…
/r/MensRights05/09/12 04:39 AM
1

I apologize for saying that my theory was an official position of the MRM and have corrected my original post. Interestingly, you posit the idea of exploiting biological differences between the sexes in survivalist society as a root cause of sexism. This is really the same root idea as gynocentrism: women's most effective role was to have and raise as many children as possible in as safe and well supplied conditions as possible. Men's most effective role was to ensure women (and their children) …
/r/MensRights04/09/12 05:54 PM
1

I apologize for implying that my theory was an official position. I have edited my original post to say what I originally intended it to. I would appreciate it if you could explain why you don't believe gynocentrism as the originator of sexism is a valid theory. I found it to be fairly robust myself and am interested in your critique of it.
/r/MensRights04/09/12 05:45 PM
1

I apologize I presented this idea poorly. I have presented two items poorly in my original post and I will clarify them here: I shouldn't have made an implication that this is an official position of the MRM. This is my interpretation of the root cause of sexism based largely on analysis of girlwriteswhat and typhonblue. The MRM is justified as a movement purely as a reaction to the problems men face in society without needing any theoretical basis. However, I personally like having theoretical …
/r/MensRights04/09/12 05:24 PM
2

The University of Western Ontario. If any MRA's go here too (or just live in London) maybe we could combine our efforts?
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:24 PM
2

My goal is to get more people involved in the MRM by sending the same message that initially got me interested in the MRM: the world is not as it has been presented to you. My initial plan is to post flyers with this information and include an email at the bottom for people to contact me if they are interested in learning more/getting involved. If enough people are interested I will organize a meeting, maybe at a public park or something, and perhaps eventually start a MR club at my university.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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