TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

simanimos Archive

View 0 posts and 59 comments by simanimos 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)
3

I dunno, in a lot of ways I think gays were probably more persecuted by the status quo than women. I guess that makes you a default ally.
/r/MensRights11/02/20 01:26 AM
1

While not ideal at least they aren't going with a two-tier system
/r/MensRights23/06/19 02:37 PM
12

You're right, its cultural, but the culture derived from puritanical reasons. People don't wanna fuck an anteater because they're led to believe that the most normal form of a penis (with the turtle neck) is less desirable.
/r/MensRights20/03/19 10:43 PM
1

Yeah she is but she is a self-identified feminist who legitimately pushes for equality in opportunity as an ideal as opposed to equality in outcome. Already that's a vast improvement from most self-ascribed feminists
/r/MensRights26/02/18 09:40 PM
1

I guess there are the Christina Hoff Sommers of the world.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 05:42 PM
1

Yes, you literally wrote that, but it doesn't say what you're suggesting it says. I understood what you meant by that, but you still didn't literally say you were MRA and egalitarian. You literally said you needed them. What you literally identified as was feminist. By the way, when I say literally I mean what was expressly written. You said you literally said that. You didn't expressly write that you were MRA or egalitarian, you expressly wrote that you needed MRA/egalitarianism, not that you a…
/r/MensRights23/11/17 08:48 PM
1

You said you need that shit, you didn't say you were that shit. You literally said you were feminist. Why you putting the word literally in quotes? You literally said what I'm saying you said. You didn't literally say what you said you said, whether or not you meant it. If there's anyone using the word literally wrong here it's you. Then again, I'm hardly surprised... you seem as self-aware as a Ritz cracker.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 08:34 PM
1

I literally said I was an MRA and egalitarian. No you didn't. What you literally said was: I've recently retaken the title of feminist... You're being downvoted for aligning yourself with a group that does not desire equality. If you're an egalitarian, fine. But to be both feminist and egalitarian in the eyes of people here is incompatible. I don't give a shit how you define yourself, I'm just saying you were downvoted for defining yourself as feminist. And, this, because feminism isn't viewed a…
/r/MensRights23/11/17 08:25 PM
3

What the hell are you even talking about? He literally said that men cannot grasp the understanding of love, of being, or of caring. We're unreliable confidantes, and we don't know when to be compassionate. Granted, maybe this is accurate generally (it's not, but let's say it is), but it certainly isn't all men in juxtaposition to all women. Some men are compassionate and some women are straight cunts. This isn't forward thinking, it's back-ass-wards thinking.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 08:18 PM
1

I see it now. Proud feminist likes GoT but is sick of the criticism for watching a show that is purportedly so anti-woman (it's not) that she makes up some justification as for why she watches it -- for science!
/r/MensRights29/09/17 03:01 PM
1

I mean, I didn't think so, but here we are.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 04:35 PM
27

Or, conversely, you're not a man because you haven't raped anyone
/r/MensRights19/06/17 03:36 PM
1

I see what you're saying when you say the only evidence they need is their own assessment but their assessment is evidence-based, which was where my reasoning was coming from. I also don't dispute that it puts men at a disadvantage.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 03:15 PM
7

Damn, Kansas don't fuck around. "Probable cause to believe a crime has been committed."
/r/MensRights10/02/17 05:11 AM
1

I'm pretty sure they need some amount of evidence in order to charge someone with a crime. I'm Canadian but I know police can detain you for 24 hours without charge in this country so technically/legally I see that it's possible but it sounds like a distortion of the spirit of the law, if nothing else, to me. I'm also worried about risk of abuse. My neighbour stole my paper? Guess where I hear the yelling from or try to prove I didn't.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 05:04 AM
2

Haha, all good fun. Cheers, mate
/r/MensRights10/02/17 03:08 AM
7

Only if you promise to suck it
/r/MensRights09/02/17 10:31 PM
8

I'm not being difficult for no reason. You're obfuscating to justify your hypocrisy. Ariana's speaking out because that's what she is expected to do. Zac isn't complaining because we like getting overt sexual validation. Did you ask them or is that just your biased assumption. Seems like a biased assumption to me.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 09:07 PM
6

The question was do women not enjoy sexual validation, and not do women enjoy sexual validation the same way men do? So... your answer is... yes? Because I've got an instagram feed full of pics that refute your opinion.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 09:01 PM
3

According to a 1995 article in Psychology Today, Hylton was part of a gang hired by victim Vigliarolo’s former partner, Louis Miranda. The gang lured Vigliarolo to an apartment where, for as long as two weeks, they tortured him. One of Hylton’s accomplices, Rita Peters, would later explain why she shoved a yard-long metal rod up his rectum. Peters said, "He was a homo anyway." When asked how did she come to that conclusion, she said, "When I stuck the bar up his rectum he wiggled. What the fucki…
/r/MensRights24/01/17 10:48 PM
3

That might have been the original official definition but [...] in todays' culture men very implicitly means male humans. It's both, though. Definition 1 is a male human and definition 2 is a human in general. One correct definition does not preclude the other. It is defined as both. but language evolves over time Agreed, but men in both forms is currently heavily used. So it isn't so much that language has evolved away from it so much as you'd like it to, in my opinion. EDIT: grammar
/r/MensRights23/01/17 08:59 PM
8

Without wanting to sound like a dick... men is the gender neutral and appropriate term. Men means members of mankind, part of humanity. It also means workers in general. Definition When they said all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing were they talking only about humans with penises? Maybe my perspective is tarnished by the French language as I live in a French part of the world. In French, if you are addressing or referring to a mixed crowd you use the masculine form.
/r/MensRights23/01/17 06:54 PM
13

don't forget those oppressive AC temperatures.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 08:27 PM
3

I hear ya. I think spreading to an extent makes sense, but to think there aren't some douchebags who overspread just to take up place or because of posturing, I think that's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 08:04 PM
-4

I wouldnt go so far as to say it like that but I find the reaction to your comment fucking hilarious. "muh dik so big I gotta spred muh legs." "u don need 2 manspread? microdick!" plus the other fun ones
/r/MensRights13/01/17 07:15 PM
1

i hear ya but, if you want them to please you, maybe not call them whores, yeh?
/r/MensRights17/12/16 05:01 PM
–

Oh, I did assume that! Sorry! You're probably right then... your book is probably total shite! :)
/r/MensRights24/11/16 08:12 PM
–

As a poli sci major I've read that book more than once. That wasn't really my interpretation of the book, or at least, I didn't think I read the book to be indoctrinated. While they are critical of capitalism and religion, the book represents a perspective (an opinion) more than anything else that's mostly used to try to get the reader to look at things from a different perspective. It's important in social sciences to try to understand class struggle as it's an important force in society. For m…
/r/MensRights24/11/16 07:55 PM
–

I mean, Marxist thought is an important school of thought, and it's helpful to understand different perspectives in academia. I feel like you're saying because you're studying Karl Marx you're being indoctrinated with communist thought. I just feel like that's a little unfair towards academia and poor ol' Mr. Marx.
/r/MensRights24/11/16 06:34 PM
3

I don't know that you can say that's what minority means in all of sociology. Certainly, when studying demographics, minority means a group of people who do not represent the plurality of a given indicator. If we're talking about power structures, I can see how the minority group is the group that does not hold the most power among compared groups, regardless of actual quantities. But then, if we talk about, for example, employers vs. employees, employees are the majority in terms of numbers, bu…
/r/MensRights24/11/16 06:30 PM
6

Actually, they are always, in terms of absolute numbers, always the majority, at least in the West. They live longer on average... At birth there are slightly more men, at about 18-20 it's equal, and then, from that point on, there are more women.
/r/MensRights24/11/16 05:56 PM
1

I hadn't read your initial question... very true that the information provided was... not particularly pertinent. Did math quick on my phone and by my count it would be 6.36. I think right now they've got it at 5.5. I'm comparing to arithmetic mean because I don't know the weights used to apply weighted mean. The distribution is still pretty fucking weird. Cannot find where that fits in with other films at the moment.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 10:45 PM
1

I dunno. Seems to me that normal distributions are a fundamental in statistics. If you ask 1000 people for their opinion the majority of the choices will be found somewhere in the middle. Sure the normal distribution curve will be skewed one way or another based on how good or bad the film is, but still the modal result should be found in near the mean and median. Really all he's saying is this bowl-shaped distribution is incredibly atypical.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 10:04 PM
4

He said that if you lop off the two extremes youre more likely to have a regular distribution. He meant in the sense of a normal distribution curve or bell curve. I've seen people call it a regular distribution before but I find that term needlessly confusing. So what he's saying is that votes will more closely resemble a typical distribution if you ignore the outliers (1 and 10) and not that it would be the same as other movies.
/r/MensRights18/07/16 09:39 PM
5

Right? Because all that inter-Asian racism, for example, isn't racism.
/r/MensRights14/07/16 02:20 PM
1

The reason kids are given the hpv vaccine so early is to make damn sure they get it before they're sexually active. AFAIK they're then protected for their entire sexually active life. I get where you're coming from with regards to kids having sex and how it being statutory rape is unfair, maybe more than most, as I've technically committed statutory rape. I started going out with this girl who was 14 when I was 16. We started having legal sex when I was 17 and she was 15. For a small period of t…
/r/MensRights07/05/16 04:16 PM
7

Really? Cuz it looks like a case of statutory rape to me.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 05:42 PM
4

As a Canadian who considers himself somewhat well versed in Canadian laws, could you expand a bit on this? It's the first I hear of it and I'd really like to know more. This is my understanding of the whole thing: Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains guaranteed equality rights. This is the entirety of the text of Section 15: Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discriminatio…
/r/MensRights14/04/16 01:57 PM
7

I'm not American so I'm not sure about the laws there but here in Canada what she did -- blocked his path -- is most certainly considered assault. It appears as though her behaviour may constitute simple battery: At common law, simple battery is a misdemeanor. The prosecutor must prove all three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1.an unlawful application of force 2.to the person of another 3.resulting in either bodily injury or an offensive touching. It doesn't seem like she actually needs to …
/r/MensRights30/03/16 03:32 PM
1

Sorry to have bothered you. That's not what I meant to imply. I don't see the phrase "got off" in that way but I concede it can be interpreted that way. It's not like I said he "got lucky" or something else that blatantly suggests his criminality.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 05:24 PM
1

That's it. The underlying concepts in question are so integral to just and fair application of the law that I don't see how they could change. I'm told that the courts should have been more understanding of the inconsistencies in the stories of the complainants because of the amount of time since the actual alleged crime. Claiming that no one can be expected to know in detail what happened during a traumatizing event ten years ago. I think thats fair but the alternative is a witch trial. That's …
/r/MensRights28/03/16 09:33 PM
3

This one hits me hard. We recently had a huge rape case involving well-known people in Canada... Jian Gomeshi trial if any of you are familiar... Anyway the guy was acquitted of all charges even though the court of public opinion did - and still does - condemn him. Basically the complainants stories kept changing and they lost a crap-tonne of credibility... and for this he won. Lots of people don't understand how I can call him innocent or how he could have won. Apparently concepts like "innocen…
/r/MensRights28/03/16 07:32 PM
1

In all fairness, the statement is controversial because, despite it having a basis in empirical data (self-reported Statistics Canada study, 2005), people choose not to believe the statistic because it contrasts so strongly from their preferred source, a police-reported study, 2011. As an (unsupported) example from Canadian Women's Foundation: Some self-reported research shows women are almost as likely to use violence against their partner as men. Although some people claim that men are too emb…
/r/MensRights12/03/15 05:31 PM
5

Sometimes you just gotta be patient and take the high road. Where I'm sitting it looks like she's already shamed herself a-plenty.
/r/MensRights12/03/15 04:55 PM
16

It's pretty easy to be right when you game the system to the point you can't be wrong. "Women have privilege." "No they don't. That idea is incompatible with my worldview, therefore you are incorrect. Case closed." "Uhh... if I believe the sky is green... doesn't make it so." "You're mansplaining. Check your privilege." ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights27/01/15 06:31 PM
13

However, it’s true that reverse oppression – like “reverse racism,” “female privilege,” and (so help me God) “cisphobia” – cannot possibly exist. Because the very nature of oppression won’t allow it to! This confuses me. Is she saying that, since women, on the aggregate, are more disadvantaged than men, we cannot possibly narrow the scope to one specific matter and consider, for one second, that a woman may have advantages or privileges that a male does not?
/r/MensRights27/01/15 05:55 PM
1

That's some exhaustive checklist of people with privilege... not.
/r/MensRights26/01/15 08:27 PM
1

IMO this doesn't have to come back and bite him in the ass because of an illegal eviction only, there are loads of illegal actions that could get him in hot water. Another that comes to mind is this one: He has sold most of the things he bought for her for extra cash and has bought everything he's been wanting all year. Gifts become the property of the receiver. Him taking them and selling them, from what I understand, constitutes theft of property. Of course, I'm not a lawyer.
/r/TheRedPill02/12/14 08:31 PM
4

Shit they even asked her while she was hiring them and she said no
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:31 AM
17

I appreciate you taking the time to do this. You have a unique perspective on things that i am elated to see you share. What advantages are there to being male? What disadvantages are there to being female?
/r/MensRights20/09/14 02:28 PM
1

The fairest way in my mind is to presume a man is not a rapist without evidence to the contrary, of course. (Presumption of innocence and all that.) What I said was that our justice systems should aspire to rehabilitate and re-educate rapists; this has nothing to do with men in general. This statement is compatible only with the idea that people who commit rape be rehabilitated and re-educated, because without criminal act one is generally not involved with the justice system. I did not say that…
/r/MensRights28/08/14 01:23 PM
2

I appreciate what you're saying. You have a point, but I have trouble whole-heartedly agreeing with you. If we can't educate and teach someone who knows what they're doing is wrong to be better, then that kind of throws the whole concept of rehabilitation and re-education that I believe our justice systems should aspire to out the window. I certainly don't think punishment is justice... it solves nothing.
/r/MensRights27/08/14 03:24 PM
2

I’m appreciative that young men like want to curb sexual assault, but anything that puts the onus on women to “discreetly” keep from being raped misses the point. We should be trying to stop rape, not just individually avoid it. First off... that "like". I don't know if she's a valley girl that doesn't know how to use commas, or if she's a hack who doesn't reread her articles. Now for my question: It's not like rapists are going around with rapist written on their forehead, and its naive to thin…
/r/MensRights27/08/14 02:52 PM
1

Im not religious at all, but boy I like hearing what that Pope Francis has to say
/r/MensRights24/06/14 06:26 AM
2

I realize youre probably trolling, but... As a Canadian, I have no problem with this, seeing as we subsidize (almost) everything medical. I smoke, and half my pack goes to healthcare. I know this is mens rights, but if im going to complain about any subsidizing, its paying for fat people. Because I choose an unhealthy habit, I gotta pay... a fortune! Wheres the fucking sugar tax so fat people can pay their own diabetes and/or heart conditions and/or hip/knee/joint replacements? That shit costs u…
/r/MensRights17/06/14 11:12 AM
1

I see what you're saying, but I am calling into question their intelligence. Anyone who establishes their beliefs on irrational or illogical, often fallacious arguments is a moron. It absolutely offers an excuse for their hate. I think hate is generally borne of stupidity. In no way, however, is that excuse justified. An unjustified excuse, after all, is meaningless.
/r/MensRights27/05/14 06:50 PM
0

I have trouble with this understanding "both sides" angle. Some people say feminism equates to egalitarianism, and, okay, ideally, that's true. Now, MR roughly equates to egalitarianism. MRA's want their fair dues. So, if A=B and B=C, then, guess what, A=C too. I'm not saying they aren't different, but they are the two sides of the same coin. If you want equality between sexes then you should be as much an MRA as a feminist, at least theoretically. That said, I wouldn't classify myself as a femi…
/r/MensRights27/05/14 05:55 PM
2

1764 morons and counting
/r/MensRights27/05/14 01:12 PM
1

Wow. Reading that really boiled my blood. You should have stopped feeding the trolls when you said you would.
/r/MensRights26/05/14 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