TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

slomo68 Archive

View 1 post and 47 comments by slomo68 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)
4

Eh... not so much. I am on a faculty search committee where one of the senior members pretty much openly admitted that we would invite some minority candidates for an interview - not because they had a chance (they didn't) but just to get the AA recruitment numbers up. This is for a department that has no non-white tenure-track faculty.
/r/MensRights18/12/10 03:02 AM
1

From a research standpoint, that article represents really poor methodology. Anybody with a moderate amount of statistical or epidemiological training knows about measurement error, and about the two different types of errors. Failure to prove an assertion is absolutely not the same thing as negating the assertion, and a lot of statistical and epidemiological effort has been expended trying to deal with that problem. As a social epidemiologist, Lisak is a hack.
/r/MensRights14/12/10 12:12 AM
2

The OP, Devil Dog, writes this in the comment section. He nails it... this is the core dynamic that underlies the issues of MRA: Throughout history, the COMMON MAN has ALWAYS been the one who is the victim, who suffers and even then carries civilization on his back. The Women rarely suffer, not under the elite, nor under the common man. The incompetent and corrupt so called leaders in Washington can’t get their heads out their asses, Republican AND Democrat, a simple decision on an issue takes y…
/r/MensRights12/12/10 11:32 PM
1

Chill out. I'm not disagreeing with you on the larger principle. I just didn't read that into this specific article. And who the fuck cares what that guy says anyway? Who is he?
/r/MensRights04/12/10 09:57 PM
2

I understand your concern, but I guess I didn't read that message into the article. Of course women can give themselves orgasms! So can men! That's a given.... But it's better if your partner does it for you. I think that's the guy's point, beyond some of the built-in dynamics of hetero sex. But maybe I missed the subtext you identified.
/r/MensRights04/12/10 09:41 PM
2

Why do anarchy forums always seem to be run as totalitarian regimes? And why do anarchists always seem so divisive? Divisiveness is antithetical to the processes necessary for weak governments: chaos and strife bring authoritarianism. Oh, maybe I just answered my first question.
/r/MensRights04/12/10 07:51 PM
3

I buy into the idea that the woman should get off first, mostly for the hydraulics issue (assuming that you in fact care about getting each other off). But I personally don't know. Gay male sex is pretty much all I know anything about, and the dynamics are a little trickier precisely because of the hydraulics. However, the same interpersonal considerations apply: your partner will appreciate you more if you are sensitive to their sexual needs.
/r/MensRights04/12/10 06:04 AM
1

You're welcome.
/r/MensRights02/12/10 04:26 AM
2

her piece was seething with misandry under the surface. Not to mention servicing the escalating police state. What was that about patriarchy again?
/r/MensRights02/12/10 04:23 AM
1

The OP helped me realize that the fundamental dynamic that underlies MR vs. misandrist feminism is hypergamy. I've argued before that feminism cannot be properly understood outside class conflict (and a telling fact is that Gloria Steinem was employed by the CIA). The idea of hypergamy fleshes out the dynamics. Essentially, feminism colludes with alpha males (or the hopes of landing an alpha male) against beta males. Feminism helps alpha males assert their dominance over beta (and lower) males. …
/r/MensRights01/12/10 04:59 PM
1

True. Personally, I find vaccines a bit creepy. Yeah, I know, crucify me.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 06:02 AM
1

The treatment uses the patient's immune system to fight the cancer. This is one of the new popular strategies in developing cancer treatments.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 05:54 AM
1

I don't know whey this treatment is labeled a "vaccine" Probably because it recruits the immune system to fight the cancer. Here's the problem with healthcare in America: For the average joe making $50K/year, the purely cost-benefit analysis would dictate against spending over $90K to buy a mean residual life increase of 4 months. But if you are pulling down $1M/year, $90K is totally worth it. It's time you learned that medical R&D isn't for the average joe, it's for the average millionaire.
/r/MensRights01/12/10 05:52 AM
3

I have to tell you that reading this subreddit has been very educational, but also a little horrifying. I am a gay guy who was raised by a single mother along with my two sisters. I grew up with a female/feminist perspective, and carried a lot of assumptions about the inherent "badness" of men, which for the first half of my adult life probably caused a lot of subtle problems in relationships. (Interestingly, even at 14 years old I saw very clearly some of the double-binds inherent in feminist i…
/r/MensRights01/12/10 05:32 AM
1

I have a question about the 72 virgins. Is their virginity replenished throughout eternity, or do you eventually exhaust the supply?
/r/MensRights01/12/10 04:24 AM
1

Nevertheless, there is in fact a science of causal inference. However, the details are mathematically challenging. One of the classic texts is Judea Pearl's Causality. It is completely possible for X to be linked Y in a causal, yet nondeterministic, manner. How this is operationally defined is that Y(x) = Y|X=x has different probability distributions for different values of x (but noting that for a single individual sample, only one value of x can ever be observed, so that the other theoreticall…
/r/MensRights01/12/10 04:20 AM
3

Protip: don't date crazy people. I once made the mistake of visiting somebody I had met recently (and was interested in) in a mental institution. At the time, there seemed like a good explanation for his being there (and, given the circumstances, I would still agree that he was under quite a bit of stress). He got out, and we dated for awhile. Now, in retrospect, I see that there was something really wrong with him, though at a much deeper level than what he was briefly institutionalized for. It…
/r/MensRights30/11/10 03:04 AM
8

As a gay guy, already doing my part, bro...
/r/MensRights28/11/10 04:48 AM
0

Not entirely true... Read Tainter's Collapse_of_Complex_Societies for (in my view) a more nuanced explanation. Tainter's argument is basically that societies collapse when their investments in marginal complexity become more costly than their benefits. In Rome's case, the investments in hierarchy and military power paid off when Rome was able to expand its territory and loot vassal states, but when the frontier was sufficiently remote and poor, the benefits did not justify the costs. At that poi…
/r/MensRights28/11/10 04:46 AM
3

kloo, I also wanted to thank you for moderating this subreddit in a rational and balanced manner. My personal interest, of late, has been to decouple feminism (the misandrist kind) from issues of gay rights. (Aside from the very real and huge problems straight men face upon divorce), many of the same issues of misandry affect gay men, sometimes doubly so. Many negative stereotypes of men in general are assumed to be intensified among gay men, while feminism pays lip service to supporting a very …
/r/MensRights24/11/10 03:09 AM
1

I will grant you that this is true. If sex is going to happen, it's probably going to happen early. It has almost never been the case that I suddenly became physically attracted to somebody long after we initially met. If there is no mutual spark, and you want there to be one, it's best to move on.
/r/MensRights23/11/10 02:59 AM
1

I don't know about that... I'm a gay guy who has plenty of gay and straight male friends with whom there is no sexual tension whatsoever. I disagree that sex is always a motive in any friendship where sex might be a possibility based on the gender configuration. That is a very one-dimensional view of life. Are you telling me that the only women you find interesting are the ones you are sexually attracted to?
/r/MensRights23/11/10 02:54 AM
1

Of course not. It has the word international in it. Silly foreigner.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 10:53 PM
7

Didn't read the OP, because it sounds like the usual tripe. However, I think it's worth pointing out that it's in everybody's best interests not to have sclerotic definitions of gender role, and that we are all better off picking and choosing what qualities we want to embody. Both my boyfriend and I have numerous traditionally "masculine" and "feminine" qualities (note: I'm a gay guy), complementing each other nicely, and I like that we are free enough to be able to express them. I like reading …
/r/MensRights14/11/10 09:21 PM
19

If I'm going to have my civil rights violated, I'd at least like a cheap thrill out of it... (That's why I, as a gay guy, would prefer the pat down from male TSA employees, though many of them turn out to be not that attractive).
/r/MensRights14/11/10 01:11 AM
4

I don't know anything about the guy. So, yeah, if he's anti-evolution in general, he's batshit...
/r/MensRights07/11/10 04:48 PM
4

Not sure how I feel about non-monogamy for heterosexual couples. Mostly because it could be messy when children are involved. For gay couples there is less risk of third parties being hurt, but even in that setting I've seen some disasters. (Interestingly the guy/guys seem to weather it, the girl/girls, not so much.)
/r/MensRights07/11/10 01:43 PM
12

I can't tell whether he rejects evolution in toto or just evolutionary psychology. Rejecting the latter is reasonable, assuming that the rationale is the great difficulty in testing specific hypotheses.
/r/MensRights07/11/10 01:38 PM
5

For the men, unlikely to amount to anything. Gay men avoid the police. (Not all police are homophobic, but enough of them are that we don't like to take chances.) And, really, even when the sex is vaguely coercive, it isn't like it is such a big deal that it's worth the hassle of getting the authorities involved. When I was much younger I was coerced into sex by a much older man: icky, but what are you going to do about it?
/r/MensRights07/11/10 01:28 PM
2

This reinforces a point I've made before: that concerns about feminism and over the issues generally addressed in the MensRights subreddit are more about class than about a war between the sexes. It was instructive for me to learn that Gloria Steinem was employed by the CIA before she rose to prominence as an outspoken feminist. Therefore, these issues are important not only for straight men, but also women and gay men as well.
/r/MensRights25/06/10 01:03 AM
2

Yes, if it were possible I would want children. I would not marry a woman, because that would be deceptive, and would ensure an unhappy life for both of us. Every instance I know of where a gay man has married a woman has ended very badly, with the wife often angry and feeling cheated (even when there were children and the husband was faithful up until the point of separation). That is not a fair thing to do to a woman. I believe that gay couples can raise healthy children, but I do also believe…
/r/MensRights14/06/10 04:23 AM
7

I have watched Alex Jones, and he has no credibility as far as I'm concerned. And the Bible, well, what can I say? I would like to think that you are a good soul at heart, who has been knocked around a bit (I have read a few of your comments). Do you actually know any gay people? You might be surprised to find that gay people are quite diverse, and some are like yourself, have the same concerns you have, some are religious, some are not, some are nice people, some are assholes, some live morally…
/r/MensRights14/06/10 04:07 AM
4

Pls explain
/r/MensRights14/06/10 03:44 AM
3

Gay people are not the problem. This is an entirely different issue. It just so happens that some particular lesbians are involved here.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 03:41 AM
1

Banning is really excessive, in my opinion, unless the person is repeatedly trolling. I got banned on my first comment to XX. Kind of my own fault - it was a snarky comment - but those people have no sense of humor whatsoever.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 03:05 AM
3

I can't even.. I don't know what to say. Hah! Seriously... I'm a gay guy and totally not interested in musicals (though I had to feign interest for my ex-partner). I bequeath to you the musical-nerd card that should be my birthright as a gay man.
/r/MensRights14/06/10 02:30 AM
1

OK, thanks. I like upvotes, but I like (what I think is) the truth more :) I agree there is growing trend of body-image consciousness among gay and straight men alike. I have come to understand all of these issues as specific instances of a much larger, general problem: one of psychological manipulation, or, more starkly, memetic warfare. One of the most important tasks which we, as individuals, must accomplish first, if we are to be free, is to develop immunity to all of the external, calculate…
/r/MensRights31/05/10 03:43 PM
2

because men are made to feel insecure about their body image, and it's not being discussed. A little bit, but not as much as women. I say that as a gay man, who knows all about male body image issues. Even still, with the vapidity of gay male commercial culture, there is more celebration of diversity of male bodies (in gay commercial culture) than of female bodies (in mainstream culture). The primary avenue of psychological attack for (straight) men is financial, and unconscious representations …
/r/MensRights31/05/10 03:28 PM
1

No, but it is implied throughout. You are not addressing my comment, which is, in effect, that men are made to feel insecure about their financial status in many of the same ways that women are made to feel insecure about their bodies. Also, on edit: I am not about pitting women vs. men. It isn't about that. It's about how media messages are used by the powerful to manipulate the less powerful and to foster insecurity.
/r/MensRights31/05/10 03:09 PM
2

I have come to understand that "patriarchy" is something much more complex than the run-of-the-mill feminist would have us believe. It is better thought of as a domination system which, in its most brutal form, involves stratification and class warfare, starting with the elite ownership class, filtering down through the middle classes of developed countries down to the underclasses of the third world. What much of feminism - as popularly characterized in the 21st Century - seems to represent is …
/r/MensRights31/05/10 02:48 PM
1

And now, substitute "beauty" for "net worth" and "woman" for "man" and see how the article reads.
/r/MensRights31/05/10 02:32 PM
2

Fun fact: I have a colleague who was involved in a birth study that required genotyping of both parents. Something like 5%-10% of the consented participants had to be quietly dropped from the study because the father's genotype did not match the child's.
/r/MensRights03/05/10 03:39 PM
-3

"I'm not saying that /r/MensRights is racist, I'm just saying that a lot of those guys sure like White Nationalists..." /Glenn Beck in feminist drag
/r/MensRights02/05/10 08:13 PM
1

We might almost be in agreement. I agree with your latest comment, especially I don't think history shows itself to be the fault/achievement of men only - women of the upper classes have done more than their fair share to perpetuate inequality and their own classes privilege However, I would add that the mechanics of this process include behaviors that have been selected for biologically (or stylized versions thereof), in particular, the use of sex as a bargaining chip to secure resources in as …
/r/MensRights02/05/10 07:43 PM
0

Bonobos are cool - I like them and am sad that the activities of homo sapiens are endangering them. Still, the concept of alpha male, while over-simplistic at the level of anthropological understanding, is a reasonable enough model to suffice in discussions of this type. It is true that social stratification exists more along a continuum than strict categorical lines - you would almost predict this in a large and complex society, simply from a study of the properties of large ensembles of smalle…
/r/MensRights02/05/10 05:04 PM
1

Brown nonetheless discriminated against McCormick because he happened to have been born a man. No: McCormick lost because he was a middle-class guy who, for whatever reason, was preyed upon by a woman from an upper-class family. Brown would never have acted in such an egregious manner if the woman's father was not a major donor. This is all about class warfare. Rich little girl cries rape, and the system moves to accommodate her.
/r/MensRights02/05/10 01:14 PM
0

The dichotomy is simplistic, but it does provide a model for the kind of social stratification that happens in primates (and canids). The spirit of the OP is dead on: one of the things that pisses me off about the 2X downvote brigade in certain topics of "feminist" interest is that, what the comments from 2X-ers actually reveal is a vicious social stratification that would place men in lower social strata firmly under the stiletto heel of privileged women. Now, the brutality of interclass relati…
/r/MensRights02/05/10 12:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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