TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

sock_tentacle Archive

View 1 post and 82 comments by sock_tentacle 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)
7

Over 150 women to every 100 men - and yet we're still having to argue that 1-in-5 is a ludicrously misleading number.
/r/MensRights01/05/16 09:25 PM
9

Jesus fucking christ, the ad on this was Longhorn Steakhouse, starting off with something like "Seared to perfection", with this steak flame-broiling next to it. I know, totally unintentional, but...
/r/MensRights01/05/16 09:22 PM
0

When I first saw the 'No More' ads I looked at the website and found surprisingly gender-neutral wording, as well as significant recognition that men and boys can be victims as well. I hope they've kept that sort of approach on their website. The simple fact is, domestic violence does affect us all, and sometimes that will be a woman needing help. I don't see a problem with it unless it's worded as if men are always the perpetrator.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 11:00 PM
1

What you got against us apostrophe-only 'people', huh? You singlequotist!
/r/MensRights13/01/15 08:25 PM
2

I would, every day. I would hand out cigars and whiskey, as well. I'd lead us in petitions to have our seats enlarged, and upholstered in leather. Flatscreens, everywhere. Poker every friday after work, gents. It'd be a gahddamn manspreading heaven. But no, let's step this up a notch. Let's call Valenti's offensive, sexist bluff: Let's get our own trains, and our own rails. And our own engineers and mechanics. Let all those wage gap enthusiasts see what happens when all the underpaid dirty men s…
/r/MensRights09/01/15 10:15 PM
2

Cathy Young Ashe Schow Tara Palmatier Christina Hoff Sommers Erin Pizzey Karen Straughan Emily Yoffe Janet Bloomfield And maybe now Elizabeth Bartholet That's my non-ironic top 9, all inspiring and thoughtful women who have pushed our causes further than it ever would be if it came from the mouth of a man. They're my growing optimistic hope that maybe someday there'll be equality for -all-, not just some. But my #10? Let's not forget the impact that Sabrina Rubin Erdely made in order to hopefull…
/r/MensRights02/01/15 08:02 PM
2

Yes, but with every member with skilled knowledge you add, you also add overhead of communication and interaction. It's harder to work as a 20 person team than a 5 person team, for instance - you do not get 4x the work completed. *I'm not saying this to say I believe women can't work together as a team, just that I don't believe adding any more persons of any gender to a small team that's required to operate with split-second response time is a good thing. If anything, this is a severe handicap …
/r/MensRights26/12/14 03:25 PM
2

Way higher than 80% - much closer to 95% if you're counting where you -might- kill a woman, and likely close to 99% if you -should- kill a woman. ...and that's just counting the games where women are even set up to die.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 03:19 PM
1

"because different people will view them as embodying different forms of feminism, be it angry or otherwise." Frankly, you could drop the 'feminism' here and have the same argument. Women need realize that 'feminism', as a concept, is not armor you put on to deflect the realities of life; that is that "different people will view [you] as embodying different forms of [being human]". Whereas Feminism seems to try to tell women that they're something special, and a suggestion that they're anything …
/r/MensRights18/12/14 06:08 PM
1

the bulk of domestic violence (around 60%) is man on woman. It really doesn't affect my point that women have to face domestic violence more than women. I'm assuming you mean men, for the second 'woman' here. But the point of this entire dumb thread was that you seem to think that men are the ones committing 'the bulk of' the violence. The simple fact is, that belief is not only false, it is not helping anyone fix the problem. The belief you are promoting inspires offering support to nearly only…
/r/MensRights08/12/14 08:15 PM
1

No, I did. You're not thinking this through. Just because "40% of victims reported to the police are male" does not at all mean that men are single-handedly beating women 60% of the time. Read the CDC study I replied with, that explains everything.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 02:54 PM
1

You're confusing "causes more damage" with how frequently violence occurs. Which wouldn't be an issue if you didn't say something as easily disprovable as "man-on-woman violence is more frequent". The fact is, your links do not prove frequency but injury. And, as this study shows, the largest predictor of injury is not, at all, if it's a man beating a woman - but if both partners are mutually violent. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
/r/MensRights08/12/14 06:02 AM
1

I said fuck-all about being oppressed. You said 60% of domestic violence is man on woman; this cannot possibly be true; studies show half of all domestic violence is mutual, and the other half is almost evenly split (man->woman, woman->man). At most any given one-sided violence can only possibly be 25%. You can quit pulling statistics out of your ass. But you can definitely fuck right off trying to say I've claimed anything about being "oppressed". Doubly so for coming here spouting shit like me…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 10:55 PM
1

that men don't need to or simply would never face in the first place, as the bulk of domestic violence (around 60%) is man on woman. -->Yeah, ok, we're done here.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 10:32 PM
1

And then I gave a great example of how this occurs, --> No, you presented evidence that girls prefer such toys, not how or why they do. And at that, it's really only evidence that marketing believes that's what girls prefer. What you have -failed- to show is that culture prefers those toys for young girls because culture says that those roles are what girls should do... and not what girls might themselves want to do. Read this, for starters: http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/you-c…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 09:56 PM
1

You said -women-.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 08:18 PM
1

that's because of ingrained cultural perspectives on what careers are acceptable -->Says... you. science based fields are dominated by men, discouraging potential female applicants. -->Possibly. Have proof that the gender balance is what causes the gender balance? women are homeless often directly as a result of patriarchal power relations. As the article explains they often cannot escape abusive relationships. -->So are they homeless or aren't they? If they cannot escape them, how did they mana…
/r/MensRights05/12/14 07:36 PM
1

Waiiiiit a minute. Why would I care if women join the gaming world? I don't think "women" were the ones who fought to have this game pulled. Pick your groups more carefully - there are plenty of awesome reasons we should love having women gaming alongside us.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 06:26 PM
2

I think you've put a lot of thought into this, but downvoting the generous helpings of unsubstantiated opinion and conjecture you've slathered on top of it. For example, you've assumed that only women cannot escape abusive relationships, but failed to explain what means men have that women do not, to escape said abusive relationships.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 06:16 PM
2

On average, men have higher paying jobs. No, on average men work more hours. Women are, generally, getting paid the same for the job, they're just working less of it.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 06:09 PM
2

BlackLivesMatter. Except when it's sexual assault against white women, in which case #LynchingIsAwesome. Whether or not you believe he's innocent, there is no way for him to defend himself. It's not an issue about whether or not Bill Cosby did these crimes, the issue is whether or not our justice system should just be torn down and handed over to the pitchfork & torches mob. The Statute of Limitations is in place for a reason, and that is to ensure justice is fair. Otherwise, we may as well just…
/r/MensRights04/12/14 01:49 PM
1

So the gaps here start at 84%. But other than that gap (google seniors, where men have 2.1 years more exp than women), the gap is no larger than 9% (men have 2.5 years exp more at that role) ...and in 8 entries of 23 women make more without controlling for experience.
/r/MensRights27/11/14 01:10 AM
2

I've completed the math on the whole table; and yes, you're right, it's certainly not true for all (I'd originally tried like 6 random samples and it was clearly for women... but the final table is more complicated than that). The line you picked had relatively low experience in general and just a two month gap between men and women; and women are earning more than men on that line anyways. What I've found is overall, experience has an effect. If you get a percentage of salary and sort them all …
/r/MensRights27/11/14 01:04 AM
3

Take your pick - on every single position listed that I tried, Salary/Exp comes up higher for women.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 04:28 PM
1

Don't start a men's group. Start another NO MA'AM bowling league.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 08:33 PM
1

Pretty tough to reach meaningfully legendary status at MIT - there's a lot of legends.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 08:32 PM
1

So, start taking pictures of it and take it to tumblr & twitter. Apparently internet shaming for stupid transgressions is the new democracy.
/r/MensRights24/11/14 08:17 PM
2

Not this video - the other video from NYC. So far as I've seen the only debunking of the NYC harassment video was that it took place practically entirely in harlem.
/r/MensRights19/11/14 04:03 PM
14

So... when do we find out that that stalker guy in the street harassment video was a paid actor, too? It's pretty sad that every well-meaning egalitarian can fight against crappy depictions of genders in fictional media... and yet there's very little uproar about viral marketing paying actors to fake evil depictions of people in viral videos. It should be criminal to make false claims that a stranger on the street is an attempted rapist. Doubly so if you've paid that stranger to do just that und…
/r/MensRights19/11/14 03:42 PM
1

Seriously, wtf. We're either being trolled or RoK is leaking again.
/r/MensRights18/11/14 03:54 PM
1

Oh, you didn't get your orders yet? Sometimes they get the address wrong. Also, your swipe card may not work for a while, might be hard for you to get into the clubhouse. It's ok, we'll save some beer for you.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 05:13 PM
1

Yes, agreed.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 02:38 PM
1

Charges dropped. That doesn't show up in most employment background checks... and he can have the arrest removed from his entire record if he wants.
/r/MensRights14/11/14 04:35 AM
16

"Ok, so it was faked - but it has a good point!" ... everywhere. Every-fucking-where. You ladies are being told to be afraid so that viral marketing and outrage-for-clicks "media outlets" can make a buck. Hey, let's even throw some subtle racism and classism into the mix, too. Stir up a few other pots while we're at it. "... but it has a good point!"
/r/MensRights13/11/14 10:33 PM
2

And FFS, help your brothers when you see signs of abuse, even emotional abuse. Help them when they need to leave. Give them the emotional support that they deserve to break free. Everyone stands up for women when we see her partner abusing her. We should be willing to do the same for men.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 04:31 PM
1

because woman are oppressed, giving them more rights makes it equal ...I think you've found your answer here, but if not - when is "more" "equal"?
/r/MensRights10/11/14 04:34 PM
1

If you think that getting into flame wars on jezebel or any similar echo chamber is helping our cause at all... well... I disagree. There are better ways to frame our issues, ways that don't put money into their pockets, and make us look childish on their turf.
/r/MensRights06/11/14 03:50 PM
2

If you've got a truly meaningful, defensible, well-written point to make, then yes, maybe. But we all know most of those replies (in the for-profit echo chambers) aren't making people think, and if they -do- make a good point they're just getting deleted. Adding to the flame wars over there just fuels the fires and continues their profits. We need to stop.
/r/MensRights05/11/14 05:32 PM
47

This is PRECISELY why we, as a movement, need to stop commenting in the comments sections. When page views are money, and controversial comments generate page views, we are quite literally "feeding the trolls". We must starve the outrage machine, not feed it. Stop commenting on their sites!
/r/MensRights05/11/14 04:01 PM
2

There are certainly some pages that need some criticism, but if you take a look throughout the site they have quite a bit of gender-neutral language and even language clearly stating that men and boys are frequently the victim. Yes, they use a lot of bad stats, and have a few writers that think men are the sole problem - but they also clearly state that is not the case in other places. They should get some credit for not completely being a mouthpiece of the echo chamber. They might respond well …
/r/MensRights03/11/14 04:29 PM
4

I'd choose Hillary over a lot of the men in the field. Certainly if the GOP's gonna put up another Sarah Palin. Or if they're gonna put up Sarah Palin.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 10:33 PM
1

I've participated and will continue to fundraise for movember. That said when I last checked they didn't have enough history yet to be properly evaluated by some of the agencies I prefer for charity watchdogs. So it is a little unfair to compare movember with komen and think the evaluations will be equivalent.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 09:33 PM
3

It's not just adults that are the problem - it's adults in positions of authority that are really the concern here. You can't go around having sex with students, even at the college level. Conflict of interest for the adult, and statutory rape of the youth.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 08:21 PM
2

It most certainly is not just that. Go do some reading.
/r/MensRights14/10/14 05:09 PM
1

That's not at all what I see in that video even after several rewatches, sorry.
/r/MensRights11/10/14 07:25 PM
-3

My impression of the video is she was patting him on the leg just the same as anyone else was. In fact, when he turns over slightly and her next pat was on his ass... she stopped doing it immediately. I have -zero-, absolutely zero, concern with her behavior. Any contact with his ass seemed unintentional. Let's not add to the hysterical bullshit.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 08:58 PM
1

Let me just start by saying I personally think 2XC isn't such a horrible place. That said, I strongly question if that is almost exclusively because they're now a default sub, and there's a LOT, a real lot, of men commenting in there. To OP's point; I don't see why we owe them any credit at all for getting the attempted rape of a ten year old boy right, and I also think that the fact we're even saying this implies we're necessarily at odds with them, and I think that really should stop. They are…
/r/MensRights10/10/14 04:55 PM
1

"Net worth isn't a indication of inequality in pay." -->I know this, you know this, read what I said: "The numbers most people will hear".
/r/MensRights09/10/14 01:47 PM
1

Actually, Beyonce's worth is stated to be $460M, Jay-Z's is $570M... so the numbers that most people will hear in this statement is about 80%. That said, these figures are from two VERY different financial choices. Jay made a big chunk of that money from Rocawear. Beyonce pretty much is making her money from music and modelling. All THAT said, I don't think she should make less than him... so maybe I am a feminist. But since I think she could make less than him, I would argue I am also an egalit…
/r/MensRights08/10/14 08:25 PM
2

Partner and I can have good, open discussions on the topics. She'll listen and think about what I've said when I have an alternative viewpoint on things. She calls herself a feminist and doesn't like hearing critique of "feminism" as a whole, but her views are pretty firmly egalitarian so I don't challenge her internal definition of the word, because when she says it she truly means 'the notion that women are people too'. She wants women to be equal to men - but believes that also means men shou…
/r/MensRights08/10/14 08:09 PM
4

So, anyone check up on the domestic violence hotline the Judge recommends? Would be quite interesting to know if they actually assist men.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 05:11 PM
7

"was like heroine to me" -->Best spelling mistake ever.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 05:10 PM
1

I'm white, I own a proper suit and tie, and had enough money in the bank to afford a lawyer who could navigate the waters. There are so many men who don't have those luxuries, who the system runs right over. But even at that, I fear it wouldn't have taken much more than a few embellished words (lies, even) for her to have me jailed. She was already saying I was abusive (on occasion I had to stop her from drinking more - not a single friend who saw how I handled those situations thought I was 'ab…
/r/MensRights05/10/14 05:11 PM
2

Thankfully, she didn't continue the order; so it expired when we went to the continuance hearing (nearly four weeks later - the two week protection order can just go on with no concern for the accused). However, in MA you cannot have a 209a removed from your record (more total bullshit), but there are lawyers that have been trying to change that. BUT, since she ALSO didn't actively stop the order, instead letting it expire, I will not qualify to have it removed from my record even if someone is …
/r/MensRights05/10/14 02:38 AM
6

You don't get to present evidence against a 209a in MA. It's not constitutionally sound, but no one dares touch it considering the political climate.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 06:45 PM
4

When I got handed a 209a I wasn't allowed to speak. I wasn't allowed to present any evidence (despite the fact that I have friends upon friends that had seen her violent). I was in leg irons and handcuffs, in the clothes I was arrested in a long and sleepless 12 hours prior. Mind you, I was her victim, not her abuser. In the eyes of the court I "battered" her when I raised my arms to block her punches.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 06:41 PM
1

Again, this is from her side of the story. "Takes it out on me" could just as easily be that she's the one causing his depression, and she's not been introspective enough to notice he's reacting to her. That's my observation, and I still think you're wrong to label the victim of violence as 'abusive' based solely on the words of their attacker.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 02:44 PM
0

The bottom line is the only information you have was he was depressed and told her to sleep on the couch. Absolutely NOTHING she has said says he was emotionally or verbally abusive. You're making assumptions that he was abusive.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 02:21 PM
1

It sounds to me that your relationship is reciprocal in it's abuseiveness. Him being emotionally/verbally So, you didn't say this part? given what we are, we have to allow for it until we hear more info. Ah, yes, the 'prove god -doesn't- exist' argument. Assume the man might be abusive. You'd never assume a battered woman might be abusive, would you? That we'd just, you know, have to allow for it until we hear more info.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 04:41 AM
9

I can understand where you're getting that impression, but that's not the case. The CDC found the single largest predictor of a woman getting injured wasn't when she had an abusive partner. The single largest predictor of a woman getting injured in domestic violence is when -she herself is violent-. Read the study here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/ Some choice findings: "One might be tempted to think that men who perpetrate violence in nonreciprocal relationships are the …
/r/MensRights02/10/14 03:16 AM
6

Oh, for fuck's sake. You've only heard one side of the story - hers. We already know she's capable of incredibly irrational responses; all she's accused him of was being depressed, and that he told her he needed space so she should sleep on the couch. You don't know he's being emotionally OR verbally abusive - at all. What you DO know is that she escalated whatever the situation was into violence. Let's not call this mutually abusive when we're talking about a guy that won't even hit back, OK? W…
/r/MensRights01/10/14 09:32 PM
109

You're not the problem, and women aren't some kind of problem the MRM wants to correct. This is the problem: You can and could have gotten away with just about anything. the system gives you any number of passes, written into law and coded into the culture. And you are responsible for none of that; you didn't set all that up. I'm sorry I've only got but one upvote for you.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 09:23 PM
6

I was. If police have a must-arrest policy, they must arrest someone if both parties are present in a domestic incident. They're often trained to take the male. This is real and documented all over the internet. Honestly, I don't think the police in my case actually believed I was the aggressor (I wasn't). Even when they showed up they were surprised I was even still there, and told me I should have run away (long story, that). I think they arrested me instead because just felt like they'd have …
/r/MensRights01/10/14 09:19 PM
16

"people with personality disorders don't self-assign blame a few hours after they do something destructive." Dead right. Abusive people with personality disorders would be blaming their boyfriend to anyone who will listen. It's actually a documented symptom.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 09:09 PM
34

The thing is, your story isn't all that unique. So now you come here, knowing that women are capable of violence. You've seen that women's actions very much can hurt men. What does this now mean to you? Can we convince you to talk to others about what you've done, and how that's shown you a glimmer of truth in what we want changed? The reality of domestic violence as it relates to women is not what you've been told - it's not the 'wife beater' putting his poor innocent wife in the hospital. Stud…
/r/MensRights01/10/14 09:05 PM
2

Are you sure this isn't just a secret meeting of the Patriarchy? Check your ... inbox, maybe you got an invite.
/r/MensRights30/09/14 04:47 PM
1

I will agree women have, in the grand scheme of things, less equality worldwide. You - and they - should also be willing to agree that men have, in the grand scheme of things, always paid for that in blood and sweat. Wars have been fought by almost exclusively men. Cities have been built by almost exclusively men. Science has been advanced by almost exclusively men. And that's not to diminish that women haven't had their own sweat and effort put into society - they most certainly have. But it is…
/r/MensRights30/09/14 02:08 PM
96

Why don't you start with the wording of HeForShe's pledge. I didn't have a ton of problems with her speech, had some great mentions of our issues as well, until she ended it all with discarding the notion that feminism could help us and then basically tossed the words 'gender equality' right into the fire. And then you go to the website she's hawking, and realize that they're pitching "gender equality" by only addressing the plight of women and girls. That's pretty clear, right? I mean, you get …
/r/MensRights30/09/14 02:33 AM
6

It's a tough one, for sure. There are different edits of the film, some with better resolution. Interestingly, most edits cut out the very first strike, which is very clear, and very much from janay. This not only happens before they get into the elevator, but you can CLEARLY see he's just standing around, minding his own business on his cell phone, and she just walks up to him and backhands him. I say minding his own business with the caveat that I haven't heard audio yet, I don't know if he sa…
/r/MensRights12/09/14 09:11 PM
1

If the threats were real they would investigate them. Here, in your own words, you imply that because there is no investigation, the threats must not be real. Because "If the threats were real they would investigate them." So, I say again, yes, you HAVE said an investigation is evidence that the threats were real.
/r/MensRights04/09/14 05:50 PM
3

You started with false equivalency, and now you've just moved the goalposts from "what the FBI will investigate" to "what someone will report", on the topic of "investigation == evidence".
/r/MensRights02/09/14 04:56 PM
1

I really hope our "Serve and Protect" justice system isn't wasting our tax money chasing every pimple-faced teenager making threats online. But even at that, you should know better. If "police investigation" is evidence, then all the un-investigated domestic assault that men undergo is right out the window. We made it up, right? Because the police ignored us? Come on. This isn't a good argument at all.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 03:57 PM
3

Do we really not see the difference here? The leaked photos is a hack of iCloud, a major cloud storage site fromAPPLE. There's serious corporate interests involved here; hacking a company that many, many people use always gets attention of the cybercrime divisions. Anita's harassment is a drop in the bucket. If you believe it's true, or don't believe it's true (I'm squarely undecided) you've got to be able to see that the FBI isn't going to have any reason to pursue it either way, the same way y…
/r/MensRights02/09/14 01:59 PM
2

I wouldn't say 'no mention'. "Not exclusively" women - is men. All other concerns about it being too slanted ('majority of victims') are valid, can't say it's the worst offender I've seen though.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 01:03 AM
1

I think people believe men care about the number. It's true, some (maybe many) insecure men do care about how many women their partner has been with. It's important to note this is a different issue than 'slut-shaming'. Probably deserves it's own discussion, too. And that's a feeling that I think I'd accept it is males problem to fix. Slut shaming is, as noted in this thread, more often a female-on-female problem. Guys do it sometimes too, but the root cause is different. Women - it's a competit…
/r/MensRights20/03/14 04:51 PM
0

That message isn't falling on deaf ears, though... and petty attacks on feminism isn't making the 'legbeard' claims sound unfounded. We should be better at this.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 03:23 PM
1

No, the subject was where the line is drawn between coercion and negotiation. If you have been empowered to say no, and you still say yes to receive some benefit, you haven't been coerced. You can't accept money for sex and then claim rape; you were complicit in prostitution. Now, that said, coercion by definition is a threat, and certainly in the workplace, quid pro quo is a threat. But it's also a threat where the benefit of the doubt is on the employee being threatened, and even opens paths t…
/r/MensRights10/03/14 03:18 PM
3

I didn't at all say more immediate. I said it is not immediate. When there are multiple avenues of escape, picking the one where you knowingly consent to sex really weakens a claim that consent didn't exist. Go call your lawyer, and have a nice meeting with HR.
/r/MensRights06/03/14 11:43 PM
5

When people are not aware that the law protects them against something like this -->I sympathize with those people who have lived under a rock the past three decades... I do. I'm sure their blindness is also a pretty difficult thing to get over, what with having to have someone guide you to the clock to punch in at, the one that has all the workplace harassment notices above it in large letters that the rest of us can see. "have sex with me now or I kill you tomorrow" -->Is not only not immediat…
/r/MensRights06/03/14 10:33 PM
10

Yes, but you completely missed the point - ignorance of the law is not a valid legal defense. Holding a gun to someone's head is immediate. If you said to me that someone held a gun to your head and told you to have sex with them, that's clearly rape. But a boss takes you in the office and tells you you have to have sex with him - unless there's some reason you cannot walk out that door and march your ass to HR you do not have a rape. You have several outs - and no, they aren't great, but the la…
/r/MensRights06/03/14 07:42 PM
0

I love this stupid libertarian belief in self-sufficiency. You'll pay cash. So, you have $50K in the bank? Oh, you mean you'll sell your car? Oh, no, that was in the car wreck too - and you didn't have car insurance, did you? So, sell your house? I expect that when you're hobbling out of the hospital after your leg was amputated for the car wreck (wasn't your fault, but hey - no fault state!) and you realize that you are homeless, out of a job because hey, no leg, and need a place to stay... wel…
/r/MensRights06/03/14 07:30 PM
10

I would want to know why someone would go through with actually having intercourse to keep their job - instead of reporting it. In some ways I would see that as entrapment; you've got this boss on the hook for one violation - but milk it out and go for a charge of rape? It's not rape to proposition someone, nor is it rape to suggest their job is dependent on intercourse. Agreeing to that intercourse is a terrible idea; and claiming that in this day and age a person would be unable to report it a…
/r/MensRights06/03/14 06:45 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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