TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

specofdust Archive

View 4 posts and 161 comments by specofdust 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

Defeating the nazis. Worth the price.
/r/MensRights19/10/20 08:29 PM
2

It's written in English.
/r/MensRights19/10/20 06:07 PM
-3

Lefties won't tolerate people being right wing, hence any popularly funded organisation or business person will at least pretend to be apolitical or left wing.
/r/MensRights24/01/19 05:12 PM
2

Wow, way to make yourself sound like a total weirdo.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 02:53 PM
34

People are assholes in response to grammar or spelling corrections on reddit even if they're done nicely and with the spirit of helping people improve.
/r/MensRights15/08/18 01:30 PM
8

Tightest, not best
/r/MensRights03/03/18 09:41 AM
1

Right, and "Stoptober" could mean "stop taking your bins out" but the adverts which bring these things to people's attention can explain using the 8 words required what the cause is about. It's not "Let's all not have a drink for October to raise money for charity" because a) that's a fucking awful name and b) that's a description, not a name. No Shave November sounds crap, and you're not meant to not shave anyway, you're meant to grow a moustache.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 06:39 PM
4

Are you kidding? That's a shite name.
/r/MensRights14/11/17 11:52 PM
3

Jesus...neuroticism overload mate, chill! If anyone who was there before you fails to make any movement when it's their turn you can simply ask them "Are you waiting?" and then if they so no, you go. It's hardly "vigilance" to take a quick scan when you walk in and then have a quick scan around when ever someone gets out of a chair. I'm genuinely astonished that anyone could find this so challenging.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 07:22 PM
1

Fair enough, if you want to sit around for an extra 20-30 minutes that's your choice I guess.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 07:16 PM
1

So...you understand the basics of a queue but struggle with it anyhow? I'm at a loss to why this would be. What are you finding so difficult?
/r/MensRights07/08/17 07:06 PM
3

Of course I'd care, queue jumpers should be shot. Accidental queue jumpers should be corrected and feel shame for failing in their basic ability to queue. My time is as valuable to me as anyone else's is to them, there's no reason I should wait longer so that someone else can wait less time.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 07:04 PM
5

Is your entire country composed of people with learning difficulties? When you walk in you take note of who is there. When those people are gone, it is your turn and when asked who is next, you go. Everyone does either this, or they track people who have come in after them and when only those faces are left, it is their turn. This is how queuing in a barber works, I never had this explained to me by anyone, it's just a basic function of existing as a human.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 07:03 PM
1

I can't believe the number of people in this thread who find this difficult, it's...mind blowing that there could be so many people who are utterly incapable at functioning in such a basic situation.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 07:00 PM
3

It's just a really awkward and cumbersome experience every goddamn time. How is it awkward and cumbersome? Barber says "Who's next?" and when its your turn to go you get up and go sit down in his chair. That's literally all there is to it.
/r/MensRights07/08/17 06:58 PM
2

If it helps, no one around you has any more of a clue then you do. Are you kidding? I use barbers same as every other guy I know and everyone knows who is next. When you come in you take note of who is present, or you take note of anyone who comes in after you, or both, and you use that to determine your place in the queue. How hard is that?
/r/MensRights07/08/17 06:57 PM
2

He was saying how he'd hit a woman for everyone who pledged not to. I mean stuff like that is totally unhelpful. There's a difference between wanting equality and hating women. It shouldn't be about getting one over on women/feminists, it should be about winning the argument by being a better person/movement than them.
/r/MensRights23/11/16 08:29 PM
-2

Aaaaaaaaaand that's why people say the MRM is mysogynistic.
/r/MensRights23/11/16 09:20 AM
-1

"some" people will do anything, but really, I think you're mischaracterising, and that does no-one any favours. That's all I'm saying.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 06:50 PM
16

Will they though? I mean, I've encountered a lot of feminists/women claiming that false rape allegations are far rarer than made out, or that they're accorded a much higher profile than would reflect their prevalence, but it doesn't seem to be common to insist that they never happen. I think it's important to stick to reality, especially when your opposition doesn't always.
/r/MensRights14/08/16 05:16 PM
10

Yup. Women "attempt" suicide and normally fail, men just do it.
/r/MensRights27/05/16 04:08 PM
31

Posted by the woman who went nuts when a man invited her for coffee. Wouldn't really expect more.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 11:06 AM
1

I'm pretty sure Trump isn't going to genocide anyone. I also don't view the presidency as a comedic position. I suppose that all rests on whether one is American or not. I am not, so, I adore Trump. Milo is similar.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 10:42 PM
2

"You'll have many, they'll compete".. As if the insurance companies will lower prices so substantially because there are no "lines around the state". Please, explain how this works since you seem to be so supportive. I would love to hear how the expansion of the insurance companies across state lines actually correlates with lower prices in the market. You don't think I actually like Trump because of his policies do you? I like him because he'd be hilarious in power, not because he'd be good. Ye…
/r/MensRights26/02/16 06:09 PM
2

Don't you mean socialist healthcare? Anyway, aside from all that I'm pretty much onboard. The wall isn't really just about economic benefit, it's also about enforcing the laws of the nation and stopping bad people getting into the US.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 05:54 PM
2

What's wrong with that?
/r/MensRights26/02/16 05:42 PM
4

Why is he a quack?
/r/MensRights26/02/16 04:58 PM
1

Ah it's the beeb, they've been on a totally by the book crusade for all the usual suspects the past 3-6 months for some reason. Every day I check the news there's some new issue-of-the-moment about another SJW issue.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 12:39 PM
6

Wot? Gay people can marry in 17 countries around the world, including Canada....
/r/MensRights20/06/15 02:52 PM
2

The judiciary is independent in the UK though. Our judges get well pissy when the politicians try and interfere.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 07:19 PM
0

They work their arses off.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 01:46 AM
2

Britain in the '80s might have. It's a very different story today.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 01:46 AM
3

“I think it’s what happens to you as a group when you are starting to get most of what you fought for? What do you do now?” Irrooooonnnnny
/r/MensRights13/11/14 02:48 PM
1

Umm, I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to get at here. Could you rephrase/explain?
/r/MensRights05/11/14 08:16 PM
10

wot? /r/mensrights users are pretty much all of the view that men should defend themselves if attacked, by either gender. Your experience sounds atypical for that sub.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 07:38 PM
2

Ah OK, thought I was going to have to get angry at someone being wrong on the internet there but you seem to be not a tool.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 08:58 PM
3

Only a womans body?
/r/MensRights02/10/14 08:30 PM
14

You think Scotland will be better if we went our own way? Mate the entire political class would support measures like this if we got a yes vote in September.
/r/MensRights07/07/14 04:23 PM
43

dat pay gap.....xd
/r/MensRights08/06/14 08:00 PM
0

Signed :)
/r/MensRights19/03/14 05:37 PM
4

Only that he views women as less capable than men Why so? Or rather, what has he said to make you think this. edit: Gotta love the instant downvote because a foreigner who take a passing interest in Aussie politics asks a question.
/r/MensRights19/03/14 04:46 PM
0

Heh, ok.
/r/MensRights09/03/14 09:39 PM
1

I know the difference which some describe, but my point was what difference would it make in this specific instance?
/r/MensRights09/03/14 07:24 PM
1

What difference would it make?
/r/MensRights09/03/14 05:46 PM
6

The only thing we're allowed to do which is correct is stand back so everything is multi-ethnic multi-religious and everyone is present and included but us evil white males. Of course we're expected to pony up all the money for these things to happen, that's our duty because we're evil and cruelly dominate all of the obviously cushy and easy (dangerous 14 hour a day) jobs which bring in tonnes of money. But we mustn't do more than just open our wallets and stand idly by. To do more would be us a…
/r/MensRights12/02/14 08:31 PM
6

Lol, no. I work in the north sea. Rigs don't stop, ever. Are you meaning that you got your rotation weeks off or that the rig actually shut down for Christmas? Because that's rare as hell in my book. In the North Sea you normally get either Xmas or NY off, although because of the weather this year I might have both on the rig.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 11:55 PM
25

Woah, thanks very much dude. S'rather nice for someone to give a shout out to us lot. It's easy to feel a wee bit forgotten out here.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 08:56 PM
2

Heh, that's not at all true. The Guardian are like a left wing version of the Daily Mail.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 11:00 PM
0

Indeed. Unfortunately the way the world is going these days, people think that their right to have their feelings and convenience protected trumps an individuals right to property rights and freedom of choice. The sad thing is, they think they're the ones acting morally :|
/r/MensRights16/12/13 03:15 PM
1

They're all repugnant, but all should be legal.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 02:23 PM
3

Then the courts would. To be honest the police would most likely just come around and have a chat to please the complainant but they'd probably just say "watch what you say on the internet" which is police speak for "We had to come and talk to you so we could say we talked to you to some whiny cunt who called us". While as Kennai says our rights to freedom of speech are not as robust as the US, they're not quite so ridiculous as to be about offending anyone. One can be prosecuted for speech whic…
/r/MensRights15/12/13 06:25 PM
36

It's just a word for "upset" but it's supposed to carry connotations of deep psychological damage, as opposed to just "my feelings got hurt" and hence be something one should never, ever, ever do. Uttery absurd and childish.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:33 PM
37

The sheer audacity and force of this attempt at shaming me for daring to be a woman w/ an opinion is very triggering. God, you have to love the language of it all don't you. Some people really manage to dress up "They made fun of my silly idea" in the grandest of terms don't they?
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:15 PM
6

None really, it's clearly satire. Unless they posted about how all women should die or something absurd like that then they'll be fine.
/r/MensRights15/12/13 05:14 PM
1

Dont be such an ass. Just because some people are idiots doesnt mean you need to simk to the same level.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 11:10 PM
2

Most people in the EU don't give much of a fuck about freedom of speech. Lip service is paid to it, but that's it.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 10:52 AM
4

You haven't heard of Andy Murray? Do you live under a rock?
/r/MensRights09/07/13 07:51 PM
2

If I said yes would you leave?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 04:55 AM
5

Dude it was funny, don't worry about the downvotes.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 09:02 AM
4

Fine, nation of islam then, although that's a little bit of a messier example.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 09:36 PM
32

Yeah, I think that feminist groups probably realised that MRAs were flying under the banner of "Gender equality" while feminists were just calling themselves "feminists" - so now some groups are doing that thing which so many whine about "co-opting" terminology. A gender equality group called "Feminista" is like a racial equality group called the "KKK" or "Black Panthers".
/r/MensRights27/05/13 01:18 PM
37

Careful now, you're being very sensible there....
/r/MensRights27/05/13 01:17 PM
9

Institutional victimhood continues....
/r/MensRights27/05/13 01:10 PM
-2

Fuck 'em, every downvote is a badge of honour.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 04:44 PM
61

HR.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 04:43 PM
16

Do explain.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 05:56 PM
-1

It's not a clinical term in any serious sense though because no-one is trans-sexual. Completely impossible with current medical tech.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 05:56 PM
3

Mmm, ok. I suppose it does make the subreddit and wider movement look bad. On the other hand I guess it can be viewed as an opportunity to show the world the difference between crazy nutters who hate women and a very reasonable, mature, mens rights movement.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 04:25 PM
7

What is with those guys? They seem....weird.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 03:24 PM
4

Mmm, this is true. That said, my dentist always complements my teeth so I guess not eating concentrated sugar for each meal does the job.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 03:23 PM
6

Well, it takes a long time, but it's just my routine now obviously. I was always taught: Wake up Brush Teeth Murder 25 people Eat Breakfast Go to work Murder another 25 Come home What else can I do? That's just how I was raised....
/r/MensRights27/03/13 01:11 PM
6

How on earth does the system not wring them out though? Are there parts of the US legal system which are so fucked up that there's no-one left with the power to say "Hold on a minute, this one's fucking stupid, we've gotta get rid of her".
/r/MensRights27/03/13 01:09 PM
14

I feel sorry for Americans right now, this lady is actually a judge in your country? That's just...nuts. How does someone that stupid get through a law degree?
/r/MensRights27/03/13 12:51 PM
10

Yeah, I murdered like 50 people the other day. The cops were fine with it obviously, not my fault since my parents always woke me up everyday with the words "remember to murder!"
/r/MensRights27/03/13 12:47 PM
4

Beautiful....well done sir! Good point well made.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 07:04 PM
5

I guess someone had to not get it....
/r/MensRights14/03/13 08:23 AM
4

Was my sarcasm too thick there?
/r/MensRights13/03/13 08:44 AM
23

Obviously. It's bad enough that every single woman is forced to have a baby and take time out from their career, they shouldn't have to pay for childcare too! Alimony should be for fun stuff!
/r/MensRights13/03/13 08:23 AM
-1

You can't have an opinion as a man unless you're a transsexual? Worth remembering that they consider transsexual males to be women.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 11:17 AM
8

That lot do.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 10:36 AM
25

"Abnormal" has a negative connotation And nevertheless it's completely accurate. Words should not change to accommodate feelings.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 10:34 AM
8

The UK is getting a lot better at treating these cases as they should be. I'm rather proud, so many countries are still hugely fucked up in both rape and false rape claims, the UK seem to be making progress on both, not the former only, or none at all.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 09:59 PM
2

People like this are little better than Islamic fundamentalists.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 09:24 PM
2

Agreed, the writing is terrible and sounds just like one of those retarded chain e-mails that goes around.
/r/MensRights25/12/12 03:53 PM
2

Lets just charge the same for everyone and completely ignore our knowledge of statistics and probability eh? Who wants insurance to be fair anyway?
/r/MensRights23/12/12 10:09 PM
0

Then you don't understand how insurance works and should kindly withhold your opinion.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 02:18 PM
2

Because the old system was fairer than the new one.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 02:17 PM
0

State run systems are different than legislation against private companies, and I'm not much up to speed on Obamacare (not being a yank) but I'd be inclined to say yes, I would be in favour of removing them, based on the information I currently have.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 02:13 PM
1

This is equality of outcomes, as in, lets make all boardrooms 50% females type equality. Not good.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 01:00 PM
2

We just call it National Insurance (N.I. occasionally, only in the right context) actually, it's for more than healthcare, it's also for all sorts of state benefits and assistance which the state covers. Not disagreeing with your point in principle, just pointing out that it's for more than just the NHS.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 01:00 PM
-2

Well yes, she'll probably manage, but the point is she shouldn't have to, because based on the stats she is less likely to have an expensive car crash than men of an equivalent age. This is fact, indisputable. You can argue the stats are wrong (although unless you're an actuary you probably shouldn't) - but what the stats currently say is that men 17-21 are more expensive than women aged 17-21. So men pay more. This isn't equality of opportunity, this is equality of outcomes - precisely the sort…
/r/MensRights21/12/12 12:56 PM
1

I think most knew that she was being attacked for her party's stance on the union jack being flown by Belfast City Council. I was fairly clear on that from the BBC news myself.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 02:00 AM
1

The MP attacked, IIRC, Naomi Long, belonged to Alliance, an unaligned party. Not sure what you were wanting there, I think everyone knew that the rioting was over the councils flag decision and Alliances choice to not support the continued flying of that flag. The BBC certainly is a lot better than most news organisations, but of course it's not perfect.
/r/MensRights15/12/12 01:24 AM
4

It's a perfectly reasonable reply though, there's nothing trollish about it. Arguments should not need to be reinforced by the ethos of a person. My point is just that the observation made does not invalidate the point made by 8745quantus, regardless of that individuals motivations.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 02:02 PM
16

Doesn't matter. Argue the point made, not the perceived motive.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 01:54 PM
18

The brevity of someone's membership on reddit doesn't invalidate their arguments, nor does it validate yours. That said, given the prevalence of male on male rape in US prisons I did ask myself if the BBC were seriously choosing to write a rape in prisons in the US article which solely focusses on women.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 01:50 PM
5

realize that homogenizing gender functions leads to true inequality You finally said something with some meat on it. Good. Now, pray tell why you believe this?
/r/MensRights01/12/12 07:34 PM
4

The fact that I can be mature enough to recognise inequality affects both genders doesn't require me to be subservient. In fact quite obviously from the fact that I'm here I care about inequality of all kinds, but just reject material like this which is childishly and crudely opposed to all feminism, just as I reject feminist material which does the same for MRAs.
/r/MensRights01/12/12 07:26 PM
5

Me chastising your childish representation of feminism doesn't in any way impair my ability to be a guy, or to desire equality, or to be masculine. I feel sorry for you. You're always going to be angry at the world, at least unless your views change, and what a waste it is to spend your life angry at the world.
/r/MensRights01/12/12 06:59 PM
7

Raise your level of discourse a bit yeah? edit: Assuming it was moderators who deleted this, was it really necessary? The poster was presumably a troll, but on the off chance that they were not, some productive discussion may yet have occurred :/
/r/MensRights01/12/12 06:37 PM
17

Many, many things.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 05:06 PM
7

Please don't take Jeremy Kyle as a shining example of morality. The man feeds on the poor and stupid to entertain the slightly less poor and stupid.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 01:35 PM
4

I believe you're confused, I was not issuing a correction, I was making the point that you would not be offended if I'd said "people", despite the fact that you are a part of that group, yet you are offended at me saying "guys" which you are a subset of. This is irrational, and the only possible interpretation possible is that you're working on the assumption that I'm being sexist toward you (and myself). For this I won't offer an apology, because I'm not, I was simply using a turn of phrase. As…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 03:47 PM
1

Ok, I'll give it one last go before I just move on: Pretend for a second that I said "This shouldn't happen, people" - would you then think yourself equally justified?.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 03:39 PM
2

I didn't. A statement of what should or should not happen is not an implication that all who see that statement have or would commit that which shouldn't happen. As for being insulted, it is perhaps worth remembering that offence is taken, not given.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 03:11 PM
-3

Some of us clearly are, otherwise things like this wouldn't happen.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 03:05 PM
1

I'm not entirey sure, I believe it was that one of them encountered her in a TF2 game, although as I said, I don't know all of the facts.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:02 PM
1

Not knowing the full story, I wouldn't like to assign portions of blame. I don't think it's wise to go further than to say that she had messages sent to her which shouldn't have been sent to her. Beyond that, I know little. I accept it's conceivable that she was harassing and provoking, but I just don't know, and as much as I can't stand radfems, I'm not going to assume she was provoking the group just because she is one.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 12:52 PM
2

The response to her provocations should have been reasonable and measured though. If she was able to get them banned for harassment, the admin of that group could probably have done the same if she was harassing him. That's a big if at this point too.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 12:22 PM
6

The radfem links to messages recieved in this blog post. There is plenty there which is completely unacceptable, and regardless of whether she agitated them or not would be perfectly reasonable grounds for a group being banned.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 11:52 AM
3

You didn't appear to have much to start with.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 10:37 AM
2

I repeat: If you think violence is the answer to rights issues then you are a complete fool, and an embarrassment to the egalitarian community. Whether you agree with her or not, whether you hate her opinions or not, that does not make violence legitimate. Further to that, the fact that you reach for such a ridiculous threat at the very first makes us look bad to the outer world, reinforces feminist beliefs about the very idea of mens rights, and makes guys who might wonder what this MRM thing i…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 10:35 AM
2

Actually no that's not how you get your rights respected at all. Right yes, let's just hit them over the head with our clubs and drag them back to our caves eh? Didn't you learn anything from how the bitches sprung this whole feminist bullshit on us in the first place? I wasn't around 100 years ago when suffragettes were protesting for the vote, but I'm glad they got the damn thing because men chose to give it to them. If you think violence is the answer to rights issues then you are a complete …
/r/MensRights03/08/12 10:28 AM
8

Great, thanks for reinforcing all of the crazy feminist beliefs about men being violent monsters. Grow the fuck up. If we want our rights to be respected then we need to respect everyone else's rights too.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 10:00 AM
147

I'm actually just going to disagree outright with the premise of this thread. The title is wrong. The group wasn't shut down for being males only. The women who got it shut down may be a crazy tumblr feminist, but the fact that the admin of the group was sending her rape and murder threats is wrong. That shouldn't happen guys. If it had just been a member of the group I'd say that Valve over-reacted, however when it was the group's founder and admin, to shut down the group seems relatively logic…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:23 AM
8

No, ffs no! The last group got shut down because of the Admin being an idiot and making serious threats against this girl. He was an idiot, and Valve unfortunately decided to close the group because it was the group creator and admin harassing this tumblr feminist. It's good that a new group has been created, but there's it'd be wrong to go about falsifying harassment claims against girl gamer groups.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:19 AM
31

PAAAATRIIIAAARRRCCHHHHHYYYYYY!
/r/MensRights29/07/12 10:50 AM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights15/07/12 12:30 PM
1

I never said it did.
/r/MensRights15/07/12 11:33 AM
4

It should be protected under free speech laws, obviously. We're all big boys and girls, we can handle people saying nasty stuff.
/r/MensRights15/07/12 10:37 AM
9

Guys, come on now, this is good news. She got jailed for it, that's appropriate action being taken for a heinous act. I'm starting to think that the UK is actually becoming very active on this issue of false rape allegations. While commiting rape in the UK will land you in jail for many years, going to the police with false allegations of rape will also land people in jail, and that's the system functioning exactly as it should. Let's not be angry about the fact this happened, for the lady is cl…
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:53 PM
8

Ditto! FTFY
/r/MensRights27/06/12 01:25 PM
4

Muslims?
/r/MensRights27/06/12 10:06 AM
1

You'd have to find a sympathetic doctor though and try to convince them. Sure, it'll still happen, but not automatically, and just not just because some old fairytales say that all new born boys should have a part of their dick cut off.
/r/MensRights27/06/12 10:06 AM
1

If the average man needs that service sooner than the average woman then it will be reflected in the higher average price men end up paying thanks to customers who've had their premiums raised after a crash. But it isn't, because the insurance companies need men to pay before they crash as well as after, and to try and charge only men who've crashed for the much higher incidence rate of crashing among men would be unrealistically expensive. The likelihood you're going to need that coverage is 10…
/r/MensRights29/05/12 08:22 AM
1

Statistics remain irrelevant. Gender equality is a natural right. You have gender equality. You pay an equal amount for services rendered to the other gender. That's equal. I'm suggesting a change for ethical reasons. And I'm arguing that your motivations are not ethical, since you want to pay less than the other gender per unit of service. Yeah, and I am the one group out there who's definitely not responsible for other people crashing cars, but I'm paying for their accidents anyway when I buy …
/r/MensRights28/05/12 09:59 PM
1

Saying an average white person has more money is statistics. Acting as though all brown people have less money than any white person is prejudice. Similarly, it is entirely accurate to say that men have more car accidents, but it is prejudiced to treat every man as though he is more likely to crash than any woman. I disagree, lacking any better method of determining who will crash more, and who will crash less, a complex statistical model is the fairest and best model available to us. I suppose …
/r/MensRights28/05/12 10:21 AM
1

Prejudice is about pre-judging people. Well I actually disagree with your extrapolation of the definition from the etymology (roots, as you termed it) of the word. Rather I'd argue that the term has come to mean pre judging others based on notions not rooted in fact or reality. For instance, if I say that on average brown people are poorer than white people, that is not prejudiced, because it is true. Similarly, if I say that on average men get into more expensive crashes than women, that is not…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 08:34 PM
1

... and is therefore ageist as well as sexist. Ageism is far more tolerable than sexism, both legally and ethically. I don't see why any of them are intolerable when they're based upon rational reasoning. The underlying reasons are irrelevant. Money alone is not sufficient reason to permit overt sexual prejudice. It's not prejudice. Prejucide is about holding preconcieved notions not based on reason or experience. Men's higher premiums exist precisely because of reason and experience. I applaud …
/r/MensRights27/05/12 06:38 PM
1

I am so tired of people telling me that systems which treats men and women differently 'aren't about gender.' The system also treats old and young people differently, and would right and left handed, black and brown haired, tall and short, if it could. It's not because we're men that we get discriminated against, it's because we're statistically more likely to have an expensive crash - they just know this because they know we happen to be men. If white people had more accidents on average, would…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 05:49 PM
1

It's not about gender per se though, it's about risk. Men are riskier drivers, and hence we generally pay more. In a similar vein, young people are riskier drivers, and hence they pay more. There are two ways of doing insurance, either everyone pays an identical fee, and you and I end up paying for all the really dangerous drivers out there, or we allow discrimination, and you pay an amount which correlates with how risky a driver you are likely to be. No. What are you talking about? Affirmative…
/r/MensRights27/05/12 03:32 PM
1

Equality is treating men differently from women? Equality of opertunity is different from equality of outcomes. Equality of outcomes results in insurance rates being equal across the sexes, and also requires quotas on who works in board rooms, and all sorts of positive discrimination. This is what you're arguing for here.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 11:18 AM
-5

I'm a guy so I'll pay higher fees, and I think that's a terrible directive. Insurance with discrimination is absurd. The companies should be free to discriminate to the maximum possible degree - at least that results in averaged out fairness, unlike a situation where no-one can discriminate. edit: To those downvoting me, what I'm arguing for is equality of opertunity, everyone judged on their own merits. What you guys must want, is equality of outcomes, just like all the crazy feminists out ther…
/r/MensRights26/05/12 04:42 PM
2

It's an opt-out service being adopted by many ISP's. The government here (Right wing, socially conservative, authoritarian) has been making rumblings about making it a legal requirement to have an opt-out service, so if you sign up with an ISP and want to access all content (except for the pirate bay, which has just been banned, although is still completely a accessible) then you have to prove to them that you're 18 and request that the "service" be turned off. Many ISP's are adopting forms of t…
/r/MensRights19/05/12 10:47 AM
3

but my point is to disprove the notion that men are superior to women Not superior, physically superior. They are not physically equal, you will never achieve this if this is your goal to show it, because it is factually false. It can not be true unless we start to tamper with genetics. The bodies are built differently, from muscle and bone density, to lung capacity, to heart size, to hormones and natural steroids, and just the bodies programming to make more muscle if it's a male body.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:36 PM
2

To an extent!. While an average woman can push herself to become as strong as an average man, if you take one of each and they both work out for 6 months, the man will still have a massive lead. Further to that, if you take the most physically superior woman you can find in the world and bring her to the peak of her physical life, she's still going to barely enter top 100 rankings for many an athletic or sporting event.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:25 PM
2

my evidence is in the media that is pushing women to be weak and skinny instead of strong That's awful evidence. I am talking about actual indisputable science here I'm afraid, you can disagree all you want but your acceptance isn't required for the facts to match reality. farm story here Yes, so this shows that by working very hard you were able to outperform three men at farmwork. That doesn't disprove a single thing I've said. I didn't say all men were physically better than all women, I didn…
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:20 PM
3

given time and effort a woman's body can be just as strong and physically capable as a man's Why do you think this? There is plenty of easily available evidence that men can push further than women can in athletic terms. I'm not saying that no woman can ever be physically superior to a man, I'm just saying that overall men are physically superior at most athletics and sports, and that this is for physiological reasons. You are denying biological facts here.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 11:07 PM
2

What is your evidence for this besides desire?
/r/MensRights15/05/12 10:58 PM
5

these studies were done on women that neglected their bodies due to gender roles Are you a troll or just really ignorant? What you're saying is nonsense, these are facts of the human body, part of the corpus of physiological medical knowledge. Different genders are fundamentally different, and that has nothing to do with gender roles (in fact it's probably the very cause of those gender roles) or what women or men are taught, and everything to do with the fact that men are built far more athleti…
/r/MensRights15/05/12 10:56 PM
3

not to mention testosterone. .....
/r/MensRights15/05/12 10:17 PM
7

Oh, it's just, you're also very wrong. The top 10 marathon times for women wouldn't find a place in the top 100 times for men's completion of a marathon. Men in general have the potential to be considerably more athleticly capable in many regards, and if you have mixed gender competition, there are plenty of sports and athletic activities where women will never be remotely near the top of leagues. There are big differences in our physiology. Men are on average about 30-40% stronger in the upper …
/r/MensRights15/05/12 10:06 PM
9

Can't tell if you're being serious there or not.
/r/MensRights15/05/12 09:55 PM
14

The problem is that you pay by skill, and if you pay by skill men will forever be the most highly paid athletes in most areas, and you know who won't like that?
/r/MensRights15/05/12 08:34 PM
1

The idea that the definition of equality should be that all people are treated the same is something that women's studies scholars have challenged through research and theoretical work over the years Interesting. I think that pretty much says it all, equality of opportunity is not desired, equality of outcomes is. "Fair" has been redefined.
/r/MensRights05/05/12 10:57 AM
0

Subverted it. The bastards.
/r/MensRights27/04/12 12:38 PM
4

"Women's studies" and associated disciplines aren't taken very seriously inside academia. That's because they're barely inside academia.
/r/MensRights05/03/12 03:43 PM
1

he has ALL these studies, facts, statistics to prove how men have oppressed the world. So look into them. Argue the truth, not the way he wraps it. Check out the studies, his facts, his statistics. Are they valid? Was the methodology correctly constructed? Were sample sizes large enough? Were they representative? Information forms the foundation of any good argument, if you want to take out someone's argument, the first thing to do is grab hold of their foundations and shake 'em about to see if …
/r/MensRights16/11/11 01:19 PM
2

Indeed! Cheers for the stats, I'm surprised how high a social catagory a significant number of Daily Mail readers are in.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 05:44 PM
8

Not objecting to this assertion, but do you have anything to back it up? I'd be really curious on correlation stats between newspaper readership and gender/age etc.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 04:53 PM
-6

I don't throw hate, I state facts without cushioning them perhaps, but then offense is taken, not given. I have nothing against people who feel like they are off a different sex than they are, I just won't pretend to believe in things which aren't the case.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 05:37 PM
-3

I'm not sure that you properly read my above post but I already observed that indeed it should not automatically be assumed that penis means XY, and that there are rare chromosomal configurations which allow for the possibility of male sex characteristics without XY chromosomes. I'm afraid you have not introduced me to anything new, and in fact I have studied intersexuality a little bit several years ago.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 05:16 PM
-3

Well this is a point, it is possible that the above person is intersex, or has a genetic abnormality such as XXY etc, however while I suppose I probably shouldn't have said that fuzzytoe is a man, I can most certainly say that they are not a woman, if they were born with a penis.
/r/MensRights17/09/11 11:23 AM
-6

With the utmost respect, you identify as a woman, but you are biologically speaking a man. You have XY chromosomes and as of yet this can not be changed, I wish you all the best in life.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 10:14 PM
0

I'm not a biologist (chemistry is my forté), but it seems that as I had originally understood chromosomal abnormalities are not mostly a facet of intersexuality but rather, entirely so. While I appreciate you taking the time to reply to my post, it does seem that all we're left with here is a few studies of a small number of people showing promising but limited research into neurological indicators of non-standard gender identification. Now this doesn't really create a problem in terms of my poi…
/r/MensRights16/09/11 02:11 PM
1

The neurology is interesting and obviously further study is needed, since the studies done seem to all have been very small scale. Interesting nonetheless. I'm curious what you mean by saying that XX can occur in males and XY in females. My understanding of sex is that a man is XX and a woman is XY and that's about it. Of course there are chromosomal abnormalities which exist in a tiny minority of people with Turners syndrome or Kleinfelters etc., but these are rare and breach traditional sex an…
/r/MensRights16/09/11 01:13 PM
-3

I'd be curious to hear about the chromosomal and neurological indicators which back up the "woman born in the wrong body" theory. You can call me ignorant of the medicine if you please for it's a charge I can accept to a good degree. But by all means please do back up your position instead of simply insulting me. edit: downvoted for requesting evidence? Now who's being biggoted cunts, eh reddit?
/r/MensRights16/09/11 12:30 PM
-2

But she has valid points. A man who undergoes surgery is still a man. Many women in women's shelters do not want to be around men for the time they are there, and that many of the women there will recognise the man dressed as a women with no dick, as a man. While I can accept that there might be valid objections to some of the other things she says, I think /r/mensrights has gone very wrong somewhere if it has gotten to the point where it won't accept that some men do beat the shit out of their …
/r/MensRights16/09/11 09:54 AM
-3

Well, while I read and sometimes post in mensrights, and agree with some of what is posted, I wouldn't include myself in the club.
/r/MensRights16/09/11 09:21 AM
-2

I don't think she has an interest in keeping men "out of the feminist camp" as you say, IIRC the problem she raises is having men who've undergone "gender reassignment" working in homes for women's shelters. This seems understandable to me, as I think there's probably a good proportion of people who will not recognise someone who has had their dick cut off as a woman, just because they desire to be that way. Men are not becoming women, this is nonsense. A man can not become a woman yet, it is im…
/r/MensRights16/09/11 07:53 AM
-21

She demonstrates no real fear towards transgender people here. In fact as someone who supports equality of opportunity for all, I've gotta say that a lot of what she says here seems spot on. Declaring that transexuals can not change gender is true. They can not. What they have done to them is simple, brutal surgery, and yet she seems to be being hated for admitting the truth. I'm not sure whether this is feminism hate, or transexual ideology turned stupidity, but either way, the objection to thi…
/r/MensRights15/09/11 07:41 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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