TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

sudo_rm_onering Archive

View 0 posts and 42 comments by sudo_rm_onering 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)
5

Aaaand, now you're being downvoted. This sub has become really just toxic in general. Groupthink is getting almost as bad as some of the subs decried here. Which is too bad, because there really are important issues covered here that you don't often see elsewhere. I hope, for the sake of Mens Rights gaining mainstream attention, the sub takes measures to clean itself up a bit... because if I, someone who has sympathies for the group and wants to see it meet its goals, is getting turned off by th…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 12:38 AM
0

/r/im14andthisisfunny
/r/MensRights29/05/15 12:07 AM
5

were the #1 military for a reason That would be money.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 04:14 AM
4

I missed the part where I said a man should get the final say in a woman's medical procedure.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 06:24 AM
4

No, just the ones paying for the decision only another gets to make.
/r/MensRights08/03/15 05:31 AM
1

This pretty plainly shows people don't really care if something is devastating until you can show the effect it has on women. This just hasn't been my experience. We've been beating the drum of heart disease as a predominantly male problem, and a large American problem, since the 90's. I mean, the whole "heart-healthy" craze that products like Cheerios hopped on board with pretty much came from the heart-disease awareness campaigns we've had for years. This is just another awareness campaign tar…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 02:05 PM
1

Like any group, it's a mixed bag. Some are too extreme, some get carried away, some are moderate in their stances... my comment got 15 upvotes, so that's something. Be the change you want to see!
/r/MensRights09/02/15 03:07 AM
26

I think maybe the intent is to get women to realize heart disease isn't just a men's issue, but that it effects many women, too. I think most people already think of heart disease as mostly a male issue. Personally, I didn't read this as exclusionary at all. Just trying to raise awareness.
/r/MensRights08/02/15 06:38 PM
2

I agree, it's absolutely impossible to have a discussion here without it all being one sided. Well... you added to the discussion and made it not one-sided, and you seem to have at least some approval. Be the change you want to see, there's hope yet for rationality!
/r/MensRights31/01/15 06:23 AM
3

What's with the generalizing?
/r/MensRights24/01/15 10:22 PM
1

... but he's from Israel, right?
/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:17 AM
1

He's from Israel... I dunno, I feel lije cross-cultural stories tend to sound fake because details like that are just different.
/r/MensRights13/01/15 06:15 AM
1

Nope, nope, nope. You can call a group dedicated to torturing people in the worst ways imaginable the Happy Funtime Party, but it doesn't mean they are happy or that people are having a fun time. You're either being disingenuous or obtuse if you're seriously pointing out a word in their name to extrapolate a general ideology instead of.... ya know, what they actually fucking wrote about ideology.
/r/MensRights11/01/15 06:05 PM
1

Perhaps you could explain what you feel is different. Because universities have traditionally not been run as a business. Like medical care, the primary purpose is to serve a public need, not to make money off of students. Sometimes this is done by private institutions, but recent advents like University of Phoenix aside, they still didn't really operate like a business maximizing profits. http://www.harvard.edu/faqs/mission-statement Students are, in many ways, a captive audience, and in that s…
/r/MensRights26/12/14 08:31 PM
1

I'm sorry, but I just reject that the university/student relationship is the same as a business/consumer one, though they have some similarities.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 11:02 PM
1

It isn't obvious to me that a business choosing what products to stock for consumers has the same relationships as a campus. Yes, in a very vague sense they are suppliers of a product, but due to the nature of many campuses I think it is more difficult for students to simply "shop elsewhere", which would be the normal consumer response. So in the end, you're really just removing the choice of other students who DO support Israel to use the product. I'm just saying I think the context of this bei…
/r/MensRights25/12/14 10:22 PM
1

Aren't we talking about students giving their university grief over this? More recently, radical anti-Israel students tried to get SodaStream products banned from Harvard dining halls,
/r/MensRights25/12/14 09:36 PM
2

The point is, you're taking away user choice because you don't like their choices rather than trying to convince them to your side. Whether or not there is a legal ban, the result is the same: less choice for users based on the sensibilities of others.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 08:10 PM
2

It makes more sense to me to try and convince other users you're right, instead of taking the choice away from them. That's typically how boycotts work.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 08:08 PM
1

What the actual fuck?
/r/MensRights14/12/14 04:38 PM
7

Interesting timing. This attack has been making the rounds in the news near here. Supposedly, the attack was led by a woman who they are still trying to locate. Police say three guys and a woman humiliated the 20-year-old victim on the streets of Central Fresno by robbing her, stripping her, and beating her. The humiliation only got worse when the attack made it onto Facebook for everyone to see. Investigators say the chief culprit is the woman in the red tank top. She's known as "Baby Dreamer" …
/r/MensRights11/09/14 07:26 PM
2

I absolutely agree with you. 14 y/o boys are probably the horniest little fuckers on the planet. I don't get where all these e-MRA's come from - it's as if they didn't go through puberty. 14 y/o boys are full of testosterone. All they can think about is sex. Sex sex sex. Sex. Sex sex. Sex. Sex sex sex. This is not unique to boys. The correct statement would be teenagers are focused on sex, sex, sex. Because they are biologically supposed to be.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 08:45 PM
1

I am not comfortable applying a blanket "rape" label to all sex between a younger adolescent and an older adolescent I can actually get on-board with this. World isn't black and white. A 20 year old having sex with a 14 year old isn't the same as a 50 year old having sex with a 10 year old. especially when the younger party is male. Here's where you lose me. This is based on (Anglo/"Commonwealth") cultural preconceived notions, not science. Biologically, girls mature faster than boys and so are …
/r/MensRights05/09/14 08:42 PM
3

Most 14 year old boys want to fuck, and often the objects of their desires are 20 year old girls. Actually, biologically, it's more common for females to seek older, established mates at a younger age than boys, AFAIK. Males tend to shoot for younger, fertile females. Contrary to American views on the innocence of young girls and the horndog young bucks.
/r/MensRights05/09/14 08:36 PM
-1

Concern trolling isn't anyone who wants to effect change within a group/shows concern for current behavior.
/r/MensRights03/09/14 05:28 PM
5

Yeah we have way higher standards and put more pressure on women. That must be why women have historically higher rates of suicide. Wait...
/r/MensRights30/08/14 05:32 PM
1

Strange, I didn't need to for some reason. You could also look on NPR's facebook page, but I warn you, some of the comments are really pretty callous.
/r/MensRights11/08/14 02:16 PM
37

The article doesn't bother me nearly as much as the comments. Man, how do you walk away from that not feeling devalued, as a person? Invalidated? Soul-crushing shit to start off your day, right there.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 03:26 PM
3

/u/SpiritofJames mostly set me straight already. Interesting stuff. Gen ed history for you, I guess.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 05:39 AM
1

So, perhaps Machiavelli was simply pointing out a condition that already existed at the time?
/r/MensRights10/08/14 03:58 AM
6

It seems like this is the sort of thing couples should work out the minute things get serious enough that this is a possibility. Do you want kids? Do you want to stay home, would you rather I stay home, should we both work and split the household duties? My wife and I decided as soon as we had the kids talk that she would be far happier pursuing a law career, and I'd be far happier being a stay at home Dad. She didn't give me permission... we came to the decision together, like reasonable adults…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 03:48 AM
1

I guess I'll take your word for it, since I'm not in the humanities, but I definitely remember that isn't what was taught in my college during gen ed history when we read The Prince. Not exactly in depth, so again, I'll take your word for it. That said, it is still doesn't really affect my point that men can be just as devious. Machiavellian tactics were definitely a big deal in their day, so whether or not The Prince was meant to be taken as satire, many men did seem to take it as an instructio…
/r/MensRights10/08/14 03:28 AM
1

My personal experience hasn't been that. So which of our experiences is right? Can you at all effectively determine which sex does what more, to any significant degree? I'm not so sure. Some possible insight: my wife mentioned that it is possible that this is an old stereotype that's out-of-date. Historically, it may be more likely that women were more likely to be schemers, since that's the only real way they could get anything done. They traditionally did not directly hold positions of power, …
/r/MensRights10/08/14 01:52 AM
0

... which was supposed to be taken as a manual for how princes should conduct policy, right? "Mirrors for princes" and all that. I'm not sure why the distinction of it not being about Machiavelli himself matters in this case... it refers to characters in his book, which was meant to instruct rulers how to behave. Many would call those instructions - written by Machiavelli - devious and underhanded.
/r/MensRights10/08/14 01:37 AM
0

Enlighten me.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 11:00 PM
2

I was simply pointing out it is beyond ridiculous to paint this as a gendered issue, and continuing these mythical gender roles is silly. To that end, I found it ironic that what we might call a Machiavellian scheme, you were spinning as female in nature. You were the only one trying to compare genders, not I. This isn't a gendered issue.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 07:53 PM
2

It isn't exactly unheard of, that people hire other people to kill people they don't like. I don't know why having a penis or vagina affects that. http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-man-charged-botched-murder-hire-plot-kill/story?id=17215629
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:41 PM
11

I couldn't disagree more. You know we might call this a Machiavellian scheme - as in the man, Machiavelli, known as one of the greatest callous schemers of all time, to such an extent that we name this shit after him. Men and women can both be pretty underhanded, from where I'm standing. I think you're fooling yourself if you think this is a male/female thing.
/r/MensRights09/08/14 05:27 PM
3

Sounds like someone who hasn't been interacting with many MRAs. I see a lot more statistics and studies than I do hyperbole. There may be a lot of anecdotes from personal experience, but not hyperbole. The lack of specific examples leads me to believe the author is probably extrapolating that from a few Internet arguments they had. If we took anonymous Internet shit-talk as real representations of a movement in the real world, pretty much no group would have any moral high ground, ever. We tend …
/r/MensRights04/08/14 05:15 PM
5

A decreased risk of urinary tract infections. You don't chop off your arm because you might get a rash. You just treat the fucking rash. A reduced risk of sexually transmitted diseases in men. Condoms aren't exactly a new invention, if STD's are a concern. And is far, far more effective. Anyone relying on being cut to avoid an STD will be in for a nasty surprise. Protection against penile cancer and a reduced risk of cervical cancer in female sex partners. Extremely unlikely to happen. And again…
/r/MensRights04/08/14 04:12 PM
1

Isn't it every young man's dream to fuck someone? Young girls being attracted to and wanting sex from older, established men is also not uncommon. That doesn't make a sexual relationship right. There is an inherent power imbalance between a grown adult and a juvenile. As for how a penis works /can't be hard without being turned on, lolnope. Teenagers get random erections constantly that they wish would go away because they aren't turned on and it's awkward (due to body-shaming, btw). As another …
/r/MensRights10/06/14 03:24 AM
1

Honestly, I think this generalization is mostly out-of-date. At least it's never rung true for me. Hey, I masturbated as much as the next teenager, but I wasn't really into getting girls, and didn't have sex until late in my teenage years. I still have a lower libido than my wife, who has a very active one. On the other end of the spectrum, I worked from age 18 in a hotel as a bellman. We had a ton of high school bands/sports teams stay with us. Let me tell you, these teenage girls away from hom…
/r/MensRights06/08/13 09:27 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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