TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

swizzcheez Archive

View 0 posts and 57 comments by swizzcheez 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)
0

Read that as "Poe Slaw". Obviously my monitor needs a cleaning.
/r/MensRights23/02/15 01:01 PM
3

It's even in the side bar.
/r/MensRights04/06/14 02:31 PM
1

"Bridal" for her, "Bridle" for him?
/r/MensRights28/01/14 04:57 PM
15

The following is here only to provide context for the readers of this thread and does not indicate an opinion on my part in any way shape or form (I do not want to intermingle information with personal thoughts on the matter). Here is the apology from one of the two accused, from the related Y-Combinator forum: Hi, I'm the guy who made a comment about big dongles. First of all I'd like to say I'm sorry. I really did not mean to offend anyone and I really do regret the comment and how it made Adr…
/r/MensRights19/03/13 10:53 PM
4

Foe's law.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 11:28 PM
2

Given enough time and influence, I'm pretty sure there are radical branches of feminism that would actually figure out ways to accomplish this. See also "Val" in this link
/r/MensRights15/11/12 03:41 PM
1

Get your parents involved. Let them read the paper and if they approve of your arguments then don't worry, they'll do the heavy lifting for you. You are not likely in a position to make any real dent, whereas parents frequently are.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 03:21 PM
11

What happens if you get hot and heavy with the notary?
/r/MensRights05/11/12 02:45 AM
5

Really? Anyone blames Google for that? I always read that as blaming what Google is reflecting (society at large) and Google was understandably mindlessly reinforcing it.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 03:13 PM
1

Assuming you're actually talking about car doors... When you are driving three other people around do you run around the car opening the door and tuck them in? And then run around once you've parked to hold each door open? It must take forever going anywhere with you when four (total) capable people could do the ingress/egress operations in parallel. OTOH, building doors are a different story and I'll hold those open for anyone. It's no extra effort and very little wasted time (in fact it is mor…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 06:01 PM
2

And this is one of the largest problems that Reddit faces IMHO -- the concepts of topic and community are conflated. As a result, one can't have a civil discussion about a topic in an appropriately named subreddit without someone feeling their community is being threatened.
/r/MensRights24/07/12 05:10 PM
30

To her credit, Sarah Gilbert did not join in on that and did stand up enough to question the group. Yes, she could have gone further but, given her situation, she still did the right thing by dissenting. [Edit: Let loose another comma to set a phrase off correctly]
/r/MensRights05/06/12 08:41 PM
8

Yeah, in the same way as adding water to the soup makes it thinner. Sounds like statistics manipulation to me.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 08:22 PM
0

Maybe they're still married and he just got a newer model... of car of course.
/r/MensRights16/05/12 02:55 PM
5

The fact that they're requesting an exclusionary use of public land is the central sticking point according to the article. I would hope that a exclusively women's club on public funds would face similar scrutiny.
/r/MensRights18/04/12 01:03 AM
33

It seems to me that the state should be on the hook for the child support.
/r/MensRights23/03/12 03:34 PM
4

So... part 2. It gets worse...
/r/MensRights07/12/11 03:34 PM
3

It sounds like there was plenty of misandry there as well. Neither side appears to be the sort that is worth thinking much of IMHO.
/r/MensRights03/11/11 12:45 AM
2

Hmmm... wouldn't a charge of slander work well here?
/r/MensRights28/10/11 07:44 PM
1

I had no idea, but am not surprised, that subreddit existed.
/r/MensRights27/10/11 07:32 PM
12

According to the version history, the changes have been reverted (as of Oct. 14, 9:51 GMT Eastern). The discussion page says that a protection request has been made.
/r/MensRights14/10/11 01:17 PM
3

The difference is in whether the word is commonly applied as attribution or definition. Most swear words are used as attributes. "You're a dick," for instance, roughly translates into "You are behaving in a obnoxious, invasive, and/or brutish manner." It is usually implied that the person could one day stop behaving that way and that the person might very well transcend the attribute. "Cunt," in the same way as "nigger," is historically applied definitively, in that the negative connotations of …
/r/MensRights13/08/11 06:49 PM
7

I really wish he would have addressed the clip at the end with Sara Gilbert. I've said this in other posts, but honestly she did try to stop it. Leah and Holly looked like deer caught in the headlights unable to process how to slow down the topic in the face of the mob so at least I can understand their situation. However, I do wish we lived in a world where Osbourne and Chen found it hard to ever get on any media outlet ever again...
/r/MensRights23/07/11 06:07 PM
7

I think Sara Gilbert in particular was obviously bothered by the line the discussion was heading enough to challenge it. In addition, it looked like Leah Remini and Holly Robinson Petter were clearly uncomfortable but didn't know how to steer the conversation (or the mob) otherwise. As such, I don't particularly have an axe to grind with them on this issue. However, Julie Chen appeared to willfully stir the pot so I would have no problem if she took some career heat over this.
/r/MensRights21/07/11 08:08 PM
2

Yeah, Melissa Gilbert's litter sister seemed to have the best grip on how awful the situation was getting. The lady to her right and the lady to the left of Sharon Osborne also appeared somewhat uncomfortable.
/r/MensRights19/07/11 01:35 AM
0

Hit the sponsors -- I doubt the complaint form does anything.
/r/MensRights17/07/11 02:53 PM
3

It would seem to make sense to use genderless standards then. In other words, work out what the unit needs for qualifications, regardless of gender, and allow all applicants that meet the qualifications have a shot at it. If the average soldier needs to march with 80 lbs, and a woman can, then so be it. If not, touch luck, maybe those applicants are better suited for other units.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 05:17 PM
1

You know the law.
/r/MensRights13/07/11 05:09 PM
0

An important item for debate and analysis? Yes. Even a top three MR issue? Not a chance. In my opinion, paternal rights, working against false rape charges, and emerging workplace discrimination issues are far more immediate.
/r/MensRights13/05/11 01:23 PM
14

That mayor is aptly named.
/r/MensRights22/03/11 04:31 PM
1

Please tell me this is just the normal Encyclopedia Dramatica nonsense.
/r/MensRights18/03/11 02:15 PM
4

Of course it pained him. It's not the thing that plays well in elections.
/r/MensRights15/03/11 06:35 PM
8

You need to sprinkle on a little context here buckaroo. I don't know where the quote came from, who the woman in the picture is, or how they are supposed to relate. I can make some guesses but without any context I have no idea how valid those guesses are.
/r/MensRights02/03/11 01:56 PM
1

No doubt that alimony needs to change dramatically -- that was never the issue. I only take issue with the absolute position that alimony has no place in any circumstance. As mentioned in other threads, I completely agree that alimony non-payment really should never be a "jailable" crime. I completely concur that many of the rulings are abominable. However, in some cases for very time limited, diminishing, and reasonable amounts I believe alimony could still has a place. I think there's a good p…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 07:20 PM
2

No doubt that alimony needs to change dramatically -- that was never the issue. I only take issue with the absolute position that alimony has no place in any circumstance. As mentioned in other threads, I completely agree that alimony non-payment really should never be a "jailable" crime. I completely concur that many of the rulings are abominable. However, in some cases for very time limited, diminishing, and reasonable amounts I believe alimony could still has a place. I think there's a good p…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 07:20 PM
1

So basically, if you devote your life to the home to the point where your future career is stunted and the marriage eventually falls apart (assuming you are not the cause) then it's "sucks to be you"? Even if the homemaker is well educated doesn't mean that a job in the chosen career path is even possible once the marriage dissolves, sometimes partially due to the devotion to the home. (Again not in all cases, but not in zero either.) Heck, I thought MensRights had a better sense of fairness tha…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 06:54 PM
2

It can cut both ways. I've known men who have decided to do the "Mr. Mom" thing and end up unemployable following a divorce too. Not all spouses who work have a reasonable career path. In many cases that is due to staying at home to raise kids. If that is the case then there is some benefit in getting that person productive in a good paying job. As to public welfare, I don't disagree that it could have some effect. However, one situation is the couple who puts one of the partners through law sch…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 06:33 PM
1

Hint: There is no difference. Both parents can work. Being a stay at home mom is now a choice. Hint: choosing family over career is still a sacrifice, even if a choice. What is the difference between both working and using some of the extra income to pay for daycare and the mom staying home to take care of the kids as far as the "Primary" earner is concerned? So I'm assuming you're not arguing that the homemaker is due back-pay for all the daycare/nanny/etc that wasn't incurred during their serv…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 06:25 PM
2

So in what currency do they deserve to be paid if we're in agreement that there is a contribution and it isn't worthless? Even if both parents work, one often earns more or has to work more hours. Which resource is more valuable and a larger contribution? How do you measure the contribution to the family and growth of the children? Again, I'm not saying current alimony system isn't a flagrant abuse of rights -- just that the position of no alimony at all seems pretty one-sided too. It just doesn…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 06:18 PM
2

Nope, but honestly it is a help not to have to try to raise kids and deal with the household at the same time as trying to make a living. Ignoring those contributions only lends credibility to the more misanthropic foolishness of the feminist movement.
/r/MensRights22/02/11 06:10 PM
2

I'm in agreement with most, if not all, of your post. My position is simple: alimony is necessary in some cases. It should be short-term, reasonable, and diminishing. I would also agree that it should never include jail time.
/r/MensRights22/02/11 06:07 PM
0

That ignores the fact that the non-earner, in taking familial responsibilities, often enables the earner to achieve what they do. I'm not arguing that if one is actually loafing that anything is owed but it is flagrantly myopic to assume that the lesser earner contributed nothing just because it wasn't in the form of the dollar.
/r/MensRights22/02/11 05:19 PM
2

My feelings are the same for women and men - GET. A. JOB! Sound crazy to you? Absolutely not. Indeed, my expectation is that the lower earner is responsible for taking the steps necessary to become self sufficient quickly. The question is whether the marriage created an environment where getting any job day one would be close to impossible, not to mention a reasonable one within a few years. However: 1) I completely agree that the current state of alimony is draconian. In cases of childless coup…
/r/MensRights22/02/11 05:15 PM
3

This is not entirely a men's rights issue. This is a question of balance between the earner and the non-earner, who may have foregone a career in favor of familial occupation. Think of alimony as severance pay. Granted, the amounts are ridiculous (I won't debate that) but some effort to get the non-earner on their feet seems reasonable. Consider if you will two youngish people getting married. One has great career potential, the other has skills that allow then to earn a very meager amount. Due …
/r/MensRights22/02/11 04:22 PM
6

However, there are some households that are still single earner. In those cases it makes some sense to allow for some payment to the home-maker (man or woman) to allow them to get on their feet, maybe enough time to get a degree. But alimony, even in that circumstance, for longer than about 7 years seems to be simple involuntary servitude.
/r/MensRights22/02/11 02:37 PM
3

Try bolding the reversals. To be fair though, I had to read it somewhat carefully to see what you had done there. (Edit: Retracting thinking ass part regarding 47toolate -- it's probably too harsh. Sorry!)
/r/MensRights15/02/11 02:06 AM
2

Spoiler alert: #########the genders are reversed in rantgrrl's comment to try the role reversal on for size. (Edit: What? No spoiler alert protection on this /r?)
/r/MensRights15/02/11 02:03 AM
21

It's an article about intentionally watching "Jersey Shore" for pleasure. You were expecting witty commentary that isn't 180 degrees from any sense of rationality?
/r/MensRights14/02/11 08:00 PM
1

Does Eric Clausen's theory have a leg to stand on? Not from what's in the article. Should having a rather foolish view of the world cost him his job? Not from what's in the article. This is not the rallying cry you are looking for. Move along. (Edit: typo)
/r/MensRights02/02/11 08:58 PM
8

That's what he gets for not having an EULA on his gametes.
/r/MensRights01/02/11 06:34 PM
3

Isn't Fox over the air?
/r/MensRights31/01/11 08:26 PM
0

and has the balls to promptly hand him a $111,000 bill for child support that had accumulated while he was unjustly locked up So, is the child supposed to suffer instead? Perhaps it would be more proper for the false accuser to pay that bill (and maybe some others as well).
/r/MensRights28/01/11 03:28 PM
1

Perhaps in lieu of draconian measures, simply saddling her with the child support and reimbursement would be a good option. Of course, it wouldn't be unreasonable for her to have to work that bill off while in prison of course...
/r/MensRights28/01/11 03:26 PM
4

Women Human beings having double standards? Shocking!..... FTFY. Personally, I see both sides having gripes. OTOH, I think the world would be a lot worse place if we took all the griping seriously and didn't just rise above being offended all the damned time.
/r/MensRights27/01/11 07:40 PM
1

So, let's try not to be emotional and boil the numbers down to something more manageable. Given what you know, does it make sense to maintain a system that is predisposed to put even one innocent person in jail per any number of those guilty of the actual crime?
/r/MensRights18/12/10 04:46 PM
4

I was pleasantly surprised that the argument wasn't that she was under duress due to drinking and therefore couldn't consent.
/r/MensRights02/12/10 09:15 PM
17

At which point he was probably painted as an asshole for making the "victim" feel worse about it.
/r/MensRights27/09/10 07:34 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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