TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

test90001 Archive

View 0 posts and 107 comments by test90001 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)
1

These proposals are fine, but it takes two to make a baby. Any incentives, therefore, should go to both parents.
/r/MensRights22/08/22 10:01 AM
3

This is exactly why lawyer's groups in Florida oppose alimony reform. Less work and less billable hours for them.
/r/MensRights03/08/22 06:07 AM
1

It's obviously an attempt at trolling. The idea is to question the idea that life begins at conception.
/r/MensRights28/07/22 01:05 AM
1

I'm guessing it was because her daughter was born. It's kind of hard to tell your kid that you went all the way to the Supreme Court to get them aborted, so she had to backtrack.
/r/MensRights28/06/22 04:56 PM
2

Yeah, that's pretty normal for these high-level cases. The named plaintiff is just someone who volunteers to let the lawyers use their case as a test case.
/r/MensRights28/06/22 04:55 PM
1

So she made a legal mess and didn't even go through with the abortion. She didn't "go through" with the abortion because she couldn't. It takes a lot more than 9 months to get a case before the Supreme Court. Normally a case like this would be considered moot and dismissed, but the courts decided to go through with it in order to establish a precedent.
/r/MensRights28/06/22 04:54 PM
2

Democrats have done far more for men than Republicans. Remember when Trump and the Republican congress changed the tax code so that the payer (usually men) would have to pay tax on alimony/child support rather than the receiver (usually women)?
/r/MensRights26/06/22 08:53 AM
1

Slavery was effectively abolished in Delaware by the start of the war. Just because there wasn't a legal mandate against it doesn't mean it hadn't been abolished in practice.
/r/MensRights21/06/22 12:01 AM
1

I totally agree that we need to address multiple aspects of this issue. My point is that gun control is a major part of that. While all the other things you mention are important and should be addressed, they should be addressed in addition to our gun laws, not as a substitute.
/r/MensRights20/06/22 09:00 AM
1

Slavery actually remained legal in the north for some time after the war. That is complete nonsense (as is the rest of your post). Slavery was abolished in all northern states by the time the civil war started, with the exception of Delaware, where it was legal but basically defunct. The war ended in May 1865 and by the end of the year, the constitution had been amended to abolish slavery nationwide.
/r/MensRights20/06/22 07:05 AM
1

Those are good points, but the fact is that there are always going to be members of society that are marginalized or have mental illnesses or whatever. No society has ever figured out how to eliminate those issues. It would be near impossible to address mass shootings by focusing on mental illnesses, because creating an utopian society where mental illness doesn't exist is nearly impossible. It would be much more effective to address it the way many other countries have done successfully, by foc…
/r/MensRights19/06/22 11:44 PM
1

No matter what my opinion on gun availability/prevalence, mental health is clearly a driving factor here, to the extent that even though guns feature heavily in attacks in the USA, it's true that those same people could and probably would engage in destructive and self-destructive behaviour even if they didn't have access to those guns. Can we please stop with this "mental health" nonsense? The US isnt' the only place with mental health issues. Why do European teenagers with mental health issues…
/r/MensRights19/06/22 11:30 AM
13

First, you will need to talk to your parents if you haven't already. If they trust you, they should support you. Don't talk to anyone at the school, or the police. If the police get involved, you will likely need a lawyer.
/r/MensRights09/06/22 11:24 PM
2

Lawyers oppose this bill because it simplifies the law and therefore enables many parents to resolve custody issues without hiring them. To those who are opposed to this bill, note that 50-50 is not required, it is a starting point.
/r/MensRights06/06/22 01:32 AM
3

Absolutely, in fact some of the most significant MRAs have been women. Women simply have more credibility than men when it comes to gender-related issues, so speaking out really helps. For example, when a man complains about how alimony payments are excessive and unfair, he is written off as whining about not wanting to fulfill his obligations, but when a woman says the same thing, she may be taken more seriously. Please talk to people about gender-related matters so society can understand their…
/r/MensRights06/06/22 01:30 AM
2

Have you checked that sub's posting requirements? Some subs will block your post if your account isn't at least a certain age, if you don't have a valid e-mail address verification, etc.
/r/MensRights03/06/22 05:30 AM
3

Oh, that's frustrating.
/r/MensRights03/06/22 01:53 AM
13

I've seen this type of thing at nightclubs and dance venues, but never at a bar. What country are you in?
/r/MensRights02/06/22 12:03 PM
1

Thanks for speaking out. Please continue to do so, not just in dedicated spaces, but also more widely. As a woman, you have far more credibility than we do when it comes to gender issues.
/r/MensRights26/05/22 09:54 AM
2

I have heard multiple men say they do this to their wives and it works, so it's definitely a real thing. In some cases it may simply be doing a task differently, but in others, it's intentional. Whether it's as widespread as feminists claim, I have no idea.
/r/MensRights26/05/22 09:52 AM
1

Sure, but it's hard to figure out what you're referring to exactly. A concrete example would help.
/r/MensRights23/05/22 11:57 PM
1

This doesn't sound normal to me. Can you give any specifics? Like an example of when this happened?
/r/MensRights23/05/22 05:53 AM
1

You seem like a great person too! Thanks for posting.
/r/MensRights20/05/22 05:42 AM
1

The term "feminist" has many meanings. It started out as a movement for legal equality (voting, ability to own property, etc.) but now the movement seems to have been taken over by extremists. I think most people here support feminism if you use its original definition of equal rights. But modern-day feminism now seems to have become a female supremacist movement. Thanks for your comments though. As a woman, you have more credibility when it comes to gender-related issues, so please continue to …
/r/MensRights19/05/22 08:05 AM
4

I don't believe that men's rights are incompatible with feminism. Most MRAs that I know support abortion rights, for example,. If you have heard that MRAs are on the "far right" and are trying to hurt women, that is just propaganda from feminists. My personal experience is that feminists come in several varieties, and many of them are quite reasonable and advocate for equality, but some of the radical ones will criticize us for trying to bring attention to men's issues because it goes against th…
/r/MensRights19/05/22 12:31 AM
2

All I said was that the title is misleading. I don't really care what you call me. My statement is factually accurate.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:41 PM
1

That's the reality whether you accept it or not. Federal tax data is public information, you can look it up yourself.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:31 PM
1

No problem, good luck! I hope everything works out for you.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:29 PM
2

It's clickbait because the title misrepresents the reality. The reality is that only a few percent of scholarships are exclusively for women. But a headline like "3% of scholarships are exclusively for women" wouldn't get the same amount of clicks.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:29 PM
8

Choose one what? Your quote is not from my message.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:24 AM
0

Are you sure about that? The article I read didn't specify.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:06 AM
3

Your title contradicts your post. If death means nothing to you, that is totally fine. We are all going to die eventually, and we have to be at peace with that. But your title implies that you are waiting for death, which is not normal. You should consider talking to a therapist about it.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:05 AM
1

u/Somedudeshat is a fascist who has been brainwashed by 4Chan and Fox news. Just ignore him.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:03 AM
0

California and a few other liberal states are paying the taxes that enable the welfare states to survive.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:02 AM
1

Californians already pay the highest taxes in the nation so theres honestly no telling. No, they don't. This is just Fox News propaganda. This is exactly why Corporation and people are leaving California in mass exodus to Republican states, they've had their fill. The only ones leaving are those that cannot compete. California is a better place to live, hence it's more expensive, and those that aren't successful enough to afford it are forced to move to less desirable, cheaper states.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:02 AM
1

I self-identify as a "radical left" and I have never heard anyone say "kill all cops". I've heard "defund the cops" and "revoke their qualified immunity", but you're just making stuff up. I might as well accuse the "radical right" of saying "kill all schoolteachers".
/r/MensRights18/05/22 10:00 AM
1

If teaching kids that gay people exist is "grooming" them, then you're absolutely right. To conservatives, anything other than a Bible-based education is grooming.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 09:59 AM
1

One final example of Gun Violence in this country, Just last weekend in Lori Lightfoots Liberal Chicago, 33 people were shot to death in gang violence. But you don't hear about Biden going to Chicago in solidarity, because that doesn't fit their narrative Chicago isn't even in the top 10 cities in the US with the highest murder rates. But conservatives won't shut up about all the crime there, because it fits their narrative.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 09:58 AM
1

You eliminate the quota, and instead require companies to give "special consideration" to female applicants, or however you want to word it.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 09:56 AM
1

Perhaps that's true, but it's no reason to mandate diversity. Let companies figure it out for themselves.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 09:52 AM
38

Title is misleading. The majority of scholarships are open to everyone. Of the few that are restricted by gender, 10 out of 11 are exclusively for women. Let's focus on getting the facts straight rather than spreading clickbait.
/r/MensRights18/05/22 09:51 AM
1

I think the term "toxic masculinity" started out as a way of describing men that would engage in harmful behaviors because of their pride. This could be something as simple as refusing to ask for directions when lost, or as major as physically attacking someone to defend their "honor". Nowadays, however, it seems to have been broadened to become a way of shaming men for being men.
/r/MensRights17/05/22 02:33 AM
2

Judges really aren't subject to political pressure. I think that despite all the complaints, the judiciary is quite independent.
/r/MensRights17/05/22 02:30 AM
5

I think the state knew fully well that it was unconstitutional, but of course the attorney general's office still has to defend it. IIRC, Governor Brown actually said that it may be unconstitutional when he signed it, but that might have been the one for racial minorities.
/r/MensRights17/05/22 02:28 AM
1

When properly worn, condoms have a negligible failure rate. I'm comfortable relying on them alone. Of course, it's up to each individual to decide.
/r/MensRights13/05/22 01:14 AM
1

Yeah, too many missing details here. I think we should wait to find out more before releasing the outrage, otherwise it just makes us look bad.
/r/MensRights13/05/22 01:13 AM
1

Perhaps, but if used correctly this is extremely rare.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 07:52 AM
1

I think a condom is sufficient, so I don't see the need for a pill. Repealing Roe won't really change anything in this area. Even if the option of an abortion is available, it's always the woman's choice to make.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 05:26 AM
4

The article is quite vague. It's not clear whether these 3 days are in addition to other leave, whether they are paid or unpaid, or under what conditions they can be used. I don't think it's as simple as "3 days paid holiday per month" like some people on this thread seem to have assumed from the headline.
/r/MensRights12/05/22 05:24 AM
1

Is it part of a larger network?
/r/MensRights11/05/22 05:24 AM
2

A therapist might help. It wouldn't hurt to try.
/r/MensRights11/05/22 05:22 AM
1

What kind of organization is this? If it's a college or workplace, then you may have certain protections. If it's just a private group, then they can usually remove whoever they want. You may have a case for defamation, but it's hard to say. A lawyer may not want to take your case unless you have quantifiable damages (like loss of employment opportunities).
/r/MensRights11/05/22 05:20 AM
5

Glad to read this! Please keep speaking out. As a woman, you have far more credibility on gender issues than men do, so people are more likely to listen.
/r/MensRights11/05/22 05:19 AM
4

It's not really clear what type of housing situation you're referring to, but if it's a shared house, then I think it's perfectly fine to limit it to a certain gender. Men may be more willing to have women in their house than vice versa, but it is common in both directions. Try to look for an apartment yourself, and then advertise for a roommate for the other room. That is what I did when I was younger.
/r/MensRights09/05/22 09:34 AM
2

Incels are, by definition, involuntarily celibate. This sub focuses on several issues that concern marriage, children, etc., and therefore cannot be an "incel" sub. I think that these days "incel" has just become a generic term that is used to attack men. Saying that the draft is sexist will get you called an incel.
/r/MensRights09/05/22 09:32 AM
1

That wasn't part of the question, and is not really helpful here.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 06:57 AM
2

Obviously your lawyer can advise better than any of us, but I would go with option 3. A divorce is unlikely to cost 20k unless she has the money to drag it out. If you pay her, then she knows that she has that control over you, and can make similar demands in the future. Even if you negotiate and reach an agreement, there is nothing stopping her from saying "give me another 20k or I'll scrap this agreement and sue you".
/r/MensRights04/05/22 06:56 AM
11

As a self-identified MRA, I am fully in favor of bodily autonomy for all humans, male and female. I support abortion rights and will vote for candidates that support those rights. As far as I can see, most MRAs are on the same page. People who oppose abortion rights tend to be conservative and support "traditional" family values, and from what I can see, many women fall into this category as well.
/r/MensRights04/05/22 06:54 AM
3

I think female MRAs are very valuable, because they have more credibility. Women may at least listen to their ideas.
/r/MensRights03/05/22 02:28 AM
2

Calling it a "hate crime" is a bit absurd. It is not a crime in any sense, and we don't want to be accused of suppressing anyone's speech. It is simply a factually incorrect argument. When someone makes this argument, there is no need to silence them, because it's easily refutable with facts.
/r/MensRights02/05/22 06:49 AM
-4

It's difficult to generalize. We have all heard about such biased cases, but I don't think it's as widespread as some people claim.
/r/MensRights02/05/22 06:46 AM
4

You absolutely need a good attorney here. Trying to do it yourself will lead to situations like this. Every dollar you spend on an attorney will save you 5 dollars in child support.
/r/MensRights02/05/22 06:45 AM
2

From what I can tell, the public at large seems to be on Depp's side.
/r/MensRights28/04/22 09:22 AM
1

That depends on local laws, but in the US, it would probably not be possible to get reimbursement of attorney's fees.
/r/MensRights28/04/22 09:14 AM
1

Yes, they are obligated to at least look into it, otherwise it can cause problems for them in the future. He should calmly deny all allegations and ask for evidence. If there is none, then he should say there is nothing to investigate. Not much to do other than avoid crazy people.
/r/MensRights28/04/22 09:13 AM
1

If she is just telling people, then ignore her. Many people won't believe her and it will be obvious that she is vengeful. This will probably die down on its own. If it doesn't, and it gets to the point where it is adversely affecting your reputation (in terms of job, family, friendships, etc.) then look into hiring a lawyer to send a cease and desist. This is usually quite cheap and can scare her into keeping quiet.
/r/MensRights28/04/22 09:09 AM
1

It really depends on the situation. In some industries, skills cannot be measured objectively, and diversity is needed, for example it has been proven that children need role models that are similar to themselves, so having all white teachers in a school in a black neighborhood can be a problem. But in some places, there is also a push to diversify just for the sake of doing so, as a PR move. The good thing is that in the US, any discrimination in hiring on the basis of race or sex is illegal (w…
/r/MensRights28/04/22 09:06 AM
1

I guess it depends on how many self-identified feminists subscribe to each group. But I agree it sucks, we should focus on equality.
/r/MensRights22/04/22 11:13 PM
3

How has the term been weaponized, and by whom?
/r/MensRights22/04/22 09:30 AM
2

I’ve heard almost everyone’s definition of feminism say that they fight for equality and for men’s rights. I've heard that too, but I haven't seen it happen. The only case I can think of where feminists fight for men's rights is fighting "toxic masculinity", and encouraging men to express their emotions in a healthy way. That's great, but there are a lot more issues that they ignore or fight agaisnt. As for educating yourself, I'd encourage you to read books written by both feminists and men's a…
/r/MensRights22/04/22 09:29 AM
1

You are asking the wrong question. The issue is not with how to get consent, but how to prove that it was given. If one party later says that the incident was non-consensual, then it can be difficult to prove, even if it was given verbally.
/r/MensRights22/04/22 09:18 AM
1

What makes you think they are spineless? Maybe the members wanted this. There are still single-gender troops available. Just because you disagree with a choice doesn't make them spineless.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 07:45 AM
1

Their leaders are voted on by the members.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 03:33 AM
1

Sure, but my point is that it was their own choice. They weren't ordered to admit girls by a law or court ruling or anything like that.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 02:42 AM
1

Plenty of men are killed while walking around in Mexico, who have nothing to do with cartels. I'm not interested in debating the meaning of words, but the fact remains that men are at higher risk of violence than women in Mexico, and everywhere else. But of course, when a woman gets murdered, it gets more attention and more publicity.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 02:50 AM
1

I'm fairly certain that there are more male homicide victims than female homicide victims in Mexico, and every other country. So what privilege do men have here?
/r/MensRights17/04/22 02:39 AM
1

There are/were plenty of cultures where female toplessness was completely acceptable. No child was ever traumatized by this. Again, kids are only traumatized by seeing boobs because society teaches them that this is taboo. In countries where men can't go shirtless in public, a child might be traumatized by seeing a man's chest. Same logic applies.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:22 AM
2

Yes, absolutely. Boy Scouts was losing members and running into financial trouble. Broadening the membership field was their attempt to rectify this.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:20 AM
1

Opposing special treatment is not the same as not caring about someone. Funny how feminists demand equality except when it suits them.
/r/MensRights17/04/22 01:19 AM
0

Dreaming about what? That was a factual statement, not a matter of opinion.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 02:59 AM
9

Exactly.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 02:33 AM
1

If somebody would start male only gym, they would get sued by rabid feminists (happened before). In which jurisdiction did that happen? What was the outcome of the case? In many countries there are male only gyms and men go there just fine, so fuck off with brain dead assumptions. I've literally never seen a male-only gym in any western country. They may exist in the middle east and some conservative Asian societies, but that's about it.
/r/MensRights16/04/22 02:32 AM
-8

Go back and read my post. I haven't changed a single thing.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 11:34 PM
-9

Sure you would, and a few others. But there wouldn't be enough to make it a viable business. If there were, someone would have started one by now.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 11:28 PM
-3

Yes, I think we all agree that it is sexist and improper. The question was who is fighting against it, and why are they fighting against it, if they have no intention of actually going topless? The answer is probably (1) creepy men who want to see topless women, and (2) women who want something to complain about.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:58 PM
13

That's a bit dramatic. As I said, I know many women who have taken public transport in Mexico, and never had any issues. Of course there is always some degree of concern, but they aren't "afraid for their safety" any more than they would be in any other public place. But where does this end? Should we also have female-only coffee shops, restaurants, and stores? How about government services like the post office? Women can be groped in any of these places too. Some countries, like Saudi Arabia, h…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:47 PM
22

If it's not safe for women, then that can be addressed in other ways. The majority of the world has figured out how to make it safe for women, so this isn't some insurmountable problem. But I have ridden several buses in Mexico, and although I'm male, none of my female companions have ever had any issues. While I'm sure issues occasionally come up, this argument about "public transport isn't safe for women" just sounds like an excuse to justify women getting special treatment in the form of a mo…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:36 PM
17

There's nothing to "assume". Any money spent on women-only buses, by definition, takes away from money spent on the other buses. Women are not being inconvenienced in any way. They still have the option of riding the regular buses if they want. As for your last statement, why all men be collectively held liable for their behavior?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:27 PM
21

If some buses are designated for women only, then there are fewer buses available for men to use. That means men may have to wait longer for a bus to arrive, or ride buses that are more crowded.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:17 PM
2

It's been a crime for a long time. It would also be a crime for a woman to show her vagina at the mall.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:11 PM
-4

Right, but who is organizing that rally? If no one wanted to smoke marijuana, then there would never have been a movement to legalize it. Once the movement exists, then others will join in. But if the number of women actually wanting to go topless in public is almost zero, then where is the push coming from?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:10 PM
29

Because men are paying equal taxes and therefore deserve equal government services.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:08 PM
-5

Boy Scouts was never forced to let girls in. It was their own choice.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:06 PM
-14

I think it's just a matter of demand. Men wouldn't go to a male-only gym, so there wouldn't be enough customers. Legally, there would be nothing wrong with it in most places, but it wouldn't be commercially viable.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:05 PM
18

Clubs are different from businesses. They are basically seen as private groups, just like a circle of friends.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:04 PM
4

Racial discrimination and sexual discrimination are covered under different laws. In the US, racial discrimination in public accommodations is banned by the Civil Rights Act (I can't remember which title) but sexual is not. Therefore, limiting entry based on gender (like gyms) or charging different prices based on gender (like nightclubs) is legal unless there is a state law saying otherwise. A few states, like California, have laws that make this illegal, but in the majority of the country it i…
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:03 PM
1

Taking your penis out at the mall is a crime. Completely different situation.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 10:00 PM
4

maybe if they're in an area where only adults walk it's fine. but legal to be topless in front of children. no. that's not ok. no questions Why not? Children don't care. They see their mom's breasts from the time they are born. It's not weird to them unless society makes it weird.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 09:59 PM
-3

Sure, but if you don't smoke it, are you really going to fight that hard to make it legal?
/r/MensRights15/04/22 09:57 PM
9

That is not true. There are public decency laws in most places.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 09:57 PM
7

Women going topless has been technically legal in many places for years now. It's very rare that women actually exercise this right, and it tends to be older women.
/r/MensRights15/04/22 09:56 PM
3

It depends on the department. English and history departments probably have more tenured women than men. Engineering departments will have more men. But I don't see any reason why it should be equal. Rather, it should reflect the demographic. If most of the people receiving Ph.D.'s in a certain field are of a certain gender, and the hiring process is unbiased, then most tenured faculty will be of that gender.
/r/MensRights01/04/22 11:07 PM
9

I have been on university hiring committees, and it is certainly based on merit. No process is perfect, of course, but in my experience they do a pretty good job of addressing conflicts of interest and making sure that candidates are treated fairly and neutrally. I have also seen plenty of women get tenure while having children, so I'm not sure what you're referring to there. Perhaps it's more difficult for them if they want to focus more on their kids, but that's a choice that they make. If any…
/r/MensRights01/04/22 09:04 AM
4

Those are some good points. I guess the question is whether government officials should represent the population, or be hired on merit? Because when more qualified men are passed over in favor of less qualified women in order to meet a target percentage, men are going to view it as unfair. I think a better solution might be to try to encourage the next generation of girls/women to get the proper education and skills to take these jobs on an equal basis.
/r/MensRights01/04/22 08:14 AM
19

Yes, I joined feminism, and got banned within my first few posts. Some of the posts in this group do attack feminism, but only when feminism is harming men. For example, when feminists push for hiring that favors women, it takes jobs away from men who are more qualified. I think you're right that some of the posts on this sub are somewhat angry or bitter, which can happen in any movement. If you look past that and try to examine the underlying issues, I think you will see several legitimate case…
/r/MensRights01/04/22 07:34 AM
4

Did they actually define "feminist" for the study? I'm sure a lot of these women simply thought "I believe in equality, so I'm a feminist".
/r/MensRights17/03/22 12:26 PM
1

Most feminists are pro-abolishing the draft for men, too, so they’re not really denying equality as much as actually fighting for it But that's just a cop out. To flip it around, it's like saying that we shouldn't worry about the gender pay gap because we should be focused on raising wages for everyone instead.
/r/MensRights17/03/22 12:24 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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