TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

the_ancient1 Archive

View 0 posts and 56 comments by the_ancient1 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

It would have to be more than just a simple "One or Two Party" and most states have different laws governing different types of situations, for example it may be legal to record in person conversations with only 1 consenting party, but illegal to record telephone or remote conversations with only 1 consenting party. Some states also have conditions on where a recording may be allowed and not allowed, such as a public venue or not. A good reference would be https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recordin…
/r/MensRights16/01/18 02:43 AM
1

Judges would be out of a job for pulling that kind of profiling on a basis regular enough to be called normal behavior. Doubtful, there is very little in actual accountability for anything except out right bribery or direct corruption like that, personal basis is displayed all the time in judge rulings and opinions never gets called out. There was just a case not to long ago where the judge expressly state he was giving a harsh sentence because he disagrees with this generations "hookup culture"…
/r/MensRights15/01/18 08:43 PM
2

Well first of all America runs on an innocent until proven guilty system so the defense is not required to prove innocence the prosecution is required to prove guilt. ROFL.... Sure that is how it is described in the text books, anyone with any actual real life experience will tell you it not that simple. Especially when it comes to sex crimes. Jury's will convict people based on all kinds of factors, including if the person "looks like a criminal" that is why what the defendant wears, how they a…
/r/MensRights15/01/18 03:15 PM
1

you could have been at the scene of the crime with your prints on the murder weapon and still be innocent Which is what an impartial investigation would reveal, instead they will formulate their conclusion that since you were at the scene with the weapon you did it, and will proceed to "build their case" on that assumption. Imagine a spouse walking in on their dead or dying SO moments after the murderer escapes and not knowing what to do they remove the knife or examine the gun (assuming its lef…
/r/MensRights15/01/18 02:59 PM
10

hat's silly. Everyone makes mistakes even good judges. This is why there is soo many check valves in the system, most of which have been removed or limited over the last few years especially when it comes to sex crimes. IMO the only way to "falsely convict" someone is if there is gross criminal negligence on the part of judges, prosecutors and cops when they willfully dismiss, excuse, or toss exculpatory evidence and narratives under the guise of it being "victim blaming" or some other excuse Th…
/r/MensRights14/01/18 06:20 PM
14

They don’t want the sub to turn into a political discussion about the law, and I understand that. The problem is most of the comments not deleted are not infact about the law at all but are appeals to emotion, "think of the child", "do not take it out on the child", type of non-sense. They want the not-father to be legally on the hooks for paying the for fraudulent ex wife / mothers life style, and up keep for the next decade+ to protect the childs feelings. IMO the Truth is always what is best.…
/r/MensRights14/01/18 06:09 PM
2

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" Since you refuse to provide any Evidence I can Dismiss all of your claims, including the claims you are being harassed More likely you have been called out for being wrong and simply do not want to support your claims. Not uncommon with Feminists
/r/MensRights25/09/17 07:32 PM
4

You read my original comment but apparently didn't look at the comments with other links in them, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. I am the first one to call you out on the inaccurate statements as such you should have placed your further research under my original reply from yesterday. I have read every single one of your comments, there is no proof there. NONE
/r/MensRights25/09/17 07:23 PM
2

this company produced LOTS of material during the same era that states men and boys are victims of domestic abuse. Show me the proof that THE HOME OFFICE produced lot so material stating this. I have yet to see one. you keep referring to is "this company" as well, What company are you talking about, Home Office is a government Agency as I have said 10 million times yet you continue to refer to it as a company.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 07:21 PM
4

But, yes, it is a fact that the posters were created by one company, dispersed by the UK government between years 2011-2013 You can not even get the basic facts right, they where created by the UK Government and used in Advertisements from 2011 to 2016. and then used as part of a larger series commercially that continued until 2016 and then was discontinued. Each individual "campaign" lasted 2-3 months at a time, they didn't print posters every day for 6 years. Read my other comments if you'd li…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 07:17 PM
3

especially because you completely misinterpreted my post I am not misinterpreting your post at all, you made a claim of fact that these posters were part of a larger PSA Campaign and were taken out of context. You offered no evidence to support those claims and when I refuted your assertions with actual facts you then claim to be attacked for your "opinions" when you did not simply state opinions you attempted to change history and misrepresent facts.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 06:42 PM
6

No, I disagree with the opinions of others who say that a small portion of a larger movement represents the whole. This is the problem, you have offered no proof that these posters were a small part of a larger whole that did not have the All Men are abusers rhetoric I have however offered proof they were in fact part of an Ad Campaign run by the government that exclusively painted Men as Abusers and Women as Abused. Your belief that other organizations may have had other messaging is neither su…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 06:40 PM
3

No I was direct, curt and to the point because your feels are not relevant to me. I do not deal in feelings I deal in facts. Emotions are a waste of energy and time, only facts and data matter matter. The fact of the matter is you still have not stopped spreading your false information, nor have you corrected your original post. You have now go on to complain about how people are calling you a feminist and how you can not "support Men rights" any more because of it Since you refuse to correct yo…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 10:16 AM
2

I just saw this on /r/all, upvoted your gilded post Why would you upvote and buy gold for factually wrong information
/r/MensRights25/09/17 10:04 AM
7

The problem is it is not the "Men Rights Community" upvoting this, this spread to /r/all which is gotten alot of traffic that never ever visit this place. As such there are alot of people that do not support Men Rights at all upvoting this propaganda and misinformation
/r/MensRights25/09/17 09:59 AM
11

Is it my responsibility to give constant updates on the state of this post It is your responbility to correct factual errors when they have been pointed out to you several times The fact you continue to allow flase information to be spread shows you do not care about the the truth but instead are simply a propagandist spreading lies and misinformation for the purposes of a political agenda, you are simply another feminist that will not let the truth get in the way of your preconceived narrative
/r/MensRights25/09/17 09:58 AM
10

You really don't need to r/iamverysmart me with information about Home Office I guess I should he happy you did not accuse me of mansplaining to you.... It is sad state of affairs when someone correcting factual incorrect statements is some how wrong or frowned upon.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 02:18 AM
26

And it's not my job to do that. HOWEVER, when an entire subreddit seems content to use an outdated, inaccurate, out-of-context example as a means of practically women-bashing all through the comments, I am gonna say something. Sorry. Repeating yourself now huh... You are not simply being a "critic" you were posting information as Facts which were not fact. You did an useless reverse image search, then assumed any images that appeared along with the orignal where "part of the same ad campiagn" Th…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 02:13 AM
9

Hell, I'm not even from UK, and I've never been there or Nor am I, I live in the US, and have never traveled anywhere in the EU or been taught anything about offices being parts of governments at all. And it's not my job to do that. Home Office is fairly well known and has been in pop culture featured in some movies and TV shows. Outside of that I also take it upon myself to gather facts and data before commenting on a subject. If you were not so factually incorrect in your statements here I wou…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 02:05 AM
30

NOW, if you have a problem with the UK government having an official stance on who commits domestic violence (which I have never seen evidence of, nor has anyone linked here), What the hell.... The website I linked to is the offical UK Government The publisher of these Posters is the Official UK Government. "Home Office" is a Law Enforcement Agency in the UK These posters I linked to are the evidence of the official stance of the UK Government
/r/MensRights25/09/17 01:56 AM
10

the company (Home Office) that submitted "Home Office" is not a company. The Home Office is a ministerial department of Her Majesty's Government of the United Kingdom, responsible for immigration, security and law and order. It is Akin to the US FBI and ICE all in one. They are a National Law Enforcement Agency in the UK I really don't wanna sit here playing investigative journalist Good because you are clearly very very very bad at it
/r/MensRights25/09/17 01:53 AM
33

It's nice that you really feel strongly about how awful these posters and the movement is I feel really strongly about the true and data, Your posting is factually incorrect and if you cared about the truth you would correct your statements. It is clear you however do not care about the truth... so I question what your motivation here is I really don't see the productive benefit in bashing a single campaign made in 2011 that has since been archived and is no longer in use Because it was in use u…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 01:43 AM
34

If you wanna do more research on those, go ahead, I dug into the most obvious one. I think I did, and I posted better sources than a inaccurate reverse image search. I posted a Direct Link to Archive of Original Sources from the Original Government Agency that ran the ad campaign For reference that link is https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teenage-relationship-abuse-campaign-posters
/r/MensRights25/09/17 01:26 AM
63

I dont see any thing that supports your claim these are part of the same series or same year first and foremost The 2 Other posters you presented are from an independent agency called Light House, where the OP's are Home Office Posters so they are clearly separate Ad campaigns Do you have examples of Home Office posters that refute the OP's implied commentary? Where is your sources to support your claim. You say a "simple google search" gives you more info, but I could not locate it. From what I…
/r/MensRights25/09/17 01:10 AM
8

The United States is part of an international convention in which countries have a bilateral agreement with the United States regarding enforcement of child support when the obligor moves to that country. The United States, Great Britain, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, El Salvador, Hungary, Norway, Czech Republic, Finland, Poland, Switzerland, Slovak Republic and Portugal are currently part of this convention. Source: https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=6306
/r/MensRights22/07/17 05:46 PM
1

Is not... Only 8 States in the US have the legal concept of Common law Marriage, and in those states one must to more than cohabitat to from a common law marriage. Common Law Marriage was the primary form of marriage prior to government creating the Concept of "Licenced Marriage". Rarely known fact in the US, the government started to require formal processes and marriage licences to prevent interracial marriage as there was no method to prevent it in Common law Marriage Statutes
/r/MensRights05/03/17 05:44 PM
1

What other option do you have if you want to spend your life with another human being, like is normal and natural? You spend your life with them if you choose, I do take issue with you stating it is "normal" or "natural" it is more religious than it is natural, and no religion is not natural Common law turns into marriage anyway after a certain amount of time, in most cases common-law means marriage. Only 8 states in the US have anything like a common law marriage, so it is not "common" as you s…
/r/MensRights05/03/17 05:40 PM
-2

He is the law in that room No actually he is not. Judges are over turned every day, that is why we have an appeals process, that is why there are "chief" justices or supervisory justices, and that is why many many many judge positions are elected not appointed.. Judges do not get mini-fiefdoms even if they think they do
/r/PussyPassDenied12/01/15 05:05 PM
-3

I see so a judge should be allowed to hold someone for life if they do not bow and kiss their ring? Funny I thought I got rid of the King in 1776. He is the authority No he is a representative a an oppressive legal system and appears to love abusing his the power the people have bestowed upon him when they elected him to the post of Judge. He is not the law, no matter how much they think they are. Respect is earned, one does not automatically deserve respect because they have gun men at their di…
/r/PussyPassDenied12/01/15 02:42 AM
6

Plan A is obviously doing what ever you can to stay married I thought Plan A was doing what ever you can to never get married in the first place?
/r/MensRights15/05/13 10:22 AM
13

while the teacher & mother of his child goes on to raise the 7 year old kid for the next 11 years. I despair at such cruelty! That is easily solved, if the mother can not provide for the child then the father should have custody... See simple
/r/MensRights08/12/12 07:06 PM
41

umm unless you had a prenup, that is exactly what just happened you mistakenly thought that your property/savings is yours... When it comes to divorces, esp when a child is involved, the women will get anything she wants. even if they leave you broke and homeless
/r/MensRights08/12/12 03:12 PM
6

This glosses over the REAL reason Anonymity is vital to free speech. Look no further than China, Iran, North Korea, etc to understand why Anonymity is a vital component.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 07:37 PM
12

I have a strict "Mind your own business" policy. You assume too much personal and legal liability trying to "help" people these days, sad but true
/r/MensRights14/09/12 08:39 PM
3

What is really screwed up is in some of these cases not only do they have to pay child support, since they are not the "father" they do not have/get any visitation even if they wanted to..... So they are literally just a bank for the GF/fiance/wife
/r/MensRights12/09/12 06:05 PM
2

The judge uses "What is best for the child" has the rational behind it. Even at Birth does not guarantee you will not have to pay child support, There are cases where the guy did suspect something, had the test done at birth, and filed for divorce based on the test that proved cheating, and still had to pay I also remember reading a case about 6 years ago where a guy married a single mother, they were together for a number of years, then the mother got back together with the biological father an…
/r/MensRights12/09/12 03:59 PM
3

Umm there are 100's if not 1000's of cases where men have proven with DNA they are not the father of the child and still have been required to pay child support. DNA is irrelevant in many cases, it comes down to "what is best for the child"
/r/MensRights12/09/12 03:10 PM
6

it is possible to be nice and crazy at the same time.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 01:21 PM
14

Ohh it is very much true, being the Biological father or not it irrelevant, Now the chances of her getting a babysitter to pay child support are nill, but there are 100's if not 1000's of cases where men have proven with DNA they are not the father of the child and still have been required to pay child support.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 12:23 PM
-9

Women = Crazy Some are just slightly crazy and then some are Bat Shit insane, but they are all crazy
/r/MensRights12/09/12 12:15 PM
0

That is why we have so much government. The government forcibly took over charity, and community support. No one looks to their Neighbours, or member of the community for assistance, they expect/demand it to be provided by the government. That is a terrible society to live in
/r/MensRights18/03/12 12:52 PM
2

STRANGER DANGER STRANGER DANGER STRANGER DANGER STRANGER DANGER STRANGER DANGER please
/r/MensRights18/03/12 12:49 PM
3

Stats are like miniskirts, they give you good ideas but hide the important things
/r/MensRights15/01/12 05:56 PM
3

Then you have no concept of how the Legal System, Cops or Prosecutors operate, and your ignorance in this matter is causing you to shift blame. There are cases of Plain False Accusation, this does not appear to be one of those cases, and is more align with the standard absurd standard procedures that Police and Prosecutors use to "clear cases" instead of finding the real criminal.
/r/MensRights15/01/12 05:39 PM
4

If you read the report is says she was shown the photos several times and was "unsure" many times What happens is the Police "got their man" and wear down the victims to ID the person they feel did it, twisting and hinting at what the victim should do. Ofcourse the "cunt lies" part shows me you have sever women issues, and have not ability to logically or rationally think about anything so I am sure I just wasted my time
/r/MensRights15/01/12 05:20 PM
4

100% of the blame falls on the Officers and Prosecutors, not the victim If you say how the Police and Prosecutors leads, intimidate, and convince victim's that the state's version of events is what really happened, you would understand how these wrongful conviction occur. Victims in these cases are almost brain washed by the state
/r/MensRights15/01/12 02:30 PM
1

Indiana has a nice online calculator that you can fill out to find out how much the women can steal from from.... I did it once just to see it came out to like 20% of my income......
/r/MensRights09/11/11 04:17 AM
1

Most states just use the mothers word There are 100's of cases where even AFTER a paternity test is done (years later) and if is found that the "father" is not really the father, the man still has to pay support for his non-child because that is "what is best for the child"
/r/MensRights08/11/11 07:12 PM
0

Truth Hurts, I cant stop speaking the truth just because people feelings get hurt... The Evidence is very very clear on the matter.
/r/MensRights08/11/11 03:34 PM
-2

The pain of pregnancy is nothing compared to the Pain of Nagging that women inflict on men.... You know that soon enough ......
/r/MensRights08/11/11 03:10 AM
1

Well Duh, All men are abusers dont ya know.... Only Women can raise a Child...... Jeeze......
/r/MensRights08/11/11 03:07 AM
-14

Personally I think paternity testing should be automatic these days Everyone knows all women are wh&$'s so it should just be automatic..... At minimum no child support should be granted with out it. This should be doubly true for unwed parents.
/r/MensRights08/11/11 02:52 AM
3

Loisianna Law: If the conviction has been vacated and the petitioner can prove factual innocence, they may be eligible for $15,000 year for each year of wrongful incarceration, with a cap of $150,000. Courts may also award any or all of the following: costs of job or skill training for one year, medical and counseling services for three years, tuition expenses at a community college or unit of the state university system. Effective: 2005; Amended most recently: 2008 So based on the Cap, this guy…
/r/MensRights22/10/11 01:32 AM
3

There might be a civil case for the Accuser, but you will never get the Government Employees to pay, even if you sued them directly in civil court, the Government or the Government's Insurance would pay any verdict on behalf of the officers, Judges or Prosecutors,
/r/MensRights22/10/11 01:22 AM
3

Just keep repeating "I am sorry I do not talk with police with out an attorney" Over and over.... Even if they beat you.... and Especially if your innocent. there is ZERO value for an innocent person to cooperate with police, NONE ZERO ZILCH... Never speak to police unless your attorney directs you to.
/r/MensRights22/10/11 01:20 AM
7

Better that 10 Guilty Men go Free than 1 Innocent be Jailed That is the Foundation of a moral Justice System
/r/MensRights22/10/11 01:14 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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