TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

the_omega99 Archive

View 0 posts and 169 comments by the_omega99 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)
9

Agreed. I like OP's comment. It's reasonable, rational, and quite gender neutral. Strawmen and subtle (or not-so-subtle) bashing of the other side doesn't work as well.
/r/MensRights16/05/16 01:53 AM
1

"Paper". The Daily Mail is trash that's half a tabloid.
/r/MensRights11/05/16 09:52 PM
3

This doesn't seem like a fault of OITNB so much as all the other shows that portray male prisoners as largely inhuman. Yet the person being replied to is directing all their criticism towards OITNB.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 07:46 PM
1

I'm not sure if it's always a good idea to scale punishments solely to the trouble caused. I think the potential for damage is also something to consider. For example, a drunk driver could get lucky and manage to not kill anyone... or they could kill several innocent people. I don't consider there to be a strong distinction in either case. They have the same intentions. With regards to "make an example of someone", that's mostly a "within reason" thing. I disagree with the idea of punishing some…
/r/MensRights06/04/16 03:59 AM
2

I agree. Jail isn't suitable here. It's simply too questionable if they fully comprehended the seriousness about what they lied about. We have to remember that lying is something that almost everyone does and never gets anything more than a slap on the wrist. It takes a fair bit of mental maturity to realize what kinds of things are completely unsuitable to lie about. And 13 year olds... well, they're not exactly known for maturity of any kind. That said, wrong actions can't go unpunished and an…
/r/MensRights06/04/16 12:05 AM
1

To be fair, when people say "rape culture", they don't mean just the number of reported rapes. They also refer to things like whether victims are shamed for coming forward, the media presentation (the Steubenville case comes to mind), and yes, the treatment of those who are falsely accused. That said, I think you have to be absolutely crazy to think things are getting worse. They seem to clearly be getting better to me. Stuff like spousal rape is now correctly classified as rape (which is as rec…
/r/MensRights25/03/16 09:27 PM
1

I've never heard of anyone facing legal trouble for one-off flirting. The issue is harassment -- when you constantly try and flirt with someone who already told you that they're not interested. I think that's a reasonable law.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 03:59 PM
6

No, he's reading between the lines. Most feminists are pro-choice and naturally don't consider abortion to be murder. We wouldn't say that lives are lost to abortion. Yet for whatever reason, that's exactly what Watson is saying here. While I can agree that gender-selective abortion is problematic, she's not helping her cause by suddenly acting like lives are lost. We need to be consistent about our views.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 12:02 AM
2

But while the abortions themselves were about self interest and not misogyny, couldn't we argue that the self interest is biased towards boys because of misogyny on the cultural level? After all, there must be a reason that boys are preferable. Particularly since this seems to come down to economic success. Presumably due to some form of the wage gap. It begs question what keeps that in place. Is there misogyny somewhere? Are women going against their best interests? If so, why? Is it all the re…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 11:59 PM
10

It does not. It's true that many feminists are anti-MRA and that many MRAs are anti-feminist, but the two movements are not mutually exclusive. Bear in mind that these are loosely organized movements. There's no central body for what makes you a feminist or MRA. Really the requirement to call yourself one of those is that you have some kind of believe about reducing sexism and inequality for that gender. You don't have to be batshit crazy to be a feminist (as some members of this sub make it see…
/r/MensRights17/02/16 09:30 PM
1

Well, gender dysphoria is fairly well studied, including the effects of its treatment: sex change. Brain scans have shown some differences in the genders, as well as how many transgendered people have scans closer to their identified gender. And for the case of gender being different from sex, it's a psychology thing (sociology would be a component of studying gender as a whole, though). Psychology is a rather interesting science as it straddles the fence between hard and soft sciences. A primar…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 08:01 PM
9

Gender is more of a psychology thing. Biology would include sex, though. And arguably psychology is essentially a level of abstraction above biology (like how biology is a level of abstraction above chemistry). There's also obviously a sociology component. And in a similar sense, history and anthropology.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 09:27 PM
1

Is that a problem with feminism or with society as a whole? Because it seems to apply to a huge number of groups. This is evident in things like how organizations can blatantly mislead even in congress (remember that Planned Parenthood graph?). In fact, it's not even just statistics. The general public can be just plain dumb about a lot of things.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 06:00 PM
0

/u/51m0n's statement is obviously hyperbole, but yes, the MRM certainly does have somewhat of a hate/fear portion driving it. This very image is a clear example. It's painting all feminists as hateful towards men; particularly with the overreaching "feminism is a hate movement". For fucks sake, most of the people in this sub would hate it if people called MRM a hate movement, yet some of you think that you can do the same to your sister movement. I find it incredulous that such trash can get upv…
/r/MensRights30/01/16 05:56 PM
2

One thing that comes to mind is that you're not suddenly a bad person just because you got mislead on a statistic. There's a big difference between the radicals who are purposefully trying to mislead vs those who end up getting mislead. Especially if you consider how widespread some of these myths are. On reddit they might get shot down fast, but most of the world doesn't use reddit.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 05:49 PM
4

I agree with you. The post is obviously misleading, particularly when compared to things like how the US has the draft, which men must participate in to vote and can actually cost your life. Although at the same time, I feel it's a nitpick over just another inaccurate Facebook post (which are a dime a dozen). And while there wasn't really any deaths involved in getting the female vote, it's not like it wasn't a disgrace that it took so long and how the suffragettes were treated. It's distracting…
/r/MensRights29/01/16 07:52 PM
5

while gay men are "gross". I wouldn't say that's true. It's very socially unacceptable to criticize gay men in general. I think we're thinking about different things. I'm not talking about some kind of public comment. Most people have more tact than that. Just a silent degree of shying away from said people. Eg, you can see this on dating sites. Bisexual men will have less women interested in them than if they just claim to be straight. You're not going to Men's Rights your way into more women s…
/r/MensRights25/01/16 11:19 PM
3

acting like the vagina is some oppressed American myth or something? I suppose that to be fair, sex ed in the US is usually very lacking. So naturally many people don't really understand vaginas well. They don't understand penises well, either, but I'd argue that penises are a lot simpler than vaginas. The most common myth I see with regards to penises is how erections work (lots of naive people think you can just have one on whim or that they imply consent). With vaginas, you will frequently he…
/r/MensRights25/01/16 08:59 PM
1

Is cornbread big in America? Or maybe more of a southern thing? Here in Sask, Canada, I don't see it at BBQs, like, ever. In fact, I think I've only ever seen it at Monatana's (a Canadian cookhouse chain).
/r/MensRights25/01/16 08:53 PM
29

And even more: Bisexuality is much better received for women than men. Also, lesbianism is usually looked on as "hot" while gay men are "gross". In dom/sub relationships, submissive men are largely looked down upon. Women definitely have a lot more freedom for both sides. For getting casual sex, the deck is heavily stacked towards women. Pretty much every website related to casual sex has far more men and they're far more desperate. So desperate that they're far more likely to resort to trying t…
/r/MensRights25/01/16 08:46 PM
0

I don't completely agree. For example, it makes perfect sense to mention a hashtag in an essay if you do so to explain about a news event that occurred as a result of the hashtag or if you're quoting someone and the hashtag is an important part of the quote. Although hashtags and slang like "lol" don't really have any place in typical writing. Eg, you can't just write "men think they're entitled but they're actually really stupid, lol". That's just immature and completely out of place in academi…
/r/MensRights19/01/16 07:25 PM
9

It seems like a really brilliant question and I'd love to see more like them used in testing people's ability to construct arguments. That is, focus on topics that are sure to be highly emotional and elect biases, so as to weed out those who cannot set aside their biases to construct a rational argument (and that includes some of the members of this sub). Topics like: Race (in politics, social perceptions towards them, biases that society has, etc) Gender (similar topics to race) Abortion Gay ma…
/r/MensRights19/01/16 07:21 PM
24

I agree. I find it sad that some people continue to press for lower burdens of truth and similar. Like, I get that it's frustrating when the seemingly guilty get off from a lack of evidence. It must be especially so if you know that someone raped you (or tortured you, robbed you, etc) and just can't prove it. However, the cost of false imprisonment is extremely high. Far too high. There's few things worse than a guilty person going unpunished, and an innocent person being found guilty is one of …
/r/MensRights05/01/16 06:29 AM
6

Vincenti sisters.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 08:15 AM
4

Eh, the headline isn't wrong. And it's not like records are necessarily a good thing. "Number displaced worldwide hits record high - UN report" "UK net migration hits record high" "Record number of kittens dumped says Blue Cross charity" Those are all headlines from BBC that show the use of "record" for clearly negative topics. It's people's own fault if they look at this headline and conclude that it's a good thing (as some certainly will). I think you're looking into it too much.
/r/MensRights18/12/15 12:04 AM
1

Yeah, I think that the standards for female beauty are lower in the sense that the typical woman is more attractive than the typical male. An OkCupid blog post has a somewhat more objective look at this. The TL;DR is when trying to judge if someone is average, above average, or below average, the curve of men judging women looks like pretty normal bell curve whereas the women judging mencurve is heavily skewed towards below average. ie, women think the average male is below average attractivenes…
/r/MensRights12/12/15 05:12 AM
1

I don't agree with all the points in this list, and some are overreaching generalizations, but it also has a large number of good points. I don't think I even need a disclaimer for you to know that the site is going to be ridiculously biased (but then again, so it this sub).
/r/MensRights12/12/15 05:02 AM
1

I agree. Transitioning is really freaking major. It's very expensive, takes a while, embarrassing, hard to explain to work/parents/friends/etc, and there's a lot of very prejudiced people who will happily let you know what they think of trans people if they find out you are one. Although it probably does have a minor affect on the rate of people transitioning. It's probably a lot easier to justify your choice if you think that you'll be more valued, considered less disposable, etc. I can't see i…
/r/MensRights12/12/15 04:33 AM
15

Don't pull this shit, man. Idiotic comments like that are why the MRs community is treated like a joke by many others.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 06:30 PM
6

I think the poster doesn't actually say. I believe the white text says: Here we aren't allowed to talk about the single biggest killer of men aged under 45 but we are here www.biggerissues.co.uk So presumably they are trying to use the whole suspense theme to get people to check out the website, where you'd find out that they were referring to suicide. Actually, thinking about it a little, it's quite clever. People tend to avoid talking about suicide. It's an uncomfortable topic. The poster may …
/r/MensRights10/11/15 05:19 PM
21

I agree that this needs to be defined better and is likely meaningless otherwise. I mean, I think most healthy people have at some low point of their lives wondered what would happen if they just ended it there. They'd never seriously do it, but by definition, they're contemplating it. So if I'm right that most people have done this at some time or another, then arguably the results of this poll are pretty much just checking what people consider "contemplating". With the versatility of English, …
/r/MensRights02/11/15 05:37 AM
3

I haven't seen any anti-women mentality on this subreddit that was even nearly as toxic as the anti-men mentality I've seen on basically any feminist platform. So I don't think you'll get down-voted at all. I'm inclined to agree. The sub is, however, often vehemently anti-feminist. Although that's hardly the same as being anti-women. Sadly, some women mistakenly interpret it that way, which makes it hard to have any kind of rational discourse. though I must say, this article and trying to post i…
/r/MensRights02/10/15 06:47 PM
6

While /r/Egalitarianism does seem to have a bit of a male-oriented bias, I haven't seen anything quite like what you described. Although for the most part, it does keep respectful. It's a really small sub, though.
/r/MensRights02/10/15 06:43 PM
-2

While you have good points, I personally don't like the direction that the sub is going with so many top posts preferring to focus almost entirely on cases of women doing bad things. It makes sense for something like this post, where it clearly highlights sexism in sentencing, but this one is just a run of the mill false accusation that doesn't even seem to have any real gender component to it. Regarding false accusations, I don't think the kind of people who deny that they happen or similar wou…
/r/MensRights24/09/15 06:26 PM
1

In that particular state. Such laws are interesting when they aren't the norm. In about 75% of the US, it wouldn't have been statuary rape. I just find it interesting that whether or not you're a rapist depends on borders. It's one of those sort of crimes that you typically don't think of a geographical sense. Like, whether or not you view someone as a rapist wouldn't depend on whether they're from Nevada or Utah or what.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 09:11 PM
3

As an aside, what's the logic of the age of consent for men being higher? It doesn't even seem to fit in the the typical conservative views.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 09:08 PM
2

Would he have turned it down in the <12 months when he turned 18? Really? Also, he could have consented in about 75% of the US, where the age of consent is 17 or lower. So even most of the US has agreed that it wouldn't have been exploitation.
/r/MensRights17/09/15 09:07 PM
3

I dunno. I think there's been countless cases in which the defense attorney tries to pain the accused as a victim in some way. Most often they try and paint them as a victim of circumstances in an attempt to solicit pity (how often do you hear about how the accused came from a troubled background?). Yeah, it's disgusting to watch, but hardly anything new. I'll agree that this argument seems especially bad, though. At least the whole "came from a troubled background" stuff doesn't usually reek of…
/r/MensRights01/09/15 07:03 PM
3

That was the first thing that comes to mind. Most delivery people I see are men. Likewise, construction and similar jobs that require a vehicle or access to more remote locations seem male dominated. Without controls for job type or location, this article is trash.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 08:46 PM
1

Likewise. I wonder if everyone here is just commenting on the title? I'm somewhat interested in the article to see if it raises any other points or anything. Although unless there's something wrong with the title, it's discuss-able enough on its own.
/r/MensRights17/08/15 06:48 PM
9

I would expect that scholarship programs that target women exclusively might play some part (but am very skeptical if they could really cause such a large gap -- I'd consider them a tangential issue). Mostly I think it's a social thing. I suspect that women are being persuaded that trades and dirty jobs are "mens' work". As a result, we'd see more men going into such fields and less women (which the numbers certainly support). This is not a new trend, but rather the increased access to universit…
/r/MensRights17/08/15 06:40 PM
3

Showing your work is important, but some teachers get way too extreme about this. Showing your work should be so: You can get partial marks if you ultimately screw up, since you had some parts correct. To show you didn't cheat (kinda -- it mostly just shows you didn't flat out figure out the answer without knowing how to get the answer). Kind of weak because there's ways to cheat and get the work (eg, copying from a peer, using a program like Wolfram Alpha, etc). To show that you can utilize the…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 08:32 PM
1

I wonder if the sub was brigaded (the top posts are older than this post, but the voting pattern could have heavily changed after this being posted)? Does anyone have a snapshot or anything from the time of posting? If that's not the case, then what's with OP's title, I wonder? The current state of the thread doesn't seem to reflect the title at all.
/r/MensRights01/07/15 10:04 PM
6

I agree. Ideally, we'd be able to assume that people can be assertive and will be able to say "no" when they don't want to do things and won't let themselves be peer pressured. Of course, the reality is that many people can't handle peer pressure well and simply aren't assertive (and may not even know how to be assertive). So an ethical person would certainly take that into account and avoid pressuring people and understand that some people might not want to do something but legitimately not kno…
/r/MensRights01/07/15 09:59 PM
5

To be fair, in her mind, she thinks she was harmed (by being treated "as little more than a live-in maid or housekeeper"). So it's not necessarily wrong if we're lax in our terms. And I wouldn't consider being described as vengeful to be a good thing (not really a bad thing either -- pretty neutral, really). So I don't really look into this as far as you do and am willing to chalk it up to creative freedom of the writer, trying to add another adjective into their story.
/r/MensRights16/06/15 04:16 AM
14

Really weird coloring. 20-80%? That's kind of a big range to give one color.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 01:05 AM
46

Yeah, it's paying back what the government payed out in his place. So he's not paying the son at all.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 02:57 PM
1

You're right, my bad. Should work for both the US and Canada.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 04:54 AM
7

They do exist, but there seems to be fewer resources available for men. For example, in Canada, there's the National Domestic Violence Hotline, which is completely gender neutral and anonymous. Of course, the problem is that often we do need to call the police. There's no reason that someone should be beaten, stabbed, or have their life threatened without recourse because of their gender. Some things definitely do need to be a criminal matter.
/r/MensRights31/05/15 01:40 AM
1

I think most of us (in this thread) are referring specifically to soldiers (ie, combat roles). While not explicitly stated and obviously rulings that affect the whole navy would affect people in what's basically office jobs, the soldiers are the role of particular note. You'll note that /u/xNOM's original comment specifically says "soldiers having babies", not "military personal having babies".
/r/MensRights18/05/15 06:23 AM
1

I think what /u/heimdahl81 meant is to prevent people from getting pregnant (or getting others pregnant) while they're serving their military career. Then what /u/xseeks means is because deployment may occur at any point of their military career (sure, it's usually well planned in advance, but pregnancy is very long term and wars can start requiring unexpected deployment). I agree with /u/heimdahl81 that pregnancy just isn't compatible with being an active duty soldier. If kids are your immediat…
/r/MensRights18/05/15 06:20 AM
-4

While they technically are objectifying, for many men, superhero muscles are a fantasy that they'd love to have. So it's not like the fake muscles aren't something that they want (in fact, people usually pay a premium for the suits with the fake muscles).
/r/MensRights04/05/15 10:21 AM
4

To be fair, fantasy stories often at least slightly base themselves off of a medieval earth society, where men were traditionally the soldiers and politicians. Since such stories are frequently oriented around war, we tend to see male dominated armies while the roles that women would traditionally play keep them more behind the scenes. Magic helps even things out, since it's not usually dependent on physical strength. Races other than humans help too (it seems very common for humans to be based …
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:51 AM
2

there is usually very little connection between the parts. Direct sequels are denoted by something like Final Fantasy X-2 or XIII-2/3 They're actually completely independent universes, with a few exceptions. There's common themes and ideas that are often used (eg, most FFs have a guy named Cid in them and he's usually a scientist or involved with airships). They're not really connected in anything more than a "trope" if you will. There's also some classes of species that appear in multiple games…
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:42 AM
1

I'd argue that it's RPGs in general that often do this. Major western RPGs like The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, etc have also had very fair portrayals of men and women (with all of those series allowing the player character to choose their gender). Of course, there's always going to be exceptions. Single exceptions aren't necessarily a bad thing, though. It's not the first time Square Enix has a single-gender cast (FF X-2 had all female player characters).
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:31 AM
3

FF X-2 had a pretty much all female cast (all the main characters, anyway, which I presume is the same here). It did come across as a little gimmicky (particularly since the previous game had a very balanced cast), but didn't really ruin the game or anything. Granted, it wasn't like men were completely removed from the story, since one particular "dead" character has a roll in the story (but not as a player character).
/r/MensRights01/05/15 09:28 AM
2

Fully agreed. I would consider male-only scholarships to be as big of a failure as female-only scholarships.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:06 AM
19

The idea behind the comparison is to shed light on how uncircumcised people view the "I'm circumcised and I like it" people. The point is that you can find plenty of people who can defend practices you might view as barbaric (I'm assuming you'd find removing the clitoris to be barbaric). You'd probably justify this thinking by that the woman justifying her own circumcision has been brainwashed into thinking it's good. Or perhaps it's because they've been circumcised their whole life and really c…
/r/MensRights21/04/15 03:30 PM
3

Not to mention that being out of the workforce for some time means there's a lot of time available for your own education. The amount of time needed to be a stay-at-home parent is usually exaggerated and thanks to online schooling, you don't need typical hours to get an education (of course, there's still the issue of paying for it, but that's not going to improve after a divorce).
/r/MensRights15/04/15 07:53 AM
3

Am I the only one who wants to know how anything changes if that one caveat is still included ? I agree. It seems to me that the "alimony payments could only continue for a period of time from 25 percent to 75 percent of the length of the marriage" part of the bill gives more than enough leeway. That's a really big range, especially when you can get up to 55% of the partner's income. I'm just not seeing any case where an exception is necessary that won't also put a great amount of strain on the …
/r/MensRights15/04/15 07:52 AM
2

And that's the thing: it wouldn't. They mentioned that such a review is unnecessary because the law isn't retroactive. If you got suckered into paying alimony unfairly in the past, it doesn't seem like this bill will help you unless you can somehow find a way to get the alimony payment reviewed.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 07:45 AM
3

Surely nobody would be putting this much effort into opposing a bill just because they misread something? Ideology seems the most likely reason.
/r/MensRights15/04/15 07:44 AM
15

"Common law marriage". Live together for a bit and you're considered to be in one without a choice. I don't believe there's even a way to opt out (strangely enough, considering that this was supposed to be for tax purposes). I don't understand why governments had decided that wealth should be split in this arrangement without any input from the people that it affects.. Seems like a terrible idea to me. This is entirely what marriage is for. Common law marriages seem completely unnecessary.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 01:18 AM
7

But usually you hear about those for prenups that are stuff like "you get nothing if we divorce". This one is a very reasonable prenup. 5k a month for five years and a million dollars to get out of the house? That's pretty good. With that said, the pre-nup hasn't been thrown out. It's simply being challenged. Hopefully the judge will uphold it, though. There's no rational reason to throw this out. It's a binding legal agreement that both parties willingly signed. Believing that you were somehow …
/r/MensRights12/04/15 01:11 AM
1

What ever happened to the idea of debtors prison being illegal? Several US states have exceptions for child support payments, for some reason. Alabama seems to be the worst of them, as it not only imprisons them, but applies interest while they're imprisoned. I also noted from the Wikipedia page that SC doesn't even give the debtor a right to defence counsel. I don't understand how anyone could have made these laws without realizing it was a terrible idea. "Oh, yeah, we'll throw you in jail beca…
/r/MensRights11/04/15 10:22 AM
11

But Youtube was crappy (regarding comments and quality of many videos) before they introduced ad revenue sharing. And Youtube's biggest flaw with ads is that they use highly obtrusive ads that must be viewed before the video or obscure part of the video. If the ads are like Reddit's, then I wouldn't have a problem with them. Biggest issue is the risk of people who spam low quality content in an attempt to get as many high voted posts as possible. But people already do that on Reddit without the …
/r/MensRights06/04/15 08:43 PM
23

Absolutely. This is how it works for most laws. It's illegal to falsely claim that someone committed a murder, for example. The main issue is the sheer difficulty of proving that they were outright lying (there's a number of things that could happen instead of lying, such as harboring false memories). One particular issue is that losing a court case doesn't necessarily mean that the other person isn't guilty. It could mean that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute (especially in cases where…
/r/MensRights02/04/15 07:42 PM
1

I disagree on the principal that banning hate speech has worked well for countries like Canada (and numerous others). I haven't seen any evidence of a slippery slope so far, with it used only for obvious intents to spread hatred. It's fully possible to speak critically of something without it being hatred (and there's been no cases of such being banned). An example of an advantage of such a law is to maintain order and prevent people from using intimidation and fear as a way to make political pr…
/r/MensRights29/03/15 03:10 AM
7

I really don't understand this logic. If gay men wanted to ogle fit dudes, they don't need male only gym hours/rooms. It's not like seeing a woman is going to ruin all the men around.
/r/MensRights22/03/15 10:16 AM
8

Online petitions are mostly worthless ways to make people feel better about themselves. If you want to make an impact, call or write the the people involved directly. I've also heard that writing letters to newspaper editors is effective at calling people out.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 03:26 AM
5

Of particular interest is the link at the bottom right. Male survivors Workshop for men who have been abused by other men Like, women are completely incapable of abusing a man, so the male survivors must be victims of other men!
/r/MensRights09/01/15 01:50 AM
1

I would have liked this adaption a bit better if the gender icons didn't cover the text.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 08:50 AM
1

I stand corrected.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 04:35 AM
14

its not like its a requirement in a long term relationship It's noteworthy, however, that some places have civil law relationships that are practically marriage in the eyes of the courts. Stay together long enough and it doesn't matter that you're not married.
/r/MensRights01/01/15 12:54 AM
4

I agree with you. There's no need for such a requirement. Rather, that's a personal requirement. For example, I value ambition and self sustainability (to some degree, anyway) and don't think I would be a match with someone whose life goal is to stay at home and look after the kids. However, I can certainly see why someone who has a very good job wouldn't need or wouldn't want their spouse to work. They have all the money they need and a stay at home parent is easier in some ways (less need for …
/r/MensRights01/01/15 12:52 AM
2

Because acid isn't the problem. You could just as easily replace acid with a gun, a knife, a piece of rope, a metal wire, a heavy rock, a cinder block, a car, a golf club, a baseball bat, a baseball, a Molotov cocktail, kerosine and a match, a heavy laptop, ooooorrrrrr hot water. All of these can do permanent damage to you, or worse, they'll straight out kill you. Take Sharon Budd here as an example. She was hit by a rock thrown off an overpass. It'd be impossible to ban or limit access to rocks…
/r/MensRights22/12/14 02:58 AM
13

Won't even matter in some places. Live together like you're married and many places will treat you almost like you're married ("common law relationship").
/r/MensRights09/12/14 03:07 AM
6

Note that these aren't necessarily universal (anecdotal). And many are actually false, since we're looking at how society discriminates (and discrimination is often irrational). All of these, however, can actually be harmful to men, too. It depends on how we look at them. Physical strength (obviously). And a general expectation that you'll be stronger, faster, etc (but this also works against you as you'll be ridiculed if you're not in optimal shape, eg, "you throw like a girl"). Held to a highe…
/r/MensRights13/11/14 07:24 AM
1

I suspect it would depend a lot on circumstances. I think that the attitude towards war in countries like the US (and Canada, the UK, etc) has changes quite a bit since the cold war era. Particularly with the Vietnam war being portrayed in such a negative light in media following the war. It could simply be too controversial to conscript people. For Canada, it's even less likely that conscription could ever be reintroduced without causing a revolution. It'd probably take an invasion onto native …
/r/MensRights12/11/14 03:31 AM
2

I thought it was a pretty funny movie. Main characters are rather dislikable, but it's a good satire film.
/r/MensRights07/11/14 08:24 AM
14

So they want Sexmission to become a reality?
/r/MensRights07/11/14 08:14 AM
1

Still probably very major specific. My university is 56% female but in my program (computer science), there's probably only 10-20% female.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 06:44 AM
6

Note that you don't necessarily have to be married. Common-law marriage is also applicable. They usually don't divvy up your assets, but sometimes they do. You'll have to check your provincial/state laws (for example, Quebec doesn't have common-law marriage). So if you're in a long term relationship where you live together and basically act like you're married, then the law may view you as being married.
/r/MensRights01/11/14 03:27 AM
1

No we're not trying to accommodate these people, but it is a benefit that ever so slightly makes up for a tiny amount of the awfulness.
/r/MensRights23/10/14 06:38 AM
1

Fair enough, but if you want to use it to argue that prostitution is bad, it simply doesn't hold up (and let's be honest here: the main reason to state your opinions online is to argue in favour of them).
/r/MensRights22/10/14 09:27 PM
2

It's demeaning, but logical. And it's not like some humans aren't despicable, horrible people. We can't sugar coat our species.
/r/MensRights22/10/14 09:22 PM
3

You're making presumptions about how prostitution would work. It's not necessary that prostitutes would have to hang out on street corners or whatever. They could just as easily work entirely from home (and find clients online, where you wouldn't see ads unless you look for them). Or they could work in brothels. And either way, it's happening behind closed doors. You don't see them having sex, if that's what worries you (and as someone else said, it's very possible that it's already going on aro…
/r/MensRights22/10/14 09:20 PM
1

I felt it had done a lot of damage to them. That doesn't sound like a strong argument to me. You "felt" like it damaged them? Or perhaps your own feelings towards prostitution biases you? I think on a whole it will just have a negative effect on individuals and society as a whole. If you're going to make claims, you need to back them up with reasons. It is important to note that making prostitution illegal (or making it difficult) doesn't stop prostitution (or people from becoming prostitutes) a…
/r/MensRights22/10/14 09:07 PM
2

Unfortunately, based on the different types of comments on sites like Facebook (since comments can be negative), there's way too many people who think like this guy. Quite possibly a majority.
/r/MensRights27/09/14 03:46 PM
2

Personally, I'd like to see eligibility for parole come a lot earlier for many sentences. It offers the chance of releasing those who genuinely change and behave well while still allowing to imprison those who could be a danger to society. Could also provide a reason to improve (etc) versus sentences with no eligibility for parole. I'm not sure what affect that would have on the justice system, though (in terms of case load).
/r/MensRights24/09/14 07:04 AM
6

How would you see him rehabilitated? Rehabilitation is more of an art than a science. As much as we might want to, there's no real way to rehabilitate everyone who is fucked in the head. Heck, we don't even know how to treat most mental illnesses.
/r/MensRights24/09/14 06:59 AM
2

Why? New drivers and older drivers are definitely less experienced and more likely to cause accidents, but why punish every young and old driver because some of them are more likely to fuck up? The bad drivers will still have the pay the deductible, if they get in an accident, and there's a penalty fee for going into the negative points (which occurs for traffic violations as well as accidents). This seems ideal to me because only those who are poor drivers pay more. At any rate, the discounts f…
/r/MensRights16/09/14 05:58 PM
1

Damn, that's a lot. My insurance is a bit cheaper because it's an older, simpler car (1998 Oldsmobile Intrigue). Still, my dad's 2008 F150 only costs $1151 (counting the 20% discount for a 10 year safe driving record). Calculator here.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 05:39 PM
6

SGI (Saskatchewan Government Insurance) does a much better job. No gender discrimination No age discrimination Discounts for those with a safe driving record (based on a point system) New drivers aren't charged more (although there is a more restricted license for new drivers) Insurance cost scales with car value (and I think some other factors). My insurance is about CAD $770 a year.
/r/MensRights16/09/14 03:47 PM
8

To be fair, feminism is an incredibly broad belief. There is no single central organization or set of ideals. There's extremes on both ends and a confusing middle. The problem with this is that we can have extremists that most people disagree with and very reasonable people who most people would agree with; both of these people are claiming to be on the same side. It makes it quite difficult to determine exactly what the goal of feminism is (I'd say that there is no single goal, but a mixed set …
/r/MensRights02/09/14 11:36 PM
0

Yes, you definitely are missing something. The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus [..] Sticking your fingers in someone's mouth, eyes, ears (etc), however, is not considered sexual assault.
/r/MensRights02/09/14 05:10 AM
9

As an aside, an alternative to #5 is to abolish selective service entirely. In a previous discussion on this subreddit, this was more positively received.
/r/MensRights18/08/14 06:18 AM
1

It seems to me, however, that it'd be easier to simply drop the program than to continue it. Dropping it would simply be a matter of destroying all the records and stop trying to keep track of the selected service. Way easier than continuing a service that will never be useful.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 01:08 PM
-1

Men generally know how to trap, hunt, know what plants are edible, build shelter, build fire and obtain and filter potable water better/more than women do. Although that's really just because society prefers to teach these things to men. There's no actual limitation stopping women from learning all these things equally. Although mens' greater strength would probably benefit them more in a survival situation. I mean, if we're at the point where gender differences are all that's keeping a person f…
/r/MensRights13/08/14 05:35 AM
0

In general, though, the multitasking one is true for at least some situations (source). But it really is important to note the "in general" part. There definitely are going to be men who are better at multitasking than women (and I couldn't say how big the overlap is). And as the linked study shows, for some types of multitasking, there is no gender difference.
/r/MensRights13/08/14 05:27 AM
8

Has she been found guilty yet, though? Surely it'd be hypocritical to expect them to publish the names of the accused before they've been found guilty in an article that's discussing the very ramifications of assuming guilty until proven innocence?
/r/MensRights12/08/14 12:36 AM
29

After a bit of Googling, I think that /u/dat_smile and /u/leftajar are referring to Lawrence Summers (news article).
/r/MensRights06/08/14 09:30 PM
3

How the hell did you manage to create this text wall? Copying and pasting directly from the article has the needed two new lines that markdown requires. Anyway, I'm pasting this (readable) text because the retarded website opens some uncloseable popup bullshit about some newsletter or crap. A Westchester County woman who shepherded her young son to forensic psychologists in what a court said was a concerted effort to undermine his relationship with his father, and paid a former soap opera actres…
/r/MensRights26/07/14 09:29 PM
3

I would argue that in some cases, this is harmful to society. The person could be considered a high risk to reoffend. What about people who died? Who makes the decisions for them? If the next of kin does, how do we know that they're acting in good faith? Guessing what the victim wants has plenty of problems (no way to accurately make a decision here). But not guessing makes extortion very effective. Some crimes may only have a specific victim, yet cause a disruption to society, ranging from cost…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 09:10 PM
3

To be fair, if we always let the victim choose whether or not to press charges, we may also have issues with the victim not choosing to press charges when they probably should. For example, the accused could get off because the victim is too scared to press charges or because they are friends with the accused (when not pressing charges could allow the accused to reoffend). It seems to me that the idea balance is letting either the state or victim choose to press charges. But this has issues of i…
/r/MensRights16/07/14 08:05 PM
10

Also, most children are kidnapped by someone they know. One could jokingly conclude it's safer to go to the park alone than to go with your parents.
/r/MensRights15/07/14 04:03 PM
15

When I was 6, I had a friend who proudly stated that he could spell "hunting". I was impressed. "Consent" is pretty good, too, though.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 01:02 AM
14

Poe's law. Poe's law, in broader form, states: Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing.
/r/MensRights06/07/14 06:36 AM
5

Already exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Men%27s_Issues
/r/MensRights17/06/14 08:33 PM
3

To be fair, there's nothing stopping a MR project from being created (if there isn't already one). There can be projects for anything. For example, there's a liberalism task force. It's okay for editors to be biased in what they choose to edit as long as the actual edits are from a NPOV (which is admittedly a concern).
/r/MensRights17/06/14 08:26 PM
11

Even more, people are still held accountable for their actions if they commit a crime while drunk. We also expect drunk people to have the wits to not drink and drive. It seems inconsistent that we can expect a drunk person to be accountable for some of their choices (driving) but not others (sex).
/r/MensRights03/06/14 02:22 AM
1

Nothing will happen to your food. Contrary to what a lot of people think, tampering with food is very rarely done. It's often illegal and typically grounds for immediate dismissal. Serious businesses will handle food tampering very harshly, regardless of how much of an asshole the customer was. It takes really shitty places to do something like spitting in your food.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 03:52 AM
1

But the idea of "purity" (or lack thereof) having "value" is entirely a social construct. Sure, a portion of society (and perhaps a large one) might think less of people based on the amount of sex they have, but I would argue that it's not tied to a person's "value" at all. It's entirely subjective. This is evident in how some people might dislike people who have what they consider to be too much sex ("slut shaming", if you will). Other people will dislike people who don't have enough sex (in so…
/r/MensRights17/05/14 03:46 AM
1

And for those wondering, NP stands for "no participation". It merely allows the use of different subreddit styles. In particular, it allows moderators of a subreddit to hide things like the voting buttons.
/r/MensRights14/04/14 01:46 PM
36

I think some of these are pretty mediocre. The fifth image (reading left to right) makes that damn annoying "real" distinction. That's just as bad as the people who say "real men..." Not to mention she seems to be "slut shaming". And really, many of the other pictures are just about how some individuals don't face problems. I think generalizing here is a terrible idea. For example, it's great that the person in the sixth image doesn't need anyone to speak for her, but it's not nearly so easy in …
/r/MensRights08/03/14 05:20 PM
3

Reddit has vote fuzzing. The upvote/downvote ratio displayed by RES is not accurate. Only the net votes is accurate.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 04:57 PM
-5

I would argue that anonymous reports do have some value, as they allow people to report crime without fear of backlash if they are found out. However, they should be used for the purpose of investigation, and suspending someone without investigation based on such reports is irresponsible.
/r/MensRights07/02/14 03:04 PM
1

I agree, although there's still a very strong bias. I with /r/egalitarian had people in it.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 07:05 PM
4

There's no brigade. What on earth makes you think that the sub is racist? Not a single comment is racist here... I didn't even know his race until it you mentioned it repetitively. Some of your comments are being downvoted because they're very one sided.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 11:23 AM
1

Do you have a source for that? I tried a few quick google searches and found this site, which seems to put the percentage of male teachers at a roughly stable 15%.
/r/MensRights19/11/13 02:46 PM
4

I'm sorry, but could you explain what you mean by "once again this is how I feel after reading the comments"? The original submission is here. Sorting the comments by "best", which is the default, is a bit subjective to time, so I'll sort by "top" instead. OP explaining the post. He or she notes that the judge seems to have ruled purely in the child's interest and the manner of the comment stresses that OP does not agree with the judge's idea of applying child compensation. A joke that this shou…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 08:38 AM
2

That's not a square root sign, it's an integrand. The question is an integral.
/r/MensRights08/04/13 04:18 AM
0

April fools, right?
/r/MensRights01/04/13 09:33 AM
-10

LET'S COUNT THE EXCLAMATION MARKS! WE SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE SO EXCITED! I LOVE EXCLAMATION MARKS! THIS PETITION HAS FOUR OF THEM!
/r/MensRights10/03/13 06:31 PM
1

Why is this filed under the news category instead of opinion? Oh, wait, it's actually a tabloid.
/r/MensRights10/03/13 06:05 PM
-2

That sucks. Having to do an entire year of school because your parents thought they could school you and failed.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 10:31 AM
3

I'm sorry. It's the dangers of English classes. They make you start pouncing on anyone who so much as uses a semicolon wrong (which is actually almost every usage).
/r/MensRights05/03/13 10:30 AM
-6

Jesus, homeschooling must have been awful. They even distilled improper bracket usage into you.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 09:48 AM
4

In the essence of honesty, life also has a 100% mortality rate. Not that it changes anything. Although feminists didn't give you your disease. The majority of feminists don't even oppose MR, even. I'm sorry for your illness, but your blaming a lot of people for no reason.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 09:15 AM
0

While it can be assumed, we can also assume that not everyone will assume that.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 02:58 AM
2

Maybe, but I think an abortion would be more of a win win. OP doesn't sound like he wants to be a father yet and the woman isn't ready to be a mother yet, either.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 04:03 AM
1

Maybe not necessarily crazy, but I wouldn't classify her as a good person given what she did.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 03:58 AM
3

Good logic. Test it anyway, but in the meantime, get legal help.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 01:57 PM
1

How does that work? Revealing an abusive partner hurts your chances at getting joint custody?
/r/MensRights17/02/13 01:53 PM
9

It's still going to be bad for the child, though, since the mother is apparently crazy.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 01:47 PM
-7

Why are you blaming feminism for one idiot trying to get her boyfriend into trouble (which would never work since she's stupid enough to make a facebook post like this). Granted, I severely doubt this is even real, and not really in any way a progressive post here.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 04:13 AM
0

I have to admit to having little knowledge of the finer details of the American electoral system. As an honestly curious offtopic question, why does the US still have conscription (or this form of it)?
/r/MensRights14/01/13 06:16 AM
-2

Oh, I agree, sure. My point is simply that feminism did a lot of good for women at times, particularly as you laid out in your third point, and men didn't really have anything like feminism at the time that these strides were made.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 04:22 AM
-1

Women were not prevented by society from receiving education. Some women (and some men) couldn't afford it. Others could. That was a poverty issue, not a gender issue. That depends on what we're looking at. The medieval ages didn't necessarily ban women from accessing education, but the ancient greeks didn't allow women to go to school. They could learn what their family and husband were willing to share and that was about it. Women were not a group which was uniquely denied voting rights in the…
/r/MensRights14/01/13 04:20 AM
-2

I would describe it slightly differently: society is always discriminating to both genders, but feminism took huge strides in removing that discrimination (in some parts of the world, anyway). However, several issues involving entirely or mostly men got left behind in the process. Consider it this way: women were once treated so inferior they couldn't vote or receive education. That discrimination has been removed. On the other hand, conscription in armed forces largely effects men and male geni…
/r/MensRights14/01/13 03:12 AM
12

I'm in full agreement with you. Not to mention that most things from 4chan are fake, anyway. I don't understand how something of such awful quality got so many upvotes. Because it's a good read? Never mind how it turns the entire subreddit into a joke. I'm of the opinion that we need to step up in moderation to cut down on joke and bullshit submissions.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 05:16 AM
8

Disregarding that 4chan is a terrible platform and there's no reason to believe this ever happened, one does have to consider that during the past, women really were second class citizens. For example, for a long period of time, they were expected to marry their rapists and then there's things like being denied education in a number of ancient civilizations (and could argue that feminism has a legitimate purpose in removing such shackles from countries that still hold these views). Sure, I agree…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 05:13 AM
12

To all the people, stay strong.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 01:27 AM
2

I think the term you're looking for is "egalitarian" (belief in equality between the genders), and I agree.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 06:35 PM
8

I agree with you, OP. I hate half the discussions in this sub because they enforce some view that all women are against men or because they take offense to obvious jokes. Sadly, the guy who replied to you isn't wrong. There's a lot of people here who think all feminists are bad, who make posts mocking those "I need feminism" signs, and the like. We complain about double standards while making out own. And grouping all feminists into that extremist "mens rights are bad" view is like grouping all …
/r/MensRights22/12/12 05:47 PM
4

I was with you all the way until the last statement. This could be so much easier if you didn't equally group all feminists together. Yes, I hate this article, but why the fuck is MRM suddenly "anti-feminist"? Yes, I hate it when the more extreme feminists talk badly of MRM as though men "have it all", but can we at least acknowledge that there exist (many) feminists who hold egalitarian views similar to ours? They don't want to see the other gender pushed backwards, they just want equality for …
/r/MensRights14/12/12 08:29 AM
8

As a Canadian student, I have no idea who this "Canadian Federation of Students" is. However, I really hate the twitter medium and have no idea what's going on here. Is there a more reliable source? In the absence of that, I'll consider whatever happened to be irrelevant.
/r/MensRights01/12/12 12:45 PM
1

"Help me" may not be very accurate, but there's a small number of women who seem to expect men to do most of the physical work. Received a heavy package? He goes and gets it. Yes, the majority of men are stronger than the majority of women, but that doesn't mean she can't carry a 20 pound box. I personally don't see this very often, and the expectation of men to do physical work is more evident in the jobs people passively choose: men are more likely to work in the mining or construction industr…
/r/MensRights30/11/12 03:34 AM
2

We need to break up.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 06:53 AM
2

You wanna be my equality friend too? Hifive?
/r/MensRights28/11/12 03:56 AM
3

Yay! Hifive, equality friend!
/r/MensRights28/11/12 01:50 AM
19

Personally? I think both sides are in the wrong there. I support equality, and both genders are oppressed in some of those areas. For example, women are still heavily discriminated in many non-industrialized countries. On the other hand, men often suffer many double standards that don't effect women, but do effect men (such as the impact of false rape charges). There's obviously a lot more, but I do believe that neither side contradicts each other; just some people try and take things too far. Y…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 10:58 PM
16

MRAs and feminists aren't by any means antifeminist, though; MRAs simply dislike the extremist feminists who argue for a double standard (such as those who believe women shouldn't have to be jailed). Likewise, feminists dislike the extremist MRAs who say feminism has no place anymore. The core similarities of the two movements can very much coexist without any mocking.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 10:47 PM
10

Interesting. Where I'm from, if the womens' washroom has a change table, the mens' does too. If there's a family washroom, neither of the gendered washrooms will usually have a change table.
/r/MensRights21/11/12 03:27 AM
-6

Hmm, I didn't think about it that way. On the other hand, though, "that hits close to home" is an analogy for something making an impact on you, so it is also figurative.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 11:37 AM
-10

It figuratively hits close to home.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 11:23 AM
1

Noting that OP didn't mention a country, I have to conditionally disagree on the student loans. Maybe this is the case in America or something, but in other countries, this doesn't necessarily apply. Bearing in mind that education is usually cheaper in other countries (honestly, I have no idea why American universities are literally five to ten times the cost of Canadian universities). Here in Canada, for example, student loans are actually pretty fair. I'd imagine that'd be the case for most of…
/r/MensRights16/11/12 08:40 AM
1

While you're right about their reasoning, it's illogical to force him to shave simply because other people can't grow facial hair. I can understand them not officially sponsoring his activity or something, but actually banning the growth of facial hair, and through that, his ability to raise money for charity on his own? Ridiculous.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 03:04 PM
1

Thanks, that bibme site was handy. It just so happens I have an essay coming up that will be my first time writing in the MLA style.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 05:49 AM
2

Unfortunately, there's more than just the law that's the problem: people have outdated social conventions. If they see a man without a top they don't pay him a second thought, but if they see a woman without a top, they suddenly think something's wrong. There was a case a while back here in Canada where a woman was breastfeeding in public (that's legal) and a Walmart manager asked her to stop. He later issued an apology. The store didn't even have a policy against it, but the manager thought it …
/r/MensRights06/11/12 04:19 AM
1

Which itself has its flaws. First of all, nobody's making the women wear makeup. That's their own choice, and they're certainly not expected to (it's well known that most men prefer women with "natural" makeup or no makeup). As well, guys can wear makeup if they wish, most just choose not to (there's a lot of negative stigma there, though, since guys are historically not expected to wear makeup). Heck, personally, I wouldn't mind using makeup to cover up the occasional acne or bruise, but I woul…
/r/MensRights06/11/12 04:00 AM
2

Noteworthy that a number of countries don't have compulsory military service (but, yeah, compulsory military service is very sexist if it exists). Out of curiosity, what countries still have compulsory military service?
/r/MensRights06/11/12 03:52 AM
4

Banning a word list wouldn't work. There's too many legitimate uses of words. For example, penis could be discussed on a biology page, rape could be used in a history site talking about the "rape" of Nanking, sex could be used by sex ed courses (you have those in the States, right?). And any site that allows comments could contain any number of inappropriate words. Sites like Wikipedia aren't censored and even pages that seem to have no correlation with an inappropriate word could be vandalized.…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 09:58 AM
2

Might I propose that we ban complaining about SRS? There's been way too many threads complaining "oh, SRS are such dicks!". For example: A pre-emptive response to SRS Why does SRS feel the need to fuck with everyone? This seems to be the operational flowchart for every member of SRS I know in real life---and I know quite a few. Surely I'm not the only one who simply is here to discuss MRA without discussing the behavior of a few trolls. I agree that we need to stop taking issue with someone joki…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 05:00 AM
1

Just a curious question: what is all this primary/secondary driver stuff? Where I'm from (Saskatchewan), automobile insurance is mandatory and run by the provincial government. If you want to drive your car, you need it to be insured. It's a product of the democratic socialist government of 1944, and to date, remains well liked. I paid $800 a year in insurance on my late 90s car when starting out. If I maintain a safe driving record over the years, the price can drop as much as 20% (whereas if y…
/r/MensRights24/10/12 06:28 AM
3

Incidentally, I'm a fantastic cook, but haven't the foggiest how I'd repair a stove.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 06:20 AM
14

For petes sake, it was meant to be a friendly joke. I'm sure that if we look around, we'd find plenty of instances of the reverse case. Let's not over dramatize anything.
/r/MensRights23/10/12 12:32 PM
7

While this is more or less true and I know we all hate srs here, can we please not bring them up every thread? This is /r/MensRights not "srs sucks".
/r/MensRights15/10/12 06:46 PM
-3

I think that's a bit harsh. While I question the posters numbers and it's general bias, it isn't really related to the work Intel does (they also happen to be a male dominated company). Of course, their processors are far better than AMDs, so there isn't much of an alternative. Finally, while boycotts against companies that foster poor views can bend the into making better choices, if they're permanent, the company has no reason to reverse its decision.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 12:16 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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