TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

topoi Archive

View 1 post and 79 comments by topoi 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)
5

topoi/r/MensRights04/09/11 08:37 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

Whether sex workers are uncoerced is a point of contention. There are good theories of coercion, supported on independent grounds, that have as a consequence that coercive pressures are at work in a sex worker's decision to work. Even if you don't think sex work is coercive (for example, the mainstream account is Wertheimer's, and it says that sex workers are not generally coerced), there's still plenty of room to hold that sex work involves exploitative relationships. Exploitation is generally …
/r/MensRights02/07/12 04:59 AM
–

Nobody said men weren't objectified. There are material differences in the effects of objectification on men and on women. That's a big part of objectification theory. The parallels don't run very deep. I mean what are they going to do? It's not just a natural thing...but is also something you can't really "solve". implies that even if we could change it, it wouldn't be worth changing.
/r/MensRights01/07/12 06:21 AM
1

If you believe that there is an important difference between the harms suffered by women and those suffered by men, then it makes sense to use different words for them. It's not part of some diabolical scheme.
/r/MensRights01/07/12 05:54 AM
–

Differentiating this gets into the distinction between, for instance, killing and letting die. I don't know much about action theory, but I do know that it is very very hard to distinguish between selling someone a gun and hiring a contract killer. So, just appealing to the fact there is a difference doesn't tell us where objectification falls. I think we should defer to the experts in this case, since it is not apparent to reflection which side objectification falls on. The experts agree that o…
/r/MensRights01/07/12 03:29 AM
–

Fair enough, I didn't know. Still, I think it's important to keep the two ways of using the word "sexism" in mind. It seems to lie at the bottom of many disagreements between MRAs and feminists on this topic.
/r/MensRights30/06/12 11:52 PM
–

99% of the people I come across in a day I really don't care enough about to "treat [...] as full thinking and feeling human beings". As far as I'm concerned they are (and for all it matters they may as well be) objects. Their human-ness is utterly irrelevant to me, and mine to them. Do you think that this is totally ok? Wouldn't the world be much better if we did consider others as the thinking and feeling people with rich inner lives that they are? e: Many are asking how it is even possible to…
/r/MensRights30/06/12 10:08 PM
–

I should have been clearer: By "objectifying in a harmful way" I meant that the prevalence and method of objectification leads to or facilitates harm. There are many dozens of papers (both conceptual and empirical) written about the harms of objectification and objectification in certain ways. This field is called objectification theory. It does look disproportionately at the effects of objectification on women, but that doesn't mean that its findings (that is, "objectification is harmful to wom…
/r/MensRights30/06/12 10:04 PM
–

This post doesn't say or imply that only women can be objectified. I don't think that you misrepresented the argument on purpose, but it pays to be careful when discussing highly-charged topics like this one. When people aren't on the same page, discussion suffers and everyone is done a disservice. As for the "only misogyny is real", a lot of people define sexism in such a way that it needs to be systematic and institutional. On this definition, the gender of the poster doesn't matter and that m…
/r/MensRights30/06/12 09:56 PM
–

*Nobody** argues that objectification is defined as "appreciation of the female form". There is a big difference between appreciating a person's beauty and objectifying them in a harmful way. Feminists are not some kind of weird Kantians who think "Objectification is bad whenever it occurs, and it only ever occurs to women". There is a growing genre of sex-positive porn, which tries to provide harmlessly objectifying material. In light of this, it doesn't make sense to say that feminists are try…
/r/MensRights30/06/12 09:36 PM
3

This article doesn't offer anything in the way of proof. This is the same old plausible-sounding evopsych that we're warned to cast a skeptical eye on. All the factors this author explains through evolution can be explained through socialization.
/r/MensRights24/06/12 02:17 PM
1

I agree that a commitment to men's rights is necessary, but I am uncomfortable with your assertion that I only care about female survivors of sexual violence. My point is that it is really quite significantly more likely that a female will be subject to sexual violence in the U.S. military than a male and that that feminists are doing something to address military rape. Whether or not this warrants special treatment for females is, as far as I can tell, an open question. There are good arguments…
/r/MensRights24/06/12 06:36 AM
–

That is a point worth considering in general, but it's a much more subtle and intricate issue than the ones I'm discussing here. I would be much less confident in any of my assertions for that reason, and I would reluctantly discuss that on another occasion. Thankfully, that is a separate issue, and we can work out the issues of (i) whether feminists are doing enough to help women in the military and (ii) the relative frequency of male-on-female and *-on-male ones military rapes without deciding…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 10:14 PM
1

it would be more likely that the civilian men would have a higher rate of being subject to sexual violence then the combatant men. Not really. All it takes to be a combatant is to be part of "any kind of regular or irregular armed force in any capacity, including but not limited to participation in combat, laying mines or explosives, serving as a cook or domestic laborer, decoy, courier, guide, guard, porter, or spy, trained or drilled as a combatant, or serving as a sexual servant or slave." Ba…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 09:42 PM
–

I thought you meant any kind of self-reporting at all, not only official reports. My bad. Still, the situations are incomparable. In order to be a Liberian combatant, you need to participate in combat in any capacity. In the Liberian study, sexual violence includes being forced to perform sexual acts on a third party, forced marriage, and mutilation of genitals. It is also possible that this includes being forced to witness sexual violence performed on a loved one. The study isn't clear: "any vi…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 08:51 PM
–

It's hard to draw conclusions about the U.S. military from a study of people who lived through the Liberian Civil War, an extremely violent and extremely sexually violent conflict. Their definition of "exposure to sexual violence", while completely appropriate for a study of sexual violence during the Liberian Civil War, is broader than the sexual violence that occurs in the U.S military. Furthermore, there were a much higher occurrence of sexual violence among the Liberian soliders directed at …
/r/MensRights23/06/12 08:27 PM
–

Not to mince words, but the overwhelming majority of military rapes are male-on-female (exhibits 13-16 in the doc). Reports for military academies (page 3 in the final appendix) show the same. This, combined with the difficulty of obtaining an abortion for military rape victims, makes male-on-female military rape a more pressing issue. That is not to say that male-on-male or female-on-male are unimportant, but that with limited resources available and the extreme difficulty of affecting any chan…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 06:50 PM
–

Resources for women in the US military: MRCC, POD. The problem of rape in the U.S. military is something that feminists are still fighting against. It doesn't happen overnight, and the military has been very reluctant to even admit it's a problem. But, people are taking action through lawsuits. As for the Middle East, Western feminists don't go over there and do things because they aren't in a position to spearhead those groups. Middle Eastern women know what issues are most pressing much better…
/r/MensRights23/06/12 04:43 PM
0

Huh! Thanks for that. So it seems like somebody does actually want to implement that. Fortunately, it seems like nobody pays much of any attention to that site (it has no alexa ranking). The way your post is written, it reads like legislators were considering this. This website is very fringe.
/r/MensRights15/06/12 01:47 AM
–

I looked around and could not find any version where enforcement works like you say it does. Either provide references or don't make outlandish claims.
/r/MensRights14/06/12 02:17 PM
1

People of color
/r/MensRights10/06/12 02:53 PM
–

I'm not saying that those things aren't true (though I don't really get your thing about voting power). What I am saying is that it is very reasonable for your average person or even your average feminist to not believe those things. It is reasonable for them to believe that there is no sexism against men. The evidence is not easy to come by.
/r/MensRights10/06/12 02:33 AM
–

To distinguish between injustices and mere jerkishness. A popular view is that something that would be jerkish when performed by an individual becomes unjust when institutionalized either by social or formal structures. Injustices warrant certain more extreme responses than just being a jerk, such as government intervention. We don't want the government interfering when I refuse to share my candy even though I am being a real asshole. Many want affirmative action programs, though. We need some p…
/r/MensRights10/06/12 02:13 AM
–

And if you went just a little bit farther down the page: When feminists say that women can’t be sexist towards men, they aren’t saying that women being prejudiced against men is a good thing, or something that should be accepted. Prejudice is bad and should not be accepted. Bold emphasis is theirs.
/r/MensRights10/06/12 01:50 AM
3

For further reading, Anne Fausto-Sterling is an amazing resource. Judith Butler talks about this, but her writing style is hard to wade through. And there's always the SEP!!!!!!
/r/MensRights10/06/12 01:48 AM
2

There is a good way to understand "sexism" such that it must be systematic and pervasive. This is one way to separate -ism from mere jerkishness (which many people want to do). It is eminently reasonable given the evidence that most people have to believe that sexism against men does not exist. Moreover, when a group forms around a topic that people in different social groups will approach differently, there's nothing wrong with wanting to close it off to some groups. That is to say, there is no…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 10:25 PM
1

I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say "sexual objectification of men and women is symmetrical. i.e. men and women are objectified in the same way". You could mean either that every gender is, in principle, a target for objectification. I think it's more likely that you mean that every gender is actually objectified in the same way as the others. (Note that I am not here taking a position, but showing that the idea that objectification of men is not systematic is a reasonable one) Taking …
/r/MensRights09/06/12 05:04 PM
3

That is a very interesting observation and I think everyone can get a lot of mileage out of it. On the one hand, it could be argued that this dominance provides the basis for the difficulty in objectifying men in the way that many identify as objectionable: At least as far as our society is concerned, dominance is tied to both autonomy and subjectivity (and the other possible criteria for objectification). Because male sexuality is related to dominance in the way that it is, male sexuality does …
/r/MensRights09/06/12 05:58 AM
–

Feminist philosopher Martha Nussbaum wrote a paper about the possible meanings of "objectification". You can find it in Philosophy and Public Affairs Vol 24, No 4 (some kind of institutional access is required... sorry). Of the seven definitions Nussbaum considers, none of them involve any gender in particular. Her discussion is seen as canonical in many circles. More recently, Rae Langton added a couple of further phenomena that are rightly called "objectification". She is also a well-respected…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 04:34 AM
1

While feminists have certainly claimed that men are never objectified, this is so obviously false as to be not worth considering. The interesting, reasonable, and plausible claim that they make is that men are objectified with neither the frequency nor intensity that women are. Studies like this one are good evidence for that claim. Basically, it seems that images of sexualized women are processed by the brain the same way that objects are, whereas men are not. e: This study should not, of cours…
/r/MensRights09/06/12 04:20 AM
–

It's not just or even especially women who impede equal parenting roles. Many facets of our culture make it difficult for parents to share responsibility for childcare and for people to see that sharing is desirable in the first place.
/r/MensRights02/05/12 06:06 PM
1

First, I wish you wouldn't use gendered language. It's really irrelevant. We are discussing how consent works, not specific statistics: A person of any gender can rape a person of any other gender, and that doesn't make a difference to the issue of consent. I want to only talk about moral responsibility. I don't know anything about legal responsibility, and I don't think either of us are qualified to decide the finer points of legislation. This extends to whether anyone should be expelled. For n…
/r/MensRights14/04/12 06:11 AM
1

We may be talking about different things. Can you give me a concrete case?
/r/MensRights13/04/12 11:46 AM
1

I don't know what you mean by secondary characteristics, and how do they trump social categories? I have doubts that a fully Marxist analysis would be able to capture gender, race, and ability differences. It was the failure of Marx's project to account for gender differences that inspired many feminists to develop their own theories in the first place.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 05:16 PM
1

Because the first is attempted rape and the second is accomplished rape.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 05:14 PM
1

Can you elaborate on My problem with kyriarchy is that it assumes that social groups are politically or economically homogenous, and that the individuals they are made of, all approach power differentials from the same angle. This is obviously false. Madonna, or the late Christopher Reeve had/have very different lives and possibilities than an average able-bodied Joe. ? The sense that I got was that "kyriarchy", like any sociological concept, was full of qualifiers like "normally", "generally", …
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:58 PM
1

Can you justify this without assuming "A person has consented until they rescind their consent"?
/r/MensRights12/04/12 05:08 AM
1

Cheers!
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:15 AM
2

Koss's work showed that 84% of rapists said that what they did was definitely not rape. Some consider the research to have been discredited and it only probes man-on-woman rape, but it continues to be cited by many in the relevant field and results have been confirmed by subsequent studies. I suppose you could say that despite the fact that the experts agree, this research is worthless. Then we have no data and are in a skeptical position. This puts us both at a standstill.
/r/MensRights12/04/12 01:11 AM
2

It doesn't treat what we should be treating, viz. many do not understand how consent works and why it is so important.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 11:55 PM
1

The notion of kyriarchy doesn't strike me as particularly objectionable: Different people are subject to different norms or accorded different privileges according to their social group in systematic ways. Women, men, black people, poor people, disabled people, etc. all have harmful stereotypes associated with them. In fact, this can be seen on the general model of fitting a theory to the evidence. People recognized that "patriarchy" was too crude to get at everything and introduced kyriarchy to…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 11:54 PM
1

I'm not sure that it has to be verbal; this depends on what our theory of speech-acts (like consenting, promising, marrying, etc.) is like. For the sake of argument, let's say it does. Then, most sex is non-consensual, whether either party realizes it. This has a consequence that either (i) not every harm is appreciable by the affected parties or (ii) that not every wrong is harmful or (iii) both. Is this such a bad conclusion? If we are concerned with what's Right and Wrong, it doesn't seem lik…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 11:44 PM
1

What you are saying is true, but I think that in this case it is irrelevant. We are activists, and so we are concerned with helping people. We can see that "Take self-defense" is not the right solution to the problem in cases of acquaintance rape. In such cases, it is better to educate people about the importance of consent. I think that this is at the heart of the "Men Can Stop Rape" campaigns, though again the execution is misguided.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 11:34 PM
1

I don't think I ever said it wasn't ok. If I did, I was in error. I think that when some victim-blaming incident occurs it is usually the product of a confusion between a well-meaning piece of advice and something less palatable. It is important to remember, though, that if a large portion of the population that we think is otherwise reasonable is interpreting these messages as instances of victim-blaming, we should make sure they aren't. This means being careful about how we deliver the "Take s…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 08:49 PM
0

Here is my formulation of the Principle of Charity: When people act in a certain way, we should interpret their action so that it is reasonable given their life-history. So, yes, when a rapist rapes we should think that they are either ignorant about how consent works or that they do it by compulsion. We should not think they soberly sit down for a moment of self-reflection and say "Ah yes, tonight I will rape an innocent person!". Similarly, for a survivor, if they did not make a big show of th…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 08:40 PM
1

Wait... what is our disagreement?
/r/MensRights11/04/12 08:24 PM
1

Nothing I have said relies on men being rapists. Again, I do not like the posters and I'm not defending them. I cannot be held responsible for who the study I cited investigated. It would be very interesting to have the corresponding numbers for women, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar patterns. You seriously overestimate the influence of Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon in modern feminism. The third-wave (i.e. our contemporary feminists) is a backlash against a lot of thei…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 08:13 PM
–

If we are social activists (not police), our goal is to stop the morally responsible agent from performing the action, not to attack the weakest link in the causal chain. That is to say, as activists, we want to stop what's bad and leave what's neutral. This means getting the morally responsible agent not to perform the action.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 08:07 PM
1

This is a question for a criminologist or public policy expert. I have not said anything about who gets how much funding for what, just about what we should put the funding towards if we get it.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:57 PM
1

Just because you do not see it doesn't mean it isn't there. In order to get that conclusion, you need to controvert what I said about the principle of charity. When you are interacting with someone in an intimate manner, you have a responsibility to look out for their well-being (as far as the interaction goes). Whether people think it's sexy or not is irrelevant when the issue is Right and Wrong. If your friends ask you "Do you want to play some sports with us?" and you say "Yeah, sure", that i…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:55 PM
2

No one can work on every project at once. If we've identified our focus as gender/sexual issues, then it is appropriate for us to address issues like these.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:44 PM
–

I honestly do not see where you are going with this. What action are you identifying as careless? What I was trying to get across is that, as long as the rapist is acting of their own free will, they are solely morally responsible for the rape. This is different from causal responsibility: My selling a car to somebody makes me (partly) causally responsible for any subsequent hit-and-runs they commit. I caused the driver to possess a car. I played a crucial role in the causal chain leading to the…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:41 PM
–

Even if we get rid of As it is now, there are a horrific number of rapes, my point stands so long as you think that non-violent acquaintance rape occurs.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:26 PM
1

First, I don't think it's a minor inconvenience to ask someone to stop. I myself am not a survivor of sexual assault, but the principle of charity tells us that if survivors haven't done this, we have good reason to think it is not nearly as easy as it appears. Second, for very many actions, we do not assume consent. Lack of consent is assumed until the other agent grants it by way of saying "I consent to the following..." or something similar (usually not so formal sounding). Why should this be…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:19 PM
–

The way I see it, we have a right to personal autonomy. This is what makes it impermissible for people to harm us, for doctors to perform unwanted and unnecessary operations, for governments to wrongfully imprisoning their citizens, and many many other things. We can temporarily waive this right by performing a speech-act, consenting. This is what makes it permissible for a doctor to perform an operation or for people to practice BDSM. Though people normally aren't allowed to cut you open with a…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:13 PM
–

If somebody has sex with a person that has not given consent, it is rape. We should not be teaching people "If your partner says no, it is rape", but "If your partner does not say yes, it is rape". Also, have you looked at the studies? (1) Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate? (2) Ha…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 04:30 PM
1

I am saying that the appropriate message (the ability to defend yourself is vital) is often delivered or interpreted as the second. As I have been stressing, if we really want to stop rape, we cannot be satisfied with "Take self-defense". We need to address the rapists themselves. I have no reason to think all or most feminists have "vilify and subjugate men" as a goal (surely, some self-described feminists do). This is basically postulating an evil shadow- and smoke-filled room conspiracy, so w…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 04:24 PM
2

This is simply inaccurate. Most people who rape do not realize that their actions constitute rape. I refer you to Lisak & Miller 2002 and McWhorter 2009.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 04:16 PM
2

I doubt that most rapists are mentally sick like you say. The cause of rape is pretty easy to identify, in my opinion: Rapists are people who do not have proper respect for their partner's consent. This need not be a result of mental illness; date rape (which is much more common than back-alley rape) is not caused by violent, uncontrollable sexual urges. It seems that most rapists are ignorant of the importance of consent. Evidence for this is that most rapes are not violent and studies showing …
/r/MensRights11/04/12 04:09 PM
–

I don't think anybody is so optimistic as to say "The last rape will occur in XXXX". As it is now, there are a horrific number of rapes, so we have to do something to decrease the number. I think that you're right. "Short-term" was the wrong word. The important thing is that it doesn't get at causes of rape. To compare: It's great to have an evacuation plan, but it's really much better if the power plant doesn't melt down in the first place. I agree with pretty much everything you've said here a…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:33 PM
1

Please see my other post.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:19 PM
–

I want to stress that I don't like the posters either. I'm not going to try to defend them. I don't know what the psychology of the rapist is like. Maybe there are 100 reasons people rape, maybe there are 3. It really doesn't matter. The important point is that, whatever the reason, responsibility for the action lies with the rapist. We do have obligations to protect others. That is what morality is about. This "Every person for themself" mentality is the wrong one to have if you're going to be …
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:18 PM
–

This is fine as a short-term thing, as long as the message is delivered appropriately. Apparently, it usually isn't. Perhaps it ought to be qualified much more heavily and explained that this is a temporary fix. Again, I don't think "Men can stop rape" is the solution either. Anyway, if we want to make the world a better place (and isn't that what activism is about?), we cannot be satisfied with "Take a self-defense class". What's best is for people not to have to learn self-defense in the first…
/r/MensRights11/04/12 02:11 PM
–

"Take self-defense" and "Carry a weapon" do not get at the cause of rape. I do not think "Men can stop rape" does either, but if we want to stop rape, we can't make it the victims' (men or women) responsibility. We must must must do something to change the behavior of the rapists (men or women).
/r/MensRights11/04/12 07:21 AM
–

That may well be true, but that doesn't mean that the idea of enthusiastic consent is a bad one. Good ideas can be put to bad purposes.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 09:49 PM
–

I appreciate a lot of feminist thought, but I care about Men's Rights (and I don't think the two are inconsistent). I don't see what's dishonest about what I've said. I'm not an activist, so I don't know if I can properly call myself a feminist or an MRA. I haven't embarked on any project of educating people about enthusiastic consent because I haven't fully worked out my thoughts on the relationship between consent and enthusiastic consent.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 09:29 PM
5

Can you elaborate on how it is a red herring?
/r/MensRights07/04/12 07:27 PM
–

In my experience with talking with proponents of enthusiastic consent, they are quick to admit (after the tiniest bit of pushing) that an encounter can be consensual even if the consent is not enthusiastic. That is to say, someone can consent unenthusiastically, but ideally all consent would be enthusiastic. If we want to have sex at all, it must be consensual, and it should be enthusiastic. They are concerned with getting people to see sex on the model of enthusiastic consent because they belie…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 07:26 PM
–

From Intercourse, Chapter 7: Intercourse occurs in a context of a power relation that is pervasive and incontrovertible. The context in which the act takes place, whatever the meaning of the act in and of itself, is one in which men have social, economic, political, and physical power over women. Some men do not have all those kinds of power over all women; but all men have some kinds of power over all women; and most men have controlling power over... the women they fuck... Intercourse as an ac…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 05:49 PM
–

Though biology dictates that reproductive sex is penetrative, nothing from nature implies that the penetrated partner be passive. Biology does not say that sex is done to women, it says that either they are penetrated or (to put it less passively) they engulf the penis. Dworkin's argument is that sex as it's done is a violent act. She says that if there were radical social change, people could have consensual, respectful sex.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 05:15 PM
–

Actually, feminists recognize that the modern sexual script is framed in a way that sex is "done to" the woman, and (generally) see this as problematic. Feminist ideas about enthusiastic consent are meant to work against this. Enthusiastic consent seems like a thing that feminists and MRAs could easily agree on.
/r/MensRights07/04/12 03:09 PM
2

The bank's advice is practical, and you should follow it. If we stopped at advice for potential victims and didn't try to stop muggers from mugging, I think you would have grounds for saying that responsibility is being placed on the heads of the victims. Many people see rape as just a fact of life, and so do stop at "Learn self-defense". When people say things like this without making it clear that these are meant to be temporary fixes on the way to treating root causes, it is reasonable to inf…
/r/MensRights16/01/12 02:29 PM
3

That some people choose to rape is not the "cause" of rape. Er... sorry, but isn't it? It is the penultimate step in the causal chain leading to the rape (the last step being initiating the action that constitutes the rape). Even though there are other causes, this one is still a cause. Moreover it is also the second-most (again, aside from initiating the action) insensitive step in the causal chain leading to a rape. This means that the part of the chain running from "choosing to rape" to "rapi…
/r/MensRights15/01/12 10:26 PM
6

I think the idea is to turn common advice given to women about how to avoid being raped on its head. While tips like "Don't drink something someone else has poured" or "Take a self-defense class" may be practical, they treat symptoms, not causes. This poster tries to stop rape at its cause: the rapist (let us, for the moment, ignore the fact that "rapist" does not strictly imply "man". This is not what Syphillitis is taking issue with, and the vast majority of rapists are men). Women are taught …
/r/MensRights15/01/12 09:35 PM
–

Middle schoolers' failing to take something seriously is not very good evidence that it isn't a real problem. They aren't exactly known for their maturity or compassion.
/r/MensRights14/01/12 10:50 AM
–

There's also the "'No' means 'maybe'" thing, which is rape-y.
/r/MensRights09/12/11 11:09 PM
–

And we haven't even consider the discrimination that nerds/geeks face. Even if it is hard for an attractive girl to be assumed to be a nerd/geek, she still retains the power to get up and move into other social circles where classically nerds/geeks are banned from. Same is true for an athletic and attractive male. That doesn't show that the fan community is not sexist, nor does it make the sexism non-problematic. I'm not sure why you wrote it; what point were you trying to support?
/r/MensRights07/12/11 04:01 PM
1

I refuse to address your points (which must be addressed if her apology is to be sincere) because you are disrespectful in discussion. There's no reason to call someone who simply disagrees with you a dumbfuck or emasculated. Civility and charity are important for having productive disagreements, i.e., not just shouting matches. You lack both. It is true that I have responded ad hominem to your ad hominem. I'm fine with that.
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:24 PM
–

I think it's a bit unreasonable to expect her to blog about the plight of the modern American father because she isn't one. Anything she could write would necessarily be second hand, and then we might as well just read the first hand sources. She did perpetuate fear/stereotypes/a kyriarchal system. She has since publicly recanted. If her apology is not actually sincere, I can see why you'd be unhappy with the whole affair. Personally, I take people (men and women alike) at their word, so if some…
/r/MensRights26/10/11 03:12 PM
–

If one thinks her apology is adequate (as I do), then what's the reason to keep her on? For the same reason we don't want people to be kept on sex-offender registries after they have served their time, we shouldn't want her to be kept on this registry. If she has truly reformed, it is unfair to mark her permanently. At the very least, a note that she has apologized and retracts her previous position is in order. Edit: Not how the system works for men. Why should it work that way for this girl? T…
/r/MensRights25/10/11 04:32 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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