TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

trangle42 Archive

View 2 posts and 64 comments by trangle42 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

What a whale. She should have taken the knife to her own gut.
/r/MensRights13/01/18 05:19 AM
7

The suspect also told officers that Zolkowski had been trying to get a refund from her college for her courses. College refund. Add this to the long, long list of reasons women lie about rape
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:47 AM
5

While he waited for his appeal, Mr Kay remained locked up with sex offenders. He was also made to see a psychiatrist because he was judged to be ‘in denial’ because of his protestations of innocence. Convicted without evidence, subjected to brainwashing for maintaining innocence. Kafkaesque in the extreme. Mr Kay’s case has prompted calls for a national review of all rape investigations But not for convictions. Strange that. This is an important victory for justice. This is the tip of an iceberg…
/r/MensRights31/12/17 11:42 AM
1

Since when did juries pass sentence instead of the judge?
/r/PussyPass30/12/17 11:07 AM
4

Until he suicides.
/r/MensRights30/12/17 07:30 AM
5

My 2018 hope - HuffPo will do a Rolling Stone or a Gawker and then get Hulked to death.
/r/MensRights30/12/17 07:29 AM
1

I'm not arguing against that, I'm just saying he is a douche who buys a poor person on a website, and I don't really give a fuck if she does get everything. I think men should avoid marriage, not buy a poor human being from SE Asia or Eastern Europe as an alternative.
/r/MensRights30/12/17 06:22 AM
5

THAT'S DIFFERENT YOU SEXIST PIGS!!! /s
/r/MensRights29/12/17 09:56 PM
9

I'm guessing she won't be facing Texas Justice because she's a woman.
/r/MensRights29/12/17 12:19 PM
2

Our system no longer deserves to be considered the envy of the world. I'm curious as to why they thought this in the first place. It always seemed riddled with corrupt establishment influence where powerful people got a nod and a wink from the judge...and they used to hang children for stealing loaves of bread. It seems more like nothing has changed.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 05:08 PM
0

They responded, no, it's because men are more violent, so better success at suicide. You usually only hear that from the most extreme, radical feminists. Not a good indicator about what the group is about.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 08:50 AM
2

And they were mostly chick flicks. What does that tell you?
/r/MensRights28/12/17 08:47 AM
1

Your assuming that women then go through with the pregnancy. Once they know the jackpot has been taken away, most of them probably won't.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 08:37 AM
2

Investigating with an open mind is not the same as believing, it's kind of the opposite as the investigator should consider the possibility of a false report, especially without any evidence to support the claim.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 07:15 AM
1

Citation needed.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 06:37 AM
7

Hehe I suspect this is basically correct.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:38 PM
2

What laws? I thought the US had a non secretive court system where all documents are publicly accessible. Or at the courts hiding basic information like the names of parties?
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:31 PM
6

Sorry I want to give other men rights, not my tax dollars.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:29 PM
5

If you are aware of MRM issues, you should be following a staying single path, building a career and saving money. Welfare doesn't benefit you, it is just giving your tax dollars away to women mostly. The democrats will increase welfare and strip away mens rights in many areas, from refusing alimony reform to college kangaroo rape courts. About the only way GOP might be worse for men is they support conscription, but that is mostly a theoretical concern, and if it really comes to WW3 I doubt eit…
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:18 PM
1

This whole thing was a mainstream media conspiracy that blew up in their face. It was resurrected as the Brock Turner story and played around the world. If you want to know more about the forces behind the mass media conspiracy read this http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:07 PM
17

"The courts no longer treat family violence as less serious than assault of a stranger". Apart from the majority of child abuse, which is committed by women, it seems. Interestingly this state, South Australia, had a bad record punishing female criminals. They used to have a law that said any married woman who commits a crime can automatically blame her husband, that law was reduced but it's still considered a "good defense".
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:02 PM
9

using the 51% evidence standard And what evidence was used to reach that decision? Preponderance of the evidence still requires actual evidence, in fact is more explicit about it than "beyond reasonable doubt". It seems the standard being applied is far lower, called "believe the victim".
/r/MensRights27/12/17 05:52 PM
6

Why aren't they naming the accuser? There are no laws against that in America, surely she is named in police or court records. Or is this college fix not as pro accused as it claims?
/r/MensRights27/12/17 05:46 PM
26

It’s not bad procedure for them to start from a place of “if someone is coming to us saying there was a crime, we should trust them unless there is evidence to the contraryinvestigate with an open mind and go where the evidence leads.” I think that's close to how it's supposed to work, and probably does for all other crimes.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 06:08 AM
163

Police guidance states that complainants should be believed from the outset "unless there is credible evidence at the point the allegation is made that determines no crime has been committed". Literally guilty until proven innocent.
/r/MensRights27/12/17 02:11 AM
4

And then they get accused of rape and everything changes.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 05:47 PM
6

Ah Trunbull, the man who got his respect for women from his deadbeat mum who walked out on his family when the was a kid. Yet he still doesn't two shits about divorced fathers.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 05:43 PM
24

Wasn't The Force Awakens just as bad? It's pretty obvious the direction Disney is taking this, and we can probably expect more of the same shit. Star Wars is dead people, rewatch the originals every now and again and move on.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 05:41 PM
5

Yes it's true. In fact, I have not heard of many cases where a prenup is actually upheld. Marriage is a bad bet for all men.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 09:05 AM
4

It's not victim centred, it's accuser centred. They don't give a fuck who the real victim is - they just want to railroad men into jail.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 08:45 AM
3

The teen at the center of the cases was not a special education student Do they feel the need to clarify this because they usually are? Pretty fucked up.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 08:42 AM
-2

No they aren't, but in this case I'm still like fuck this guy. The husband, known as Mr Kennedy, had assets of at least $18 million. If you're rich as hell, try and import a poor Eastern European woman and cut her out of any money 11 days before the wedding, quite frankly I don't care if she walks away with most of it. Better her than an entitled western feminist. This is not the case of the ordinary man getting married in good faith and then getting raped by the system.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 08:39 AM
3

Replace hard math with comparative intersectional heteronormative deconstruction and you will be off to a flying start.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 08:29 AM
1

I don't have a problem with women per se, but the SYSTEM has turned them into a toxic danger that can and does destroy the lives of innocent men on a daily basis. MGTOW is one way of surviving the system, that requires men to avoid women to protect themselves from the danger the system has turned them into. I always though of MensRights as theory, and MGTOW as practice, but you are free to disagree.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 07:15 AM
12

And when will they open the can of worms of all the questionable convictions that should also be under review?
/r/MensRights26/12/17 04:13 AM
12

The best protest that won't ruin the economy (at least straight away) is to simply go MGTOW, as you already indicated. Acquire financial independence, retire early and go live on a beach somewhere, without exposing yourself to the severe risks that come from interacting with women on any level.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 07:54 PM
2

You really think you had it to begin with?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 01:05 PM
46

Don't fall for their attention seeking trap.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 12:02 PM
2

Surprising no-one. At least they can't change the originals, but I bet they wish they could.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 09:38 PM
14

The things police would say if they were allowed to speak freely....like at a Royal Commission.
/r/MensRights24/12/17 11:49 AM
59

He slammed the crisis and said that police forces shouldn't train their officers to presume that suspects are guilty. They shouldn't presume the accused are suspects and that the alleged crime even occurred. First establish a crime has actually been committed, based on evidence, then start looking for suspects. This is what's missing. Claims previously made by Chief Constable Simon Bailey of the College of Policing that only 0.1 per cent of allegations are false were rejected by Sir Richard Henr…
/r/MensRights24/12/17 11:45 AM
112

I wonder what happens if a woman sexually abuses a little girl. Or would that cause a glitch in the matrix?
/r/MensRights24/12/17 09:49 AM
5

I think it's better to not bring attention to this vomit.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 07:34 PM
44

If it is that easy for someone to make 15 claims and put an innocent man in jail....the entire legal system should be on trial.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 07:32 PM
4

Have some taste of your own medicine, hope it tastes nice. Next week: "Max Landis decries unfair court system biased against men".
/r/MensRights23/12/17 07:26 PM
8

The report authors said they identified a number of cases where lawyers who should have sent inadequate files back to detectives demanding they obtain more evidence to build a case but instead chose to charge a suspect because they were under “undue pressure”. Charging people without evidence should fail at committal hearings, and then charges of malicious prosecution against the police and CPS. Yet strangely these cases get through committal as well. The system is stacked from end to end.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 07:23 PM
8

Seems pretty obvious when you think about it. Pretty sad these women only have their "big realizations" after they have a son. If I had a daughter, I would not change any of my views.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 07:19 PM
2

If the parties disagree with no other evidence that is an acquittal It should be an acquittal. It should not even be a trial. It should not even result in charges laid or an arrest. Sadly, none of that is the case.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 07:16 PM
58

If only you didn't need people like her to prove your innocence, and it is the prosecution lawyer who has to be hunting for actual evidence.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 09:35 AM
5

one to investigate the complainant’s account and another to investigate the defendant’s to ensure objectivity, Aren't they both complainants? Are they saying police don't currently investigate all angles of an alleged crime? Why are they even charging someone before they have thoroughly investigated both sides?
/r/MensRights23/12/17 09:27 AM
10

She initially thought he was 19 but kept messaging him when told he was 13 Prepubescent boys look nothing like adults.
/r/MensRights23/12/17 09:17 AM
5

A further fear is that innocent people are facing trials with incomplete evidence and some are almost certainly behind bars. So how about we review every rape conviction since 1980 that did not involve any evidence (based on my understanding this would be in the 98%+ range). Maybe a Royal Commission into Rape Persecution would be appropriate. And we need to stop pretending this has been some kind of accident. It is a result of deliberate policy that has been supported by the government, the lega…
/r/MensRights22/12/17 07:59 PM
2

in relation to the truthfulness and reliability of (the woman) ... and the reliability of (Mr Kay's) account and his truthfulness." So how did they determine those things before any actual evidence was presented?
/r/MensRights22/12/17 07:53 PM
6

Concerns have previously been raised at the most senior level of the criminal bar that disclosure failures and lack of resources will lead to miscarriages of justice. But the most fundamental problem, allowing people to be tried and convicted without evidence, led to no such concerns. How strange. It has now opened the door for hundreds of convicted rapists to start appealing their sentences. Concern about miscarriages of justice, yet at the same time concerned potential victims of said miscarri…
/r/MensRights22/12/17 07:52 PM
8

Railroad people through show trials and into jail...then years later start looking for evidence they actually did it (or are innocent). What a system!
/r/MensRights22/12/17 07:46 PM
5

Nothing like having to prove your innocence in a kangaroo court of "law".
/r/MensRights22/12/17 03:10 AM
14

the police did not turn over text messages that showed the accusers were lying about being raped. Nor did they, upon discovering the lies, stop charging the boys and charge the females with perverting the course of justice, which is the real point here. To not turn over evidence is one thing. But to knowingly prosecute the victim instead of the offender is another.
/r/MensRights22/12/17 03:06 AM
3

A robust legal system should tolerate bad police and prosecutors. It's why we have things like evidenciary standards, burden of proof, presumption of evidence, reasonable doubt etc. The real problem is judges - they are allowing cases to proceed to trial without evidence. Fix that problem and everything else disappears. Edit: it should tolerate bad judges too, that's why a right to appeal exists. When it comes to rape, it's bad judges all the way up.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 07:46 PM
2

Lord Macdonald backed the prosecution of complainants who made false allegations, but he cautioned against stepping up such prosecutions in case it deterred genuine complainants to come forward. Lolwat. Sounds like he doesn't support it except in the worst cases. Contradictory much?
/r/MensRights21/12/17 07:28 PM
6

Theresa May told the Commons: “It is important that we look at this again so we make sure we are truly providing justice.” Do you think she means justice for falsely accused men and boys?
/r/MensRights21/12/17 07:25 PM
1

While this is a sort of positive, the question remains: why do accused men need to rely on police uncovering exculpatory evidence to prove their evidence? "Guilty until police (who are paid to prosecute1 crimes) find evidence to undermine their own case" doesn't sound very reassuring does it? in the sense that they identify suspects, arrest them then build a case against them which they then pass onto the actual prosecutor.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 07:21 PM
2

If there are any positives that will comes out of this Great Big Diversion of "police victim policies"1 it will be lots more of this - jury not-guilty verdicts. The diversion is talking about near irrelevant things like police referring to "victims" when the real issue is they are arresting, charging and prosecuting people without any evidence of a crime being committed.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 07:12 PM
1

We can take rape out of it and just say, don't believe accusers. Because that already happens, for all crimes except rape. That's why you can't take rape out it. And let's stop pretending this is about anything to do with police or recent policy changes - we ALL know it goes all the way back to legal changes in the 80s and 90s that allowed people to be put on trial without evidence. That's the real issue here. I mean, it wouldn't matter how biased and malicious the police were if they were just …
/r/MensRights21/12/17 07:06 PM
6

I think it is normal for police to refer to victims as victims where there is evidence a crime has been committed. This is not the problem. The problem is that they arrest, charge and prosecute based on no evidence, or against evidence that shows the accusations are false. Would it make a difference if they referred to "complainants" if they still believe the accuser, don't investigate the alternative accusation that she is a false accuser, and take cases to trial with zero evidence to support t…
/r/MensRights21/12/17 06:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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