TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ulrikft Archive

View 0 posts and 47 comments by ulrikft on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Are you on the autism spectrum?
/r/PussyPassDenied15/03/21 12:19 AM
-5

Of course, if that makes you feel better go ahead and believe that. I wouldn’t want a snowflake to melt now, would I? Keep in mind however, that your original claim is complete bonkers for everyone outside very marginal alt right echo chambers and hate groups online. While the opposite opinion is the consensus in most universities, progressive political movements and media outlets not owned by fox news. You can imagine what is closest to an echo chamber.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 06:34 PM
1

You need to get out of your echo chamber more.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 02:51 PM
0

Yes imagine what he said, then we wouldn't have the insane amount of mediocre white men in positions of power. I wish!
/r/PussyPassDenied04/08/17 02:46 PM
1

Appreciate the honesty! Just a quick note, the Assange case in Sweden isn't about withdrawal of consent after sex per se but about the criteria for consent, and what happens if you consent based on a certain piece of information or based on a fact (say, the usage of a condom) and the facts change against your will.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/07/17 06:31 AM
1

If it were all over the place I'm sure you could link to it?
/r/PussyPassDenied28/07/17 03:24 AM
-1

Someone is butt hurt.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 09:10 PM
-5

So you don't have any sources that support your fake rape epidemic claim? Duly noted. Your anecdotes are worthless. And you do share a totalitarian bed with the alt right. You made it, stop. Whining about having to lie in it.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 08:27 PM
-16

If you by spicy mean sad, I agree.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 06:15 PM
-7

So you feel free to complain about how the other side does not argue honestly and reasonable, but refuse to adhere to the most basic of discourse principles. That is encouraging.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 06:15 PM
-40

incredible rise of false rape claims [citation needed] You stupid fucks made everything rape but the tide is turning. No, not really, not legally anyway. Women who file false rape claims hurt real victims real bad. I don't really think anyone is disputing that. So you can take your fake rape culture and fake rape claims and ram them elbow deep where the sun does not shine. Did you just equate the rape culture debate with false rape claims? That is rather childish and completely irrationally. Ree…
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 05:58 PM
3

The comment completely ignores the question of why women choose differently. Are some inherent biological traits leading to this trend, or are there structural and cultural factors that lead to these choices (or a bit of both). Looking at the number of female students in various parts of academia during a transition to a more gender equal society may give us an indication (take Norway for instance), and it doesn't look like the "it's biology stupid" hypothesis holds water.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/07/17 04:42 AM
5

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-60.3 Care to elaborate on what part of the provision you believe is relevant/applicable?
/r/MensRights23/05/17 06:18 AM
5

[citation needed]
/r/MensRights23/05/17 04:38 AM
1

This was oddly specific. Citing personal experiences..? If you keep getting accused of participating in gang rapes, dare I suggest that it isn't the victims that are the problem..?
/r/MGTOW22/05/17 04:49 AM
0

Of course, questioning unsourced and unverifiable stories tailor made to further the misogynist agenda of this sub is censorship. Because dissent and questions is hugely problematic. Can't have that.
/r/MGTOW13/05/17 06:41 AM
-7

Your anecdotal evidence is so convincing! And I really do believe that it all happened just like you describe it! Yessir.
/r/MGTOW12/05/17 11:18 PM
–

Have you read https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leuchter_report..?
/r/PussyPass23/04/17 09:19 AM
–

Are you fucking kidding me, the mountain of evidence for holocaust is staggering. Denying it worse than denying the moon landings. It is completely idiotic. And asking for a singular proof, as if you would understand or accept evidence anyway..? If you live in 2017 and disbelieve the holocaust, you are a failed human being.
/r/PussyPass22/04/17 10:13 PM
1

The wage gap has not been "disproved time and time again", but since you claim that, please do provide sources to that claim. Since you are so against /r/facepalm moments...
/r/PussyPassDenied13/04/17 08:30 AM
1

Because the context of the thread is comparing abortion rights with circumcision. Attack the OP if you dislike discussing what is "better or worse than the other".
/r/MensRights13/03/17 06:19 PM
1

I didn't make a claim on numbers. There are comparable forms of MGM/FGM. That's not disputable. There are situations where torture and surgery are comparable too. That does not mean that comparing the two on that basis alone is worthwhile. The most prevalent forms of FGM are far more invasive, medically problematic and socially disruptive than the most prevalent forms of MGM. If you wanted to discuss the hypothetical relationship between very rare forms of MGM and the most prevalent forms of FGM…
/r/MensRights13/03/17 02:05 PM
0

Do you really believe that the number of less invasive FMG are even visible on the statistics? If so, please give citations. And not the ethical issues aren't identical. Exactly because the most prevalent forms of FGM are far more invasive, and because FGM is used to control female sexuality, and because health issues related to FGM are far more prevalent. Not sure why people have to fall in the trap of believing that Y is somehow just as bad as X, merely because it is bad. It does not work that…
/r/MensRights12/03/17 08:47 AM
-2

No, not really.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 08:44 AM
-9

ITT: people that erroneously compare female circumcision with male circumcision, compare parents making choices - even choices with permanent consequences for children - with (mostly) male politicians deciding what women do with their bodies. These comparisons are horrendously bad. Please do better. This only confirms my prejudices against basement dwelling, uneducated prepubertal cheese doodle eating men's rights activists. Ps: male circumcision IS wrong, but that does not make it comparable to…
/r/MensRights11/03/17 10:27 PM
0

But merely believing something, and postulating that something should be such or so, isn't a very strong argument in itself, is it now?
/r/MensRights19/12/16 09:43 AM
3

I would say that these post are going in exactly that direction, with a sprinkling of /r/imverysmart ontop.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 06:55 AM
2

Or they are just tired of trolls from echo chambers like this sub and want to avoid having the same feminism 101 debates with people that know nothing about feminism and women's rights the n-t time.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 05:16 AM
1

But the government does that all the time, so the argument is rather weak.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 05:14 AM
2

How do you support that assertion? When are goals societies strive towards legal matters..? I would say that is a classic policy issue, and I don't see how "I want the population to feel safe" is a very hairy or weird goal.
/r/MensRights19/12/16 05:14 AM
3

I mean why - what purpose do you think long sentences have? How does the American system work better than inter alia the Norwegian one...? recidivism rate? Hardly. General crime rates? Surely not.. So how? Why?!
/r/PussyPassDenied24/12/15 11:59 PM
1

Why? For what purpose? Other than petty revenge?
/r/PussyPassDenied24/12/15 07:31 PM
1

Evidence for hidden barriers? Well, there are quite a few empirical studies on different kinds of barriers - like men feeling like women are worse leaders than men - when the only difference is the first name, women not getting called into interviews - when the only difference is the first name. The same tendencies can be seen for immigrants and other minority groups. Men make most of these companies as well. Yes, and why do you think that is...? Because men are inherently smarter than women? Or…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 02:30 PM
1

discrimination against coloured people was much more prevalent 30-50 years ago, more recently a lot has changed, so to compare to historical data is loading the question to favour one answer. The fact that discrimination was worse 30-50 years ago, is hardly an argument when discussing the current discrimination? The third explanation is that equal opportunities laws have made it possible for discriminated people to get these jobs, and the proportions now merely show the best people getting the b…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 09:31 AM
1

The thing is though, I've highlighted two possible explanations for disproportionate representation - one is that some groups are less fit for leadership, the other is that they face hidden obstacles to participation. I think we can safely say that the first has been thoroughly discredited throughout the last 40-50 years, which leaves us with the second explanation - or a yet to be discovered third explanation. Lacking this third explanation - occams razor, empirical evidence from for instance t…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 09:03 AM
1

Not at all. Different people have different ambitions. Not everyone wants to be a manager. I don't see it as discrimination if they were the best for the job. But on aggregate... you do agree that "different people" are equally distributed between different races, genders and sexual orientation, and that statistically - when looking at country wide numbers, these differences should equal each other out? Or are you trying to say, using an euphemism, that men have different ambitions than women, a…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 08:48 AM
2

You don't think that if you see, on aggregate on a large scale, a highly disproportionate share of white, middle aged men, that it indicates discrimination?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 08:36 AM
2

So we do agree that in a large population - if there aren't any hidden barriers based on gender, race or sexual orientation, you would see a proportionate representation in board rooms?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 08:29 AM
1

I'd like to add that just because there's a majority of one group it doesn't mean they'll be the best for the job, there could be 100 males and 10 females, but the females they hired could be much better managers than the 100 males But why would they be better? In a large population, don't you agree that in average, they would not..?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 08:24 AM
2

Ok, I'll try to backtrack: Do you agree with my earlier premise: In a perfect world, where there aren't any hidden limitations or barriers based on gender, race or sexual orientation, you would (on an aggregate scale) see a relative representative selection of genders, races and sexual orientations in board rooms. there would be differences between businesses, but overall the trend would be close to representative. ?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 08:13 AM
1

Ideally directors are appointed for this reason, and the majority of the time I'd like to think (and I hope) this is true. But if you look at american board rooms, they aren't very representative? For instance, there's (I believe) a higher population of male gamers than female gamers. Does that mean there will be fewer CEOs etc at gaming companies? But why is there more male than female gamers? We are getting at the root issue now - are games a "manly" activity? or are there systematic issues at…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 08:03 AM
1

Ok, I'll try to explain it again: First: In a perfect world, where there aren't any hidden limitations or barriers based on gender, race or sexual orientation, you would (on an aggregate scale) see a relative representative selection of genders, races and sexual orientations in board rooms. there would be differences between businesses, but overall the trend would be close to representative. I assume you agree with this premise? Secondly: We live in the real world, and there isn't a relatively r…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 07:37 AM
0

I agree that there's more men than women in boardrooms. I don't agree that this means there's any discrimination. So, what is your explanation for this overrepresentation/misrepresentation? It can sometimes not be the case, most likely the majority of the time Based on what? Your personal common sense..? Otherwise the company will only suffer for it. And the free market's invisible hand surely weeds out all such inefficiencies - right?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 07:22 AM
1

So why do you think that men are over represented in boardrooms, leadership positions etc? Do you think that it reflects a level playing field? That women are somewhat less fit for leadership roles...?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 07:07 AM
1

Do you think that the field is level/equal today? That the huge imbalances we see (men overrepresented in board rooms and in politics) are natural or fair?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 04:50 AM
1

So.. When you have a far more then representative share of men in most boardrooms, even though women have the same opportunities - legally and in principle to be there, you think that is optimal?
/r/MensRights07/04/15 04:49 AM
2

She actually makes a few factual errors in her article, for instance: In Norway, violence towards children is done by females in a majority of the cases, and a NTNU report also showed that female on male violence were more common in close relations than the opposite (male on female violence have worse consequences though).
/r/MensRights09/04/09 10:34 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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