TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

wd4 Archive

View 1 post and 35 comments by wd4 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)
10

wd4/r/MensRights23/01/14 12:45 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

no
/r/MensRights19/05/14 09:30 PM
1

they've also been very clear that when the CDC records a man "being forced to penetrate" someone, it's totally not rape and doesn't count
/r/MensRights06/05/14 10:55 AM
0

hard working isn't the same as privileged
/r/MensRights04/05/14 05:54 PM
4

there are situations where people need to get cut later in life due to infection, happened to people i know and it's not fun
/r/MensRights01/05/14 03:54 PM
-1

yes, but there are also those that show no change
/r/MensRights01/05/14 03:53 PM
20

if you don't want your kids sitting next to 50% of the population, you probably shouldn't take them in public
/r/MensRights27/04/14 03:22 PM
1

what case would the school have against the government?
/r/MensRights18/03/14 01:05 PM
7

you could switch any of them and have it make sense...or just apply the same standards to all people
/r/MensRights18/03/14 12:25 PM
9

like most things, replace women with men in this sentence and it makes the same amount of sense
/r/MensRights18/03/14 10:39 AM
7

If colleges get rid of their 50.1% policies, they can get federal funding cut off. Unless Obama's education department gets their heads out of the sand, the only way to stop it is to make wrongful expulsion lawsuits more expensive for schools than losing federal funding. Hopefully that will happen in this case
/r/MensRights17/03/14 06:09 PM
1

they can't, because the numbers aren't actually that high
/r/MensRights16/02/14 09:05 AM
1

i think if there was a shooting, the suspect would be expelled
/r/MensRights16/02/14 09:02 AM
1

i think that just means you can't be legally prosecuted for it twice. a private organization can still take action (if its a private school, for sure). This is more akin to getting fired for a job because you were accused of a crime. I don't think it violates double jeopardy.
/r/MensRights16/02/14 09:02 AM
0

the law says "he" though?
/r/MensRights13/02/14 05:58 PM
1

so it's not the gender of the victim, it's the gender of the rapist.
/r/MensRights13/02/14 05:51 PM
5

yes- i believe so. it's prosecuted as if you punched someone. penalties are much more severe if the victim is female
/r/MensRights13/02/14 03:19 PM
1

i'm not saying this is a useless program but there is much more work to be done in the UK, where it is actually legal to rape a man
/r/MensRights13/02/14 02:47 PM
22

doesn't the uk rape law still say it's only rape if the victim is female? edit: /u/DukePPUk pointed out that the law simply says you have to have a penis to be guilty- so a man's rapist can be convicted, if the rapist has a penis. here's the law There are apparently cases of females being convicted but they are rare. [Rapes of men by women are usually recorded as "buggery"] (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/man-abducted-from-train-and-raped-1557478.html) The max sentence for buggery is 10 ye…
/r/MensRights13/02/14 02:23 PM
1

where does the WH have numbers proving this wrong?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 06:52 PM
1

does it make a difference?
/r/MensRights23/01/14 01:30 AM
13

stop that. equality has no place in this administration!
/r/MensRights23/01/14 01:22 AM
1

sorry about that- it's from the dear colleague letter. someone beat me to it
/r/MensRights15/01/14 10:09 PM
13

If they don't do these absurd tribunals that assume guilt, they can lose federal funding (per obama admin directive). If they do assume guilt, they inevitably expel innocent students, which results in expensive lawsuits. Federal funding probably outweighs legal liabilities for false expulsions, so the choice is easy.
/r/MensRights15/01/14 03:50 PM
1

have these levels changed at all since 2010?
/r/MensRights18/12/13 11:16 PM
1

that's how it used to work in the us- then the obama admin sent a letter to colleges saying they were violating the laws if they didn't presume everyone accused was guilty
/r/MensRights17/12/13 09:20 PM
-2

i wonder how the assumption of guilt part will play out. the school could probably argue that they were required to act that way by the obama education department.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 09:18 PM
1

if you add a regular expense of $100 to your insurance plan, the price of your insurance will go up by $100
/r/MensRights17/12/13 07:34 PM
1

insurance is to protect against risk of unusual events. it's contradictory to buy insurance for something you know 100% will happen. it's not insurance, it's just a payment plan. Requiring insurance plans to cover a regular expense (like birth control), then preventing them from charging men and women different rates was just a way to make men pay for birth control pills, but not give them any additional reproductive rights.
/r/MensRights16/12/13 09:14 PM
1

insuring regular expenses is an oxymoron, it's just a way to get men to subsidize women's costs
/r/MensRights16/12/13 03:05 PM
1

wow. there is a lot of stupid in this world
/r/MensRights09/12/13 12:19 PM
2

can someone link to a criticism of the male pill? I didn't know anyone opposed it
/r/MensRights09/12/13 01:40 AM
1

i think the point was just against ITT tech, not trade schools in general
/r/MensRights04/12/13 08:32 PM
1

what do you mean? If you go to LSE (the school in the article), your career opportunities are phenomenal
/r/MensRights04/12/13 08:09 PM
2

depends what you want to do...going to ITT tech instead of LSE would close a lot of doors and cause your expected income to plummet
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:44 PM
2

by the time they get to college hopefully they can make their own views. they'll be much better off going to a top ranked school and getting a good job
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:43 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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