TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

xfceice Archive

View 3 posts and 72 comments by xfceice 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)
1

Discriminationxfceice/r/MensRights15/01/19 02:22 AM
0

Feminismxfceice/r/MensRights14/01/19 09:01 PM
0

Feminismxfceice/r/MensRights14/01/19 07:58 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

This is just straight up bullying this woman. She hasn’t even written anything to suggest she has unreasonable expectations for a partner. Looks like people in this sub just ran out of shit to post.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen19/07/19 06:52 AM
1

So. Let me get this -- er -- straight -- The female nipple is the equivalent of an erect penis, and not the equivalent of the male nipple? ​ Sound logic!
/r/MensRights19/04/19 03:42 AM
-28

It’s considered “more impressive” because believe it or not, there are people — people even within this subreddit — that still believe human beings with a vagina are intrinsically less intelligent and less capable than those born with a penis. In this way, a female accomplishing the same thing as a male is seen as “beating the odds.”
/r/MensRights11/03/19 02:23 PM
0

lol ... that was the point of the narrative ... the 16 TOP women at these banks aren’t even close to being an “executive”
/r/MensRights04/03/19 02:40 AM
-1

Addresses criticism by claiming the means of expressing said-criticism is “unintelligible.” Absolutely brilliant. Oh! And typical!
/r/MensRights24/02/19 06:43 PM
-10

Lol, actually, it is, but I guess people are too dumb to think an extra step ahead. Half of those things are a consequence of the stereotype that 1) women are too weak and fragile to significantly harm the opposite sex and 2) that women are inherently “good”— where do you think these stereotypes came from?
/r/MensRights24/02/19 06:24 PM
-2

If you’ve only ever taught boys, exclusively, throughout your career, how could you ever validly assess boys’ interactions with girls? How can you confidently say “they need NONE of this”?
/r/MensRights22/02/19 06:54 PM
1

I’m sorry— but this is not indicative of some gendered hypocrisy. She’s a piece of shit human being — and clearly, everybody agrees — men and women alike.
/r/MensRights16/02/19 05:33 AM
4

I don’t deny that the same disparity of what the sub is meant to be and what it really represents is present in r/Feminism. But I will say that vice is not wrong about r/MensRights. There are some genuine users and posts, but there is also some horridly disgusting content.
/r/MensRights14/02/19 05:57 AM
1

I think this is trying to say that if you care about human rights and you’re excluding certain demographics, especially those that continue to be disadvantaged (like women of color), then you can’t pretend to care about human rights.
/r/MensRights14/02/19 04:01 AM
1

I can’t fathom what universe someone has to live in to believe that it is more plausible for this woman to have attacked the guy irrationally than to have had an incentive to do it. This is not about excusing her behavior. How the hell is it more reasonable to deny the domestic violence against her, to believe she did it “out of no where” than to say “what she did was wrong, and she did it because of X reason.”
/r/MensRights06/02/19 03:40 AM
-18

I don’t think she’s being praised cause she cut her husbands penis off— she is being praised because she stood up against domestic violence and martial rape. FYI — I remember watching a documentary on this a couple years ago. He was acquitted for rape, his facts didn’t line up, and he had a history of abuse against her, which supposedly is what led to her act of violence (still fucked). His penis was reattached and he went into the porn industry after....
/r/MensRights05/02/19 07:31 AM
6

I doubt that she will get a serious conviction. And it’s because of the nature of the scenario. She assaulted him after Shroyer essentially claimed assault “wasn’t a big deal.” He also said that he “didn’t care” that she just did that, but that if a man had done it he’d be grabbed by the police in no time. Given his background statements on sexual assault and harassment, I think her defense will reasonably argue that Shroyer pushed the case not because he was traumatized or suffered injustice fr…
/r/MensRights04/02/19 08:42 AM
-2

I don’t feel sorry for her. But that reporter is only exposing his own hypocrisy in taking her to court. If he really had a problem with sexual assault and harassment, he wouldn’t try so hard to excuse Trump’s behavior. But he did, and he continues to. In the women’s march video, he acknowledges its “not ok” but says “yeah, so what, I don’t think it’s a big deal” when one protestor mentioned Trump’s leaked video bothered him. He has done the same in previous videos....where he attempts to expose…
/r/MensRights04/02/19 08:26 AM
1

Logic! Of course!
/r/MensRights30/01/19 06:33 PM
-32

If this is #MeToo summed up, is “toxic masculinity” #AllMen summed up?
/r/MensRights30/01/19 03:57 AM
-3

He actually makes a solid point at the end. Is the phrase “fat men” offensive? Because “fat” has a negative connotation and modifies “men”? Are we saying ALL MEN are fat when we say “fat men,” or are we referring to a subset of men who are fat? We know the answer to this ... It’s the same thing with the phrase toxic masculinity. It doesn’t mean EVERYTHING about masculinity is toxic, it is referring to a particular subset of characteristics that fit a certain criteria, and not everyone who is mas…
/r/MensRights27/01/19 10:05 AM
1

Then why comment, in the first place?
/r/MensRights24/01/19 01:12 AM
1

As much as I'd like to say why I think incoherent nonsense is incoherent nonsense, I'd be saying it to someone who thinks that incoherent nonsense is the highest truth. Boy oh boy— your approach to argumentation will solve the world’s problems!
/r/MensRights23/01/19 04:35 AM
1

I really do wonder what gives you the confidence to expertly tell men all about what their lives are really like. I can sometimes guess what someone else's life is like, but the guess would be tempered by the knowledge that I don’t even know how you logically form that conclusion. You respond to any challenged viewpoint with personal attacks —“why do you think you can do this, say that, why do you think you know everything?” But it makes sense to you apparently, so, hey, maybe I lack the proper …
/r/MensRights23/01/19 02:14 AM
0

Rape culture refers to a class of behaviors and is inclusive of more than the physical act itself. But oh, yes, I forgot — something that is true of you MUST be true for every other man. Right!
/r/MensRights23/01/19 12:11 AM
-1

If we “as a society” behaved equally, there would be no controversy around anything. There would be no need for any movements or discussions because we’d know how people behaved 100% of the time. If this behavior wasn’t apparent in a significant portion of the human population, there would be no such thing as #MeToo, there would be no feminism, there would be no Men’s Rights group. Unfortunately, yes, some people still condone this behavior. No, I do not think it’s all-encompassing.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 08:14 PM
-1

Yes it definitely does. At the highest level it might refer to direct physical harm— like forced penetration, gang rape, or molestation, which don’t exist as much in Western society as they do in other places, but there are behaviors and actions at sub levels that contribute to dismissive attitudes that can be problematic. Like sexual coercion, threatening, blatant violation of safe words, aggression, stalking, cat calling, revenge porn, rape jokes, victim blaming. These are pretty common.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 07:17 PM
1

Which were those? No I don’t think I have seen them
/r/MensRights22/01/19 09:23 AM
3

Some of the people who “listen” do so because it’s the popular, honorable, socially accepted way of behaving. Not necessarily because they’ve thought critically about particular scenarios or analyzed people’s motives. Psychology works like that. Picture this scenario — An auditorium of men, only men. A female speaker. She starts talking about ways in which she’s felt victimized or taken advantage of. She brings up women’s issues. She starts talking about “male expectations”— “men are expected to…
/r/MensRights22/01/19 09:09 AM
2

Last I checked the original Gillette ad it had 112k dislikes and 11k likes. #MeToo is evidently surrounded by controversy because a great deal of people assume women are either lying or exaggerating. Doesn’t sound like unanimous support to me —what does it sound like to you?
/r/MensRights22/01/19 08:53 AM
1

I think this is a perfect analogy for illustrating the problem people have with the ad. To offer a qualifying perspective— I do not think the implication was for men to be ashamed of being men. The idea is that men learn acceptable behavior from other men. A woman complaining about “unacceptable behavior” means nothing. Nobody wants to hear it. It’s background noise. Men who speak out and challenge violent behavior are at least doing the part of discouraging misconduct rather than enabling it.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 06:54 AM
3

I agree that counts of terrifying examples can distort peoples perceptions about a particular group of people, but to think that the majority of stories are falsities or exaggerations is a bit absurd. Shit like that happens, and applying your logic to your perspective— it might be hard for you to accept that those things happen because you don’t necessarily experience them yourself. You are only particularly conscientious of the things that happen to you, and people like you. That’d be like a wo…
/r/MensRights22/01/19 06:30 AM
47

“My sisters house was robbed in the night. My sister caught the guy and got his information. Instead of calling the police like a little kid, she sent the guy an email and he apologized. He said he was very sorry, he was just tight on money, it was a stupid mistake, and he will never do it again. This is how real adults handle situations.”
/r/MensRights22/01/19 05:55 AM
2

I think this video could have gone far enough to actually reach and influence a female audience, but tried too hard to replace the original Gillette video with female characters. Women can be bullies, but not for the same reasons. Toxic femininity is more encompassing. The women who suffer from toxic femininity are the ones who make their sexuality their personality. Their self worth revolves on sex appeal and appearance. They think they can use it to get everything and anything they want, and t…
/r/MensRights18/01/19 09:25 PM
21

“sometimes I question if I would be better off with a traditional women who actually wants to be a women.” If you consider yourself to be a traditional man, a traditional woman would likely better complement your persona. What’s dangerous is presuming that traditional means “actual” or “real.” We are all real men, and we are all real women. Attempting to distort these definitions is what gets us into trouble. It confines men and women to these traditional roles.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 07:22 AM
3

Sounds like a tough situation to be in :/ What is the root of your disagreement? Is she generalizing male behavior, which you find to be offensive? Are you dismissing sexual assault as a non-issue, which she finds offensive?
/r/MensRights18/01/19 06:59 AM
-2

I see why people want to boycott. It does suggest that bullying and harassment are intrinsic to being “a man,” but I agree with u/Captain-_ that the overall message is positive. In what world is being an asshole “biological”?
/r/MensRights18/01/19 06:49 AM
1

“This one is... reasonable? ... That’s not a real feminist!!” You are very good at portraying feminists the way you want to see them.
/r/MensRights18/01/19 06:34 AM
0

Exactly— if that is wrong, this should be too.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 12:17 AM
0

Your inability to understand is your problem — let other people make up their own minds and answer as they please.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 06:12 PM
0

There’s nothing to expose if there is nothing to hide. I’m a reddit user just like the rest. If you’re as unbiased as you preach, you’d be open for discussion. But you’re not, and you hate to be reminded of that, which is why you live to call attention to any posts that might invite disagreement. I don’t see you activating on the posts that are blatantly hateful. You don’t give a shit about human rights — you’re here to shit on people to make yourself feel better; you’re not here to solve proble…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 05:01 PM
0

This is not always true, and you know it. Who makes up a larger portion of perpetrators and victims in war crimes, murders, assault and battery? — men on men violence. It exists.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 04:22 PM
-1

People are answering the question to their liking, don’t you worry. I have and will continue to gauge as many responses as possible. Go back to hating yourself, perplexed. Are you attempting to incite censorship? A question is a question. Hello, free speech? What are we, snowflakes here?
/r/MensRights15/01/19 03:59 PM
0

You are playing right into the politics here, and you don’t even know it. According to this logic, I could argue that we must put black American kids in a class and teach them not to rape and kill and steal when they grow up. When people are gonna call me racist for that I'm just gonna say "If we find that traits X and Y are particularly detrimental, we attempt to shift their influence by way of things like, say, social and political movements". That is precisely why things like affirmative acti…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 09:20 AM
0

The ideas they stand for are most certainly in use.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 03:31 AM
1

Excuse me, I understand you’re actively trying to avoid the basis of the argument, but that’s not going to cut it: Can you tell me what is offensive or wrong about what these two terms stand for? And why they don’t merit discussion? “Hehdbrudb” — the subset of masculine characteristics, traits, and expectations that are detrimental “Hdhdhrhd” — the subset of feminine characteristics, traits, and expectations that are detrimental
/r/MensRights15/01/19 03:26 AM
0

What is wrong with toxic masculinity is that it is used in a way that implies men have an innate potential for toxicity. “Innate potential” is essentially the equivalent of saying “human beings have the natural possibility of becoming.” Yes, we all possess the potential to become. That is what it means to be human. Unless society tells me what's right, I am expected to become toxic. That is how social conditioning works. The environment in which you are born, E, exists in a certain state — a sta…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 02:40 AM
1

It doesn't change the fact that the phrase "toxic masculinity" is offensive to men. Why do you insist on using it, despite being told many times why it's wrong? Say we rename it “xhbehxbdh”— a made up, gender neutral term. Can we talk about it then?
/r/MensRights15/01/19 02:30 AM
1

Because we are convinced by the chorus: where you choose to put your attention is not neutral, and representation matters. If this post is contained within r/MensRights, isn’t it reasonable to assume you are surrounded by a community of users who understand gendered bias? Who can approach the question level-headedly? If anywhere, this should be the safest place to have these discussions, as at least they are being directed at the group of people in concern. If asking the question is detrimental …
/r/MensRights14/01/19 10:51 PM
1

Take time to introspect on that than making more silly posts. Interesting you assume I haven’t read the “better rated comments,” or taken the time to reflect on what they’re saying. I’m specifically targeting my interaction with you. I’m asking — you— what are the men’s rights you’re advocating for?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:43 PM
1

The ideology you represent is your face here. And that face is toxic for men and women equally, it is a burden on society's forward progress now. Lot of human life, resources are being needlessly wasted to appease your ilk. Thankfully, world have started to recognize all that at least slightly. You just throw empty content with no real backing. What aspect of anything I have ever said suggests “toxicity”? What part is nonsense, political correctness?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:21 PM
1

Do you think there are any expectations for you that you can be harmful to yourself, if you were sane headed? I do. That’s what I call “toxic femininity,” and I try to actively address it not only in myself but in the women around me. Sometimes my words have an effect, sometimes they don’t, but at least I’m trying for what’s right. Do you do the same? Or is your penchant for righteousness just as insincere as it seems? You choose to focus your efforts on “exposing the hypocrisy” of the other sid…
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:03 PM
0

“Cult,” “toxic,” “control”— do you see what picture you’re painting here? Where’s the meat? Do you have any reasonable ideological disagreements? Do you think there are any expectations for men that can be harmful to them?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 07:33 PM
0

Which group has traditionally had more political and social power? Generally? Men or women?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 07:27 PM
0

Thanks u/goodmod
/r/MensRights14/01/19 07:25 PM
0

The phrase toxic masculinity should not be taken to mean all masculinity is toxic. It is a go-to reference for a culmination of behaviors that are harmful, those which are a subset of all the qualities that define masculinity— though let’s agree that the phrase in itself has a negative connotation that can easily be interpreted to mean all masculinity is toxic. What do you Love in a Man? Do you like that they exhibit leadership, assertion, independence, confidence? These are traditional masculin…
/r/MensRights14/01/19 07:23 PM
3

Do you see the problem with your question? Who said they don’t belong? Are all feminine qualities reserved for women? And are all masculine qualities reserved for men? This is what the “feminist” movement is actively fighting for. For people to not be assigned to expectations.
/r/MensRights14/01/19 11:48 AM
1

I agree with nearly everything you say. I only feel sorry that you have active members in this very channel who contribute to the attitudes that harm men. And they don’t want to hear that they’re part of the problem. One user: “Raising males feminine is child abuse. It leads to ineptitude and suicide.” Is this okay?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 10:03 AM
0

Where’s your argument if it’s wrong, please
/r/MensRights14/01/19 09:59 AM
0

The following qualities would be traditionally characterized as “feminine”: Sympathy, understanding, affection, compassion. By your logic — a male exhibiting, or being raised to exhibit, these qualities is not only against nature, but also immoral. You wanna talk about male suicide rates? Men are almost 4x more likely to die by suicide than women (FYI, those are numbers backed by people advocating for men’s rights in this very channel). Why do you think that is?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 09:54 AM
-3

Dude, you complain about man hating in every thread. Now you try to use my gender against me? Please tell me how you’re not being hateful right now.
/r/MensRights14/01/19 09:21 AM
0

Oh you’re the same guy who said men who exhibit any feminine qualities are evolutionarily disadvantaged. “Fucking weird,” right? You’re part of the problem. This is why r/MensRights exists.
/r/MensRights14/01/19 09:03 AM
-1

Only learning from the best (I mean you!) You don’t consider it rude to engage with people in an arrogant manner, asking them if anything you’re saying is “making sense?” I speak English, don’t I? Or maybe you can tell me, since you know better, no?
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:50 AM
-5

I understand, master. Thank you. Gosh, you are so much smarter than me 🤧.
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:44 AM
1

What if when you’re playing chess you constantly have the opponents supporters on the side, telling you you’re inadequate, that you’re genetically predisposed to losing, that you’re just weaker, you don’t belong, don’t even try in the first place. Naw just get over it, right? Life’s tough? Yeah.
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:40 AM
-1

I will grant you exceptional wisdom and say 45!
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:30 AM
-2

Good to see you are willing to have an educated discussion :)
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:19 AM
1

This is how I see it: the good aspects of femininity + good aspects of masculinity = ideal human beings. I agree that the toxic femininity is not discussed equally, probably because people think debasing qualities of an already disadvantaged group is just making things worse. (My take on it is: because men have traditionally had more influence and social power than women, it has been largely their sentiments to influence the expectations of the other, and so people consider masculinity as the ro…
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:18 AM
1

Dude I’m sorry, don’t you think this is sexist? Why shouldn’t we fight to change this? It’s “instinctual” because we’re conditioned to respond the way others around us respond. It’s learned. But evidently it’s doing harm. It’s making men who have feminine qualities think they’re worthless. “There’s no virtue in being harmless”.. just contributing to all that “nice guys finish last” shit? Implying they have no place in society, frowning down upon them? Isn’t that fucked up? Why shouldn’t people b…
/r/MensRights14/01/19 08:06 AM
1

I think some so called feminists are just not trained to see solutions in context of men’s rights. Feminism is just what the name implies — an embrace of feminine qualities. The idea is that men should also feel free to exhibit feminine qualities — because they are human qualities after all— without feeling inadequate or emasculated, but nobody vouches for this because they associate being feminine with being female. That’s why any discussion of toxic masculinity is interpreted as being “man hat…
/r/MensRights14/01/19 07:42 AM
-4

Sure, an individual can ~decide~ if something is offensive. But it’s always up to an external moderator to determine its validity and reasonability with respect to consequence. No, a male coworker can’t be condemned for harassment if his female coworker thought his claiming “the carpet is green” constitutes sexual harassment. The external moderators in this scenario would be people like lawyers, people in HR, whatever. Companies have policy on sexual harassment, and employees are trained to refr…
/r/MensRights13/01/19 11:15 AM
1

Dude, when you find yourself a partner who respects you, you won’t worry about this, because you’ll realIze these feelings are all exaggerated. The person who is right for you will want a partnership — no gendered expectations, none of that bullshit. If the girl you date is a REAL feminist, she will embrace these non-gendered expectations, despite the stigma associated with that word.
/r/MensRights13/01/19 10:24 AM
-6

Did anybody read this article? Why we acting like it’s rocket science here. It’s pretty simple— refrain from making comments about people’s appearance, whether they’re male or female or whatever the fuck. This holding the door open is just bullshit and mostly unrelated to most of the content of the article. For people who are still “super confused”— Do you open the door for anyone, regardless of gender? Nice. Thanks for being courteous. Are you opening the door for women just cause they’re women…
/r/MensRights13/01/19 10:10 AM
1

Very easy to brush all men and all women under one trope. Saying “all men”, “all women” — very dangerous. Some men, some women, — yes. For every blanket statement I can find a counter statement to illustrate examples of an opposite reality. “both men and women think men exist to cater to women” >>>>> ask yourself how common sentiments like “a woman belongs in the kitchen” or jokes like “go make me a sandwich” are. This is indicative of who catering to who? Do all men think they exist to cater to…
/r/MGTOW13/01/19 09:45 AM
1

When two people get married, they essentially exist as an entity, legally. There is no he or she, it’s “them.” You gotta problem with that — bring it up with the law. Evidently, this definition of marriage can cause problems, but it is at least founded on some reasonable premise— if you’re getting married to someone, you’re essentially intending to spend the rest of your life with them, to form a partnership, live a life as equals, yada yada. The Bezos were together long before Amazon even launc…
/r/MGTOW13/01/19 09:15 AM
2

When two people get married, they essentially exist as an entity, legally. There is no he or she, it’s “them.” You gotta problem with that — bring it up with the law. Evidently, this definition of marriage can cause problems, but it is at least founded on some reasonable premise— if you’re getting married to someone, you’re essentially intending to spend the rest of your life with them, to form a partnership, live a life as equals, yada yada. The Bezos were together long before Amazon even launc…
/r/MGTOW13/01/19 09:15 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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