TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

z3ddicus Archive

View 0 posts and 30 comments by z3ddicus 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

Please explain why that is a stupid question.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:26 AM
4

What happened to your 48 hour ban?
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:16 AM
8

Stand by your principles of promoting retaliatory violence?
/r/MensRights14/03/12 01:34 AM
0

Who the fuck are you to say whether someone should or shouldn't find what they see as attractive, attractive?! I don't understand how you get from I personally think that making generalizations about the type of people we find attractive is not useful and actively counter productive. to that. I'm not telling anyone what to find attractive. I said that in my opinion, having preconceived notions about what we find attractive influences our opinion of whether or not we find a person attractive. I n…
/r/MensRights13/11/11 09:32 AM
1

Is this a joke? Where on earth did I say that statements that objectify support rape culture? Many of you seem to be making a great deal of assumptions. I don't make any judgment of objectification in my comment, I simply point out that the type of statements she refers to, do objectify. That is not the same as treating a person like an object.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 09:19 AM
-2

My point is that I think the author of this post is wrong to say that the people making those statements are treating women like objects, but I do think that statements like those do objectify. I personally think that making generalizations about the type of people we find attractive is not useful and actively counter productive. If you convince yourself that you don't like girls with blonde hair, you could dismiss a person that you could have fallen madly in love with had you given them an oppo…
/r/MensRights13/11/11 02:42 AM
-5

The definition of objectify (in this context) is depersonalize: make impersonal or present as an object. When you make statements about people's attractiveness based solely on a single physical characteristic, you are absolutely objectifying them. Does that mean that you treat people as though they are objects? Of course not. I'm not making any moral judgments about objectification here, just pointing out that this is objectification.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 02:30 AM
2

Well, not entirely but for the most part.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 02:19 AM
-8

I think I may understand your confusion now. When someone makes a statement about a specific physical characteristic, in making that statement they are ignoring all other characteristics. That does not mean that when choosing potential mate, that person ignores all other characteristics, and I never suggested that it does.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 02:09 AM
2

So this is universally true for blondes?
/r/MensRights13/11/11 01:59 AM
-9

Are you serious? Are you really not able to see the distinction between a person that ignores all other characteristics and a statement that does?
/r/MensRights13/11/11 01:42 AM
-7

The statement "I like brunetttes" does ignore all other characteristics besides hair color. That does not mean that the person who makes the statement ignores all other characteristics.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 01:18 AM
-11

I didn't say that you do ignore all non-physical characteristics. I said that when you make statements like that you are. Which is true. The statement "I like blondes" ignores all characteristics of a person other than the color of their hair.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 01:01 AM
0

This is exactly what I am talking about. You are making generalizations about an entire group of people that have nothing in common except the color of their hair.
/r/MensRights13/11/11 12:51 AM
-20

While I agree that women do this equally as often as men, I do feel that it is objectification to a degree. When you say things like "I like blondes", you are suggesting that people who have blond hair are more attractive to you because they have blond hair and that people who don't have blond hair are less attractive to you because they do not. This does completely ignore all non-physical characteristics and suggest that people are just objects with physical traits that determine their value or…
/r/MensRights13/11/11 12:17 AM
2

past FTFY
/r/MensRights26/10/11 08:56 PM
1

In 1890, the life expectancy for white males* at birth was 72.7 This is what you said. This is wrong.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 06:18 AM
0

Yep, and if you look at the column with the 0 as in the column that shows the life expectancy from birth, it says 42.5 for 1890. What don't you understand?
/r/MensRights25/10/11 06:08 AM
0

I don't understand what you are looking at. For 1890 it clearly says life expectancy at birth was 42.5 not 72.7. It didn't reach that high until 1990. Life expectancy has increased dramatically since 1890. As to your second argument, people were having children earlier out of necessity. It is far from necessary any longer. Evolution is far from perfect and there are huge numbers of problems and imperfections in humankind, like the incredible pain of child birth for example.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 05:58 AM
0

I'm not sure where you got these numbers since you didn't include a source, but they are very wrong according to this, and this What do you mean meant to? Meant to by whom or what? Being physically capable of something, doesn't mean it's a good idea or healthy.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 05:44 AM
2

That was because life expectancy was so much shorter so people were forced to start families at younger ages. It will not go back down.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 05:17 AM
3

You are welcome to your opinion, but as long as the vast majority disagrees with you and as long as evidence and experience shows us that sexual encounters between children and adults can have lasting damaging emotional effects, it will continue to be illegal.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 04:55 AM
3

Well, in my opinion, and the opinion of many others and the law, a 15 year old is a child. So you think it's okay for a 19 year old man to have sex with a 15 year old child?
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:48 AM
0

No, a child is not emotionally mature enough to provide consent. That's why contracts made with mniors are voidable.
/r/MensRights25/10/11 03:36 AM
1

I've never even played this game and it was glaringly obvious to me that this was a joke describing an in-game situation.
/r/MensRights23/10/11 11:09 AM
-2

Edit 2: There are also two reasons I really don't care. First, regardless of my positions, I have the karma to make sure that no matter what I say that I'm not seen as a troll when I make them. I also have other accounts with much, much greater karma counts if karma somehow became an issue. I just don't think it's worth looking at in the first point. Second, when the day crew comes on they'll probably agree with me here. The night crew is generally far more condemning, pedantic, and assholish th…
/r/MensRights23/10/11 10:56 AM
-1

What evidence is there that someone acted irresponsibly? What evidence is there that this would have played out differently had the child been female?
/r/MensRights23/10/11 10:54 AM
-3

But that doesn't explain the downvotes. Downvotes are for comments that add nothing to the discussion, they are most certainly not for opinions you disagree with. We use our words for those.
/r/MensRights23/10/11 09:49 AM
1

Based on the article, I'd have to say that I agree with Dr. Buckley. If a surgeon assisted with the operation in Ireland and performed it in Pakistan, why would it not be safe to assume he would be capable of doing it himself? More importantly, how could you begin to suggest that this story has anything to do with gender discrimination?
/r/MensRights23/10/11 09:42 AM
-1

Can someone please explain why this post is being downvoted?
/r/MensRights23/10/11 09:39 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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