TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Judge rules that Biden's restaurant relief plan discriminates against male owners.

Vista_Seagrape

May 21, 2021
263 upvotes
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
https://thehill.com/regulation/554361-federal-judge-says-biden-restaurant-fund-discriminated-against-white-male
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Judge rules that Biden's restaurant relief plan discriminates against male owners.
Author

Vista_Seagrape

Upvotes 263
Comments 43
Date May 21, 2021 9:19 PM UTC
(5 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/ni36ne/judge_rules_that_bidens_restaurant_relief_plan/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/judge-rules-that-bidens-restaurant-relief-plan.1061272
https://theredarchive.com/post/1061272
Top posts by Vista_Seagrape

Reminder, a feminist organization is currently pushing the UK government to eliminate funding for male victims of domestic violence

438 upvotes
May 8, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Many countries still practice male only conscription, included so-called "gender equal" countries such as Austria and Finland

425 upvotes
October 13, 2021
/r/MensRights

Dear Menslib - we tried to tell you.

360 upvotes
September 19, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Homeless men in Los Angeles will be de-prioritized in shelter mandate.

326 upvotes
April 22, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

In the US, only 41% of college scholarships go to men. Men are already a minority of college students.

311 upvotes
May 17, 2021
/r/MensRights

Why are American men shamed for being angry about circumcision?

284 upvotes
June 23, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Dear Menslib- we've been trying to tell you.

248 upvotes
September 19, 2021
/r/MensRights

After the 2010 Haiti earthquake, the U.N set up women-only food lines. Men were left to starve.

244 upvotes
June 13, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Comments

[–]Vista_Seagrape[S] 74 points75 points76 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This article is about a judge blocking what was a discriminatory stimulus package; under the original language, a restaurant owner would have been denied the grant due to the way they were born.

[–]turbulance4left-wing male advocate 53 points54 points55 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I called this out when it was first implemented. Glad to see there is something happening to correct it. That was unexpected.

[–]hehimCA 27 points28 points29 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yay thank god. There is some justice left.

[–]thanks_man12 59 points60 points61 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Biden is extremely anti-male

[–]hehimCA 33 points34 points35 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He hates other men. Typical white knight. Save the women, screw other men, he gets all the adulation.

[–]enjoycarrots 36 points37 points38 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Some of his policies certainly are, but I don't think it's because he's personally anti-male as much as it is because he's a typically pandering politician. Of course, functionally there is very little difference. The one important difference, though, is that the latter leaves more room for him to be pushed on the issue if tides shift. Biden is susceptible to "bullying" and pressure. The left is leaning heavy on him on a number of issues, and has gotten some results from that. I hope that there will come a time when voices against these kinds of unfairly gendered policies can do the same, although our voices aren't prominent enough for that just yet.

[–]DefiantDepth8932left-wing male advocate 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I hope that by "The Left" you mean the intersectionality idiots, cancel culture people and "anti racists" only. Since most of us here are left wingers lol.

[–]enjoycarrots 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, I mean the actual left on economic issues and other various platform concessions, in a positive way.

[–]WanabeInflatable 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Basically it doesnt matter what Biden thinks, he's a puppet.

[–]SchalaZeal01 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He made the Dear Colleague thing, and gendered VAWA.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Basicalky he's old, straight Pete Buttigieg

[–]goldenjuniperleft-wing male advocate 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

How does biden tie into this?

[–]Singdancetypethings 43 points44 points45 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's his plan, though not necessarily his implementation.

[+]heimdahl81 -20 points-19 points-18 points 5 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

That the white supremacist Trump toadie Stephen Miller is behind this lawsuit and brought it before an extreme right leaning judge to get the ruling should make every left leaning person cheering this ruling take pause.

[–]enjoycarrots 16 points17 points18 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

should make every left leaning person cheering this ruling take pause.

Only if the judge justified their ruling with questionable right wing viewpoints. It's unfortunate that somebody as reprehensible as Stephen Miller is the one responsible for the lawsuit, but that doesn't make the result less correct.

That said, I'd have to look a bit more closely at the case to be sure. If the case was brought forward or ruled on in such a way that bolsters other extreme right wing aims, I might take pause. But, I'd want specifics on how that is before I condemn it.

[–]Vista_Seagrape[S] 30 points31 points32 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The case is the case regardless, and in this case it was pretty clearly discrimination.

[–]heimdahl81 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is literally impossible to correct persistent inequalities created by past discrimination without discrimination in the opposite direction. It's like trying to make a 3 foot rope and a 7 foot rope the same length by tying 5 foot ropes to each.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 24 points25 points26 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Indeed. Why wasn't it a left-leaning person who made the case for an egalitarian policy? How come that the left has become so racist and sexist?

[–]heimdahl81 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I would argue that the policy is egalitarian. It is helping correct existing inequalities based on race and sex.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

It clearly isn't when you discriminate based on race and sex.

[–]heimdahl81 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Past discrimination was based on race and sex, so compensation will be too. Might as well complain that they only give wheelchairs to people without legs.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

No because anyone has access to wheelchairs. Not the same at all.

[–]heimdahl81 -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

And anyone has access to these jobs. It's just that some have easier access (like people with no legs get wheelchairs paid for in part or in full by the government).

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

We're talking here about a policy that specifically excluded white men.

[–]heimdahl81 -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That is false. It prioritiezed other groups over white men. They were still included, just at a lower priority.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No. They prioritized minorities and women, and then ended the program before white men were given a chance.

[–]Kingreaper 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It does. Unfortunately it makes us take pause at the fact we're left-leaning while the right wing are the ones who actually stand up for men.

And then we look around and realise that just because the right wing does a good thing once every few years, often out of spite, doesn't mean it's worth supporting them.

[–]heimdahl81 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The right wing doesn't stand up for men. They stand up for the status quo. That includes men being thrown into the meat grinder of war.

[+]BuffaloBruce -17 points-16 points-15 points 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Yah, when I read that my bullshit detector starting pinging. Somethings not right about this case, first it being just one man that will be skipping the line but also with such limited funding (this is a half ass bailout tbh) priority is kind of a unfortunate necessity that I'm sure we could all understand as leftists.

It's not fair but it's attempting to be and those excluded when the money runs out should be demanding there's as well, bake a bigger pie and we'll all get a bigger slice.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 22 points23 points24 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

with such limited funding (this is a half ass bailout tbh) priority is kind of a unfortunate necessity that I'm sure we could all understand as leftists.

Yes. We would expect priority to be given to those with the highest need, and where it would protect the most jobs.

It's not fair but it's attempting to be

It's a far cry from attempting to be fair when it is gatekeeping on the basis of race and gender. It is really shameful that this correction needed to come from the right.

[+]BuffaloBruce -11 points-10 points-9 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

It is really shameful that this correction needed to come from the right.

Well that's assuming a correction is needed. Would you happen to know if white men are being denied benefits because they're white and male or as a result of their general socioeconomic status and proportion of white male restaurant owners?

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 18 points19 points20 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The policy specifically prioritized minority and women owners of small businesses.

[+]BuffaloBruce -11 points-10 points-9 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Yes I know.

[+]ilikepizza26267 points 5 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

Then why'd you ask?

[+]BuffaloBruce -8 points-7 points-6 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Well you're claiming the priotizing groups with less capital influence is actively harms white men instead of it being a leg up to those traditionally excluded.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What happened to treating people as individuals based on their actual needs? The government shouldn't be into discriminating based on skin color or gender.

[–]BuffaloBruce -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That is the problem, society and government at large HAS discriminated based on skin color and gender.

[–]enjoycarrots -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're being downvoted, but skepticism is indeed called for. When far-right people bring up seemingly good lawsuits or policy recommendations, there's often something in the details that really sours the deal. Every once in a while, though, they're just plain correct on a given case. Maybe they care about the case for the wrong reasons, and maybe their political goals in bringing it forward include things we wouldn't like. But, that doesn't mean the case itself isn't still a good one.

So, in the end, I'd want more details and explanation of how this particular case was unworthy, in bad faith, or harmful. And only with those details would I condemn it.

I'm feeling a bit too lazy at a moment to research the details of this, but I might later.

[–]BuffaloBruce -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So, in the end, I'd want more details and explanation of how this particular case was unworthy, in bad faith, or harmful. And only with those details would I condemn it.

Couldn't agree more and I would add I wouldn't promote it either.

[–]TEL-CFC_boi 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Ok, so what are the after-effects? I'm not US, so I barely pay attention to US politics, but does this change anything? A ruling against the Big Cheese sounds like a pretty big deal

[–]Morpherman 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Na, happens all the time is US government. The president has a LOT of power, but if something is found unconstitutional it gets shut down fast. It's pretty small all things considered so I doubt there will be much political backlash.

[–]TEL-CFC_boi 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So what I’m getting from this is that someone makes a political flair...but nothing actually happens

[–]Morpherman 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Kind of? The policy just gets blocked or adjusted, in this case likely adjusted to the new ruling.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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