TheRedArchive needs help
With 700,000+ posts and 16,000,000+ comments archived, and new Red Pill content being added every week, keeping TheRedArchive alive and discoverable to everyone is starting to become very costly. As a 20-year-old student who just moved out and is living independently for the first time, keeping TheRedArchive alive is beginning to cost me much more than I thought.

Therefore, if you appreciate the website, have gained a lot of knowledge and insight from it, and want to show your appreciation, you can do so by donating any amount that you want via the options below. The money will be used on the expensive monthly host bill and any future maintenance of the website.
Thank you, and I wish you all a successful 2021 and a good luck with achieving your goals and dreams!

Best, /u/dream-hunter

decades of feminists trying to oppres women has caused MEN to actually lose some priviliges or ones that men have never even had

Reddit View
May 16, 2020

1.Women have the right to genital integrity

Regardless of how you personally feel about the practice of circumcision (I personally find it barbaric, cruel and completely unjustifiable), the legal fact is that infant girls are protected against any genital cutting of any kind and infant boys are not.  Many feminists will argue that female genital mutilation (FGM) is a magnitude of brutality beyond male genital mutilation and while that may be true, I do not find the “it’s only a little bit brutal” argument to be very compelling. It’s like saying cutting off a toe is okay because cutting off a foot is much worse. Ultimately, the argument is immaterial to the fact that women have the legal right to be protected from having their body parts sliced off. Men do not.

2.Women have the right to vote without agreeing to die

In the US, citizens are free to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right to democratically choose their own leaders through the process of casting a ballot in an election once they reach the age of 18. Women achieve this right by the simple act of surviving 18 years. Men may not actualize their basic rights as a citizen without first signing a Selective Service card, in which they agree that at the discretion of the democratically elected government, they will take up arms and die to defend their liberty and way of life. The draft. Men may vote if, and only if, they agree they will face death if required. Women have no such obligation, but they do get to vote for the governments that can potentially send men to meet death. Again, regardless of how you feel about the draft, women have the right to vote without agreeing to be drafted. Men don’t.

3.women have the right to choose parenthood

Women have three options to absolve themselves of all legal, moral, financial and social responsibility for children they did not intend and do not want. Women may abort the child before it is born, they may surrender the child for adoption without notifying or identifying the father or they may surrender the infant under Safe Haven laws and walk away from all responsibility and obligation. Women cannot be forced or coerced into parenthood, but they are legally allowed to force men into financing their reproductive choices. In many states, men can be forced into financial responsibility for children whom they did not biologically father. As long as a particular man is identified as the father, he will be held accountable. Paternity fraud is legal. In no state is legal paternal surrender permitted without the express agreement of the mother.

4.women have the right to be assumed caregivers for children

When parental relationships irretrievably break down, current custody laws assume one primary caregiver (almost always a woman) and one tertiary caregiver (almost always a man). In order to win equal or shared custody, the tertiary caregiver must litigate to prove they are worthy of equal parenting, a proposition that is not only very difficult to “prove”, it is also very expensive. The legal presumption of shared parenting upon divorce – that children have a legal right to an equal relationship with both their mother and their father following relationship breakdown – is strongly resisted by the National Organization for Women (NOW) and other feminist organizations who know that women will almost always win custody of children under the default laws. In actual fact, men who can afford to purse legal remedies and challenge primary custody stand a good chance of winning, because women do not have the market cornered on loving or caring for children. So while the law does not specifically indicate that custody will be awarded to women, the defacto result of primary/tertiary caregiver custody law is that women have a legal right to be assumed caregivers for children. Men do not.

5.women have the right to call unwanted coerced sex rape

The original FBI definition of rape specifically identified women as the victims, excluding the possibility of male rape victims. When the FBI updated that, it did so in way that includes a small minority of male rape victims but excluded most male rape victims by retaining the “penetration” clause. Penetration of any orifice must occur for rape to have happened. The FBI does collect another set of statistics though, under the category of “other sexual assault” – it’s the awkwardly named “made to penetrate” category, which includes men who were coerced, tricked or bullied into penetrative sex with women they would otherwise not have had sex with. The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey similarly considers the two types of assault separately, despite the fact that occurrences are virtually identical. 1.27M women report rape (p.18)  and 1.26M men report “made to penetrate” (p.19).  By collecting the information under separate categories, following the legal definitions, women have the right to have their rapes called “rape”. Men do not.

the pay gap is also BS. while it does in fact exist it has been informed to people incorrectly

first of all, women tend to choose jobs that are more "family friendly" (i.e., that allow reconciling work and family life) or gender stereotypes (defined as attitudes and behaviors that society expects from women) assimilated during childhood that lead women to choose traditionally female occupations.

until 1980 women were less likely to have college education than men, with the subsequent negative impact on their income. but nowadays this is not the case anymore today, women earn more Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees than men, which has reversed the education gap.

Children tend to have a depressing impact on women’s wages. This effect works through channels: the pre-child effect (anticipating motherhood, women may choose family-friendly careers) and the post-child effect (women may change their jobs as a result of motherhood).

men also tend to work more overtime, take more risks at work, ask for a raise more often

the reason men get paid more is not sexism it is because men work more dangerous more requiring jobs this is also affected by the fact that men work more than women

Edit: I want to also talk about feminism being insulting and demeaning to WOMEN of all people.

1.The new Yes Means Yes affirmative consent law in California achieves a few astonishing feats: it turns normal, consensual sex into rape and it strips the accused of due process by requiring confirmation of consent at all stages of sexual encounters. Consent must be enthusiastic, ongoing and affirmed. Not only does this turn sex into a decidedly unsexy, legally fraught encounter, but it also implicitly requires men to obtain consent from women and not the other way around. I have yet to have a feminist give me a clear answer to one simple question: “I have never, ever once requested permission from a man to have sex with him—am I a rapist?” What underlies the whole affirmative consent program is the idea that women are emotionally crippled, fearful, insecure and immature weaklings who cannot possibly make their thoughts and desires clearly known to adult partners.

Feminist laws about consent turn grown women into slobbering, babbling toddlers who must be interrogated at every stage of the game to see what their thoughts might be, rather like trying to figure out which underpants your two-year-old wants to wear when he has forgotten the words “Incredible Hulk.” My, how empowering.


Trigger warnings are the most ridiculous, patronizing and infantilizing creations ever to come out of feminism. The general idea is that individuals who have experienced some particular issue (rape, fat-shaming, street harassment, papercuts, etc.) might confront an article called “I Got a Papercut and Was Fat-Shamed by a Street Harasser Two Days After I Was Raped,” have absolutely no idea what the article might be about, proceed to read said article and subsequently require medication to deal with the PTSD triggered by the memories of the traumatic event(s). Exactly how pathetic do you have to be to confront words describing situations you might find upsetting and require authorial permission to stop reading? Know what I hate? Reading about adults who kill infants. It makes me feel sick to my stomach, so when I see headlines like “Mother Microwaves Baby,” I don’t read them.

In the era of clickbait journalism, it’s incredibly rare to see headlines like “Unusual Situation Happened Last Night” or some other misleading or elusive headline that downplays the actual events. Quite the opposite. But feminists adore trigger warnings because it reinforces the idea that women are ruled by their emotions, are incapable of recovering from trauma and are just generally hysterical nitwits unprepared to confront adulthood and reality.


One of the most frustrating things about watching feminists deny that women can be and are violent in their personal relationships is that feminism is in essence denying that women are fully human. In order to perpetuate the narrative that men are violent monsters who must be controlled by women lest we all end up chained in basements, feminists deny the full humanity of men and women. The goal is undoubtedly to create a climate of fear that discourages women and men from creating loving, trusting relationships with one another beyond the control of the state or an ideology. But in dehumanizing men, feminism also dehumanizes women. Men are left with strength, power, agency and responsibility (which of course they abuse), and women are left with weakness, powerlessness, resignation and defeat.

The Duluth Model—which emphasizes that no matter what injuries a woman has inflicted on a man, the man should be considered the perpetrator—also reinforces the idea that women are equivalent to children who must not be held responsible for their actions because they lack the maturity and rationality to understand what they are doing. You don’t arrest a child for kicking her mother, but you do arrest a mother for kicking her child. When it comes to domestic violence, feminists consider the women children. Gee, that’s not infantilizing at all. The trouble with being human is that sometimes humans suck and they act like deranged, violent assholes and, sorry, feminists, but men do not have the market cornered on that at all

Affirmative action programs were born out of a time in which black students in particular were denied access to higher education for no reason other than the fact they were black. They had the abilities, grades, achievements and skills to be in a particular discipline and were denied the opportunity because of the level of melanin in their skin. Those were worthwhile programs that needed to happen, but then feminists got hold of them. They began to change programs from ones designed to address real, actual prejudice and promote a meritocracy into ones designed to force access for the un- or under-qualified simply because.

Interestingly enough, affirmative action programs that push qualified black students higher up the academic chain are more likely to result in those students dropping out, since being perfectly qualified to compete in a B-level school but getting shoved up to an A-level because someone thinks superficial diversity is a good idea means that a competitive student is suddenly facing adversaries he or she is not qualified to compete with.

This is the exact impact that pushing women into STEM careers is having. Women are encouraged to ignore what their natural needs and wants are, enter careers that they are only nominally qualified to be in and guess what happens? The vast majority of women with STEM qualifications are not working in the field at all. Money and time wasted, all because feminism thinks women should be forced into ideologically defined roles (Engineer! Astrophysicist! Chemist!) that meet their fantasies of “equality.” Feminism insults women by telling them that their natural interests are wrong and they are too stupid to know what’s good for them

If trigger warnings are the dumbest thing to come out of feminism, microaggressions are a close second. The very definition of pettiness, microaggressions are teeny-tiny irritations that women are encouraged to nurture into long-standing grudges until they spill out into hysteria and mania. Did you once go for coffee with a guy and it led to sex? Any time a guy asks you for coffee, it automatically means he wants to fuck you! Were you one time slightly uncomfortable in an elevator with a guy you sort of knew but not really? Men on elevators will attack you! Did a guy on an elevator ask you for coffee? Sexual harassment! Alert the presses! Asking women for coffee is a way to remind them that elevators are perfect places to rape!

What feminists refer to as microaggressions, the rest of us sane adults call life. Getting cut off in traffic, having someone snap at you because they’re having a shitty day, a socially awkward moment with a colleague, a stranger rushing past you and inadvertently bumping your coffee—these are not things meant to point out your meaningless existence and your powerlessness in the face of others. They’re just life.

The concept of microaggressions encourages women to think that every single thing in the world is, or should be, about them. It encourages breathless levels of narcissism, solipsism and just plain delusion. You know who else thinks that everything in the world is about them? Two-year-olds. Feminism encourages women to believe that they have the same reasoning and coping abilities as toddlers.

6.When researchers at Loyola University asked men and women whom they preferred to make the first move, 83% of men and a whopping 93% of women preferred that men do the asking. Any man who reasonably expects to initiate a relationship with a woman had better be prepared to suck it up and put himself out there to risk rejection, and potentially very humiliating rejection.

Is it really any wonder that some men, particularly those of lower socioeconomic standing, might mitigate against rejection by injecting some levity or a degree of inappropriateness into their approach? Poor men, and poor men of color in particular, are of the least social value to women. Women still want rich guys. Big surprise. And women want men to approach them. Now take a white woman and have her stomp through economically deprived New York neighborhoods with a scowl on her face, acting like she owns the damn place, and what do you think happens? She gets a few comments. And then promptly begins to shriek about street harassment.

Street harassment is the trifecta of feminist insults to women. Women are presumed to be racist, classist and sexist all at the same time but still encouraged to imagine themselves the victim. It is sexist for women to expect men to make the first move in establishing contact. It is racist for women to enter public spaces dominated by people of color and then sneer at those people for attempting to initiate contact. It is classist for women to enter lower socioeconomic neighborhoods and then behave contemptuously towards the people who live there. That street harassment video was especially infuriating for promoting a cluelessness in women that relentlessly insults and degrades poor men of color, all the while encouraging women to exult in their own victimhood status.

Women are perfectly capable of understanding race, class and sexism and acting in ways that perpetuate none of those things. Women are more than capable of understanding which situations afford them privileges and not to take advantage of those privileges in a way that dehumanizes and abuses other people. Once again, feminism insists that women are toddlers and whoever takes the sippy cup from their hands is mean and wrong.

Women as children, women as hysterical, women as irrational, women as incapable, women as selfish, women as unaccountable—these are all accusations that feminists throw at the so-called patriarchy. But when you put down the dictionary and look at what feminism actually says and does, who is it that insults, infantilizes and demoralizes women?

The broader culture treats women as adult humans capable of making choices and dealing with the consequences of those choices, just as we expect all men to do. Feminism is the social movement pushing to treat women as large children who need protection from their own actions.

The earliest waves of feminism fought long and hard to give women all the rights and some of the responsibilities of adulthood. I would like to see women achieve full equality by accepting all the same responsibilities that men do. The only thing standing in the way of equality that I can see is feminism. And we don’t need a movement that undermines women’s agency and adulthood.

Post Information
Title decades of feminists trying to oppres women has caused MEN to actually lose some priviliges or ones that men have never even had
Author japanese-bo1
Upvotes 66
Comments 12
Date 16 May 2020 02:19 PM UTC (9 months ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Original Link
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
domestic violencegamefeministfeminismclosesolipsism

[–]iHaveAtinyWoody2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

Some really good points made in this post. I may not necessarily agree with absolutely everything, but thanks for taking the time to make it.

[–]japanese-bo1[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

thanks for agreeing

but what points do you not agree with? i can share some light on it and have a discussion about it to reach a good conclusion

[–]iHaveAtinyWoody0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Off the top of my head, from what I remember... the comparing female genital mutilation to circumcision. There are laws in place because people were mutilating female genitals in their own homes for religious reasons and for "punishment". This is still highly illegal for males as well. Circumcision shouldn't be compared to this. Regardless of how you feel about it, it's still a practice that many (especially in the US) doctors approve of, and claim to have benefits, as well as being humane. There is absolutely no reason ever that a vagina should be cut up at birth (at least that I'm aware of).

In order for this to change there would have to be a law completely restricting or making circumcision illegal, and that's never going to happen (in the US).

[–]japanese-bo1[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

male circumsision is harmful and leads to a bad sex life

"If a man is circumcised, he faces an increased risk of experiencing delayed orgasm, and his female partner has an increased risk of not feeling sexually fulfilled.

This is the clear-cut conclusion of a new Danish research article, which has received international attention.

Some 5,000 sexually active men and women were surveyed about their experiences and possible problems with their sex lives. With a specific focus on circumcised men and their women, the results are startling.

“Circumcised men are three times as likely to experience a frequent inability to reach an orgasm,” says one of the researchers, Associate Professor Morten Frisch from Danish research enterprise SSI.

This is one of only a few studies of the sexual consequences of male circumcision, and in one area in particular it is groundbreaking:

“Previous studies into male circumcision have looked at the effects it has on the men. But scientists have never really studied the effects this has on the women's sex lives,” says Frisch.

“It appears that women with circumcised men are twice as likely to be sexually frustrated. They experience a three-fold risk of frequent difficulties in achieving orgasm, and an eight-fold risk of feeling pain during intercourse – also known as dyspareunia.” "

read more here

and the benefits are miniscule and it also has cons that is about similar to the pros

[–]mellainadiba1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

For pay gap, just start with the obvious.... if women were 20% cheaper to hire, why on earth would anyone hire women? These are companies who literally use child and slave labour as long as they can get away with it (as long as they can control the public backlash), they also outsource to other countries.... your telling me they could have just save 20% (more when consider benefits and taxes e..g. national insurance in UK) by just hiring women..... that would be amazing to for PR

[–]japanese-bo1[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

yeah true but that they would explain by saying "iTs sExIsM"

[–]QuaxDerBruchpilot0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Do men really need to sign a paper that they will go to war if necessary when they are trying to vote? This sounds absurd to me? I have never heard of this before.

[–]Rambow10112 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

I'm not 100% sure about the " in order to vote" part but at least in the US you need to sign up for the draft (selective service).

Edit: a quick google search says you aren't required in order to vote but within 3o days of turning 18 you are legally required to sign up.

[–]japanese-bo1[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

so it means i might have quite misrepresented with it but its true and its practically what i said just a tiny bit different which doesnt affect the outcome

[–]b1tchyBetty0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

They have to register for it or something

[–]dankest_taco0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

What's wrong with circumcision, it's easy to clean and more sanitary

[–]japanese-bo1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

its way more brutal that circumsicion.

now lets use the comparison.

is it ok to cut off a toe because cutting of a foot is more violent/painful?

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter