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

Just some info in case you're stuck in a discussion with a feminist.

Reddit View
Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Copy link
PDF EPUB TXT PNG
aroh100876
January 17, 2019
35 upvotes
antifeminists
  • During the middle age, female leaders were 27% more likely to start a war than their male counterparts. Of course, the ones who were sent to fight were men.
  • Children are more likely to be harmed by their biological mother than father. Mothers are more likely than fathers to be responsible for physical abuse 49 per cent of incidents compared to 40 per cent. 71 per cent of children killed by one parent are killed by their mothers, 60 per cent of those victims are boys.
  • More than 20% of child sexual abuse cases involve a primary female perpetrator.
  • More than 40% of domestic violence victims are male.

Post Information
Title Just some info in case you're stuck in a discussion with a feminist.
Author aroh100876
Upvotes 35
Comments 13
Date 17 January 2019 11:51 AM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/711609
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/agx0ao/just_some_info_in_case_youre_stuck_in_a/
Similar Posts
Loading Loading

Red Pill terms found in post:
domestic violencefeminist
Comments

[–]d_theta6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy

Do you mind posting the links for these? Otherwise, we can't really trigger the feminists with our facts.

[–]aroh100876[S] 8 points9 points  (4 children) | Copy

Everyone of my points are just a Google search away to be verified:

[–]wolfmaster00711 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Thanks for this man

[–]ethidium_bromide0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

All he did was post google results...

[–]wolfmaster00712 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yeah, much needed ones

[–]Sprach_McGrachan0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is heroic shit right here. Thanks man.

[–]Diogenes--6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy

Great post. Here's a meta statistic: All statistics favor women, since the criminal justice system (from which we get statistics) heavily favors women: https://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx

So you can safely assume the real number of female criminals is 2-3 times higher than the statistics say, maybe even more.

Case in point:

More than 20% of child sexual abuse cases involve a primary female perpetrator.

My mother molested me. I saw a psychiatrist twice a week beginning age 8, but she never faced justice for her crime.

My feminist grandmother abused me severely to punish me for being male. I called the police on her age 10, but they didn't do anything.

Neither my mother or grandmother are a part of female criminal statistics. And I asked for help - how many children do not ask for help? They may not know it's abuse, since children have no frame of reference. They may also not ask for help because they think that if their mother is this bad, strangers would be worse.

[–]aroh100876[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I'm sorry to hear that happen to you.

And yes, I've always taken the statistics with a grain of salt and always suppose the percentages may be higher when talking about women.

For example, domestic violence perpetrated by women may be much higher, since while women are seen as victims, it's shameful to be an abused man and so, I'm sure most cases are not reported.

[–]Aro22200 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Yep. Statistics are very important but you have to understand how they are being gathered to understand how valid they might be.

I remember lamenting to a lawyer once about how women and men are treated very differently in court. They agreed without hesitation but said that we all carry that bias with us. In other words, it may be less that the courts are run by feminazis but more that there is an unspoken understanding between men and women that men are the protectors and women are the protected.

The courts do not acknowledge this human characteristic and so all of justice is skewed.

And I think that alone is the most dishonest / corrupt part about this whole thing. The courts know that you can manipulate memory and lead witnesses etc and all of that has rules against it so people can't be taken advantage of. But none of this exists for men/women.

The problem is not even equality, which is what men were pitched as to what this was all about in the first place and they were okay with that. The problem isn't that women and men will be equal... they were asymmetrically equal before and depending on who you talk to, women had a better deal in a lot of ways. Sure, men were typically the 'boss' and typically had more physical strength but men also had to put on their boots and march through mortar fire so I mean... men are fine with not being able to have babies because having babies hurts.

So I think the problem isn't that women want equality. It's that women want equality without equal merit while being grandfathered (grandmothered?) in to the old law which gave them all kinds of exclusions and benefits for being the vagina.

Psychologically both men and women understand the value of protecting women. The whole human race would end if we didn't. It's on a subconscious level that's so deep it's right up there with fight and flight. It has nothing to do with society.

Look at the market. Look at all those businesses out there. How many of those businesses GENERALIZE all roles within the company vs how many of them specialize? They all specialize! Everyone wants each worker to be really good at one thing. By fitting all these workers together you can accomplish something that even a hundred times as many general workers couldn't do.

And the same goes with the family. The male and the female have distinct roles and they have genetic advantages to accomplish those roles and genetic inferiority preventing them from accomplishing the other role. Of course you can work your ass off and get good at something you aren't gifted at but if you put that much work into something you were gifted for imagine how much further you would go. I think it's sort of like that. It's just a loss of efficiency which sounds like nothing but the results once you unfold them out to 7 billion people is untold suffering and tragedy at unimaginable scale.

[–]Profligate-Prophet0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

To add to this. The field of psychology is extremely flawed by the persons own perticular Bias towards the person they are diagnosing. Women dominate the psychology field... They also have female ingroup preference.

I was just listing to wondering wojack and he was stating how men are more likley to have grandiose narsassitic personality disorder. While women are more likley to have vulnerable narcassitic personality disorder. The later is far less likley to be diagnosed. And combine that with female in group preference you can see the result. ... feminism.

[–]Aro22200 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I hate to say this because it always gets shit on so much by brainwashed people who don't think about things but I think women getting the vote was a mistake. I'm not sexist, at all. How can I say women shouldn't have the vote while not being sexist? It's easy. There's plenty of psychological evidence showing that women, in general, are more likely to be agreeable. Meaning, they go with the flow. So if there's a strong push by the media to support a particular position it is much more likely that a woman will go along to get along than a man. It isn't to say that there aren't free thinking women or submissive men but we're talking about millions or even billions of people so the outliers are not so relevant.

When you have 50% (or more) of the vote belonging to a class of people who, generally speaking, are very likely to go with whatever authority demands at the time (including things that are very bad for the people) it's hard to really have a functioning democracy.

If your people are too ignorant (which is everyone these days) AND/OR if they are too afraid or incapable to think for themselves or feel that they DO NOT have some kind of duty/obligation/responsibility to do educate themselves and make selfless decisions with their voting power then any democracy cannot function.

And the reasons are not racist or sexist or any other kind of ism. The reasons are mathematical.

[–]Profligate-Prophet0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

You should add ..

*a stark majority of school shooters come from single MOTHER homes.

*70% of all criminals comes froma single mother home.

*Lesbian relationships have more domestic violence than gay couples. While straight couples have the least.

Oh and new studies are comming out that children of single father homes fare better than children who come from single mother homes... though the father is much more likley to die very early. Probably because of his sacrificial nature.

[–]aroh100876[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I was able to find information about the shotters and criminals and a little about single fathers vs single mothers.

I wasn't able to find information about lesbian, gay and straight couples violence.



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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter