TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • 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/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/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • 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 Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Just some facts (Sources provided at the bottom)

adamdrewmerry

February 1, 2017
55 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://imgur.com/smHB1Fo
Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Just some facts (Sources provided at the bottom)
Author

adamdrewmerry

Upvotes 55
Comments 38
Date February 1, 2017 6:31 PM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5rh819/just_some_facts_sources_provided_at_the_bottom/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/just-some-facts-sources-provided-at-the-bottom.932874
https://theredarchive.com/post/932874

Comments

[–]ISOanexplanation 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"Homocide". C'mon, graphic artist, use a spellchecker.

[–]RoboLegGaming 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's obviously talking about the murder of gay people. /s

[–]Walter_jones 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Why even include combat deaths if women were not allowed to serve in combat roles?

Are the sentences for the same crimes or just in general? Because men are much more likely to commit murder, robbery, etc. Including stats like that will just ruin your cause.

[–]bufedad 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Are the sentences for the same crimes or just in general?

Same crimes. You should read the Starr Research on the gender gap.

[–]XMACROSSED 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women were allowed to fight in war during and after the 1st Gulf War.

[–]Walter_jones 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not combat roles.

[–]Rethgil 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you have stats that can prove the wage gap myth?

[–]Rethgil 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Walter Jones". Another 'coincidental' poster who regularly posts on reddit but practically never in the MRA area who suddenly shows up at the exact same time as a handful of other posters here who do the EXACT same thing. Ignore the issues raised, make a claim that's more like pedantry, then vanish. Last post here was again against the MRA poster "Why is only the father allowed to refuse financial responsibility while the mother can't?"

A month ago. And that was a one off too. Don't suppose you know the other lurkers here by any chance..?

[–]WillMeatLover 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why even include combat deaths if women were not allowed to serve in combat roles?

Because men's lives have inherent human value.

[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why even include combat deaths if women were not allowed to serve in combat roles?

Well if it was honest (which is isn't) one of the big drivers for casulties during the relivant period would be be the wars in the DRC and they don't care about "combat roles" concept. If you happen to be in the village targeted today it doesn't matter if you are in a combat role or not. It does matter if you are a Pygmy because that increases your chances of getting eaten.

[–]Ted8367 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A couple of remarks on the formatting: the picture needs more definition. It's difficult to make out the sources, particularly the letter 'i' in the first source. And "homicide' is spelled wrong.

[–]Rethgil 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This post is proving very valuable as evidence of the latest fem tactics we've been warned about in other social media/by mods. Fem posters pretending to not be feminists posting, use of their friends and families accounts to hide their true views and beliefs and to make it seem like the original post has less support, and using friends accounts for the same purposes.

They got caught lurking under their own names because its easy to check accounts. So they switched to creating new accounts. But the mods here caught them using that as a new tactic, because the obvious account names and creation dates gave them away.

So now the latest thing has been to get colleagues, friends, family members, partners and so on to either post things for them, or just 'borrowing' their accounts to post.

We MUST be vigilant about this as its the anti MRA posters latest tactic and call it out when we see it.

Feel free to share or tell others in your own words.

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Interesting. Since the original post was made and certain phantom and substitute posters were called out for being feminist lurkers, some of the posters have mysteriously vanished, while the majority of the rest have not replied once to questions about their posts or their strange and 'coincidental' timing of posts and content....

[–]adamdrewmerry1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I honestly didn't know r/mensrights had this type of shit going on. I really should have known tbh

[+]davidtc3 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Many more men die by suicide partly because they are more prone to using firearms in their attempts, as opposed to women's habits of attempting suicide with pills and/or slitting of their wrists.

[–]Rethgil 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can't be serious. That's the stupidest thing I ever heard. How do you explain the consistent suicide differences between men and women globally, in countries where guns ARENT EVEN LEGAL?

EDIT

"DAVIDTC3"

ANOTHER mysterious poster who comes up with a ridiculous obvious biased piece of information who hasn't posted here for at LEAST SIX MONTHS-but suddenly appears to back up other posters who share the same patterns of lurking....

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Some graphs are interesting but the final average sentence one does not accurately reflect any disparity. To truly compare it would have to be split by type of crime. If less women are sentenced for murder then obviously their average sentence will be far lower. We saw the vast majority of homicide victims were men and the vast majority of murderers are also men. Comparing sentencing accurately cannot be done on a general scale.

[–]Rethgil 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

Funny to see certain posters pop up out of nowhere suddenly to criticise some well established issues that reveal the lie about feminism and how privileged women are compared to men. Almost like the insane bat signal went off and a few fem lurking posters got organised. Or, as MRA posters have been alerted to, the possibility that some fems are actually getting siblings, relations and friends to post on their behalf to hide the lurking, or using their accounts.

"Yoohooboo".

A quick glance shows you haven't posted here for at least ten months. Maybe even for years. And are a housewife. I dont knoe whether to welcome you to mra as an unusal demographic or just call this out for what it seems. Er....

Edit.

Hasn't posted at all. Two years and no posts in anything like this area, on anything like this subject. Reported.

[–]yoohooboo 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I only pointed out a disparity issue with the last pie chart. At no point have I criticised issues raised. I was browsing this sub seeing what it was about after seeing a post on r/all. Thought I would point out the inconsistent data and express an interest in seeing a true comparison based on crimes.

I'm sorry if the comment came across as me complaining or arguing with the general ethos of the sub. I was truly interested in an accurate look at those facts. (I had no doubt the data represented a true disparity but was wondering how big it was when looked at per crime, e.g. if women got less time for assault but more for shoplifting etc.)

You seem to have made a lot of assumptions about me based on that and a quick reddit stalk. I am not and never will be a housewife. I have a career, I earn more than my husband (a piece of evidence you can use in future) and was truly interested in this sub. I didn't realise that my opinion wouldn't count because I am a woman and that I would be labelled a ... I'm not really sure what you were implying.

I was trying to stimulate conversation as all posts before me were ripping the first few charts apart. I was interested in the topic of data comparison that showed a consistent more detailed picture.

A look through my history will have shown you I really don't do the feminist bullshit. Equality is an important factor but it works both ways. As a teacher the welfare and educational gaps of young men is worrying and I would never condone making those larger.

[–]Rethgil 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

...and typical fem tactics alert.

First actual addressing of my points and what do you do? Passive aggressively accuse me of stalking for just backing up my facts with proof of your 'coincidental' actions timed with others. Whether you are a female teacher who self proclaims to be a feminist or not doesn't change either your views or the other issues raised.

And you 'happened' to see this in the other section? A post that at the time had less than 15 comments and 45 upvotes!? Is that seriously the best explanation you can come up with.

Try again.

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really don't understand why you are so angry I commented. A different post from the sub was on r/all and I decided to browse the top few posts after clicking on the sub. Surely you would be happy to see more people thinking about your message?

I saw a chart and wanted to discuss specifics behind it further. I disagreed with nothing... I never implied the bias wasn't real. I think perhaps you are taking out issues that have happened with 'fems' on anyone who arrives.

Stalk is a generalised term for looking back over history. I can see that clearly there is an issue here with people putting down what goes on but I felt I should reply as I really was interested. I haven't been to the sub before... the timing I can see is suspect considering other things that go on. However a look through my history should have confirmed to you that I don't go round ranting about feminism. I sit around like a sad bitch working and doting on my dog, moaning about eating from slate instead of plates in restaurants.

Perhaps keeping an open mind and pointing out what the user below you did would have been a more appropriate response. If I'd then gone crazy rant the fiery comment would perhaps have been called for.

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Also I would be interested to know what female tactics are...

(In all seriousness I find it an interesting topic and would appreciate an explanation of what it entails. You mentioned that I did it, clearly I did it unintentionally so would be interesting to see which behaviours society embeds in women without them knowing it.)

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Your passive aggressive comments give you away. Its like you just can't help yourself. BTW I clearly never said female tactics, I said feminist tactics.

Try again.

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

You said fem tactics. I just expanded from my own mind. If I really was one of these people you claim I am I would have just left by now as all the others clearly have.

The above comment was not passive aggressive, you have accused me of that twice. It was a straightforward question due to interest. I have not heard of feminist tactics is all, as you know I've not been around the culture.

I am genuinely interested as I have seen how annoyed you are over this and am interested in finding out more.

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

And the moment you ask me specifically a coherent question without trying to imply things about me or my mood, and address the point I made in previous posts, I would happily answer them. I suggested, as others have noted, that some fem lurkers were getting friends or relatives and so forth to post sentiment and arguments. This has been seen many times. So the fact that you haven't simply bailed doesn't mean anything. Perhaps such people would even avoid bailing and stay and make vague presumptions about people who called them out. Its also interesting that you've still not commented much about many of the other main facts in the original post. This is why were here isn't it? Because we agree or disagree or wish to debate it? Having not been here at all, at the same time as others, who interestingly enough, have bailed, you seem intent on avoiding debate of the facts. Perhaps you would like to comment on the other posters who coincidentally did the same as you but didn't address this? Since you keep claiming that the mere fact your reply 'must' prove you weren't doing that? Over to you....

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I would like to ask you legitimately and coherently about feminist tactics as you referenced earlier in a reply... You pointed out certain wording I used linking it to typical feminist tactics.

I have not heard of these before and am genuinely interested to find out more. I clearly used one earlier unintentionally/ unconsciously and am interested to know more so that I can self reflect.

I find it interesting that I used a tactic without knowing as I do not consider myself a feminist and think it would be genuinely interesting to reflect on how much feminism (to the detriment of mens rights) is embedded in women today who would not class themselves as feminists. I feel a discussion on this would definitely be of interest and in line with the ideas behind this sub - linking itself directly with how many mens rights are automatically reduced by societies norms and thinking.

I totally understand your frustration with situations you stated with feminists bombarding this sub to insult and put down information and ideals shared. Perhaps I took offense unnecessarily due to this and became sensitive without realising fully. I would honestly wish to put previous animosity that has sprung up due to misconceptions behind us and discuss the question I posted above about feminist tactics. Perhaps a fresh start on both sides and a discussion on that question along with advice would be a good move?

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Don't know what to teell you buddy but as I said, I personally held no animosity towards you. I'm sorry you felt it towards me for just pointing things out. And I'm impressed by the interesting use of logic where you claim you couldn't possibly have done any of the things I described. Because you said you didn't. Well that proves that then(!)

As for detail of tactics I've described them repeatedly. Should you wish to read even more about such things you are welcome to browse my previous posts. Don't worry, I won't accuse you of being a 'stalker' for it. I'm not deluded enough to do that....

[–]yoohooboo1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I shall continue to look through the rest of the sub as you clearly are unwilling to look beyond first impressions. I wanted to discuss feminist tactics straight with a person to view my own actions in comparison. (I found it rather unsettling that I used such a thing when thinking very differently of myself - I always viewed myself as an equalist.)

I can't prove any of your accusations aren't true... it's a simple impossibility beyond saying I didn't do it as you pointed out.

It's not animosity I hold, I think it's just a difficult situation as I was interested in the topic but clearly came across in a similar way to the nutty feminists I always despise. (Which immediately put my back up that I sounded like them.) I've always viewed myself as something different as what I came across as and have found some of the things you pointed out to me enlightening.

Rather than stalk your posts (which I feel would take a long time and not all be linked to the topic...) would you be able to refer me to a good post outlining the tactics in general?

[–]Rethgil1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think its better that you do your own searching as you clearly are able to, clearly spend a fair amount of time on the net, and are obviously capable of telling fact from fiction when you desire. Since however you keep still trying to smear me as having stalked you simply for fact checking some of your posts that showed you never visited the MRA section other than to rubbish posters claims, I think it best you aren't able to blame me or accuse me of things that I've done innocently. Will be interesting to see your contributions in the MRA section in future, if you do indeed intend to contribute, or to just derail, smear and so on.

[–]yoohooboo1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I really haven't accused you of stalking me and am certainly not still trying to smear you. You keep accusing me of this but I haven't mentioned anything negative about you. (Other than the stalk reference which prompted my fem tactics question.)

I'm happy to go away and research for myself what was meant if you are more comfortable that way.

I look forward to actually being able to discuss an issue with you in future rather than justifying why I chose to comment.

[–]Rethgil1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And yet every time you refer to "it" you repeatedly describe it with the word 'stalking' rather than admitting it wasn't an accurate choice of words at best. Isn't that funny? Perhaps you could discuss that.

[–]yoohooboo1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I tried to discuss that. I openly said I hadn't realised that was a feminist tactic. I then expressed interest in discussing it further. I hadn't realised you would want some form of apology by admitting it wasn't correct I simply didn't use the term referring to you again as I knew you found it to be dismissive of men.

Whenever the word was used from that point on it was in relation to my own actions. As in I would stalk or not stalk as it's simply the word I had always used for browsing back posts on sites like this. (After some reflection possibly linked to the Facebook term)

Throughout this comment thread I have simply tried to make up for different things I have said that you seem to have an issue with. However every time I have tried to engage in a topic of conversation not about my original screw up with the word stalk (to deepen my understanding) you have dismissed it.

At this point the conversation is going in circles, I took your advice and posted elsewhere, I joined in conversations and I gave my opinion. I've yet to find a post directly discussing what I wished to discuss but I'm sure I shall eventually.

Thank you for the help in getting started here.

[–]Rethgil1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"I hadn't realised you would want some form of apology"

Either you honestly can't help being passive aggressive, or you do it deliberately. Either way I think you've only succeeded in making yourself look very foolish.

I stopped reading after that point. If you can learn how to debate in an adult and calm fashion, get back to me.

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow I really overused the word interesting in that comment!

[–]sociopathwithrice 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

From the study, which you can find cited at the bottom of the image:

To summarize, equation (1) estimates the extent to which an individual who is in the same district court, commits the same offense, and has the same criminal history and offense level as another person receives a different sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or gender. This constitutes the basic definition of sentencing disparity in this paper.

From the conclusion:

This analysis estimates the extent to which an individual sentenced in the same district court, who commits the same offense, and has the same criminal history and offense level as another person receives a different sentence on the basis of race, ethnicity, or gender. Its primary conclusion is that after including more exhaustive controls than any previous study, large differences in the length of sentence exist on the basis of race, gender, education, income, and citizenship.These disparities occur in spite of explicit statements in the guidelines that these characteristics should not affect the sentence length.

[–]yoohooboo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So it is based on the same crimes. I didn't see that part. Not sure why that wasn't the first graph as it's certainly the most shocking to me. Arguments can be made for many of the others but that is a clear gender bias.

[–]geniice -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well the first claim is false and given the source only covers two wars out of the various post 1991 wars it isn't even capable of supporting the claim made.

Is there any reason I should pay further attention to this?

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Gosh "Geniice" funny to see you posting in men's rights again. You only ever seem to cone out to play to criticise. Interesting timing.

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