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

Vera Baird has now posted a second sexist hate poster on her police force's Facebook page

JohnKimble111

December 25, 2015
271 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://archive.is/AME3Y
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 Vera Baird has now posted a second sexist hate poster on her police force's Facebook page
Author

JohnKimble111

Upvotes 271
Comments 42
Date December 25, 2015 5:30 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3y7491/vera_baird_has_now_posted_a_second_sexist_hate/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/vera-baird-has-now-posted-a-second-sexist-hate.964521
https://theredarchive.com/post/964521
Top posts by JohnKimble111

Women Should Have to Register for the Draft, Congressional Commission Says

6700 upvotes
March 25, 2020
/r/PussyPassDenied

BBC admits its viral “women write better code” story was fake news

6298 upvotes
December 28, 2016
/r/MensRights

Gender pay gap in modelling sees men paid 75% less than women

6153 upvotes
February 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Toxic Masculinity

5904 upvotes
March 10, 2018
/r/MensRights

After feminist cry sexism over BBC pay, official review uncovers more underpaid men than women

5789 upvotes
January 31, 2018
/r/MensRights

Controlling girlfriend, 22, who starved and stabbed her partner, banned him from her bed and took over his Facebook account is jailed for more than seven years

3826 upvotes
April 16, 2018
/r/PussyPassDenied

'If you tell anyone I've cheated, I'll ruin you': Cambridge don is cleared after his PhD student fiancee accused him of assault 'to get back at him' for calling off their wedding after she had affair in Galapagos Islands

3770 upvotes
September 16, 2017
/r/MensRights

Amber Heard loses bid to get $50 million defamation suit by her ex Johnny Depp thrown out

3737 upvotes
March 28, 2020
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]casusbelli1 51 points52 points53 points 10 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

For those of you who are unaware, these posters are ripped directly from the Duluth Model's power and control wheel.

Edit: As some have pointed out, I (mistakenly) originally posted a link to an edited version of the wheel. The original is unambiguously anti-male. Link is now to the original version.

[–]perverted_alt 16 points17 points18 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

First time I've seen that. It's fucked up.

[–]AWright5 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Why?

[–]Red_Tannins 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Maybe because no one showed him before?

[–]perverted_alt 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

yep

[–]AWright5 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

No why's it fucked up

[–]ECompany101 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

using male priviledge

Only men can commit domestic abuse

[–]Aarondhp24 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Even when the definition of abuse that follows can be carried out by men or women. Calling that male privilege was a gross error.

[–]AWright5 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I don't see that in the duluth wheel thingy, that uses both sets of pronouns.. when the guy said it was fucked up I assume he meant the wheel which seems fine to me no?

[–]Ted8367 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No.

That image has been edited to sanitize it. For an example of the original, see

http://www.theguardian.com/money/us-money-blog/2014/nov/08/domestic-violence-your-questions-answered

If you see nothing wrong with the edited image, then surely you must see the gross bias in the original. The original was used in all the arguments for the biased system we have now.

Whoever edited the image did a sloppy job. They forgot to change "Male Privilege"(look just under 9-o'clock on the left) to "Gender Privilege". This mistake has been corrected on some other images around on the web.

[–]AWright5 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh ok yeah I see it now. Fucked up.

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

Maybe I'm just drunk, but pretty much every segment, apart from the "male privilege" one, are things women do.

[–]victorymonk 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Because it's wrong. Source wiki. Ellen Pence is a feminist who co-invented the Duluth model and then later realized that it's wrong.

However, Ellen Pence herself has written,

"By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff [...] remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with [...] It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find."

[–]AWright5 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I was asking about the previous version of the link that the original commenter put up which used gender neutral wording

[–]PolackTopKek 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not directly, at least that diagram uses both gender pronouns. For some reason Vera Baird saw fit to edit it to be all about men.

[–]Ted8367 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Vera Baird saw fit to edit it

No, the editing was done on the example presented here. And clumsily too. The original wheel was solidly male perpetrator, female victim.

[–]Murican_Freedom1776 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Shit... I've been in multiple abusive relationships and didn't even know it. Good thing i am not in one now though.

[–]MonkeyCB 83 points84 points85 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So when a woman threatens to leave a man and take away his children, will these officers arrest her for domestic violence? /crickets

[–]perverted_alt 31 points32 points33 points 10 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

That law is insane.

If you're wife is gaining weight, and every 10 lbs she gains you remind her that you are displeased you are guilty of breaking this law.

If she gains 200lbs and you tell her you will leave her unless she loses some weight, you are guilty of breaking this law.

If you make most of the money and don't let your wife have equal control of it, you are guilty of breaking this law.

But it's so much worse.

If anyone you are in a relationship with accuses you of making them feel bad you will be found guilty. There is no evidence and no evidence is required. Read the following passages of this article:

"Police investigating reports of domestic abuse, are often left frustrated as abusers are not prosecuted due to a lack of clear evidence"

So, we have the inability of prosecuting someone WITHOUT EVIDENCE presented as the problem. This bill will solve that "problem". How?

"Under the terms of the Bill a person convicted of coercive control could face up to 14-years in prison and there will be no statutory time limit for the offences, meaning abuse dating back years can be taken into account."

So, with no physical evidence and indeed not even a "event" taking place, you can be charged at any time based on a history of someone's perceived emotional abuse.

I can't imagine trying to prove or defend against the concept of emotional abuse that just took place, much less a hurting someone's feelings or being "intimidating" to someone years ago.

This is absurd.

"When similar laws were introduced in the United States it led to a 50 per cent rise in the number of women coming forward to report domestic abuse."

WHAT? There is nothing like this in the united states. Someone please tell me where there is a law that defines "Emotional abuse" and makes it a crime.

"“It is a fact that for every single act of abuse or violence there are usually thirty or more previous occurrences which have not been the subject of any reporting."

Because they weren't crimes. This law will effectively make any argument or disagreement with your wife or girlfriend a criminal offense.

"“Coercive behaviour can be as insidious and as damaging as physical violence and this must be recognised in law.”

Said no person actually physically hurt ever.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11244275/New-domestic-violence-law-will-outlaw-coercive-control.html

Here is another description of what the law covers from a woman's website:

Coercive control is broadly defined as an act or pattern of acts of assault, sexual coercion, threats, humiliation, and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten a victim.

"You spending our rent money on new clothes is disgusting (humiliation) and because of that I'm taking control of the money (punish) and if you do something like this again I'll leave you (intimidation)."

Off to jail you go. lol

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You'll just have to skip the warnings and leave her as soon as any of those situations come up. You have no power in your relationship and as soon as it comes up you HAVE to bail out. It's not against the law to break up with her yet so it's your only option.

Thus creating more bitter and angry women who will hate men as a demographic for what individuals do and feed the Feminist war machine.

[–]perverted_alt 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not against the law to break up with her yet so it's your only option.

LOL....... :(

[–]zaiguy 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Problem: she can then say, years later if she chooses, that you coercively controlled her and you will be charged even if she has no evidence.

Best thing you can do is avoid getting involved with any woman, and whenever someone asks you why you're still single, tell them about this law and how you're protecting yourself.

Eventually enough pressure will mount from women themselves to get rid of this insane backwards system.

Until then, fuck 'em and rid your life of all women.

[–]SkyGuppy 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

According to both NISVS 2010 and 2011 men are twice as likely to be the victims of coercive control by their partner compared to women. 2010: Men - 15.2%, women 10.7%; 2011: Men 15.4%, women 10.4%.

[–]perverted_alt 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not surprising.

However, you and I both know how this law will be applied. It will be used almost exclusively against men.

[–]SkyGuppy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course it will. Anything else would acknowledge the agency of women and we know that cannot be allowed.

[–]MrFlesh 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes dulith model was implemented in the u.s. but was dialed back because in socal where it was enforced draconianily there were more men being jailed for "abuse" than the system could proccess. Even the creator of dulith model has admitted the entire thing was created based on a belief system and they thought the evidence would materialize once it was put in place, but it never happened.

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

I've heard of the "dulith model" and it's "implementation" in some context, but not in the context in question here.

Again, I would love someone to point me to a source where a current US law defines and criminalizes "emotional abuse".

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

At least most people are recognizing the hypocrisy and hate behind these posters. If someone made statements like this with genders switched they'd have been forced to resign already

[–]tomsix 37 points38 points39 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is insane. Women are the ones who can and do use their children as emotional weapons.

[–]Tmomp 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Combined with inequality in the legal system

[–]microflops 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Imgur for the love of god please. That's so hard to navigate on mobile.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What a great time to be married in the UK. Get out while you can, before the death camps open.

[–]ARedthorn 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For the record: Some of these posters do describe forms of abuse. The offensive bit is where they come from (Duluth), and how they always cast the male as the abuser.

Also, a few of them are described in an absurd way. Having complete and total control over the family finances, locking the other partner out can be abusive. "Running a tight budget" is not the same thing.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Another example of how putting women in charge just makes things worse rather than better.

[–]Ted8367 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

5 days to go

4 days to go

Gloating and counting ...

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

Vera Baird is creating MGTOW with every poster she releases.

Thanks, Vera!

[–]victorymonk 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

OP, how do we know it's Vera Baird?

[–]JohnKimble111[S] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

  1. She's the Police an Crime Commissioner for Northumbria so ultimately responsible for whatever the force gets up to.
  2. Because she hates men.
  3. Because she's so keen on self-promotion that she even puts her own name on every such poster!

[–]victorymonk 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

LOL, there is her name there on that poster. How the hell did I not notice?! Thanks!

[–]KazOondo -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Actually that one doesn't seem nearly as bad. I mean if a man did that it would be horrible. The only really sexist thing about it is the assumption that it's going to be the man, but that's all context.

Edit: What are the down-votes disagreeing with, exactly?

Edit: No seriously, if a man says he's going to hurt his children if his wife leaves him, isn't that wrong? Shouldn't that be a crime? Obviously if a women says the same thing that's just as wrong.

[–]JohnKimble111[S] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Baird has a long history of misandry. One possibly sexist poster is bad enough but the fact she's followed up it with this makes the overall situation worse.

[–]KazOondo 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To be sure.

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