~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Cyborg_Genos
[–]cryptotim7072618 points19 points20 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I said in a reply on another post that they are just pissing of the deciding vote for all their future lawsuits.
[–]Sir_manalot14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link
Quick question, why do MGTOWers want abortion to be illegal.
The whole reason we made it legal was to help curb crime and single-motherhood because women wouldn't stop having sex with stupid violent druggie Chads even if they had to keep the kid.
Which results in a lot more children who are genetically inferior, more likely to be criminals with absent shitty deadbeat fathers and single mothers who take our money via taxes.
Aka abortion is an important damage control measure
[–]DigitalDegenerate61435 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I don't want it illegal, but I don't think it should be an obligation as a taxpayer to foot the bill for every sluts unwanted fuck trophy termination in the entire US either.
[–]William_A_Bishop26 points27 points28 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
It makes women face more consequences for their actions.
Also the harpie shrieks that will arise will be hilarious
[–]Sir_manalot3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
Except we will be paying for it.
Is revenge worth more taxes or less freedom?
Edit: downvotes? Did everyone forget that our taxes go to helping single mothers and making more single mothers would require us to be taxed more.
Not only that but more unwanted children means more criminals, which results in more issues.
[–]febreezing_hobos16 points17 points18 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
We already do, so whats the big deal? It's not necessarily revenge, although I could see it being framed that way. Society is glorifying whoredom and shitting all over us as men to do it. They say they want equal treatment as men, which means accountability for you actions. Call their bluff. Give them what they say they want.
[–]Sir_manalot5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It is definitely about revenge.
Forcing a women to have a baby isn't good for anyone, especially the child who will not only be mistreated, but hated for even existing.
And society will glorify whoredem either way.
[–]William_A_Bishop2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Ehh, i sit solidly in the lowest tax bracket, the government pays me! I can support myself on not much money why waste time and energy trying to impress people i dont really give a shit about?
[–]Sir_manalot3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So why would you want to risk what you have for revenge then?
Without abortion, the government is going to see a large spike in single-motherhood.
They will redirect the resources they have towards these women while looking for ways to get more.
Which will result in you getting less in the end.
[–]William_A_Bishop0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh, i forgot to mention: im not american. And i doubt canada will get rid of abortion ever
[–]xopi20003 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I don't understand this either. The whole abortion is murder argument. What's your point? Would it make you feel better if I say yes it absolutely is murder. I still think that's a better utilitarian choice than forcing her to keep it and draining the system even more
[–]Chrh4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think if you start looking into it more, it turns into a philosophical/moral argument whether we should condone murder. Is it okay to turn of a machine that is keeping someone alive, because he wouldn't survive without it, if I hit someone with my car and they had a pacemaker, did I really kill someone then? It comes down to whether tax money should go towards killing people.
[–]Sir_manalot3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
People are selfish.
They want to "save" the child's life by bringing him/her into a family where he/she isn't wanted...which will most likely result in the child being abandoned in some way.
In the end he/she will be abused and will wish he/she was never born in the end.
Some people will say it is always better to live then not, but that is just a selfish form of kindness really....and these people are usually the ones who refuse to offer any help to unwanted children.
[–]TrudeauFucksDogs -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
"It is a better utilitarian choice ".
Said every mass murderer ever.
[–]xopi20000 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I am 100% ok with killing babies.
These dumbass tradcons think it's better to have millions of kids raised by single moms or worse, only to end up to be criminals. But hey "all life is precious".
Don't even give me the put them up for adoption bullshit argument. The foster system is so overloaded with children, I'd argue that's even slightly worse than being raised by single mom, only a step up from being raised by actual wolves. Besides people adopting don't want crack babies with fetal alcohol syndrome. They want babies with decent genetics. They don't want a kid where who knows who the father is and the mom can be found on 12th Street at night soliciting cars.
It's not like the adoption process is easy or cheap, like having an actual baby. I'm going to get the best kid I can. Adoption costs tens of thousands of dollars and takes months and is a pain in the ass. Don't think it's like adopting a pet where you go to the pound with $50 in hand and you walk out with a dog and still have time to make it back to work before your lunch break is over.
[–]TrudeauFucksDogs -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You are young, and dumb. Thanks for the wall of text. You'll learn.
Utilitarians are tyrants. You'll learn.
[–]Count_LongJohn 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
The benefit is that its harder for a whore to be a whore if she cant get rid of the evidence
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Whores are praised in our modern society.
So I doubt they care about being labeled a whore.
[–]Count_LongJohn 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
if that were true slutwalks wouldnt be a thing
[–]Sir_manalot1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The fact that slut walks are even a thing show that they don't care.
Even before abortion was legalized, women didn't care.
They started whoring right after the pill became mainstream. Abortion was legalized as a way to control the large spike in criminal activity that these unwanted children were causing.
And even when it was illegal, women aboetes anyway.
[–]EvilCoyote1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Why should women have more rights than me?
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Who said that women should have more rights then you?
[–]EvilCoyote0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I have no reproductive rights. Why should they? They won't provide me with rights, so there you go--now I'm "pro-life."
Why not go in the other direction and give men more rights over fatherhood? Like the ability to choose to be responsible as the father or not.
And as for the reason why they should have birth control and/or abortion. Because I like sex and would prefer to have the opportunity to have sex without a high risk of getting her pregnant every time.
Birth control isn't 100% effect and I would rather not be stuck with a unplanned pregnancy if the condom breaks or the pill fails.
I could just abstain from sex entirely, but I would prefer not to.
[–]EvilCoyote0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Because women will vote to take things from other women but not to give things to men.
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fair enough.
[–]guitarstunedgood 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
For me, I look at it as pretty simple. You can make arguments about what will happen in practice due to all the immoral behavior our culture permits and encourages and how it will just make things worse to have these kids running around. Those are decent arguments and I don't disagree with them on the facts of the matter. The thing is, that I would much prefer to live in a society that respects life and values responsibility, where a choice like engaging in an act of procreation is not removed from the consequences it can carry. Where the fundamental base of an action so central to civilization and life doesn't have it's root ripped out from the soil by the state and various quasi-state institutions. When you make a choice to have sex, you incur risks. Those risks are vast, but luckily, you can also considerably mitigate those risks through various methods and courses of action. You don't get to opt out of the consequences after the fact because you rolled a 1 when you knew damned well you were gambling. It also opens a dangerous door for eugenics as you laid out. Eugenics by choice is still easily manipulated, they same way voters are swayed in a democracy. A state shouldn't need eugenics, even soft eugenics, to keep it's people free and tilted towards moral behavior.
If I could craft a society from the top down, I would certainly limit abortion to cases of rape and require some solid evidence that the pregnancy was indeed a result of rape. I would also not have the kind of welfare spending or programs that exist in much of the western world either though in addition to having a highly restrictive immigration and preventing other such factors that inevitably lend to such inflation of state control and deflation of personal responsibility. This post probably sounds like I'm super libertarian. I'm really more of a mix of new right/tradcon/libertarian, but I think a minimal level of state intervention in affairs concerning "sacred acts" such as procreation is the only moral approach for a state to have. Such deeply personal things should only be intervened in when it's an attempt to preserve their personal nature. As you remove these kinds of acts from their ends, they become impersonal and meaningless. Just hollow meanderings not much different than twiddling your thumbs or whittling a stick. Obviously all who have any sense of wisdom understand that acts of procreation are not like these other acts. They are specific acts that involve all kinds of biology that ripple effects into all corners of life in a significant way. They have the power to move mountains or burn cities. When you allow that to be forgotten, you not only degrade people, but you make your society weak and confused.
All imo, of course.
[–]Sir_manalot2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You would have to ban birth control and abortion to get the society you want.
Abortion was nothing more then a damage control measure to control the crime spike the pill caused.
[–]UshankaDalek-2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
1) Above any and every other reason, morality. I firmly, fundamentally, and on every level believe that abortion is murder. Murdering an unborn child is among the most heinous acts an individual could conceivably commit. I am not willing to change my mind on this.
2) To quote Rollo Tomassi, "Abortion is the ultimate expression of hypergamy--to unilaterally terminate a man's genetic legacy in utero."
3) Legal abortion promotes irresponsible behavior and brings out the worst in people. People these days seem to believe that sex and reproduction are unrelated, and feel they are entitled to fuck without consequence even if it means killing their offspring.
You should be fighting against all forms birth control first, then abortion.
For as long as effect forms of birth control exist, abortion is necessary to keep single motherhood and crime under control....it is why we legalized it in the first place.
Also, I don't understand your second point. A ton of abortions happen because the father doesn't want the child and abortion has nothing to do with hypergamy at all.
Do MGTOWers want a world where men can only have sex a few times and have to risk fatherhood everytime?
[+][deleted] 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[deleted]
As long as birth control remains legal, abortion is a necessity to have.
If you try to ban abortion alone, then two things will happen.
Single motherhood will spike and crime rates will spike dramatically again.
Many people that want abortions will still have them.
Just like what was going on before we legalized abortion.
You have to ban all forms of birth control if you ever hope to succeed in banning abortion (which is a fair and reasonable solution if that is what you want).
And even if I am using the strawman fallacy, using the fallacy fallacy to try and disprove my view is equally as illogical.
[–]Philosognostic10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Anyone else notice an eerie similarity to the Governor?
[–]betterredthenwed4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
OMG ... You're right! 😳🤣
[–]ManIsWalking2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Looks more like big boss to me
[–]starkfuture8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Because the right tried to co-opt most men's rights movements and now MGTOW - essentially anyone representing the opposite of the feminazis. And traditionally the right has problem with abortion and even birth control.
Problem is MGTOWers and even RPs aren't as deranged as the feminazis. So, brainwashing them won't work as well.
I believe the government should not have to worry about the sexual health of these cunts. If the cunts put undue stress on the welfare system, then they should do what is most expedient and cost effective including forceful birth control.
[–]Sir_manalot5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
What I don't understand is that the right hates welfare systems. But without birth control and abortion, welfare systems will be more needed and costly then ever.
We could gut both, but all the men from these poor households would end up forming powerful gangs and have the strength to cause severe issues for everyone else (which is why the right isn't actually trying to gut welfare).
We already have this issue to a great extent, which is why republicans are the ones looking into universal income systems as it is becoming difficult to build enough prisons to keep these men contained.
As they want to lower welfare costs, but want to keep the large group of poor men docile via keeping there bellies full.
I repeat not democrats, but republicans are testing universal income systems.
[–]Widerstand5434 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Welfare should be universal. Talking about helping the "poor" but actually helping women needs to stop.
I agree.
I think a workfare system would be better (as long as you work, you get enough to atleast survive).
Welfare punishes people who actually try to get out of the there dependency on it and many of the people who are on welfare would love to work or try to get into a higher bracket.
[–]starkfuture0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Helping is actually teaching something to a person that they can leverage to get a job. The food stamps and vaginamoney and child support BS has got to go. It can be a temporary state of things - every one can have a bad year. Lose a job and had an accident, sure we can help them get back on their feets.
But when a woman's livelihood for 18 years depends on the forced confiscation of money from someone else, it's got to go.
[–]divorcedbp0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is where you’re argument falls apart - you’re accepting the premise. No, the welfare state is not “needed”. In essence, you’re making a tautology - “easy access to welfare causes more single mothers, so we need to increase the size of the welfare state!”
End it. Now. Peel off the bandaid. Yes, it will cause short term social unrest, and a lot of hardship. But any negative consequences we will face today are absolutely dwarfed by the utter Armageddon we are guaranteed to face when we run out of other people’s money.
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Except it is and why republicans are not going to gut it (and why republicans are the ones testing alernatives like universal income).
If we kill welfare, the economy will collapse, crime would skyrocket and riots would start happening (probably resulting in a totaltarian socialist government).
If we gut it now, the only thing it would do is accelerate our collapse. And I would prefer to postpone the collapse to enjoy life as long as possible.
Just look at the current job market to get an idea, one out of seven prime aged men are not working...yet we still do not have enough jobs for everyone and many of the people on SSI and such are working (low tier part time jobs).
To be clear, I agree that it is shitty and we should of fixed this far earlier, but it is way, way to late to fix it now.
[–]MrMannheim6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Why are we still here? Just to suffer?"
[–]KC_weeden1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No more holding back.
[–]Atton_Risk1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
His strength in the darkside of growing
[–]GiitaFan9 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why Punished Snake? Can someone explain the joke
[–]fretit0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I just wanted to point out that he hasn't been accused of rape (yet). He has been accused for sexual assault, indecent exposure, and trying to spike the punch at parties where gang rapes occurred.
[–]Endlesscube230 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
[–]miamiedge0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Guys! Supreme Court justices are judicial professionals who make dispassionate decisions based on constitutional principles only.
.....*smiles evilly*
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]cryptotim7072618 points19 points20 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot14 points15 points16 points (30 children) | Copy Link
[–]DigitalDegenerate61435 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]William_A_Bishop26 points27 points28 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot3 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]febreezing_hobos16 points17 points18 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]William_A_Bishop2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]William_A_Bishop0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xopi20003 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Chrh4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TrudeauFucksDogs -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]xopi20000 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]TrudeauFucksDogs -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Count_LongJohn 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Count_LongJohn 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EvilCoyote1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]EvilCoyote0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]EvilCoyote0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]guitarstunedgood 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]UshankaDalek-2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Philosognostic10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]betterredthenwed4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ManIsWalking2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]starkfuture8 points9 points10 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot5 points6 points7 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Widerstand5434 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]starkfuture0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]divorcedbp0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MrMannheim6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]KC_weeden1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Atton_Risk1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]GiitaFan9 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fretit0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endlesscube230 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]miamiedge0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link