~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
tripona
[–]KRosen333 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Even had problem glasses....
[–][deleted] 47 points48 points49 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link
How is "grab her by the pussy" outragous enough to warrant the attention that it did whereas the feminist "The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race" goes by without any kind of spectacle?
And it never got any kind of apology either. Say what you will about the representatives of "the patriarchy" but they at least apologize for what supposedly offends. Feminists made kill all men into a meme instead.
[–]NUMBERS2357 35 points36 points37 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Because nobody running for President said the 10% thing. If Hillary said the 10% thing it would have been a very major story.
[–]McFeely_Smackup 63 points64 points65 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
No, Hillary just trivialized the deaths of men because it inconveniences women
Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat - Hillary Clinton
[–]NUMBERS2357 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Crazy to me how people can be so outraged by that quote and totally ignore when Trump called for the deaths of underage kids falsely accused of rape, and then refused to say they shouldn't be after they were exonerated by DNA evidence. Or that time Trump said he'd kill the families of terrorists.
Either way, it doesn't matter at this point what Hillary said, because she's just a private citizen now. Trump's the one who's gonna be President, he's the one we should focus on.
[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Or that time Trump said he'd kill the families of terrorists.
Considering our past two presidents have been basically doing this exact thing on a regular basis via drone strikes, people really don't seem to care as much as they should.
[–]NUMBERS2357 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
If people think it was bad under Obama, how much worse under a guy who brags about that shit. And who supports every military intervention in the Mideast there is. And wants to bring back more torture than ever, who is contemptuous of individual liberties and has praised dictators specifically for their violation of same, etc.
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
If people think it was bad under Obama, how much worse under a guy who brags about that shit.
You missed my point, people largely don't care now, they won't care under Trump. Furthermore the assertion that drone strikes would somehow be worse under Trump than under Clinton is baseless. Both parties appear to have have an urge to kill people in the Middle East.
And who supports every military intervention in the Mideast there is.
Wait, are we living in a different universe? Clinton is undoubtedly more hawkish than Trump, mostly because she's the only one who has been a politician long enough to prove she's actually hawkish. Or is being a war-hawk only acceptable if you're dishonest about it?
And wants to bring back more torture than ever
Again, not really a valid criticism, Guantanamo is still open, we're still torturing people and holding people without trial indefinitely. That's not really a partisan issue. Again is supporting the use of torture only acceptable if you keep quiet about it?
who is contemptuous of individual liberties
I don't remember that part of his speeches. Do you have an example? Hilary seemed quite contemptuous of individual liberties when you actually look at her record.
has praised dictators specifically for their violation of same
He praised Putin, was it specifically because he violates individual rights?
I heard the exact same talking points as you repeated ad nauseum over the past several months. The only difference is I approached it with a critical mind.
[–]NUMBERS2357 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
the assertion that drone strikes would somehow be worse under Trump than under Clinton is baseless.
I didn't say they would be. I don't know. But it doesn't change my point - the people talking about that Clinton quote aren't going on about drone strikes, they're going on about that quote.
Clinton is undoubtedly more hawkish than Trump, mostly because she's the only one who has been a politician long enough to prove she's actually hawkish.
So if someone ran who said "read my lips: if elected President I will do nothing but start wars, I will nuke cities at every chance, I have personally murdered 17 people already" you'd say "but they haven't proven they're actually hawkish because they haven't been in office"?
we're still torturing people
Are we? Obama signed an EO banning it, and later a law expanding prohibitions on it, and I haven't heard people allege he violated them. GITMO is open, due to Congressional pressure from mostly Republicans and some more moderate Dems, I don't see how that's possibly a mark against liberal Democrats like Obama or Clinton.
Trump said he'd bring back worse than before.
Do you have an example?
National stop and frisk, banning/surveilling Muslims, saying he'd ignore courts in carrying out mass deportations, expanded NSA powers, wants to weaken first amendment protections against overly-broad libel laws.
Yes! Although I was thinking of what he said about Saddam:
Saddam Hussein was a bad guy. Right? He was a bad guy, really bad guy. But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights — they didn't talk, they were a terrorist, it was over
But as for Putin:
"He is really very much of a leader," Trump told NBC's Matt Lauer last week. "I mean, you can say, 'Oh, isn't that a terrible thing.' The man has very strong control over a country."
and
Co-host Joe Scarborough then asked Trump what he thought about the number of high-profile murders of journalists who have been critical of Putin. “He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader, you know unlike what we have in this country,” Trump responded.
And about Tiananmen Square:
When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it, then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength
later calling it a "riot".
More generally about Trump: Hillary's not gonna be President. If your argument is "Trump sucks, but Hillary would be worse", even if we disagree on the second part, it's now irrelevant. If that's your argument you should be on the anti-Trump side now.
[–]enjoycarrots -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Just felt like an upvote wasn't enough to commend this comment that I completely agree with. Presented much better than I could.
[–]Cristoff13 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Didn't Trump criticize Obama's intervention in Libya as excessive, and then turn around and promise a US ground invasion of Syria (but it would all be over very quickly!). Hopefully like most of his other big promises he was just blowing smoke out his ass on that one. For all his positive qualities, Trump has a habit of saying some stupid shit.
[–]NUMBERS2357 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
He also called for intervening in Libya on Twitter before Obama did so.
[–]Blutarg -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Amen.
[–]BoozeBumAddict 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
To be fair women only find 10% of men sexually attractive. They could do very well if the other 90% just disappeared. Women only want sex with those top genetic 10%. It's evolutionary biology.
[–]Rolten 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Are you serious?
Are we just supposed to ignore real life and somehow believe that women are only attracted 10% of the men?
I really hope I'm being massively baited here. If so, please use a /s, because on this subreddit there tends to be a rather thin line between MRAs and delusional/idiotic/crazy/sexist persons.
[–]Dnile1000BC 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
It's not 90% of men that are unattractive that's completely false. It's 80%.
source: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/
[–]Rolten 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Thanks for the data. It's interesting, but I always wonder how it applies to real life though.
Almost every man I know is capable of finding a woman that finds him attractive. There's the exceptions (whether that be 10 or 20%) but most are capable of finding a girlfriend.
In the data, are we just seeing the averages and in real life everyone finds the exception that they find attractive? Or are women settling?
[–]Dnile1000BC 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It does look like women are settling.
Here is a study about our closest cousins in the animal kingdom: chimpanzees.
NCBI/PubMed - Male dominance rank and reproductive success in chimpanzees http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19498952
In human evolution, you can also see this effect: Genome Research - A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity http://genome.cshlp.org/content/25/4/459.full.pdf
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It's probably not bait. Just an /r/incels guy.
[–]Rolten 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Wow, that seems to be a big gathering of the 10% of men that women find unattractive, not the 90%. And not unattractive because they might be ugly, but because of a whole lot of other things.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Hold on, now you're talking 10% of men that women find unattractive? What does that make the 90% then?
[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sorry. I meant a gathering of the 10% of men that is found unattractive by women.
[–]McFeely_Smackup 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
yeah, because women would just share their sperm pump with 10 other women no problem.
[–]BoozeBumAddict 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Actually yes. Women would rather share the same guy between each other than have sex with one of the unattractive 90%. In fact that's how one-night stands and FWBs work, women only want sex with one of the top 10%.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Dating website statistics are kind of unreliable for real life relationships, considering that the people on there are already picky. If they weren't, they would have found someone already.
[–]BoozeBumAddict 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And on dating websites all women get requests and attention. Few men get the same.
And they made a study in a university where the lined up a bunch of random men and asked women who among them they found datable. Results are consistent.
Men make millions of sperm every day while women make one egg a month, a single man can impregnate thousands of women, so it makes sense they'd only be attracted to a small few of us.
[–]feedmecarrots 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think that women do have a problem with this. Men should not have to stand there and take it indefinitely.
You can be against both!
[–]Bewolfs 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Do we have a more real example to this behaviour instead of a cartoon?
[–]Blutarg 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Jessica Valenti: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bt0kdE8CIAIoXFy.png
And
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/07/election-2016-sexism-hillary-clinton-donald-trump
[–]Bewolfs 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is alot more convincing than a cartoon :)
[–]Blutarg 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Saved.
[–]Politere 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, fucking hypocrites. They're just upset that their "feelings" are going to be infringed by God Emperor Trump
[–]inspiron3000 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I am confused now. HuffPo is promoting #safetypin as a tag for everyone who feels "unsafe" because of Trump's victory. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/safety-pin-trump-brexit_us_58251b53e4b0c4b63b0c11a9?section=us_queer-voices&
Then again, HuffPo is attacking the same trend. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dear-white-people-your-safety-pins-are-embarassing_us_58278b9de4b02b1f5257a36a
Should I feel unsafe about feminists?
[–]sunfirepassionapple 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
im "feminists" #brosinthemist #killallmen ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
[–]sunfirepassionapple 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ah he lives! Good job mate, giving the MRA ammo.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh man.
[–]Gorkildeathgod 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Sorry but what the fuck is killallmen?
[–]fengpi 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You use Twitter?
[–]Gorkildeathgod 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
No I do not use Twitter but I know what hashtags are. I didn't look this one up because I'm actually worried about getting really fucking angry. I really hope that's something that's just made up for a cartoon and not an actual hashtag
[–]fengpi 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh, it was an "ironic misandry" hashtag that made the rounds some time back. It was hypocritical because we all know how they'd flip their shit if a similar sentiment-- even in jest-- were directed against women.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]KRosen333 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 47 points48 points49 points (24 children) | Copy Link
[–]NUMBERS2357 35 points36 points37 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]McFeely_Smackup 63 points64 points65 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]NUMBERS2357 8 points9 points10 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]NUMBERS2357 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]NUMBERS2357 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]enjoycarrots -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Cristoff13 -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]NUMBERS2357 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Blutarg -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BoozeBumAddict 3 points4 points5 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rolten 6 points7 points8 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dnile1000BC 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rolten 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Dnile1000BC 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rolten 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]McFeely_Smackup 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]BoozeBumAddict 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]BoozeBumAddict 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]feedmecarrots 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NUMBERS2357 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Bewolfs 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Blutarg 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Bewolfs 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Blutarg 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Politere 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]inspiron3000 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]sunfirepassionapple 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]sunfirepassionapple 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gorkildeathgod 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]fengpi 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gorkildeathgod 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]fengpi 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link