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
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • 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

Already seeing a counterattack on the decision coming in the form of calls for bad behavior....wondering how bad the cities are going to be this weekend.

Hunter_Este

June 24, 2022
1 upvotes
/r/MensRights

​

https://preview.redd.it/d48jmefewl791.png?width=645&format=png&auto=webp&s=20c54efe679fe6dc40d8482c17da60d2f06c0410

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 Already seeing a counterattack on the decision coming in the form of calls for bad behavior....wondering how bad the cities are going to be this weekend.
Author

Hunter_Este

Upvotes 1
Comments 54
Date June 24, 2022 5:45 PM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/vju3qo/already_seeing_a_counterattack_on_the_decision/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/already-seeing-a-counterattack-on-the-decision.1120175
https://theredarchive.com/post/1120175
Top posts by Hunter_Este

Child Support Countdown. How much time you all have left?

45 upvotes
December 4, 2022
/r/MensRights

I'm getting so tired...

35 upvotes
March 31, 2019
/r/MensRights

Child Support. Help me see the light at the end of the tunnel.

24 upvotes
April 4, 2019
/r/MensRights

Don't make my mistake. Morale support needed from other men.

1 upvotes
July 25, 2021
/r/MGTOW2

Comments

[–]DavidByron2 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd support such a form of democratic outburst even without this decision.

Not sure the justices are the best choice. Aim higher!

The rich treat the rest of us like slaves. Everyone knows it.

Anyway -not really on topic here?

[–]63daddy 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As we’ve seen in the past, violence and threats of violence under the banner of wokeness will be largely excused.

Those who object to this decision and choose to riot, vandalize, loot, arson or commit other violent acts will be referred to as peaceful protesters and most illegal acts of violence won’t be prosecuted. Same with threats of violence.

Threats against a Supreme Court justice would normally be taken very seriously, but with this issue most such threats will be let slide.

[–]NTWM420 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

I dont condone violence but Pro life is not pro mens rights. You should know this.

[–]ElectricalTrash404 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Tell that to the male babies that are aborted. It's a big right.

[–]NTWM420 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Same with Female babies.

It would be one thing to say Male babies are exclusively being aborted but that isn't the case.

Also they aren't babies if they haven't left the womb. They're fetuses.

This ruling will only make men worse off. More child support, worse economic security for men, more women depending on men and public welfare.

This would make both men and women who are raped suffer by forcing them to keep pregnancies to completion and forcing them into the child support system. Will also increase amount of babies being given up for adoption and being supported by the government.

Do your research please.

[–]4morian5 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Even worse, it's not like this will stop abortions. It will stop safe abortions.

We'll go back to bad old days of coat hangers, alcohol, and shady "doctors". Of teenagers being thrown out or running away to seek abortion in another state. Of suicude and homicide to prevent an unwanted child from beimg born. Of orphans and broken homes. Of hundreds of women a year dying because their bodies couldn't handle a pregnancy but they were forced to carry it anyway.

[–]NTWM420 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly 💯

[–]MiddleReasonable647 -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Calling a thing a fetus doesn’t change its ontology. Fail. It’s a living being, and human, and not the mother’s body.

[–]NTWM420 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I disagree but to each their own. In my perspective it's developing into a human. Not yet it's own being, being able to survive on its own. Therefore in that pov it's dependent on the carriers body.

[–]MiddleReasonable647 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Newborn babies are dependent on adults for survival. So are people on ventilators. That proves nothing.
A fetus is an ontologically, biologically, genetically, and immunologically distinct creature from the mother. It is human, alive, and therefore a human being.

[–]NTWM420 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

A fetus is not distinct from the mother. There is no way or form for it to survive without being carried by the mother. It won't survive not even hooked up to machines. Premature babies are human. They could survive and breath on their own. And when Premature they are incubated and do survive. At early stages that isn't possible.

[–]MiddleReasonable647 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

False.
The fetus is not a part of the mother immunologically or genetically, it occupies a space outside the mother’s body in the same biological sense as the alimentary canal being external to our organisms. The fetus will be expelled from a cavity that it external to the mother. The placenta is a barrier between the mother’s body and the fetus’s body. It allows transfer of molecules from the fetus to the mother.
Biologically, the fetus is a parasite on the mother. Genetically it is quite distinct. The mother can even raise an immune reaction against the fetus.
Dependency is not a criterion for humanity. A comatose person is human but dependent on other humans for existence.

[–]NTWM420 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It cannot survive without the mother. Simple. The parasite cannot live outside. Not even with medical help. How is it that hard to understand.

[–]MiddleReasonable647 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A parasite lives off its host. How is that hard for you to understand? Biologists make the point that a fetus is basically a parasite, biologically speaking.
How do you not understand that a fetus is a separate being?! The genetics are different from the mother. How can the fetus be a part of the mother when it has different genes and is expelled?! Nobody claims otherwise except you lol.

[–]NTWM4200 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You just said the fetus lives off its host. So how could the fetus survive withoutvits host? It cannot. Either way I won't change your mind and you won't change mine. But facts are facts. A fetus during the abortion stage cannot survive on its own.

[–]MiddleReasonable6470 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Surviving “on your own” means nothing regarding your ontological essence. A newborn cannot live on its own. In fact, most adult humans cannot “live on their own”.

[–]Viesegel -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This would make both men and women who are raped suffer by forcing them to keep pregnancies to completion

In how many states would abortion for rape be declared illegal?

[–]Apellosine 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Seeing as many states have already started to draft such laws...many

[–]Hunter_Este[S] 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

and all the fathers who wanted the baby, but the mom decided to dispose of it anyway.

[–]biff64gc 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is kind the only logical result when you have a fetus relying on the mother for life support collides with bodily autonomy of the mother. Not much can be done to justify expanding the dad's right to raise the unborn baby until we develop test tube babies.

[+]NTWM420 -6 points-5 points-4 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not saying pro choice is perfect. Obviously the policy could be improved, but the current decision of making abortion illegal is going backwards not forward.

Ideally both men and women should have equal rights. If the woman wants baby and man doesn't, man shouldn't be liable for CS. Just like if woman doesn't want baby and man does, then man should be able to keep without woman being liable for CS.

This step backwards is bad for both.

[–]biff64gc 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

To be fair this doesn't make it illegal, it just gives control over it to the states. Granted I expect over the next day or two every rust belt state is going to have some form of a ban drafted that will be passed within the next week.

But yes, this is overall a step backwards. You're unfortunately not going to find too many people on a sub like this agreeing with us, however. The majority here have made it clear they won't fight for the rights of others if they don't directly benefit from it.

[–]NTWM420 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah true, it's not outright illegal but the restrictions some states will enact or already have in preparation for this make it extremely difficult. Not to mention psychologically harming as well.

It's unfortunate that many in this sub go to extremes. That's not advocating for fairness in men's rights. That doing the most just like the feminists they condemn.

[–]MiddleReasonable647 -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I’m pro life and pro men and pro family.

[–]NTWM420 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you're pro life then you would agree that more people don't need ti be brought into the world without taking care of the current ones without homes.

[–]MiddleReasonable647 -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

False dichotomy that you made. We can solve all of the world’s problems through mass suicide, total annihilation of human life. Problems solved!

[–]ThrowawayGhostGuy1 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Literally in the middle of the Jan 6 “commission.” Do they even know they’re gaslighting us?

[–]biff64gc -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, because the right were so peaceful when Trump lost the election and they have never lashed out at abortion doctors and patients. Also very quiet over the whole mask mandate and vaccine requirements. No threats of violence to be heard.

Both sides get upset and can get violent when rights are compromised. It's just a debate on how justified those outbursts are.

[–][deleted] 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Viesegel -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

If peaceful revolution is impossible, violent revolution is inevitable

A peaceful answer is possible. Just have a majority vote to allow for abortion.

[–]Anih1list 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Can’t. Direct federal ballot initiatives aren’t a thing. Instead, we have to go through a minority-controlled senate.

[–]Viesegel 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can vote at state level, right?

[–]NTWM420 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you know how the US government works? It's not that easy. Unfortunately nutjobs are in position of power.

[–]g1455ofwater -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

So pro abortionists are committing terrorism. Will the media be calling this a terrorism a threat to democracy?

[–]Anih1list 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

No, because a majority of people didn’t want roe overturned. The American Revolution was violent and democratic

[–]g1455ofwater -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

You're not allowed to commit terrorism and threaten democracy because you don't like a verdict from a court.

[–]Anih1list 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Actually, it depends on the verdict that court reaches. Would it be okay for the Jews to “do a terrorism” on democratically elected officials of the national socialist party in Germany before they were able to achieve power? I’d argue that would be a form of defensive and democratic action. Now, suppose the U.S. Supreme Court is undermining human rights…

[–]g1455ofwater 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Not treating these threats and actions of terrorism is an undermining of human rights, it's inequality under the law.

[–]Anih1list 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Ok, so do you think the Jews should’ve just let the holocaust happen? Or is there a line at which non-electoral political action becomes defensive and justifiable?

[–]g1455ofwater 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

False equivalence trying to justify illegal and immoral terrorism.

[–]Anih1list 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Instead of making a bald assertion, can you explain how the equivalence is false? Where would your line be?

[–]g1455ofwater 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

My assertion is correct. You explain what why pro abortionists committing terrorism deserve a 2 tiered justice system of inequality? Who else do you think is allowed to be a terrorist?

[–]Anih1list 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, I didn’t say anything about any justice system. I said some illegal violence is morally justified. I did not say these acts should be free from prosecution and conviction. Suppose some number of Jews assassinated the Nazi leadership. I would support those Jews being imprisoned, but also recognize it is worth preventing the holocaust even if some “innocent Nazis” get illegally murdered.

[–]NTWM420 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Terrorism is the countless nutjobs that have gotten weapons and killed so many in shootings. Thank Republicans for that.

[–]g1455ofwater 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Whataboutism to try and run cover for terrorism and inequality.

[–]MiddleReasonable647 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, the founding fathers gave us the right to bear arms. Even DemoKKKRats supported that for most of their insidious existence.

[–]NTWM420 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So right to bear arms gives you the right to kill innocent people?

[–]MiddleReasonable647 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I never claimed that.

[–]OozlumConcorde -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They're threatening terrorism on twitter, there is in fact a difference. How many left-wing assassinations have there been in the last 25 years?

[–]g1455ofwater 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It goes way beyond Twitter but even with that said you aren't allowed to commit terrorism on Twitter. What is the significance of the specific topic of left-wing assassinations in the last 25 years? whether it's 1 or 1 billion it doesn't mean pro abortionist terrorists are allowed to escape equal justice for their terrorism.

[–]ChxsenK -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They are just exposing their true colors, nothing else.

[–]xTheVyrusx -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

One half wants a revolution the other half always threatens to leave the country. How will the extreme left fight the fight if nobody is there to do it?

[–]Anih1list -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Woah, the Supreme Court only revoked human rights from like a sixth of the population. It’s not like policy can have consequences far more substantial than individual cases of violence, is it? Of course such a decision-maker shouldn’t need to fear for their own safety after revoking the safety of others. That would be, like, really mean!

[–]jamesbwbevis -4 points-3 points-2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women are pussies they aren't going to do anything

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