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

Apparently, we shouldn't make misandry a hate crime, and if you think so, that should concern you.

KuAblian12

October 4, 2022
351 upvotes
/r/MensRights

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/misandry-men-hate-crime-women-sexism-racism-feminism-a8586591.html

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 Apparently, we shouldn't make misandry a hate crime, and if you think so, that should concern you.
Author

KuAblian12

Upvotes 351
Comments 74
Date October 4, 2022 1:41 PM UTC
(3 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xvfg0y/apparently_we_shouldnt_make_misandry_a_hate_crime/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/apparently-we-shouldnt-make-misandry-a-hate-crime.1135130
https://theredarchive.com/post/1135130
Red Pill terms in post
feminismmisandry
Top posts by KuAblian12

According to the Atlantic, we should unite with, not oppose feminists when trying to fight for men's rights.

253 upvotes
October 29, 2022
/r/MensRights

What are your thoughts on the notion that "men cause their own problems"?

171 upvotes
December 4, 2022
/r/MensRights

Why are international relief agencies such as the UN or UNICEF so biased against men?

46 upvotes
November 2, 2022
/r/MensRights

What are some societal standards that men are expected to follow?

1 upvotes
October 21, 2022
/r/MensRights

Why do feminists talk about how there is "more pressure" on women in society?

1 upvotes
October 20, 2022
/r/MensRights

Why do so many posts here talk about marriage/dating? Isn't that a clear violation of the 1st rule?

1 upvotes
October 18, 2022
/r/MensRights

If victim-blaming women for sexual assault is common, how could false rape accusations ruin a man's life?

1 upvotes
October 17, 2022
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]WeEatBabies 91 points92 points93 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Rules for thee but not for me!

[–]Wrathful_Spirit_666 35 points36 points37 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is the equality feminists are fighting for /s.

[–]lilsquinty9 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Didn’t even need to put the /s there tbh

[–]RepresentativeShadow 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Equal Rights Means Equal Fights. You Attack me I WILL not hesitate to Defend Myself. This isn’t the Disney channel where you can throw punches at guys and they have stand there and take it.

[–]MathematicianReal542 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then in the next seen, the women have no bruises or swelling of their hands. They also can hit a guy several times, but none of his punches connect (because we all know that one punch to her face would cave the whole face in).

[–]TheSnesLord 69 points70 points71 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"As a feminist, I confess that I am not happy about this. I am also well aware of the way in which such unhappiness will be perceived by many. Typical feminist, right? I say I want equality, but I actually want special treatment. I say feminism isn’t about hating men… but actually, it is."

The author says that in a sarcastic manner, but it's actually factual. And she knows it.

[–]paliostheos 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Someone said the quiet part out loud.

[–]DavidByron2 33 points34 points35 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This is good for us. Everyone can see that feminists hate equality when they post crap like this.

[–]TheSnesLord 23 points24 points25 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It doesn't help men much at all. Don't underestimate the gullibility and stupidity of Normies, and there's too many white-knights that are happy to buy into the crap that the author wrote.

[–]DavidByron2 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If the author didn't realize it was a big problem for feminism that this was going on then they wouldn't have to try to justify / explain it.

The problem is that just by trying to justify it, they spread awareness.

Of course getting feminists to stupidly defend themselves is most of the MRA strategy.

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

It’s not a very good strategy because it hasn’t done shit no matter how many times they’ve shown themselves to be dumb

[–]mikesteane 90 points91 points92 points 3 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

The whole concept of a hate crime is absurd. I can hate whoever I want to hate, not that hating will do me any good. A crime, however, is a whole different matter.

[–]urto373721 points 3 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

i agree. people aren't obligated to love you.

[–]Angryasfk 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. This really angers me. It’s ok for someone to hate me, but hate my sister, and it’s evil!

[–]elebrin 25 points26 points27 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The original conception is that if you are part of a racist or sexist group or harbor those sorts of attitudes that is based around hating your chosen group then you should receive punishments beyond the normal.

If someone pisses you off and you chain them to the back of your truck and drag them 20 miles down a dirt road, you need to go to prison. If you do that to a black person and you are a KKK member, then there is a very high likelihood that you are going to do the same again and you need to be put in prison much longer.

On the one hand I understand the desire to codify punishments in this way. On the other, I am concerned that going too far and codifying too much really ties the hands of our judges and justice system to be lenient when necessary.

[–]CawlinAlcarz 30 points31 points32 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

The original conception is that if you are part of a racist or sexist group or harbor those sorts of attitudes that is based around hating your chosen group then you should receive punishments beyond the normal.

Close but not quite...

The issue is that if you COMMIT A CRIME that has as part of its motivation, some sort of group level hatred for a protected group (i.e. not just individual hatred for that person) that you should be subject to harsher punishment. It is an important distinction.

With that said, I think it's a garbage set of laws because the inevitable "hate speech" addendum got added to the list of crimes as a result, and this was not a crime before and with good reason (hello, First Amendment).

Hate crime legislation inches us closer to thought police and moves our society towards outlawing speaking against the government.

[–]elebrin 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah - I was really trying to say that I understand the motivation, but I think it really ties the hands of the justice system.

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

Fair enough, but there are a lot of important distinctions that get missed when people think about hate crime legislation. Misunderstanding what it is about leads them to being blind to the inevitability of the erosion of their ability to speak freely and to be free citizens.

[–]Themesong12 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Hey man can u dm me. I am facing alot of misandry and sexism. Im new here so i cant send u private message. I just chose any random person to talk to. I cant even make posts...

[–]elebrin 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am sorry to hear that.

You need to find someone in your life you can talk to. Speak to your pastor or a man you trust. You should not consider me someone trustworthy, because you don't know me. I cannot help you.

[–]Themesong12 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well i agree but we can talk here if u want.. I saw a post about a guy who was attacked by a female kickboxer. He was not at fault but she was at fault. He got knocked out and recieved a concussion. When i talked about going to the police and reported it. PEOPLE started calling me musogynyst and sexist. And also to the guy who was the victim. He just said "I got hit by a girl, i have a hard time coming to terms with it... " and boy you cant imagine the backlash he recieved. Despite being a victim he was called sexist, misogynyst and people forgot the true sexists: his cousins who were laughing at him and making fun of him because its funny if a guy gets attacked by a woman. Now i am being called an asshole because I am supporting the victim . Its so sad that men are treated badly by people. The guy just said " I think i have been stripped of off my man hood" and people started laughing at him more and more. There were a few positive comments that told him he is not less of a man and he should go to the police to report but people forget that if you laugh at the victim he will ofcourse feel embarressed. That post made me feel afraid of people and my view of the earth is changing.

[–]Amazing-Bit6140 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can't trust pastor's either... They have a vested interest on keeping you in the indoctrination box and making them money/influence.

[–]Dmonney 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In the us, it was partly to get around local juries/judges/prosecutors letting off the KKK. They made federal hate crimes which state officials couldn’t just ignore.

[–]Huffers1010 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

There's something worth understanding here.

In most jurisdictions where terms like "hate crime" are used, the implication is not, usually, that hating something is a crime. What it usually means, as here, is that evidence of some kind of prejudice is taken as a significant exacerbating factor, leading to harsher sentencing, etc.

In many ways there's nothing wrong with that, even if only on the basis that it's the sort of thing that any judge would take into account when sentencing someone anyway, back through history.

Generally (not exclusively, but generally) you have to have actually committed an existing crime with prejudice as a motivating factor, such as beating someone up because you don't like his race, for it to be a hate crime.

Let's get this right.

[–]mikesteane 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

In many ways there's nothing wrong with that

Yes there is. There's everything wrong with it, because it immediately creates special groups which undermines the whole idea of fairness.

[–]Huffers1010 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not necessarily. What I'm talking about here is the severity of and motivations behind a crime affecting sentencing, which is completely normal. It was already quite possible to punish someone more severely for a crime up if the perpetrator was motivated by (say) racism. We never really needed what's been called hate crime rules to do that; it's a sort of legislative virtue signalling.

Now, you could say that a woman assaulting a man based on the fact that she's a hardline feminist fundamentalist and dislikes men is just as much a hate crime as anything else, but that the justice system is unlikely to see it that way, and I'd agree. Still, that doesn't obviate the principle here.

[–]Desthr0 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The issue at hand is that it is illegal to restrict the speech of the people, with a few notable exceptions involving actual harm to other people. "Hate" speech cannot be used as a punitive enhancement to meet this criteria because it is criminalizing speech that does not cause harm in the ways that libel, slander, and false testimony do. Each of these is criminalized because the speech is deliberately used to cause harm to someone.

Being a racist fuck isn't illegal. Being a racist fuck shouldn't be criminalized when a racist fuck commits a crime. Framing it in the language of protected classes is still questionable because unless the law is applied equally across all forms of hatred towards groups of people, then the law disproportionately targets certain forms of hate over others and may not criminalize other forms of hate that are equally vitriolic and not only makes hate speech illegal, it only makes it illegal for some people and not for others.

No thanks.

[–]Huffers1010 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Framing it in the language of protected classes is still questionable because unless the law is applied equally across all forms of hatred towards groups of people, then the law disproportionately targets certain forms of hate over others and may not criminalize other forms of hate that are equally vitriolic

Well, quite. If there's a problem here, that's it.

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

with prejudice as a motivating factor

And how can you determine what the motivating factor was?

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well a white guy hits a black man, it must be prejudice. A black guy hits a white man, can’t be racist by definition. And feminism is seeking the same. Men committing crimes against women should have heavier penalties and be a priority. Women committing crimes against men: much less important and should be punished less for the same crime. And certainly a lower priority for law enforcement.

It’s really like the justice system in the Jim Crow era they’re pushing. Black man commits crime against white woman: must find and hang his black arse. Black guy commits crime against other black guy? Shrug shoulders. This is what “hate crimes” today has become. A list of favoured groups who are deemed of more worth than others.

[–]Huffers1010 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's what the court case is for. Ultimately sentencing is in the gift of the judge; I guess the clue is in the name.

Either way, I'm not taking a position on the state of the law, or whether this is good or bad, fair or unfair; I'm just stating what the law is.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The problem is that assumptions will be made, based on stereotypes or unrelated things that the defendant may have done or said.

[–]Huffers1010 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure, very possibly. I'm not here to argue that it's good law, although as I say, it's pretty much a restatement of the status quo that's existed for years.

As far as I'm aware courts are generally quite careful about letting juries know about someone's past, on the basis that they're supposed to be considering what someone's done on this occasion, not what everyone thinks that person is likely to have done based on what's happened in the past. This is one reason that rape complainants are sometimes frustrated by being the tenth person to make a complaint but being unable to mention that because it's felt to be prejudicial to a fair trial. Frankly, I can see both sides of that. Hugely difficult area. Applies differently to sentencing decisions, as far as I know.

In the end, it's really a judgement call as to whether someone beating someone else up while screaming racist abuse at the victim is worse than just beating that person up while not saying a word. Personally I think it probably is worse, but morals have never had many absolute characteristics and it is very much in the eye of the beholder.

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

it's the sort of thing that any judge would take into account when sentencing someone anyway, back through history.

Mens rea seems a forgotten idea these days.

[–]PrimeWolf88 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes and no. Some people are certainly targeted based on something they can't control, such as sexuality or race. The problem seems to be the slippery slope of constantly expanding this list to stupid things that are a choice or a belief.

[–]Desthr0 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The slippery slope is the fact that the law never gets applied equally nor consistently. It only criminalizes hate speech and only for some people and not others. The people are supposed to be protected equally under the law.

[–]PrimeWolf88 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've always agreed with Peter Tatchell or Jordan Peterson that speech policing will become a serious problem.

When I expressed support for hate crime laws I meant physical acts, not speech. Speech should only be policed in very extreme situations (like threats, slander, or calling for violence). People being targeted for innate characteristics does happen and they should be protected from people who would target them based on that.

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

You're not more or less a victim based on the motivations of your victimizer.

[–]PrimeWolf88 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Every single one of the 9 comments to that article is critical of the author or her sexist viewpoint. Great to see that toxic feminism is rejected by society.

[–]Skywarriorad 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This needs to be at the top. It’ll help guys faith restore in society if they read the comments. There was only one i couldnt really fully understand, but none of them condoned what she was saying and even calling her out for her hypocritical text. One even recommending removing the published article

[–]RedditIsProMisandry 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It will also destroy your faith in humanity if you look at the comments of most articles.

[–]PrimeWolf88 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I read the Daily Mail online and am frequently downvoted for things which are either common sense or which no reasonable person could disagree with.

[–]PrimeWolf88 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

These hate mongers don't have the audience or support they think they do in the real world. Twitter mobs don't translate into real world support.

[–]DavidByron2 19 points20 points21 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Btw if anyone reading this thinks there are such things as "nice" feminists could they explain why none of these nice feminists are campaigning for the proposed law banning "misogyny" to be sex neutral?

It sure is funny how you never see people who think nice feminists exist in these threads.

[–]Angryasfk 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think there are brainwashed and deluded women who think feminism is something other than what it is. The Gender Studies brigade and others: well royalty has more sympathy for the working class than they have for men! In 1926 King George V said to some moaning about striking coal miners “Try living for a week on their wages before you criticise them”. I cannot imagine a single leading feminist saying anything even remotely like that about the struggles men have. Which is why I’m so dismissive of their occasional rumbles about “capitalism”. Those types are implacable enemies who refuse to even imagine there is anything legitimate in those they hate.

[–]crz8956 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hate crimes are absurd.

Activism is not normal state of mind.

[–]noserotonyn 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

How can a supposedly well-regarded newspaper like the Independent publish something like that.

[–]Huffers1010 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Clickbait, that's how.

[–]Skywarriorad 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately true…

[–]Angryasfk 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The Independent isn’t a good newspaper anymore. It’s the same with The Guardian. They’re both (especially The Guardian which “celebrated” the “empowerment” of FDS remember) just feminist rags now, wholly controlled by them.

[–]A_blue_horse 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The guardian also twisted and gaslit the amber heard trial tried to paint her as some poor soul. However I was happy to see sky news tore them apart for it

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s questionable if The Guardian is even fit to wipe you’re @rse with these days.

[–]jessi387 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wait, so is misandry a hate crime in the uk ?

[–]BasedSigmaGrindset 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bro the first paragraph is just hilarious. The title literally says “should concern those who believe in equality”, and then in the first paragraph she bitches about “having to share” 💀💀💀 absolutely no thought went into this

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Equal treatment of men and woman apparently is something that "should concern everyone who believes in equality"

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

"The fact that we're considering making misandry a hate crime should concern everyone who believes in equality"

The title of the article is enough for me.
I'm sorry but if anyone is for "equality" then they should be concerned if we DON'T make Misandry a hate crime.

If Misogyny is a hate crime then EQUALLY Misandry should also be a hate crime.. That's literally how equality works.

This is yet another example of feminists wanting to have their cake and eat it too..

[–]bored-in-asia 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Hate crimes shouldn't be a thing in law, regardless of the aggrieved group.

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Perhaps as part of incitement laws. But beyond that????

[–]bored-in-asia 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's an addition to an existing crime. Why do crimes require additional charges just because of the motive?

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

There is incitement, where you push others to commit crimes.

But other than that…

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

The level of terfs energy from that

[–]rabel111 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If misogyny is made a special category of crime, while misandry is not, that is the state declaring war on men and boys. When laws become so biased as to single out people for crimes based on their sex, race or sexual preference, those laws are nothing more than state sponsored hate.

[–]OctaviaPinfold1 points 3 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

The fact that there are people taking shit like this seriously should concern everyone who believes in equality.

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

Worse it’s pretty mainstream for feminism and allegedly “left wing politics”. This is what we’re up against.

[–]MotCADK 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What a garbage article. I was searching for coherent points in a mess of flowery words, and meaningless garble.

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Standard woke/feminist garbage then.

[–]KazukiYahashi 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They just don’t seem to understand that with equal rights, comes equal consequences.

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love the way she says there’s nothing women can have that men are not expected to share given that’s what feminists do to men all the time. Men have a club or “space” it must be opened to women, with massive political or legal campaigns to force them to open up or close. But if women have a womens’ only club or “safe space”: we need more of them! Even Mens Sheds, set up to address male depression and alienation, are continually pushed to open to women, and it’s seen as an affront if some do not. And yet feminists like this are in utter denial about how their own movement operates. It’s why I do not believe a word they say about wanting “equality” and not hating men.

[–]Commercial_Invite_84 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think the idea of a hate crime is stupid

[–]A_blue_horse 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There were actual feminists in london about two years ago who were trying to get the words misandry and misandrist turned into hate speech against women lol. I'm guessing they realised they overstepped because I can't find that article anyway nowadays.

[–]dgshotuk 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The independant is a rag

[–]EvidencePlz -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Stopped reading that piece of shit many years ago

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And The Guardian is even worse.

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

As aways these feminist columnists are the worst, and how comfortably they propagate their prejudist is disgusting.

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