~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
dillonmcdoodle
[+]Dembara 8 years ago [recovered] (107 children) | Copy Link
Queens actually declare wars more often than kings.
[–]Caspasho 313 points314 points315 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/01/european-queens-waged-more-wars-than-kings.html
Heres the source.
[–]swiggitdoggy 92 points93 points94 points 8 years ago (69 children) | Copy Link
Do you wonder why?
[–]shellbroth 322 points323 points324 points 8 years ago (47 children) | Copy Link
Kings usually go to war with their army, they risk their lives when they declare war. Queen declare war and then just stay comfy at home... Maybe the reason more Queen declared war is because it didn't endangered their lives so "why not?", whereas King usually only used it as "last resort" putting their own life on the line.
[–]starvinggarbage 299 points300 points301 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
I mean, as devil's advocate I've gotta say it's probably largely due to the fact that female leaders would be perceived as weaker by rivals, particularly in a time dominated by monarchy. When the neighbors get aggressive sometimes war is the best or only option. I'm sure there were plenty of times when women declared war for reasons more related to vanity or pride, but no moreso than with male rules.
It's a pretty meaningless statistic, even when taken in historical context. It does nothing for gender relations except prove the overt falsehood of the notion that with female leaders there would be no war.
[–]el_padlina 37 points38 points39 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It's more than just that.
[–]Grasshopper21 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Are we actually going to call going to war a strengthened reigning capacity?
[–]el_padlina 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nope, declaring wars was a result of strenghtened reigning capacity. They could do more when the roles were split so they did.
[–]jeegte12 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
well how would you describe it?
[–]starvinggarbage 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Theres some good points in there, too.
[–]XtremeDarkness 32 points33 points34 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Seems logical too to me, guess it's debatable
[–]macthefire 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
To further defend SOME of the leaders on that list, people like Queen Elizabeth I are considered to be some of the best ruling monarchs ever. I doubt leaders like her were like "Meh, sucks to be you guys lolz".
[–]circlhat -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
I mean, as devil's advocate I've gotta say it's probably largely due to the fact that female leaders would be perceived as weaker by rivals
But they declared war not defending themselves against a war, your logic is baseless and is feminist propaganda.
This is the excuse use by female police officers who murder men, they always say,
"well they had a vagina and these big evil men with their penises forced them to act a certain way and kill innocent people cuz my vagina"
You act as if men and women exists in a vacuum , please provide facts and evidences not lies and deceit
[–]starvinggarbage 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Your logic is a gross oversimplification of history. The person declaring war is not always the aggressor. War is often declared in response to hostile acts by an enemy. As I said, it likely isn't what happened in every single case, but it most definitely accounts for some of the statistical difference.
[+]circlhat -6 points-5 points-4 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
but you must prove that, otherwise your just making the classic female assumption, its ALL MEN'S FAULT
[–]starvinggarbage 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Are you just trolling? Because this is idiotic. I clearly said it can't account for all of it. I was extremely reasonable. I think you're a feminist posting on here to try to make MRAs look stupid.
[–]circlhat -5 points-4 points-3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Your assumption is simply untrue not if you provide evidences to make me look stupid please do so, but your simply spreading feminist lies which women use to excuse violent behavior
[–]starvinggarbage 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You're really doubling down on the act now.
Catherine the Great waged a war against Persia only after their invasion of Georgia, which she was treaty-bound to defend. Her wars with Turkey were only a furtherance of the policy of her male predecessors. In the second Russo-Turkish War the Ottomans were the aggressors.
Sir Walter Raleigh actually believed that Elizabeth I was far too cautious with her troops in her war against Spain (which was supporting rebellious catholic forces within her territory. It was a war that spanned all of Europe between Protestantism and Catholicism.) Her caution was largely due to the fact that her commanders would often disregard her orders entirely and fail to report back to her for long stretches of time, something they were much less likely to do with a male ruler.
Queen Maria Theresa fought the wars of Austrian Succession after aggression from her neighbors, including Prussia just straight up invading Silesia without a formal declaration of war.
Can you find a single example of a female ruler starting a war solely because she would not be the one fighting it? You're making the assertion that the increase in violence is due to something wrong with the women themselves but you have literally no evidence to back this up.
[–]Red_Historian1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Let's be honest, the one declaring the war is rarely the one fighting it regardless of gender. Be they politicians or princes they are always sending other people's kids to war.
[–]Anon3mous11 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I think you'd be hard pressed to find any wars that were declared for literally no reason, even if the reason is not a good one.
Wars of conquest don't tend to be 'declared', rather you just don't recognise the sovereignty of what ever nation you're invading.
[–]cottonkandykiller 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lol whiny little bitch
[–]Sherlock--Holmes 40 points41 points42 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
Usually? I doubt that. I have no evidence to support my belief but I'd bet most times kings stayed behind and sent generals to run their battles.
Further, when they did go to war I doubt they risked their lives very often actually swinging swords as they do in Hollywood movies.
[–]CrimeanSF 36 points37 points38 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
That comment belongs in /r/badhistory, only a small minority of kings actually led their armies from the front and center. The rest sat well beyond the front line of any battle and never put themselves in any real danger - which was the smart thing to do anyway.
[–]PinguRambo 26 points27 points28 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You say that, but there are so many instances of kings and princes being capture on the battlefield: From the Roman empire time, to the 100 years war.
And just another reference, if you want.
So it happened more than once, and your comment is also worthy of /r/badhistory :)
[–]WikiTextBot 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Caratacus
Caratacus (Brythonic *Caratācos, Middle Welsh Caratawc; Welsh Caradog; Breton Karadeg; Greek Καράτακος; variants Latin Caractacus, Greek Καρτάκης) was a first-century British chieftain of the Catuvellauni tribe, who led the British resistance to the Roman conquest.
Before the Roman invasion Caratacus is associated with the expansion of his tribe's territory. His apparent success led to Roman invasion, nominally in support of his defeated enemies. He resisted the Romans for almost a decade, mixing guerrilla warfare with set-piece battles, but was unsuccessful in the latter.
Ransom of King John II of France
The ransom of King John II of France was an incident during the Hundred Years War between France and England. Following the English capture of the French king during the Battle of Poitiers in 1356, John was held for ransom by the English crown. The incident had serious consequences for later events in the Hundred Years War.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.27
[–]Meistermalkav 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The interresting part is, that it was almost a badge of honor, to risk your own family and line of sucession. After all, honors in war still meant something back then. Think of it like the british modell of "england does not abandon its people".
Of course, the crown prince would, inevitably, be surrounded by prime troops, would never be in a regiment that was in immediate danger, would see some carefully planned front line action, and at the slightest hint of danger he and his regiment would be flown out of wherever they were. And if things just happened to go south, hey, heaven and earth would move to get the royals back. But that's more a function of "we must protect the royals" then "uuuuh, lets not do stupid shit".
Think of it as a carefully managed press op, to drive home the importance of fighting in wars.
The king himself, well, he has to run a state to run, right, can't just abandone it, but look here, this is the prince, third in sucession, and several of his cousins, ten to 20 in succession, they serve with the troops, why don't you. He will eat your bread, drink your booze, and smoke all the good stuff, and him just being invited to all the generals balls and the partties does a LOT for the troops morale.
But just in case something happens, we put him in the middle of the most veteran troops, people who have walked to hell and back, and we make it clear, they get prefferential treatment, but only as long as the prince is alive and able to father offspring. Depending on the severity of injuries to the prince incurred, their priviledges get cut back.
Of course, some nice shit, like, for example, a scar or so forth, that's just what happens in wartime, but a leg or an arm loss, whoooo, I wouldn't want you to be you when you have to bring me those news.
I am not going to say that you have to prevent all injuries, and have to carry him, but think of the queen during the blitz. You make sure he sees some action, safe, of course, fires a few volleys, is coincidentially in the area when a charge of the light brigade is called, and, noooo, you are not supposed to treat him any differently, but hey, think of all those extra things you get... like when the prince gets invited to an officers ball, you as his regiment get the preferred seating, if the prince is on a diplomatic mission, you get to travel first class, because of course, any thing less for the royal escort is unthinkable, but if you happen to loose the prince, or get the prince killed.... The last regiment that got a prince killed, we kept in military servie, with the distinct order to count all the snowflakes in their area. Just saying, nobody is saying he has to be treated differently, but loosing a prince is like a crime against the crown.
Oh, and as for the king? I heard he is waiting behind the lines, and when the tides are good enough, he is going to join the fun. with his private regiment. for a bit. you know, they don't treat him anything special as well, right? just a regular ordinary military man, who rose thanks to his qualifications, not because he does not have a last name.
[–]Tom_Brett 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Richard the Lionheart definitely did. Sometimes the Kings would send their heir though like The Black Prince of Edward III. Or Kings would make a few charges to rally the troops.
[–]shellbroth 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
A few examples: Alexander the Great, Albert I of Belgium, Richard the Lionhart, Harold II , Julius Caesar, Magnus Barefoot, George II of Great Britain, Władysław III of Poland, Sebastian I of Portugal, etc.
Throughout history lots of Kings and country leaders were captured during battles they fought in... Saying it's uncommon just show your lack of knowledge in History.
How ironic considering the topic...
[–]THEAdrian 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'll add Gustav II Adolf and Charles XII of Sweden too. And that was 1600-1700s
[–]sneakpeekbot 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Here's a sneak peek of /r/badhistory using the top posts of the year!
#1: Breitbart/ Reddit: Only White People fought at Dunkirk. #2: "The Muslim slave trade was much larger, lasted much longer, and was more brutal than the transatlantic slave trade and yet few people have heard about it." #3: The United States led the global abolitionist movement that ended the mainstream practice of slavery, t. The_Donald
I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact me | Info | Opt-out
[–]Downvotesturnmeonbby 17 points18 points19 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ah, yet another good sub ruined by political agendas and astroturf votes.
[–]Queen_Jezza 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Lol those top posts. Definitely not a biased sub I'm sure
[–]Scrawlericious 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Biased how?
[–]Queen_Jezza 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Look at the top posts. Number two is a bullshit post that doesn't debunk it at all, and is obviously only upvoted because it's anti-anti-leftist ideology. One and three are indeed debunked, but then again the premise they are debunking is obvious bollocks and nobody actually believes those things, so again it's pointless.
[–]KDulius 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Also for point number one, only a teeny tiny minority of the soilders at Dunkirk where non-white.
There 500 very brave Indians who worked in the logistics core of the BEA and some French colonial troops, but the vast bulk for the ~250,000 men on the beaches where white.
Also, Dunkirk (the film) does have some non-white people in the group shots
[–]Scrawlericious 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Gotchya, thanks
[–]Grasshopper21 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I dont see how #2 is bad history. Its a factual truth.
[–]shellbroth 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A lot of Kings actually fight in battles, a lots of Kings actually became Kings because they won a lot of battles! I gave a small list of example in another answer of kings that fought on the front line alongside their people (you know swinging swords and stuff)... and there are so much more.
[–]like_a_horse 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Eh Queen Elizabeth I made appearances with her army most famously while defending against the Spanish Armada. I'd wager it had more to do with female rulers needing to prove themselves as strong competent leaders. One way to do that is crush your enemies. Elizabeth I faced many challenges to her power through out her rule from both internal and external sources.
[–]shellbroth 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
She made an appearance, big deal. Was she on the front line? I can (and already have on this topic) name several Kings / Rulers that have lead their army from the front line at least once. Lots of Kings took the sword and fought real battles (in some cultures like Vikings, you became King because you defeated everybody else, by yourself), and an even greater number went on battlefields to lead the troops from the site (like Bonaparte did). So big deal if a few Queen "made an appearance" on the battlefield, that's peanut in comparaison.
[–]like_a_horse 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah she was. What I'm getting at is queens didn't just wage war because they could and losing a war could very well get you killed even if you don't fight.
But fine how about Bodiccia? She lead the Icini people in a successful revolt against the romans in Britain even sacking what is today the city of London. Her rebellion ended when she was caught and flogged to death. Or what about the Trung sisters of Vietnam? They lead the Vietnamese people in a successful revolt against the Chinese empire.
I would also like to add that many monarchs faked their involvement in battle. For example Charles IV of Spain was considered an ineffectual leader and general. But you better believe portraits of him commemorating a battle shows him on horse back charging in whereas there's really no evidence or accounts from his generals to back that up.
[–]MR_Flarg 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Niggga what queen Elizabeth got on a fucking horse when the Amanda came and went to the beaches to yell at her men she often joined navel expeditions
Why the fuck does this place attract such retardeds
[–]CalvinsCuriosity 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Holy shit, I know this is gonna sound rude but it's there any legit source on this? This could be more evidence against anyone who pulls that "women aren't violent" argument. While maintaining that they are manipulative and cowardly(not all but it would shut down anyone who says this).
[–]shellbroth 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A lot of kings or country leaders (whatever the titles they had) actually fought in the battles themselves. Not always on the front line, but they were there with their people fighting with them.
Most of the time Kings were only Kings because they won battles. Most Kings spent most of their time at court, hunting, feasting and, you know, governing their kingdom. When things came to war they would fight, but only in a few battles which is way more than what Queen would do...
[–]TubbyandthePoo-Bah -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
#notallwomen
/s
[+]Koussevitzky 8 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
You honestly believe that most kings personally went with their armies into battle? That is extremely misinformed. /r/badhistory
[–]poloport 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
deleted What is this?
[–]Koussevitzky7 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
"Plenty of Kings" is far from MOST kings like the comment I replied to insinuated
[–]wangyuanji58 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Cersei Fook'n Lannister.
"Go fight the dragons Jaime"
" go fight the dothraki jaime"
"You still have one good hand Jaime"
"Dragon fire can't melt steel beams Jaime".
[+]BrownButterStick -9 points-8 points-7 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Heeeeey you forgot that /s at the end there buddy.
[–]Grasshopper21 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
you forgot your pile of downvotes buddy.
[–]Strongblackfemale 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Same reason Hilldog was threatening war with Russia during the election and the same reason there was never a military conflict she didn't support America being involved in. She has something to prove. Say what you will about Trump, but Hilldog was a war-monger.
[–]swiggitdoggy -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Hillary never once threatened war with Russia.
[–]Strongblackfemale 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Mmmmm ok...... this took literally 5 seconds. Do you even try to research your opinions?
https://www.tremr.com/rchusid/clinton-threatens-war-with-russia
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/07/the-kremlin-really-believes-that-hillary-clinton-will-start-a-war-with-russia-donald-trump-vladimir-putin/amp/
[–]swiggitdoggy 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Lol "the kremlin". Their propaganda is truly amazing.
And a "no fly zone" doesn't mean automatic retaliation. This isn't a video game, diplomacy exists.
[–]Strongblackfemale 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If you see a scenario where Putin doesn't retaliate against America shooting down Russian planes, well the you're clearly a Hilldog supporter. It's irresponsible chest puffing, or worse, she actually thought it was a good policy.
[–]swiggitdoggy -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I definitely don't support Hillary, she's a capitalist warhawk just like Obama, Trump, and Bush. But she's not stupid, she and Putin both know that nuclear exchange is not going to happen.
[–]blue_strat 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
There were far more kings than queens, so if only a couple of queens went to war they'd be a larger proportion of their set.
There's also a case to be made that a country willing to accept a queen (which especially after Magna Carta was more in the hands of nobility than simple succession) may also be advanced enough to expand empires.
Elizabeth in England, Catherine in Russia - they were both historically placed to open relations with some countries, forming new treaties including mutual defence, and invade other countries to expand territory.
But I expect this sub would rather believe it was because they were on their periods or something.
[–]Grasshopper21 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Not when you look at it on a% scale. someone linked a study that states queens were 27% more likely to initiate war.
[–]blue_strat -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The article put it down to division of labour under queens, which left them free to pursue foreign policy in a way kings didn't give themselves time to do.
[–]Grasshopper21 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
i wouldn't call engaging in risky politics like war a strength, but rather a poor resut due to labor being divided
[–]blue_strat 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The British Empire paints a different picture.
[–]el_padlina 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/706n2s/comment/dn17dxv
Article in that comment gives a good idea why.
[–]kickstand 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Female leaders have more to prove, maybe?
[–]funnyferret 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Most articles say that it is because Queens had their husbands run the military, so you have someone always tending to the military, instead of one person doing it all. Also, I think it would be because Kings don't want to go to war, because they probably know that it's hell, if they have fought before.
[–]Dembara 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What I have heard the prevailing theory is that queens rely less on advisers than kings did and the advisers would always caution against war.
[–]Choice77777 -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Itchy tampons ?
[–]NO_FIX_AUTOCORRECT -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Because of their periods.
Heyo!
Okay, bad joke. I'll go home alone and masturbation now.
[–]jeegte12 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
the joke was bad but the rest of the comment was worse. we'd be better off had you not said anything.
[–]NO_FIX_AUTOCORRECT 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're right.
[–]swiggitdoggy -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This sub is like a cancer containment unit. Thank god it's here
[–]tigrn914 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's cause they didn't fight in them.
[–]deku_link -5 points-4 points-3 points 8 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link
Source?
[–]Batbuckleyourpants 121 points122 points123 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
3 seconds on google later.
"European Queens Waged More Wars Than Kings"
"Europe's queens were 27 per cent more likely than its kings to wage war."
[–]Cleficate 37 points38 points39 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yep
[–]jackhellerson 23 points24 points25 points 8 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link
Here
Though you could have just googled it and not been an ass.
[–]Draestyn 30 points31 points32 points 8 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link
What? If I hadn't already seen a study on it, I would have asked for a source too. Since when is that being an ass
[–]jackhellerson 18 points19 points20 points 8 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link
Sorry, it's just that this request has been fulfilled hundreds if not thousand of times on Reddit. And the comment "source" is kinda pretentious in its own right.
[–]gottoloveya 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
I feel like asking for proof when someone makes an argument is not a bad thing to do.
[–]Taxus_Calyx -5 points-4 points-3 points 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
Proof is not the same as source.
[–]Draestyn 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
They're interchangeable on the internet, don't be pedantic
[–]Taxus_Calyx 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Your use of 'pedantic' is more pedantic than my use of 'source'.
[+]Taxus_Calyx -6 points-5 points-4 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
I'll be correct, thanks.
[–]Draestyn 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Everyone asks for a source instead of asking for proof. They're interchangeable.
[–]ElfmanLV1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Proof?
[–]Grasshopper211 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/706n2s/cuz_only_men_can_declare_wars/dn1c3id/
[–]Taxus_Calyx1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Not as interchangeable as your logic with nonsense.
[–]Draestyn1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
are you retarded
No, its called using words by their actual meanings. Try it.
[–]stefman666 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
You'll be a douche, thanks.
[–]Taxus_Calyx0 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
And you'll be an ignorant douche.
[–]stefman6662 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
You can be technically correct but have poor communication because of it. Words change meanings and uses constantly and while it's absolutely important to stick to the technical definition, it's not always the best in a situation. Saying to rewind a DVD or video playing digitally is technically wrong but gets the message across anyway as an example. It's most important to communicate effectively so as long as the message is understood properly actual verbage is not always worth nitpicking, even though it is still important. I'm not ignorant because i'm not the one being closed minded here, you're literally fitting that definition.
I see your meaning. You have valid points. I also really appreciate your correct word usage.
Hey man I appreciate you saying so, and I don't want you to think i'm trying to invalidate your stance on how important proper word usage is, because that most likely leads to way more miscommunication than anything else, it's just not the be all end all in context. There's a balance between the two for sure.
Agreed.
[–]thatfancychap 22 points23 points24 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
the comment "source" is kinda pretentious in its own right.
[–]Siganid 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
A couple decades of feminists working to falsify enough statistics to make it an underhanded way to discredit someone.
[–]Taxus_Calyx 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
That's an explanation. But I'm sure there are lots of sources too.
[–]Siganid 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sure, and the minute you share one, it's called fake news because it's not from a narrow list of approved sources.
[–]Taxus_Calyx 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is true. In our time, as in Huxley's 'Brave New World', it is not Orwellian censorship, but an overabundance of information which keeps many people blind to the truth.
[–]PwsAreHard 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No it's not. Every time you state something as fact you should provide a source.
[–]Dembara 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Asking for a source if perfectly reasonable. It is the burden of someone making a claim to provide their sources.
[–]deku_link 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How was asking for a source in a claim being an ass? I just saw something on Reddit and wanted to know more dude.
[–]dietah 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
whats an army? does it come in black too?
[+]M16-andPregnant 8 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
Let me look at the greatest generals in history.
Ghengis Khan
Muhhumud
Cyrus the great
Napoleon
Hannibal
Julius Caesar
Vlad the impaler
Etc.
Most of the greatest generals in the history of mankind are males.
[–]Dembara 12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Most queens, like with kings, didn't lead their own armies. They declared war and elected an expert general to lead their forces.
[–]fengpi 175 points176 points177 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
At least he didn't need to wait too long.
[–]Anarchytect1204 104 points105 points106 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Not trying to be sexist , but I've a feeling that it's a she.
[–]jackhellerson 52 points53 points54 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Meh, could just as easily have been a neckbeard feminist man protecting the honor of M'lady. The kind of men who -- ironically -- post on subs like "justneckbeardthings" and "niceguys" lol.
[–]Draestyn 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
""""""""ironically"""""""""
[–]NotKennyLoggins 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
can confirm am neckbeard man
[–]lothartheunkind 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Idk, I have a (former) friend who would likely say some dumb shit like this
[–]Sketchy_Uncle 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So glad too that they had good, solid answers and were able to turn the tables.
[–]Electroverted 106 points107 points108 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You need finish it off with "Please educate yourself." Feminists love being told that!
[–]supacrusha 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nono, feminists love saying that after linking you to an everydayfeminist article, and then when you hit them back with wikipedia, they say its a biased source.
[–]Silmariel 44 points45 points46 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
"Over 193 reigns, they found that states ruled by queens were 27% more likely to wage war than those ruled by kings."
https://www.economist.com/news/europe/21722877-european-history-answer-queens-especially-married-ones-who-gets-more-wars-kings
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Its that bitterness at it again.
[–]ShureYnaut 46 points47 points48 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Any time someone ends an online argument with "I'll wait," they always get owned immediately
[–]DustPalacePapa 20 points21 points22 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Well, I upvoted your comment, but I bet you wont upvote mine cuz your a male. I'll wait...
[–]supacrusha 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Ha, Im male and I upvoted your comment.
[–]blackxxwolf3 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
SHOWED HIM!!!
[–]ISOanexplanation 81 points82 points83 points 8 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link
I made this one a while ago. So much blood on those delicate little hands.
http://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/humann/QueensOrig.jpg
[+]Draestyn 8 years ago* [recovered] (32 children) | Copy Link
Maggie thatcher is my hero and I'm american
[–]ISOanexplanation 36 points37 points38 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
That's fine, she isn't one of mine and I'm American as well. The point was that she prosecuted at least one war where men died and feminists blaming war on men alone when women have been sending men to die in wars since they were building the pyramids, it's a bit stupid.
[–]iongnil 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
She declared war on Argentina after they invaded UK territory.
[–]KDulius 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah... Thatcher did some fucking terrible things to the South Wales valleys and North Eastern England that means that no matter how cancerous Corbyn's labour gets, they will get those seats no matter what, but the Falklands was a justified war in that it was purely defensive in nature
[–]BackFromTheBan 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
TBF. We have a dispute on those islads going back to 1833 when the UK took them. Before that they were under the Spanish crown but they abandoned them in 1811 and then Argentina occupied in 1820.
But yes. Galtiery, a military dictator, gave the order to attack the islands in 1982 as a political stunt. He was a drunk.
Our troop took the islands by surprice but there never was any occupation plan, nor logistics to hold them. They just sended the troops. No food, no ammo supply, no support, no nothing. That way some troops stated pillating the villages. Hunger and cold.
Those who came back said that they were treated better as military prisioners by the UK than as soldiers by the argentinian army.
[+]Draestyn 8 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah no doubt, I wasn't trying to imply that she wasn't brutal in her own right. Dunno what the downvotes are for, but whatevs
[–]muzlightyear 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think it's probably because of how hated she is here in Engand, and saying as an american she's you're hero doesn't go down well.
[–]trenescese 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link
Why are you downvoted?
[–]pacmatt27 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
He's being downvoted because Margaret Thatcher was an incredibly divisive figure in UK politics. Many blame her for a lot of significant economic problems for the working classes starting in the 70s. Not everyone agrees, some think what she did was harsh but necessary. However, a lot of people will be irritated by an American calling a widely hated British prime minister (who is blamed for ruining the lives of millions of people) one of his heroes. Especially since the American in question shows little understanding of the consequences of her leadership and lots of arrogance.
[+]Draestyn 8 years ago* [recovered] (19 children) | Copy Link
Muh evil conservatives
[–]pacmatt27 19 points20 points21 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Lol. It's nothing to do with her political leaning. It's the fact that she systematically destroyed the livelihoods of millions of working class people in Britain, caused a generation of economic instability for them and was a warmongering, unsympathetic, hatebeast.
Maybe learn a bit more about your "hero" and what she did to her own country before you comment.
[+]Draestyn -9 points-8 points-7 points 8 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link
tfw you equate being dragged out of a recession and a gdp rise of >20% with "systematic destruction" and "economic instability"
[–]pacmatt27 21 points22 points23 points 8 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link
Tfw you equate overall economic gains with higher quality of life for everyone in the country. The recession continued for working class people and they saw none of the benefits of her policies. Her leadership widened the gap between working and middle class people and reduced social mobility. Their jobs were gone, unions destroyed and essentially lived in poverty for decades. It's the same policy that the conservatives are currently using and, again, overall economic improvements because of austerity are overshadowed by the fact that young people and working class people have no jobs, no homes and a bleak future.
I mean... Realistically you're talking to someone from the country she governed. Would it not be wiser to ask for their perspective rather than assume you know everything already? Fact is, you don't. You didn't live through it and none of your friends or family were affected by it. She was hated by half of the country, ever wonder why? Saying she's your hero is going to get people's backs up, not because she was conservative, but because she ruined lives. She was a divisive figure but I'd hardly call someone that callous a hero. There are many ways to combat recession and hers was arguably one of the fucking worst.
[+]Draestyn -7 points-6 points-5 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
it's not because she was conservative, just that her policies came from a conservative platform
lul
and my mom came to the us right before I was conceived, don't talk down to me as though it's impossible for an american to know anything about life across the pond you dick
Also,
implying that the economic hit you took before thatcher even had power had a solution that wouldn't have fucked you even harder
[–]pacmatt27 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
I mean. That's not what I said. Conservatism is fine but austerity doesn't work. I guess if you equate conservatism to austerity alone and not giving a shit about working class people then, ok, yeah. I guess it is cos she's a conservative. But that, supposedly, isn't what conservatism stands for, you moron.
my mom came to the us right before I was conceived
Read: Mommy ran away from her country and told me to believe a thing so I did. So you have the perspective of one stupid cunt who absolutely failed at raising her child, leaving us to deal with an ignorant, callous, belligerent asshole? You have that perspective and I have that of thousands of people who live and work here. Wow you must know so much. Pls enlighten me you dick. It's not impossible, it's just very fucking unlikely and your attitude does little to convince me that you're one of those rare individuals.
I mean. It did. They always do. There are literally hundreds of alternatives ranging from almost exactly the same to the complete opposite. Some would have been worse and some would have been better. Again, she had absolutely no concern for the lives she destroyed, no plan to get those people back into employment and no concern for distributing wealth fairly after the economy recovered. She simply did not give a shit about those people.
Call her your hero if you like but everyone over here will fucking hate you for it because it just shows you to be a naive asshole. Even British people who respected her leadership think she was callous. At this point, however, it's clear that you're not willing to listen to anything that challenges your worldview. I'll let the votes speak for me.
Edit: And speak they have. Gl with your shitty attitude.
[+]R_Lupin -7 points-6 points-5 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Biggest load of nonsense I've ever seen on the subject, everyone ignore this shit and go do your own research
[–]pacmatt275 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Sweet contribution.
[–]Scrawlericious5 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
dumb
[–]PwsAreHard3 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I'll ELI5 it:
GDP is not an indicator of living standard. If you are a politician that reduces living standards for a significant percentage of a population while simultaneously increasing the GDP you'll not win a popularity contest with that group.
Even simpler: If you make people worse off than they were during the recession they won't care if you took them out of the recession, they will only care about the fact that you made their life even more shit than it already was.
[–]pacmatt271 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Thankyou. That is a wonderfully succinct way of explaining what I tried to say.
[–]Scrawlericious 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yur dumb
[–]Draestyn -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You're illiterate
[–]Scrawlericious1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Ouch
[–]KDulius 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Churchill was a conservative, he was loved by his country when he died.
[–]Draestyn 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
People love the right when they're in the middle of a war
[–]KDulius 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Churchill died in the mid 60s you loon
[–]Draestyn 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
...and?
[+]zb9194 -6 points-5 points-4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You probably like limited govt too, you fucking CUCK
[–]Draestyn 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
reeeee
[–]TubbyandthePoo-Bah 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
She single handedly gutted the UK's industrial capacity to such an extent that it can never recover. Sure she increased GDP but she did so by implementing a service economy that provides thankless low paid jobs with no chance for betterment.
And she stole my fucking milk.
Fuck Maggie.
You say that like it was her fault your economy was in the toilet before she took power
[–]iKarllos 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You are a disgrace to your country then
no u
[–]theothermod[M] 23 points24 points25 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Hello and welcome to /r/MensRights. If you are not a subscriber, please take a moment to understand what you are seeing.
This subreddit is about the issues faced by men in our society.
We welcome healthy debate and you won't be banned merely for disagreement. It is common here to reject feminist ideology, but that doesn't mean we hate women or oppose equal rights. Rather, we seek to expand those equal rights to include men.
These are some of the best discussions we've had. There is also a documentary made by a feminist who investigated our movement. If you want to know more about the issues we are concerned with, try these books: The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers or The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell.
Thank you for being open minded.
[–]dillonmcdoodle[S] 30 points31 points32 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Original post: https://www.reddit.com/r/quityourbullshit/comments/702zwa/only_men_declare_war/
[–]jackhellerson 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is actually from a thread on this sub. I remember it. Tons of other examples were listed as well.
[–]Slushsoup 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thank you! :)
[–]aych001 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Some more:
Indira Gandhi (Liberation of Bangladesh, '71)
Golda Meir (Yom Kippur War, '73)
[–]klingma 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Boudicea
[–]deku_link 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Boudicca was acting defensively though
[–]klingma 12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Eh to a degree. Burning cities to the ground was not a defensive tactic. Burning temples with people inside was not a defensive tactic. Her defensive actions turned into a defacto war for independence.
[–]supacrusha 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Leading what amounted to almost a genocide against Roman settlers wasnt exactly defensive though...
[–]DongleNocker 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Margret Thatcher was the loudest saber rattler in the days after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. You might even say she badgered George H.W. Bush into pushing the USA to enter the conflict.
[–]isaiahtx 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I'm not railing this sub, but it could be used for both the feminist and mensrights subreddits
[–]AKAPolock 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It could, that's originally what I thought this was referring to. Taken out of context this could be taken either way
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
How?
[–]isaiahtx 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It could be a staunch sexist saying that only men have the mental capacity to declare war or some BS like that.
"staunch sexist" oh, so you mean like... feminists?
[–]Afrobean 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Hillary Clinton's actions as a senator in 2002 were instrumental in getting Congress to approve the invasion of Iraq in 2003. And Congress is the only entity in the US who is allowed to declare war. Furthermore, she threatened to use the military against Russia last August based on the allegations that the Russian government was involved with Wikileaks somehow. Don't even get me started on her time as Secretary of State. If she had won the election, I'm confident the US military would be directly fighting Russia today.
The problem isn't the gender of the warmonger. The problem is that sociopaths rise to positions of power and they use that power to cause the deaths of thousands of innocent people just so their buddies in the military industrial complex get to pad their wallets with a few more hundred billion dollars.
[–]Ginger-saurus-rex 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nailed it.
[–]wlxr 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
God. This one time in Civilization 5, I was Elizabeth and I declared war on the world just after getting Ship of the Line while playing multiplayer with a friend of mine (We allied.) I don't remember how but I managed to have like 90+ships, enough to take literally every coastal city in the game I didn't already control, and wipe every other naval unit on the map.
Even with the in game information I could tell you that women have declared War in the Past.
Wanna hear something even funnier? These feminists know less about history than even what a fucking video game can teach you.
[–]Mauzeraut 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Olga of Kiev.
[–]DarthCerebroX 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I absolutely hate how these are always the posts that get the most upvotes and make it to the front page...
Instead of casual redditors seeing posts about our activism, or reading about some of the important issues we try to bring awareness about...
... instead they see posts like this where we point out some ridiculous comment some random person (that nobody gives a fuck about) on the internet made.
And then we turn around and wonder why most people think we don't actually have any real issues to complain about.. or think our movement is pointless.
It's no wonder when the only times they see our sub on the front page is some ridiculous, pointless bullshit like this.
I really wish there was a better sub people could post things like this... I get that this post points out some of the ridiculous revisionist history that feminists like to push ... but come on ..... there's much more important things we do here that people need to see instead of this shit.
[–]willvotetrumpagain 21 points22 points23 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Angela Merkel is declaring a war on Germans right now.
[+]satellitegif 8 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
Oh man, this is scary to watch
[–]pm_me_whale_pictures 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It's just a bunch of random no-context shit designed to scare easily intimidated people.
Don't be gullible.
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is true, but that still doesnt negate the fact that the refugee crisis is a ,uch bigger problem than it has to be, and the real matter is that, most of these refugees are actually fighting age men from Sudan and Pakistan, not women and children from Syria, now, Im not saying that all of them are jihadists like the guy in the video, Im just saying they should probably not be receiving entitlements that were meant for women and children from Syria.
[–]pm_me_whale_pictures 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I see where you're coming from, but I would caution you against using other people's talking points when you say things like:
most of these refugees are actually fighting age men from Sudan and Pakistan, not women and children from Syria
Especially without specific context or sources. That's a bold but relatively unsubstantiated claim many have made without much empirical evidence. (If you know something I don't though, please clue me in to your sources)
Videos and pictures can be very hard to make definitive statements on, especially with the advent of the internet, and even more if there are crucial facts not included in the pics/vids.
Im just saying they should probably not be receiving entitlements that were meant for women and children from Syria.
The other point here is the issue of gatekeeping. You don't want to be a gatekeeper for fear of accidentally locking yourself or loved ones out, now or in the unforeseen future.
Goes back to the old saying, "Would you rather live in a country that helps no-one because some people may abuse it? Or a country that helps everyone despite some people abusing it?"
I want to believe things can be better though, so I choose the latter.
[–]blackxxwolf3 -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
my first thought when i saw this was "remember the last time the germans got together and marched down the street waving flags?" WW3 EVERYONE incoming!
God, such disgraces to islam.
[–]unmuteme -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
who upvotes bullshit like this?
[–]Jah348 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not to mention Cersai. That bitch is savage.
[–]Lawfulgray 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
So litterally everytime a woman is in power she declares war on someone? Well it's not like Hillary was calling for war with any specific nation... /s
[–]CalvinsCuriosity 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Which?
[–]BrundleCopter 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Syria, Libya, Russia, ... quite a few really. Hillary is a callous warmonger. She literally laughed GLEEFULLY about killing Gaddafi. Totally inappropriate attitude for a statesperson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y
And yes, she pushed for those conflicts, as secretary of state, even though they happened before her presidential run:
https://www.democracynow.org/2016/3/3/the_libya_gamble_inside_hillary_clinton
Pretty sure we'd have been at war with Russia within the first two months of her presidency. We dodged a bullet there.
[–]CalvinsCuriosity 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Cool. Thanks.
[–]pretzelzetzel 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lol Queen Victoria oppressed half the world's landmass without ever declaring war, apparently! It's a miracle!
Queen Boudicca of the celts not only started an insurgency but led a genocide against Romans in Britain.
[–]smellypantleg 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well damn that wasn't a long wait at all.
[–]_LadyBoy 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Queen Mary of Scots also known as Bloody Mary.
[–]MikeNew513 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The great Iron Mags didn't declare war on the Argentinians. She simply to back British territory from an invader.
[–]KingRobotPrince 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'll wait
Such confidence from someone who has literally no idea what they are talking about.
[–]Phkn-Pharaoh 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Why must we protect the usernames of complete retards?
[–]travelocitygnomarch 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The OP of that comment is now posting this very screenshot around like it wasn't them and trying to karmafarm from their own troll, by their own admission. My recent comment history is relevant to this.
[–]iplayguitarbackwards 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's funny how stupid a person can appear just by not know anything about history.
This was a troll as admitted by the poster, who is now posting this screenshot around trying to karmafarm from it like it wasn't them (not the OP of THIS thread though)
My recent comment history has relevant discussion shall we say.
[–]RedForman- 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lol she didn't have to wait long
[–]MyOtherTagsGood 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This has what to do with Men's rights?
[–]funnyferret 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hey my comment!
[–]fallacator 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hierarchies exist because of women, so they basically start every war.
[–]swelteringheat 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Margaret Thacher only went to war after Argentina invaded the Falklands so that one doesn't really count.
[–]NotKennyLoggins 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
i demand that this is taken down so i may post it, as it is my intellectual property
[–]SocietopathyObserved 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hillary Clinton would have if she could have. She basically did in her campaign.
[–]BaronRafiki 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I think there ahould be a sub for this. R/rediculuswomen or somerhing.
r/cringeanarchy you mean?
[–]notabotisbotanot 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Margaret Sanger
[–]atomw0lf1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Oh my god, that bitch is seriously ignorant...
[–]Denebula -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Cuz five outta three (thousand) ain't baaaaaad. I think thats how the song goes. Idk, im just a stupid girl
[–]GuyBatarang -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Where's Cersei and Daenerys?!
[–]_Fuzzy-Dunlop_ -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
This sub is satire, right?
[–]supacrusha 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Nope, we are actually people that fight for real equal rights, holy shit, I know, insane.
[–]_Fuzzy-Dunlop_ 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh, I thought it was just a echo chamber for grossly misled teenagers who took a philosophy elective.
Yep, I know, it may seem like that at first, but then you realise that youve just been brainwashed by feminism into thinking anything that isnt feminism is inherently sexist.
[–]MyOtherTagsGood -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's getting to be that way unfortunately.
[–]_Fuzzy-Dunlop_ -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It seems to be a mixture of r/sadcringe and r/iamverysmart, with a peppering of r/incels
[+]well_duh_doy_son -60 points-59 points-58 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Sad little boys
[–]tallwheel 14 points15 points16 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Says the loser who looks at pornography of pregnant women on reddit.
[+]well_duh_doy_son -20 points-19 points-18 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
That's pretty weak dude.
[–]stefman666 12 points13 points14 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I think he's calling you a sad little boy.
[+]well_duh_doy_son -16 points-15 points-14 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Right, but I don't think he came to that conclusion fairly. Certainly not creatively.
[–]Stenwalden 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Should he have asked his mystic what she thinks about you? That creative enough for you?
[–]well_duh_doy_son -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No, asking someone else wouldn't be creative at all
[–]supacrusha 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sad little user, waiting for a sad little reaction, what a sad lonely piece of shit... how sad.
I think you might've left out a "sad" there
[–]Krissam 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Says the guy who posts from his throwaway account.
LOL noice bruh
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[+]Dembara [recovered] (107 children) | Copy Link
Queens actually declare wars more often than kings.
[–]Caspasho 313 points314 points315 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]swiggitdoggy 92 points93 points94 points (69 children) | Copy Link
[–]shellbroth 322 points323 points324 points (47 children) | Copy Link
[–]starvinggarbage 299 points300 points301 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]el_padlina 37 points38 points39 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper21 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]el_padlina 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeegte12 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]starvinggarbage 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]XtremeDarkness 32 points33 points34 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]macthefire 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]circlhat -2 points-1 points0 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]starvinggarbage 16 points17 points18 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]circlhat -6 points-5 points-4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]starvinggarbage 11 points12 points13 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]circlhat -5 points-4 points-3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]starvinggarbage 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Red_Historian1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Anon3mous11 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]cottonkandykiller 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sherlock--Holmes 40 points41 points42 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]CrimeanSF 36 points37 points38 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]PinguRambo 26 points27 points28 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]WikiTextBot 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meistermalkav 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Tom_Brett 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]shellbroth 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]THEAdrian 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]sneakpeekbot 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Downvotesturnmeonbby 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Queen_Jezza 13 points14 points15 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Scrawlericious 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Queen_Jezza 15 points16 points17 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]KDulius 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Scrawlericious 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper21 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]shellbroth 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]like_a_horse 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]shellbroth 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]like_a_horse 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MR_Flarg 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CalvinsCuriosity 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]shellbroth 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TubbyandthePoo-Bah -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Koussevitzky [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
You honestly believe that most kings personally went with their armies into battle? That is extremely misinformed. /r/badhistory
[–]poloport 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Koussevitzky7 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]wangyuanji58 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]BrownButterStick -9 points-8 points-7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper21 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Strongblackfemale 3 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]swiggitdoggy -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Strongblackfemale 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]swiggitdoggy 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Strongblackfemale 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]swiggitdoggy -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]blue_strat 9 points10 points11 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper21 9 points10 points11 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]blue_strat -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper21 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]blue_strat 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]el_padlina 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kickstand 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]funnyferret 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dembara 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Choice77777 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NO_FIX_AUTOCORRECT -3 points-2 points-1 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeegte12 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]NO_FIX_AUTOCORRECT 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]swiggitdoggy -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tigrn914 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]deku_link -5 points-4 points-3 points (30 children) | Copy Link
[–]Batbuckleyourpants 121 points122 points123 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Cleficate 37 points38 points39 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jackhellerson 23 points24 points25 points (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 30 points31 points32 points (24 children) | Copy Link
[–]jackhellerson 18 points19 points20 points (23 children) | Copy Link
[–]gottoloveya 11 points12 points13 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx -5 points-4 points-3 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 4 points5 points6 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Taxus_Calyx -6 points-5 points-4 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]ElfmanLV1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper211 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]stefman666 4 points5 points6 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]stefman6662 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]stefman6662 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]thatfancychap 22 points23 points24 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Siganid 15 points16 points17 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Siganid 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Taxus_Calyx 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PwsAreHard 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dembara 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]deku_link 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dietah 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]M16-andPregnant [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
Let me look at the greatest generals in history.
Ghengis Khan
Muhhumud
Cyrus the great
Napoleon
Hannibal
Julius Caesar
Vlad the impaler
Etc.
Most of the greatest generals in the history of mankind are males.
[–]Dembara 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fengpi 175 points176 points177 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Anarchytect1204 104 points105 points106 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]jackhellerson 52 points53 points54 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NotKennyLoggins 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lothartheunkind 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sketchy_Uncle 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Electroverted 106 points107 points108 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Silmariel 44 points45 points46 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ShureYnaut 46 points47 points48 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]DustPalacePapa 20 points21 points22 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]blackxxwolf3 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ISOanexplanation 81 points82 points83 points (33 children) | Copy Link
[+]Draestyn [recovered] (32 children) | Copy Link
Maggie thatcher is my hero and I'm american
[–]ISOanexplanation 36 points37 points38 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]iongnil 11 points12 points13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]KDulius 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BackFromTheBan 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Draestyn [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah no doubt, I wasn't trying to imply that she wasn't brutal in her own right. Dunno what the downvotes are for, but whatevs
[–]muzlightyear 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]trenescese 5 points6 points7 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–]pacmatt27 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Draestyn [recovered] (19 children) | Copy Link
Muh evil conservatives
[–]pacmatt27 19 points20 points21 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[+]Draestyn -9 points-8 points-7 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]pacmatt27 21 points22 points23 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[+]Draestyn -7 points-6 points-5 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]pacmatt27 13 points14 points15 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[+]R_Lupin -7 points-6 points-5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]pacmatt275 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Scrawlericious5 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]PwsAreHard3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]pacmatt271 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Scrawlericious 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Scrawlericious1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]KDulius 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]KDulius 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]zb9194 -6 points-5 points-4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TubbyandthePoo-Bah 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iKarllos 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Draestyn 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]theothermod[M] 23 points24 points25 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dillonmcdoodle[S] 30 points31 points32 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]jackhellerson 16 points17 points18 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Slushsoup 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]aych001 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]klingma 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]deku_link 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]klingma 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DongleNocker 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]isaiahtx 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]AKAPolock 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]isaiahtx 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Afrobean 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Ginger-saurus-rex 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wlxr 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mauzeraut 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DarthCerebroX 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]willvotetrumpagain 21 points22 points23 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]satellitegif [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
Oh man, this is scary to watch
[–]pm_me_whale_pictures 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]pm_me_whale_pictures 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]blackxxwolf3 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]unmuteme -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jah348 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lawfulgray 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]CalvinsCuriosity 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]BrundleCopter 16 points17 points18 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]CalvinsCuriosity 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pretzelzetzel 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]smellypantleg 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]_LadyBoy 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MikeNew513 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]KingRobotPrince 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Phkn-Pharaoh 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]travelocitygnomarch 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iplayguitarbackwards 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iplayguitarbackwards 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]travelocitygnomarch 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RedForman- 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MyOtherTagsGood 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]funnyferret 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fallacator 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]swelteringheat 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NotKennyLoggins 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SocietopathyObserved 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BaronRafiki 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]notabotisbotanot 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]atomw0lf1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Denebula -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]GuyBatarang -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]_Fuzzy-Dunlop_ -2 points-1 points0 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]_Fuzzy-Dunlop_ 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MyOtherTagsGood -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]_Fuzzy-Dunlop_ -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]well_duh_doy_son -60 points-59 points-58 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]tallwheel 14 points15 points16 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[+]well_duh_doy_son -20 points-19 points-18 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]stefman666 12 points13 points14 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]well_duh_doy_son -16 points-15 points-14 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Stenwalden 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]well_duh_doy_son -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]supacrusha 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]well_duh_doy_son -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Krissam 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]well_duh_doy_son -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link