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

New York Pharmacy Takes a Stand by Introducing a "Man Tax" - it may be a few months old but still very relevant

superzepto

March 1, 2017
101 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://bigthink.com/design-for-good/new-york-pharmacy-takes-a-stand-by-introducing-a-man-tax
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 New York Pharmacy Takes a Stand by Introducing a "Man Tax" - it may be a few months old but still very relevant
Author

superzepto

Upvotes 101
Comments 37
Date March 1, 2017 6:11 AM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5wtoax/new_york_pharmacy_takes_a_stand_by_introducing_a/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/new-york-pharmacy-takes-a-stand-by-introducing-a.930800
https://theredarchive.com/post/930800
Top posts by superzepto

My experiences as a survivor of abuse

84 upvotes
October 23, 2021
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

A mother attempted to drown her two sons in the Murray River yesterday, and now the father has spoken out about his devastation.

76 upvotes
March 4, 2017
/r/MensRights

This sub was in a TV show!

28 upvotes
December 3, 2017
/r/MensRights

It frustrates me to no end that I need to state the obvious while engaging with people who profess solidarity with the working class.

1 upvotes
November 17, 2022
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Comments

[–]Tmomp 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"We want to bring awareness on how it feels to be a woman, so the men actually get to feel it."

93% of workplace injuries and fatalities affect men. How about some compassion for them? How about the men who don't get to spend time with their children because they work far from home, or the ones who work outdoors in any weather while women tend to work indoors?

Or do they prefer to cherry pick issues that conform to their particular bias?

[–]Apexbreed 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Do they not consider that maybe the cost going into producing and marketing female porducts are actually higher? Looking at my razor compared to my wifes razor makes the obviously clear. Stupid practice too, considering women could just do the shoping here for the man's products that he needs. Way to fail.

[–]johnnie-fuckwit2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's not R&D, it's just marketing. Women are prepared to pay more, so companies charge more. It's not fucking sexism. Want cheaper shit? Buy less useless and expensive shit!

[–]perplexedm 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

marketing female porducts are actually higher?

But it is good for marketing, advertising, tv, media and a whole lot of business that depend on such income.

[–]bitawareaustralia 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually giving women a lower price as store policy surely infringes discrimination laws.

They could put the signs up to raise awareness of the practice but not actually charge men more / women less, and that would be just as effective.

[–]Revorob 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Who gives a shit? Any man who sees this sign in the window will shop elsewhere. Problem solved.

[–]perplexedm 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

What if this is considered as a precedent and govt. opt for such tax norms ?

[–]Revorob 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

That's a scary thought. However, seeing as men make up nearly 50% of the voting demographic, I doubt any government would be that stupid. But - I could be wrong.

[–]perplexedm 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Read somewhere discussions on taxing unmarried men. So...

[–]Revorob -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That's a good example of why one should not give credit to everything one reads. Whilst I will concede that nothing is impossible, I have always thought the idea of a man tax to be highly unlikely to ever see the light of day.

[+]perplexedm points 9 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

That's a good example of why one should not give credit to everything one reads.

Historically, bachelor tax was implemented in various forms. There are many proposals roaming around even these days in different cultures.

If govt. faces problems, they will not mind blaming men for and tax them.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-25/japan-considers-handsome-tax-libido-crisis-looms?page=1

[–]Revorob 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The link you posted is an interesting read. One line that jumped out at me was........

"the situation has got worse and government and economists are looking for solutions: from imposing "handsome taxes" to make it easier for uglier men to get laid"

I personally would not oppose a tax only levied at conventionally handsome men. Mainly because such men are usually seen as alpha by women and tend to be relatively useless to society. By contrast, less attractive beta men - at least in the view of women - tend to be the major contributors to society. As things stand at the present, beta guys like me whom are well educated and highly employed pay the majority of taxes that keep women alive yet we get no access to sex. On the other hand, most guys I know that lay women left and right are fucking losers who have nothing to offer the gene pool. With this in mind, is it any wonder men are increasingly going MGTOW? Any society that imposes a general man-tax is basically telling its males that if they dare to contribute to civilisation, they will pay for it. Given the choice, a less attractive beta man is better off doing cash-in-hand work and paying no tax whatsoever. As soon as large numbers of beta men start doing that, society ends.

However, getting back to my original point, I have no problem with supposed "alpha" men paying extra tax to support women. After all, they are the fathers of most illigitimate children as they are ones women are freely giving sex to.

[–]perplexedm 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I personally would not oppose a tax only levied at conventionally handsome men.

However, getting back to my original point, I have no problem with supposed "alpha" men paying extra tax to support women.

Dude, what are you trying to say.

After all, they are the fathers of most illigitimate children as they are ones women are freely giving sex to.

You are not holding women self accountable for their actions, rather men just because they look good ?

Your major concern was about possibility of taxing men. Well, I give you a real world example.

Now, to follow up:

https://gynocentrism.com/tag/bachelor-tax/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_tax#History

[–]Revorob 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Dude, what are you trying to say.

Upon re-reading, I think I may have worded my statement poorly. What I was trying to say was that if women have a tendency to ignore most men in terms of sex, respect and whatever else one cares to mention, why should those men be contributing financially to women. On the other hand, it is well known that women are sufficiently superficial that they demand men be good looking in order to be worth their consideration. With this in mind, I am asserting that if women want to rely on the male tax dollar to exist (and they do), then it should be the men that actually get some benefit from women (mainly the "handsome" ones) who should be paying. Make no mistake, by virtue that men pay something in the order of 75% of the taxation dollar in most developed countries, there is effectively a man-tax already existing. I am merely suggesting that this needs to be slanted towards men whom actually get something out of women.

You are not holding women self accountable for their actions

Quite true. However, I have learned - from much experience - that holding a woman accountable for her behaviour is about as productive as holding a cat accountable for its behaviour. However, one facet of female behaviour that can be relied on is the tendency for women to screw exclusively (by and large) good looking men. From my own observation, pretty much all men I know who score a lot of pussy are good looking and pretty much all men I know who are good looking just happen to be scoring a lot of pussy. As far as I am concerned, if society allows women to ignore "ordinary" men, then society can go after women and their preferred "handsome" men for their tax dollars.

Thank you for the further links. I do not have time to read them just now but I shall later today.

[–]SupremeAuthority 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You want to piss off 50% of voters? Go ahead and try.

[–]perplexedm 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You cannot easily piss of men and men don't care much about other men. The reason why mra interests are extreme weak within men in society. And why this sub gets very low attention compared to feminist subs.

[–]Stevet159 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then that's something to care about, but this person is marketing with their own personal business. It's probably great business.

[–]elegant_groundhog -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Any evidence that this will happen?

[–]perplexedm 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Any evidence that this will not happen? Because this is how precedents are sent, there are few discussions on those lines already and some are already being carried out by society.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

clearly the store knows that, and my guess is their customer base is almost entirely female already, so are counting on free publicity to bring in more women.

I'm calling bullshit on "women shop tax free"...eating 8.875% sales tax seems pretty unlikely.

[–]Revorob 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

clearly the store knows that, and my guess is their customer base is almost entirely female already, so are counting on free publicity to bring in more women.

I agree. In Australia, we have a large national discount pharmacy chain called "Chemist Warehouse". Without fail, if a man has to go to a pharmacy, he will try to go to a Chemist Warehouse purely as their prices are a shitload cheaper than any independant pharmacy. The warehouses don't have that same warm and fuzzy atmosphere the smaller independent pharmacies have (and women love) but most men aren't warm and fuzzy so don't care.

I'm calling bullshit on "women shop tax free"...eating 8.875% sales tax seems pretty unlikely.

I got the impression they were adding an extra tax for men as opposed to taking a tax off for women. I could be wrong.

EDIT: I FU the formatting.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The sign says "all female customers shop tax free"...I don't know what that would mean other than taking taxes off for women. I also don't believe they're actually doing that, so who knows.

[+]johnnie-fuckwit points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

So what you're saying... is that it's consumer choice, not sexism, that drives price setting in the market. And profligate spenders ... get charged more. Fascinating!

[–]Revorob 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ultimately, the market is driven by supply and demand. Demand is largely (but not exclusively) driven by consumer choice. For example, if 90% of consumers who currently eat meat converted to vegetarianism, this would lead to a glut of meat on the market. This oversupply of meat would be a direct result of the choices of consumers. You can bet your bottom dollar that the price of meat would plummet as butchers (and whomever else sells meat) would be desperate to offload their exessive stocks of meat that few people wanted. This would be an example of consumer choice directly driving the market.

In regards to the pharmacy situation - the only men who wil be affected by the man tax are those whom choose to spend money at that pharmacy. If some men out there want to pay extra because they believe in the non-existant wage gap, more power to them; there is no law against either ignorance or stupidity. However, any man who has enough sense to dismiss the mythical wage-gap for the bullshit it is will likely spend his hard earned elsewhere. Either way, the consumers (male ones in this instance) will continue to drive the market via their choices.

EDIT: Missed word.

[–]feedmecarrots 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes, it is a few months old. Are they still doing this? It's discriminatory as can be be, but it is against men, so who in government will care?

[–]Apexbreed 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Would they care if, for instance, they offered a white male discount on the grounds that white males pay the highest percentage of taxes? I would bet my left leg that the government would step in immediately and heads would roll. But we all have been learning that discrimination is okay if the government doesn't care about the group discriminated against.

[–]feedmecarrots 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Aren't we all getting little tired of all this?

[–]kal_el_diablo 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A neighboring bar or restaurant should introduce a "female tax" on drinks and meals. Except, of course, men would just end up paying it one way or another anyway.

[–]PerniciousOne 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What if I am one of the 55 other genders in New York.

[–]Armand28 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Companies don't charge more because the product is for women, they charge more because either the production run is lower or demand is higher. In short they charge more whenever they have to recoup higher production costs and where people are willing to pay more. Same reason left-handed versions and xxxl versions of a lot of products cost more. It's not discrimination against left-handed people or larger people, it's just supply and demand.

[–]thrway_1000 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://archive.is/jS4QA

[–]ReallySeriousThere 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'll just say I identify as a woman, problem solved. Top kek

[–]englishfury 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

pretty much, if they complain cause a scene.

[–]BMeyerBA 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What about boys under 16? Since they probably don't have a job are they exempt? I know they enjoy changing the meaning of words and phrases so ALL MALES could mean only adults, if they aren't complete scum fucks, that is

[–]johnnie-fuckwit2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Profligate spenders get charged more. Simple market principle. If they could get away with charging men more, you don't think they would?

[–]LibertyIsNotFree 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd have loved the money I won from suing that store.

I believe what they're doing is entirely fine, but laws don't agree. I support people to have freedom of association unlimitedly, no matter who is offended. Unless laws are fixed, everyone has to play by the same stupid rules

[–]Urishima 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why the repost? What's the point?

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