TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

9iLsgs1TYI Archive

View 1 post and 152 comments by 9iLsgs1TYI on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

9iLsgs1TYI/r/MensRights28/01/13 04:21 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Did your doctor discuss a Preputioplasty (NSFW) with you?
/r/MensRights27/10/15 01:05 AM
2

Try this one.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/06/15 03:17 AM
526

http://www.surenews.com/violence/daughter-gets-assaulted-father-comes-in-and-cleans-house/ Try this link if you're on mobile.
/r/PussyPassDenied27/06/15 09:09 PM
2

Archived here.
/r/MensRights20/06/15 01:42 AM
10

You've probably never thought to question why you were circumcised. College Humor has an interesting video on it. Another video on the effects/history of circumcision. (NSFW)
/r/MensRights22/01/15 10:01 PM
1

Exactly. Like the 13-year-old boy who was forced to pay his rapist child support. One of the issues I see with the typical opt-out LPS is that it requires the man to be aware of the pregnancy. This means that a woman must only lie or hide the pregnancy until past the cutoff-mark so the man is powerless to refuse fatherhood. Opting-in avoids the entire issue.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 09:36 PM
1

Every single accidental pregnancy is now by default 100% the woman's problem to deal with, and men will never carry any responsibility. Ignoring rape, pregnancy should be 100% the woman's responsibility because its her body and she therefore has 100% control. She has far more birth control options than a man and she has final veto power over whether the child is birthed or not. She can place the child up for adoption or abandon it at a safe haven if she so chooses. GirlWritesWhat has a good vide…
/r/MensRights16/10/14 08:41 PM
2

Opting in has no chance of ever happening, and creates more complications and problems than an LPS contract. I disagree. How is signing one "opt-in" contract any more complicated than signing multiple "opt-out" contracts? The opt-in contract is likely to be signed with a long-term partner and in a more professional (sober) environment. Additionally, consider how more trivial obligations require the signing of a contract (having a driver's license or a pet) yet raising a child does not. It doesn'…
/r/MensRights16/10/14 10:56 AM
2

I believe LPS should work like a prenuptial agreement. He presents a contract that states his intention to remain child free... What man is going to present a contract for a one night stand? And if he does, what happens if either participant is drunk? Or if she rapes him? Do men deserve legal protection in such situations? The opt-out approach seems unnecessarily complex and completely counter intuitive. Just as couples opt-into marriage, men should opt-into fatherhood. I've talked about this be…
/r/MensRights16/10/14 08:19 AM
4

Pro-Injustice Warrior.
/r/MensRights07/09/14 08:44 PM
2

Adventure games ≠ Choose your own adventure games
/r/MensRights01/09/14 08:00 PM
1

Its worth noting that there is a more preferable procedure for extereme phimosis called a Preputioplasty (NSFW). This type of surgery does not remove the foreskin and has a quicker recovery time than circumcision. All surgeries should be a last resort for phimosis as most instances are easily corrected by manual stretching (sometimes with the help of steroidal cream). Edit: Mistakenly posted Frenuloplasty (NSFW) instead of Preputioplasty.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 03:10 AM
6

Here's a good article explaining why the vaccination-circumcision comparison is a poor argument.
/r/MensRights14/08/14 02:54 AM
3

Album of the first page of comments.
/r/MensRights08/07/14 01:24 AM
3

Unless you're trying to be sarcastic, the real quote is: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Edit: Yeah, you are right. Whether for ideological or publicity purposes, she's intentionally slandering the MRM.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 06:31 AM
1

How will the child feel about the father... Angry? Unloved? Disinterested? How can we be certain? The question, although interesting, is arguably a red herring. Why is the question being asked now and with such conviction? How is the question more relevant to paternal surrender than adoption or abandonment? To treat the physical enslavement of men who pay support for children they never wanted as less serious than a child's opinion of his father, is simply dumbfounding. An absent father is unfor…
/r/MensRights05/04/14 07:24 PM
2

"Without financial abortion, we would encourage men to exercise more caution when determining a suitable mate." Yet this is happening, albeit slowly. Mens Rights and MGTOW are both movements that warn men about the dangers of marriage/fatherhood. If paternal surrender were legal, these people would not be taking to the web to warn others. Such situations would have solutions. Increasing a person's control over reproduction enables them to be more cautious. Men have one time to exercise caution (…
/r/MensRights05/04/14 06:17 PM
22

I'm pretty sure a lot of boys would hate their fathers for "abandoning" them. Be realistic. I am pretty sure a lot of adopted girls hate their mothers for "abandoning" them. As shitty as it is, reproductive rights have their consequences. If you fail to see that then I'd say you're the one being unrealistic.
/r/MensRights05/04/14 12:11 AM
29

How will this affect future generations of boys? Girls? Boys would learn that they have reproductive rights. Their fears of unplanned pregnancy would be eased and they would likely become more trusting of women. The risks of unprotected sex would not be forgotten, especially for boys whose fathers chose to exercise paternal surrender. Girls would learn that boys have reproductive rights. Forced fatherhood would no longer be a means to an end. Women pursuing a family would likely become less trus…
/r/MensRights04/04/14 10:58 PM
1

As already stated by Eryemil, the foreskin is not a small piece of skin. In an adult male the foreskin is about as large as a 3x5" index card. The answer to why the foreskin is the most erogenous part of male's anatomy has to do with it housing most of the male's sexual tissues and specialized nerves. See for yourself (SFW). Along with enumerating the sexual components removed in a circumcision, the previous link also shares whether the lost tissue is currently restorable.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:38 AM
2

What is so horrible about circumcision? This video answers your question in full. If you can't be bothered to watch the whole thing, there is a shorter version here. Both links are NSFW as they contain graphic video of the procedure.
/r/MensRights25/01/14 01:03 AM
19

Women have the same rights as men. What about the right to genital integrity?
/r/MensRights17/11/13 07:45 AM
1

Surgical regrowth can bring back to 90% of the feeling to the penis. Do you happen to have a source for that figure? It is often debated whether sensitivity is lost in a circumcision so I would like to know how that question was addressed. I am not arguing that circumcision should not be done until later in a mans life, my main argument was that female circumcision is much worse Sorry if I missed that.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 07:53 AM
2

[Labiaplasty], along with all other cosmetic surgery is not allowed on a minor. Ignoring corrective surgeries for birth defects, circumcision is the only surgery that is legal to perform on a minor for cosmetic reasons. One of the most common excuses given by parents who opt to have their son circumcised is "so that he will look like his father." These are some reports which found this or similar reasoning used in 40.9% of cases, 21% of cases, and 57.4% of cases. Except [circumcision as an adult…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 07:27 AM
2

There is not a single woman in the world who is happy with her female circumcision, or would choose to get one later on in life. It's worth pointing out the rising number of women who are choosing to undergo a labiaplasty. The increasing rates of this cosmetic procedure (to the point of being comparable to breast enhancement surgery) is evidence that women do choose to have their genitals altered later in life. Although nowhere close the severity of FGM, labiaplasties are still illegal to perfor…
/r/MensRights05/11/13 02:07 AM
1

But it's not like everybody with a tight foreskin can stretch it away. Maybe not, but multiple treatment options exist for a tight foreskin other than circumcision. Alternatives include topical steroid or non-steroid therapy, preputioplasty (NSFW), or the less common dorsal slit. These procedures, unlike circumcision, conserve most if not all of the foreskin and can therefore restore it to its normal function.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 04:58 PM
3

Excellent point. The removal of the foreskin certainly isn't a side-effect. Thanks. I suppose the point I was trying to make is that it is worth knowing precisely how a circumcision affects an adult man.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 09:07 PM
2

I disagree. Knowing the full implications of the procedure, including what is lost, is very relevant to the discussion. It's similar to the side-effects you hear about at the end of a drug advertisement. It's not there to scare you; it's there to give you full disclosure. One of the side-effects with circumcision is the loss of much of the boys genital anatomy.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:07 AM
2

...someone was citing the area of skin that is removed from an adult make who is circumcised. The only purpose of that fact is to make circumcision seem bad, rather than to actually inform. Or the purpose is to give perspective on the procedure; that the "little flap of skin" isn't really that little after the boy is grown up, Maybe the purpose is to show that the procedure is far from insignificant. Every time I see the 15 square inches figure it is always stated in the explicit context of an a…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 11:22 PM
1

Please inform me what sexual function I've lost. This link should be more than satisfactory in answering your question. But here is a simple analogy to a simple concept: The sheath of the male penis is removed in a circumcision. No sheath means no sheath sensations. Factor in the years of exposure/friction the glans undergoes without this protective sheath and the conclusion is obvious. A circumcised penis has significantly reduced amount of fine-touch sensations compared to the norm (PDF warnin…
/r/MensRights16/07/13 02:06 AM
2

Have you watched any of these videos before? They will help explain why the argument exists. Circumcision, an Elephant in the Hospital Excerpts - [10:28] Penn & Teller - Bullshit - Circumcision [29:40] Circumcision The Whole Story - [19:44]
/r/MensRights15/07/13 09:36 AM
2

If I am not mistaken, she is a feminist who started the whole Elevator-gate debacle. From what I can remember: She and a male attendee entered an elevator at an Atheism conference. The male attendee, a stranger to Rebecca, proceeded to ask Rebecca if she wanted to join him for coffee which she took to be a sexual advance. Since then, she has advocated for stricter sexual harassment rules at these conferences. I am pretty sure Thunderf00t made a video about the incident which I'll try to link. Ed…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 06:20 AM
3

It's him. Here's an AMA session he did under the same account a month ago.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 05:34 AM
1

No problem. I don't think forced fatherhood is violence per-say but I do think it is abuse of the system and worth fighting against.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:45 PM
15

Still doesn't make comparable to forced pregnancy. I was never arguing this. You stated that forced fatherhood has nothing to do with the man's body which I explained is false. ...we don't think paying taxes is a form of violence. Again, I was never arguing this. We should actually support abortion laws since it would decrease forced fatherhood. I do support women's right to choose! Why does this have to be an either-or situation? I am pro-choice not because it decreases forced fatherhood but be…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:33 PM
90

Forced fatherhood however is a social issue and has nothing to do with your body. Aside from the fact that you require your body to earn money for the child support payments. Also there is the whole aspect of being thrown in jail if you fail to meet the payment expected of you. Both instances here do involve the man's body.
/r/MensRights01/07/13 10:00 PM
2

I'm missing 2 square cm. of my skin! To be more accurate, circumcision removes what will be approximately 15 square inches (NSFW) or 96.77 cm2 of highly erogenous tissue. The posts I read on circumcision on this subreddit make me look down on my own manhood. It has never been the intent of Intactivists to belittle circumcised men or their manhood – many Intactivists are circumcised men! Rather the goal has always been to educate future parents about the procedure; particularly how it violates th…
/r/MensRights01/07/13 11:42 AM
6

You appear to be confusing equality of outcome with equality of opportunity. The concept of equal opportunity is to offer everyone a chance but to select the person who is the most suited for the role. Equality of outcome is affirmative action; i.e. legally enforced discrimination. Equality of opportunity would largely favour men in the case of military or hard labour jobs because men are typically stronger or more suited for these roles. Women would still compete for these jobs and would be sel…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:37 AM
3

Can you provide an example of when equal opportunity a bad thing?
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:54 AM
15

The MRM is not an ideology.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 08:31 PM
6

yeahtron3000 has said the following regarding circumcision: I am glad my parents did choose for me to get it done while I was still a baby, otherwise I would be faced with a difficult choice as to whether to get it done now that I am fully grown, aware of the operation and know of pain. At the same token, I have never agonised about getting a foreskin. I've never even thought about it in fact. As a circumcised man, my parents are both not religious.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 08:22 PM
0

I am not too sure how the system works. Sometimes you are required to enter a captcha and other times you are prevented from posting until a set number of minutes have passed. I believe this is on a per subreddit basis so moderators here might be able to quickly reduce the amount of spam coming through if it is enabled.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:12 AM
-2

Reddit already has a system that can limit the time between an account's posts. Perhaps it could be temporarily enabled for /r/MensRights?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 11:06 AM
2

Not only are you censored from making a joke because one person finds it offensive (not the person at whom the joke was directed at), you are also prevented from repeating the content for the sake of discussion. The moderator disregards the context of the second comment and removes it for reasons that only appear to be power-tripping. Perhaps the person who made that original post was offended and PM-ed the moderators, or perhaps several users who happened upon your comment were offended and rep…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 03:53 AM
23

Do not fret; nothing of value has been lost. Many videos have been made to document the ridiculousness that is Atheism+ since "the great poster tear-down extravaganza" last fall. These videos are often posted to /r/MensRights to show the continuous attempts of Feminists to co-opt other groups. The atheism and gaming communities are simply the most recent to be targeted. Here is a video by Thunderf00t where he succinctly dissects Atheism+. This is part of his series "Why 'Feminism' is Poisoning A…
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:18 PM
1

Thanks. I had heard the 60% stat before but not the 90%.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 11:07 PM
1

What is the source for the 9 to 1 in Canada statistic?
/r/MensRights01/06/13 02:52 AM
1

because the sentence [...] cannot be construed as a command. That's irrelevant. No, that is very relevant. Ambiguous sentences like those which can be read as both a command or a statement are examples of poor writing. In fact, I hesitate to call it ambiguous because I would always read such sentences commands. Again, your new example is not an adequate comparison. "Going for a jog now" cannot be construed as a command which was my initial complaint to the phrase "Apologize if".
/r/MensRights30/05/13 11:20 AM
7

55 seconds into the video he makes this statement: ... I am going to put the procedures in order from the least-severe on the bottom to the most-severe on top. There is no exact order for the severeness of these procedures so I am estimating to the best of my ability here.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 11:08 AM
1

That comparison does not work because the sentence "Went for a jog last night" cannot be construed as a command. "Apologize if" is set in present tense whereas "Went for a jog" is past tense. Here are some examples of commands becoming statements when the word 'I' is added to them: "Shout if you wear red." vs "I shout if you wear red." "Speed through school zones." vs "I speed through school zones." "Work in a coal mine." vs "I work in a coal mine." The first sentences are either commands or bad…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 10:58 AM
1

I think you mean "Apologies if I am." What you wrote, "Apologize if I am," is a command for us to apologize to you in the event that you are wrong. Edit: Added missing word.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 06:09 AM
25

who bets that guy doesn't send the wink to his male colleagues? How is that relevant? Who wants to bet that the girl has sent the wink to other colleagues? It is normal for people to form unique relationships with others and for people to have highly personalized ways of communicating. The appeal of emoticons is their ability to convey tone and emotion where simple text is ambiguous. As anyone should know, the winking emoticon is based on the human gesture of winking which is used for many reaso…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 05:55 AM
15

This is a recent post on /r/MensRights about this topic: If you ever hear someone say "You can't compare male circumcision to FGM!", show them this video.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 04:59 AM
1

It looks like your last sentence is unfinished.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:38 AM
7

Link to bypass YouTube's content warning.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 08:36 PM
1

Thanks. This is the first time I have seen comments disabled on a post. I thought Reddit mods just remove offending comments, not disable comments entirely.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:16 PM
1

Why are the comments disabled on the /r/videos post? http://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/1ekr97/crazy_landlord_fakes_rape_while_attacking_tenant/
/r/MensRights20/05/13 04:10 AM
1

Here is a link to bypass the content warning on the Vevo video.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 03:25 AM
3

Here's an illuminating comment from an anarchy101 moderator. (Source)
/r/MensRights01/05/13 06:51 AM
2

This is nothing new: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xwngx/srsersfeminists_vandalising_mrm_material_on/ Same user involved too.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 10:19 PM
3

This is a common misconception. Gender is decided at conception not sometime later in the womb. It is the fertilizing sperm which determines a person's sex by whether the sperm has an XX or XY chromosome. Link to a previous post on the topic.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 08:13 PM
2

You are making an appeal to tone and attempting to police the use of language. This is outrageous for three reasons: It is plain censorship. Reddit has a built-in system for regulating content. Users are able to down-vote nonsense and report hate speech. There is no need to bring in a (unelected/biased) third-party to dictate this for us. Although your intentions may be good, you cannot compensate for everyone. That with which one person takes offense may or may not offend another. For example, …
/r/MensRights02/04/13 08:59 AM
71

If the genders were reversed I doubt the humiliating footage would have been broadcasted on television. It literally looks like someone being raped. I cannot imagine a news channel broadcasting video of a woman being stripped of her clothing after some censor blur is added to her face and privates. Does this not overstep the boy's right to privacy?
/r/MensRights02/04/13 07:47 AM
3

Another is /r/MRAStats.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 09:47 PM
2

The first post of yours which I replied to claimed the Facebook post "is focusing on the lack of rights of women and how men don't have to deal with similar things". I attempted to explain how men already suffer from these things and asked for clarification regarding the lack of reproductive rights for women. Imagine women being denied a voice regarding children sired from rape. Imagine if a mother was still legally obligated to support children who she placed up for adoption or abandoned. Isn't…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 11:47 AM
1

Are you ThatCynicalCynicism from YouTube? Assuming you are, thanks for making your videos. Concise, honest, MRM content like yours is exactly what the movement needs. Unfortunately, two MRA YouTube channels just recently shutdown without warning. Specifically PatrickyHenryist and BigGimpin101. With so few MRM channels to begin with, I hope we do not lose anymore.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 08:02 AM
5

Has she actually began teaching about feminism? Unless she is actively preaching lies, you might be jumping the gun. She is not automatically wrong just because she mentioned feminism. Perhaps allow here a chance to explain before you engage in debate with her. If you do decide to contest her, it may be better after class or through e-mail. This is to prevent her claiming you are disrupting class and to permit a more professional discussion with sources and links. As /u/pickelsurprise said, you …
/r/MensRights17/03/13 07:35 AM
2

Sexism/Racism or any "ism" usually is when someone who has power uses it negatively or positively against an individual based upon some attribute. This is false. Sexism/racism does not rely on power... the idea you present is a redefinition - a loophole - created and abused by bigots to excuse their own sexism. Anyone can be racist or sexist. The topic of sexual differences is quite taboo in our society and a shining example of a double-standard: Men are not allowed to be better than women but w…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 07:12 AM
1

...all of those things are things the government currently doesn't do to men... I disagree. I would say that the government does treat men as the questions imply. Should the government control men's bodies? Should government mandate men's bodies be life support for the unborn? Should government have control over what free citizens can & cannot do with their bodies? The government does control men's bodies by forcing them to be the financial life support for children. The MRM is concerned with th…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 06:43 AM
40

The men's side is missing vasectomy and withdrawl. The women's side is missing diaphragm, IUD, and morning after pill.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 07:10 AM
52

I have a lot of respect for the trust/risk men face. Most men are oblivious to the risks. Rather than courage or calculated risk, I would hazard that what you are witnessing is pure ignorance. It is this lack of awareness which allows the unjust system to thrive. We often use the metaphor 'taking the red pill' to describe a man awakened to reality; often times this man is a victim to the unfair laws and will be labeled 'bitter' for openly discussing the issue. You appear to be a very astute pers…
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:14 AM
2

...minor... optional procedure. You appear to be downplaying the seriousness of this issue. The procedure is anything but minor and in virtually all cases not a choice for the circumcised. A minor procedure is using steroidal cream to treat phimosis, antibodies to fight UTIs, or a condom to prevent STDs. Minor procedures are non-invasive, easily reversible, and otherwise administered on a case-by-case basis. Preemptively amputating a healthy and functioning body part to prevent the above conditi…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 10:08 PM
2

Circumcision is not that serious of a crime Circumcision is not always a crime. A mature adult who consents to the procedure is not a victim but rather a person who has exercised their right to choose. What is a crime however, is the mandatory, non-medically necessary, cutting of an infant's genitals. It is important to be clear when discussing this topic. Ambiguous language risks representing a false argument. Acting as though male circumcision and female circumcision are on the same level is a…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 08:16 AM
5

Treading awfully close to the "no memes or rage comics" rule.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 06:25 AM
1

A minor grievance of mine: https://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/noone.html
/r/MensRights25/02/13 01:02 AM
1

Already asked. See here: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/18xqvd/mramrm_vs_mhramhrm/c8iz0kj?context=2
/r/MensRights25/02/13 12:57 AM
1

Have you seen this documentary? The Gender Equality Paradox - [38:53] It investigates and questions the idea of nature vs nurture with regards to differences between the sexes.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 06:05 AM
1

I agree with the origins and original necessity for male disposability although it has outlived its usefulness. The unfortunate truth is that there is no way to equalize disposaibility... it is a function of biology. Would you consider the invention and widespread use of artificial uterus-es to be an equalizer? If the biological function of gestation were moved to a machine women would be freed from pregnancy. This circumvents the whole issue of females being more innately valuable simply for po…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 10:11 AM
1

I am surprised. The forums added (but since removed) an auto-correction for MRM to MHRM. I thought John's video stated that the label was a personal choice but clearly not if it was forced on every forum member. Andy Man raises a good point: Changes like this need to carry people with them, not alienate them. Also, what is up with /r/menshumanrights? It has been a subreddit for over 7 months. Has the MRHM term been around for that long?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 09:45 AM
1

Thank you for the articulate response. I see a lot of truth in the steps you provide for obtaining equality. As you will have predicted, I cannot provide a concrete solution for obtaining equal disposability between the genders. The MRM does concern itself with this issue and advocates for equal sentences for equal crimes. I always thought egalitarians fought for the same thing. Is there any evidence to the contrary? I am hopeful that people will strive for parity in rights, responsibility, and …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 09:10 AM
2

No you can't. Egalitarians are advocating for a system which is detrimental to men. The two are incompatible. I was not aware of this. Would you care to explain why they are incompatible?
/r/MensRights21/02/13 06:39 AM
4

If you want to be an mHra, then /r/egalitarian is over in that direction... The proposed MHRA term does not incorporate egalitarianism; its just an alias for the original MRM. People can still identify both a MRA and an egalitarian (as most do) but ultimately the two movements are distinct from each other. Men and women are not equal. I am not sure why you begin arguing this. The original post only asks whether you would prefer to include or exclude the letter 'H' in the movement's acronym. The …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 06:27 AM
7

JohnTheOther recently posted a video to YouTube where he stated that he will be using the term MHRM (Men's Human Rights Movement) in place of MRM. His reasoning being that “it is more descriptive and accurate terminology". While I agree that the term is more accurate, I find the rename to be unnecessary for several reasons: The explicit addition of the word 'human' reinforces the idea that 'men' does not mean human. One should not have to say 'human man' nor 'human woman'; the word 'human' shoul…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 06:19 AM
7

Reminds me of this ManWomanMyth video.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 10:10 PM
3

...with a pre-nup could I forfeit parenthood? No. Unfortunate as it is, such a clause is not legal and could potentially void an entire pre-nup. Men and women are not afforded the legal right to dictate their paternal obligations (including child support). This is not an issue for women however as they retain options to escape motherhood post-conception. So what options do you have? Not many and all of them are preemptive: Always use and personally dispose of your own condoms. Check for holes in…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 08:43 PM
2

It's ridiculous to deprive yourself of sex just for this reason, in this modern era, when there are plenty of ways you can prevent pregnancy on your own. Plenty of ways? Men have four options when it comes to preventing a pregnancy: abstinence, condoms, withdrawal, and a vasectomy. Abstinence should not even count and the other three methods do not provide guaranteed protection. The possibility of contraception failing would not be an issue if men were provided a choice regarding fatherhood afte…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 09:25 AM
4

Just wear a condom dude. Condoms are not perfect. They can fail and when they do, the man will not be given a choice regarding fatherhood. Contrast this with a woman's options. Before sex she may utilize a condom, the pill, or an IUD. If those tactics fail she can still escape motherhood through the morning after pill, abortion, adoption, and abandonment. /u/BJ2RK583YJ is correct when he says "by consenting to sex I am also consenting to fatherhood". edit: It should not be this way however. Men …
/r/MensRights20/02/13 02:41 AM
8

I find the 'objectification' issue to be quite trivial. Objectification is a process humans use to dissect traits or qualities from a larger whole. We use it daily and indiscriminately: At a supermarket you might pass on fruit that is mushy, off-colour, or otherwise below par. When selecting a babysitter you will likely consider the person's experience, cleanliness, and willingness to listen. In both instances we have objectified our focus into certain traits to help us make a decision. Apparent…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:19 PM
2

...I just disagree with us blaming things unrelated to them as them. Understandably so, although it may help your case to be more specific. Which issues in particular does /r/MensRights unjustly attribute to feminism? The Facebook post you linked above (whether real or fictitious) depicts the problem of false rape accusations. Blame is placed on feminism for this issue due to the abuse-prone rape protection laws feminists pushed to create. MRAs claim that feminism should be held accountable for …
/r/MensRights18/02/13 02:09 AM
6

Check out this link from the sidebar: Discussion on why feminism is not a solution for men's issues. It is a collection of evidence demonstrating how feminism harms men.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 11:42 PM
4

People are diverse: /r/MensRights, \/r/AgainstMensRights \/r/SRS, \/r/AntiSRS /r/Conspiracy, /r/Conspiratard /r/Apple, /r/AppleSucks /r/Banana, /r/Pickle
/r/MensRights17/02/13 09:27 AM
19

Actually, during a brief questions-and-answer session at the UOT event, Warren stated that he had never been picketed up till that point. As he was not expecting any controversy, no precautions were taken. The cops were only called after the protesters barred entry. Based on that fact, I doubt he's very accustomed to the type of opposition his advocacy stirs up.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 06:09 AM
5

I'm not that well versed in it mind you, but can you guys tell me the cold hard facts as to why this is totally medically unnecessary? You are begging the question by presuming that circumcision is 'totally medically necessary'. The honest question is why infant circumcision is so medically-critical as to avoid being delayed. If no pressing medical concerns exist, how is the procedure justified? Anyways, you asked for the cold hard facts so I will oblige: Circumcision - NSFW [6:04]. Video of an …
/r/MensRights16/02/13 09:20 AM
2

This particular topic is regularly posted to /r/MensRights. Its almost daily that someone is complaining about the content of /r/MensRights and each time we have the same discussion. Are these type of posts not intended for /r/MensRightsMeta? I'll point you to a well thought-out comment by /u/oneiorosgrip where she discusses how the posts you condemn may actually serve a greater purpose: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/x4vop/this_needs_to_stop_now/c5j8gs9
/r/MensRights14/02/13 03:07 AM
2

I'm sorry, I too am mutilated. I'm hideously deformed, scarred, violated, broken, and otherwise disgusting. Nonsense. You are a beautiful human being who's presence warms us all. With that said, you should not be ashamed for something that was not of your own choosing. So, do you think you can show me the problem with parents, who decide a child's environment, neighborhood, early friends, education, entertainment, exposure to sports, dating limitations, and diet making this decision? What's with…
/r/MensRights13/02/13 11:28 AM
3

The core tenant to the circumcision issue is that the victim is physically maimed and has their human rights violated (mutilation). This is a logical argument and should not be censored in debates. Someone who posts in such a debate that "they're happy they were cut" has initiated a line of argument wherein they are the evidence. Personal criticism is guaranteed and completely valid. To cry foul here would simply be special pleading. Understandably, the deliberate act to insult another person sh…
/r/MensRights13/02/13 11:05 AM
2

Edit: I posted this video to generate discussion about the clip, not because I agree with what he's saying. I understand the knee-jerk reaction to down vote hateful speech but I think there much to learn here. Carlin's standup was always ahead of its time. Not afraid of offending his audience, he regularly criticized religion, political correctness, and government policies. His stage persona was a no-bullshit type of guy who promoted free-thinking, free speech, and skepticism. As such, I have al…
/r/MensRights28/01/13 09:13 AM
1

She*
/r/MensRights15/01/13 05:45 AM
3

I agree with everything you said with one exception: ... men initially develop as women and only develop in men later in the womb ... This is not true. A person's sex is determined at conception by the fertilizing sperm. Whether that sperm contains XY or XX chromosomes dictates whether the fetus is male or female. Both sexes develop the same rudimentary/non-functional genitals which eventually specialize into the testes/ovaries. From an evolutionary stand-point this is efficient: create people u…
/r/MensRights04/01/13 10:31 AM
0

Your parents appear to be honest people; their refusal to conform to ridiculous social norms is commendable. Hopefully you recognize the respect they demonstrated through keeping you intact. If you are truly adamant about knowing, perhaps a simple thank you will uncover their reasoning. They may be relieved to know that you do not resent their decision. Either way, it is preposterous that society expects a reason when keeping a child intact but not when amputating part of the body.
/r/MensRights25/12/12 05:26 AM
3

This is worth repeating: do not get married. No one should learn this the hard way. The fact that all prenups fail to guarantee the protection they intend should raise several red flags. I recall an interview with a lawyer who discussed what is considered when trying to break a prenup. He mentioned the following points which may or may not be valid: Too little time between the wedding and when the document was signed. He said this is potential grounds for duress and recommends at least a month g…
/r/MensRights23/12/12 03:44 AM
3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgR83ufREqE
/r/MensRights23/12/12 02:11 AM
58

Does testosterone provide an unfair advantage with regards to non-physical sports as well? I ask this because the competitive sport of chess is also split into gendered leagues. This is a game involving minimal physical involvement but instead has a core focus on memorization and spacial awareness. Separating players based on their sex in this sport implies that one group possesses an advantage over the other; but what might that advantage be? Is it really gender related? It should be noted that…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 03:45 AM
5

How would one verify that someone is on the pill?
/r/MensRights14/12/12 09:44 PM
3

Babies do not have autonomy. When exactly do babies acquire their autonomy then? On their n-th birthday? Infants have preferences, feelings, and emotions. They may have limited autonomy but they certainly possess it. And while they are free to feed (as in provide nutrients), they can't NOT (malnutrition) feed them adequate sustenance. Well we agree here. A parent's right to choose for their child is not absolute. They are bound to respecting the rights and life of the child. I argue that to resp…
/r/MensRights29/11/12 11:15 PM
4

Vaccinations, piercings, haircuts, diet, bathing, clothing, shelter, etc. Here's an article on why vaccinations are not comparable to circumcision. Piercings and haircuts are non-permanent, they will heal/regrow over time. The same cannot be said about removing the foreskin. You cannot feed your child whatever you like. Malnutrition is taken very serious and can be grounds for removing the child from the parents' care. Same with umbilical cord cutting. Sure, we could let it dry out and fall off,…
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:59 PM
4

Only for a few years. Why can't the surgery be delayed?
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:36 PM
3

If some parent wants a kid with a circumcised penis, they have every right to do so. What if the kid doesn't want to be circumcised?
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:10 PM
3

The Fox who had Lost his Tail
/r/MensRights29/11/12 09:00 PM
6

It's horrific and I feel terribly sorry for boys growing up in Jewish homes. They'll be eight days old when their genitals are mutilated and sucked in the name of a religion they cannot know. The event is not as much for the boy's faith as it is is for the parents'. A forced sacrifice. So what if circumcision is "in their heritage"? That's an appeal to tradition -- a logical fallacy. Should foot binding and female circumcision be allowed because they were once tradition? What other abominations …
/r/MensRights29/11/12 08:13 AM
15

Factional comics.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 08:11 PM
5

Ad hominem? What part of Eryemi's post was a personal attack? Is it the part where he tells you that he's intact? Do you honestly find that offensive? If you're "intact" then the only reasonable conclusion is that men who are circumcised are not whole men, right? You have missed the point of Eryemi's post and constructed a straw man. You are also either falsely equivocating a person's humanity with a person's body, or you apply double-think and believe a surgery that removes part of a person's b…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 05:48 AM
2

Please explain.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 04:01 AM
1

I agree that the primary purpose of safe haven laws is to prevent the mistreatment of children. These laws provide an important escape route from parental responsibilities that otherwise would be limited to infanticide, suicide, or hard abandonment. Also, women absolutely cannot place a child up for adoption without the father's consent. You are forgetting that a mother may fail to inform the father of the pregnancy. She may say the father is unknown. He cannot contest her decision if he is unaw…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 03:01 AM
3

The point to note is that even though they exist, an abandoned child will not receive financial support from either biological parent. A common argument against paternal surrender is that a child has the right to financial support from their parents; so we've found a double-standard. Also important is that a child can be abandoned by a mother who claims to not know the father. Fathers cannot use this excuse because hospital records will indicate who the mother is. The question of how the father …
/r/MensRights26/11/12 11:47 PM
6

You may also find of interest /r/FeMRA and /r/LadyMRAs.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 10:58 PM
2

A woman may also abandon a baby at a safe haven without the father present. No questions asked. If she chooses to do this she is not obligated to pay child support.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 10:53 PM
3

If you're interested, here are some previous discussions on /r/MensRights regarding the issue: If a woman can abort a baby, as well as her responsibility to said child, without the father's consent, should the father be able to abort his responsibility to pay child support if the mother refuses adoption or abortion? Pregnancy Dichotomy And a relevant GirlWritesWhat video. I have posted in both topics suggesting an opt-in approach to parenthood as opposed to opting-out. What are your thoughts on …
/r/MensRights26/11/12 10:50 PM
5

Are you saying that you do not consider the procedure physically dangerous? If you are labeling it mutilation, as do I, then by the very definition it is physically dangerous. When is mutilation not dangerous? The procedure removes a healthy part of the body and has several risks including infection, total loss of the penis, and death. All these risks taken for something you called "completely unnecessary". I agree with you that the procedure is unnecessary and in fact a violation of human right…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 10:06 PM
2

Thanks for answering my questions. ...my cellphone was dead so I could not record any of it, sorry. People should not expect you to film the meeting as this is a responsibility of the organizer(s). Difficulty attending the event was an issue for you, another, someone else, and possibly more. Had the assembly been recorded, the difficulty in scheduling would have been alleviated and the speaker(s) protected from misrepresentation. I applaud your courage to identify as an MRA in front of a non-app…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 09:29 PM
13

Many men rights activists are misogynists in disguise. There is an underlying sense of violence in Men’s Rights groups. Men’s Rights Groups are all organized by white, educated males. Sounds like a terrible meeting. I would hope the ad hominem and racist remarks would have elicited anger and people walking out. Still, not all is bad. It's good to see discussion about the MRM which brings the movement into the conscious of more people. I do have some questions: Was the meeting filmed and if so, i…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 10:04 AM
2

Molesting is sexual, whereas Circumcision is not so. One reason for circumcising boys (admittedly, old fashion) is to prevent them from masturbating. Is that not sexual in nature? The definition of molestation is “the forcing of undesired sexual behavior by one person upon another”. An infant cannot consent to circumcision; a procedure often justified by purely sexual reasoning (namely, STD protection and for 'her approval'). While these benefits are up for debate, the boy's sexuality is not. Th…
/r/MensRights23/11/12 08:29 AM
1

I was speaking on the morality of those particular actions, not the justifications for particular circumstances. This sounds as though you're implying the morality of an act is inherent in the act itself. Or in other words, the reasoning behind an act is unimportant. Have I misread you? When determining if an action is moral, the circumstances should definitely be considered. For example, NAP considers violence to be immoral unless it is in retaliation. This is in stark contrast to Pacifism wher…
/r/MensRights20/11/12 10:28 AM
1

One could argue that the concept of a justified crime is an oxymoron. Understanding that justice is a philosophical question, we cannot we be certain that our form of justice is correct. We must acknowledge the influences of bias, culture, and religion on our sense of justice. Your statement, "There's no such thing as moral/justified rape", is equally subjective as the retort, "there is no such thing as a justified murder". I do not say this with regards to the current legal system, but rather t…
/r/MensRights20/11/12 07:43 AM
2

A link to GirlWritesWhat's YouTube page. ManWomanMyth is another YouTube channel I recommend. His videos span several Men's Rights issues but are very blunt. They document many double standards that people do not like to discuss. Some other Men's Rights YouTube channels: Barbarossaaaa Stardusk PatrickHenryist Chapin's Inferno
/r/MensRights17/11/12 07:49 AM
7

I recommend that she sees a video the surgery before she has her son cut. Of all the graphic videos I've seen on the internet, watching an infant boy being circumcised is among the most horrific. You may also wish to remind her that by keeping him intact he has the choice to get circumcised later. If she cuts him now, she will rob him of this choice.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 05:46 AM
0

I agree. I also noticed that check-boxes were used for every question except the first one which means you can select multiple answers. Overall unprofessional so I just quit halfway through.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 05:32 AM
6

FuquanMcCain is addressing that. A site called faggotniggerorvirgin.com would have just as much if not more material to work with. Online insults are not exclusive to women.
/r/MensRights15/11/12 06:03 AM
3

Thanks for replying. I agree with the age system you've proposed as it would permit young adults to have sex while also protecting them from predators. I realize now how limited my initial concept of deception was. Both you and samarye have informed me of scenarios which I failed to consider. I appreciate you for enlightening me on this matter. Thanks for addressing my concerns.
/r/MensRights12/11/12 03:17 PM
3

Thanks for the response and great resources. You have shown me legitimate areas I failed to consider (bogus medical treatments, impersonations) and reassured me that trivial lies are not considered rape by fraud. One part of this document that intrigued me was this which starts on page 45: When raped by a juvenile employing fraud, an adult has intercourse with the juvenile and thus commits statutory rape. Consider the following example. Ben falls asleep waiting for his wife, Jane, to return home…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 09:55 AM
7

You are maliciously putting words in ErasmusMRA's mouth. In no way are they encouraging 'rape culture' or excusing the behaviour you claim they are. Rather, ErasmusMRA has contributed a valid point concerning the definition of a rapist (the whole point of this topic). The point brought forth by ErasmusMRA is to consider the intention of the person being accused of rape. This is not a new concept and happens all the time in legal cases. I'll try to demonstrate how someone's intent matters by usin…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 05:14 AM
7

This should be the standard definition as it encompasses every victim including men. I agree with nearly all of it but do have a few questions: over a minimum age Do you think that people close to the minimum age should be afforded more leniency? For example, if the age-of-consent is set at 18, should two people aged 17 and 19 be legally able to have sex? ... or being significantly decieved about the situation. Do you care to you elaborate on this? Under what circumstances could one claim to hav…
/r/MensRights12/11/12 03:44 AM
3

Not sure if these are the kind of links you're interested in but I think they're relevant. Man forced to pay support for a child that is not his because he dated the mother (post by carchamp1) Video on circumcision, there is a link in the description to the full video which contains sources in its description (post by JohnAdamZiolkowski)
/r/MensRights09/11/12 09:24 PM
1

Great video! Thanks for posting.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:05 AM
2

I think it is because your submission title is the same as the original plus the keyword 'fixed'. This bot scans for such submissions and posts a comment so users who missed the original post may find it. Some redditors mockingly 'fix' other posts with their own submission; this bot serves a useful role in linking the two. It has not gone wrong though.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 02:45 AM
1

This is tricky dilemma. The woman is in an unfortunate position where she cannot speak or act on her own behalf. In a perfect world, her intentions would be documented so doctors could fulfill them. It would prevent the woman from birthing children she intended on aborting while also saving the children she desired keeping. I cannot speak for every person but I have stated my position on the default procedure. Here's an interesting collection of documented births while the mother was in a coma. …
/r/MensRights08/11/12 10:56 AM
2

Yes, I agree. We should skip the opt-out in favour of mandatory opting-in, it is much more direct and prevents the, "Oops, forgot to tell you", scenario. I was simply trying to highlight that giving men the ability to opt-out is still better than the current situation where men have no options at all. With that said, I disagree with abortion being the default procedure to pregnant, comatose-women for the same reason I disagree with circumcising infant boys: If the woman does want the child and i…
/r/MensRights08/11/12 09:26 AM
0

This issue was recently discussed on MensRights and I left my thoughts on the subject which are much inline with your own. I try to outline why opting-into child support is more favourable than opting-out. I agree, it is a blatant double standard to prevent men freedom from child support while simultaneously offering women multiple escape routes (abortion, adoption, safe havens). Men should be allowed equal rights to those afforded to women. Currently it is illegal to create a contract with any …
/r/MensRights08/11/12 07:25 AM
22

I sent the following e-mail to their general manager's office ([email protected]): This e-mail follows your organization's decision to fire Mr. Artis Hughes, the bus driver who defended himself from the violent passenger Ms. Shi' Dea Lane. I first became aware of the issue between Mr. Hughes and the passenger after viewing footage of the events from a website that showcases everyday justices. The events of September 18 are quite clear and your organization is fortunate to have such impartial and docu…
/r/MensRights06/11/12 11:00 PM
3

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/11wr3d/michelle_obamas_facebook_page_just_put_this_up/
/r/MensRights05/11/12 11:40 PM
1

-In some cases yes the penis has become unusable or babies have died from the procedure, but the danger is only part of the issue . Here's an example for those curious: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
/r/MensRights04/11/12 10:05 PM
3

Yes, if abandonment, abortions, and initiating adoption by one parent were illegal, the need for paternal surrender would be void. This is unlikely to happen though as it prevents the decisions a woman can make about her body and may lead to infanticide of unwanted children.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 01:11 AM
3

Non-biased custody hearings is exactly what I was hoping this system would create. By bringing legal work into parenthood, each participant's motive can be demonstrated in court. If someone steals your semen to get pregnant but there is no contract between you, the court will rule you have no obligation to support the child. If there is a contract available in court, the judge can determine both parents knew the risks, acknowledged the other to be an appropriate partner, and consented to parenth…
/r/MensRights03/11/12 09:35 PM
3

That is a very good point. A man should always be provided the option to opt-in after learning of a pregnancy for he may be a willing father. If he learns about the pregnancy after the safe time for an abortion I still don't think its fair to force him into being a father. If that were the case, women would have a loophole whereby getting pregnant and claiming they were unaware would force a man to provide for her.
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:46 AM
6

Our demographic isn't constrained to just North America.
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:36 AM
2

I understand completely. I am not saying that taxing everyone is the solution, just a possibility. The nature of taxes forces people to pay for many services they do not agree with. Others here have suggested just the two who were involved in the sex should pay. This would absolve people who are against abortion or who do not have sex from paying for it. I commented elsewhere with a few problems I see this solution: How does one prove who the other participant is? Especially with regards to one-…
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:33 AM
15

Supposing healthcare covered abortions, taxes would naturally rise but would be paid by both genders. You're right, in this type of system men would be paying for decisions that weren't theirs, but so would other women. This is how taxes work unfortunately; part of peoples' taxes go to fund services they disagree with (ex. wars). By providing national access to abortions I would imagine the cost of child care would decrease, but even then that bill would come out of the pocket of the person rais…
/r/MensRights02/11/12 03:37 PM
111

I am personally of the opinion that fatherhood should be opt-in rather than opt-out. I'll try to explain. There are numerous examples of how ridiculous the current system is; how it allows women to become pregnant by any means available and then extract child support from a man -- any man, even if he's not the father. A woman may, without the man's permission or knowledge, inseminate herself with his semen and then demand child support. She may also start a family through a semen donor only to f…
/r/MensRights02/11/12 12:54 PM
2

I am interested, but I don't accept information from obviously biased opinions on the subject. Have you dismissed every point on the merits of one? I definitely agree with you that women have different preferences with regards to foreskin. I would expect their preferences to match whatever was most common amongst the men they grew up with. Last time I checked condoms don't reduce the risk of cancer in men and women; a really huge part of the equation that you keep seeming to leave out. I wasn't …
/r/MensRights31/10/12 11:12 PM
2

What are the medical benefits behind not being circumcisized? If you're interested, http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm, from the same site I linked to earlier which includes cites. Repeating myself though, STDs are not a concern to children. Circumcising infants who are not having sex in the name of preventing STDs does not compute. When they reach sexual maturity they will have the option of using a condom, which is a far safer and effective method of preventing STDs, not to mention being abl…
/r/MensRights31/10/12 10:29 AM
3

From the site I linked: Circumcision does not prevent any disease. At best, circumcision is only alleged to "reduce risk" of certain rare diseases, all of which are behavior-related. Behavior-related diseases are those over which individuals have absolute control by virtue of their hygiene and sexual choices (e.g., penile cancer and other sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS). The key point to take away is that these issues are not epidemic to the children these operations are performed on. I…
/r/MensRights30/10/12 01:30 AM
7

http://www.noharmm.org/vaccin.htm
/r/MensRights29/10/12 08:47 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter