TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

C0uN7rY Archive

View 3 posts and 174 comments by C0uN7rY on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Fuckin A man. Saving this shit just for that last paragraph. Got eem!
/r/MensRights19/05/18 01:55 AM
–

Try telling your boss you only want to work Monday through Thursday, but want the same salary as the people who show up on Friday. You'd be let go for certain. So what these women want is for the state to intervene in their behalf and force a business to hire women, then allow those women to work a shorter week, but also pay these women exactly the same as their male counterparts.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 04:47 PM
10

I'm going to make an assumption here, but your ex didn't decide she wanted to live the easy life on your dime and the divorce was rather amicable. In most cases, if child support (or any other terms in a divorce) are reasonable, it is because the woman was reasonable. Of course, there are fair judges and all that, but they tend to be an exception more than the rule. Family/Divorce courts tend to be nothing more than an institution to ensure the woman gets what she asks for. Heck, I've heard of s…
/r/MensRights03/01/17 09:32 PM
15

Nah, but the child is still a little shit. They all are. Honestly, kids are great, I love em. Doesn't change facts though. Kids are little shits.
/r/MensRights03/01/17 09:26 PM
25

Worth noting is that this also has nothing to do with Trump or any candidate. If your significant other, no matter the gender, withholds affection that they typically show (including sex) because you did not or will not do what they want, they are being manipulative and emotionally abusive. If they are really bothered by your actions that they find you sexually unattractive over a month later and can no longer display affection as they once did, they need to be an adult and break it off. Sexual …
/r/MensRights24/12/16 05:45 PM
2

Yes. Keep the robots fighting one another so that they don't turn on humanity. I like it.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:57 PM
1

First, if you can be forced into any kind of service, military or otherwise, you not a free man (or woman). Second, everyone who serves already gets those benefits. So aside from forcing people to do something, I'm not sure what new thing you propose by this. Third, the type of nationalism you are hinting to sounds like a good way to end up at fascism to me. The idea that a nation's needs are more important than individuals has rarely (if ever) ended well. Lastly, if you can be forced into any k…
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:49 PM
4

Not sure why you got down voted. When I went through, this is what we were told. The point isn't to build fighting skills as much as fighting mentality and instinct. They want to know you can be the type who won't pull punches or let up on an enemy because you have some aversion to potentially hurting someone. Edit: When I wrote this, the comment above mine was at -2, it has since reversed. I jumped the gun a bit.
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:39 PM
1

When you get amped up and adrenaline flowing and are engaged in a fight, you tend to not want to stop until something or someone makes you. You see it in MMA all the time when a fighter continues to strike a clearly knocked out opponent until the ref rushes in to stop them. To be an effective fighter, you have to have that mentality or start pulling punches which is a sure way to get your ass beat. Because of this, officials tend to break up fights quickly and forcefully like you see here in ord…
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:35 PM
-1

Yeah and they will be just like the Republicans that they revile who suddenly didn't want the government to grant marriages to anyone now that gays can be married. People like this (I call them statists, no matter which side of the aisle they sit) always seem to be fine with the government being assholes to others, but when the very law they were fine with is negatively applied to them, the law is suddenly a major problem. Government sanctioned marriages were a non-issue with most conservative C…
/r/MensRights21/06/16 06:24 PM
6

You're dumb if you think there can be such a thing as consensual sex for prepubescent kids. I convinced my little cousin that his brain had broken and was running out his nose when his nose was bleeding. Any kid can easily be coerced into anything. So, no, sex with prepubescent kids should ALWAYS be illegal.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 03:00 AM
2

It's both. Kind of like how Jewish is both a religion and an ethnic group.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 03:00 AM
1

To flip it on you. So anyone, can sexually harass or assault people, and an employer must allow them to stay at work until they receive a conviction in court, despite the fact that they may (and in the case of sexual criminals, likely will) harass or assault others in the meantime. You seem to be coming at this without considering that there really are bad people out there and not every claim by a woman is false. Yes, many are and I don't deny that at all, but the majority are not. I also don't …
/r/MensRights03/03/16 05:22 AM
1

For one, the key word is "should". Decent management would look into it, but they are not obligated to. Secondly, you are taking my original comment a little out of context. if you have an employee with a history of sexual harassment and I simply would not want an employee with a documented history of harassment My wording did not imply a single unsubstantiated claim that is barely more than a rumor. It implied either a trend of claims, or outright police involvement. However, if an employer doe…
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:11 AM
1

It would be easy to throw mud at someone just because you don't like them, make their life hell, and they'd have no recourse, and that's fine because it's the employer losing good talent?? I don't understand. Who is the mud slinger? A fellow employee, an outsider, or the employer? If it's a fellow employee, then management should be putting a stop to it by seeing if there is validity to the claims and, if not, correcting the mud slinger. If it is an outsider, once again, management should see if…
/r/MensRights03/03/16 01:27 AM
2

I'd agree with this. A decent boss isn't going to hear some rumor around the water cooler and fire the guy that day. I just think it's not entirely fair to villianize an employer because they are trying to protect themselves and their company from what could be major issues.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 06:19 PM
1

From my own point of view, that's fine. Nobody entitled a job and the employer essentially owns their business, it is their property and they should be able to hire and fire whoever they choose for whatever they choose. If they are firing good skilled workers over stupid crap, that's on them. To be honest, that worker wasn't going to go far with that company anyway. If they are willing to fire over stupid stuff, then they are willing to hold you back or make the job a pain in lieu of outright fi…
/r/MensRights02/03/16 06:15 PM
1

Well, we have laws against such actions. The employer isn't in the wrong for choosing not to hire, the person slandering you is in the wrong and can be sued for defamation.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 05:46 PM
6

To be fair, I find this acceptable from the stand point of the employer. Yes, the victim of a sexual harassment case was not an employee, but if you have an employee with a history of sexual harassment, they are like a lawsuit just waiting to happen. Not to mention the discomfort and distrust that would cause within the workplace. This isn't about whether the case is true or false, but as an employer I simply would not want an employee with a documented history of harassment. Same as I would not…
/r/MensRights02/03/16 01:46 PM
1

Male counterparts most definitly alter their schedules and take days off etc for their children, and also take time off to be with the baby, way to generalize and denegrate those men who put in an effort to be a part of their children's lives. Yes, and those men will also see similar results as women in their career. I'm not saying men or women SHOULD dedicate more time to work or more time to family. I am saying, to choose family means slower advancement in career and to choose career means les…
/r/MensRights08/02/16 07:37 PM
2

That's what I meant. I meant feminist women and those who buy into it. Not all or even most women by any means.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 05:20 PM
5

whatever choice they make is fine as long as they understand the consequences That's the crux though. They don't want there to be ANY consequences regardless of which choice they make. Think of their gripe on wage gap and all that. They want to be able to get a job and do as well as men, which is fine and good, but then they want to work fewer hours to have more family time, often leave early or arrive late due to things regarding their children, they want to take several weeks or even months of…
/r/MensRights08/02/16 04:09 PM
2

I'd say to give the mother custody is their reason Why though? Why do they feel it is so important that the mother have full custody, that completely ruining a man's life is of zero concern?
/r/MensRights25/10/15 02:51 PM
3

NOW opposes the reinstatement of registration and draft if we cannot stop the return to registration and draft Reinstatement? Return? What? While there has been no draft in a long time, registration for it is ongoing and has never gone anywhere. It sounds like NOW, for some reason, believes that selective service isn't a thing anymore. NOW's primary focus on this issue is on opposition to registration and draft. We oppose any registration or draft that excludes women Then put your money where yo…
/r/MensRights13/10/15 02:31 PM
2

OK. It's not "fair" to make a man carry a woman's weight in combat. It isn't "fair" to force a man to accept a lower quality partner in a dangerous occupation. It isn't "fair" that person A must accept responsibility for person B's short comings. In this instance, you are only looking at what is fair for the woman. Also "fairness" has no place on a battlefield. Enemies, especially the enemies we find ourselves fighting today, are not going to be fair to women, they are trying to kill them at any…
/r/MensRights01/10/15 11:54 AM
5

The enemy isn't going to go easy on a woman in combat. This training is to prepare people for combat. It can then logically be concluded that if combat does not make exceptions for women, then the training for combat should not either. To be totally blunt: I feel that for every woman who dies because they were under trained or physically deficient and every man who dies because their woman comrade was under trained or physically deficient, their blood is on the hands of people with this mindset.…
/r/MensRights01/10/15 11:46 AM
11

The only problem I have with this is that Ranger school and similar programs are VERY expensive. If a woman only stands a 1 in 20 chance of passing versus a man's 1 in 5 (example numbers), that is a lot of money invested in to these soldiers at high risk of low/no return on investment. I'm not really putting my vote one way or the other, but to say there is no need... Eh... It may not be a "need" but there is plenty of reason.
/r/MensRights01/10/15 11:37 AM
0

In a functional justice system, he should not need "exonerated". If there is no evidence saying he did it, then in the eyes of the law, he didn't. He shouldn't have to prove he didn't. Also, more specific to your question, private messages would mean A LOT more than public posts. Also the private messages between the friends means much more than a public "My bf is so great" post.
/r/MensRights29/09/15 11:38 PM
-3

No problem. Happy Cakeday!
/r/MensRights29/09/15 03:43 PM
-4

No it isn't. It can't be. I already explained why. People in abusive relationships can act just as lovey dovey as those in nonabusive ones. Those message do not prove he didn't do anything anymore than they prove he did. They don't prove anything other than a woman said sweet nothings about a guy on the internet. If they were private messages to the guy, then sure, it means a little more, but abused people OFTEN show public admiration of their abuser. Have you ever seen an abusive relationship i…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 03:41 PM
-2

I don't think he means that it is proof the relationship was abusive, he was simply showing how it cannot be used as proof that it wasn't. Really, it can't be used as proof of anything because women in nonabusive relationships show love admiration toward their partner, but also women in abusive relationships have been known to show the same love and admiration to their abusive partner. The old "He hurts me, but I really love him and know that deep down he loves me" and the ven worse "He hurts me…
/r/MensRights29/09/15 03:27 PM
8

In some sense, they already do... They just call it tax evasion.
/r/MensRights28/09/15 11:31 AM
1

To be honest, I'm good. (Not just saying that, never been deployed or anything my whole 6 years) I just want to make sure people know that at least someone cares. Too many bad statistics in the veteran demographic. Glad to hear you're getting some help, and the same goes for you, PM me if you ever need to vent or just chat. My civilian job is pretty boring, so I'm always up for good conversation.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 07:08 PM
1

I'm sure you know that this stuff is out there, but we've lost way too many vets to this shit for me to just scroll down without offering this up. Nothing wrong with getting help. Lots of veterans are going through this, and every veteran out there needs to be looking out for one another. We wouldn't abandon one another while we were in, we shouldn't do it when we get out either. If you need help, reach out man. Sorry if I'm being one of those guys or beating a dead horse.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 06:13 PM
2

Not quite on topic: but seriously, if I say in the beginning "I'm just looking and pricing around" don't be upset with me because you spent 30 minutes pushing product on me only to have me walk away without purchasing. I'll ask questions and if you are polite and answer them, it will seriously raise your odds of me buying from you, but don't get pissy that didn't buy when I said from the start "I'm not buying today" and if you have better things to do then talk to me since you know I'm just look…
/r/MensRights24/09/15 06:02 PM
2

I couldn't really remember. Thanks.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 11:37 AM
3

We find the one-sided scale more appropriate for our purposes agenda Fixed that for them. It would go against that whole "The Patriarchy has you" narrative if people were to find out that women actually have it better in some areas.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 11:27 AM
5

Child custody. Currently, mother's win the majority of custody cases that make it to court. Men, on average, are ordered to pay more in child support than women who are required to pay. Men are also much more harshly punished when they fail to pay. Feminist groups have rallied not only to maintain this imbalance, but to increase it. At one point a state had legislation to start all custody disputes at 50/50 shared custody. NOW opposed this and eventually saw it shot down. This is just one exampl…
/r/MensRights24/09/15 11:23 AM
6

Women have been allowed in combat roles for a couple years now. They have consistently performed poorly in the training schools associated with these roles, but that is neithere here nor there. Now they are allowed in combat and I have yet to here a single feminist/SJW even mentioning the draft. Sure, if we bring up selective serice, they say "There shouldn't be slctive service" and we all say "Look we agree", but what have they actually done? When have they brought it up themselves as an exampl…
/r/MensRights24/09/15 11:13 AM
1

Couldn't the extra coverage and concern be the cause of the decrease in child sexual abuse? With awareness and enforcement up as well as the extra (perhaps sometimes extreme) measures that parents have put into sheltering/protecting their kids, could that be driving the occurrences down? Not trying to argue or anything, I am genuinely curious.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 11:12 PM
1

What does this have to do with what I said?
/r/MensRights18/08/15 06:01 PM
6

I'd also add that humans tend to dissociate with insects and the like. I'd be more concerned about a kid torturing a mammal of some kind than I would a bug or a fish. Not that torturing those things is OK, simply that it is less likely a sign of deeper mental issues.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 12:24 PM
24

That and racists aren't in the mainstream if modern thought. Racists don't have major political and financial influence. Racists can't get me fired from my job. Racists don't have a death grip on our education system. Of course, with racists, there are exceptions, but with feminists, it's the rule.
/r/MensRights18/08/15 12:20 PM
2

I love how this infantilizes grown ass adults and abdolves them of their own stupidity. " You did nothing wrong sweetie. The bad man running the bar is at fault for giving you the alcohol you paid for and are legally old enough to consume" Disgusting.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 11:46 AM
1

Yeah, and you're not who I was talking to previously. Sorry about the attitude ridden response. Responded without looking at your username. I was more trying to make the point that this officer would be right if it was a case of fitness rather than ability, but since it is not, she is in the wrong and needs to accept that everyone should be meeting the same standard. Sorry it wasn't clear. Rereading, I see it now.
/r/MensRights25/06/15 12:32 PM
1

You really aren't getting my point at all. I have already said a dozen times in a dozen ways, if it is about ability to perform a task it shod be the same, if it is only about health it shouldn't. I'm done going over this. You keep coming back to women needing to meet the same standard for physical ability which I agree with. I was only making a point about if it was strictly about fitness in the sense if being healthy, it's different between men and women. You simply seem incapable of grasping …
/r/MensRights25/06/15 02:22 AM
2

A person can be physically fit, but not physically capable of handling combat, police work, farm work, mining, etc etc. If all you care about is fitness and health and not what that makes a person capable of doing, then you'd have to have different standards for men and women as men and women have very different bodies. If you care about what a person is capable of doing, a specific task or aet of tasks, there should be no difference between the genders because, male or female, you need them to …
/r/MensRights24/06/15 08:07 PM
3

Apparently you didn't get my point... For a police officer it should be a test of physical ability, therefore the same for everyone. If it was simply a job that requires you to be physically healthy (or fit) it should be different because a healthy man can do more than a healthy woman. Do you see the difference? One is about having the physicality to perform duties (same for everyone) one is a measurement of how healthy someone is (different for men and women) Military (at least the USAF) is kin…
/r/MensRights24/06/15 05:42 PM
3

If it is a test of physical fitness, then it is right that women should have a different test than men, as there are differences between a fit man and fit woman. How ever, if this is supposed to be a test of performance and ability. Then it should be the same across the board. E.g. if part of your job may have you lifting 80lb sacks and you cannot lift 80lbs, then you do not have the ability to perform your job and it is fair that you not get that job regardless if gender.
/r/MensRights24/06/15 03:08 PM
1

Top comment in that thread is gone... Why exactly?
/r/MensRights22/06/15 08:41 PM
1

Or bring up what feminism was against 60 years ago and say that by not supporting the current movement, you must also oppose everything the old movement stood for. Eg. "You're anti-feminist? So you are against women voting and being allowed to own property and work a job? You must want women barefoot and pregnant!"
/r/MensRights09/06/15 04:32 PM
2

TIL, thanks
/r/MensRights19/05/15 07:08 AM
1

Samuel Colt was never a Colonel...
/r/MensRights18/05/15 08:02 PM
5

I'd agree with it for every victimless crime. Drug use/possession being the one that stands out most.
/r/MensRights18/05/15 12:57 PM
1

I'm not changing subjects. This is simply not a men's right issue. If you think it is such a crime that the kid couldn't get financial aid, that's fine. But none of this is based on the kid's nor the step dads gender. That has been my point the whole time.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 07:50 PM
5

My point has always been that nobody is forced to pay and nobody is stuvk paying. The kid got denied financial aid from the government because step daddy makes too much money. That does not mean step daddy is stuck with the bill. Instead of getting hostile and jumping to conclusions, actually try to get what I'm saying.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 06:33 PM
8

Government financial aid for schooling doesn't go through courts... You submit an application to a board, they review, check your income and your families income and then approve or deny.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 06:29 PM
23

No. I'm trying to explain why this isn't a men's rights issue. If the genders were reversed, the kid would still be denied because the government only grants aid if parents make less than y and the kids parents make x which is greater than y. If that is problem for you, OK, bring it up in discussion about how unfair financial aid for school is, not how unfair men have it.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 04:50 PM
21

I wouldn't say they are expected to pay as much as they could pay. If the child of a wealthy family applies for aid, they'll be denied, even if mom and dad are refusing to cover education costs. Same here, step dad may be refusing to pay and he is allowed to, but the government still says, "the money is there, if step dad won't pay, that's between you and him"
/r/MensRights05/05/15 04:23 PM
5

I think homemaker should be considered a career of sorts. Your service is cooking, cleaning, caring for children. You are paid in food, a home, clothes, etc. If you choose to quit that job/provide that service (divorce), then your customer (the breadwinning husband or wife) has no obligation to continue payment. Put another way, if I hire a gardener and he quits, am I required to continue payment because he sacrificed other career and work opportunities he may have had to work for me? No, it wou…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 04:50 PM
7

Even if he did cheat, there is a line between punishment/control and basic changes to privacy to begin mending. I think it's completely acceptable if a spouse cheats but wants a second chance for the other spouse to make conditions like wanting their Facebook/email passwords to be able to see what's going on and to be allowed to view the cheaters phone at anytime. All done with intent of being able to see what is beinh said/done while simultaneously working g to rebuild trust in the relationship…
/r/MensRights15/04/15 03:30 PM
1

Never saw it.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 09:14 PM
1

I mentioned above, in my office the women are the last to show, first to leave and take the most time off. Without exceptions. They also require the most help from other techs in their day to day job.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 09:00 PM
1

May be anecdotal evidence but in my office the women are the last to arrive, the first to leave and take the most vacation and sick days, without exception.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 08:45 PM
1

Not to mention if they get tenure, they become damn near unfireable. So they'd don't even have to put in a solid effort and instead can sit on their ass and not really teach for those 180 days and still get to keep their job.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 08:42 PM
2

I was on the job market recently. I keep all my shit anonymous because it's standard practice now to look people up on twitter, facebook, linkedin, etc. IT is a pretty competitive market and I don't want to be passed on job because I hate feminists, own guns, cuss a bunch, and don't trust the gov. None of which follow me to work everyday, but that won't matter to the uber-pc hr rep checking me out as a potential hire
/r/MensRights08/11/14 03:29 AM
1

The thing is: I don't get ANY support from my superiors at work. My boss doesn't pat my back, say "good job", give me awards or trophies, etc. Unless I actually go beyond what my co-workers do. Who the hell needs support to do their damn job? You get paid for your work. Why do you need golden star stickers to do your damn job? I don't get this "Support from my boss" thing. Shut the fuck up and do work.
/r/MensRights08/11/14 03:17 AM
4

Yeah those aren't Selective Service card we're sent on our 18th Bday. They are "dream sheets". Basically, you fill them out with the job you want most, check the boxes next to the privileges that apply to you, and if you have enough points your dream job is just handed to you.
/r/MensRights04/11/14 03:30 AM
2

I think anything "sexual" a 7 year old child does is made sexual strictly in the mind of the adults assessing the situation.
/r/MensRights03/11/14 05:30 AM
3

At 7 years old (pre-puberty) did she see them as "sex-acts"? I find it hard to believe such a young prepubescent child gets any sexual gratification from anything. If she was 11-13 I would then consider there being some sexual aspect to this.
/r/MensRights03/11/14 05:25 AM
2

Certainly this would happen, but I agree with the above comment that it should not happen regardless of gender. Example: While the draft is a thing, yes, women should also be required to sign up, but our ultimate goal as a society should be to abolish the draft all together Their point was similar, if a 7yo boy would be strung up for this then all being equal so should a 7yo girl, but ultimately these are 7yos and regardless of gender a 7yo child does not understand enough and should not be dest…
/r/MensRights03/11/14 05:18 AM
3

Because fuck the scientific method and properly researching and studying their claims.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 10:13 PM
2

It's as if both genders have violent people but one is more discreet with their violence. Plus women typically have resources available to them so they are usually not driven to desperation to commit violent crimes like mugging and robbery.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 10:12 PM
9

80% percent of the percentages on that site are 80% so it's unlikely they would less than 80% truthful about 80% of their claims, but that is just 80% my opinion and I'm only 80% sure I'm right.
/r/MensRights28/10/14 10:08 PM
8

Setp 1: Ask her "What has femism done about (issue or issues men face here)? She will respond with basically: "Fighting gender roles and patriarchy" Step 2: Point out how issues women face are directly addressed with protests, ad campaigns, lobbying, and legislation. Ask how are feminists directly address men's issues like they do for women? She will most likely make an excuse, dodge, or ignore. Know that it's not as much about changing her mind, but creating awareness for those watching your ex…
/r/MensRights28/10/14 01:52 AM
3

Do it again. Send a message. The more times it gets shot down, the more proof of idealistic administrator censoring.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 05:13 AM
3

What can we really do about less than desirable admins?
/r/MensRights27/10/14 05:12 AM
8

If I kick 16 puppies then say "Water is made from two hydrogen atoms bonded to a single oxygen atom" Yeah, I'm a dick for kicking those puppies, but I'm still right about the water.
/r/MensRights27/10/14 05:09 AM
5

The feminist weapon of choice
/r/MensRights27/10/14 05:04 AM
1

Yeah, I'm currently on the job market so I don't use my "real" twitter for my more political\controversial views since it's common practice in hiring to look people up on the web before interviewing or hiring.
/r/MensRights26/10/14 02:25 AM
2

Warren Farrell has never demonized masculinity. He has challenged aspects of it, society's view of it, and forcing gender roles on anyone. I have yet to hear him demonize masculinity as a whole. From what I've red he seems to encourage masculinity that is unforced, healthy and stable and not detrimental to boys.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 03:13 PM
4

violence encouraged in youth with the playing with guns and all. Violence in boys (even in play) is more discouraged more than ever. As is playing with toy guns by both educators and parents. That's why there are these zero-sense(tolerance) policies leading to boys being suspended for squirt guns, making gun shapes with their hands, and biting a pop tart til it's vaguely shaped into a gun. I'm sorry, but I simply have to call BS on this part of your theory.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 03:08 PM
3

While I'd agree that certain aspects of traditional masculinity need to be challenged and phased out. It's not the masculinity (as a whole) that's toxic. It's how masculinity is treated as toxic. How do expect a boy to cope in an education system that treats boys like broken and dysfunctional girls, that overlooks boys in a rush to help girls. To fix these broken boys we just start loading them up on meds to settle em down. These meds have effects on the mind that young people simply have an iss…
/r/MensRights25/10/14 03:02 PM
1

It's not the masculinity that's toxic. It's how masculinity is treated. How do expect a boy to cope in an education system that treats boys like broken and dysfunctional girls, that overlooks boys in a rush to help girls. To fix these broken boys we just start loading them up on meds to settle em down. These meds have effects on the mind that young people simply have an issue of analyzing and realizing it is not normal and probably a result of the meds. Then they demonize their sexuality at an a…
/r/MensRights25/10/14 03:00 PM
2

The thing is, if you just evaluate these events from a statistical standpoint, they are not very relevant. 316 Million in US, 2.5 Million die every year, 35 Die every year in active shooter incidents of any/all kinds, that is 0.0014% of all deaths. If anything these are a rare symptom, not a disease.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 02:49 PM
7

She needs to lose her deals with colleges and no longer be allowed to give seminars. You kiddin? The current feminist influenced university atmosphere that allows gender study courses with SCUM Manifesto as part of the curriculum? They'll worship the ground she walks on. Shit, college is where she probably learned these ideologies.
/r/MensRights25/10/14 06:47 AM
5

"The patriarchy?" "The patriarchy is what gives a man his power. It's an energy field created by all living men. It surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together."
/r/MensRights25/10/14 05:11 AM
4

"I don't know why people are so mad!"
/r/MensRights25/10/14 05:01 AM
10

Maybe the mods need to do verification on certain types of posts
/r/MensRights25/10/14 01:37 AM
33

No, then we just hear how men aren't doing their share for society
/r/MensRights25/10/14 01:34 AM
4

It's good evidence that feminism in the western world has basically reached it's end. Anytime a powerful group attains it's core objectives, the infighting begins because they are split on what the next objective is or should be. Only a few seem to have the sense and grace to say "we're done here, let's move on, feminism as we knew it is over, let's move on to another cause"
/r/MensRights21/10/14 07:35 PM
1

I just got out of the AF less than a month ago.
/r/MensRights20/10/14 06:46 PM
1

There are several options for that: Vouchers that basically equal money for the school. A little more tightly restricted and enforced than most current welfare programs and the parents are expected to pay a percentage of it back. If you can afford the average price of schooling in your area but are simply choosing not to, no voucher. If you can't reasonably afford schooling in your area. You get a voucher equal to or maybe slightly less than the average school cost. Kids get an education from th…
/r/MensRights20/10/14 02:34 AM
1

There were quite a few females who did better than me on PT tests. I had great respect for them and I would feel fine with them at my side if shit got bad. I am against the overweight slobs who can barely past the females' already lowered standards. I just don't think they have any place in combat.
/r/MensRights20/10/14 02:09 AM
0

Yeah, and look how public schools are doing. I'm for private schooling, and having an option about where your kids get an education. Then when teachers are garbage and do shit like kick boys out for being boys and over react to small incidents meanwhile telling young boys that they simply are not as smart as girls, they will either get fired because parents complain and some fuckin union can't save their ass, or as a parent you can take your money elsewhere.
/r/MensRights20/10/14 02:07 AM
1

I'm not arguing against women in the draft, women in the military, or even women in combat roles. I'm arguing against women in combat roles that need slackened PT tests and the like, and I'm arguing against shoving women to the front who can't meet those standards. I'm arguing for 1 test and 1 set standard for everyone and no one goes to the front who can't do it. That has been my point all along and you made your quip "If they can hold a gun and shoot it, make me do it" and the like. Edit: I no…
/r/MensRights20/10/14 02:03 AM
3

They can be firefighters. As long as they pass the test, the real test, not the watered down female's test. When you have a job that people's lives depend on you doing right, don't cut corners. You wouldn't want to be taken care of by a doctor that took an easier test. You wouldn't want to be on a plane with a pilot who only had half the flight hours needed for a license. Why would you want soldiers, police, or firefighters that had an easier PT test?
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:25 PM
6

Do you realize how physically demanding piloting a fighter jet is? Also, they can already fly planes, including fighter jets, because they passed the test. Tank drivers aren't slouches either. There are already women serving in tanks though, because they passed the test. There are women in infantry, cause the passed the test. They are also already on ships. The fact remains though, that most women (and men) can't pass the test, so we don't want them. Seriously, just a little research would revea…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 01:23 PM
10

There is a lot more to combat than shooting guns bro. If I get injured and need dragged out, they can't do that. If we need to move debris out of our way as we clear a street, they can't do it. If a heavy door needs kicked in, they can't do it. If they have to go toe to toe in close range fisticuffs, they can't do it. If they have to ruck for 3 days through shit terrain, they can't do it. Cute quip you have there, but it ignores the reality of combat and war. You may want them there from your ar…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:58 AM
6

Well I was talking about them using the fact that it was illegal for women in combat roles as a reason not to draft women. The only problem I have with forcing women to the front for quality's sake is that on average they are weaker. I'm not worried about the individual as much as the individuals on their left and right. Not many women can carry my ass out of the fire and I don't want to carry half their shit into the fire. I'm not for keeping people out of combat based on sex. I am for keeping …
/r/MensRights19/10/14 05:03 AM
-3

Repeating yourself will make it more true for sure. "welcome to the real world, don't worry about consequences, we'll take care of you"
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:33 AM
-6

Since you stopped discussing like an adult and started cussing and talking down to me and others. here we go: Nobody in your example has any obligation to help her. If she didn't want to pay all that fucking money and be on the street she should have picked the incredibly cheap option of birth control (15$ a month for pill, less than a dollar for a condom). That and there are charitable orgs that cover contraception e.g. Planned Parenthood AND if she can't afford the fucking kid she should surre…
/r/MensRights19/10/14 04:14 AM
0

Cool. Just give people an option where they can pay someone besides the government to do that for them. Just because the government is only ones who do it, doesn't make them the only ones who can. The government is the only one providing roads right now, any drugstore or doctor can provide birth control for a fee affordable by an individual. That and what someone else posted. Taxes paying for roads helps the community as a whole, the pill only helps the woman taking it.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 03:57 AM
-5

Cause I don't want to pay for contraception for other people of either sex. Condoms, the pill, vasectomies, plan b, vasalgel, pay for that shit yourself.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:50 AM
4

The overwhelming majority of military roles are support roles.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:42 AM
15

Even before the change to the rule on women in combat roles, I don't understand the courts decision. For every one soldier in combat there are like 4 or 5 in support roles. Wouldn't drafting women and putting them in those support roles free up male draftees for combat roles. One woman turning a wrench frees up one man to pull a trigger. Keeping women out of the draft because they can't go into combat makes no sense.
/r/MensRights19/10/14 02:41 AM
3

To SJW's "thin-privilege" is a thing now. Well, as a fat guy myself, I realize that my own "thin-privilege" is just a few running sessions and a healthy diet away. Though I admit some people seem a little privileged... My buddy is a stick but eats like 20 chicken nuggets and a whole pizza everyday, meanwhile here I am gaining 20 pounds off a Hershey's kiss. Fuckin assholes
/r/MensRights18/10/14 04:41 AM
1

As someone who has only had sex with two partners and regrets the first because she wasn't the woman I married, I hereby withdrawal my consent.
/r/MensRights18/10/14 04:33 AM
2

In our home we just leave it how we leave it. I put it up, she puts it down. Sometimes I also put it down. Seems fair to me as opposed to I put it up AND put it down and she never touches it. It seems like a silly battle or argument, but fair is fair. I don't ask her to put it up for me, why am I expected to put it down for her, ya know?
/r/MensRights18/10/14 04:26 AM
1

Yeah, I get that. I'm just a data whore. While it may be nothing conclusive the info is always neat.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 05:56 PM
2

I think it's a shitty commercial for both genders on this one. As much as I hate the "bumbling idiot man" and the "You go girl!" attitude toward women on men violence (which this basically has) I can sympathize with women probably not enjoying being portrayed as the over-emotional, irrational, balling woman like this commercial ALSO does. It's a shit commercial all the way around. It's unfortunate because it's a good message too (about not texting and driving I mean)
/r/MensRights16/10/14 06:13 AM
1

I think it was the SPLC that gave it the label. (Allegedly, because I can't find a source)
/r/MensRights16/10/14 06:05 AM
1

Definitely beats AVFM getting pumped cause they got 10K in a month.
/r/MensRights16/10/14 05:59 AM
2

I think, they would do a horrible job. Many things MRA's are for, feminism is simply against. Sure they will acknowledge SOME problems and address them in SOME ways, but mostly be a let down. I don't think any feminists will address the disparity between men's and women's prison sentences. I truly think they would approach it from the angle of "teach men not to crime" rather than A.) enforce lower sentencing of men or B) Enforce higher sentencing of women. I think the issue of men being unfairly…
/r/MensRights16/10/14 05:54 AM
1

That's why Playboy has info about their centerfolds (likes, dislikes, plans for the future). That's why most prostitutes report that most clients actually want someone to talk to (in addition to sex). That's why men like / dislike certain porn-stars for their (perceived) personalities - not only their bodies and activities. Sounds interesting. Is there actually studies or articles on this?
/r/MensRights16/10/14 04:56 AM
5

There is already talk on feminist sites about how this is "MRA's/Men'S/Patriacrchy's attempt to silence women who speak out against sexism" and anti-gun sites about how "this threat was more real because it was legal for citizens to carry firearms there." "Never let a good tragedy go to waste"
/r/MensRights16/10/14 04:50 AM
1

Gotcha and I get it, but typically for something as simple as a word, just look it up. We certainly want socialization and conversation, just more discussing what the post is about, or something along those lines. What is x? x is this. Not really a stimulating conversation, ya know? Now if x is a little more vague like an idea or thought, then we'd be in business, because than can incite discussion.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 07:40 PM
2

Many reasons can lead to this. Emotional attachment to your abuser leads to fear of harming them, even when they are harming you. Resisting your partner with force can often lead to DV accusations against you especially if you are male. A partner can through emotional abuse, lead someone to a point of accepting the event because "I am just lucky to have someone" or "I deserve this" Societal norms have made you believe men should just accept sex or that it is unmanly to push a woman away who desi…
/r/MensRights13/10/14 04:03 PM
3

Tylenol is a type of pain relief medication, in case you were asking in seriousness. If you were, a simple google search would have instantly given you that answer, as this is a very popular over the counter medication, hence the downvotes. If you weren't serious and were making some kind of joke, it was not very good.
/r/MensRights13/10/14 03:53 PM
5

Or she could have simply believed the shit spewed out in schools and the media. In a elementary school I heard teachers make comments that amounted to "girls are just smarter than boys" and "the world would be fair and peaceful if women ran it" and get told by feminist teachers how men oppress women at every turn. Then after school they get to watch their favorite celebs telling men not to rape and how awful women have it and politicians and judges have set up a system where men are assumed the …
/r/MensRights13/10/14 03:30 PM
3

I have never understood the concept of proficiency tests as being inherently racist. If there is a disparity between races, it seems to make less sense to attack the test than to address the real issue: education. If person A can't pass a test that person B can, it's probably safe to assume that person B is better educated than person A. Read as better educated, not smarter.
/r/MensRights12/10/14 04:56 AM
2

I don't hate going to the doctor because of some masculine toughness, I just hate going because it sucks. Making the appointment for like a week out, driving myself there, sitting and waiting in that waiting room while filling out forms asking how many bites I took before swallowing this mornings bagels. Then I go in, get his/her cold hands and stethoscope and other shit touching me, lights pointed in my eyes, and occasionally, my junk handled . Then he prescribes some shit barely better than wh…
/r/MensRights11/10/14 03:32 AM
2

What the actual fuck? You know, I agree with these people... I do. I fully believe that a man or woman SHOULD be able to walk alone at night, drunk as a fool, wearing whatever they please without being the target of a criminal be it thug, mugger, serial killer, or rapist. Problem is: This is the real fucking world, these people are out there and they always will be, it's fucked up but true. So I disagree that teaching people how to avoid being victims is blaming them. It's just teaching them how…
/r/MensRights10/10/14 07:06 AM
1

Female teacher who sought sex with to rape 10-year-old boy walks free
/r/MensRights10/10/14 06:57 AM
1

I read an article somewhere (trying to find it without luck) that basically said the guys who are the "Everybody loves Raymond" style husbands are them most likely to be cheated on by their spouse and it has a lot to do with the lack of respect he has from his wife. You know the type: "I'll have to ask my wife" "sorry, the wife said no" "If I were to do X my wife would beat my ass" "I had to sleep on the couch last night" Basically the article mentioned that being so submissive to your spouse ca…
/r/MensRights10/10/14 06:49 AM
2

The guy she had sex with was 30 years old. Her guilt came from the fact that she was friends with the dude's mom. Seriously, read the article before you comment, the two to three lines in the title rarely tell the whole story.
/r/MensRights10/10/14 06:10 AM
4

I say this with little more than personal experience and having read some articles and watched youtube videos. I would imagine it comes from men tending to be more ambitious in their career than women. A lot of this is men view their value based in how much they earn and provide for their family (assuming they have one). Women tend to be less ambitious in the work place, shown not only by how little they negotiate for pay but in how they also spend less time at home doing work, work fewer overti…
/r/MensRights09/10/14 10:28 PM
4

Also from what I have heard is that pay negotiation is a big part of it too. I read somewhere that women are much less liely than men to negotiate for higher pay. The company offers both the man and the woman the same pay, but it's usually only the man that says "I'd like more".
/r/MensRights09/10/14 10:07 PM
2

I admit to mistyping. I meant 53 not 63. I apologize. However, that is still a difference of millions of voters and 20 electoral points and women have had a voter advantage since 1972. So I would still argue that women hold the real political power in this country. You also seem to be arguing that custody laws\policies\outcomes have gotten better. I disagree
/r/MensRights09/10/14 04:12 AM
7

Okay, let's assume this "patriarchy" is real and feminists truly wish to dismantle it. You used the issue of unfair custody laws. The primary cause of which is the "Tender Years Doctrine". This was a piece of legislation created and lobbied for by feminists. Sounds like feminism is as much, if not more so, to blame for "gender coded behavior" at least in this instance. Yes most judges and politicians are men, I admit that, but these people are elected officials. Do you know who makes up the majo…
/r/MensRights08/10/14 03:42 AM
3

I completely agree. I was just pointing out the silliness of it from a different angle.
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:17 AM
3

Even without terminology they come to the table laughing (quite literally) at the idea of men having problems. Then when you do convince them of certain problems, they simply wave it off with a "women had it worse, your problems are irrelevant."
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:07 AM
7

Lol, men's issues? Men have it easy. They always have. Men don't have issues. Even if they do, women had it worse so who care about men's problems. /s
/r/MensRights08/10/14 12:01 AM
8

I find the very idea of "The Patriarchy" insulting. Think about it. They say Patriarchy is a system that oppresses women in favor of men, but then say patriarchy hurts men too. Like we (men) are so incompetent that even in world where we have all the power and put in place a system to oppress women, we can't do it without hurting ourselves. How idiotic would men have to be in these feminists' minds?
/r/MensRights07/10/14 11:44 PM
2

He's lucky that not being the father actually mattered in this instance. There have been incidents where it hasn't.Of course since this only Maury, a judge could still decide to fuck him for child support.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:58 AM
4

If anything is an example of no expectation of female responsibility, this is it. The idea that a grown ass woman can be pressured into any action by a 13 year old boy barely into puberty is bonkers.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 01:00 AM
3

Of course. Most businesses do this but many have go down the road a little ways before they say "oh, we fucked up" Comics are big one that comes to mind. Comic readers typically are not against female characters, black characters, gay characters, etc. They are against taking characters that have been established for decades and saying "Let's change them to be more inclusive." Which is shoehorning and lazy and caused a drop in sales. Most of us just want you to actually be innovative enough to cr…
/r/MensRights04/10/14 05:35 AM
20

Worst part is they attack different hobbies and groups saying that it is not inclusive enough, or sexist, or whatever. They basically turn the whole thing on it's head, get the changes they want and many long time customers/hobbyists/whatever walk away. Do the SJWs and feminists fill in the hole made themselves? Nope. They walk too. Even though the whole time they spout off how "we'd participate if it was more inclusive" Like an army that conquers for the sake of conquering they raze the town, b…
/r/MensRights03/10/14 09:07 PM
88

This is normal behavior in court it seems. My uncle went to court to defend himself against false claims of DV against him. The judge basically made him shut up and let the lady speak. They blatantly led the "witness" (her mother) with things like "Are you really sure he has never once displayed any violence toward the kids or your daughter in front of you?" after she said no to the question twice and all of sudden "well, I guess he does seem very short with her the kids". Shit like that. He was…
/r/MensRights03/10/14 05:02 AM
4

While I agree on the age part. My problem isn't that the women were older than him. It's that they were in an authority position over him. The age difference with their authority over him, plus his likely inexperience in even the most basic of intimate relationships, much less a relationship with two older teachers. While perhaps nothing may come of this (as far as the boy's well being goes) it is definitely a knifes edge from fucking up peoples' worlds.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 04:41 AM
1

Sounds like we basically agree. Difference is how suspicious each of us are willing to be, and certainly my suspicions probably are increased by me having been in the military and brief stint in law enforcement. At the end of the day we agree that we should not be panicking and calling police at the drop of a hat and we should not base our suspicions on race or gender. I wouldn't say I suspect any and all strangers as being "up to no good" more like I am more aware of their presence until I have…
/r/MensRights02/10/14 07:40 AM
-1

1) I agree profiling is wrong. At the same time there is no getting around certain crimes done largely by a certain type of person. E.g. serial killers and mass shooters are by and large white males. Other crimes are perpetrated by both sexes and all races. E.g. Theft and robbery. So if I see a stranger in my neighborhood I'd have some suspicion regardless of race or sex. 2) I thought my previous comment made it clear I don't believe in a kneejerk reaction to things. Calling the cops because you…
/r/MensRights02/10/14 04:20 AM
-2

Women need to be named and shamed when they make reports like this. Eh, yes and no. Certainly many people today are straight up paranoid and over-react to things, but a healthy dose of situational awareness is not out of the question. I certainly don't see anything wrong with treating activity I'm not used to with a degree of suspicion and caution. Whether it's people I'm not used to seeing around my neighborhood, people at the mall wearing coats or jackets at the mall mid-summer, or even and in…
/r/MensRights02/10/14 12:50 AM
1

Many laws create a bad cycle like this. "To combat out of control x we'll expand the definition of x." Now that more things are considered x, there are (obviously) more occurrences of x. "X is on the rise, we must stop it. To help we will be passing anti-x legislation, part of which will expand the definition of x." Here we go again, more things considered x means more x which means more to stop x.
/r/MensRights01/10/14 03:08 PM
1

"But not all feminists do x, y, or z..."
/r/MensRights19/09/14 07:51 AM
1

You aren't maintaining the societal standards laid out for you. So it is pretty unreasonable of you. /s
/r/MensRights19/09/14 07:46 AM
1

They are always the "gay best friend" which I think is kinda shitty. I know it made me feel kinda bad when one of my friends (who is a woman) referred to me as her best guy friend... like I didn't rank best friend unless she excluded females from the equation. I can only imagine "gay best friends" must feel the same. I did call her out and she did get what I was saying. Ever since I've been "one of her best friends"
/r/MensRights19/09/14 07:41 AM
1

There really aren't many things in this world consistent enough to make up 99% of anything. Maybe when it comes to physics and stuff sure. Human behavior though... no way.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 07:07 AM
2

Why is that?
/r/MensRights19/09/14 06:40 AM
2

I agree, as long as none of it is forced or coerced, it's fine. I often hear feminists throw out "women should do as they please with their body" in regard to abortion or birth control or sex, but when it comes to porn, modeling, or stripping... well, that's just no acceptable. Many feminist ideologies seem to follow this line of thought. "Women should be free to do what they want, as long as it meets feminist doctrine." My wife still gets shit from feminist types for wanting to be the "traditio…
/r/MensRights19/09/14 06:31 AM
39

"Because I am so out of control of my own sex drive that I can't fathom turning down the sexual advances of any member of the opposite sex, this MUST be true of all men" Disgusting. This kind of confused language is something to expect from young teenage boys going through puberty, it is absolute bigoted garbage from a grown man. I have to wonder if their sexual development was stunted somehow to have such an immature view on healthy relationships between men and women.
/r/MensRights19/09/14 06:08 AM
1

Maybe, but find it rather foolish that someone would consider themselves members of a movement they know little to nothing about. Sounds more like these are people calling themselves feminists based more on social pressure than anything.
/r/MensRights27/07/14 09:59 PM
1

It really doesn't matter what the feminists on the street say and rhink. What do they do? What are these reasonable "true feminists" doing to stop the powerful and influential feminists who are nothing more than man hating sexists? Which begs the other question: how do these hateful wacks become so powerful and influential if not for a large amount of public support? I don't care what any of these people say, what they do is all that matters.
/r/MensRights27/07/14 08:27 PM
1

I agree and disagree. While we should always aim to stay on topic, I can certainly understand the desire to get opinions and discussion from people with common interests and beliefs.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 09:18 PM
3

Actions speak louder than words. They always say "not all feminists" or "feminism cares for both genders" but none of their actions say either of these to me.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 08:23 PM
2

Chump change in this country. Also this bone is only offered to black males. Offering a bone to only one dog leaves the other dogs hungry.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 08:18 PM
2

So the president can not come up with this himself? He can't just over ride his own staff? If our leaders are so unreachable that good ideas like this never reach him because a single staffer shut him down, then we are in a bad place with really bad leaders.
/r/MensRights26/07/14 08:15 PM
2

Yes, but it also quite dishonestly down plays the actual mistake, which in this case, is outright lying.
/r/MensRights12/07/14 11:25 PM
1

You have "freedom from religion". You are free to seek employment elsewhere. Your freedom is only being infringed if you are being forced into something you don't want. Who is forced to work for hobby lobby or any other company?
/r/MensRights02/07/14 02:10 AM
0

If the employee is allowed to leave, why not?
/r/MensRights01/07/14 05:42 PM
-1

Religion should be separated from politics sure, but if some one wants to impose there religious views on their own business (Read as: their own property) they should be free to do so as much as the employee is free to leave and seek employment elsewhere. Basically as long as nobody is forced to work for company x then company x should not be forced to provide anything to the people who work for them.
/r/MensRights01/07/14 05:12 PM
0

You realize that the vast majority of military members are in support roles and will never see combat, right? And yea, I'll chance getting deployed to a combat zone before I'll chance being an uneducated homeless man. It has paid off too, I have a nice apartment, a car, and a bachelor's degree. I have not been deployed once. That is in 5 years of service.
/r/MensRights01/11/13 08:54 PM
1

I think you're getting way too serious on wordplay here. The intent behind the "God given rights" is more that they do not come from men. Whether you say God given, Allah given, Flying spaghetti monster given, naturally occurring, or whatever, the real point to take away is that they were not given to you by any man or group of men and so no man or group of men should be allowed to take them away.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 07:46 PM
1

My bet is that it is because there alot of good and fair women out there and some of them are judges. They tend to be more fair on this because they won't be called sexist if they drop the hammer on a woman the way a male judge would. Also, it's tough to become a judge, so no woman that has made it there is going to buy into needing to go easy on women because they are women.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 12:18 PM
3

Plus when it's worded as "how many care about men's rights issues?" it's kind of like saying "how many people care about global warming?" Personally, I do not care about global warming, however, by that same right I do not laugh at or discredit those who do. I have simply chosen my battles and global warming is not one. In the same way, you don't necessarily have to find a woman who "cares" about men's rights, as much as one that simply understands and treats it as a legitimate issue when brough…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 12:00 PM
3

That and in instances of marriage, rape is usually just one of many abusive offenses.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 11:55 AM
1

I'd say you'll most likely be alright. Use your head and things will be ok. If the person shows any warning signs of being abusive, vindictive, etc. then gtfo. Even if you just feel uncomfortable, gtfo. I would say that no matter who you are. Sex while intoxicated is never a good idea for a variety of reasons. The rape claims are a big problem, but even outside of that, alcohol can cause some... performance... issues. It's awkward. If I can't walk properly then I'm probably not gonna be much mor…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 06:51 PM
2

assuming they are, in fact, his.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 05:53 PM
1

It is when you go to a mens rights subreddit to argue against mens rights. You don't like it, don't come here. You knew before you clicked on this reddit you did not aggree the MRM, yet, you are here anyway. Why then are you here if it is not to start arguments? Is your life that boring? Is there nothing you care about in your life enough to devote time to positively influence? You would really rather just find websites you don't like or agree with and go there to start arguments? Do you have an…
/r/MensRights22/06/12 12:45 PM
1

(Remember, I'm talking about in the large scale, centuries) Sometimes, men are portrayed as dumb. Sometimes ignorant, but usually when they are. How do I stand a chance against this kind of logic? I am being told my argument is invalid because of things that happened "centuries" ago and because men are portrayed as dumb when they are. I'm not trying anymore. I noticed (too late) a comment below to not feed the troll. I think I agree. (So the women portrayed as sexy are not sexy?)
/r/MensRights21/06/12 11:55 AM
6

Yes, this does happen, but that doesn't make right. Two wrongs don't make a right, remember? There are plenty of people/groups that stand up to that? Yet, how many stand for the men? There is a bit of a difference. I am not defending it, I am simply pointing it out. What you describe is portraying women as sexy, desirable, attractive, etc. All postive attributes to have. The ads we are upset about portray men as dumb, ignorant, immature, and childish. So, thinking about it, If there were a comme…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 05:48 PM
1

I just didn't see what he/she wrote as an argument as much as it is an informative response. To me an argument would be: "I notice you are doing X. I think you should do Y instead. Here is why Y is better/more important than X." It kind of sounded more like: "I know you are doing X. Are you also including Y? If not, I think you should consider it. Here is why." To me that is the perfect form of activism. Seeing something happen that opens the door for discussion and information dissimination of …
/r/MensRights15/06/12 06:23 PM
0

That isn't activism. That is ignore the problem and hope it goes away. Isn't that the mentality we DON'T want to have?
/r/MensRights15/06/12 03:34 PM
7

One of my buddies got taken for a ride like this. She has custody. He gets visitation. She moved 14 hours away. He's military so he's not allowed to go even if he wanted to or could afford to (which he could). She gets $750 a month child support and the "visitation" is that he can go up to where she is twice a year and spend a couple days with his son. She has it set up so he can't take the kid overnight and if she wants to be present he has to let her. She has made it such a pain in the ass on …
/r/MensRights29/12/11 08:02 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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