TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Canadian4Paul Archive

View 10 posts and 527 comments by Canadian4Paul 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)
4

Then wouldn't the decision just get thrown out if he appeals?
/r/MensRights23/06/14 01:38 PM
2

Yep that movie was posted here about a year ago. It is extremely rage inducing.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 01:25 PM
2

Welcome to reddit.
/r/MensRights09/04/13 02:12 PM
3

Feminist logic: Men are born with privilege. If you are privileged, you are unable to see your own privilege (but trust us, it's there!). Therefore, affirmative action that favors females is needed to make up for male privilege. Equality How do you even argue with that?
/r/MensRights25/03/13 08:48 PM
3

This is becoming the equivalent of the "legitimate rape" comment for this subreddit... And to be honest I kinda like it.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 08:43 PM
4

A lot of the time they don't realize protocol is to automatically arrest the guy in these situations, and all they wanted was for someone to intervene and calm the situation down.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 08:42 PM
1

When you allow intoxicated individuals females to absolve themselves of any responsibility for their actions during sex, then they are logically going to search for other areas where the system can be manipulated in their favor. FTFY
/r/MensRights22/03/13 07:00 PM
2

Patriarchy, rape culture. There's your reasoning.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:50 PM
7

But don't you guys see? Women never lie about rape so 42% of rapists are getting away with it! /s
/r/MensRights18/03/13 06:31 PM
43

Literally none. The only time "women in the kitchen" comments are made among male peers is in a clear satirical or joking context, similar to your typical racist joke. They're funny but that's it.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 06:25 PM
5

TL;DR: My fiance's dad just died. HOW CAN I MAKE THIS ABOUT MEEEEE?? Sounds like this guy dodged a bullet.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 06:17 PM
11

It's not that silly, take a look at what Julian Assange is being sued for in Sweden. A woman who stops taking birth control without her partner's knowledge would never have similar repercussions.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 11:34 AM
87

Tell them they should create an equivalent list for women. If they see a problem with that, then they are hypocrites.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 08:14 PM
22

Why do they even need the heated argument? Just call the cops and say their spouse is being abusive.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 08:00 PM
2

Under section 318 of the Criminal Code of Canada, it is illegal to promote genocide. Under section 319, it is illegal to publicly incite hatred against people based on their colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, and sexual orientation, except where the statements made are true or are made in good faith. The prohibition against inciting hatred based on sexual orientation was added to the section in 2004 with the passage of Bill C-250. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country#Can…
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:18 PM
7

"The Students' Association however, will not recognize any club or group whose activities, in the opinion of the SA..." That right there is where you're going to get fucked over. Canadian Universities and their Student's Associations in particular are liberal feminist circlejerks who will immediately deligitimize your efforts. Are you in Ontario by any chance? The only way I think this might work is if you are in Alberta.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:10 PM
7

Why would it be called the Violence Against Women Act if it provides equal protections for women and men? Either it doesn't, or it's implying that women are the primary and most important victims of violence. Would it really have killed them to just call it the "Domestic Violence Act"?
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:05 PM
3

You handled that argument very well.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 04:03 PM
16

It was just so that Jezebel doesn't get the ad revenue from our clicks.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:57 PM
3

I want to know her reasoning behind this.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:53 PM
2

There isn't all that much difference here than what a man would have gotten. The REAL injustice will come at the sentencing.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:29 PM
9

They say they're thankful it was done when they were babies since they don't have to remember the pain of it. The same reasoning could be used to for FGM. And female circumcision isn't really a fair comparison. As far as I know, the male counterpart would be closer to castration. Nobody is in favor of castration. In most cases, yes, but most people are against ALL forms of FGM, even ones that would be comparable to MGM.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:26 PM
33

Right, because women and children are the primary victims of war. Don't you guys listen to Hilary Clinton? Geeze.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:17 PM
41

Just wanted to thank you for taking screenshots instead of linking to the article, OP.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:15 PM
4

It's the same ink used in dye-packs during bank robberies. Hard as FUCK to remove.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:13 PM
6

Unless you're in a formal debate, appeals to emotion are both valid and encouraged forms of argument. You need facts AND emotion to win your argument. It's similar to Star Trek's Spock and Captain Kirk. One is purely logical and the other is very emotional, but together they develop kick-ass solutions.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:12 PM
7

Marriage has nothing to do with it. This is why you shouldn't have sex unless you get a visectomy.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 02:09 PM
2

Not quite sure why you are getting downvoted...
/r/MensRights04/03/13 07:00 PM
1

I'm in my last year of University in Canada, and I grew up going to school system that was very much sexist. The number of stories I have that would make you want to scratch your eyes out is too high to consider. I've written a few in this subreddit before. The main issues are definitely lack of male role models and teachers (not so much in high school but DEFINITELY in grades 1-8) and favoritism towards girls in grading and punishments.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 06:58 PM
2

I'll humbly disagree. Anybody who opposes the "Violence Against Women Act" is automatically setting themselves up to be labelled a misogynist. I'm also pretty sure Republicans are the only ones who voted against it...
/r/MensRights04/03/13 06:47 PM
2

Even Republicans know political suicide when they see it.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 06:34 PM
1

As a Commerce student, Yahoo Finance is just fine. It isn't as useful as some of the exclusive paid databases you can get on campus, but for a free source, it's great.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 06:33 PM
2

It varies by issue. I think RELATIVELY speaking, men do have it better in some countries. You can still bring up issues like male disposability anywhere on the planet, but that can be far outweighed by the discrimination women in those places face. Every country has men's rights problems, and every country has women's rights problems.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 06:31 PM
0

Are you implying that most men who are married with kids are miserable?
/r/MensRights01/03/13 06:30 PM
1

The Patriarchy actively supresses the best female fighters and athletes to perpetuate the idea that women are less physically capable than men. This naturally causes society to view men as the "strong protector", further empowering themselves and belittling women to the role of housewife. /s
/r/MensRights01/03/13 05:23 PM
1

Don't let the stuff posted on this subreddit influence your decisions to such absolutes. Protect yourself? Yes. Be conscious of the potential issues? Definitely. If you don't want to have kids for personal reasons then fine, but don't say no just because of the one-sided stories that get posted here. There are plenty more men who raise great families and feel great about it.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 05:21 PM
15

Pretty spot on. If you were a man at home during the second world war, women were encouraged to give you the white feather, which was meant to be a symbol of cowardice. They were intended to shame men into joining the war effort. There was even a story I read of a man who was granted a week to come home (during the war) because his mother was sick and dying. After his mother died he was sitting outside the hospital crying, and a group of women passing by dropped a white feather on his lap.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 05:16 PM
2

There have been a few comprehensive studies, and the consensus seems to be about 4%. http://menshealth.about.com/od/lifestyle/a/paternity.htm
/r/MensRights01/03/13 03:04 PM
1

When we do the opposite, we are greedy 1%ers.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:28 PM
1

Yes but why specify women? Why shouldn't EVERYONE be afforded the same protection? The Violence Against Women Act is sexist. It should be the Violence Against People Act. It's basically admitting that violence against men is OK, or at least more socially acceptable.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:21 PM
0

One specific case doesn't show that at all. A statistic showing the percentage of all cases of this type who are female might be better. Even then, has there ever been a problem where people only perceive men as ones who steal? I think society knows that both men and women steal...
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:19 PM
4

Same as Germany, you can get a court order. ~1000 were issued last year.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:13 PM
3

I believe the more accurate number is 5%. There was a scientific study posted here a while ago but I don't have the link.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 02:12 PM
3

The whole point is to not get caught.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 08:57 PM
1

Posters. POSTERS EVERYWHERE.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 07:05 PM
1

Oh the things I learn from Civ 5...
/r/MensRights25/02/13 06:45 PM
1

That's not a mensrights issue, it's an officers rights issue. Wat?
/r/MensRights25/02/13 06:41 PM
17

they claimed the specialized training that would be necessary for the instructors was cost prohibitive. Probably because male demand for the course would be much lower than current female demand. If you have 50 females interested, they all sign up for the course at $25 per person. If you have 5 men interested, it's $250 per person and no one will sign up. Unfortunately I think the Police department was right. Edit: Accidentally a word.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 06:27 PM
0

Carleton here... I would watch the shit of that.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 06:22 PM
12

So you are, in essence, betting nothing that anything will happen?
/r/MensRights25/02/13 06:21 PM
5

Excellent advice, Doctor! Now what do we do in the 18% of cases where the condom fails?
/r/MensRights22/02/13 08:16 PM
1

She's actually a great girl, and these are more slip-ups than anything else. The reason I bring it up is because I don't think she realizes fully what she's doing, rather it's just a way for her to poke fun. I'm sure when I mention it to her she'll do her best to stop. I've probably done the same to her a few times, again, with innocent intentions.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 05:18 PM
2

My only advice is that the post is too bloated, and I doubt anyone will read the whole thing. It needs something to grab their attention, possibly an infographic or something similar. Make your claims more condensed and to the point. Expand and cite later if you are challenged on them.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 04:05 PM
17

She humiliates you in front of others? This isn't something I've considered before, but it's right on the money. My current girlfriend does this ALL the time. If there's something that bugs her, she will often bring it up in front of my family or friends in an attempt to humiliate me. It's usually after we've already talked about it, and it will often be an incorrect version of the story to make things appear in a bad light (or she will conveniently leave out very important details that make her…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:54 PM
1

Unfortunately, the reality is that emotional arguments almost always win, unless you are in an academic setting like a formal debate where an appeal to emotion can easily be called out. On your points though, I wasn't trying to address what the impact of their rebuttal would be. I was only stating that rather than continue to overlook the 80% stat, they could just as easily spin it to fit their "all men are evil abusers" mindset. It will have the same impact as the other bullshit facts they spew…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:43 PM
2

I've also never seen a woman complain about women's lack of representation in the coal mining or garbabe removal fields.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:29 PM
2

And instead of trying to convince women to work harder, work more hours, and enter these fields where they are underrepresented, they expect these things to just be GIVEN to them. Work less hours and receive more benefits? We should still earn the same salary and receive as many promotions. Underrepresented in a field? We should have scholarship opportunities that are only available to us, and need affirmative action so that we are selected over more qualified men.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:26 PM
2

Advice*, not advise. (Sorry to correct grammar but it came up twice, and it's probably good to know for future reference). It would be tough to convince him that it's a good option to take, because it sounds like he relies on her a lot financially, and courts typically aren't too keen on awarding financial support from woman to man. I honestly can't say what course of action is best because what seemingly should be fair is often very unpredictable once it reaches the courts.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:21 PM
0

I find it interesting that the 80% female initiated divorce stat is completely overlooked. It will be dismissed and explained by saying that it's because men are the main perpertrators of abuse, so women initiate divorce more often on those grounds (despite the fact we know women commit domestic abuse just as often, if not more than men).
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:17 PM
6

In other news: Canadian man convicted of first-degree murder, ruled dangerous offender, for infecting partners with HIV during sexual intercourse http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/08/02/hiv-offender-aziga.html
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:04 PM
3

Even our Conservative Party is known as the "Progressive-Conservative" party. It's impossible for a true conservative party to exist in this country...
/r/MensRights22/02/13 02:59 PM
3

Many would claim this is already the case.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 02:57 PM
6

I can't be the only one who gets the impression that a LOT of mainstream feminism is just feeble attempts by lesbians trying to convince women that they are all, in fact, lesbians.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 02:53 PM
26

Whenever I am in one of my University's administrative buildings, 100% of the workers are female. Doesn't matter which department or office. Last week I was at Best Buy, and surprise surprise, everybody in the computers & electronics section, video games section, and geek squad were male. It's almost as though men and women prefer different jobs or something...
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:57 PM
3

Gonna reply here or else I doubt it will get seen: Rape by Deception Ask your lawyer if you might have a case for that. It varies by state, so I hope to God you are in a state that recognizes it.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:12 PM
1

Does anyone else
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:00 PM
7

My personal opinion is that you shouldn't marry someone simply because you think it would make them more willing to relocate and drop opportunities she has going for her. It's situations like those that are just asking for a divorce to happen anyways. Why not wait to let her finish school first? I'm in a similar situation where I'll be finishing school at least a year and a half before my girlfriend, and it will likely mean spending a lot of time seperated over that period. I know that I want to…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:56 PM
4

What about a boy who wants to compete in girl's sports? Perhaps he is way below the standard for boys, or he wants to play a sport where male teams are rare, such as field hockey?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:47 PM
1

Which is why I re-worded my question for you. Allowing boys to compete in girl's sports is social The fact that boys are typically better in sports is biological, not social. When these inequalities arise as a result of these biological differences, should we try to apply corrective measures?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:44 PM
20

The entire article is written under the assumption that women never lie about being raped. Obviously if we are to make that assumption it makes sense to name the accused, but at no point does the author consider that those accused might actually be innocent.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:42 PM
2

But the examples you have given are not attempts to do so Can you explain? Perhaps I should have worded it "Should society try to correct inequalities arising from biological differences in genders", but that's what I was alluding to.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:39 PM
2

OP has been a redditor for 17 hours, and one of the top voted comments is a shitty feminist rebuttal / counter post. I sense a troll and vote brigade.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 07:04 PM
9

Don't know why you were downvoted, it's true. Many people need to vent / someone to listen.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:52 PM
4

The first bullet should be excluded given the example, but the rest are valid.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 02:05 PM
6

Pregnancy can still occur when you wear a condom, and the whole post is about men who AREN'T ACTUALLY THE FATHER being forced to pay for kids that aren't theirs.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 10:19 PM
7

how does your Wife or Girlfriend react to these discussions? Can you talk about female chauvinism with them or do you have to hide your feelings? I'm still weary of mentioning Men's Rights, but I've spoken to my GF about many of the issues specifically and she agrees with pretty much everything.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 07:51 PM
11

average cost of raising a child in that region. Which should be held as the MAXIMUM child support payment a court can order. I don't expect someone earning way under the average income to have to pay the average cost of raising a child.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 07:49 PM
1

Oh I agree it's a problem, but I fail to see how this post reflects that problem.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 07:05 PM
1

Personal preference and sentimental value.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:55 PM
1

"Best interest of the child"
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:45 PM
1

Can they use that test to get out of responsibility or will French courts not recognize the evidence? They are still ordered to pay in the best interest of the child. Read the article I posted in another comment. France determines fatherhood based on societies view, not on any biological evidence.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:33 PM
1

Pretty much. There are some situations where the court can order a paternity test, but to put things into comparison, this was only done roughly 1,500 times, compared the the 15,000 who had to get it done illegally.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:22 PM
3

In the U.S. and most countries yes. There are even "do it at home" tests that are 99.9% accurate. In France they are banned, and fathers have to illegally mail samples outside the country for their tests. It is estimated that 15,000 French fathers do this every year, and approximately 1/30 have their suspicions verified.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:53 PM
2

See the source I posted to one of the replies to my first comment. It seems fairly legitimate and well-researched to me.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:52 PM
-1

I guess marriage is just that, it's an added sentimental title. It's a way of showing your complete devotion and trust towards another person. People can hold it to whatever sentiment they like, but all I am trying to say is some will place a higher value on it than others, and I strongly suggest those people seek what will make them happy, regardless of the risks that go along with it.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:50 PM
-3

Yet only 50% of marriages end in divorce. That number is staggaringly high, but keep in mind many people get divorced 2, 3, or even 4+ times. My mother has just been asked to be her friend's maid of honour for the fourth time. What I'm saying is that it's more likely the marriage will last forever than not, so why try to convince those people it's not worth it?
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:47 PM
-4

The title doesn't say "be careful where you swim", it says "don't ever swim". Absolutes like that are just plain unprogressive.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:00 PM
-3

The only benefit for men regarding marriage is for their children. Again, speak for yourself. Perhaps many men will agree with you, but some of us do get significant emotional benefits from marriage. This isn't an absolute, open and shut case.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 04:54 PM
14

Every. Fucking. Time. "Well, this woman did/said a shitty thing... but you see something shitty happened to her at some point in her life so she isn't responsible for the things she says or does anymore."
/r/MensRights15/02/13 04:27 PM
1

This is the best I could do: According to the U.S. Department of Justice, nearly 6 out of 10 rape/sexual assault incidents are reported by victims to have occurred in their own home or the home of a friend, relative, or neighbor. http://www.ncdsv.org/images/sexualassaultstatistics.pdf
/r/MensRights15/02/13 04:23 PM
2

Fair enough, and I think it's fair to say the 71% statistic is a little bit closer to the truth. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics 71 percent of rapes are current partner, relative, or another acquaintance. The wording definitely makes it sound like it was someone very close to the victim. Even if it's less, consider the percentage of people you encounter every day that could be considered an acquaintance versus those you encounter who are not. There's this image people have that rap…
/r/MensRights15/02/13 04:12 PM
0

Ahh well that might be a fair point, but then again I don't think we have enough information here. Do we know whether or not this woman is being sought after by police?
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:57 PM
98

Men do not have any reproductive rights, and have no say when a woman is pregnant. In some countries (such as Germany and France), men do not have the right to a paternity test. Other countries have been pushing to follow suit. Even if it is later found out that you are not the father, you are still liable for child support for the best interest of the child. If these all hold firm, then you may be responsible to pay child support to any woman you have sex with who subsequently becomes pregnant,…
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:55 PM
1

Yeah my comment was getting off-topic. I'm not here to debate amounts, just that I didn't see how a woman owing child support is a sign that women are advantaged. It seems perfectly plausible to me that a number like that can accrue.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:48 PM
-2

I'm in exactly the same situation. Girlfriend and I have been together over 2 years, see each other every day and spend every night together. I graduate in April, and she'll follow suit not too long after. We've already talked about moving in together and marriage. She's a sweetheart and I trust her fully.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:46 PM
5

In his example, the equivalent would be a man using self-depreciating humour, not a feminist.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:07 PM
3

I am arguing that regardless of whether or not a law is just every single law needs to be applied evenly to men and women. That's what I was getting at. I don't see how the picture shows any inequality in the way men are treated. The fact that she owes that much in child support shows quite clearly that she was treated exactly the same way as a man in the same situation.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 03:02 PM
2

Which is excessive, unless we are talking about multiple children.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:41 PM
7

Unfortunately, my country is one of the worst when it comes to this. Any opinion that isn't already labelled a socially respectable opinion will be shut down without any debate. We have already decided which topics are debateable and which ones are not. If you have an opinion that challenges these beliefs you are not even allowed to debate them without your opinion being labelled hate speech.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:39 PM
7

Ok, I guess I'll be the guy who calls bullshit. Marriage isn't for everyone. Yes there is a negative stigma surrounding men who refuse to get married or "commit" and that needs to change, but that aside, many men enjoy very fulfilling marriages. To many of us (myself included), the idea of being permanently and romantically attached through marriage is very self-fulfilling and enriching. Yes, bad things can happen, and yes, the courts will be stacked against you. There is no doubting that some u…
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:33 PM
1

Oh, shit. Looks like I have to cancel my 7:30 plans. Maybe I'll just go play some video games instead.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:25 PM
3

So basically she needs to be told to carry the pocket knife and pepper spray whenever she is around friends and family, but she can leave it at home when she goes out to the bar.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:17 PM
8

The extent to which some people are pushing to have personal feelings measured equally to facts, logic, and statistics for the sake of making women's opinions more valid annoys me to no end. I'm sorry that women evolved to be, on average, more emotional thinkers, but that does NOT make it an equally valid opinion or argument to logic and facts.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:14 PM
10

unfair treatment of men vs. women in child support. How does it highlight that issue? She owes $137k in child support. Isn't that a tad excessive for anyone to be paying?
/r/MensRights15/02/13 02:08 PM
5

Men get women pregnant, women don't get pregnant despite "its their body". It's a fairly easy conclusion to reach for those who think that all heterosexual sex, even when between a married couple, is rape.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:33 PM
3

The same reason Christians have to beg God for forgiveness for the sin he created them with.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 05:51 PM
2

There are some of us who might agree with the idea of child support to an extent, but would like to see it applied to women just as often as it does to men.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 05:49 PM
4

That makes a surprising amount of sense.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 07:02 PM
2

They studied 18 different maritime disasters, including 16 previously unstudied shipwrecks, between the 1850s and 2011. For starters, more recent wrecks (1950 to 2011) would probably skew the data. I also didn't read anything that noted if the studied wrecks were all passenger carriers, or whether they could have been male-dominated fishing boats, transports, or warships. "In fact, Titanic and the HMS Birkenhead are the only two shipwrecks in our sample in which women have a survival advantage o…
/r/MensRights11/02/13 06:52 PM
2

Gotcha. My interpretation of the phrase has always come from the movie "Titanic", where mothers would accompany their children onto the boats and fathers stayed behind.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 06:22 PM
1

I may be one of the few who doesn't buy in to the "once a cheater, always a cheater" bullshit. People do grow up. I think 99% of the time, you should break up with somebody who cheats on you. Even if you do take someone back, you do so with the knowledge that you are probably setting yourself up to be hurt again. With that said, I never take relationship advice in the form of an absolute.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 06:14 PM
2

Pardon my ignorance here, but how?
/r/MensRights11/02/13 06:03 PM
3

In the few relationships I've had (I'm 21), I paid for the first few dates (I'd say a month or two worth), and then we start to split things evenly. Sometimes I pay, sometimes she pays, sometimes we split the bill. All depends who has been paying more recently and who is in a better position to spend. Often if she's the one who wanted to go out she will pay, and vice versa.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 05:51 PM
10

It's going to be tough explaining to a boy that he'll have to choose between good grades, or acting like a teacher's pet and getting bullied.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 03:20 PM
4

At that point I don't think it would have been considered a "sucker" punch.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:17 AM
7

That's the problem. Men ARE expected to do these things because of our gender. And then they want us to split the cooking and cleaning down the middle.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 12:12 AM
1

Be overqualified.
/r/MensRights07/02/13 01:32 PM
1

Your freedom of speech is ignorance my friend. That comment from him really rustled my jimmies. It's the same argument I hear from most of my liberal friends on facebook. Sorry to make this a political point, but it's something I've only ever seen from that group (I consider myself liberal too, but I disagree with them on many issues). At some point, it became a political talking point to suggest any non-left opinion was ignorant and/or hate speech, and not even worthy of debate. It sickens me t…
/r/MensRights07/02/13 01:20 PM
3

Men can only get an erection when sexually aroused? The boners I used to get in the middle of gym class or presentations disagree. Oh and morning wood. Oh, and there's that drug called Viagra whose sole purpose is to produce a lasting erection. Even if we accept that: Erections can only be caused by sexual arousal. Sexual arousal dismisses any claim of rape Then it follows that any girl who is wet during penetration was not raped.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 05:15 PM
6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country#Canada Under section 319, it is illegal to publicly incite hatred against people based on their colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, and sexual orientation, except where the statements made are true or are made in good faith.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 02:32 PM
2

Was there a blip?
/r/MensRights06/02/13 02:28 PM
1

Didn't notice that. Thanks.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 01:24 PM
9

Going to war was not a choice in most of those cases. It was as expected of men as it was expected of women to stay at home. The system that kept women at home while men went off to war was the same system that forced them to stay at home Making that comparison is like saying the Christians had it worse than the Jews in WWII because the Christians didn't have the opportunity to go to the concentration camps. They just HAD to stay at home in their war torn cities instead. Some of your other point…
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:46 PM
3

Because calling someone a faggot is always the best way to get your point across -_-
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:39 PM
-4

So, what, I should've known that by "intelligent" you meant "analytical"? Originally, I said "most" were defensible scientifically because I understand some of the traits I chose were not. When I took on the task of defending intelligence as a trait, I had to clarify and was more specific. The same went for most of the other objections you brought up.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 12:01 AM
-5

You are essentially just nit-picking the words I used in my original post. I could have addressed most of those concerns if I wanted to write an essay, but I prefer to keep it short and sweet. For the record, it was a subjective opinion, which is what OP is looking for. I had no intention of making a blanket, objectively true statement. Is a fair objection. Is exactly what I said in my previous post regarding multiple definitions of intelligence. That's not what I did. I took the the fact that w…
/r/MensRights04/02/13 11:24 PM
1

Alright the story seems to make a bit of sense now. Thanks.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 10:38 PM
-2

Which is why I chose to use the word "most". And I would disagree on all 3 counts to an extent. Women are known to be more emotional thinkers. They use the areas of the brain more associated with emotion and creativity. Men use areas of the brain more associated with logic and mathematical skills. It's kind of funny that anyone who reads this probably thinks I'm a sexist just for repeating this information, but these are basic facts taught in pretty much any intro to psychology course. Intellige…
/r/MensRights04/02/13 09:30 PM
1

So is the first point ;)
/r/MensRights04/02/13 09:10 PM
8

I'm assuming the intent of the rape kit was an attempt to "prove" she was not raped.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 09:00 PM
1

So it was a random stranger? How did you meet? Why is she in your phone on a first name basis? How did the topic of fixing her computer come up in the first place?
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:48 PM
-1

Non-modern means I won't be politically correct. I see men as leaders, emotionally stable, physically strong, logical thinkers, intelligent, and independent. Most of those are in terms of averages. Not every man is a born leader, more emotionally stable, physically strong, etc. but on average, a man is more likely to have those traits than a woman. Most of these traits are a result of evolution and natural selection, and are scientifically verifiable. But apparantly somewhere along the line, sug…
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:46 PM
5

If you want to define genders using the modern definition of gender equality, then there is no definition I can give for masculinism that won't be equally applicable to women, and have me labelled as a sexist for suggesting.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:34 PM
4

Is she a friend or a customer?
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:31 PM
11

If condoms prevent any DNA transfer during sex (I'm not 100% sure either way), then there isn't anything that can pinpoint OP as the perpertrator anyway since OP did not have sex with her.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:27 PM
12

Lawyer up Good advice. file a lawsuit against her for libel and slander. I would let his lawyer decide whether or not that's best for his situation.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:18 PM
19

What if she had sex with someone elsE? The DNA would not match.
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:17 PM
57

This isn't the first story I've heard about this kind of thing happening, and the others weren't Germany. It's kind of scary this shit keeps happening, and even more scary that COURTS KEEP RULING IN FAVOUR OF THE PERSON WHO STOLE THE SPERM without the father's consent. What the fuck!? This guy should steal her cheque book, make out a cheque to himself every month totalling the amount he had to pay for the child's expenses, and deposit it into his bank account. Apparantly even if he gets caught a…
/r/MensRights04/02/13 08:10 PM
9

Sort of like how women can compete in many men's sports, but men can't compete in women's sports?
/r/MensRights04/02/13 07:48 PM
3

/s ?
/r/MensRights04/02/13 07:47 PM
1

I am an HR rep, but it's the legal system that would have been the problem for the guy in the case I described, not likely HR.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 06:38 PM
1

She claims he was the perpetrator of the sexual harrassment and it's her word against his, guess who's getting the short end of that stick?
/r/MensRights01/02/13 05:44 PM
1

Not everybody has the same situation. For all we know, his job could have been a lot more important to him. Even if he says no, what then? He gets fired, and has to try and say it was because of sexual harassment from his female boss? He probably felt nobody would believe him or take him seriously.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 05:24 PM
5

We are getting through to people. Just don't expect it to happen overnight.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 05:01 PM
2

I'm not your friend, guy! Oh who am I kidding, gimme a hug, friend!
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:58 PM
1

blame also falls on the cop Victim-blaming... Not cool.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:56 PM
8

Dissenting opinions are welcomed. I wouldn't consider either your post in this thread or the one linked to be a dissenting opinion, just trollspam.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:51 PM
6

I'll admit that growing up was probably tougher for a gay boy. There was a vast amount of homophobia and intolerance when I was in school. If you came out as gay, you would probably be bullied.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:46 PM
1

I'm Canadian, of course I can't forgive you.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:44 PM
3

I am sure the abuser (had she been an adult) would have faced a harsher sentence for the abuse. Absolutely. And if it was a male abuser, he would be tried as an adult.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:39 PM
2

Exactly. She even confessed to the incident by her own will and accord, recognizing it was wrong. What's scarier is the other women who do the same but don't think their behaviour is wrong.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:38 PM
3

I'm not so sure. I don't think it was ever 'Not OK' for a woman to do this, and all of a sudden became OK to do because of feminism. Women have always gotten a pass for this sort of behaviour on kids, especially boys, and especially if they were in a parenting/nanny role.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:35 PM
1

Of course, but I thought that was as implicit as it was in your statement.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:29 PM
3

Actually, yes, this could probably work. Once you get up to the superintendent level, there is usually a good female/male split, and most of those people (both genders) will have some more common sense. The problem is the original one brought up by OP - not enough people think it's a cause for concern. It's an issue that would likely have to be brought to the school board by his parents, which would involve convincing his parents that it was an issue. Even that isn't a guarantee the people at th…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:24 PM
2

Seems like I'm replying to you a lot today... Anyways, I feel like this needs a fix: "Women are equal to men . . . but less responsible for their actions". Women should be equal to men, but less responsible for their actions; however they are not yet equal to men so we need affirmative action in every desireable male-dominated function of society to ensure that women match or surpass them in those areas.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:12 PM
3

Might work where you're from but Canada? Not a chance.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:09 PM
2

The key to that last point is bona-fide occupational requirements. If you can demonstrate that something is required to carry out the task of the job, you are allowed to discriminate based on just about anything... except for women. I'm being completely serious with that last point. If an acting position requires a white male for the purposes of the plot, its perfectly acceptable not to allow blacks to apply. But take firefighters and police, and we actually LOWER what was previously a bonafide …
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:04 PM
5

Their response would likely be: "Oh, well in that case it's acceptable". I honestly doubt they would see anything wrong with the hipocrisy.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:01 PM
2

"Keep it in your pants if you don't want a kid!" Next time a woman goes in for an abortion, we will say "you should have kept your legs shut if you didn't want a child". /s
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:00 PM
4

For people who do not believe that sex=consent to a child, another popular argument you will hear is 'It's about the best interests of the child!' or, 'What about that poor baby, what's he/her to do!!' If a woman chooses, she can exclude the father from parenting rights regardless of "best interest for the child", because we don't consider a child growing up without a father to be a bad thing. Only a child without a mother is seen as bad. I believe it's something like 90%+ of custody battles wil…
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:56 PM
2

Your English is very good. I just thought you should know that :P
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:42 PM
2

To be fair, the only one I can think of is discounts and benefits to seniors and/or military, both of which I find completely acceptable.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:33 PM
11

If his school is anything like mine were, the administration will be 100% female and likely laugh in his face.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:16 PM
14

In fact, just about any other form of seperation aside from gender would have the same effect, even a random draw. Randomly select 10 students to go first and 10 to go last, and the 10 who go last will say "Wtf why do they get to go ahead". But you make it so the girls get to go first, and nobody thinks twice about it.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 03:13 PM
3

How bad either party had it, or currently has it, is irrelevant to the attitudes they express in the context you brought up. What matters is that negative attitudes existed, were challenged, and were changed. Before they were challenged, they existed as a normal part of society, similar to the small penis joke on the poster.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 10:20 PM
3

That's completely irrelevant to my point.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 10:03 PM
3

What's your point? Don't you see where this is going? 60 years ago, 90% of women weren't offended about being expected to be a housewife, limited employment opportunities, male "bar" jokes and culture, etc.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 09:22 PM
4

It could be argued that what your saying is extremely discriminatory towards women. Why do you think it would cause such outrage? Because women are dramatic? That's the same as suggesting that me stating 'a black person would find the term "cotton-picker" offensive' is racist. It has nothing to do with the fact that they are dramatic. It has everything to do with my experience and what I have witnessed women (and some men) express outrage over. Also the picture itself could be used as a womens r…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 09:12 PM
11

The outrage is that the equivalent in a female bathroom would draw HUGE outrage. Perhaps it's an acceptable form of humour, but if it is, are you going to be the one to defend the mockup of girl's boob sizes in their washroom? Good luck with that.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 08:56 PM
26

It's the attitude that men have to just " stop being a pussy, man up and take it" that most of the Men's Rights problems exist, that's the whole point. It's the equivalent of saying "don't fight for equality, just deal with it".
/r/MensRights31/01/13 08:17 PM
49

stop being a pussy, man the fuck up It's attitudes like that we fight against.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 08:11 PM
28

What's even worse is when the man wants to take care of the kids (or at least partial custody), and instead he's told he's not allowed to have a role in the kid's life. And then on top of that, he's forced to pay money out of his pocket to help raise the kid he's not allowed to see. It would be like if a robber broke into your house, stole your computer, and then the courts forced you to pay his internet and computer maintenance bills for the rest of your life. The alimony system is a way of tel…
/r/MensRights28/01/13 08:25 PM
2

Move to Quebec and stay common law. After the Supreme Court ruling a few days ago, that's the last safe haven men in Canada have left.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 06:43 PM
2

If that doesn't get to her, show her this
/r/MensRights28/01/13 05:50 PM
16

If I leave the front door to my house unlocked and I get robbed, am I to blame? No. Could I have prevented it, or made the robbery much more difficult? Yes. Am I an idiot? Yes.
/r/MensRights26/01/13 07:00 PM
2

Quebec too. Definitely Quebec.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:14 PM
11

Another good quote from the article: "In this way, it has preserved the freedom of those who wish to organize their patrimonial relationships outside the mandatory statutory framework."
/r/MensRights25/01/13 05:09 PM
1

Am I safe to assume you are American? I'm not sure about the States, but where I'm from what your boss did could easily be construed as a wrongful dismissal. I know it's too late now, but as someone in HR, it angers me when I hear stuff like that. You can't fire someone for the sole fact that they were accused of a crime.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 04:24 PM
11

That isn't something that is heavily discussed here. We are very much indifferent to what gender someone identifies with. All we want is to cease discrimination against men (or those who identify as men).
/r/MensRights25/01/13 04:18 PM
-1

I always have to laugh when I see these messages. Why don't they just save time and space by writing "Everyone who is not a white male".
/r/MensRights25/01/13 04:13 PM
2

Welcome to the Dailymail. Where what's not news is!
/r/MensRights25/01/13 04:08 PM
7

Well it's 4chan, so I'm pinning this at >50% chance of having never happened. The sad part is that even if it's not true, everything described is completely plausible.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 03:16 PM
1

Friday’s decision involves a billionaire and a former Brazilian model. The couple, who can be identified only as Eric and Lola, met in 1992, when she was 17 and he was 32. They had three children during their seven-year relationship. Lola, the primary caregiver, asserts that she was unable to work outside the home. She maintained that by refusing her persistent requests that they get married, Eric effectively managed to safeguard his vast fortune. Cases like this are a tough one for me. I'm sorr…
/r/MensRights25/01/13 03:04 PM
2

You may be speaking sarcastically, but if a woman was to become injured after a man blocked her punch, I wouldn't be surprised if this was actually the case.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:59 PM
42

Police acknowledge that the woman who accused Nassr lied about the assault. They have filed a cross-claim against her, asking the court to make her responsible for any damages awarded to Nassr as well as making her pay for the cost of defending his lawsuit. Ahh, so the police will actually pursue charges against false rape accusers when it's THEM being sued for damages. The more you know...
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:55 PM
7

I think it is safe to say that there is a fairly linear relationship between feminism and left-leaning states. That's just been my observation.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:52 PM
16

The reason for the MRA explosion in Toronto is because guys there have been dealing with extreme feminist bullshit for too long. Only move there if you are prepared to deal with that.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:49 PM
20

She was clearly the victim of an abusive father growing up, and not responsible for her behaviour in any way.
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:48 PM
31

I, too, like to physically assault people with weapons when they are being assholes. /s
/r/MensRights25/01/13 02:45 PM
5

I worked in HR at a small federal law enforcement agency for the summer. Let me tell you, at least in Canada, that female officers are subjected to the same fitness testing and requirements as men, which is why there are far fewer females in the force. The real problem wasn't women who couldn't lift a bigger man (as would be required by the job in many instances). The problem was old and overweight officers who let go after passing the initial entrance exams.
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:10 PM
21

I actually witnessed something similar. As a student I worked at a large chain store, and we had a customer become irate after his return was refused. He wandered over to the electronics section and started smashing. I picked up the phone and spoke over the PA "code 1, electronics. Code 1, electronics" as I had been trained to do, and watched as our 2 male managers went over to subdue the man while our 2 female managers looked on from a distance. One of the male managers was cut by broken glass …
/r/MensRights23/01/13 02:06 PM
3

By leaving those claims uncontested, they opened the door to what happened. All of a sudden a cold-blooded killer is a battered wife who tried multiple times to contact police but received no help and felt trapped.
/r/MensRights22/01/13 11:13 PM
4

Then don't give into the demands. If she's being as unreasonable as you are making it sound, don't put up with it. Stop putting out unless it's being reciprocated. If that means you have no more sex life, then move on.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:04 PM
5

Correct.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:01 PM
4

I meant mature in a biological sense, as in their bodies mature sooner.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 09:00 PM
4

It seems strange that she would speak about your sex life being better collectively. Better for her doesn't mean better for both of you, and if that's her attitude, then it needs to be changed. She does know you feel like your sex life has deteriorated, right?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 08:12 PM
2

Have you talked to her about that yet? You said she mentioned "women shouldn't have to settle for a lackluster sex life". Ask her if men should have settle for a lackluster sex life. You should at least be able to make the argument that it be equal. If you can't, it's up to you, but I'd be looking elsewhere. You don't want to be disappointed with your sex life for the rest of your life.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 08:02 PM
2

So then men should be exempt from voting on legislation concerning women's health?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 07:12 PM
4

I agree, but I don't know any of this other context with OP, so I made the best judgement I could.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 07:07 PM
2

That is terrible advice.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 07:05 PM
12

Unless you are from Quebec or New Brunswick (about 15-25% of Canada's population), your first language is likely English, and most French Canadians learn to speak English fluently. FTR I'm Eastern Canadian.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 07:03 PM
3

So far, I've got "Tradition." So next time someone claims males are privileged, all I have to do is defend it as "tradition"? Sweet!
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:54 PM
11

Misleading title. Everyone is voting on it, not just women. Men also get to vote on issues concerning women, you know.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:52 PM
9

Thanks for sharing. Sounds like you needed to get that off your chest. Sex should be mutually beneficial. You should give as much as you get, and vice versa. If you climax quickly, then there should be lots of foreplay to make sure she gets taken care of too. If you get a BJ for nothing in return, don't you think it's fair she gets the same every once in a while? It sounds like you had it pretty good at first, and it's starting to go backwards. It sounds like she wasn't happy with the sex life (…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:45 PM
1

I read the second half of your post and that made sense to me. Too late to delete it now though, d'oh!
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:35 PM
3

"I understand that direct oral suction will be performed on my child" The parents sign, not the kids.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:27 PM
2

None.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:26 PM
13

This would be a case of "rape by deception", but I guess the thought that he might have changed his mind never entered their heads. I suppose now if a man initiates a divorce, all the sex they had during marriage will be subject to the same penalty?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:23 PM
12

Relevant
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:20 PM
2

Exams have always been my downfall. I typically get C's on tests and A's on assignments, averaging out to a B in the course. I believe my final exam mark in English was a B, which as far as I'm concerned, was fair.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:06 PM
15

I know I should have. I was definitely more of a shy, non confrontational type, and only used it as a last resort.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 06:04 PM
6

Girlfriend accuses you of rape. Girlfriend collects "victim dollars". Girlfriend admits that she lied. Profit $$$ Repeat.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 05:41 PM
2

For lack of a better term, due to the title using "beneath them".
/r/MensRights18/01/13 05:32 PM
57

Story time: I had the same English teacher in grades 10, 11, and 12. She was an older woman, and my least favorite teacher. You'll find out why by the time you're done reading this. English was, and always has been, one of my stronger courses. The problem with this teacher was that girls in our class could easily be expected to score a full letter grade higher with no additional effort. I was one of the better performing guys in the class, and my marks were normally in the 75-84% range (B to A-)…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 05:26 PM
2

I read that after posting, so I guess the last sentence becomes null. I asked a question earlier that still wasn't responded to though: Did she ever try to get a restraining order? And why did the cops dismiss it as a civil matter? Doesn't make sense to me.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 04:46 PM
5

So what you're saying is that it was necessary to get her attention first? I guess I can see that in some cases.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 04:16 PM
4

Women on average hit menopause at age 51. I didn't know it was that high. Usually I hear people talking about age 40 as "crunch time" when it comes to women having kids. Naturally, 38 felt like it would be the time for women to start stressing about that sort of thing if they haven't had kids. I think 38 signifies a general age at which women are typically more financially secure, and then therefore are more willing to 'marry down' because the man in question is more compatible personality wise.…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 04:14 PM
36

Fair enough, but my "Proceed with caution" alarm is still ringing.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 04:11 PM
9

Yes, but that's not the point. If you are saying that a boy getting an erection is proof that he consents to sex, then you must also say that a girl getting wet is proof that she consents to sex. Therefore if a woman is raped, it doesn't count if she was wet (which a lot of female bodies are programmed to do biologically, even if they don't like what's happening). Similarily, a man can get an erection from physical contact, even if it's involuntary. The other point you made is that it's not rape…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 04:06 PM
3

That wasn't exactly what I was getting at. The 95% stat opened the door for that discussion, and that's great! But was it way it was presented that had that effect, or just the stat itself?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 04:02 PM
5

The erections I used to get in gym class can confirm the truth of this statement.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:59 PM
5

Hey man, erectile disfunction is a serious problem!
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:58 PM
12

Isn't that what feminism is supposedly about? Making girls equal to boys?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:55 PM
24

The funny thing is, biologically, girls mature and go through puberty earlier than boys. If anything, it should be the other way around.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:54 PM
7

I suppose it will have different effects on different readers. My question is, would your mother's reaction have been any different ("she had a real problem with the idea of women doing equal work for equal pay") if you had just quoted the real statistic from the get-go?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:41 PM
21

I guess the point is that a lot of men are willing to "downgrade", so to speak, if the woman is attractive, friendly, a good person, etc. Women, on the other hand, are much more concerned with economic factors regardless of these other traits. The only exception is older women. Once they hit the age of around 38 and are typically not able to have kids, they become a bit more desperate for that match. You're right. It's not unreasonable to set your standard at the same economic level, but the fac…
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:38 PM
4

I think the type of people that would just shrug those things off would still just shrug it off when they find out they were deceived, except they'll just be more ticked off about it. The type of people that shrug those things off aren't the type of people to reflect and go "why did my emotions calm when the victims were men?"
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:25 PM
48

The 1 in 3 statistic has been floating around for a long time now, and I haven't seen the credibility blowback yet.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:22 PM
27

What is the definition of womanhood? Is it a flat belly, curled hair, and thin arms? Is it umpteen hours spent on the treadmill? Is it rash driving and drunken parties? The definition of womanhood is not the size of your bra But the space between your ears. How you think is how womanly you are. The true test of your womanhood is how you treat a man. All men. Any man. Every man. If you do not respect a man you are only half a woman.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:18 PM
6

I just don't see the point. Why not post a picture with the correct symbols? It still stimulates the same discussion as to why men have such a higher rate of suicide, less the possibility someone won't read the legend and think the graphic is about women.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:13 PM
23

Most of the stats feminists throw out already are classified as incorrect and proven misinformation, yet we still hear it quoted as truth. Do you really think it would be any different for the suicide statistic?
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:11 PM
5

I'd recommend you edit out a few of them. It started out great, but then it started to get very redundant. There were a few I just plain disagree with. Other than that, good luck!
/r/MensRights18/01/13 03:09 PM
3

Did she have or try to get a restraining order? I'm confused as to why the police would dismiss is at a civil matter.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 02:58 PM
10

Or the prosecution is just inept. I'm sorry but how difficult should it be to convince a jury that there were avenues other than murder? She obviously wasn't trapped in her house because she had the ability to go out and HIRE A HITMAN. That's a planned, cold-blooded, first-degree murder. I was always taught in school that if I'm under duress, I'm supposed to call 9-1-1.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 02:11 PM
4

childish I was trying to come up with an eloquent way to voice my displeasure while this thread was loading, and there it was. A one-word summation of everything I wanted to say. Oh, uhh, I mean.... THIS.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 09:56 PM
6

If a patriarchy hurts men in any kind of pervasive way then that society cannot be a patriarchy. They are essentially implying that we are incompetent leaders. We set the rules to try to make society better for ourselves but in turn make it worse. Imagine a "Childarchy". It would be like if a child were to make rules such as "I get to do whatever I want, I get to eat candy and play video games all day, parents have to give me anything I want", etc. While children here are in power and are shifti…
/r/MensRights17/01/13 09:47 PM
2

I'm willing to bet the number of men who do this has grown since the 1940's as well.
/r/MensRights17/01/13 03:48 PM
8

How do we fight sexism? Why, with more sexism, of course!
/r/MensRights14/01/13 05:38 PM
1

absolutely hates any comment that posits logic and questions the ideology around here We hate unquestioned truths, not the questioned ones. You're the one speaking in absolutes: A Rape Crisis center isn't ever going to hang up on a victim For instance, no professional 'councellor' is ever going to scream at a patient, call them a liar and then kick them out. What makes you the high and mighty declarer of objective reality?
/r/MensRights11/01/13 06:14 PM
1

Almost identical to another 4chan post about holding the door open for a woman.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 03:40 PM
3

Even then, parents do not have the authority to make certain decisions such as non necessary medical decisions. That's essentially exactly what I said.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:39 PM
-1

One might argue that breast and cervix tissue serve more purpose later in life than the skin at the tip of your penis. The male equivalent of your example would be to remove the whole penis.
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:38 PM
2

The problem with letting them choose is that the procedure becomes much more difficult and is much more likely to have complications later in life. Other than that, I agree.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 10:30 PM
2

That's nowhere near equivalent.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 10:29 PM
-1

I'm not in /r/mensrights to debate religion with you, but reading that just made me drop a few IQ points. For either side to think they have the "obvious, one true answer" is just ridiculous. For the record, your argument is known as the watch in the sand argument and is easily countered.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 09:41 PM
7

Yes but that wasn't what I was addressing. If you consider circumcision to be a health procedure with health benefits, then it is perfectly within the scope and responsibility of the parents to have the procedure performed on their child. It's a paternal responsibility to act in someone's best interest when they can not do so themself. Now whether or not circumcision is for the boy's best interest, that's where the debate is at.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 09:29 PM
2

Ahh but nay, as an HR student I can tell you that investing in people is one of the best things a company can do ;) However when you invest in property, you expect direct returns from the property. When you invest in people, your returns come in the form of reduced absenteeism, higher work efficiency, increased motivation, etc. As when you invest time and money into a partner, you get an increase in the quality of your relationsihip. (Probably time and effort more so than money). It goes without…
/r/MensRights07/01/13 09:02 PM
2

Every kid finds one parent more "mean" than the other. Based on the examples I wouldn't think too much of this. From the other things you've mentioned he seems to love his kids very much. Other women in the house? My dad seperated when I was 1 and he was always very liberal, so this doesn't bother me too much personally. Do the kids know you are going through a seperation? Smoking weed in the house should be addressed. I don't smoke, but have nothing against someone who wants to use it themselve…
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:58 PM
-1

Women should not be allowed to have an abortion or put a child up for adoption if the father wants to keep the child. I don't think a man should be able to force a woman to abort or give her child away, but I do think the man has the right to keep the child he fathered.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:42 PM
1

It's not scripted. I know a friend of a friend who was on the show. However, Judge Judy can only award a maximum of $5,000 and the costs of all rulings are paid by the show (so they pay a maximum of $10,000 per episode). It's the incentive of not having to pay, win or lose, that gets people on the show in the first place.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:28 PM
2

a black who views whites as property and a black who views whites properly. ಠ_ಠ
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:24 PM
1

Easy. You're not investing in "property" as long as your expected ROI is 0.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:23 PM
14

Children and their bodies are not the parents' property that they do with as they please. They actually are, but with limitations. As a newborn child can't care for themselves, there parents have the responsibility of making decisions regarding their health. The debate is whether or not circumcision actually has any real health benefits.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:13 PM
2

From the examples we've seen float around this subreddit, there is no legal recourse available to you. Wrap up or pack up.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 08:09 PM
4

Just because all of those stories get posted to r/mensrights doesn't mean it's indicative of the majority of situations.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 07:46 PM
2

Let's not forget she runs a reality TV show. Everything she says or does on air has to be taken with a grain of salt.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 07:44 PM
3

And how are you connected to the internet I wonder, considering Syria severed all connections a few months ago?
/r/MensRights07/01/13 07:27 PM
2

There have been a few cases where Judge Judy has had no remorse for women who hit men. I can't remember exact details, but a while back there were two examples posted where she came off as very MRM friendly.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 07:21 PM
8

Ok, but I expect a cut out of next month's alimony payment if they win!
/r/MensRights07/01/13 07:15 PM
3

"A drop of alcohol" is definitely overdoing it, especially since he says in the story that they were both hammered, but not fucking a drunk chick is solid good advice. I disagree that taking precautions is a sign of mistrust. It's exactly what it is, a precaution. I don't sign a prenup because I think my marriage will end in divorce, I do it to cover my back. I don't install fire alarms because the odds are there will be a fire, I do it in case of that one in a million chance. Don't fuck a drunk…
/r/MensRights04/01/13 06:31 PM
5

The problem with verifiable stories is that it often comes at the cost of disclosing personal identities, which we obviously can't have. And I don't know about you, but the misogynist tendencies I've noticed are only every directed towards women who unjustly use their position as a woman to seek pseudo justice against a man. False rape allegations, blackmail, etc. will draw comments from this sub, sure, but do you really feel that people on this subreddit have a natural tendency to dislike ALL w…
/r/MensRights04/01/13 06:07 PM
6

"Cheap date? Bad" coupled with the photo is meant to imply the man did not pay as much as the woman expected, and therefore it was a bad date. Try explaining to your friends that you had a bad first date with a girl because she refused to pick up the entire bill.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 05:49 PM
10

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but all the bikini girls in the world still isn't making me buy Bud Light.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 05:46 PM
5

Name me one sub-reddit that doesn't have its share of made up stories. No they are not all true, but are you so high and mighty that you can tell in advance which are which? Or do you automatically assume it's a lie?
/r/MensRights04/01/13 05:39 PM
17

I noticed this too. My assumption as soon as I read "civilian" was "this guy's military".
/r/MensRights04/01/13 05:37 PM
8

I don't remember exactly how, but I always felt that the feminist movement had been pushing too far, and in doing caused an imbalance to the equilibrium. It also pissed me off to no end that people were using cases of female oppression in places like the Middle East to justify oppression of men in Western nations. I had to hold these thoughts to myself because it was social suicide to talk about these in public, but once I found this place I never left.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 04:36 PM
1

Actually, the "find my keys when I lose them" is taken care of. Check out /r/technology. "Stick-N-Find Bluetooth stickers let you tag and locate your goods with a smartphone"
/r/MensRights04/01/13 04:31 PM
5

Then write to the journal star and voice your opinion ;)
/r/MensRights04/01/13 04:30 PM
2

I understand that, and I was merely trying to be humurous. Normally though, redditors will downvote you for replying with "this" or "came here to say this" without adding any of your own comments. If you reply with "Agreed" or "Seconded" on the other hand, you won't.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 04:22 PM
45

Did that just become the new way to say "This." without getting downvoted?
/r/MensRights04/01/13 03:28 PM
10

Sure, but then you have to deal with homophobia and that's a whole new ballgame.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 08:17 PM
5

Rather than lecture you on how to get through to your mother (I'm sure your better suited at that than anyone here), I'm just going to point you to the sidebar's "Interesting Discussions to Consider", since you mentioned you wanted some cold hard facts.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 08:14 PM
12

What FGM are you referring to? Some FGM involves nothing but a "symbolic" pin-prick to draw a drop of blood, whereas male circumcision would definitely be considered much worse. There is a subjective line somewhere where FGM might be considered worse, but if we have decided the pin-prick is wrong for women, then all MGM is wrong against men.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 08:11 PM
16

Because they are being raped. /s
/r/MensRights03/01/13 08:04 PM
3

Definitely good things to consider.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:41 PM
5

How about every institution stops giving any support to anybody on the basis of race or gender, and bases its decisions on a person's merits, as the constitutions of nearly every Western country dictates they should. Is this concept really so hard for people to grasp?
/r/MensRights03/01/13 04:10 PM
2

Thanks for your analysis. It adds much more credibility to the movement when we can fact-check our own studies, even when the results aren't what we want.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:55 PM
1

The problem with this case is that they did not use the standard, state-controlled channels to get a sperm donor. They found this guy on the internet, and the guy gave them his sperm. If he had gone to a sperm bank he would have been absolved of the responsibility. While I still disagree in principle that he should have to pay any child support, the man still made a stupid, stupid mistake on this one.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:51 PM
4

I might get downvoted for this, but does anyone else think that the issue could be widened to single parenting in general? Problems like this can usually be blamed on the mother since they are more likely to be awarded sole custody (the issue worth fighting), but it's the lack of a 2nd parent that has these effects, not solely the lack of a father.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:46 PM
3

I guess when there's no evidence of your guilt, "indefinitely detained" is a much better suited word than "imprisoned".
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:37 PM
13

I agree. Reducing the affirmative action for women would do it for me.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:35 PM
6

For those who get the reference, abuse allegations are becoming the south park equivalent of the Chewbacca defense.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:29 PM
-1

Maybe THEN my wife will have sex with me...
/r/MensRights03/01/13 02:21 PM
1

No, I meant for the guy on the other end of the prostitution deal. But I suppose it can apply that way as well.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 04:09 AM
1

a woman could be arrested on a loose definition of prostitution which is just "wealth transfer = sex" It follows that a man could be arrested under the same loose definition. Why not fix it for both genders instead of specifying just the woman?
/r/MensRights03/01/13 04:01 AM
1

Then why not cover the man for those instances as well?
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:50 AM
22

One of the worst injustices in the legal system is that a man can be convicted of rape and sent to prison on nothing more than the word of mouth of one person. Hopefully this starts a ball rolling that will lead to greater evidence requirements, or at the very least will end the social trend of calling rape to escape personal responsibility.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:46 AM
8

Yep. You can only hope the change is for the better.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:17 AM
161

A woman can abuse her husband all she wants BUT SHE BETTER NOT LAY A FUCKING FINGER ON THE HAMSTER
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:15 AM
1

It suffers from both equally.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 07:52 PM
2

Girlwriteswhat even weighed in. Her response was fabulous: http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/15ld8w/bbc_news_delhi_gangrape_victim_dies_in_hospital/c7pnbb8
/r/MensRights02/01/13 06:05 PM
9

He never mentions the MRA or Men's Rights. Until he does, this isn't a concern. If you were to post that blog entry anonymously to any MR forum, it would be denounced.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:50 PM
5

Isn't nice just being used as a synonym of "kind", as in not an asshole?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:44 PM
9

You're right. Physical/sexual attraction has nothing to do with racism. I could hate asian people, but find asian women more attractive than white women. By the same logic, I could be perfectly ok with black people, but just not find the women to be that attractive.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:43 PM
1

And what wrez says is law to the MRM?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:31 PM
1

Like our image?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:30 PM
0

Why /s? If I was addressing an inequality that black people had in society, would I use the term "nigger-pass"?
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:29 PM
33

They are an organized hate group. If it was just a bunch of stupid people posting stupid shit in their own stupid shitty subreddit, nobody would care (much like r/spacedicks). The problem is that they organize themselves into actually trying to do physical and emotional harm to those who have different opinions than them. They may be children, but they are resourceful and have the numbers.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:23 PM
46

http://imgur.com/F4YLe
/r/MensRights21/12/12 03:35 PM
5

I’m a 25 year old male and have never been able to achieve orgasm from any type of sex I'm assuming you're able to achieve orgasm from masturbation? The other reason is I wondered if anyone else was afflicted with this particular ailment and how they dealt with it. Alright, you asked for it... I'm not sure if this will be at all helpful, but I used to have the same problem. I started having regular sex at 18, with my then girlfriend, and was unable to reach climax during sex. I started to think …
/r/MensRights14/12/12 05:47 PM
1

Couldn't they just get the discount Wendnesday AND Thursday?
/r/MensRights14/12/12 05:12 PM
17

I'm glad to hear they are recognizing perjury is a punishable crime, even in cases of rape accusations. On the other hand, it's disheartening they haven't realized that the problem here was a conviction without evidence. Apparantly one witness testimony is now enough to satisfy "reasonable doubt".
/r/MensRights14/12/12 05:08 PM
7

And he continues to say: He is the point person they trot out to to make Charles Murray, bell curve-style arguments that obviously distort and misuse statistics, anecdotal evidence and historical record in defence of what are transparently specious and ahistorical notions that patriarchy is a myth not only now, but even in the past. Hmm.... Yeah I'm gonna need a citation on that one.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 04:57 PM
0

My mistake (and a bad one). Apparantly about 0.7% of men will get breast cancer. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20448380 However, statistically speaking, the prevelance of female prison rape is much closer in comparison to stay-at-home dads than it is to occurences of male breast cancer.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 04:50 PM
-5

No, breast cancer by definition can only affect women. Both men and women can be affected by prison rape. A better comparison would be to write an article about stay-at-home parents, using a stay-at-home dad as the main example. I don't know about you, but I would find this acceptable.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 04:36 PM
1

The California Commission on Judicial Performance voted 10-0 to impose a public admonishment Thursday, saying Superior Court Judge Derek Johnson's comments were inappropriate and a breach of judicial ethics. Yes, clearly, this was representative of the "system's" viewpoint. /s
/r/MensRights14/12/12 04:15 PM
7

Divorce: a judicial declaration dissolving a marriage in whole or in part, especially one that releases the husband and wife from all matrimonial obligations, typically initiated by the woman. Alimony: an allowance paid to a person (typically the woman) by that person's spouse or former spouse (typically the man) for maintenance, granted by a court upon a legal separation or a divorce or while action is pending.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 04:05 PM
4

The dictionaries are supposed to give the definition not only in its literal meaning, but in the context in which it has developed or is most commonly used. Definitions are subjective, after all; the only meaning they have is what we give to them as a collective, and many words can have multiple meanings depending on the context. In our society, it's true that sexism is much more often used to label discrimination against women than men. The fault is on how society has been using the word, not o…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:57 PM
2

I have to agree with you here. This isn't a typical situation where we can say "reverse the roles and the perception would be completely different!". This article makes a good point and should not be discredited simply because the example they decided to use was of a woman. The fact that it was only discovered because they became pregnant was probably one of the big reasons it was used. They even go on to say: The US Congress has taken action, and the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) came into…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:51 PM
2

One could see where an act of rape asserts more dominance than beating the shit out of someone. Just my opinion.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 03:46 PM
13

and the consensus is that it's one of the worst crimes out there Hell, even other inmates will beat the shit out of you if they find out you are in for rape. Bonus points if the victim was underage.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 05:56 PM
3

Or my personal favorite: "Shooter kills 15 and injures 22. No women or children harmed."
/r/MensRights07/12/12 03:24 PM
1

How is it not analogous? If men consume more of the gym's time and resources, then why not make them pay more? Time and resources is the same argument used to charge women more for a haircut.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 08:26 PM
3

Socially liberal, fiscally conservative.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 07:22 PM
1

Yeah I think I hinted at that, but would these places charge a man for a woman's cut if he had the equivalent of a female "elaborate and time consuming" hair cut? I think you're right and it should be on a case by case basis for the business to decide, perhaps with legal intervention if it's abused, but I can think of situations where the same argument could be used to discriminate against men. Do you think a man should be charged more for a gym membership if men generally were found to go to th…
/r/MensRights16/11/12 06:43 PM
1

What about car insurance companies who can charge higher rates for men because they are statistically more likely to get in an accident? I'm only aware of my own province (Ontario), and this is very much legal.
/r/MensRights16/11/12 06:39 PM
8

What man would want to pay $65 for his haircut, anyway? To play devil's advocate, some women get their haircuts at barber shops because the price of the cut is around 50-80% cheaper. Some unisex parlours will even have two prices: men's cut and women's cut, for which the men's cut is drastically lower. This is due to simple supply and demand. Women are willing to pay more on appearances, so the cost of their cuts are higher. I'm no hairstylist, but I assume longer hair also means more work. What…
/r/MensRights16/11/12 03:43 PM
3

When Cosmo says something, the opposite is true.
/r/MensRights14/11/12 12:49 PM
10

Does that make all the feminists who disagree with girlwriteswhat misogynist? Checkmate, feminists!
/r/MensRights09/11/12 05:42 PM
8

Should a company offer additional employment opportunities or incentives to minority groups that are not adequately represented in the company? If a company consists of 40% male workers and 60% female workers, should the company give preferential treatment to future male applicants over female applicants?
/r/MensRights09/11/12 05:12 PM
1

It was a video posted here a while ago of a woman talking about unjustness in the family courts system. I don't have much else than that, but I am 100% sure of the quote. It was an interview on a prominent news station, although I don't remember which one. I don't know how accurate her sources were. I realize that's a lot of "don't knows", but jus trying to be honest ;)
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:55 PM
2

The statistic I heard was: 90% of all custody cases are resolved by the parents. Of the remaining 10%, the mother is granted custody 90% of the time. It could be that the 66% statistic factored in the times when the parents develop their own resolution, and would involve shared custody pulling the 90% statistic towards 50%.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:48 PM
8

Fuck my country's feminism. If there's ONE downside to socially liberal countries (i.e. Canada, Sweden, France), it's the prevalence of bias towards women. I'm not asking for them to be repressed, I'm just asking for men to receive the same benefits they do. Is that too much?
/r/MensRights09/11/12 04:34 PM
11

The picture of last year's graduating class is a pretty tell-tale sign to me. If I owned a company and started a "management training for men" program that was geared towards men, don't you think I would receive a discrimination suit even if I allowed women to enter (especially if I had no equivalent for women). You also need your company's referral/sponsorship. Good luck getting your company to sponsor you in the "Management Development for Women" program if you are a man.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 07:56 PM
4

Title should read "no unsubsidized or subsidized equivalent", as in there is no similar programs offered that men can apply to, at all.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 05:54 PM
59

There won't be a conviction, but nevertheless that has got to be fucking humiliating.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 02:46 PM
28

That woman with the air horn looks like she is trying to break his fucking ear drums. The look of hate on her is plain disgusting.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 01:16 PM
5

This is why chivalry is dead. Men can't talk to a woman, let alone hold a door open for one without being seen as threatening or creepy.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 01:13 PM
1

I would think "businesses can't discriminate based on sex, race" etc. would be common knowledge, no?
/r/MensRights21/10/12 02:26 PM
0

In practise that's a very ineffective method, especially for a smaller company. Leaving things to the "free market" doesn't work for things like that.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 07:01 PM
1

Just curious, why do you keep bringing up "peaceful means"? I'm not espousing violence and have made no mention of it. Legal proceedings are peaceful means. To answer your question, that was the main (and I mean THE MAIN) topic for discussion in business ethics. If something is subjectively good, how do I justify it to others? I can try to use arguments like Kant's Categorical Imperative, Utilitarianism, Justice Theory, and a band of others. What it usually comes down to in practice, though, is …
/r/MensRights19/10/12 06:35 PM
2

Yeah I wasn't using those points to justify the 77c (or apparantly 72c according to the woman in the Obama-Romney debate). I was saying we need to make sure we actually specify why that gap exists using points like the ones you just made, not "we're more dedicated workers". That alone is very easy to take out of context.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 06:31 PM
3

This would be justifiable.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 06:27 PM
1

That's a tough question. I'll copy you the slide I had on that subject from my 4th year business ethics class. "Who decides what’s a human right? e.g., The various nations or other entities might disagree on what’s on the “list” of human rights. Can lead to a “might makes rights” situation, where a smaller society that doesn’t believe in certain rights is forced to accept them by a larger society or coalition of societies e.g., UN declaration of human rights" Proposed are to decide what should o…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 06:25 PM
1

This is my issue with non-business people discussing business issues. I'm an HR Manager. If you're in business you probably know that HR is concerned with compliance. That's why we're there. I understand it's a part of business. I understand the merits of allowing such systems. I'm also saying it's technically illegal. If a complaint were to be filed, the onus is on the boss to show why his men are receiving more than his women for the same work. Edit: And no, "they asked for more" is not a vali…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:54 PM
3

And jobs with a greater chance of injury pay more, which is another reason for the pay gap. Men are more likely to accept these dangerous types of work.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:49 PM
1

It's possible to measure output and in most cases, quite easily. If someone has more experience, I can conclude they are less likely to make mistakes and will be more efficient. If someone has more education, I can conclude that they will likely have a larger pool of knowledge and skills. If someone completes more projects in a given period of time, I can conclude that they have been working harder or longer hours. These all justify giving someone more money than the rest of the workers. "He ask…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:44 PM
1

Surely you can't think the right to a ham sandwhich is the same as a right to equal pay?
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:41 PM
1

When did I say or imply violence against them? I am only arguing what is right or wrong, and discriminating based on gender or colour is violating a person's positive right to equal pay.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:23 PM
1

"equal work" indeed means the same output, not the same position.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:02 PM
1

It seems like you are espousing a purely libertarian society. Look up positive rights and negative rights. What you are saying is that as long as someone does not violate your negative rights, then it is ok. I am saying that he is violating my positive right to an equal wage.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 05:00 PM
1

Our society saw a problem (the scenario you explained where you can discriminate all you want) and the only protests allowed are boycotts. Society saw this led to social inequalities and so they fixed it with pay equity laws. This all ties into Rawlsian Justice Theory where you have to imagine you are subject to the Veil of Ignorance when you are designing your society. Basically this means that you design society not knowing what or who you will be in the society (man, woman, disabled, black, w…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:44 PM
0

I disagree. Let's leave it at that.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:32 PM
-1

This doesn't do squat for minorities. Let's say you are a black man living in the south in the 1920s. You are blatantly discriminated against. Can you protest? Will your boycotts do anything? No. It is the government's responsibility to ensure that everybody receives fair treatment in the workplace, or else the minorities get fucked.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:31 PM
1

In the case of pay equity, I would have to demonstrate that any differences in pay can be explained by one of the reasons I listed. If I can't, then that's all the proof they need.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:28 PM
1

Ahh but that's different. If I incentivize a position based on output, then I can easily justify pay increases.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:26 PM
1

He could just say that this particular man asked for a raise and argued his point. It sounded like you were saying that he could use that excuse in a legal defense. If I give ANYONE a raise if it's reasonable and they can argue their case, then sure I can see that being reasonable, however it can still put you at risk of discrimination charges.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:24 PM
0

No. No you can't. Not if you are discriminating on sex, race, or creed. Especially if this is internal to your own company.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:15 PM
-1

That's irrelevant. He would need to show a bona fide occupational reason. Pay equity is a fundamental human right, based on the principle that men and women doing work of equal value should be paid equally. This principle of non-discrimination in wages is well-established in international human rights law and is enshrined in several human rights treaties to which Canada is a signatory" Pay equity does not concern itself with legitimate factors that shape wages, such as supply and demand, trainin…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:11 PM
1

Like I said, calling out the .77 stat is the easy one. As an example, in business school we addressed the Old Boy's Club. What happens if I would have piped up and tried to defend this? This means giving logical reasons as to why it exists, or denying its existence. Either way, my work would have been cut out for me.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:05 PM
5

Well that's a relief.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:00 PM
1

If a business owner is shown to give higher wages to men and can not demonstrate a bona fide occupational reason for doing so (experience, effort, results, sales, education, etc.) then he (or the company) can be sued for discrimination.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:59 PM
-2

In Western society, the choice is entirely up to the women, and the man has no say. If a man and a woman engage in consensual sex and the woman gets pregnant, the decision vests entirely with her. If anything, that's an area of female privilege simply because of the way our bodies work. Man wants to keep the baby and women does not want parental responsibility? No baby. Man does not want the parental responsibility and woman wants to keep the baby? Baby is on the way! Say goodbye to those payche…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:49 PM
3

Just curious, was her superior a man? If it was, it probably just confirmed her belief in patriarchy :/
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:43 PM
1

The second topic would be very interesting. Instead of health effects though, maybe look at social effects?
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:41 PM
1

If we get paid more simply because we ask for more, despite putting in equal effort and work, then that is a privilege, and the system should adjust so that asking for money does not get you more money. My degree is in Human Resource Management (appeal to authority, I understand), but I can tell you that justifying pay inequalities on that basis alone would not work out so well. If you are preparing to assert that we put in greater effort and work in equal positions, then you must be prepared to…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:36 PM
3

Reply with this: I ask not much, but for her grace Perhaps my one true love's embrace One who gives as much as they take I'd give my life, for goodness' sake! It's not exactly fair, you see For you to ask all this of me When you're not prepared to do the same It makes us men all feel ashamed We come home tired, stiff, and sore Just to have you ask for more My money spent on your desires Further fuel my inner fires But do I ask for all that much? Or just to relax in peace and such? You see your l…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:28 PM
4

OP should reply with the man's poem. Good work.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:00 PM
1

I'm just saying we need to be careful in how we assert our arguments. If I was naive on this subject and read your response, I would say all you have done is labelled an inequality that needs to be fixed. Men negotiate their salaries at a much higher rate men aren't simply working longer hours, they are more dedicated employees. Should men get paid more for the same work because they negotiate more? Are we asserting that we deserve higher pay because we are harder working? Well yes, but you need…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:52 PM
1

men aren't simply working longer hours, they are more dedicated employees. That needs a bit more explanation or it looks like we're just saying "we're privileged because we earn it". Women favour benefits and flexibility over gross pay. Men favour gross pay over just about everything else. Therefore, men actively seek out the higher paying jobs while women seek out social positions with less hours and greater benefits.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:39 PM
3

Only white women were saved... no white men were saved... therefore no male privilege. You have been banned from /r/SRS [deleted post]
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:36 PM
3

When I sent her the email asking why she sent me out, though, she forwarded it to the rest of the class. That's a serious breach of trust, and something I would have brought up with the Dean.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:30 PM
1

Ok, so according to the article: Brendan Potter was into child sex, and fantasised about it while Butler performed sex acts in Rushcutters Bay Park, and later at her Potts Point apartment. So, when Mr Potter conjured a detailed fantasy about performing sex acts on her younger sister, she snapped. Did he actually try to entice her into getting this opportunity, or did he just openly muse and fantasize about them? I think that would make a big difference. Furthermore: Born to a 15-year-old, Butler…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:26 PM
20

Women think they've got it bad and men don't know how bad they have it. If they do know, they can't say. That's the biggest problem for me. I can come on this sub-reddit and muse all day about the differences and hardships, but I dare not open my mouth outside this community. It would be social suicide. On the $0.77 / $1 ratio, however, I think most people are open to rebuttals when this gets brought up. Last year in my Behavioral Research class (3rd year Commerce) my group conducted our own res…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 01:39 PM
6

what can I do? Apply to the deli/butchery :P
/r/MensRights19/10/12 01:27 PM
1

Sorry, that rule is not in the Bro Code (starts p.25). I refuse to acknowledge.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:46 PM
2

I have a feeling cooking is one of the "domestic duties of the house".
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:42 PM
7

Here is what hate hub had to say about our subreddit: A “subreddit” of the user-generated news site Reddit, this forum describes itself as a “place for people who feel that men are currently being disadvantaged by society.” While it presents itself as a home for men seeking equality, it is notable for the anger it shows toward any program designed to help women. It also trafficks in various conspiracy theories. “Kloo2yoo,” identified as a site moderator, writes that there is “undeniable proof” o…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 02:26 PM
2

He said even her family doesn't know where she went and has no contact with her.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 06:35 PM
3

Doxxing often involves making false accusation about a person to his employer or family, which is what I was referring to when I brought up libel. Although the more you speak, the more you're convincing me that you're just an SRS troll.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 08:34 PM
1

I am aware of the difference. I used detention because it made better rhetoric :P
/r/MensRights12/10/12 07:37 PM
1

appeals to emotion peppered with logic You'd be surprised just how well appeals to emotion with faulty logic work, too ;)
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:46 PM
1

I suppose. I guess I just feel the plan could backfire.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:36 PM
5

I realize I'm going against my previous promise not to answer, but where and when exactly did I defend VA's actions or ideologies? I, like the vast majority of r/MensRights, agree that his posts are not worthy of defense. Does that justify libel and trying to destroy his life? That's not even what I'm arguing. Does it change the definition of extortion or coercion? You seem like the type of person who would justify murdering a defense lawyer for giving legal counsel to accused rapists. That's ho…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:33 PM
1

But again, they can simply say "The reason I answered that way is because I grew up in a misogynist society where such thinking is the norm". All you are doing, in their eyes, is proving that they too are misogynist, and they will continue to advocate changing society to reflect that bias.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:24 PM
12

I'm assuming you meant autistic? How grown up of you. Allow me to set the record straight, and then I'm going to stop replying until you show you can handle an argument like an adult. Your first post misrepresented the definition of blackmail. My post sought only to correct you in adding that eliciting an action (which is extremely broad), as opposed to only money or favours, is extortion. I made no claim about whether or not the incident in question was actually extortion in my original reply. …
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:18 PM
9

Deleting his account and turning over mod control of his subreddits to SRS weren't actions? Who knew!? In your original post you stated: nobody asked violentacrez for any money or favors in exchange for silence I pointed out that the definition is broader than asking for money or favors. Any "elicited action" as a result of a threat is extortion / blackmail.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 05:20 PM
1

They can apply the exact same retort. It's not allowed because society is misogynist and sees women as less capable in sports, thus men would have a clear advantage. There are better ways to show societal misandry, and they are well documented in our FAQ. I'd stick to topics such as education biases, military draft, suicide/work fatality rates, homeless rates, family courts, etc. Those can't be defended by pointing to misogyny. Their only argument would be to point out that it proves that inequa…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 04:03 PM
1

But with a domain like www.news.com, how could it not be?
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:59 PM
1

Exactly sums up what I wanted to say. They act as though men should be completely trustworthy in all aspects of the relationship and assume all of the risks, even if it poses no additional risk to the woman. Any regard where a man chooses to reduce his risks in a relationship (male birth control, prenup, refusing to co-sign for loans/cars/apartments that aren't his, refusing shared bank accounts) is immediately touted as a lack of necessary trust.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:52 PM
3

Tell your parents the situation and make sure they make a formal complaint if you get suspended. First to the school, then to the district if the school does nothing. If they don't bite, they should threaten legal action. If nothing happens then, they should talk to a lawyer.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:40 PM
3

I believe it differs by country, state (or province), and school board. I was suspended for 1 day in 10th grade for "inflicting harm requiring medical treatment" in self-defense. School board policy said that since he needed to be hospitalized (broken jaw) it was a mandatory expulsion, so the principal felt he had to suspend me a day. It was required that it stay on my school record for 1 year (which colleges can see) after which I could write my principal a letter asking for it to be removed. I…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:36 PM
6

You must have a decent amount of spare change if you can afford to pay a lawyer every time your kid gets a school detention. Simply having the parents threaten legal action will have essentially the same effect, less the $500 you're going to pay for an hour and a half of your lawyer's time.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:32 PM
9

To build on this, doxing often has a purpose above simply finding your identity. Once your identity is known, they can easily harass you and try to ruin your life. Common methods include: Contacting your employer to try to cost you your job. Creating fake information about you on websites, and promoting them on google searches so they will show up first. The information is often libel and intended to affect future background checks on you. Engaging in or promoting physical harm to your person. C…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:22 PM
2

No. They can resign to create a vacancy, which would lead to another by-election that the PM can run in. If they do this in a riding that is very supportive of their party, then the chances are he can be elected, but it's not a guarantee.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 03:13 PM
3

No, he doesn't. There is no rule or law saying that this is so. It would just be very awkward if he didn't, because he wouldn't be in the House of Commons otherwise. So it turns out it's slightly more complicated. A Prime Minister may lose his or her seat in an election, but can remain in office as long as the party keeps a majority in the House of Commons, though again, he or she must, by custom, win a seat very promptly (King lost his seat in 1925 but his party retained power; he won a seat in…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:50 PM
11

Neither extortion nor blackmail require a threat of a criminal act, such as violence, merely a threat used to elicit actions, money, or property from the object of the extortion. Such threats include the filing of reports (true or not) of criminal behavior to the police, revelation of damaging facts (such as pictures of the object of the extortion in a compromising position), etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:39 PM
3

Nope, most (if not all) of the selection is done internally within the party, although they will often times use public opinion polls to base their decisions. Who runs in what riding and who leads the party is entirely up to the party itself.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:27 PM
4

Yes, the Prime Minister is also a Member of Parliament (MP). It would be like if the POTUS also acted as a Member of Congress. The PM gets a vote in Parliament like any other MP, and ALSO assumes the additional responsibilities of the Executive Branch. America has seperate elections for President and Members of Congress. In Canada, each respective party nominates a leader. This leader automatically becomes Prime Minister if his party wins the most seats in Parliament (even if they don't get the …
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:10 PM
2

They don't. Paul Ryan's original position (as pointed out by Biden in the debate) is that there should be NO exceptions. Only when he became the VP nominee and had to adopt Romney's more centered positions did he change to this idea. The whole point is not to make sense from a pro-life point of view, but to appease the pro-choicers or undecided. They are basically saying "we know we could never get the majority of Americans to accept a 'no abortion with no exceptions' stance, so we will let it s…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 02:03 PM
4

The "cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother" clause is the only way the Republicans can try to appease some pro-choicers or undecideds on the abortion issue. The exceptions apply to the pro-choice mindset, and are not meant to make sense from a pro-life point of view.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 01:58 PM
6

No, Canada still has 3 branches of governments (Executive, Legislative, Judicial) but our executive branch has fewer powers, however they have a very broad range of responsibilities. The executive branch operates, implements and enforces all the laws created by the legislative branch. It is composed of the Queen (represented by the Governor General), the Cabinet (a body of high-ranking members of government that includes the prime minister) and the administration. The administration includes all…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 01:52 PM
1

I don't think they're asserting that no women are conniving. They just ignore that area of inconvenient discussion altogether.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 07:43 PM
11

Not to mention that many women will take offense to it and play the old "Don't you trust me?" card. Very similar to what they do with pre-nups.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 07:34 PM
18

Something is left out that I feel should be mentioned. Did the mother KNOW that he wasn't the father and purposely deceive him, or did she cheat on him and wasn't sure who the real father was? Not that I think it matters in terms of the ruling, but it's a big detail and would give us some more insight as to the scale of the decision.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 06:36 PM
5

I considered that. I had a segment written about how it's possible that since health insurance is a bigger necessity than car insurance, it's more fair that it be mandated to be equal in pricing. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm Canadian), but aren't the female benefits relating to health insurance mandated federally in Obamacare? Second, car ownership is more or less a necessity for lots of people. If you own a car, you MUST own car insurance. The single father who needs a minivan or SUV to take hi…
/r/MensRights05/10/12 03:01 PM
0

Look at it another way: What if women spend more time trying to "give the relationship another chance" and men just abandon ship sooner when they know something is wrong?
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:52 PM
2

My Grandmother once told me this story and I think its relevant. When she was growing up (1940s - 1950s, Great Britain) most stores used to hire a man whose sole job was to open the door of the store, but only for women. When feminists came along, they saw this as degrading. Equality meant that they shouldn't receive this sort of special treatment. "I'm a grown woman and I can open the damn door myself, thank you" became the new mindset. Thus, stores had to stop hiring these types of men. And no…
/r/MensRights05/10/12 02:12 PM
1

Ottawa here. Good luck, eh?
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:59 PM
15

It doesn't seem like you read the entire argument, or at least you didn't address is properly. He is saying if we are legally mandating health insurance companies to give women the same rates as men despite consuming more healthcare, then we need to apply the same to men and women in car insurance despite men getting in more car accidents. Most of us agree with your logic, but you missed the point entirely.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:56 PM
18

That guy sounds like a scumbag tbh.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:45 PM
21

We see a lot of it on this sub-reddit but it's not good to generalize. Not all woman are like that, and I doubt even half of them are.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:44 PM
9

Find the names of the people running the website and continuously submit their names.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 01:41 PM
1

Point taken, but when it comes to the MRA issues, out situation is exactly the same.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 06:23 PM
22

Not only defending their right to a fair trial, but ensuring that they are not discriminated against when they are not found guilty. Many lives are ruined for YEARS after the accusation, even if the man was tried and acquitted in court.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 06:50 PM
1

As I said it might be implied, but not explicit. Not enough information to make a conclusion either way. On the other hand, she was unconscious. Whether or not she did giv consent, that's another debate just on its own.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 06:12 PM
5

Nowhere in that post does she say she consented. Legally, I was incapable of consenting. So, no. Does she imply that she did consent, but it legally "didn't count" because she had too much to drink? Perhaps, but that's not explicitly stated. Furthermore: People were feeding me drinks, when we had sex I was in blackout.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 05:26 PM
3

Could you link me to that post?
/r/MensRights01/10/12 05:20 PM
5

Fair enough, but your original post said "consensual sex", when she said she had never given consent. It's a touchy subject to say the least.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:58 PM
18

Not quite that straightforward. She didn't give consent and believes she was passed out when the sex occured. If she was unconscious, I have to agree that she was raped.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:48 PM
5

Most of my relationships start out with a 300 times per year average. That lasts 2 months when it gradually declines to about 1/3 of that.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 04:19 PM
17

I realize I'm replying to my own comment, but I feel it's too big of a change to warrant an edit. This, to me, sums up the jist of the gender debates perfectly. A man is not allowed to play on a girl's team because men are more physically fight (in general) and thus would have an unfair advantage. I have to admit this actually seems like a rational and fair point. A woman is allowed to compete on a men's team because she is at a physical disadvantage to the rest of the players. If she can compet…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:36 PM
3

He can have an upvote for enthusiasm.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:43 PM
38

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't girls allowed to freely compete on boy's teams if they are up to the competition?
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:25 PM
23

no pun intended I'm calling your bluff. That pun was 110% intentional :P
/r/MensRights25/09/12 03:15 PM
1

Obviously you only wanted to stay with your dad because he would let you smoke crack and play violent video games. /s
/r/MensRights21/09/12 01:40 PM
1

Technically, the child cannot choose which parent they want to live with. Rather, the court considers the child's wishes and preferences about the parents. What the child wants is only one out of several facts a court considers. The older the child is, the more weight that is given to his or her opinion. This is for Canada. http://www.ottawadivorce.com/age.htm
/r/MensRights21/09/12 01:39 PM
2

I'll give you 6 lines from when I was 7 years old, and you won't find something to hang me for.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 12:05 AM
6

And that one white guy in the wheelchair.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:06 PM
14

I can't believe what I'm reading from these comments so far. Legal advice? It depends? It was wrong? You were 7. You can't be held accountable for something you did when you were 7. Besides, this was clearly mutual, and you have the e-mails to prove she's just drumming shit up.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:00 PM
7

Depends. Were there microscopes and/or beakers containing a light-blue transparent liquid in the background?
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:21 PM
0

I like this, but I prefer a different spin on it: Equality knows no gender.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 05:23 PM
3

Does anyone else find it funny that they don't find it necessary to include the reverse in the same legislation? What if the law stated there can be no less than 40% women AND no less than 40% men? I still wouldn't approve of it for other reasons, but why is it ok to quota one side but not the other?
/r/MensRights17/09/12 03:00 PM
12

And makes your penis bigger.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 02:54 PM
2

Every point you've made is accurate. Men still feel emotional jealousy and women still feel sexual jealousy. I just tried to explain why each was more predominant in each of the sexes.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 04:50 PM
10

It's sort of like what Soporus explained, but I can detail a bit further. Males evolved to feel much more sexual jealousy than women, while women evolved to feel much more emotional jealousy. If you ask a woman which would upset her more: Her significant other having sex with another woman, or her significant other falling deeply in love with another woman, she will likely choose the latter. If you ask a man the same question, he will likely choose the former. The reason? Men who experienced sex…
/r/MensRights14/09/12 05:28 PM
9

That's the point. Why single out the "domestic violence" guy, and not the other ones? You'd see these stickers all over the rap section if that were the case.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 05:03 PM
14

The reason I posted this was not because I feel he should be excused for his actions. He is a violent offender and should pay every second of jailtime he deserves. However, is this something that would have been posted on his albums if he was convicted of say, armed robbery? Gang violence? Fraud? I found it intriguing that it is publically acceptable to deface his albums when he is convicted of assaulting his girlfriend, but for any other situation you would not see these stickers. Any other cri…
/r/MensRights14/09/12 04:53 PM
3

I'm not sure about the "women make the first move, pay for the date, etc." part, but the number of desireable men is extremely low. Most of those Russian dating sites exist because (mainly) Ukrainian women are unable to find decent guys at home.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 04:33 PM
3

It's already like this in Ukraine.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 04:24 PM
-2

SRS Rep here. This was clearly a sattire news piece. /s
/r/MensRights09/09/12 01:44 PM
3

I believe the correct term is schluck.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 01:43 PM
2

He resigned.
/r/MensRights03/09/12 12:01 AM
2

I can see where you are going with this, but it's getting off-topic. Neither you nor I are lawyers or specialists in international law (I would presume). Regardless, in the US one could argue he is protected by freedom of speech and of the press. There is probably a good counter-argument for this, but I digress. The issue is still with his trial. To me the point has never been his guilt or lack of, it is that I strongly believe his trial would be biased. Everyone, regardless of guilt, deserves a…
/r/MensRights23/08/12 08:15 PM
0

I don't think it cn be narrowed down to a single time or place. He runs a website that is reponsible for publishing millions of "leaked" documents.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 06:33 PM
2

Then barring some gross violation of American principles, I'd let them stand trial there. The point is it WOULD be a gross violation of American principles. No matter his innocence or guilt, it is almost guaranteed they would be found guilty and given the death penalty. It would not be a fair trial. Furthermore, Al-Qaida values and laws do not reflect the values of Americans, and in fact are in direct contradiction with many of them. This is why extradition treaties have to exist in the first pl…
/r/MensRights23/08/12 05:32 PM
5

Yes.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 04:53 PM
9

Doesn't matter. The violation was committed in the USA. If Al-Qaida accused an American citizen of a crime, do you believe he should be sent to receive trial? I'm not trying to equate America to Al-Qaida, but to send someone for a trial you believe is not going to be just for the sole fact that they were accused seems like a ridiculous argument. If you don't feel they will receive a fair trial, then you should object to the trial. It doesn't mean you object to the charges.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 04:18 PM
12

There is a difference between a country with a biased judicial system, and one who actively assassinates people they don't like. I am not stating my concern as if it was an absolute (he WILL receive an unfair trial). I am saying that the US judicial system has lost credibility. Just look at the Kim Dotcom case as an example. Federal interests have too much power in judicial processes, but I never made the leap to say that this extends to extra-judicial affairs. Their influence does have its limi…
/r/MensRights23/08/12 03:53 PM
1

Should the father have parental rights? It should be the mother's choice whether or not the rapist gets parental rights. Any pre-existing rights to visitation should be forfeited when you force sex without consent. Should he be absolved from having to pay child support? No. The rapist made a choice to have sex. Sex carries with it the risk of pregnancy. If the result is a child, the rapist should be liable for child support.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 03:07 PM
3

So we now have one case of a man saving the lives of 2 unaccompanied children he was sitting next to on a plane, and 0 cases of a man molesting unaccompanied children he was sitting next to on a plane. There is one case of unaccompanied child molestation on a plane, and it was by a woman. We can now actually state that your children are safer on a plane if they are sitting next to a man.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 02:43 PM
17

I don't believe he'd receive a fair trial or treatment. Of course I don't know any of this for sure, but I feel the US has lost its credibility on the international stage when it comes to these affairs. I would prefer to see him face charges in an EU or international court.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 02:33 PM
24

The first quote you mentioned is great. Personally I'm not against Assange facing trial in Sweden, as long as he gets a fair trial. From what I gather, there is essentially no case against him. The issue with his case is, and always has been, that Sweden will likely be forced to extradite him to the US to face ridiculous espionnage charges. Until that is brushed up, I'm against any extradition to Sweden. The second quote shows a continued misunderstanding of false rape allegations by feminists. …
/r/MensRights23/08/12 02:26 PM
32

I think I'll take a charter to Pakistan next week, and walk around small villages putting up posters that read "Muslims can stop terrorism". We'll see how that flies.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 03:53 PM
4

Others how ever might view it as away to try and close the "wage gap." It would widen the wage gap. Assuming the amount paid to stay-at-home moms would be below the median wage for women in the workforce in Germany, it would pull down their average.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 06:03 PM
12

Agreed. Actually sounds like a great system (if both men and women were included), but refusing to pay fathers would actually be BAD for feminism. It will encourage mothers to stay home, and fathers to work. All this means is that women will be encouraged to be the stay-at-home parents instead of men. Isn't this opposite of what feminism is trying to achieve?
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:15 PM
2

Sports. Most men have the ability to progress farther in sports and play them at a faster and more competitive level. Obviously a man who is new to a sport is going to get schooled by a woman with 10+ years experience and in good shape, but you get the idea..
/r/MensRights17/08/12 02:01 PM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 05:03 PM
1

In principle, I can see where the ethics for this one comes from. I would be furious if my son or daughter was preyed on by their high school teacher, even if they were 18. The sentencing is a joke though? 20 years? In Canada, that's what we give to murderers. Community service and losing your job would do it for this one...
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:56 PM
3

Neither should be taken into account if she claims to have been raped. It is irrelevant. Either she got raped, or she didn't. That's what should be focused on. I don't think any MRA's are advocating the opposite position. We don't believe there is ever an excuse to rape, or people who are more deserving of rape. That's simply a misrepresentation of our position.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:26 PM
5

I find this a lot better than the hyphenated surname crap And when Mr. Smith-Jones wants to marry Ms. Richardson-Bailey, and they choose to hyphenate, we will start seeing the problems with this as a long-term solution.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:20 PM
1

In 15 states, specific laws have been passed to criminalize educator-student relationships even when the student is of the age of consent. Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas have specific laws aimed at educators who prey on students. For example, without equivocation the Texas statute makes it clear that educators cannot have sex with their students regardless of the student’s ag…
/r/MensRights16/08/12 03:13 PM
4

I understand, except I explicitly stated that my personal belief was that both genders should receive the lower sentencing. My exact words were "such sentences (as given in the article) are fair". I pointed out that: A) A double standard in sentencing and public opinion exists B) The double standard should not exist; men and women should be sentenced equally for the same crimes. C) The lighter sentence is the most favourable (for both genders).
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:03 PM
4

That's what I said. If you were to ask my personal opinion, I'd say that in consenting relationships like these, such sentences (as given in the article) are fair, but you need to be prepared to give this leeway for men in this position, too.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:35 PM
26

As is usual though, let's look at the double standard. If the details were EXACTLY the same, but between a male teacher and female student, there would still be widespread calls for his head on a platter. Even if the student was "bragging" about the relationship on facebook, there would be plenty people arguing that the teacher was in a position of trust and thus should face tough punishment. For abuse of a position of trust, you receive 6 months - 5 years in the UK. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 02:03 PM
6

You're missing the point. Swap the genders in the video. Would people still find it hilarious?
/r/MensRights15/08/12 01:35 PM
32

They might be likely to view it as an attempt to demonize women and write off any of your arguments immediately. That is the fault of their own fallacious thinking. There isn't much we can do against that. Ad hominems, appeals to equality, guilt by association, appeals to consequences, appeals to emotion, appeals to motive, are all common among arguments and counter-arguments used against MRA's. It's not like we can stop people from using them, but we can simply ignore those who do.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:16 PM
2

My mistake, but most of my point still stands.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:04 PM
2

Oh c'mon, downvotes? Did I really need a sarcasm tag for this one?
/r/MensRights14/08/12 03:15 PM
3

This graph shows the number of dollars spent towards prevention. While there is an implication that the prevention dollars are being spent proportionate to actual violence, this opens you up to the rebuttal that money is being spent on male prevention despite higher violence towards women, a la patriarchy. A graph denoting actual cases of violence would be better.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 02:17 PM
2

The penetrator is the perpetrator.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 02:11 PM
2

I wish I could have saved the story of the 2 men who sued an airline when they were asked to move, claiming sex discrimination. They won a petty amount (something like $3,000 each) and donated it to charity. If everyone did this when this type of incident happened, the airlines would be forced to re-evaluate the policy. People should honestly be getting pissed off when this happens, and doing more than venting their frustrations online. E-mail corporate and threaten legal action.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 02:07 PM
1

Correct, I'll edit this in.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 07:14 PM
2

I didn't imply that all of the facts were presented to provide an equal story to both sides; I only pointed out that the facts listed were indeed correct, and obvious.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 03:20 PM
16

It's actually all true, but for obvious reasons. married men make more money Married men are generally older than unmarried men. They have progressed farther in their careers and thus earn more. Additionally, single men who earn more are more likely to be sought as partners by women due to their higher incomes, and are thus more likely to end up married in the long run. have more sex Single men, who statistically have the least sex, fall under the category of unmarried men, and pull down the ave…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:59 PM
1

Makes more sense that way.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 08:02 PM
1

So when I'm in trouble, I just give the murder weapon and the body to my attorney, and I'm good?
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:16 PM
2

Forgive my ignorance on the topic, but isn't that was search & seizure warrants are for?
/r/MensRights10/08/12 06:58 PM
7

Karla Leanne Homolka, also known as Karla Leanne Teale and Leanne Bordelais (born 4 May 1970 in Port Credit, Ontario, Canada), is a convicted Canadian serial killer. She attracted worldwide media attention when she was convicted of manslaughter following a plea bargain in the 1991 and 1992 rape-murders of two Ontario teenage girls, Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French, as well as the rape and death of her own sister Tammy.[2] Homolka and Paul Bernardo, her husband and partner in crime, were arreste…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 05:54 PM
14

They will usually only offer a lower sentence for a guilty plea if they don't think they have enough evidence to convict you. By the sound of it, there is more than enough evidence.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:32 PM
-10

I know, this one is kind of ridiculous. I was more expecting it to say a woman sexually assaulted a girl on the same airline, or something.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:21 PM
6

BA is understood to have admitted sex discrimination in Mr Fischer’s case and agreed to pay £2,161 in costs and £750 in damages. Mr Fischer donated the damages payout and £2,250 of his own money to the child protection charities Kidscape and Orphans in the Wild after learning of the decision. Although Mr Fischer told the BBC News website he was disappointed BA limited its admission of sex discrimination to his case, he said his case would help any other men who faced a similar predicament. He sa…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 01:30 PM
70

How the FUCK do you get the sentence reduced to manslaughter when you DRUG somebody's food then STAB and MUTILATE them while they are unconscious!? Did the prosecution not think they had enough grounds for 1st degree murder?
/r/MensRights10/08/12 12:51 PM
1

I'm not an expert on biology, but essentially is the way our species has developed. Women took care of the family while the men went out to hunt.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 09:11 PM
2

Wish I could have been there to spectate. Canadian as I am, Vancouver is still about a 3 day's drive away...
/r/MensRights09/08/12 05:08 PM
6

No, it's a fact. Women take more time off for family related activities than men. If a kid has soccer practice after school, it's the mother who is more likely to leave work early to take the kid to soccer practice, while dad works late. It's not that men don't give a shit about their kid going to soccer practice, it's simply that women are more likely to take on that role. This is one of the reasons women tend to work fewer hours (on average) or favour flexibility over gross pay. If you want to…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 04:11 PM
6

Similarly, I have the "round pile". It gets this name because its where I toss all the rejected resumes and ends up forming a very unneat pile (in the rough shape of a circle) I later chuck. My "chosen pile" stays neat and rectangular for later review. I need a more exciting job...
/r/MensRights09/08/12 02:06 PM
1

Ahh makes sense when you put it that way. I suppose I'll agree.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 08:02 PM
5

maintaining physical attributes contains a lot less risk of failure. Do you have anything to suggest this? Men progress upwards in their careers (generally) where as body image naturally gets worse as time progresses. You can't talk about men or women without generalizations. Generalizations should be based off the general population, not off either extreme.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 07:13 PM
11

(Most) Women don't love men. They respect them (and their earning potential) and think that is love. Children, on the other hand, they love. They love children just for being. Disagree entirely. What leads you to believe this? It seems like you are taking the worst cases and using them to generalize all women.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 06:49 PM
12

I could write a novel for each one but am going to give you as much of a TL;DR as possible. How do you define feminism? The promotion of ideas, laws, programs, and societal structures that improve the well-being of women. What is your opinion on rape culture? It's surprising to me that anyone actually considers this to be a thing. It's a myth. Rape is bad. Everyone agrees that rape is bad. Convicted rapists go to jail. Nobody "excuses, tolerates, or condones" sexual violence. Any form of sexual …
/r/MensRights03/08/12 06:29 PM
3

Family courts, sex life, benefit of the doubt, school environment, selective military service, prison sentencing. These are the first that come to mind where I would consider women to be privileged. By benefit of the doubt, I mean that in instances of he said she said, men are much more likely to be considered the liar, especially when younger.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:55 PM
1

Unfortunately I don't. I remember watching it many years ago (long before I became interested in MRM), and haven't been able to find it since.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 05:54 PM
2

For what it's worth, I have a friend of a friend who went on the show. From what I understand, it was completely legitimate. The show does, however, pay all of the court costs and settlements (after the fact).
/r/MensRights31/07/12 02:02 PM
3

I can't remember the episode, but there was another case on Judge Judy where a woman started punching her boyfriend or roommate (or both, can't remember) and in response he punched her in the face and broke her nose. The roommate was suing for unpaid rent, and she was counter-suing for medical costs. Judge Judy basically told her, in the way she does best, that if you hit someone and they hit you back harder, it's your own damn stupid fault. Case dismissed. Not that I advocate violence like this…
/r/MensRights31/07/12 01:58 PM
1

What the website fails to mention is probably: He violated his restraining order by dropping off the easter eggs and presents.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:07 PM
1

Damn. I'll show myself the door.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 03:13 PM
1

At work and can't watch the youtube video. Stephen fry meme: Can't tell if sarcastic, or genuinely grateful I taught him a random fact of the day.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 02:48 PM
4

I can already picture the survey: Have you ever had sex while under the influence of alcohol? Next day's headline: "60% of all women report having been raped at least once in their lifetime!"
/r/MensRights26/07/12 02:34 PM
8

For the record, 20/200* vision would actually be very, very bad. The first number is always 20. It means that what you see on the chart at 20 feet, a normal person could see at 200 feet. 20/200 is the cutoff for being legally blind. 20/15 is considered having above average vision (you can read a line on the chart at 20 feet, where as an average person would need to be at 15 feet). 20/10 is excellent. A hawk has 20/2 vision. http://health.howstuffworks.com/human-body/systems/eye/question126.htm T…
/r/MensRights26/07/12 02:30 PM
2

What's wrong with finding James Holmes cute? Nothing. But who the hell goes and posts "So this James Holmes guy, kind of cute isn't he?" That's seriously the best thing you have to say about him? Nevermind the fact he murdered 12 people, the 1 thing you think people should know about this person is that he's attractive? It's fucked up is what I'm saying.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 05:38 PM
2

Twitter police? When did I insinuate they shouldn't be allowed to post it? I simply meant that there is a difference between thinking something and keeping it to yourself, and expressing yourself on the web.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 05:23 PM
2

I don't see anything wrong with thinking a mass murderer is physically attractive. I'd question wanting to date them or associate with them, but that's another story. But who goes on twitter and announces to the world they have a crush on a mass murderer? At that point it's beyond a simple side-thought when glancing at their picture.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 03:42 PM
9

Veteran soldier gets badly wounded in battle. Wife assaults him while he is in hospital for his injuries, then tries to kill herself. Father is ordered to pay 57% of his gross income as child support. Mother gets full custody and father has zero visitation. Am I missing something?
/r/MensRights25/07/12 03:35 PM
1

Then tried to kill herself.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 03:28 PM
3

Feeling the urge to tell the world about it on Twitter is another story
/r/MensRights25/07/12 12:52 PM
34

I know what you mean. Do do you guys remember that video from last year where the toddler was run over (twice) in China and passed by something like 20 pedestrians before someone tried to help? The more I hear of people getting chewed out when trying to help or save someone else's kid, the more I think they want a world where nobody is concerned for anyone but themselve's or their own family. "Martin Davis thought he was doing a good turn by dropping off the 17 year-old boy, who had forgotten hi…
/r/MensRights20/07/12 02:43 PM
1

As an avid fan of Lord of the Rings, that is even worse :P
/r/MensRights20/07/12 02:16 PM
3

Just my two euro cents. Why should you get a larger vote than me? My canadian two cents amounts to only half of your opinion :(
/r/MensRights20/07/12 12:47 PM
1

But, should it have been male hosts talking about how women should be soft, sexy, and disposable, imagine the shitfest that would be plastered across every news station in the country. It depends how and where it is said. Things of this nature are said all the time in a joking manner without any problems. If the speaker is trying to make a legitimate point, then obviously they are going to be lambasted. I doubt the speakers of E! news were being completely serious (are they ever?).
/r/MensRights20/07/12 12:40 PM
2

To be fair, this thread is titled "A question of rape". The quesion OP asked was "Is this not rape?". It's not surprising then that discussion turned into, as you described, "what's really, really rape.". If you weren't interested in that conversation, this topic wasn't the one for you.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:53 PM
4

Not to mention suicides.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:40 PM
3

I contest that it would be difficult and possibly impossible to convict anyone, man or woman. I was working under the assumption that the allegations could be proven. However in the case of a female accuser, we have seen many examples of "guilty until proven innocent" mentality when accusing a man of rape. Even if there is no conviction, the accused are still often put through a living nightmare. Huh. I tend to think that the best judge of who was raped is the person that was raped. In general y…
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:30 PM
4

The man was also drunk, and therefore could not consent to sex either. Does this mean the woman is also guilty of rape? What if the woman initiated the sex? If the answer to both of these questions is no, something is fundamentally wrong.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:14 PM
3

I don't think roles need to be reversed. I was simply pointing out that if the roles were reversed, social blackmailing would be a very legitimate reason to prosecute for rape. If I tell a woman "have sex with me or I'm going to tell person X that you did Y", then I have commited rape. The person I was responding to seemed to have reservations about whether a female could be prosecuted under those circumstances. The sad part is, it would be very difficult, if not impossible to prosecute a female…
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:12 PM
2

Forbidding religious circumcision would obviously be against freedom of religion Nobody is stopping him from chopping the skin off his own penis.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:06 PM
1

The funny thing is, these are all conservative concepts, but the roles seem to have been reversed in the last few decades.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 06:01 PM
1

Canadian here, so by labelling myself as a liberal I am saying that I am fairly center. I am fiscally conservative when it comes to most economic issues. I am socially liberal when it comes to most social issues. When the two overlap (i.e. government spending on social programs), I tend to be more conservative, with the exception of education and health care. It is also my belief that scientific studies and reliable data are the best tools for developing effective policy.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 05:57 PM
5

The comments in that article made me rage. I can't believe the homophobia coming from some of the readers.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 05:54 PM
3

Easiest way is to reverse the roles. If a man was to socially blackmail a woman into sex, would that be considered rape? I think it comes down to whether or not any actual threats were made. If the offender actually threatened social blackmail, then it is rape. If there were no threats and the victim simply feared this outcome on their own, but consented to the sex, it is not rape.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 05:47 PM
1

Good like trying to win that argument with your teenage self :P
/r/MensRights19/07/12 05:42 PM
1

Very true. It's most likely going to come down to location. The difference is Toronto has 3 or 4 other universities close by to choose from (U of T, Brock, Trent, McMaster)
/r/MensRights13/07/12 04:25 PM
2

Was open to the possibility of pursuing my MBA at York. Now I'm not so sure.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 02:29 PM
1

I have a similar situation with my current SO. I'm expected to have sex on a whim, despite being extremely tired from a long or physically demanding day, or any other variety of reasons. On top of that, I'm expected to do the "warming up" so to speak. If I refuse either of these, I'm usually guilted by her or reprimanded in another way (be it through her abstaining when I want sex, silent treatment, etc.). It's a classic method of "If I can't get what I want, I'm going to make sure you don't get…
/r/MensRights13/07/12 02:21 PM
6

When it comes to sports, which I played minimum 5 times a week as a kid, it was always my dad. Dad who took time off work, came to support me, took the financial risks, all those long car rides, tournaments, lessons. All mom did was show up to one or two games a year. Don't get me wrong, I love my mom and she has helped in other areas, but commercials like these are a huge step backwards.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 11:56 AM
2

Do you mean now that they found out she was lying (at least about being kidnapped), or if her story had been consistent in the first place? If her story was consistent there would likely be evidence: Physical marks, DNA, address and description of the men, etc. The fact that she lied about being kidnapped, whether or not she was raped, would likely hurt her chances, yes.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 03:24 PM
-1

That's a pretty big cop-out and had nothing to do with your previous statement. The injustice doesn't justify bullshit comments.
/r/MensRights05/07/12 03:21 PM
5

How do they measure this for families who have combined bank accounts? Mom does the groceries while daddy is at work, therefore she "invests" more in the family?
/r/MensRights25/06/12 03:42 PM
1

Possible, but that isn't quite known. By the sound of it though, they only recognized it was against policy today, yet they asked her to quit at the end of May?
/r/MensRights21/06/12 03:05 PM
3

Her papers were submitted May 25th. The story was posted June 18th.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 03:01 PM
13

She did not lose her job for the incident. She retired. Likely the last day of school just passed and this was her last year.
/r/MensRights21/06/12 01:46 PM
1

The problem is, the headline says he's falsely accused. Fair point. Then it is I who misunderstood your original statement when you said "I'm genuinely not seeing where the accusation is proven false yet."
/r/MensRights20/06/12 05:21 PM
1

I'm genuinely not seeing where the accusation is proven false yet. This original post by you implied the need to prove the accusations are false. There is no such need in order to maintain innocence. That is what I was responding to. it is also not right to call someone a liar based solely on wanting to believe that what they said is false. That is precisely what I stated in my second reply: "That would only be applicable to a possible case against the accuser for bearing false testimony, not to…
/r/MensRights20/06/12 04:49 PM
3

That would only be applicable to a possible case against the accuser for bearing false testimony, not to the rape charges.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 03:56 PM
7

How do you know the accusation is false yet? Innocent until proven guilty; it doesn't matter if you can't prove it's false. You need to be able to prove it's true.
/r/MensRights20/06/12 02:26 PM
2

Unfortunately I can't provide the data as I did this last year for a 4th year business course, but I an summarize my findings and hopefully they make sense. To reach our conclusions, we used a scientific survey of 500 (250 male and 250 female) university students, and 2 focus groups consisting of 6 university students (mixed male and female). The main findings from the survey were: -Women graduate with lower wage expectations, and also see themselves earning below the median wage in their field …
/r/MensRights11/06/12 02:43 PM
1

I conducted a study on this last year, including surveys and focus groups. We found the number one reason for wage inequality was that women are more likely to substitute wages for increased benefits, such as time off work, sick leave, vacation, etc.
/r/MensRights11/06/12 02:22 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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