TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ClaudeKenni Archive

View 1 post and 236 comments by ClaudeKenni 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)
-1

Doesn't relate to anything I said, massive difference between claiming there are a few extremists doing stupid shit (which I don't dispute), and claiming that Sharia Law is being implemented in London, when the article says precisely the opposite.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 07:10 PM
-1

Awful sensationalist title, the article specifically states that it's not all adverts, just ones with issues in regards unrealistic body image. Nothing has been made illegal, just specifically not allowed on Transport of London (so trains and buses in London), and nothing to do with Sharia law either. Article in no way relates to Men's Rights, doesn't say that only adverts with women will be removed... and while there are issues in society in the ways that men and women's expectations and body i…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 06:57 PM
1

Yep, one of my favourite game series ever.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 04:55 PM
3

Yep, I'm used to seeing a few comments removed here and there, personal attacks and blatant troll attempts. But... I mean this discussion itself isn't even a controversial topic. In this instance I know a lot of the comments (mine included) that were removed were even somewhat supportive of the article, agreeing that funding for these services should increase, and even agreeing with gender separate support for domestic violence victims, only stating that male victims of domestic violence get nex…
/r/MensRights06/08/14 09:41 AM
5

The other frustrating thing from my perspective is that in the original article, in the Guardian, they actively censored all BTL comments which brought up any similar disagreement with the original piece. I think I'm pretty much done with the Guardian at this point, as much as I agree with their stance on most things, the blatant misandry in many of their pieces, and disturbing desire to censor disagreement is just too much for me. And while my opinion on Ally Fogg is mixed (while he's often on …
/r/MensRights06/08/14 06:07 AM
2

You're obviously not clear at all, because no-one said anything like that anywhere.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 06:27 AM
3

I'm not too far from London at the moment, and been meaning to make a trip up there anyway, so might have the time to.
/r/MensRights21/03/14 05:02 PM
5

I'm not a fan of Ally Fogg, but he is useful. The first issue that men must overcome is getting it in to the mainstream consciousness that men do have issues particular to them in society, and that we should be looking at ways to deal with them. I disagree strongly with Ally's approach to these issues, and having engaged with him a number of times, am ambivalent at best towards his ability to deal with criticism and challenge to some of his points. I'm also angry and frustrated at his narrow min…
/r/MensRights04/01/14 12:22 AM
2

I don't see any outrage here at all, apart from maybe a bit of annoyance of the usual patriarchy crap this app uses in its title. Other than that, it's all observations about how flipping genders will easily indicate situations where men are also screwed by gender representations online.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 10:34 AM
2

Data is useless without methodology, and the source tells you nothing about that, what is and isn't included and how the data was collected. It's like saying 100% of men are criminals, by collecting the data from prison inmates... it means nothing, and the lack of that information to me is good enough reason not to take it at face value.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 12:12 PM
3

Well then please explain what the role of the minister for womens prisons if, if there is supposed to be one minister for all?
/r/MensRights25/10/13 11:27 PM
3

Well if you would point me in the direction of the minister for mens prisons... oh wait, there isn't one. And no, men certainly don't get the same stuff, or even remotely similar. From treatment by the police, to charges, to sentencing, to treatment in prison, men are time and again treated like crap, and the narrative in the media seems to be one that is sympathetic to only women prisoners. Oh, there are too many women in prison, oh, they are treated so badly, when only a tiny percentage of pri…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:15 PM
8

Did you actually read the article? Special privileges for female offenders, 12 months support after release, employment opportunities, and the general tone that somehow female criminals are different than male criminals, and deserve all this special treatment. That the article talks about such treatment for female prisoners, and not just all prisoners, and that these female prisoners seem to be getting better treatment than not only male prisoners, but a huge number of law abiding men (from home…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 02:34 PM
2

I think the additional issue with that though is that of those who identify as feminists (and I'd consider 20% a significant percentage - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html ), far too many do so only from a distorted perspective, that lauds feminism as the saviour of all women, and ignores any criticism of feminist beliefs or methods. On top of that many more believe they are feminists, but only in a vague wishy-washy 'oh women should be equal, so I guess I'm a…
/r/MensRights08/10/13 03:49 PM
9

Men are oppressed by feminists, the government and legal system, and social expectations and double standards. Women do have some responsibility towards those issues, but to say all women, or women specifically, are the cause of that oppression, is wrong. Generally people who make such a claim are those who want to conflate women and feminists, or want to deflect from the feminist narrative which often does blame all men for situations caused by a few people.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 09:13 AM
8

The problem there is whether the question is a question of gender equality or a question of individual morality. There are two fundamental questions here, how should statutory rape be dealt with under the law, and should there be a difference in how men and women are treated (in word and deed) under the law. Either stricter treatment of women, or less strict treatment of men, will bring about equality under the law, but as to which is right comes down to political preferences, rather than prefer…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 04:33 PM
17

The issue is the arguments that need to be made to make those changes. It's far easier for the MRM, particularly given how much libelous misrepresentation there is out there of the group, to argue that women who commit statutory rape are treated more harshly, than to say that men who commit statutory rape should be treated more leniently. If we do the latter, there will be accusations that the MRM supports pedophilia from those with a vested interest in the status quo, but if we do the former, a…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 02:37 PM
3

On rape, I'm from the UK where the current rape law specifically excludes female on male rape, so it's not just an American issue. It's something which exists across many countries around the world, because the law and society in general hasn't caught up with the idea that men are victims, and it's only when you really look deeply in to the issue, and do proper research without the biases of feminist research, that you can see just how bad it is. On the question of MRM vs egalitarianism, I see m…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:58 PM
1

I think the first thing to do is work out where you're coming from with this. What articles have you read, what sites have they been on, and what issues have they been discussing? The reason I say this is because frankly your description of those articles doesn't seem to fit with any major MR site I've seen. So either your main sources have been garbage, your interpretation of the issues being discussed is off, or there is some other explanation as to the differences between the articles you've …
/r/MensRights02/10/13 11:55 AM
1

The distinction that has to be made though is between feminists caring about individual cases of rape, and caring about men, as rape victims, collectively. I'm very happy when I see feminists talking about this, but while those same feminists use intentionally flawed statistics to talk about rape as a whole, and other serious issues such as domestic violence, there is still a massive disconnect.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 08:18 AM
6

It's a shame that the comments don't play this out, still a ridiculous amount of misinformation and prejudice towards mens issues in general, and the MRM in particular.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 08:53 AM
3

To be fair, a significant proportion of the BTL commenters do call out the stupidity in how this piece is framed, as they do in most of the Guardian's messed up feminist rhetoric, which I think shows a disconnect between the paper and the views of its left-leaning readers.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 01:56 PM
2

The first point I would contend is that these posts you talk about in any way blame the opposite gender for these issues. It's not the fault of women, in general, that women get let off in courts, lighter sentencing, and generally have a bunch of privileges in society. Now the fault can certainly be with specific women, but pointing out that there are shitty people in society, while not expicitly MR without context, also isn't quite SRS territory. The important distinction is, in my opinion, whe…
/r/MensRights06/08/13 07:34 AM
3

I don't see how it's even remotely controversial to say that men's issues aren't discussed by the media, business or government, while women's issues are always discussed. While the reason for that might be a controversial topic, the fact that it's the case isn't.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 01:23 PM
23

Well it has missed something, the fact that dark chocolate manufacturers have infiltrated mass media, business and government to ensure that only dark chocolate advertising is ever put to the general public, while trying often to even deny the existance of any type of chocolate...
/r/MensRights04/08/13 09:29 AM
2

But by giving 'better' articles attention we are giving them a reason to keep on publishing them. There is no newspaper in the UK right now which is positive on mens issues, and what it comes down to is that these issues don't grab attention, don't generate buyers (for the paper) or clicks (for online). Now the Mail isn't exactly the sort of 'ally' I'd want on our side, but by encouraging them to print more stuff like this, it might in turn encourage other papers to do the same, bringing attenti…
/r/MensRights31/07/13 09:08 AM
6

Well it's a three step response... 1) Close eyes 2) Put fingers in ears 3) Go 'la la la' as loud as possible
/r/MensRights30/07/13 01:30 PM
1

Agreed on those magazines, don't touch the things. I agree about censorship in most cases, censorship can be a tool to get rid of dissenting opinion from the public consciousness or impose particular moral values on people, but we also need to be careful to be arguing against the right thing. The Co-op in this case aren't being sexist because they are choosing to censor these magazines... that's not the MR issue here, the issue is if they only censor magazines that are considered to be 'demeanin…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 12:24 PM
4

The telling thing about that quote is that it only mentions the negative effect of women's magazines on women. The worst thing about all this is that it never even occurs to so called equal rights activists that their behaviour in demonizing and ignoring half of the countries population is far more damaging than some stupid magazines.
/r/MensRights29/07/13 11:15 AM
1

Well the law in the UK is different to the US as regards what is and isn't free speech... I don't agree with a lot of the restrictions on free speech in the UK, but there is a valid argument that these things aren't protected by UK free speech laws (which is a different question than whether they should be).
/r/MensRights29/07/13 11:13 AM
8

There are three questions here really. The first is about what is acceptable to be displayed in a public place. I'm very much a supporter of minimal censorship in society, but I know others disagree, and because of that I don't mind the argument for these sort of covers. I wont neccessarily agree with it, but it's rational enough to be understood. The second question is about banning such publications, and whether they contain misogyny. I don't read those magazines, so I can't really talk from a…
/r/MensRights29/07/13 06:56 AM
4

It's a difficult consideration though, my personal opinion is that the surrender of paternal rights and responsibilities should mean that the biological father in these cases is legally a stranger to the child. I understand the argument about not wanting any contact at all, to ensure that some men don't try to avoid financial responsibilities, but still try to impose themselves as the father in the child's life, but I think that simply treating them as a stranger under the law would be sufficien…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:30 AM
9

It's not a zero-sum situation, but there is also the downside to consider. It repeats the message that it's acceptable for girls to commit crimes and get off unpunished, or that society thinks that girls can be rehabilitated at that age but boys can't. By making the message a gendered one, it disenfranchises boys from society further. I don't think that same negative can quite translate to the argument about genital mutilation, because the basis of MGM being legal isn't down to societies negativ…
/r/MensRights08/07/13 07:09 AM
2

33 percent in over 60 males is hardly statistically insignificant.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 09:29 AM
1

That's what I mean about Feminism's self-proclaimed role as the voice of equality. It's shaped the debate so drastically, that people have the idea that you're either a Feminist, or you are against equality. The MRM doesn't claim to be focused on everyone, but it doesn't claim to be the whole debate either. You can be a MRA, and a WRA, and a LGBTA... being a part of the MRM doesn't mean you think only men have issues, but it's an environment where these issues can be focused on, but not with the…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:25 PM
8

I feel you're trying to misinterpret my points here. Firstly, the debacle in Texas has nothing to do with the MRM. I never said that Feminism should be disbanded or abolished or never heard from again, or that it hasn't in some circumstances done good things for women. I said that it needs to stop being the only voice. It needs to be open to debate, to be challenged, and to acknowledge that there are different approaches to the issue of equality, and different opinions on the issue, outside of t…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 10:24 AM
4

The problem that the men's rights movement, and male issues in general have is a lack of mainstream awareness. Feminism is the only voice that is heard about 'equality'... The analogy i'd give is that it's like a dictatorship. One party has all the power, all the control, and many others are sick of it. But you wouldn't see a movement challenging this dictatorship saying 'oh, but they manage healthcare quite well'. Because the MRM is a safe place to express opinions which challenge feminism, whe…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 08:07 AM
2

I don't think I'm following your logic to be honest. I don't see how freedom of speech or privacy are particular 'male' issues, rather than issues that everyone should be concerned about. I don't see how it can be argued that womens groups are trying to take rights away, it's a succession of governments internationally, both left and right wing, who value their own power above anything else.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 12:47 PM
3

The issue here is that it confuses gender with wider politics. Most feminists are left wing, but that doesn't mean it's the responsibility of womens groups to comment on issues such as this, in the same way that it isn't a MR issue, despite the fact that many MRAs take a more right wing or libertarian view on these matters. The MRM does not and should not try to align itself with any wider political philosophy, whether left or right wing, because many of us would disagree with whatever alignment…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:43 AM
3

Indeed, the idea of financial abortion is dependent on the idea that abortion itself is ok, so that both partners have that same choice to be able to relinquish rights and responsibilities towards a child.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:19 AM
2

Simply put, rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. If a mother is the only one with the right to decide if she wants a child or not, then she is solely responsible for the child. You cannot morally have one without the other, and until these women who don't want any men to have any sort of say on abortion start campaigning for the removal of child support payments in all circumstances, or at least giving fathers the right to make the choice not to have any rights or responsibilities toward…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 10:14 AM
28

Nowhere in this article does it mention sexism in a 5 day week, it just argues that there are benefits of it (which is true), says that some women are negotiating 4 day work weeks (which if both the employer and employee are happy with, is fine), and mentions that when some are working 4 days and others 5, that those working 4 days could miss out on some areas of the workplace (which is true too). There are one or two lines about women specifically, but nothing to the detriment of men (it doesn'…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 07:06 PM
1

Indeed, and the figures don't even show how many men are afraid to say a thing about it, or those who don't consider such things to be rape. When a woman is raped, it's rightly considered as bad by all society (minus the small minority of idiots out there), while instead male rape is mocked or dismissed by far too many people. Most MR issues I'm willing to discuss with an even temper, but to me on issues such as rape, domestic violence, and suicide it's very hard, because I don't even understand…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 08:51 PM
2

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf is probably the best source for male rape figures. If you compare the figures on female rape victims, and male rape victims (page 18-19), you'll see that the number of female rape victims (1.27M) is almost identical to the number of male rape victims (1.267M). You can see that even in these sort of official figures, they don't even define these cases as rape, which I'm sure we can all agree is a big part of the problem. The second …
/r/MensRights24/06/13 06:15 PM
1

The main thrust of the article is absolutely spot on, but it does seem that a lot of talking points which seem like obvious ones to lead on from what was said were ignored. The author also makes some mistakes, perhaps intentionally to appeal to their audience (such as linking being anti-feminism with traditionalism, and a couple of pointless attacks on men). Having said that though, this is the discussion we should be having in society on issues of work and family.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 09:59 AM
3

The simple truth is not that there is a 'male gendered socio-economic system', it's just free market capitalism. Work as much as you can, for as long as you can, and get rewarded for it. If you work less, free market capitalism doesn't care why. The biological truth is that women give birth, but another biological truth is that men die younger, and in a lot of countries the retirement age for men is still higher than it is for women. If anything, shouldn't it be the other way round? Doesn't that…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 11:43 AM
1

I don't know whether or not to believe she should receive any compensation, there aren't enough details in the article for that, but if she does it should be the state, and not him, who is liable for it surely?
/r/MensRights17/06/13 04:49 PM
9

Or just avoid hitting on you altogether. No-one is worth jumping through a million hoops for, and I just don't find massive egos and clinging to archaic male stereotypes of behaviour attractive. Signed, most of the men in the world.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 04:24 PM
1

You're right, this is very damaging for a child to experience. I know, because that's exactly how my father treated me when I was young, and have (and still do) struggle with the effects to this day. The problem is that men are at least a generation behind, maybe more, in the fight to change these sort of damaging gender 'norms'. Society teaches women they can be whoever they want to be, but teaches men they have to fit strictly defined roles. Now these roles fit some men fine, in the same way t…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 05:24 PM
4

The problem with that is that you can't force a woman to keep a baby, just because the man wants it. The biological truth is that a woman carries the child, and unless that somehow changes, no woman should be compelled to keep a child she doesn't want. But, once we accept that argument, and accept that abortion is a viable choice, there is no rational argument against men having the same choice, at least within the same time period that women have to choose abortion (so that a woman, on hearing …
/r/MensRights13/06/13 02:46 PM
3

The problem with that is that you are making assumptions about the relationship between the lawyer and the athlete. If they have a friendly relationship, this behaviour may very well be 'welcomed', or at least taken as acceptable in the context that was its intented. It's not the judges place to decide that it is harassment unless the lawyer makes a complaint about it. And it would be the same if either party were male of female. So what it comes down to is the judge imposing their cultural valu…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 06:19 AM
3

But society in general does. At it's worst it sees men as rapists and pedophiles, as disposable or incompetent, violent or stoic. I think it's a mistake though to try and too closely link issues of race and sexuality with issues of gender, as the disparity in their numbers links to the disparities in how they are treated. I've never been discriminated against or treated badly because of my sexuality, and only twice because of my race (straight white european, for reference) but have countless ti…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 09:32 AM
2

The problem is that what men and women face are different, and that the argument that unless you've lived it or experienced it you can't fully accept it cuts both ways. The main difference is that the feminist narrative means that most people are aware of how women society, and prejudice towards them, but too few people see that men also face those fears, or other fears that are ingrained in them by society. There is a lack of understanding of men, and a demonization of men in society that women…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 07:10 AM
4

There are more differences than that though even between moderate feminists and MRAs. The big one though is 'the patriarchy'. I've never seen it argued by anyone that believing in the patriarchy is an extremist feminist opinion. If you disagree, then fair enough, but I think it's a safe assumption to work from. One thing I've never heard from a feminist is the statement "the patriarchy didn't cause X". When it comes down to it, I don't think there is a problem that, in the feminist sphere of dis…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 10:23 AM
10

The education system would probably be the best example of a matriarchy on the same terms as feminists define patriarchy. The education system has been feminized, manipulated to benefit women over men. The vast majority of teachers, particularly teaching our young, are women. As a result, far more women than men come out of the other end of the system with a college or university education, and still women are the ones who get incentivised over men to work their way through the education system.…
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:15 AM
2

Also not allowed in school are boys named Gunter/Gunther. I mean that has the word Gun in it! I don't usually get angry, there's so much stupidity in society today that getting angry at regular old stupidity would lead you to a heart attack. But this is such grade A, 100% idiotic braindead fuckwitted ignorance that, whether or not it's a MR issue, whoevers stupid idea it was to make this decision needs to be fired, rehired so they can be fired again, and then be employed to hit rocks with other …
/r/MensRights03/06/13 01:36 PM
4

http://books.google.ie/books?id=3nnxlqbN-IEC&pg=PA107&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false Seems pretty man-hating to me. Completely dismissing discrimination when it's against men, and trying to justify and diminish responsibility for cases where there is misandry by saying 'it's ok for women to be angry 'because patriarchy''.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 08:55 PM
1

I'd say that's a very strong statement to be making. It happens sometimes, some immature person trying to stir up shit, but to say it happens in any conversation on sexism needs a lot of evidence. And being the internet, there is also seemingly the assumption that people posting these things are men, and that their intent is to be misogynistic. It's not out of the realms of possibility that it's people (men or women) who want to continue pushing the narrative that things like this occur, to keep…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 06:44 PM
4

You'd have a point if the title wasn't "How every single discussion about sexism and women-type stuff on the internet (and real life) has ever happened and ever will happen, always, forever, until the earth finally falls in to the sun (or until the patriarchy is dismantled)". There are some idiots out there, as there are everywhere, but the reason that this happens more to feminism than us, for example, is because that feminism is by far the dominant voice in gender debates. That's what makes it…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 05:30 PM
19

A great comic, it really accurately depicts the sexism inherent in feminist attitudes, particularly towards anyone who disagrees with them, and their attitudes towards men. That delusion that they are being logical, particularly when using arguments completely unrelated to the topic at hand, and how they represent their disagreement as rational, but anyone elses disagreement with them as childish. I mean, this has to be parody right?
/r/MensRights30/05/13 01:16 PM
6

Don't like agreeing with the Mail, but it's spot on here.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 11:36 AM
6

The question really is whether or not any 18 year old who has sex with a (I thought it was 15 rather than 14, but whatever) year old should go to jail. That the relationship is same sex doesn't matter one iota. While the law in the US is pretty clear on this, morally it's a more difficult question. The age of consent is arbitary, and varies across the globe. In Europe for example, a lot of countries have an age of consent of 14 or 15, with various exceptions due to age differences, or exploit of…
/r/MensRights26/05/13 04:28 PM
-1

Discrimination against men, yes. Hatred of men, not so much, as for a lot of people are just ambivalent or unaware of mens issues, rather than outwardly hostile towards men as a gender.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:04 PM
2

Seems like a list of stuff that most feminists need to learn...
/r/MensRights25/05/13 08:39 AM
5

Firstly, they got rid of mother's day stuff too (so not 'another' anything). There's only one day, the 'family day'. The question about why there are so many single parent families, and why fathers are so frequently denied equal parenthood, is a very important and valid one. Is there any indication that on these family days that it will only be about mothers? You may want to assume as much, but I can't see that suggested anywhere in the piece, and I don't think that the MRM should be based on un…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:20 PM
4

You'd have a point if they weren't doing exactly the same for mothers day. They aren't treating fathers any differently to how they are treating mothers. While you can say that the decision they made was a bad one, you can't say that they were going after fathers with it.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:11 PM
5

My guess is that people are quick on the downvote button when they see 'not related to MR', as it's a statement which is sometimes used by those who want to stifle discussion here. There is so much stuff out there which diminishes the role and importance of fathers, and often a lack of appreciation for good fathers. This particular case though just isn't it.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 07:51 PM
2

Well i'd argue not even that, as the role of fathers as anything more than financial provider is still dismissed too easily. The reason why I said I didn't think it was a MR issue though is that this decision in no way diminishes fathers, as compared to mothers. I would assume that a family day would be inclusive of both mothers and fathers, as well as whoever else may be the primary caregiver (children who live with their grandparents, aunts and uncles, children with two mothers or two fathers …
/r/MensRights24/05/13 07:46 PM
17

Don't think it's really a MR issue after reading in to it tbh. They made the decision to stop both mothers and fathers day activities, they weren't just targeting fathers. The reasons for it were well meaning but misguided imo (trying to protect those children whose living situation wasn't the usual one mother and one father household). There's no indication that men are being treated unequally here.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 06:48 PM
6

Ok, I think you're off on this one, and will explain why. Let's ignore all the extremes of the debate (rape, spermjacking etc), and work from the beginning. Sex is a consensual act, that both partners choose to engage in. Where there are no other factors involved, such as the extreme cases I mention above, we can agree that both partners are equally responsible for the consequences of sex, such as pregnancy. Now we move on to the pro-choice position. If someone argues that abortion should only a…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 07:34 AM
1

So few people are it seems, but they are such great games :)
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:46 AM
2

1) No. There are a few broad issues where there seems to be a common consensus amongst the vast majority of the MRM, but when it comes down to the specifics, there is a lot of diversity of opinion within the group. As long as you can argue your point, and aren't afraid to have it challenged, there will be no problem. 2) Yes, plenty of them. Being a MRA is not at all being anti-woman, or even anti-marriage (though MRAs are often more aware of the inequalities that are caused by how marriage is tr…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 03:17 PM
3

No, that's a falsehood that a lot of people spread, but it isn't even remotely true. It's possible to recognise that feminism has helped women, but also be against it because of the areas where it attacks or devalues male issues, or against it because you disagree with feminist theories, such as the patriarchy (to which there is no men's rights equivalent), or against it for its misuse and manipulation of statistics, or any other number of valid reasons. I'd say if you asked MRAs whether or they…
/r/MensRights04/05/13 05:36 AM
2

Well the goal of this idea is to benefit all sides, by trying to put together something rigorous, but relatively uncontroversial in its tone and content. I know there will never be a time where the MRM and feminism are in agreement on many issues, but too many potentially productive debates are sidetracked by misapprehensions or poor assumptions. It's no one person's place to define what the MRM is, but by putting this together, I'm hoping those who define themselves as feminist, but are genuine…
/r/MensRights02/05/13 09:47 PM
3

It agree, it's too difficult and polarizing to try and define the differences specifically in this context. The main points I'm looking to cover here is about the parallels and similarities between the 'radicals' in each group, how they relate to more mainstream membership, how they are treated by this membership, and making a point about comparison of radicals in one group to mainstream members in the other as a poor debating tactic when looking for productive debate.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 09:31 PM
3

The main reason I avoided putting anything like that on the list originally, is that it didn't seem specifically relevent to the debate between the mrm and feminism; it's just good practice in any sort of debating environment (and life itself) to approach it with an open mind. I thought it might come across as a bit patronizing to write something that sounded like debating 101... the nearest I was going to touch on it in the section on evidence and causation (to be careful about using 'the patri…
/r/MensRights02/05/13 06:04 PM
1

That's the thing, I don't expect it to be read by the sort of feminist who is hostile towards the MRM without reason. But we get a lot of threads from feminists wanting to discuss things, and often their comments get downvoted when they make certain types of statements, which we in the MRM see every day. Lets take the NAFALT argument for example, a feminist has their own experience with feminism, and might genuinely believe that feminists aren't 'like that' (whatever the criticism is). But where…
/r/MensRights02/05/13 03:59 PM
1

I think the problem there then is in how the media approaches these crimes, and how much attention is given to them, but I'd say this is a wider issue than just serious crime. My opinion is that approaching it by saying "men do bad here, but women do bad there" isn't really productive... the MRM isn't about wanting women to look bad, just about making sure men are treated fairly. To me, the most concerning thing is the lack of press coverage when men are victims, or the dismissive tone in these …
/r/MensRights02/05/13 12:36 PM
2

I think you're a little off on this one to be honest. The female equivalent of 'male violence' is 'female violence'... or we can just call it all violence. The gender gap between male and female initiated violence is overstated, so I don't see the need for this sort of false equivalency. Irresponsible parenting is a completely different matter, with different causes. I think your approach to the question of abortion is a little off too, as there are often more complicated reasons not to want to …
/r/MensRights02/05/13 10:16 AM
6

I'm not seeing the sexism...
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:28 AM
5

Of course, but I feel it also then validates the use of that figure when it is without also including that the figure is a myth, but including that would make the thing less succinct. Those of us who know these things already aren't really the target of something like this, and those who don't have probably heard the figure so many times that they don't even question its validity, or see how the myth is used to demonize men. (also on Step 1, did you mean "sexually dangerous"?)
/r/MensRights01/05/13 09:36 AM
8

Just one observation, the one in four rape figure has been debunked so many times, that it shouldn't be included on any serious expressions on men's or women's rights. http://www.avoiceformen.com/video/rape-statistics-debunked-with-transcript/
/r/MensRights01/05/13 08:11 AM
2

I think the reason that it's hard to discuss suicide as a specific topic, rather than as a part of other discussions within the MRM, is because firstly, it's such a complex issue, and secondly, there are very few 'solutions' to suicide specifically, the resolutions are to the multitude of areas which can contribute to male suicide, such as lack of support for rape and domestic violence victims, to male disposability and a culture that emasculates men who don't conform to the 'strong and silent' …
/r/MensRights30/04/13 08:47 AM
1

The difference is that male disposability doesn't identify responsibility for the situation, and is just an observation of the situation. To believe in the patriarchy is to believe that a structure in society is made by men for the benefit of men. Male disposability in itself is different; as you say, some groups might try to go beyond that concept in to blame, but that doesn't mean that male disposability itself is a blaming concept, and a MRA wouldn't say that it is the fault of women (though …
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:48 AM
1

No, you're fighting for men, just like the rest of us. Being a man, or a MRA, or a MGTOW and being an asshole aren't mutually exclusive. In my opinion, the first big difference between the MRM and feminism is the ability to challenge extreme and repugnant viewpoints, instead of tacitly accepting them. An argument challenging extreme parts of feminism as bigoted just wouldn't be accepted in a moderate feminist space. I can't see any censorship going on here, unless comments have been deleted whic…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 06:22 AM
1

I think this is why the language used with these issues is so important, as talk about rape and sexual violence is very different to talking about body autonomy (where there are issues that are unique to women), and objectification (which men and women both suffer in different, but related ways). In these areas though I would say that there are no problems within the MRM, especially for the former. Body autonomy is something that MRAs are strongly supportive of (see issues such as forced male ge…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:20 PM
1

I think the problem is, is that you haven't really asserted what that issue is, as nothing so far you've mentioned is uniquely female, in the context of modern western culture. The closest argument I've come across for that is about perceived power imbalance, but again I would say that it's not an issue unique to women, even if it's women who are more likely to talk about it. The reason I say this, and I don't really like talking about this, is that I've been a victim of sexual assault twice in …
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:36 PM
4

I'd say you should probably take a look at the sidebar. There are a few links there which explain exactly how feminism does attack men, particular actions from mainstream feminist organisations which have perpetuated inequality. If feminism actually demonstrated it gave a damn about men, then there wouldn't need to be a group that does. Do your own research first, and then come back and explain why those things aren't anti-men, and maybe you'll start to have a point. Otherwise, as feminism isn't…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:00 PM
1

I'm not waving it away, I'm disagreeing with it. There are issues unique to women, from issues such as body autonomy in regards pregnancy, subservient roles in many highly religious cultures, to how women are seen in areas such as sports and STEM fields... but I do not think that this is one of those, and feel that you are underestimating what men do face in this regard. I'm not saying it's not bad for women, I am saying that I feel you can't see how bad it can be for men. That's understandable,…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:24 PM
1

Apart from the graphics :P
/r/MensRights29/04/13 03:51 PM
13

If it wasn't for wanting to take the high ground, I would say that there are some men who are disposable, the sort of men who take that sort of attitude towards someone else. There is a simpler word for them though... well a few, but I haven't used the word dipshit in a while, so that's what I'll go with. The comparison of MGTOWs to radfems seems an apt one actually. Radfems blame men for everything, and a quick look at the MGTOW website seems to blame women for everything, sometimes comes acros…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 02:59 PM
2

It is rough out there for women, but the truth is, is that it's rough out there for men too, and the big difference is that society does everything it can to silence these men, denigrate and devalue their situation, or pretend that it does not matter when men are the victims. I don't know the basis of your discussion with these women on sexual violence, but from my own experience I would say that I know more men than women who have been victims of such things, but that men far too frequently are…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 02:38 PM
1

Notice how these feminists don't want to change the word feminism... I thought it was supposed to help men as well?
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:25 PM
2

Agreed, but it's a question which leads on from the point you made about women lying about contraception, and it made me curious about the implications of that situation being defined as rape (which is why I asked the question, as you knew about the case, I thought you might have some further insight in to that situation). In that situation, as you described, the woman is committing rape as the law defines it in Canada, one of the most serious crimes someone can commit against another person. Bu…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 03:02 PM
3

As far as I know, in the US at least, there have been cases where the woman has lied about birth control, and the man was still liable for child support payments... is that the case also in Canada? The reason I ask is it seems odd for the victim of what would legally be called rape are then held financially liable for the outcome. I guess part of the problem is in comparing three different legal systems, and trying to find common ground. (Note, a quick google search came up with this http://www.…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 01:04 PM
4

I agree, I wouldn't defend the guy for what he did, but trying to define it as rape diminishes the severity of rape accusations. It's a sex crime, but should probably be defined as sexual deception or something along those lines, which would also cover falsely claiming to be on contraception, and a variety of other situations where there is consent, but one party intentionally deceives the other about some aspect of it, with the knowledge that it would cause harm, such as knowingly passing on ST…
/r/MensRights25/04/13 12:54 PM
3

I don't think I've come across a case in the UK where a male rape victim was made to pay child support (though given how close to impossible it is for a male rape victim, where the rape is perpetrated by a female, to be taken seriously anyway, there aren't exactly many opportunities for it to occur). If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me (I know it's happened in the US).
/r/MensRights25/04/13 12:09 PM
3

Well I would say that if the woman continues with the sex, that shows she accepts those terms, in the same way that in this case it is said that the man agreed, but then reneged on that agreement. But that's the problem with these sort of cases, it seems as though it'll all come down to he says, she says. Rape can be difficult to prove at the best of times, but "I told her not to bite my nipples, but she did anyway" seems impossible. The only thing to do it seems would be written sex contracts, …
/r/MensRights25/04/13 11:31 AM
35

If a woman ever lies about being on some sort of contraception before sex, or even if a man says he doesn't want a child, and the woman becomes pregnant, it would then be considered rape too under this sort of definition?
/r/MensRights25/04/13 10:35 AM
0

I should have specified all financial aid targeted by gender. I've not come across male only scholarships or financial aid.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 02:10 PM
1

The problem with this argument is that it attributes to the MRM power that it doesn't have. In your scenario, the father has power and responsibility for the son. The MRM has only really become more active and visible in the last few years, and due to feminism's monopolization of dialogue on gender issues, finds it almost impossible to get mainstream coverage. The more apt comparison is that it's mainstream feminism which is to blame for the rise of the radfems, as they are the ones who had the …
/r/MensRights22/04/13 07:35 AM
0

The question of affirmative action isn't in itself a mens rights issue, it's down to the individuals political preferences. The problem is, when affirmative action is applied, it's used in a discriminatory way. For example in education, where men are underrepresented, all scholarships and other financial aid out there targets women, who are in fact already the advantaged group. This is different when comparing to race, where there is an underrepresentation of some races, and where affirmative ac…
/r/MensRights22/04/13 07:25 AM
1

There are two main issues I believe which cause the rift between ourselves and feminism. Firstly, extreme feminists, such as those in Toronto, who are, to any sane persons mind, man-hating bigots, who actively oppose male issues. As you say, there are a lot of different kinds of feminists, but the same mainstream feminists who claim to be interested in equality are suspiciously silent when it comes to these groups. My perspective is that if these radfems are so far away from what mainstream femi…
/r/MensRights19/04/13 09:45 AM
1

The best thing to push, in my opinion, are topics where it's very hard for people to disagree, even if they have a biased agenda. Forced male genital mutilation, the high rate of male suicide and work related deaths, support for male rape and domestic violence victims, supporting fathers spending more time with their children... it's very difficult for anyone to argue against these issues without coming across badly. We might not all agree on how to solve these things, but I'd say that the entir…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 05:42 PM
1

The first thing is that people are starting to listen. The MRM is growing, and male issues are starting to be talked about. As a movement, we don't have a voice big enough to directly challenge feminist claims about aiming for equality which aren't matched with their actions in the mainstream media. But situations like Toronto show that the nastiest aspects of feminism will be picked up upon, and bring attention to mens issues. Using politics as a weapon to ensure exposure and discussion of male…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:52 PM
1

Equality is the issue. I'm not a MRA because I want to stop feminism, I am a MRA because I want the real and significant issues that men face in society today to be dealt with. If that means challenging feminism, while feminism still preaches inequality, then so be it, but I am not against feminism for the sake of being against feminism, and I don't see how sacrificing all other political opinions for the sake of a single issue is going to help anything.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:22 PM
1

As do the likes of Sarah Palin (again, if we're narrowing things down to the US), and you can't really get much more right wing. The simple fact is that mens issues are not left wing issues or right wing issues. The solution to them may be, and there are solutions that are possible from all areas of the political spectrum, but the problems themselves are not, so why should we try to limit who is a part of trying to solve them?
/r/MensRights18/04/13 04:05 PM
3

Simply though, the left ≠ feminism, social security ≠ feminism and high taxes ≠ feminism. Feminism has made itself a part of the left, not the other way around, and left wing politics have room for much more than just feminism. A right wing MRM is a movement which will lose probably half its members (there was a survey on the MRM demographics a while back, I can't find a source for the results, but I think it was a fairly even split). It will alienate left wing and centrists by forcing a single …
/r/MensRights18/04/13 03:16 PM
3

The difficulty is that Libertarian political philosophy is very much the laissez faire approach I mentioned. Perfect for getting rid of biased law, and over the top government support that women get in some areas (such as higher education, where even though women are in the majority, they are still entitled to the vast majority of support), but not much else. What, for example, would be a Libertarian approach to dealing with the vast disparity in workplace deaths, or male suicides? Looking at th…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:37 PM
4

I think the primary reason that there are left wing, or liberal MRAs (and I would say a large proportion of them), and that they can be anti-feminist is simply because the feminism that has infiltrated left wing politics is different to the "equality for everyone" face that so many like to put on feminism. I made this point the other day on some discussion about affirmative action, but for someone interested in mens rights, and setting aside political opinion for a moment, introducing affirmativ…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:36 PM
3

An interesting discussion about this here, which I think shows how easy it is to confuse mens rights issues with political leanings. Logically, there are three positions when it comes to mens rights on affirmative actions which result somehow in equality (or at least remove hypocrisy from the system). Either affirmative action is extended to men where they are the underrepresented or disadvantaged group (what I'd consider a left wing position), affirmative action is removed from women (what I'd …
/r/MensRights16/04/13 07:31 AM
25

This is one of those things that takes a bit of consideration before seeing any sort of relevence to mens rights. The assumption by some women (and more feminists) that men are unable to understand anything which is unique to women is a frustrating one, as it taps in to the stereotypical view that men don't possess empathy, while often these same women (and feminists) are happy to discuss male issues as though they are as capable, or even more capable than men of understanding them (such as the …
/r/MensRights15/04/13 12:06 PM
7

Firstly, in my opinion this has nothing to do with mens rights. However, I say good luck to them. If they can show that there's a demand for women players in Fifa games, then fine. Though given the sales figures of Fifa, we'd probably be talking hundreds of thousands of people who would buy Fifa for women players, who wouldn't buy it otherwise. However, if the best they can do are quote some irrelevent statistics (one I'd actually like to see is the percentage of Fifa players who are women, as a…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 01:59 PM
8

While protecting people against their own paranoia might make sense in a few circumstances, these circumstances are just as valid for men as for women. Trying to claim otherwise is the sort of misguided stereotype that the MRM is attempting to change.
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:48 AM
9

The main problem is that admitting that men are systematically discriminated against in some areas of society turns on its head the narrative that so many people have an interest in keeping, and too many of those people aren't willing to give up their position of privilege, even in the face of insurmountable evidence. Hostility, dismissal, changing the subject, ad hominem attacks, moving the goalposts, straw man arguments and intentional misinterpretation of statements; all common responses peop…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:30 AM
4

It's similar. Relay for Life is an international thing, which Cancer Research UK are a part of, but the Race for Life is UK only, and is done by individuals, rather than in teams.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 05:04 PM
2

Just to clarify on this, it's not the workplace that set the rule of no men, it is the charity itself (Cancer Research UK, largest cancer charity in the UK).
/r/MensRights13/04/13 05:02 PM
2

The good thing is that there are some attempts to improve awareness of male health issues (Movember is one that comes to mind which seems to now just about get mainstream interest). But the big disparity is that such things tend to have to be started from scratch by men (and women) who care about these issues, where 'big' charities, NGOs, and government initiatives with more general goals are willing to put a focus on womens health (and in general, womens issues), but not do the same for men.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 03:25 PM
12

Up to 11, to which I think their argument would be a parent who wants to participate, and bring their child along. I guess it comes down to how you believe equality is best achieved. I agree, I'd much rather they just made it open to everyone, even if the focus was womens cancer. But I don't really object to the idea of women only events (though how much of their reasoning of the decision is based on male stereotypes is a different question), I more object to the fact that an organization which …
/r/MensRights13/04/13 02:00 PM
27

http://raceforlife.cancerresearchuk.org/why-is-race-a-women-only-event/index.html The TL;DR version is basically because their research showed that the women involved in it wanted to keep it women only, and they think they would lose money if they stopped excluding men from participating. There was briefly an equivalent mens event http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_for_Moore , which seems to me to just have been lip service to the idea that they should try to look as though they care about equalit…
/r/MensRights13/04/13 01:31 PM
3

If you click on the section of text shown, it will expand to show the whole page, where the quote is just a bit lower down the same page (page 29)
/r/MensRights13/04/13 01:01 PM
8

My personal opinion is that register-her.com is a bad solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. If the justice system didn't give these people a pass for frequently disgusting criminal behaviour, there would be no reason for this site. I do think sites like this are damaging to the image of the MRM, but they also bring publicity to some of the issues that men pretty much exclusively face in society today. The question really is what is the balance between the two? The MRM is already having its…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 03:53 PM
1

My personal opinion is that once you say that it's ok for women to have the option of an abortion, there is then no logical argument for denying men the right to withdraw from all rights and responsibilities towards a child within a reasonable period of time (usually equal to the length of time that women are able to abort). I think the only time I've seen anyone within the MRM argue against that idea is when they are also against abortion.
/r/MensRights12/04/13 07:53 AM
4

The question really though comes down to does feminism try to deal with men's problems? Because I've certainly heard many times from feminists saying that the issues we discuss here are being dealt with by feminism, but the reality seems very different. A feminism that admits that it only has the interests of women at its heart is one that frankly I would be ok with. I'd disagree with a lot of its premises, but it automatically validates the need for the MRM. But a feminism that co-opts mens iss…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 04:55 PM
-8

The difference is that the MRM doesn't claim to be the equality movement, just a part of the equality movement (alongside the WRM, egalitarians etc). Too many feminists disingenuously claim that feminism = equality, and is interested in mens issues.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 01:38 PM
-5

It's just a shame that those feminists ignore rape in 50% of the population.
/r/MensRights11/04/13 10:22 AM
4

The only good point though is that comparable data with a comparable methodology, we discover by feminisms own definition, over 50% of women are rapists. There's no challenge to these figures which isn't also a challenge to the figures that feminists quote. Either way, it shows that men are also far too frequently victims of rape, and that a gendered dialogue on the discussion is both misleading and pointless.
/r/MensRights10/04/13 08:02 AM
2

But by engaging, we are making sure that those who might otherwise actively side with the extreme elements of feminism, at least stay neutral. As a movement, we don't have the privileged position of power that feminism has built for itself. But if I'm honest, I find that the hostile anti-male radfems often do good work for us. It's such a blatant display of hypocrisy, for example to oppose female genital mutilation, but support male genital mutilation, that it makes people step back and realise …
/r/MensRights09/04/13 08:10 AM
1

But we have to acknowledge that the MRM has a bad image, partly due to being misrepresented by feminists and others, but also partly to do with the behaviour of some of the more extreme members who identify themselves as MRAs (even if we disagree with them labelling themselves as that). There are issues where we are so at odds with feminism, that there's no common ground (feminism won't acknowledge the myth of the pay gap figures they use, feminism ignores completely false rape accusations, and …
/r/MensRights09/04/13 07:57 AM
22

The first problem is that in the discussion of gender issues, feminists have both the position of power, and a public perception of victimhood. When challenging discriminatory law and damaging public perceptions of men, the MRM isn't working in a vacuum, and feminism's uniquely privileged position means that we have to engage with feminism in some way or another to push forward the issues that we believe are important for men in today's society. Once we accept that we need to engage with feminis…
/r/MensRights08/04/13 12:39 PM
1

Overview of Mod Policy: No linking to SRS or affiliated subs, or Gawker Media websites. If you want to discuss the article, the best thing to do is screenshot it, host it on imgur, and then link the album.
/r/MensRights06/04/13 02:24 PM
1

We're not about keeping feminism in check, we're about the rights of men. When something as simple as an academic lecture discussing some of these issues is attacked so vitriolically by radical feminists, then we'll rightly criticize feminism. When feminism stops attacking the rights of men, we'll have no reason to discuss feminism, it's just that simple.
/r/MensRights05/04/13 07:42 PM
5

Exactly. If this isn't what feminism is, surely 'true' feminists should be the first to be challenging these bigots, not only for their anti-equality actions, but also for misrepresenting the feminist movement. Either these feminists don't think that men matter, or don't disagree with the action of these militant feminsts. So we can conclude that feminism is either disinterested in the issues of men, so can put to bed any idea that it's a movement for equality for everyone, or actively seeks to …
/r/MensRights03/04/13 10:38 AM
57

My main observation is while those NAFALT feminists are so quiet about this sort of hostility towards those of us just looking for equality, by those who label themselves as a part of the feminist movement, how can they expect everyone else not to generalize all feminists as supporting this sort of bigotry?
/r/MensRights02/04/13 03:47 PM
18

Well to be fair, there is one valid point in that link. None of what is mentioned is 'reverse sexism', it's just sexism. Reverse sexism is just another linguistic trick thats used to try and devalue sexism against men, by trying to argue that it's less important or less prevalent than the sort of sexism women suffer from.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 08:56 AM
4

I understand the argument for it, that people who make false rape allegations are using sex as a weapon to damage other people's lives, so it is technically a sex offence. But in truth simply applying proper legal process and convicting those who make false rape allegations would be enough, I don't think it's neccessary to register someone as a sex offender. Maybe just maliciously false accusations should apply? (where there is premeditated intent to use the malicious false accusation to harm so…
/r/MensRights01/04/13 08:50 AM
1

The first problem with that, is that the figures that are often quoted by others stating that there is a large pay gap also fail to take in to account demographics, and other pertinent information. The original infographic makes exactly the sort of comparison you talk about, and finds pay gaps of between 1 and 4%. If the debate around pay gaps were based on these figures, rather than ridiculous claims of 30% difference, then there would be no complaint from the MRM. Secondly, one of the big reas…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 06:29 AM
1

I'm not an expert on issues regarding race, but the argument that seems best to make without bringing down the wrath of the overly PC sort is talking first about genetic predispositions for various illnesses which differ due to race (such as Sickle Cell disease in black people, Type 2 Diabetes in Scandinavia etc). It's an argument that no-one can object to, because it's based purely on medical statistics, and implies nothing beyond that statement (no-one is saying that because this is the case, …
/r/MensRights17/03/13 03:58 PM
4

The problem I see with this, and looking at the arguing going on here in the comments, is more with how the statement is being made, rather than what is being said. The site links to an article about a particular bit of research. There's no real detail as to the article, so it's difficulty to justify the validity or otherwise of the research it's based upon. But it's based on a specific scenario in a specific industry. My personal take on what is talked about in the article, is it all seems a bi…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 03:12 PM
1

Firstly, there are genetic differences between men and women, it's impossible for any rational person to deny that. The big problem a lot of people seem to have about that discussion though is that somehow they associate difference with implied superiority/inferiority, based on a value judgement of those traits. Physical differences are usually the easiest to discuss though, because it's much harder to argue for a social or cultural reason for them. On the question of physical strength, for exam…
/r/MensRights17/03/13 12:31 PM
4

The second quote is the one that frustrated me particularly. I don't believe that the police would not question why a complaint isn't pursued, or is retracted, if not just for the victims sake, to stop them being pressured out of pursuing a case when rape did occur. If the CPS was serious about looking in to false claims, surely they could have also recorded when these cases were withdrawn because the claim was a false one? Unless they were intentionally trying to hide such figures, just in case…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:09 PM
1

The MRM wants nothing to do with enforced gender roles. Issues such as forced male genital mutilation are nothing to do with feminism. We are critical of feminism, when it is the cause of discrimination against men, but anti-women comments tend to be downvoted in to oblivion, because we are in no way anti-women. And accusing the MRM of violence is completely ridiculous. There's not much more I can say in truth, if your view of the MRM is so far away from reality.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 09:08 AM
7

The difficulty from a MRM perspective though is that there are fundamental feminist beliefs, not unique to the radical sects of feminism, which we consider to be anti-men (such as patriarchy theory), as well as mainstream feminist use of misleading statistics to further their case (the wage gap one comes immediately to mind). Until mainstream feminists distance themselves from these things, it is almost impossible for us to become allies, because where the MRM may attack feminists, sometimes unj…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 09:06 AM
6

On chivalry, the most accurate thing to say as a group is that we are against the expectation of chivalry. There's no reason, in an equal society, that men should be expected to display particular behaviours just to please women, or other men. But if someone chooses to behave that way, then there's not really a problem with it either. The question about WRAs and feminists is based on a misaprehension that the MRA is solely a reaction to feminism. The MRM is critical of any individual or group wh…
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:49 AM
12

The criticisms of feminism within the MRM aren't generally based around the fact that feminism is focused on the rights of women. In fact, it's generally commented that we would be totally supportive of a WRM, as distinctly different to feminism. The big problem though is that feminists, and feminism as a whole seem to think that it is the equality movement, rather than a part of the equality movement. A common argument made is that if you are against feminism, you are against equality. In terms…
/r/MensRights16/02/13 04:02 PM
32

Just an observation I would like to make. Firstly, there is a difference between individual feminists, and feminism as a whole. If one ten year old quote is the only positive contribution that feminism as a whole has made to the discussion of male rape victims and child support, then the quote means nothing really. If feminism is not technically the enemy in this, it certainly doesn't make it a friend when the dominant voice in 'gender equality' is doing nothing towards making changes in this bl…
/r/MensRights16/02/13 09:07 AM
2

The simple solution is paternity tests as standard, then the whole thing simply becomes a non-issue. It doesn't fix every inequality in parental rights and responsibilites, but at least keeps the issues with those who are actually involved in having a child, and not some random man who has nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 08:34 PM
2

Those in the MRM are critical of feminism when it is guilty of attacking the rights of men, whether it's through the law or social pressures. An interesting comparison to make is that between the MRM's treatment of feminism and of the LGBT movement. Where there is crossover between the two, we are supportive of the movement, but in situations where there is no crossover, we don't take any sort of view of it (as a collective movement, not as individuals). We might individually support those goals…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 03:51 PM
11

I used to be a regular Guardian reader. While the hostile articles directed at men in the paper are nothing new to me, they had been making small steps towards a more balanced coverage on gender issues, at least by one or two authors. I am now no longer a Guardian reader after reading this article, filled with such blind hate and bigotry. It's just far too much, and there's no excuse for allowing it to be published.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 02:34 PM
1

It's a difficult situation to be in, but all I can say is good luck, as you are going in to it with your eyes open, and aware of the risks. I don't think there is much else to be said, someone observing the situation from outside it is right to be concerned, because they don't know the context of your situation. You've explained the situation to her, and say that she is showing progress. Mental illness is an explanation, but only partially an excuse. It might be worth talking to her about what y…
/r/MensRights27/12/12 10:23 PM
2

I wouldn't say it's quite a red flag, but it all comes down to what those things she has to say might be. But it seems like a win win situation, as you wouldn't want to get romantically involved with someone who blew something insignificiant out of proportion anyway, as you may be at just as much risk. But if it is serious, and seems plausable, then she would be right to say so.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 09:47 PM
4

For the call center (read: rape crisis center) at which I volunteer, up until very recently (due to a change in leadership), men were not allowed to be advocates (I don't want to be too wordy and explain what an advocate is; hopefully you folks know what it means). We have very recently allowed men to become advocates, but that doesn't mean that we have men rushing to become advocates: What do you think about women potentially responding to cases of rape against men? What do you think about men …
/r/MensRights23/12/12 07:00 AM
2

I have no doubt that the story has been sensationalized where possible, but I don't think that the core facts of the case are in question. The bigger question though is why are so many mainstream press titles completely blind to such stories, though if you reversed the genders involved, they would be all over it.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 03:25 PM
1

Mens rights are a part of equal rights, and because we discuss mens rights in the mens rights subreddit (as one of the few 'safe' spaces for discussing these issues), that doesn't mean that we don't fight for everyone. I'd argue that he would say he is a mens rights activist, as well as a womens rights activist, a LGBT activist etc. I've never advocated hating feminists in general, or any other group. But I am very critical of feminist theory, and those within the feminist movement who are advoc…
/r/MensRights10/12/12 12:02 PM
0

The only other ones I can find are the examiner (which is just as bad), and the huffington post (in which the story is only a few lines long). I've certainly not seen it in any of the UK news that I would read (and if it's in the news more frequently in the US, then that is fair enough, but I've got no way of knowing that).
/r/MensRights10/12/12 11:38 AM
4

But these same women are also usually the ones to complain when men show 'too many' feelings. It's rare to find a woman who wants a man to express his feelings, but doesn't care if it's not in a 'manly' way, and it's usually not those who are angry about men being closed off, but those who actually make an effort to be aware why society makes men feel like they have to be closed off, and are supportive regardless.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 08:59 AM
0

No difference at all actually. You can be a MRA and also fight against discrimination against other groups in society, and in fact, most of us do. The MRM always seems to have a positive opinion on LGBT rights, in comparison to feminism, where there is a big divide, particularly on transgender issues. This just shows that pushing for mens rights is pushing for equality.
/r/MensRights10/12/12 08:51 AM
3

The problem is that most of the news don't report on these cases. I hate the mail as much as anyone, but these 'isolated incidents' that we see new ones almost every day in here, all add up to institutional and systemic discrimination against men in the practice of the law. If you ignore the typical mail hysteria in the article (and the exaggeration in the title of this post), the underlying issue of a ridiculous child support system is an important mens rights issue, and the ease of the judicia…
/r/MensRights10/12/12 08:39 AM
199

The stupidest thing is that even if he was earning the maximum he had earned every year, the alimony is still over 2/3 of his income before taxes, which is quite frankly ridiculous, and enough to show that the judge in this case has nefarious motives. I'm surprised from the perspective of a european that such judges themselves aren't convicted of some sort of crime for intentionally and maliciously destroying another individual's life that way with no basis in reality.
/r/MensRights07/12/12 05:12 PM
2

Mainstream feminism is based on patriarchy theory though, which by its definition blames men, or at least puts men in a position of power that does not reflect today's reality. A man at the top probably does have more power than a woman at the top, but I would say that a man at the bottom probably has it worse than a woman at the bottom (again with the clarification that I mean in North America and Europe). Choosing the label feminism, over something like egalitarian, generally does indicate som…
/r/MensRights07/12/12 11:08 AM
3

I just want to pull you up on a small point, it's not women as a group we blame (comments that unfairly generalize all women tend to get downvoted significantly here). Feminism though gets a lot of criticism, both where more extreme elements do express misandry, and when mainstream feminists blame men in general for problems that women face, or are involved in advocating actions which disadvantage men. I agree, civil discussion would help, but discussion based on the idea that criticism isn't al…
/r/MensRights07/12/12 09:46 AM
1

It's a difficult question, because if neither party is considered old enough to give informed consent, then the law shouldn't try to blame either party, but there is a big difference between two 14 year olds having sex, and a 15 year old having sex with a 12 year old. My concern would be setting out a year's age gap as law would validate those who were having sex at that age, and are not mature enough to be doing so. We have a very strong understanding of brain development, and I've seen nothing…
/r/MensRights05/12/12 08:02 AM
1

While I'm not by any stretch a Libertarian, the sort of intrusion in to people's lives that all these criteria and needs for assessment isn't one I'd ever be happy to see in civilized society. The number of rules, then exceptions to rules, and the value judgements involved in making a decision, to get this system to work are likely to cause more problems than they solve. As I said, we can't protect every outlier, my own personal opinion is that between 16-18, the partner should be no older than …
/r/MensRights04/12/12 08:20 PM
1

The biggest reason why those systems that take some account for age gaps work, is that they take the understanding that there is unlikely to be a fiduciary relationship between two people of a similar age. I can understand what you are getting at when you talk about a system that disregards age, and replaces it purely on ability to consent, but such a system is impossible. Those most likely to be taken advantage of by such a system are those who are also least likely to be able to speak out abou…
/r/MensRights04/12/12 07:41 PM
1

That shows intellectual development rather than social or emotional development though. I'm not arguing that it's completely impossible for someone of that age to be mature enough to take such decisions, but it's very difficult to legislate for such extreme exceptions in a way that doesn't then bring considerable risk to the vast majority of children who aren't capable of making such a decision, however much they may believe they are. The link you gave seems a little confusing, but I'm not used …
/r/MensRights04/12/12 04:42 PM
1

Being technically legal doesn't make it right, and I find the example you give disturbing if it's true. While I do agree that there are some grey areas in what ages consent should and should not be able to be given, I can't see any situation where a 13 year old in a sexual relationship should be acceptable. They may not be strictly subsets of each other, though I would argue it's rare for sexual molestation of a child to come from someone who doesn't have pedophilic urges. The other side of that…
/r/MensRights04/12/12 08:44 AM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia is the definition I'm going on, rather than your statement about any man who has contact with a child he doesn't know. I made the distinction of active pedophiles, those who actively engage in pedophilic activities, but your definition of child molester is too narrow, in my opinion, to cover those who we should consider being on a sex offenders list. I would say that person had a problem, but not a problem that society should judge the person on. It's a pr…
/r/MensRights03/12/12 07:49 PM
2

No, I mean pedophiles, or at least active pedophiles. Child molesters are part of that group, but so are people who don't directly molest children, but actively seek out and trade in videos of others who do. Having pedophilic urges is a psychological problem, and is stigmatised to the point where those who may suffer from such can't seek out help, but acting on it is a criminal act. The hysteria so many people have over normal men having any sort of contact with children, and the misuse of the t…
/r/MensRights03/12/12 04:53 PM
2

It needs to be changed, rather than abolished completely, but also needs to be considered in line with other changes to imprisonment and rehabilitation. The only sort of person I feel should be on such a list is one who could be considered a serious danger to those around them, such as pedophiles and most rapists. But if you are putting someone in to society who you consider such a danger, there needs to be a much greater effort with rehabilitation; the government and police can't just say "they…
/r/MensRights03/12/12 01:04 PM
4

The problem is not in the statements, but how the feminist movement actually goes about dealing with men's rights issues, and more importantly, where the results of its actions result in increasing inequalities harming men, whether it tries to correct things. Mainstream feminism can be part of the solution for some men's rights issues, but is part of the problem in others, so there is naturally distrust of feminism in the men's rights movement while this continues to be the case. To give a compa…
/r/MensRights03/12/12 12:05 PM
2

I think some of the replies here show quite clearly what the problem is. Even within the MRM many make the same mistake of thinking that there is a way that these problems 'should' be expressed. Yes, men and women are different, and that means that they can have different ways of expressing things. But while feminism often disparages the 'manly' way of dealing with things, we have to be careful to be more open minded, however a man wants to deal with things. It's ok to cry, and to talk, it's ok …
/r/MensRights20/11/12 12:43 PM
14

I'd say look at it this way, at least the craziness is up front. A woman can demand whatever she wants, doesn't mean any man out there has to be crazy enough to say yes to it.
/r/MensRights19/11/12 01:50 PM
6

My personal opinion is that some of these posts are ok. Your first line I think shows the split well, woman doing something illegal to a man, for example, isn't enough to be a men's rights issue. But a woman getting away with something that a man wouldn't do because of their gender is a men's rights issue, because it shows a situation in which men are treated badly because of their gender, even if it is just an individual case. The article you linked is an example of one I wouldn't post on, beca…
/r/MensRights09/11/12 05:01 PM
6

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-26/commentary/32859540_1_gender-wage-women-staffers-higher-paying-fields
/r/MensRights04/11/12 05:59 PM
5

There are two problems. The first is that feminism often claims to be for equal rights for everyone, but as you say, there is a 'gender slant' to it. The second is simply that feminism often attacks the rights of men, which makes anyone who is actually interested in men's rights critical of feminism. The first means there is a need for the men's rights movement, and the second is why we criticize feminism.
/r/MensRights04/11/12 05:54 PM
3

Flowers are a feminine design but pink sandpaper isn't?
/r/MensRights02/11/12 12:08 PM
3

Simply, yes, the father should have that right. Obviously the details are the difficult bit (I've explained my POV on this a few times before, so wont do it again).
/r/MensRights02/11/12 12:03 PM
2

Pretty much on the first point, I'm not read up enough on the two to distinguish the difference between them, though maybe it's only how I've put it which is the problem. As I understand it, Libertarianism supports the idea of only enough government to enforce fundamental rights. Without property rights, an anarchic form of Libertarianism would only need government (or whatever form of legitimate power) to enforce individual liberty, where anarcho capitalism relies on privately owned force for c…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 08:38 PM
1

To be honest, I'm only passingly familiar with it myself (mostly through debating with people with these views), though I'm sure there's a subreddit for it. There are a few different types of left wing Libertarianism as I understand it, from Anarchic Libertarianism (no right of property at all, basically complete anarchy), to various types of Equality Libertarianism which say that natural resources should be split between everyone in some way with various qualifications on how to do so, from say…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 06:51 PM
4

I'm not a fan of Libertarianism in general, but while I wont go in to that discussion too much, I just wanted to make a note about part of what you've written (about ownership), in that it only deals with the traditionally american definition of Libertarianism, Propertarian Libertarianism (or right wing Libertarianism). I do think there is something to be said for this approach to equality of opportunity, but prefer a more non-propertarian, or left wing approach to Libertarianalism which provide…
/r/MensRights01/11/12 05:54 PM
3

I'd say even a lot of 'mainstream' feminists tend to have a fair bit of hostility towards the MRM, because we disagree with ideas they hold to be non-negotiable under their beliefs, even if they are not generally hostile towards men as a whole. It's more progressive and egalitarian feminists, who don't blindly buy in to a lot of core feminist dogma, with whom we have a lot of common ground.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 02:35 PM
9

The goal, to put it simply, is equality. Most of the members of the MRM believe in equality of opportunity; to put it simply, that there should be no legal barriers to equality, and that everyone should be on as level a playing field as possible. Dealing with unequal legislation, both in word, and in how it's acted upon, is probably the most clear cut issue where we all agree. Awareness is the second part of it, because a lot of the problems that men face in society are social, rather than just …
/r/MensRights31/10/12 01:24 PM
3

The difficulty here is the difference between social pressures and the law in gender issues. While I can agree with you that those changes in how women see issues such as sex and financial independence might help, none of those things changes the inbalance in the law, in both word and how it is applied, which causes women to get custody in almost all cases, unreasonable financial payments, an assumption that they are completely truthful in all cases of rape and domestic violence. While mainstrea…
/r/MensRights31/10/12 08:28 AM
4

There are two main reasons that those in the MRM tend to have a poor view of feminism in general. Firstly, and most obviously, is that feminism often creates further inequality, giving women advantages over men based on no other reason but gender, and ignoring inequalities that disadvantage men. The second reason is that we are attacked often by feminists, who want to misrepresent what the MRM actually stands for, which is bound to cause, in return, some hostility. Feminism is not the same thing…
/r/MensRights30/10/12 08:00 AM
1

If a bunch of closed minded bigots want to hate us, that's their problem. Communism seems to be very similar to SRS, in that they are entrenched in their prejudices, and aren't willing to even debate that they might be wrong. I think, in truth, their narrow minded hostility only causes any sane minded person to ignore them, which is a shame really, because I do agree with the core premise that class (or more accurately wealth), is the biggest divider in society today.
/r/MensRights30/10/12 07:45 AM
5

I think you're spot on with half of the solution for male sexual liberation. A woman can choose to have sex, and be liberated, or choose not to, and be in control of her body. Both are positive traits, but for men, if we say yes, it's because we're men and it's expected, and if we say no, we're weak. Men should be judged positively for their sexual choices in the same way women are, whether we say yes or no.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 04:33 PM
1

In the context of being judge and jury in a legal case, of course. But as a starting point for discussing the double standards in female-on-male vs male-on-female rape, and people's reactions to the victims of those rapes, not really.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 03:56 PM
0

Firstly, the OP doesn't suggest they were both drunk, just that he was (though it's a fair assumption that she could have been). But as I explained, everyone makes judgements based on the information they have, and the scenario that was described was rape. Whether what actually happened was rape is a different question, because we don't have all the information, but I wasn't commenting on that, I was commenting on what happened as it was described.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 03:32 PM
0

I'd say it's more that most people reply on the basis of the information presented to them, and on that basis, the scenario in the OP is rape. If information is presented which changes that, then everyone will then judge on the new information. Making it clear you don't want to have sex, repeatedly, doesn't suggest someone needs to be 'persuaded more', it means you don't want to have sex, and I would think ill of anyone, man or woman, who would put that sort of pressure on to someone else to hav…
/r/MensRights29/10/12 03:09 PM
1

I'm also worried about how easily people go from drunk consentual sex to calling rape, just because they regret it, but from the information that we have (which may not be everything), repeat explicit noes before the act say to me that this isn't the case.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 01:51 PM
1

Coercion expresses some sort of unwarranted pressure or intimidation, as oppose to persuasion which is what's going on in your scenario. That, combined with both the drunkenness and the explicit no which was expressed repeatedly, is enough to say that this situation was rape, assuming there is no other information which is being left out of the initial post.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 01:24 PM
-8

Also take a look at the rules for the subreddit. VIa. Men, White people, Heterossexual people set the oppressive normative standards of our society. Attacking such groups does not qualify as oppressive speech and is not equivalent to attacking oppressed groups. MRAs will be instantly banned. To be honest, it seems like these people are subscribing to a very blinkered form of 30 year old neocommunism, instead of regular communism as most of us would know it.
/r/MensRights29/10/12 11:52 AM
6

There are two issues here. The first is the drunkeness, which there is always disagreement over. I do think it is possible to consent when drunk, but it does depend on the circumstances. The second though is that he said no, and that makes this clear-cut rape, regardless of the issue of drunkeness. If he hadn't said no, they had sex, and then afterwards he said he didn't want it, there might be some grounds for putting some responsibility for the act on him, but that he did say no puts all the b…
/r/MensRights29/10/12 11:35 AM
2

It's the Mail, so I wont trust all the details there. It sounds to me though that the problem is not the mother (nothing seems to show that she's involved in demanding this payment), but the CSA and the legal system. There doesn't seem to be any indication that the mother is denying this was the arrangement that was made between them. It's just a case that the law wasn't able to catch up to the realities of people's lives, and the CSA want to take the letter, and not the spirit of the law, and s…
/r/MensRights29/10/12 11:27 AM
2

Poverty is probably the most obvious external factor, but I don't agree with those who would then say that prostitution and pornography are bad because people have to use it as a last resort, simply because it gets cause and effect mixed up. The problem is the cause of the poverty, not what poverty then causes, and this is another area I feel there is some detachment between a lot of those preaching about the adult entertainment industry, and those who are actually involved in it for this reason…
/r/MensRights27/10/12 11:25 PM
2

There are considerations to be made, beyond the usual questions of consent when it comes to 'adult entertainment'. There are wider issues as far as why some people make the choice to take part in the industry in the first place, both as providers and consumers, but there should be no stigma attached to these choices. If people enjoy it, and want to be a part of it, then fair enough, but if people feel as though they are pressured in to it through external factors, or forced to be a part of it, t…
/r/MensRights27/10/12 09:56 PM
26

I think you're partly right, but it is a more complex issue than that. There are three types of 'gender law' in my opinion (not sure if that's the best way to put it, as it's both about law, wider government intervention and social constructs, but I'm tired so it'll do). Firstly, there is equality of opportunity. This is the one which is least objectionable, as it simply means giving everyone the same chance to succeed, or putting everyone under the same obligations in society. Historically, thi…
/r/MensRights27/10/12 10:14 AM
1

Sure, that's no problem.
/r/MensRights25/10/12 04:26 PM
8

Well the first argument I would put forward is that it is far more equal than the current status quo, women having all the power of choice in these circumstances. We have to accept that it's impossible for any solution to give absolute equality, and I think this is the closest that is possible. Women who have abortions, excluding issues such as rape and serious health risks, do so because they feel they are unable to deal with the demands of parenting in one way or another. Maybe they are too yo…
/r/MensRights25/10/12 04:03 PM
9

Not really, the basis of the argument for a financial abortion is from a pro-choice position, one that states that abortion in itself should be acceptable up to whatever point in time is appropriate, and therefore financial abortion within that same period should also be acceptable. Once the option for abortion is off the table (when the pregnancy has gone beyond the time period where it's ok to have an abortion), so then should be financial abortion, which stops the issue of a child being born …
/r/MensRights25/10/12 03:12 PM
0

This is something I talk about a lot. To put it briefly, there is no argument that's pro-choice, besides the issues of rape and serious health risks, that can not then also be applied to men being allowed to sever all rights and responsibilities to a child within the same period that women can legally have the choice to abort a child. The practicalities of putting something like that in to law are complex (requiring everything from notification of the father within that period, or issues of iden…
/r/MensRights23/10/12 11:27 AM
3

I know, I took a look at the text, and then went from there to look at some of the original works, to get a better context for what was said. His opinion on women isn't relevent in itself, but given that I'm not knowledgable enough on historical law to be sufficiently critical of the work, nor historical culture of that era to speculate on the wider context of what has been said, his opinion on women does make me more cautious about how selective he may have been about the sources used, as well …
/r/MensRights21/10/12 05:15 PM
3

Unfortunately I'm not expert enough on either law or history to be able to assess this sort of work critically enough for my own satisfaction. I'm however concerned by some of the statements made by the author as to how biased he may be. The justification of these demands is based upon the dogma, that, notwithstanding appearances to the contrary, women are endowed by nature with the same capacity intellectually and morally as men - The Fraud of Feminism (1913) That, for example, seems to suggest…
/r/MensRights21/10/12 07:52 AM
49

The core problem with feminism, from a mens' rights perspective, is that it continues to be based upon the idea that patriarchy theory is true, and therefore that men have power of women, collectively and individually, across all areas of society. While this might have been true 100 years ago, today, in western society, this is not the case. There are specific situations where men have power over women, as there are specific situations where women have power over men, so coming from a basis that…
/r/MensRights20/10/12 10:33 PM
0

Thank you :)
/r/MensRights20/10/12 08:29 PM
2

We certainly shouldn't apologise for people who buy in th the PUA stuff, especially for the sake of those who would try to discredit the MRM any way they can. But that doesn't mean we can't discuss it, and look critically at it in the context of mens' rights. I personally find a lot of the stuff in it really rather repulsive, but there's no denying that it challenges a lot of false perceptions that exist in today's society in regards gender interaction, sex, and relationships.
/r/MensRights20/10/12 04:12 PM
7

The point is that those who consider male genital mutilation acceptable often talk about the supposed medical benefits as justification for their actions. Even if there was found to be some sort of benefit to female genital mutilation, such as this study hinted at, no-one seems to be suggesting that it should be made a normal practice the way male genital mutilation seems to be. The double standard here is in those who consider female genital mutilation unacceptable, but then make inane dismissi…
/r/MensRights20/10/12 03:11 PM
1

I'm really not buying in to this one. I agree with the first part of the premise, that feminism is in part the cause of a breakdown in some of how relationships worked in the past, but while it dealt with female 'roles' in the formation of a relationship, it did not challenge, and instead tried to add even more to male 'roles' in relationships. But to me, this article sounds ridiculous, jumping on board with as many false stereotypes of women and men as it can manage, and coming across more as s…
/r/MensRights20/10/12 08:06 AM
4

Doxxing is not the answer, the best way to deal with these people is to take the higher ground, but that is not the same thing as inactivity. Report their hate speech to the police, to the hosts of whatever websites they are pushing their hate speech through, and if that fails, go to the media to tell them how such hate speech is being tolerated by those who should instead be acting upon it. An often used quote here is "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 07:49 PM
1

Hypocrisy at its finest (TSR as a source though? Awful for anything not student related).
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:57 PM
2

Well The Guardian is known for it's complete bias when it comes to gender issues, and an article on discussing the difference between sexism and misogyny consisting entirely of feminist voices of various levels of extremism is just another example of that.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 01:10 PM
6

One french teacher, who thought that girls were much smarter than boys, and didn't make much of an attempt to hide it. When it came to the final exams, there were two tiers of exams. Basically the first was supposed to be for most of the class, but the second for those who were good with the language, which was more difficult, but allowed them to get a top grade overall in the year. Even though myself and a couple of other guys had top grades in the class, only the girls who had top grades were …
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:08 PM
1

I think the reason you're being downvoted so much for this is because it does perpetuate some of the stereotypes that the MRM is against. You had one bad experience with a taxi driver, who didn't in any way try to harm you, from his perspective he was probably even just trying to help, and from that are fearful that all male taxi drivers are likely to be a risk to you, rather than perhaps fearing getting in to a taxi at night with anyone you don't know is a risk to you, which wouldn't have recei…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 08:01 AM
1

I'd agree with the premise, that there is more discussion of feminism in the MRM, than the MRM in feminism, but would disagree about the cause of it. Feminism takes a view that men, in general, can be considered responsible for discrimination in society, through patriarchy theory and suchlike. The MRM isn't based on the same sort of general theory as feminism, it doesn't blame women as a whole as responsible for all the discrimination men do face in society, it tends to look at specific types of…
/r/MensRights13/10/12 05:37 PM
1

From my experience with people who are committed to label themselves as feminists, it's generally true that "the patriarchy" is a catch-all way of blaming the wrongs in society on men, even in situations where women have a good share of the blame on a particular issue. The problem is that its use always implies that it's impossible for women, collectively or individually, to be at fault, because they don't have the power or 'privilege' to do so. Your assessment though is a better one, but even s…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:35 PM
3

For me, it's not because I'm a man that I consider myself a MRA, it's because there is no voice for the issues that we deal with that is accepted and promoted in the mainstream in the way that there are so many with women. I think, if the MRM had the same level of mainstream exposure as feminism does, I wouldn't feel the need to be as vocal as I try to be on these issues, because I would feel as though the balance is there, and that issues for both men and women were being taken equally as serio…
/r/MensRights10/10/12 06:02 PM
3

I think an easier question to ask is if we are egalitarian, rather than bring the question of feminism in, which will make the discussion more difficult. I would argue that most of us would consider ourselves egalitarians. The men's rights movement has no innate hostility towards women in general, and only towards feminism in particular when we feel that it is pushing against equality. The difference between the men's rights movement and feminism is usually the approach we take on dealing with i…
/r/MensRights10/10/12 04:21 PM
2

What shocks me most is just how hateful this article, and it's responses are. It would be perfectly possible to have a rational discussion on the issue, but the article just tries to paint Colleen in as worse a light as possible, and misrepresents the situation at every possibility, which I think would push any sane minded person to be against the author. Transgender issues are complex, and I don't pretend to know a huge amount about them, but to me the only question that needs to be asked seems…
/r/MensRights09/10/12 07:37 AM
1

I don't like Galloway, and his original statement wasn't made as well as it could have been, but the NUS is a sham of an organisation for many reasons, and I'm not surprised that they have went and made those sort of slanderous accusations.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 04:51 PM
2

My personal opinion is the only way to create an adequate solution is for the state to step in and support the mother. There should be no assumption of a right to visitation when someone has been convicted of rape, but I'm also sure that someone would usually not want anything to do with their rapist in this situation, because of the harm that they caused them. From this, making this woman rely on her rapist for financial support seems insensitive, and causes this difficult situation to occur. B…
/r/MensRights26/09/12 09:41 PM
1

I agree somewhat. Homophobia is something we should discuss, along with many other issues in society which affect men badly. But I think generally the MRA have a good progressive perspective on sexuality, far better than the general population as a whole, and the feminist movement in particular, who I would argue are more regressive than the general population, particularly with male homosexuality, bisexuality and transgender issues. We don't need to look at the issue because men are particularl…
/r/MensRights22/09/12 07:10 AM
0

Ignoring for a moment the way the article is worded, which is blatantly misandrist, I actually think that these proposals are a good idea, assuming they are applied equally to everyone. Anyone who hasn't experienced first hand the type of abuse that people can dish out in this manner can't understand how abusive it can be.
/r/MensRights22/09/12 07:01 AM
1

I guess there are two aspects to this article that need to be considered. The first is the usual degrading of men in its language, though I have seen far worse. I think the author was, from their perspective, trying to be 'equal', but failing badly at it, and pulling out, as so many people do, the false rape statistics as some kind of evidence for the premise. The second though is on whether spaces segregated by gender are ok. For a very long time, feminism has been saying flat out that they are…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:20 AM
7

A lot of it is down to the aggression shown towards MRAs by feminists. It's very easy to be anti-feminist, when feminists are constantly attacking and belittling the MRM. That is the reason that so many of those sort of posts get to the top of the MR subreddit, because too many people still question the validity of the MRM; not only feminists, but in the population at large. These posts show that men are discriminated against and treated badly becaue of their gender, so we can continually valida…
/r/MensRights12/09/12 07:38 AM
4

The problem with these figures is that anyone can draw whatever conclusion they feel like from them. If I, from a mens rights perspective, wanted to use this information to argue discrimination against men, it would be very easy to say that this shows the damage of feminisation of the education process, particularly at an earlier age, which causes such a large reversal of the figures in that age group, when all other data points to the opposite being true in late teens and adulthood. Without res…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:41 PM
12

Misogyny is an easy word to throw around, and is used frequently by Feminists at MRAs erroneously. MRAs don't hate women as a whole, but we do dislike, at varying degrees, the particular women who are pushing for further inequality, and continue to stereotype and denigrate men. So it's based on their actions, not the fact that they are women, but I will concede that it's sometimes easy for MRAs to fall in to the trap of generalizing all women as being guilty of perpetuating the acceptability of …
/r/MensRights30/08/12 01:23 PM
4

No, he shouldn't have parental rights, and yes, he should pay child support. Where sex is consentual, men and women should have equal rights in all areas of the pregnancy (i've discussed my opinion on this before, so wont go in to it here). But we aren't in a situation as a society where abortion is seen as a universally acceptable action, so you can't really use the argument that in a situation where a pregnancy forced on to a woman against her will, and she chooses not to abort, that the rapis…
/r/MensRights23/08/12 06:30 AM
1

The easiest reply, in my opinion, is to respond with a statement to clarify that this person is also in support of forced genital mutilation in women, as all of their arguments for circumcision can equally be applied to women. If they are in support of it, then at least they are being logically consistant, and if not, then there's a huge logic gap which I would hope even they can see.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 07:18 AM
3

The only thing to do is keep fighting. Progress is occuring, and will continue to occur, but sometimes very slowly. Those who might feel put out by the push for equality will keep pushing back, trying to prevent progress, and furthering the disparity between genders wherever possible. Most people though just simply haven't thought about it enough, they are too used to the idea of feminism = equality. It will take time to argue or persuade those who are under a bombardment of misinformation, that…
/r/MensRights12/08/12 08:20 PM
1

I guess I would see this question from the other side, that it's not that MRA is neccessarily right wing, it's that generally it's harder to convince someone on the left wing, who isn't aware of the cause, of the importance of the MRM. Which seems bizarre to me, as someone who considers themselves left wing, as you wouldn't have the same problem in arguing against discrimination against women. But it generally takes having to face the idea that part of what the left wing has advocated for so lon…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 02:06 PM
3

This is a discussion I have had a few times, and it's a difficult one to resolve, due to the differing opinions people have on many aspects of this discussion. The major problem I have is when people take logically flawed positions based on some sort of hypocracy. From a religious perspective perhaps I understand the need for child support, as it would argue that abortion isn't an option. However, once you consider abortion as a viable choice, there are circumstances where the idea of removing a…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 08:58 PM
2

The only justification that seems to be given for it, is that other groups do it too. Sinking to someone elses level is not the way to deal with anything.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 09:36 AM
8

It's a disgusting opinion, no question.
/r/MensRights11/04/12 09:24 AM
1

I guess I didn't expand my point very well, but the reason I say it's the definition of equality is because no-one is (reported to be) behaving against their nature to act that way in the working environment. I could equally say that it's equality in a (stereotypically) female environment, where female behavioural norms apply, if the women treated both men and women the same way. I think it's a mistake to try and equate gender in this scenario with religion, and especially with sexuality... the …
/r/MensRights24/03/12 06:47 PM
1

The first thing i'll say is that I tend to automatically distrust the opinion that being a man automatically makes someone privileged, it's always just seemed a rather bizarre comment in the context of current day western civilisation. With that out of the way, my point was that the scenario described in the topic is the very definition of equality, no-one is being treated differently because of their gender. It happens to be in this case, what we would traditionally label as a 'masculine' envir…
/r/MensRights22/03/12 09:50 PM
0

There is no problem with this, right up until the point that they want to impose their own model of behaviour on others, which is where there is so much issue. Replacing one unsuitable model of normalcy with another does nothing, except change the group of people who are being discriminated against.
/r/MensRights22/03/12 12:29 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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