TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

DavidNatan Archive

View 5 posts and 398 comments by DavidNatan 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)
6

But those navel-piercings are hot. It's like fucking a girl and a fat stack of cash at the same time.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 06:30 PM
8

Jeezus or buy yourself diamond earrings. Or a diamond navel-piercing.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 10:36 AM
4

The 'problem' with feminism is that it's a political body just like every other political body ever. There's the idealism and then there's the actual work. Unfortunately, just like every other political party, feminism cannot act or legislate against the interests of women. Which often means that in areas where women are in the wrong, or where women have it 'better' feminism cannot do anything to change that. So it's a fallacy to think that feminism=equality, any more than any other 'social just…
/r/MensRights11/08/13 09:44 AM
15

It's like when feminists get pissed at the Red Pill and PUA, you've got an international hit magazine full of that shit!
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:42 PM
1

It's a joke lol, the guy wanted a citation, so I gave him a citation of the relevant bit of the other guy's post. Jeeze, have your morning coffee before you Reddit :P
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:43 AM
-7

Well excuuuusee meeeee... for not including Mr. Ten Percenter in my humorous generalization of how the world works. ;)
/r/MensRights27/07/13 05:34 AM
3

"I did the math once"
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:22 AM
-5

Which means we must re-invent the world in a more perfect set of ideologies, which would ensure that people are never mean to each other anymore... or wait you said you got older! Right! Which means we must compromise most of our ideals that matter, leaving us barren shells of street-smart and people-skills to lead the rest of our lives saving up for college funds for our kids, bitter and resentful, which would ultimately lead our kids to a sort of idealism of their own, when by contrast or by c…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:20 AM
-1

The whole thread is full of people shaming him. She has a better attitude, granted, but as I said and is apparent in the title, the post is about the thread, not her own take on it. Lastly your romantic take on sex has nothing to do with the reality of sex-related laws. The different rules you so easily discard are there for a reason, because sensible as you might be in the heat of passion a lot of people have and will continue to hurt each other without them.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 12:01 PM
-1

Sorry, sex is in a different category from any other form of coercion or contract between people. For example drunk people can legally purchase stuff, sign contracts, give consent to everything except for sex. Why is it that this higher standard is applied to sex? I'll let you figure that out. My whole point is not that she shouldn't dump him if she's unsatisfied, but that nobody has a right to tell another person what they should do during sex. Nobody. Ever. That's the beginning middle and end …
/r/MensRights26/07/13 11:37 AM
1

Exactly. Validation from others is important as well, but you have to be the basis for that validation, and also receive it from yourself first, and then from others. I don't find the poster offensive, I would switch around the genders and suggest the same for women, looking for Mr. Right.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 09:01 AM
3

Does it really matter what his reason is. The most common reason why women refuse oral is because they think it demeans them and they lose respect with the man. If a sex act causes you anguish being coerced to perform it in any way including being shamed for your choice as an adult is nothing short of rape. The reason for not doing it might be a good reason to break up with him. That's what responsible adults do. But shaming him for it is absurd.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:59 AM
25

Yeah, a series usually isn't a video per year. But whatever if you're happy about it, that's all that matters. It's 'your' 150k :)
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:46 AM
31

http://www.youtube.com/user/feministfrequency?feature=watch She raised 150 000$ and produced 2 videos more than an year later. I call that a fraud. She completely abused you and the feminist idea, for her own profit, and you're ok with that? With all that's happening to women globally, you're ok with giving 150k$ to her?
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:29 AM
1

there's always bigger fish to fry, but based on the comments of that thread that little fishy of a problem has a population of several million
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:21 AM
-1

yup, exactly my point
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:20 AM
-2

That's cute, but that's not how sex works for the final time. It's not a deal about giving and receiving - it's hoping that what each person gives satisfies the other. As I said to the OP of that thread, by all means leave the relationship if you're not satisfied. My beef with that thread is not that she's unsatisfied, it's that the comments blame the man and call him 'damaged goods' 'defective' 'an asshole' for not being OK with certain sexual acts. There's nothing selfish about receiving head …
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:19 AM
2

So it's reasonable to call someone damaged goods, 'defective', an asshole, 'not a man', etc. because they refuse certain sexual acts. Because what you imagine has nothing to do with the comments in that thread. Go read them again. The majority is saying that he's not a real man if he doesn't eat pussy.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 06:13 AM
-1

That's not how sex works. If you like giving head and she likes receiving head that's fine and dandy. If you hate giving head or she hates receiving head, going through with it is rape no matter who owes what to whom. You can't legally owe somebody a sex act, against your will. Not even with prostitution, the prostitute strictly dictates what acts he/she's comfortable with.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 09:49 PM
1

Just imagine if sex worked that way - I gave you anal, so you're obliged to let me anally rape you against your will, because sex is about reciprocating exactly what you get from the other person.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 08:16 PM
2

Yeah it's an old story. The blog layout also reminds me of that guy who had a disclaimer in the same format under the banner, saying something about the 'traditional family includes mom and dad' in the sense of anti-gay-marriage who used to post sort of recycled stuff here before. It's not by any means a default blogger layout so I'd say same dude, different account or one of his readers. http://www.yourwebsite.com/nativecanadian.blogspot.com/ This is the site I'm referring to the red text under…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:18 AM
1

Article says "July 1, 2013" at the top, and "Happy July 4th" on the top right - so... Ah the past, when magazines came out once a week, it probably came out on the 1st and was supposed to cover events from the whole week. As far as the world caring for men, this is an ad for GARDASIL. Not saying it detracts from the good it does, just that the motivation is purely trivial.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:12 AM
0

You can be right and still be an asshole about it. He's supposedly there in some capacity as a representative of some union of traders/fishermen/whatever. If there wasn't a mike and an interpreter between him and that woman and the buzz that he's speaking to the EU parliament feminists (reportedly some of the most absurd kind), I doubt he'd be that disrespectful.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 07:08 AM
0

This title is bullshit. The woman said nothing like that. She said she was arguing on principle, and the guy was a complete dickhead about it. He started with asking a very reasonable question about whether her intentions were intellectual or legislative, she answered accordingly that her intentions are intellectual. He ended up with a dumb joke comparing women working on a boat to men being mermaids.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:56 PM
9

Don't forget suicide induced by not being able to write cursive.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 04:35 PM
1

What kind of soap opera does this woman live in?
/r/MensRights25/05/13 02:06 PM
1

"This blog supports the traditional family. Family includes Mom and Dad. Family is the strength of a Nation." Whether you agree or disagree with the sentiment the mere existence of this cute little disclaimer as the first thing after the banner should have been your first clue.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 12:13 AM
1

This is simply an extension of 'women are fragile and gentle and need to be protected from the big bad word' into 'women are fragile and gentle, and need to protect themselves from the big bad world'. The entire time you're assuming women must naturally make the best choices for themselves, side on caution and long term goals, and wait for the gorgeous alpha prince to come along, and take her away to a world of safe yet fiercely passionate sex and intellectual degradation. So no.
/r/TheRedPill22/05/13 11:37 PM
-4

he would be able to be Yep, sounds like the US, alright.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 01:00 AM
89

Yep, dictionaries are concerned with how words are used not whether that use is politically correct. So the definition is right.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 05:21 PM
10

"This blog supports the traditional family. Family includes Mom and Dad. Family is the strength of a Nation." Oh you! Bullshit and nationalism in the first three sentences. You sure know how to lose me. Keep warm in that cave.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 05:11 PM
1

"Would a gender tax designed so it would be about men paying higher taxes because of that there is still an unexplained pay gap of around seven per cent in favor of men." That's the root of the issue right there. Before you can explain it it's as good as fiction.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 05:02 PM
3

It's such a pervasive trope: "I nearly married that chick. I didn't care that she already had children." I mean sure, I admire men who do that and are able to build a happy life for the kids and for themselves, because that's what it really takes. Being able to be happy yourself. Burning yourself out doesn't do much for anyone. The problem is a lot of men who get into that situation are kids at heart who burn out, ruin their own lives, and leave even more scars for the kids to bear.
/r/TheRedPill08/05/13 10:14 PM
1

I don't think so. I think you can develop a taste for cock, so to speak, but that wouldn't change your ability to fall romantically in love with the same sex. Maybe in an utilitarian purely logical sense love, but I doubt anything more than that.
/r/TheRedPill08/05/13 10:05 PM
1

I don't have any info on it, but I'm inclined to trust Stephen Fry's portrayal of him in the film Wilde. Which is that he was not completely aware of his feelings and what they meant, or was suppressing them, until some point after he had married. But he was thoroughly gay, not a drop of heterosexuality in him, and any comments about women would have came from his unbelievable perceptive abilities. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhfZwKNz7Xk It's a terrific and terrifying movie, I really recommen…
/r/TheRedPill08/05/13 10:03 PM
1

Yeah I think it might be easier if those people aren't included under the same label at all.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:31 PM
2

The fact that the sex offender label is casually misused doesn't mean that a lot of sex offenders aren't actually exactly the kind of people who would threaten somebody at gunpoint. It's an issue of fixing the sex offenders registry, not a moral clairvoyance trip on whether we'll do more good by giving all sex offenders guns or not.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 12:27 PM
2

History fail. Seriously, study this shit a bit more. You read that one thread on Reddit and a binary switch in your head flipped from "Dark Ages were ultimate anti-science." to "Dark Ages was a fine day for science." Eh, whatever. As far as individualism being too vague I mean individualism as opposed to working towards a goal through any form of authoritarian compulsion. There's no doubt that humans perform better when they have a degree of freedom, even if they're conforming to a million diffe…
/r/TheRedPill08/05/13 10:49 AM
2

I've said many times before that I'd like to completely ignore Jezebel's existence, because they've proven to be trolls. So I'm not raging. I just hope this doesn't in some way give them legitimacy, because either some dumb MRA or a malicious SRSer decided to fake an article.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 03:53 PM
2

I'm not saying it applies, I'm saying that first of all it's true in the real world, and secondly it doesn't change my opinion of Jezebel. It wouldn't change it even if it was not a fake.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 03:49 PM
5

Give yourselves a break, the first half a dozen times you have no idea what you're getting into. I think the problem is that male promiscuity burned out of fashion around the early 00s and all the guys I see suffering right now are those who tried to make it work, and lit. threw their lives away trying to save their 2nd or 3rd long term relationship. edit: Male promiscuity burned out while female promiscuity is only going higher and higher (the way that it should be IMO, it's just that some guys…
/r/TheRedPill07/05/13 12:34 PM
3

Actually from my experience women tend to push you into the mold of a sort of father figure, and act in all the same ways that they did as a child. They see you as a person who's obligated to love them unconditionally, and thus obligated to perform when he is threatened to be cut off from her part of the relationship. They're not trying to make you feel like a child. They're trying to make you feel like the shitty parent of them and they themselves as the innocent victim child.
/r/TheRedPill07/05/13 12:04 PM
3

"At least stupid males are struggling to reproduce" I very much doubt that. I'd say intelligent males are much more likely to seek out an intelligent woman to reproduce with. Which is much more likely to result in one or two children. A stupid male on the other hand doesn't need game or anything much for the women he's going to go after. Children will probably be 3-6. As far as social Darwinism - the rich and successful today are richer more successful and more powerful than at any other time in…
/r/TheRedPill07/05/13 09:29 AM
1

It's just that the party line today is that what is good for girls is to reinforce and reassure their nature, while what's good for boys is to completely suppress it.
/r/TheRedPill07/05/13 09:18 AM
1

The EU mostly think this way. Parts of the US are still married to the idea of 'rightful' vengeance though, sadly.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 01:29 AM
8

But I thought feminism took care of everybody's issues, by magically or shall we say Marxically defying the most basic principles of how political representation works. Namely that no single group can unilaterally provide equality for all because no single political group is free to take away rights or benefits from the people who elected it.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:42 AM
12

If they wanted to make an impact they should have cycled between several abusers/victims of all possible gender options - as in Scanner Darkly - quickly so the gender and race become indistinguishable and all that remains is the concept of the victim and the abuser. Now that would have been in every fucking news source and on every social network by the next day, but they had to go with the party line.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:35 AM
3

I think the main problem here is that the best girls team in anything is one with the maximum number of boys in it. So for the sake of retaining competitive play in girls sports it makes sense for teams to be segregated by gender. Other than that I didn't know girls were at greater risk of concussions? Is she saying girls are clumsy and slow, because I can't think of any other difference that would make female skulls and brains any more vulnerable.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:27 AM
1

But most of the time you can't know what you don't know. Of course if you're unsure of something saying you're sure about it would be a blatant lie.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:55 PM
5

A country full of reasonable well adjusted and truly independent and emancipated women? Whose nation's first born children do we have to murder before we get there?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:47 PM
-6

I call false flag. Jezebel is notoriously anti-male anti-MRA etc. You don't need to make shit up to make Jezebel look bad. Jezebel is already rock bottom. Beyond that whatever Jezebel thinks it is in fact illegal in France for one example for a father to get a paternity test. That is exactly the reason the fake/real article presents - that it is in the interest of the child to remain in a two-parent family, and the father's interests can therefore be ignored. Extending that to include an effort …
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:32 PM
9

Western society became great through individualism. Not because there was strong and smart men more than in any other society, but because we allowed ours the degrees of freedom necessary to excel in what they did. Islam became the ruin of the ancient Arab arts and science, Christianity forced Europe into the Dark Ages, every religion everywhere made men and women either abject slaves or apathetic observers, either yearning for the release and false promises of death, or yearning for nothing at …
/r/TheRedPill06/05/13 09:53 PM
5

But you can't promise to be correct. You can promise and swear not to lie. You can't promise not to be incompetent, ignorant, confused etc. That is for the court to decide.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 08:07 PM
2

I don't think you can swear to tell what you don't know. That is even though you might not be lieing you might still be wrong.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 07:27 PM
6

I don't think they have a legal obligation to be correct. To not lie, maybe, but to be correct would be impossible to enforce.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 07:03 PM
3

What some people would assume is unfortunate. TED has themselves explained on numerous occasions what the situation is. In any case it shouldn't hurt you in any way. If someone tries to push their pseudoscience through TEDx, first point them towards the wiki article on 'arguments from authority' then explain to them what the relationship between TED and TEDx is. https://www.ted.com/pages/organize_tedx_event http://blog.tedx.com/post/37405280671/a-letter-to-the-tedx-community-on-tedx-and-bad-scie…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:51 AM
1

Wrong. Marketing is based on telling you what you ARE with our product, not what you are NOT without it. Even for something as basic as working in retail you're warned NEVER to use words like 'not' 'doesn't' in other words don't tell the customer what the product is not, but instead speak only about what it is. Where have you ever seen an example of an add that makes fun of teenage girls' body image and tells them black on white that having a certain skin condition WILL cause them to lose their …
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:03 AM
4

That is the shittiest way imaginable to go about marketing your product. By making your customers insecure. That's low. That's the lowest of low. Still not particularly sexist, other than it's using a she for an example. Could have been a he and it wouldn't change the meaning or the level of soul-draining evil.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 11:20 PM
2

Not really I think FB has a policy against drawings as well, otherwise FB would be full of mangas.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:02 PM
2

Enjoy your social suicide, unless you're absolutely brilliant.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:59 PM
17

"As I grow older I realize that I have been a complete failure because I half-assed my moral integrity, so now I'm throwing it all away and hoping to conquer by brute force and violence alone, using the same dirty methods I so vehemently used to oppose." Because what good is all your integrity if you end up dead before your childish utopian delusion is fulfilled.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:55 PM
1

I don't think individual women have any idea what they mean for themselves when they say 'nice guy' let alone feminism, on behalf of all women. This is bullshit. With the same level of clairvoyance I can predict what the next girl that I'll find attractive and intellectually challenging will usually like having for breakfast. At some point there came this trope that women need to have some kind of mental blueprint for what a perfect guy looks like, or otherwise they don't have standards or some …
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:47 PM
13

TedX is not an affiliate of TED. TedX is organized by various groups on their own money and arrangements and submitted for hosting on the TedX website. So think of it as a subcontracting thing. TED only provides guidelines but doesn't micromanage the content. So it's almost as free as YouTube, you just need a stage and a speaker and some people to clap.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 07:47 PM
2

Saying that bad things happening to bad people is okay is just childish. Implying that if he had a good intention or motivation, that would make the rape wronger is also childish. The Prison and Judicial system being viewed as a form of punishment is also childish. Rape is bad because it's rape - not based on who it is happening to, or who's doing it.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 04:33 PM
6

Don't turn it around. If you rape your wife, you're going to jail right now as opposed to having to maybe pay a fine later. It's a law that forces men in the position of sex slaves to their wives. So if the wife isn't happy with the sex she can sue the husband for compensation.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 04:20 PM
3

I've never heard anyone say that a single parent household no matter which gender the parent is is better than a two parent household. Maybe religious extremists with relations to gay couples. As far as who the single parent is yes the song tends to go along the lines of "The kids may want the father, but they need the mother." or some such bullshit.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 03:27 PM
3

‘Surprisingly, the advantages of dual parenting were also passed along when these two groups reproduced, even if their offspring were raised by one female.' Or you know those advantages are based on other factors, since they're present in dual parenting and single-parenting mice. WTF Calgary - this is the least convincing shit ever.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 03:25 PM
1

TEDx is a DIY TED venue anyway. TED doesn't actually want to micromanage or approve each submission, they only submit guidelines and pull videos down in only the extreme cases of pseudoscience. That having been said, I'm very wary of YouTube-titled speeches.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 03:01 PM
2

News flash. A woman's body doesn't belong to herself. It belongs to feminists whom it might be offending.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 02:52 PM
3

There was some talk recently of whether or not it wasn't time for Judaism to move on from the practice, and it was coming from less orthodox/secular Jewish people themselves. I think that's the best possible scenario. Of course I don't see it ending anytime soon, but if there can be an agreement culturally that it's not necessary in order to be accepted in the faith, then it would be a lot easier to take the next logical step of looking at it with the same disdain as non-orthodox have for the ex…
/r/MensRights04/05/13 12:25 AM
8

Here's a list of their users from the first 5 pages for your RES tags: http://pastebin.com/i3FsYPqz Read this if you want to merge it into your existing tags manually: http://www.reddit.com/r/masstagger/comments/1dc17k/infopost_what_to_do_if_you_absolutely_want_to/ Or use this web-site I made to create such lists, just copy your old tags into the Old Tags field, run a search and it will automatically merge them: http://dnatan.github.io/grandmaster/
/r/MensRights04/05/13 12:05 AM
8

It's more than mildly annoying that first of all when a woman does the same thing she gets a slap on the wrist, and secondly I've never seen the news title framed as blatantly as that. Imagine if they called a woman false-rape accuser an 'attention seeker' or condemned her in such strong language. Usually every attempt is made to do the opposite and hush it up using as much gender neutral language as possible.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:31 AM
4

I don't base my reaction to ideas on what I think about the suggested victim of those ideas.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 09:21 AM
4

Even the fake rape threat aside with its effects on feminist agenda, trying to destroy a campus organization by means of fraud and libel is not a victimless crime. Contrary to what Marcotte thinks a victim is not limited to a woman who's just been raped/oppressed/paid77cents/etc.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 09:05 AM
55

"then your labia and clitoris need to be completely cut off" You'd never hear the end of that scream because your eardrums would explode near the end of the first 10 seconds. Genital mutilation is such fun when talking about men.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 08:51 AM
4

The problem as with all downtrodden people is that being wronged doesn't make you a good person. It just makes you wronged. We have such a fetish for victims. I should know, without going into the details of it. Did I think so highly of myself for it that I'd have built myself a temple if I could afford it? For a while, yes. Then I became aware of my own utter lack of significant qualities and sought out to educate myself. These days I've developed a fetish for being right.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 10:15 PM
8

I see it as a symptom of their authoritarian mentality. The disease is the belief that one group of people can successfully dictate what equality is for all. Political representation does not work that way. Dictatorships do, but you can hardly call that 'working'.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 10:06 PM
1

It's like trying to come up with a word you'd forgotten no? Just let go of it, do the dishes, iron a shirt and it might come to you. Or something else will. For what it's worth that's the only secret worth knowing about expressing yourself in an appealing way.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 10:03 PM
7

No. You will never be able to help it. You'll always be referred to some sort of side-bar rule to shut you up. The best thing you can do for women is to be a strong example of what one can achieve without subscribing to or calling themselves feminist.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 05:25 PM
15

That's bullshit if you're buying drugs alcohol and cigarettes for kids there's no way you're not aware they're kids.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 12:46 PM
1

YOLO, I wanna be meta too, can I be the devil's-devil's-advocate as performed by Kristen Stewart?
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:54 AM
1

I don't think it qualifies as rape if you don't really feel like it, but rationalize that it's probably good for your career, then start completely playing along with it. Unenthusiastic consent to unpleasant and awkward sex is still consent.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:11 AM
2

Her rant at the end gave me chills. I mean she was so calm and yet so meticulous and to the point.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 01:15 PM
1

The theoretical communism was based on a classless society without money or property ownership, which is the best level of equality you can achieve. The practiced communism added another stage before that can be achieved, at which point a government party was formed, the upper classes were branded enemies of the people etc. In theory that stage would be dismantled when the people were equal enough so they could abandon money and property altogether. In practice of course that never happened. Fem…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:19 PM
16

Well, that's how you get stuff in politics. That's how political representation works. In that sense I don't in any way blame minorities for it. That's why feminism can't exist in a vacuum and expect to achieve equality by themselves. They can't and shouldn't be expected to represent everyone. Either you're a highly political organization who demand 'stuff' in the broadest terms for the people who put you there, or you stick to writing blogs and books and holding rallies and stay out of politics…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:47 PM
1

In absolutist terms, yes we are every single one. A good relationship is built on the moments that make you forget that.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 10:11 PM
5

Of course, if a man cheats on a woman, the man is an asshole. If a woman cheats on a man, the man must be an asshole.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 06:15 PM
0

I thought it might be useful, since I mentioned the tags in another thread here, and people asked me how to do it. When I explained it it turned out the list was long outdated. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1cxi7w/another_influential_journalist_defames/c9l1rep So I made this, to fix that issues, I thought it's relevant because SRS are one of the main driving forces against MRA on Reddit, and it would be useful to be able to spot them immediately on any thread around Reddit.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 12:17 AM
-2

Nope, I've only ran it with the setting to go back 5 pages from the front page. It takes longer to go through more pages because I read a while back that if you make a bot for reddit you should set it to request not more than one page per 2 seconds. 25 threads per page is 50 seconds per page. But 5 pages is hundreds of users and I don't think anyone cares to know who's been posting to a subreddit since the beginning of time. Or if they do they can set it higher and leave it running in the backgr…
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:47 PM
0

I have to learn how to use github.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:40 PM
-2

I'm not advocating in any way, harassing people simply for their affiliation with SRS :P But it helps if you have a tag to tell you what a person's agenda might be. In my experience whenever a SRS tag pops up in a normal thread, I get pretty much exactly what I paid for.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:36 PM
0

Yep all you need now is to follow the tutorial on how to add batches of tags to your RES. http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/111rsl/how_to_tag_all_srsers_through_reddit_enhancement/
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:22 PM
-1

It's in the pastebin up in the original post. I made the program so you can update it every now and again. It's just that it's static and with new users it eventually gets outdated. You can also generate a similar list with any tag you like for any subreddit you want to.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:21 PM
0

Hmm, that's weird. Here's the .rar with all the stuff in it: https://mega.co.nz/#!P8xEQSjb!NLsDZAO0ikZbVDq8NLdC6H-XDx0YJIXMB2dOqHa_PN4 Mega shouldn't be asking you for registration.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:19 PM
0

Sorry about that, RES is free, and it's quite popular on Reddit. Whenever you see someone talking about tagging people, that's what they're referring to. http://redditenhancementsuite.com/ All you really need is RES and that pastebin. If you want to create your own lists you can use my code, but that's it.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:12 PM
0

You have to install Reddit Enhancement Suite. http://redditenhancementsuite.com/ Then follow the tutorial here, in order to add the list to the list of your RES tags. http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/111rsl/how_to_tag_all_srsers_through_reddit_enhancement/
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:11 PM
0

No probs: here's the list for the first 3 pages of AgainstMensRights: http://pastebin.com/d5TKS2hd
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:09 PM
0

http://i.imgur.com/oSfrxfz.png Oh yes, that's what the final thing looks like in RES. You can automatically spot users and it works in any subreddit.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:07 PM
-1

Oh yes, first of all you should have Reddit Enhancement Suite. It makes Reddit nicer and you can tag usernames of people with various tags and colours so you're reminded who they are when you see their posts or comments again. http://redditenhancementsuite.com/ Then over here you have a tutorial how to add whole lists of tags to RES at the same time. http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/111rsl/how_to_tag_all_srsers_through_reddit_enhancement/ Lastly what the program does is generate a list …
/r/MensRights23/04/13 11:04 PM
-1

Yep, you can download the whole Dropbox folder. Read the Instructions.txt then run the start.bat file. You'll get a command prompt window which will ask you for a bunch of stuff. First it'll ask you for a subreddit name in your case it would be againstmensrights Then the number of pages to search (starting from the top page on that subreddit going down) Then the Tag you want and the color and lastly the file name. After that it will search every thread in that number of pages and generate a txt …
/r/MensRights23/04/13 10:59 PM
0

It's not about censoring them, although that's possible, but I'll have to add it as an option. It's just so you can immediately spot them in any thread outside of /r/ShitRedditSays so you don't waste your breath on them. It also works with any other subreddit.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 10:50 PM
1

All the ones that have comments or posts there right now.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 06:11 PM
1

Yeah it used to be better when I first got it. The list hasn't been updated for a while, I guess. Okay It'll take a few minutes but I'll make a bot in java to dump all the usernames in an appropriately formatted txt file. edit: Here's a pastebin of the Usernames I've collected from the first 5 pages: http://pastebin.com/TmapRztY Use that with the instructions from the above link. I'll post the code in a few minutes. Link to thread with code and program: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comment…
/r/MensRights23/04/13 06:01 PM
2

http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/111rsl/how_to_tag_all_srsers_through_reddit_enhancement/ I use this - it's not perfectly automated but it has a huge backlog of accounts who post on SRS.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:39 PM
3

I have a thingy on my RES that automatically tags people who post in SRS for me. Maybe they have something similar. But it's pointless really. Ad-hominems shouldn't impress anyone inside or outside of Reddit. As far as that guy - never heard of him. Looks like he talks a lot and way ahead of himself: https://twitter.com/WillardFoxton/status/326673180422987776 Now he's playing the affable simpleton. Great - shit on some people then excuse yourself with being willfully ignorant.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:12 PM
46

I don't get what's the point of posting this here. It's obviously designed to enrage MRAs. It's thinly veiled bullshit. There's nothing to discuss or debate about it. I say forget about Jezebel's very existence. If you try in any way to engage it you're only giving it more credibility.
/r/MensRights23/04/13 05:09 PM
1

That's absolutely amazing. I hope they find a broader audience for their ideas.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 03:15 PM
56

It's intentionally engineered to be divisive, so I suggest we collectively agree to forget about Jezebel's very existence. Please.
/r/MensRights19/04/13 02:08 PM
1

The exactitude of every single word an attorney must extract from themselves, demands destroying any emotion that might affect the quality or color even in the slightest the meaning of ones work.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:25 AM
-2

How drunk is too drunk to consent is about as abstract as how young. At some point it's too young. That's why you ask for an ID card if in doubt. In absence of any laws concerning blood alcohol levels and consent, don't sleep with drunk chicks, you don't know. I think the right thing is the same rule should apply to drunk guys, not that it shouldn't apply at all.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:00 AM
9

Now this is the kind of advice I'd keep on the low down, just for friends, or maybe friends of friends. Suddenly the amount of desperate straight guys in gay bars increases tenfold.
/r/seduction11/04/13 01:04 PM
1

They'd been divorced since 2007. The incident happened in 2011. I doubt codependency would have been an issue 4 years after a divorce. Even if they were living together and in a relationship (I can only assume since nowhere does it say that for all we know he might have let her live with him out of dumb sympathy or Cthulhu knows why) in 2011 she can't claim she couldn't foresee a possible break-up since they'd already been divorced for four years.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 11:20 PM
1

Well I'm sure being forced to perform anything at gun-point is already pretty illegal for other reasons. But yeah raping yourself doesn't mean much unless you want to include Hollywood cinema and go a good distance into allegory-territory.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 01:00 AM
3

Words, often disregarded without merit simply for being too strong.
/r/MensRights04/04/13 12:57 AM
2

By being correct, compelling, tastefully authoritative, non-trivial, and by not being wrong. Whatever voice you choose is up to you, I can't give you a panacea answer to every question about MRA, the best advice I can give you is have every argument of yours as a examined and explored personal thing, rather than as a true-sounding borrowed formulaic thing. I once watched the first five minutes of Pi for some reason. Not Life of Pi, just Pi that movie by the guy who made Requiem for a Dream. Anyw…
/r/MensRights03/04/13 11:56 PM
6

Just keep it gender neutral. Everybody knows how male on female rape happens. People have difficulty imagining how the opposite happens. What is the physiology of the penis being erect, even though the man doesn't want it? How does that happen exactly? Research that, look into the relevant cases, instead of asking us for a shortcut. Educate yourself rather than trust our opinion. Not that we're lying, it's just that we're speaking in conclusions like any other people who have been exposed to som…
/r/MensRights03/04/13 11:34 PM
2

The whole idea comes from the theory of 'objectification of women' the idea that men turn women into objects in culture and everyday life in order to belittle them as human beings. Now then, a woman can't objectify another woman, because women are pure, can't commit rape etc. etc. female sexuality is beautiful while male sexuality is inherently rapey. Male sex workers are a result of patriarchy backfiring on men, and it's quite amusing to them to watch men suffer, for that same reason.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 08:24 PM
10

Convicting a man based on a woman's story is no different as a mode of thinking than acquitting a woman based on her made up story. Two sides of the same coin.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 08:17 PM
2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA This is an amazingly good summary of the issue, by GirlWritesWhat. It's worth watching even for the sake of making yourself familiar with what's already out there, so you don't repeat it. And believe me - she covers condenses and motivates what's out there, like nobody you've ever seen or heard.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 08:07 PM
15

A movement is characterized by all of its followers, good or bad. What wouldn't be fair is to deny them affiliation, because they're uncomfortable. It's not some kind of mind-blowingly radical idea for feminists to oppose sex-workers, so much that it deserves to be decoupled from feminism. The differences are only in the execution, not in the theory.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 08:02 PM
3

So if the woman doesn't slander the husband in front of his child and the court, she deserves a lighter sentence.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 07:23 PM
33

Yeah. I get the 'tits out' thing when they're protesting everyday stuff to get more publicity, but 'tits out' at a strip club is kind of redundant isn't it. And what's with physically assaulting the strippers? Does that make sense in anyone's mind? I hope the one that pushed the stripper gets a couple weeks in jail. Not for punishment, since in Europe we at least claim to rehabilitate, but as time to think, without the influence of her Femen palls.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 06:36 PM
2

She's promoting books about the afterlife. Take a clue. The problem is criticizing MGM is a PR suicide with regards to the critical mass of hurt feels it generates in the Jewish political body in a matter of minutes. She's bringing up FGM to improve her PR, not fuck it up.
/r/MensRights03/04/13 06:06 PM
1

That's the thing, traditionally mothers spend much more time with the children, hence there's much more opportunity for mistreatment. Which is why OP's finding is not shocking in any way, but it also can't lead to any conclusions about women.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 05:04 PM
2

"Using sexual content in a way that causes harm to another should be seen as sexual harassment" No.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 10:30 AM
1

No, for the same reason we don't cut hands off when you steal something. You're playing around with the meaning of the word sexual predator, to twist it into meaning - someone who hurts somebody else in the vague context or distant proximity of sexuality. Just because rape is involved as a concept doesn't make a false allegation the same as rape or assault.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 10:25 AM
2

That's an SRS thing though, I'm not saying /r/AskFeminists is SRS, just that they're equally complacent with banning people. In a way they're worse. SRS is completely transparent about their position. /r/AskFeminists masquerades as a source of wisdom on feminism.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 11:32 PM
7

They still ban for 'unpleasant speech' though so be careful.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 10:04 PM
2

Sadly your friend understands the current state of affairs in India very well and is making use of it completely unscrupulously. He's on the wrong side of history of course, but who in their right mind gives a fuck about that, when there's an entire life to live.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 09:16 PM
3

No, they'll ban you for having an unorthodox/incomplete view on feminism. Even /r/AskFeminists or whatever its called is no exception. You can't have a debate in a safe space - that's the begining middle and end of it. Either its a debate space where feels get hurt and I MEAN HURT BAD, whether you want it or not, or its a safe space. Trying to pose as being both is completely absurd.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:12 PM
1

What I don't get is of all the procedures that require doctors to touch girls why did you choose abortions? In the end the tattooist didn't have the training and license necessary to work, so your outrage is irrelevant. Would you let someone who doesn't know how to handle sterile stuff puncture you with a needle 500 times per second, let alone touch your kid?
/r/MensRights31/03/13 03:08 PM
32

Remember that any sexually colored interaction must be initiated by the woman to be okay. Unless the woman expects the man to initiate, in which case him initiating might still not be okay, at her discretion, based on how he performs. The difference between unwanted sexual attention and wanted sexual attention is wait for it... if the woman wants the attention or not.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 07:51 PM
1

Well, we're pretty much the only ones who fit the stereotype. Let's be fair - Breivik is so white, it's going to take years of non-white mass murderers to influence that perception.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 07:25 PM
0

That is dangerous thinking right that.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 07:04 PM
3

Well if he's not licensed firstly its illegal for him to perform tatooing, because he's not licensed to handle and maintain sterile equipment. Then pretty much everything else about it becomes very illegal too.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 07:01 PM
1

The first law is idiotic, provided that tatooists are trained medical professionals (on the level of nurse I think for the sake of being able to handle and maintain sterile equipment). The second, I simply don't know how you make that connection. Is it simply because a doctor's touching a girls's lady parts? Lots of procedures require doctors to do that including regular check-ups. Why abortions of all things?
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:58 PM
17

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7D7nOh57-I8 Yes, here's the interview with a Swedish sex worker, talking about how the law actually makes women much less likely to work at home, because their land-lord has to evict them if he ever catches them, or the landlord gets sued for pimping. I think that particular Swedish law has been mentioned more than once here.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:50 PM
32

I think Sweden's simply in the business of providing mental health care to anyone who might have even the slightest indication of needing it. If the laws treat women who sell sex as victims NO MATTER WHAT and that is important to understand, then it's normal for the buyer to be seen as mentally abnormal. By definition - not because I believe in it or justify it.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:47 PM
3

Millions of dollars in damages is a small price to pay for any feminist policy. Where have you been all this time?
/r/MensRights30/03/13 06:44 PM
20

Dongle euphemisms are the worst kind of euphemisms. Imagine the flash-backs every time you use a USB stick after a trauma like that.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 05:33 PM
2

Some women are suffering in India. I know! Let's randomly prosecute almost everyone for frivolous charges! That will stop the rapists! Wonder if they took a clue from America's War on Drugs. If not themselves, at least by proxy from their imported feminism.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 03:47 PM
18

It would also be highly illegal, unless you are a woman, and you're getting everything in the divorce anyway.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:58 AM
6

I think the point is the woman will reluctantly stick around and offer herself for various sexual purposes and as a general brightener of rooms, when other people are around. Even though she knows she deserves better, which is why when nobody is around, she WILL make your life Hell with and without reason, and if you truly love her you must suck it up. In fact the only way to show your love is through the act of enduring her torture. You dirty fucking patriarch.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:53 AM
20

What's culturally instinctively and emotionally pleasing is almost always wrong.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:47 AM
-1

No, that's exactly how MRA understands it. It's still sexist. If it's mutual then a word like chivalry is completely unneeded. It's just two people taking turns caring for each other.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 08:28 PM
2

Actually it's just that. "Give us the vote, but not the draft, kthnxbye!" crickets You can't white-wash that which was never white to begin with. Unless you know you wanna throw a bucket of white paint on it.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 12:18 PM
1

That's a very bad working environment, you're describing but the Google example implies that a parent with a child is equally as likely to have to fill in for a guy on a LAN party as a single dude is to be filling in for a parent attending a school play. That's the only situation, where the Google procedure even makes sense. We'd need more information to judge it better. But what I'm saying is there shouldn't be any incentive to not take time off, as long as there's restrictions on how much you …
/r/MensRights06/03/13 05:30 PM
1

Bonuses hardly if ever apply to gross work hours. As in dumb work is not rewarded in bonuses - smart work or productive work is rewarded from my experience. If you work more hours you'll likely have more opportunity to fill in bonus quotas in whatever you're doing. That's all you're entitled to for 'hard' work. (Of course assuming you're paid by the hour, or based on quantifiable productivity, as I've said earlier) As I said bonuses shouldn't be given to someone, just because they have failed to…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 03:54 PM
1

20-something billion dollar company at stake. Must be just Yahoo being PC or AA about it...
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:46 AM
2

Abandoned WW2 pontoons set up in international waters and lots of rafts. NO drawing maps on kids backs though. That should be a rule.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:40 AM
1

If everyone has been given the same opportunity and restrictions for accommodation I don't think it's fair to divide people based on how they are making use of it. Please take your camel-mentality, and read through the rest of Zarathustra. Telling your employees they can't go to their kids play, is the same as telling them they can go, and later on penalizing them based on the work ethic of people who don't have kids or anything else in their life (Google treats "kid's play" the same as "COD LAN…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:32 AM
1

Or maybe they thought suggesting that a Googler who's been there since pretty much the very beginning (20th employee to be hired) is getting ahead by sleeping with the boss, would be met with ridicule, especially since Google has always had a halo of perfection, free love, mystic crystal revelation and the mind's true liberation surrounding it.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:20 AM
2

They're worthless and powerless, because they can do nothing in the real world except spout world-peace beauty-pageant lines. They're also used as cover up for radfems, who parade them around to show how justified and peaceful feminism is. It's an age-old trick - do the dirty work behind the scenes, and collect a group of cute little children to be your public face. Remind you of every power-hungry ideology ever?
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:13 AM
5

It's only Romeo & Juliet while it's cute. If we don't think it's cute anymore send the boy to jail. Meanwhile if a 30 year old woman sleeps with a 15 year old boy, the boy has to pay child support and feminists drop wisdom about how the courts can see through statutory rape laws, and rightfully judge the acts as consensual.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:28 AM
6

They're just starting to make it illegal in Europe.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 12:22 AM
4

Of course I'm assuming you're being paid either by the hour or based on productivity. Otherwise consistently covering for somebody else without it being reciprocated would be idiotic.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 09:26 PM
1

From the kind of 'news' articles I'm reading about her, I'd say throw it in the trash dumpsters where she lives, and it's going to be printed in the papers the next day.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 09:25 PM
4

Actually the quality of being able to put up with grunt work is very unlikely to earn you a promotion, IMO, unless you're spending that extra time on activities that earn you extra experience outside of the grind. If you're covering up for somebody, you're likely just doing more of what you already do well, rather than helping your supervisor with supervise-ish stuff as you could do given the right circumstances, if you wanted a better chance at a position like his. And we don't know the exact c…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 09:17 PM
5

Meaningless speculation with regards to what a private organization would or would not have given to their CEO. As far as who's pissed, I only dare to suggest you are, and attributing your outrage to anyone else in the company is a mistake.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 07:55 PM
2

As far as I'm concerned as long as she has the favor of the board of directors, she can do whatever she likes as long as she's within the law. If you think it's unfair, take it up with the regulatory mechanisms of the US law that applies. Otherwise it's pointless talking about it. You don't own that office space either, the board of directors acts on behalf of various parties as if it does, and hence assigns its use accordingly. Seems like for people like you the CEO model of management is inher…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 05:43 PM
21

Didn't the court rule that the arrest was justified, how can they sue anyone?
/r/MensRights05/03/13 05:20 PM
7

We're talking about gender equality here, not equality between the means of a CEO and the means of a worker. As far as the legality of it we can only scoff at what she does with her own money, and there's no requirement for any company to provide their employees with day care. Should she deprive herself of the benefits she can afford? That sounds to me a lot like what the feminists are demanding of her, only in the opposite direction. Punish her for not taking time off because it hurts women's c…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 03:28 PM
5

As far as the AdSense story I think she did the best thing possible. It was pitted as either Gawker made shit up or the Google employee made shit up, in an argument of essentially who came up with an idea, Google or a company Google owns. It's idiotic. So Mayer broke that up by providing an alternative third story, allowing for the whole thing to be dismissed as both parties in the argument being equally confused about the actual thing. That's why she's a CEO, not a Supreme Justice. As far as th…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 02:53 PM
12

Also, worth noticing - the implied negative connotation of the word 'meritocracy' as if it's demeaning or at least gravely unfortunate for a woman to be forced to get ahead by playing the game by the evil 'patriarchy's' rules. And not because she's suffering any ill consequences from it, but because it doesn't allow her to spend time and effort off of work to campaign for movement-feminists ideals.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 01:38 PM
5

All I'm saying is she did above and beyond what is expected of company policies in the case of Google. How much of that was her fault and how much Google's work culture's fault is a different topic, but she was in charge of that decision.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 01:31 PM
4

Yyyyyyyyyyeeeaah... no. Sorry. Gender rights take a step back with regards to the right to not have your home demolished, your land taken and a fence built so you can't go into your own towns anymore. Maslow's hierarchy and all. And above that it's not a matter of 'winning' it's not a game or a war. It's an act of soft genocide through apartheid and enforced poverty. As far as how much this is related to Men's Rights. Only as far as my analogy goes. I think I've motivated it as best as I can.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 08:32 PM
6

This world is not a place where valuable items are taken and given away based on moral considerations. In any case there's nothing justified, or honorable in displacing one population to give another population asylum. If you buy the 'land without people for people without a land' bullshit, then you'll buy anything else regarding Zionism. The Zionist Aliyahs to Israel started long before WWII, the Holocaust was just the final tipping point that gave them credibility and legitimacy. http://en.wik…
/r/MensRights04/03/13 04:28 PM
0

Whether they evolved independently from each other, or what I believe is more likely, third wave feminism borrowed heavily from the hugely successful self-victimizing tactics of Zionism, is irrelevant. The two operate in exactly the same manner. Posing one group as the victims, while the other as the villains, so naturally anything the victims do is justified.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:55 PM
2

Yeah, well the template for feminist theory today is Zionism. 'Unique Snowflake' to discredit any woman who disagrees, the belief that their actions are just no matter what, because of how wronged they were. The indifference to trampling male rights, whenever it benefits women, since men are the Arch-Enemy and by birth aggressor. Only men can commit acts of ter... I mean viol... I mean sexual assault and domestic abuse, since if a woman does it she's just defending herself. We know it's wrong bu…
/r/MensRights04/03/13 10:55 AM
2

I see roughly half of those countries being same-age. 27 out of 56 are same age. 13 are not in Europe. (Russia counted as Europe because why not.)Out of those 13 four have same-age. So 23 out of 43 countries in Europe listed have same-age retirement ages. I agree it's wrong but there's much greater inequalities, much more pressing and much more consequential like circumcision for example. If we can change people's minds about circumcision, as in help them see it in the same light as female genit…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 11:06 PM
2

Money as well. Huge money for VAWA related research, to reaffirm and solidify the bias against even the slightest possibility of men being victims as well. They're basically funding themselves to come up with more research to justify funding themselves.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 02:07 PM
4

If I am wronged that makes me good. The more wronged I am the more good I am, until I am faultless. If I belong to a group that is wronged that makes me wronged too. Ergo women have no other choice but to create utopias whenever they assume power. If some women do not live up to that they have been psychologically ruined by men. Feminism in as little words as possible.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 11:36 AM
7

Sweden indeed has a very broad definition of what constitutes sexual assault. A woman can withdraw consent DURING sex, without so much as saying anything to the man during or after the act and years later claim she was 'raped' since let's be honest this term nowadays is indistinguishable from sexual assault for matters of media or even statistics. That's the case Assange is facing now. Under Swedish law he's accused of the woman having withdrawn consent after the act based on that supposedly he …
/r/MensRights27/02/13 10:29 AM
3

You're a self-hating j... I mean woman, and a special snowflake. You might be beyond redemption like those poor little sex workers, and we might have to forcibly save you from your own self and your wrong ways. That is all. Sincerely, feminism.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 10:24 AM
18

Then she's a special snowflake and a self-hating j... I mean woman.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 10:13 PM
1

How is he treated like he's guilty, they're holding both in custody, because that's the only way, they can be sure they've got the right one, when the one million euro DNA test that will tell them apart comes back.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 02:02 AM
1

But what OP was saying before he deleted his stuff was that it's an atrocity for them to be even held in custody while a one million euro DNA test tells them apart. I mean sure, let them go free, we'll just run another one million euro test to tell them apart again before the sentencing. It's not a matter of convicting both or convicting the wrong one - it's a matter of them having to stay in custody, because that's the only way to make sure the DNA test has any meaning at all.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 01:56 AM
1

The reason why I'm asking is because most of your thesis is based on asserting that the poster compares CRAZY feminists to NORMAL Christians. That's all.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 10:57 PM
1

Blackstone formulation refers to punishment, not keeping a suspect in lock up until you run a fucking DNA test.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 10:53 PM
1

Did I just witness the opposite of being called sexist for disagreeing with a feminist... my my, how quickly you learn. You didn't answer the first part of my question. Is it normal for a Christian to believe in the War on Christianity. Oh an btw I'm not afraid of MRAs splitting up in opinion. I'm afraid of MRA turning into an echo chamber as senseless and outrage-loving as feminism.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 10:44 PM
1

It's six rapes, they have two suspects who are Equally likely to be the offender, and are spending ONE MILLION EURO to solve the case with SCIENCE. I don't know what six rapes is in term of years, in France, but I'm guessing it's more than half a lifetime. So it's fairly reasonable to keep the suspects locked up, in case they, I dunno - try to fucking skip the hemisphere.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 10:42 PM
-1

The twins are only held until the tests come back. They're spending one million Euro for a DNA test that's going to solve it. Fucking chill. We're turning into feminists with dicks with regards to the outrage we show to completely standard police practice. The only injustice here, is a bunch of mouth-breathers from the part of the States that still believes in the death-sentence are writing stupid shit in the comments. Anyone surprised about that?
/r/MensRights12/02/13 10:11 PM
4

Oh you mean endless self-victimization and suffering a paralyzing fear of the war on Christianity is a normal behavior for the average Christian? I think you got an idea before reading the full post and were already locked in "confirmation bias" mode by the time you were writing this post.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 09:33 PM
2

Can't words be defined logically as well as semantically? I mean it's a term in sociology if nothing else. It can't be open to infinite interpretation.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 11:28 AM
5

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=75c_1355109936&comments=1 And have you seen feminist reactions to him. It's like watching the Red Army in full blown kill mode.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 11:25 AM
37

The Valorisation of Chris Brown - stopping men? What am I now unpaid police? Fuck off.
/r/MensRights11/02/13 11:02 AM
4

Take the best orgasm you've ever had... multiply it by a thousand, and you're still nowhere near it.
/r/MensRights10/02/13 05:45 AM
6

Judges shouldn't have the power to sentence people to prison over insults. It still wouldn't have been reversed if it was a guy who did that. The case wouldn't have been covered at all if it was a guy. Imagine the news : "Boy flips judge off..." ten hours later (10 readers saw this...)
/r/MensRights09/02/13 01:30 PM
1

It's called Lulu and it's likely infringing on a well-known Worldwide Self-publishing service's copyright. http://www.lulu.com/
/r/MensRights08/02/13 11:25 PM
5

You mean she's going to be more careful speaking her mind in matters that involve PR, while continuing to apply the rule. Such an extreme belief on her part won't change, unless she's fired and people learn EXACTLY why she's fired. People in positions like this are way past the age of re-education, and we can't force them to change what they believe in nor should we. Simply fire her and be done with it.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 04:36 PM
84

On the topic of Germany, Nazi Germany practically invented animal rights, if you support animal rights you're literally Hitler.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 03:29 PM
33

Actually the right thing in that situation is to knock her out cold. You're not expected to protect the well being of your attacker if you're assaulted, quite the opposite you're expected to incapacitate them in any way possible and call the police.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 05:48 PM
2

The only other kid is the evil guy, and I don't think you can kill him at least not in his kid form. The other people there are adults as far as I remember.
/r/MensRights30/01/13 12:22 AM
1

Actually it does - if you make a film about the USSR you can't be labeled a commie, simply for sticking to the facts about the USSR.
/r/MensRights29/01/13 10:42 PM
8

I've never been penalized for shooting women in any video game I have ever played, unless it's civilians in general, and then shooting men or women doesn't make a difference. On top of that Call of Duty 2 used to have women soldiers, since women were conscripted in the Soviets army. Seriously where the fuck did you come up with the idea that women don't get killed in video games, or that its somehow worse than killing men? edit: Children is the only taboo in video games currently - case in point…
/r/MensRights29/01/13 10:36 PM
1

It could be unconstitutional if it was found to be discriminatory against common law couples, based on historical precedence for ostracizing such couples. Instead the court decided that it is not discriminatory, because the difference in treatments of the two partnerships comes from categorical differences in them, and that spousal protection should only be enforced by the government in the case that the partnership was explicitly declared to the government in the form of a marriage, instead of …
/r/MensRights26/01/13 03:40 AM
14

You realize that if you're making an argument from pragmatism you can justify the Holocaust, no? At some point you have to draw a line to what is acceptable to sacrifice from your own standards for morality, in order to achieve whatever you or your in-group believe you should be entitled to. Alternatively feminists can at least have the intellectual honesty to not claim to be for equality, but then you could make the point that intellectually honest people aren't making any changes either. I'd s…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 03:19 AM
8

The severity of a crime isn't related to the sanity of the criminal in any way. It's the defense that often resorts to claiming temporary insanity, because it often lessens the sentence. It's only the idealistic sheltered nature of humans, that a defense layer has a better chance of successfully claiming insanity if the crime is a taboo. We don't want to be thought of as even CAPABLE of doing something as horrible as that so we'd rather claim the person was insane/a monster/a demon, and avoid as…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 02:00 AM
1

Reading comprehension. Because what happened is they found her insane during the trial, then later claimed that she had been cured. Nobody's claiming that she was sane when she killed her child. Some people in the comments are even saying that killing your child automatically makes you insane, which is about as reasonable as another proposition in this thread - to tattoo criminals foreheads with their crimes. In other news - blind outrage is half of what makes extremist-feminism and extremist-'a…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 01:52 AM
6

I think the burden on proof is on you to provide a case where a woman was charged with raping a man, when BOTH of them were drunk. I like and agree with what you say in theory. But we can't ignore reality for the sake of political correctness. It ends up being just as wrong as being biased against women, just in the opposite direction.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 12:53 PM
-1

If by 'a really shitty lawyer' you mean 'a penis' then yes.
/r/MensRights19/01/13 12:19 PM
10

"..that feminism and trading places with men only occurred to women when technological and economical factors meant that for the first time it meant trading up, not down." Brilliant! I love every single video of hers.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 01:52 PM
2

Heroin is also an amazing experience once or twice.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 04:49 PM
23

Actually /r/AskFeminists is exactly the same. Has the same rule about top level comments. Bans just as much for just the same reasons. case in point
/r/MensRights14/01/13 11:29 AM
5

took a while but I found it
/r/MensRights14/01/13 08:42 AM
16

It's shitty but these days having sex with a girl whom you doubt might be even slightly on the crazy side is like banging against the insides of an electric switchboard with a hammer, and we've all seen that gif. Women have the power to ruin your life if they so much as regret having had sex with you. Considering that this guy was extremely lucky.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 10:43 PM
3

Sure, but it's /r/askfeminists - a place where on a good day you'll have women telling young girls that in order to be a feminist all you need to be is 'not a misogynist' which I personally find hilarious. Very few of the people who post there actually come from SRS which is why they're convinced that the feminazis are some mysterious mythical creature, only spoken of when men want to bash feminism for its black sheep. Turns out they're no golden standard for objectivity either.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 04:48 PM
14

Same here :P link1 My point - shortcut terms for dismissing other people like 'mansplaining' lead to party-line mentality especially in an environment as heavily moderated as feminism. SRSer objects that 'Ain't no body got time for an actual argument.' and compares feminism to an academical environment that is somehow disrupted by 'mansplainers'. I suggest on the Internet with an anonymous handle she can't make arguments ad auctoritatem and all in all shouldn't think of herself as an academician…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 12:40 PM
1

"Yesterday, an Education Department spokeswoman told The Advertiser the parents' letter had been received and the department was seeking advice." When a boy is the victim they need external advice to even decide what they're supposed to do...
/r/MensRights10/01/13 11:05 AM
24

Which is exactly DerpaNerb's point. Just get a woman to scream rape and stab your victim a few times.
/r/MensRights06/01/13 06:39 AM
4

What they don't get is that nobody is obligated to 'include' them, except for the staff who are being paid to be there. From then on it's up to the courtesy of the other students. But yeah it's hard getting out of your family where you are the undisputed center of attention into the real world where you're a cumulative product of your qualities.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 08:06 PM
131

Apparently the MIT grant is for girls only, so it's going to significantly fuck with the MIT people's ability to do their job without looking like assholes/bigots with the guys in the room. I like this idea.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 03:09 AM
2

Slate is a rag, I've given up on reading. Their articles are sometimes interesting but most of the time they're simply engineered to cause outrage in hope of views.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:23 AM
6

http://journalstar.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/wilber-woman-pleads-to-attempted-prostitution/article_9f0cac0a-0b9c-594d-abc6-e15adda6ec43.html Full story.
/r/MensRights04/01/13 01:18 AM
1

good luck
/r/MensRights03/01/13 09:02 PM
1

I'm not saying it because it's difficult lol, just that its naive, frivolous and plays into their interests. You're not in some magical Dr. House position of power where anybody tolerates you because they need you and you can afford to be "Just right." YOu have to be political as well if you want to achieve anything.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 08:57 PM
3

Yeah... I'll have to say that is not going to go in a million years... Given that the status quo right now is that we're childish assholes who have no real problems other than being pissed off at women for no reason, I don't think that arguing against the semantics or rape destroying lives is going to lead us anywhere than to more ridicule. You're just going to give them more reasons to call us rape-apologists. Instinctively you want to challenge them where their baseless accusations hurt the mo…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 08:14 PM
13

So why don't we allow female genital mutilation in a sterile clinical environment, but instead we ban it and force parents to choose riskier options done by amateurs often in a third-world country?
/r/MensRights03/01/13 07:36 PM
2

I don't think there's a mentality of 'single mother = bad' here. There's instead a mentality of 'look here's a woman sucking at parenting even though feminists tell us women = best parents' so that's what you're picking up on.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 07:06 PM
5

We've been sucking at college so much, lately, that they might affirmative action us. Those bastards!
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:42 PM
0

By giving credibility to a radical feminist offshoot aimed at converting every atheist convention out there to a radical feminist manifesto, maybe?
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:30 PM
5

No, I'm saying that not all should automatically be expected to, because that's the stories that go on reality TV shows. And I'm mocking OP for thinking he's blowing our minds with the proposition that some victims can learn to live normal lives after being raped.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:12 PM
0

However you'd like to rationalize shit, it's still shit, and believe me shit like this will come back to haunt us.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 04:16 PM
-5

Pointless semantics. You're arguing on the meaning of the populist phrase 'destroy ones life'. de·stroy /diˈstroi/ Verb 1)Put an end to the existence of (something) by damaging or attacking it. 2)Completely ruin or spoil (something). So yeah, destroy means both end and 'completely ruin and spoil'. Believe it or not, starting a sentence with 'believe it or not' probably means you think you've just blown our minds with the proposition that some rape victims can learn to lead normal lives. How can …
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:48 PM
1

As I said whether she is or not is irrelevant. Nobody's going to look at that video and that article and think... hmmm maybe he has a point even though he's obviously editing her words out of context to make her look extra crazy.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 12:25 PM
2

If you just read the article you have the parts TF edited out of context in bold and you can see how damning it is to him, the fact that he included her rant about security making her look absolutely paranoid, talking about buddy-programs and being raped and murdered, without including her whole story involving a stalker and death threats. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant, but TF has a responsibility to not assume that everybody knows and agrees with what he's talking about especially when…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 12:11 PM
3

So you're saying that because we're right and we know it, it's ok to take Watson's speech out of context. Because we already agree with the party line, we might as well make convincing everyone else as easy as possible on ourselves. I like your rhetoric - crystallized instead of edited... Am I really missing the point, when I want higher standards for MRA than what the Fempire does? Because every movement starts with a few people who are brilliantly correct, then gradually become lazy in upholdi…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 11:27 AM
1

Last time I saw a gun-apologist, they were on about how if you 'really wanted to save children' you were better off saving the millions starving in Africa, instead of the 20-something dieing in this massacre. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=416064151796666 Notice how the quoted text starts with 'gun-control' in the first sentence of OP's post, and the article claims to explain the REAL reason. The fact that this steps on MRAs toes is a bit of a coincidence really. Other articles by the s…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 10:32 AM
0

To be fair he had a point about Rebecca Watson's talk being taken out of context, in order to make her look like a paranoid nut. Shit like this is hurting MRA's case and giving Atheism+ undue legitimacy.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 07:03 AM
2

Good, I see we've achieved SRS levels of pointless outrage.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 06:48 AM
1

Why not make that standard court practice. I can't imagine any situation where the gender of the two parties can be relevant at all. The problem is the identity of the two parties will have to be protected, and the media feeds on court cases like crazy, so the rule of money says it's never going to happen. Or actually - the jury is already kept in a sort of media-blackout -they're the only once you'd have to withhold information about the parties sex anyway. That sounds much more achievable. Hav…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 06:34 AM
2

"But even in the widest and most robust network, common sense and liberal-democratic moderation are not going to win the day" First of all common sense is a bit of a paradox - it implies that sense or knowledge can be derived out of thin air or intuition - not too ministerial you'll have to agree. Second of all - wasn't the point of liberal democratic moderation... well liberal democratic moderation? Thirdly - what the hell is a Women's Rights Minister?
/r/MensRights03/01/13 06:19 AM
4

The part where he was showering while it happened is what struck me... Sounds like after the third time she changed her story her lawyer was like "Okay, well fuck this... just tell them it was self defense..." btw the video on that article is pure entertainment concentrate with the pulp. edit: omg its getting better the reporter just called the woman a moron...
/r/MensRights03/01/13 05:42 AM
1

With my link to the Daily Mail above, I think we've reached maximum saturation of crap*... but meh I CBA to find another one, and the DM link has plenty of info. *actually maybe we can find a way to work an Ebaumsworld link in as well! Get on it!
/r/MensRights03/01/13 04:09 AM
2

I guess you could although I CBA to try. I read an article somewhere that the whole 'social network' had 700 active users and 1400 reviews in total.
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:49 AM
7

They have five other children too... I mean it's horrible for them I'm sure but they should do the right thing. Some quotes by the couple: "On a blog about the case, the Freis have raised more than $20,000 to help with legal bills. They described the arrival of Achane’s daughter in their lives as 'a righteous desire blessed to fruition by God.'" ouch... "'We have not lost our conviction that we are in the right!!!!!!' Kristi Frei wrote. 'We have only ever wanted to do right by Leah, and have alw…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 03:05 AM
1

Oh yeah, sure I was just throwing some more context into the picture.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 11:08 PM
5

Sweden's law has been criticized for other reasons, namely because it doesn't recognize the possibility that the prostitute may be doing it out of their own free will. It automatically considers the person who's being paid for sex a victim. Because of that mentality the landlord the 'victim' may be renting from may be sued for pimping so if the prostitute's found out they'll be evicted from their home. So a lot of women in Sweden are against the automatic victimization of sex workers, which is a…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:54 PM
7

Last new years she was on camera wearing only lingerie for like 15 minutes. It's a running gag between the two of them, apparently they're good friends.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:27 PM
2

There's various services on the Internet, aimed only at women, flator.se for example is a very popular Swedish social network exclusively for lesbians and requires your Swedish social security number to confirm that you are female. Link to registration form stating girls-only web-service.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:21 PM
1

You did a good thing, she'll cry her eyes out and in the morning she'll throw out her princess tiara.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 09:22 PM
1

Ask a female friend to log in for you. I don't know if you're only allowed to rate men who're your FB friends, or you can search for any man with a FB profile or how it works.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 09:08 PM
4

There actually isn't one for women that I know of - they're their own social networky thing btw: https://www.luluvise.com/ That video is disturbing as hell... Also of course, no men's allowed - when I tried to log in with my real Facebook account:"Dude, you're a DUDE, and we run a strict policy about this. Good try though. We still love you anyway!"
/r/MensRights02/01/13 08:53 PM
1

"And yet you seem to think it's only been the fact that feminism has an organized movement behind them that's behind this? Human psychology counts for nothing?" So by me pointing out that they have a huge movement, you think I'm saying that the water wheel moves without the water or the laws of physics? Just because I'm saying that the waterwheel is a huge one. I'm not telling you they're right or justified, just telling you that attacking them here on general principle, isn't going to solve any…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 07:21 PM
-2

Neither do I but we can pretend that being against discrimination in general, and supporting safe spaces for various groups on reddit, is, you know, literally Hitler. Oh yeah and the red SRS tag on the person he's responding to is at least half of the whole argument.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 06:25 PM
1

Not the least because Lulu.com is a self-publishing print on demand on-line service with millions of customers and a decent presence on Facebook.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 05:58 PM
6

Just because it sucks doesn't mean it's wrong or that the other person is an asshole. ;) That's your captain speaking, telling you you're going through some mild repercussions, and that you should strap your ego and remain firmly seated in your self-confidence. But seriously most people are rightfully careful about their relationship choices. And not even careful - just plain old opinionated. Do I need to justify to you my desire to have a partner who's 5 foot something but not taller than me on…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 05:46 PM
9

Lord save me from the judgemental bigots in my bank, for they will not loan me a loan on top of my other loan which I haven't paid for in months. Since when is blind stupidity a requirement to being a nice guy? A woman isn't entitled to a guy's romantic affection - it's something he gives her of his own free will and vice versa. Judgemental is when you go out of your way to shame somebody for who they are - not when you DON'T go out of your way in order to accommodate somebody who might be perce…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 04:35 PM
1

"These procedures include the almost universal[10] threat, in this department, of polygraph testing of complainants, which is viewed as a tactic of intimidation that leads victims to avoid the justice process[11] and which, Lisak says, is "based on the misperception that a significant percentage of sexual assault reports are false." So polygraph testing in a scenario that is very often a he-said-she-said accusation is paramount to forcing the victim into silence. More so this dangerous practice …
/r/MensRights02/01/13 03:51 PM
-11

So whenever there's a point to be made, go ahead and make it, but these kind of sweeping generalizations about all feminists out there are part of the reason why nobody takes MRA seriously. Because we come off as nothing more than a cleverly-titled /r/feminismSucks. Example of an interesting post. Challenges preconceptions that only men commit domestic violence. and the top post in the subreddit, naturally OMG guiz why aren't condoms free like the pill? Oh wait they are? You can get them by the …
/r/MensRights02/01/13 02:29 AM
-3

So you want to constantly go against a mob of angry brainwashed third-wavers, on general principle, rather than challenge MR issues and challenge feminism whenever appropriate. I personally think that whomever's doing the attacking discredits themselves. When they tell us our issues don't matter and we should suck it up, they're showing their complacency, and the degradation of their movement's relevance through the years to a point where they have to bite and scratch desperate to not lose even …
/r/MensRights02/01/13 02:27 AM
-3

Well some of them are focusing on it, as exemplified by the protesters on those photos. The ones that aren't are relevant to OP, because he's the MRA version of them. He'd rather waste his time discrediting the worst of what he perceives as the opposition rather than focusing on any real issues. Half the top posts recently are along the lines of people complaining that if women should X, they should X too. Women get X and we don't because they have 50 years of a BEHEMOTH of a movement behind the…
/r/MensRights02/01/13 02:11 AM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom#Before_the_19th_century Condoms - since before the 19th century.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:54 AM
-19

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/texas-judge-oks-ban-planned-parenthood-funding-article-1.1230888 Seriously all this anti-feminist shit is completely unnecessary, it doesn't help male rights. It only makes us look EXACTLY LIKE THE WORST OF THEM.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 01:44 AM
0

...
/r/MensRights01/01/13 10:34 PM
5

For some women it's a quality of life thing, they can even stop having periods after taking them for several years. They have to be taken every day to be effective. That's part of why it's also harder to take them away, regardless of whether you believe it unjust to make society as a whole pay for it. Other than that I don't have any statistics, and since they're free and women don't need to go to a doctor to be diagnosed with especially painful menstrual cramps etc. those statistics could very …
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:34 PM
1

I was talking in general, when mentioning the medicine of those times. Things were certainly not as advance as treating gender-specific issues with hormones. For a more generic answer they were probably given largely ineffective anesthetics, and some opiates on the side to deal with the PMS issues which would then have been seen as largely psychological issues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antidepressant#History "Before the 1950s, opioids and amphetamines were commonly used as antidepressants. T…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:03 PM
2

Again you're theoretically right. I don't have any better ideas, honestly, except for the one other point I mentioned.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:00 PM
21

In the past few days I've antagonized several dozen other men, simply by suggesting women be treated with respect as a sign of maturity for MRA, and in order to avoid becoming simply a feminism retaliatory group. You are among the easier ones. And the answer is: Between getting treated with amphetamines, and shock therapy as part of mainstream dietary and psychological prescriptions, their menstrual cramps were probably very low on their list of priorities, and of course they could get a time of…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:57 PM
16

Having to diagnose and confirm every case of menstrual cramps and bad PMS, migraines etc would just incur extra costs on the system. You're technically right that just because some women have the conditions listed doesn't automatically mean that all women should be getting it for free. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost-benefit analysis favors free pills, though over unwanted pregnancies (since the women who can't afford it if it's not free likely can't afford to support a child) and the result…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:52 PM
5

Not really. People change is just an excuse to not admit that you misjudged someone. People don't change unless it's virtually LIFE AND DEATH. People hate changing, they love themselves too much and they're way too lazy and tired of having to do less and less work every day to change. So learn how to know people and you'll be fine. Knowing people involves a certain amount of hating them for their irrational stupid childish flaws, and only later on you learn to love them anyway for the parts that…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:41 PM
3

Learn to communicate a lot, and postpone it till after you believe you have a sense for the person you're talking to. Ignore the women that tell you that you have to be spontaneous within the first few days of knowing them to spark their love. That's complete and utter crap, usually just an excuse for blowing a friend off. Get to know the person well first. Learn how to get close to and figure people out. That's the only way you can protect yourself from ending up with someone who might hurt you…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:36 PM
1

"Victim blaming happens AFTER a fucking crime has occurred, not before." Haha what? You better be trolling now... Anyway I've tagged you in RES and it's pointless to keep this on, apparently, have a nice rest of your life :)
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:14 PM
-1

Can I not believe that something is shit without my feelings being involved? I'm not a feminist - If you keep telling women it's even a little bit their fault that you can't help yourself from getting rapey around a certain kind of clothing/behaviour, you're giving them EVERY reason to continue to further the idea that all men are potential rapists, given the right circumstances. This is for your own effin good, but some of you lack the perceptiveness required in order to recognize that. Inciden…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:11 PM
1

Nobody can and should tell you how to feel about something. It's physically impossible without involving drugs. Endocrinology doesn't work that way. So please stop right there. People can of course tell you that if you act a certain way you can get a huge compensation. The way to know how Anderson Cooper feels is to ask, and no other worldly way exists, no matter what anyone's trying to tell you. Everything else is thinly veiled feminist-marxist party-lines bordering on thought-policing.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:03 PM
7

I wish feminists would simply demand the rightfully expected opportunity to have just as shitty women politicians as men are, in places where there might still be some discrimination (can anyone really think of one in most of the modern world?). Instead of the trumped up claims of how women are so much more gentle and caring and social-services oriented, and male genes and hormones are the cause for wars and injustices and genocide... because historically and culturally all women-centric religio…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:59 PM
13

I don't know but as a society, I think we should just say that if the perceived victim of the act is not offended, we shouldn't have the right to be offended on their behalf. I think that's the most reasonable thing I could honestly say about this shenanigans.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:27 PM
3

It's not your job or even your right to change that through marching, unfortunately the movies industry is a matter of free enterprise, where profit and creative freedom(or intentional creative-shoot yourself in the foot with a 50 year old gender stereotype if you so desire) is king. The best way to change that instead of campaigning for a nationalized women-image-improving propaganda machine, is to make more great movies with women protagonists. Believe it or not you're not entitled to an equal…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 04:44 PM
-1

You have a right to support whichever private organization you want at your discretion with your money. You don't have a right though to tell other people whose problems you think are worse, and instruct them who they should be supporting. That is what feminists do, every time an MRA tries to bring up circumcision or MGM in a thread about FGM, and it pisses you off doesn't it. The reason it pisses you off is because it's implying there's a limited resource of attention/funding out there and that…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 04:35 PM
285

Also the pill is not only used as a contraceptive, but to treat various medical conditions: http://www.nyu.edu/shc/medservices/oral.contraceptives.html Cramps, heavy and irregular menstruation, acne, prevent ovarian cysts, blood disorders, reduce PMS, migraines... etc. etc.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 04:30 PM
2

Half of it is about American women IN America, who've obviously created a police state in order to "take dangerous chances without any consequences" Learn to read, without selectively filtering information: "The problem here is that although American women have managed to arrange society so that they may take risks with minimal consequences," "The US is the most heavily policed nation on earth outside of war zones, partly because allowing women to do as they please without fear of sexual assault…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 04:02 PM
3

I'm just as pissed off as you are that anyone is trying to dictate the content, but when this victim-blaming bullshit gets up-voted to the top, I can't help but agree that the sub is through the roof in terms of anti-feminism and low on actual MRA issues. There's already /r/SRSsucks, we don't need another one. That was my original post in case you forgot. And here's my response: So you're ad hominem, and you're demanding I don't have an opinion up, because ad hominem.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:55 PM
5

Like Twilight, The Hunger Games, Resident Evil, almost any Tarantino movie? In TV Sex and the City, Ally McBeal, Desperate Housewives, Weeds... The exact words are: "Women need to be given a chance" and the petition was to make the SW writers/producers to make the movie with a female lead character. I know it's absurd but it's absurd - you can't call it less absurd because it isn't literally people shouting EQUALITAH, but instead it's people shouting ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE OUR PRESENCE AS LEAD RO…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:51 PM
1

For some reason thread title sounds like the name of a TV series, rather than a news story.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 11:30 AM
2

Actually no, because even in the real real world you're entitled to a million things you didn't personally work for, but other people worked out for you and gave you and everybody else, like various freedoms the charter of human rights the concept of social safety nets that exists even in the most capitalist of governments. You incur thousands in costs as you grow up, and it is hoped that you will repay them, through your work as a side effect to your desire to lead a materially richer life. But…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 10:06 AM
4

What? I never even heard about the MRA before reddit. I would not believe that somehow we have a greater internet presence, with all the feminists groups and hundreds of off-shoots out there. And I can not believe that they would somehow be intimidated by our Internet presence so much that would stop them from talking about what they want to talk about of their forum.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 08:58 AM
23

Some of them don't want men to watch porn. Not hard to make the jump to sex dolls from there. There's a universe of inequality spanning between "My private sexual life as a female is my own decision." and "A man's private sexual life is subject to approval by women." but if I start really trying to imagine the thought process of someone like that I believe I'll go clinically insane. Women's sexuality is sacred, while men's sexuality is a dirty malignant sore to society that hurts women at the wo…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:49 AM
2

Being raped for the way you dress is being raped for the way you dress. My example's just as valid as any other example. :P It's intentionally absurd, hoping that you would see the absurdity of calmly telling women to change the way they dress, as if that didn't mean anything to them. As far as what causes rape, the article above keeps on restating that slutty behavior/fashion style leads to rape. Sure one CAN choose to dress tastefully, but you can't DEMAND it from them, because you're lacking …
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:36 AM
3

I've always seen the pawns as female, because they end up being Queens... But you can call me sexist for seeing the weakest pieces in chess as female, if that's what you're into.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:30 AM
1

Yeah, Google is one of the few companies that are acting on improving conditions for their workers way above and beyond what the government mandates, or even when the government prescribes against it. Example being Cali doesn't recognize same-sex partnerships for taxation purposes. So Google pays same-sex couples the difference that they are losing each year - around 1000$ I think that policy in particular started in 2011.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:24 AM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave#Europe Some Europe is more socia-licious than other Europe, but generally more than a few countries offer the option of the father taking the maternity leave or part of it. Surely, though it has to be a decision by both of them, and not one made by just one of them, since it very much affects the other. I wouldn't be surprised if the mother has the final say, either - I mean we're not that gender-blind.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 07:14 AM
2

Ok, it might seem obvious to you and as easy a decision as locking your car, but it isn't that simple. Imagine if you risked being raped, because you choose to wear a suit. Suit-rapists lurking everywhere! Or so you're told. So you can't wear a suit unless you're with friends and even then you have to be careful not to break from your group. Also you can't act posh. Acting posh attracts suit-rapists like nothing you can imagine! Because of that you're encouraged to wear baggy pants a wife-beater…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:59 AM
1

Haven't heard about the poll. Since /r/feminism is mostly unconcerned with /r/MensRights (they're currently campaigning for SW7 to have a female lead character, among other feministy things completely unconcerned about our existence - as it should rightfully be), and the only people against /r/MR are essentially the SRS/Fempire/Atheism+ etc. That's why I mention /r/SRSsucks
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:51 AM
1

Well, that doesn't necessarily have to taint marriage altogether, it's essentially divorce laws custody laws and paternity laws that are messing up the whole picture. Up to the point of divorce marriage is as helpful to a man as it is to a woman. So maybe it would be better to identify the real problem instead of railing against the institution itself. |Working during marriage is enforced for men and optional for women Nobody's actually ENFORCING it, sure that's the norm, currently but nobody's …
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:47 AM
0

I wouldn't say worthless, I'd say traditionally men are seen as the 'takers' in a sexual act and women are seen as the 'givers' which is even more immediate to the idea that the wife 'provides' sex.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:41 AM
3

You mean women are 80 percent likely to be the ones initiating the divorce process, not that 80 percent of all married women file for divorce. There's certain tax benefits to marrying - I think you get better rates for loans when buying a house and other small stuff. I agree though, I don't think you should marry anyone if you can't depend on them to support you out of their own desire to do so, or that you should be marrying at all if your idea of marriage is an exchange of obligations towards …
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:37 AM
12

Women's sexuality is a beautiful and precious thing of self-exploration and cherishing ones inner godess. Men's sexuality is fucking gross, ewww. Your female friend is naive and childish. Give her a few years before fleshlights stop being an exotic thing, and become a norm, and your female friend will simply drift into accepting it as well. edit: Of course there's the tiny possibility that your female friend's not okay with dildoes either... just for the sake of the argument.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 06:12 AM
8

So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the backlash mark — that place where the outrage finally broke and rolled back. If anything OP should be pissed at the party-line underneath: "GIRLS NEED GOLDIE Engineers are solving some of the biggest challenges our society faces. They are critical to the world economy, earn higher salaries and have greater job security. And they are 89% male. We beli…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:54 AM
20

I'm just as pissed off as you are that anyone is trying to dictate the content, but when this victim-blaming bullshit gets up-voted to the top, I can't help but agree that the sub is through the roof in terms of anti-feminism and low on actual MRA issues. There's already /r/SRSsucks, we don't need another one.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:25 AM
1

It might seem obvious to you and as easy a decision as locking your car, but it isn't that simple. Imagine if you risked being raped, because you choose to wear a suit. Suit-rapists lurking everywhere! Or so you're told. So you can't wear a suit unless you're with friends and even then you have to be careful not to break from your group. Also you can't act posh. Acting posh attracts suit-rapists like nothing you can imagine! Because of that you're encouraged to wear baggy pants a wife-beater and…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:13 AM
4

Ok, it might seem obvious to you and as easy a decision as locking your car, but it isn't that simple. Imagine if you risked being raped, because you choose to wear a suit. Suit-rapists lurking everywhere! Or so you're told. So you can't wear a suit unless you're with friends and even then you have to be careful not to break from your group. Also you can't act posh. Acting posh attracts suit-rapists like nothing you can imagine! Because of that you're encouraged to wear baggy pants a wife-beater…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 05:10 AM
5

You mean the one of the highest report rates of rape and other instances of sexual assault. Which by the way is 46 in 100,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#Sweden The same study by the Department of Justice we were talking about also states that only 5 percent of the women who suffer some form of sexual assault in US colleges report it, and it predicts the actual numbers to be 1 in 4. http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e03021472.pdf But either way it's not a competition. It doesn't af…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:07 AM
2

I'm not trying to bait you, I mentioned it because the article itself says: "The problem here is that although American women have managed to arrange society so that they may take risks with minimal consequences" I don't agree that anyone should edit their behavior to prevent rape. Sure it's ultimately achieving the same goal, but do we really want that as a society? Living in fear of being raped, because you threw somebody off with your dress-style or you weren't completely unambiguous in your …
/r/MensRights01/01/13 01:47 AM
0

How should we change the behavior of women, to stop rape committed by men? That's what's wrong with this whole argument. The idea that rape is something that happens because men can't help themselves around slutty/drunk looking/acting women. Incidentally that is part of the reason why some feminists treat all men as potential rapists - because some of us keep telling them that it's partly their fault, and that we're just a bunch of stupid animals that can't take responsibility for our actions.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 12:59 AM
3

I thought I was responding to @shadowbanned6, but either way you get my point. It's not between women's rights in the US and women's rights in the Middle East. It's not between Men's Rights and Women's Rights - there's no finite resource of activism that's somehow shared between every group that wants to make the world a better place for somebody. There's no quota to be split. And if there was one, I'm sure gender rights would fall down in the list of priorities, until we solve world hunger, pov…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 12:46 AM
4

And this is why feminists accuse us of being childish. Because you'd up-vote an article that says that women should be scared to dress the way they want to, because it challenges the semantics of a populist term such as rape-culture, based on a non-representative study.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 12:41 AM
2

The problem is it's not about anything physical, you're not losing anything because Western women want more security. It's not between your rights and anyone else's rights. All you're losing is your nationialistic self-esteem. Because you live in a shithole you want everyone else to live in a shithole. You want to feel like your way of life is normal, ergo you lash out against anybody who suggests things could be made better. I've lived with people like you for most of my life. We had a saying f…
/r/MensRights01/01/13 12:37 AM
3

So you're accusing me of strawmanning, while you yourself are arguing on the quantative and semantic qualities of the term rape-culture. I'm impressed. More so I'm impressed that you'd happily and unconditionally accept a study carried on a group of 200 students from the same university, over a Department of Justice study. Just because the conclusions of those 200 people study are convenient to your idea of how things are.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 12:08 AM
3

The title basically says: "Because other countries are riskier, the US is less risky than we thought." Gold medal in logic, that one. If there's a problem deal with it don't look for ways to avoid it by comparing yourself to the fucking Middle East. If you want to disprove rape-hysteria surely there's better ways than telling women - well at least you're not having it as bad as a third world country...
/r/MensRights31/12/12 11:50 PM
3

So you're saying that because parts of the rest of the world are majorly fucked up, women in the Western world should be scared to dress the way they want and drink? I live in Sweden, I'm not from the US, and I know well enough what the situation is elsewhere in the world. I don't get where that kind of reasoning comes from. "Look at how shitty we're having it, so you should shut up and be glad about what you have..." that's just being complacent because you're in a shit situation, anything that…
/r/MensRights31/12/12 11:31 PM
0

http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e03021472.pdf The DOJ study basically says that the 1 in 4 number is based on only 5 percent of college rape victims reporting rape incidents to the police. So we're comparing a study largely based on tell-tale evidence with a study of 200 students from a single university.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 10:50 PM
3

No it doesn't. Who told you that if someone is having it worse, that makes your situation in any way better?
/r/MensRights31/12/12 10:25 PM
2

"The problem here is that although American women have managed to arrange society so that they may take risks with minimal consequences..." So you're saying that dressing slutty is like poking a lion with a stick, and that all men are rapists, given the appropriate visual stimulation... Can we please bury this shit?
/r/MensRights31/12/12 10:02 PM
-4

So if women get raped more elsewhere that means that somehow lessens the impact of women being raped at home? WTF?
/r/MensRights31/12/12 09:55 PM
22

http://www.reddit.com/r/Feminism/comments/15olll/a_petition_for_the_creators_of_the_new_star_wars/ They're petitioning for Star Wars 7 to have a female lead character, because: "Women need the chance to play a lead character in more films in order to improve how they are viewed in society. Star Wars has an immense following and would be a great place to start." Apparently in order to give women a "chance" you need to force writers and directors to comply with feminist demands.
/r/MensRights31/12/12 09:33 PM
7

Have you seen /r/feminism? They're petitioning for Star Wars seven to have a female lead character because: "Women need the chance to play a lead character in more films in order to improve how they are viewed in society. Star Wars has an immense following and would be a great place to start." You're right. None of them have time for hating on men's rights, because they're already occupied with a ton of bullshit. Not to speak about the self-victimizing bigoted way that is phrased - "Women need t…
/r/MensRights31/12/12 06:12 PM
1

By definition feminists are as innocent and justified as the suffragette movement, in practice a lot of them are as rotten, apologetic and disingenuous as a lot of every other ideological movement you can name.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 10:07 PM
1

The last sentence. But perhaps you got distracted by the No True Scotsman two sentences before that.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 09:53 PM
1

Because all else being the same, for every man that wasted child support in that bar, six or more women did. Being PC for the sake of it ends up being just as wrong as being prejudiced (SRS being the shining example). If you're willing to overlook the real world data for the sake of defending your personal beliefs, you're no better than an honest misogynist.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 03:05 PM
7

All of this is absolutely true, except the part where it says we shouldn't blame women for being dicks, because of a blood-curse our patriarchal forefathers passed onto their sons. If anything feminists are excusing themselves with patriarchy, which is pretty ironic. When a man fucks up, it's his fault, and even if he doesn't fuck up he's a potential rapist. When a woman fucks up, it's society's fault, patriarchy's fault, men's fault. Anything but her fault. You'd think feminists themselves hold…
/r/MensRights29/12/12 03:00 PM
7

Because: a) He got paid. b) He's one of those good-hearted individuals whose kindness rivals the stupidity level of a drunk and coked up Larry David.
/r/MensRights29/12/12 02:50 PM
1

Jokes aside here's some statistics: http://singleparents.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=singleparents&cdn=parenting&tm=10&f=10&su=p504.6.342.ip_&tt=11&bt=0&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-240.pdf Turns out about 1 in 6 men become custodial parents for whatever reason, and I have to say even though the numbers are lower for men, I'm pretty happy with the rates of men being awarded/paid child support. So unless you'd like to suggest that women are 6+ times more moral than …
/r/MensRights29/12/12 01:54 PM
0

False. The twenty men in history, who've been the recipient of child support, have their own pub called "Bar at the End of the Twilight Zone" edit: Jokes aside here's some statistics: http://singleparents.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=singleparents&cdn=parenting&tm=10&f=10&su=p504.6.342.ip_&tt=11&bt=0&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-240.pdf Turns out about 1 in 6 men become custodial parents for whatever reason, and I have to say even though the numbers are lower for me…
/r/MensRights29/12/12 01:04 PM
3

From his story it seemed like she flipped on him in a matter of weeks, near the end and he was still coming to terms with the fact that she was acting a completely different person.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 08:39 PM
5

For just 10 bucks for a martini, the mom can provide the kid with unlimited cashews and peanuts. That's a huge amount of healthy protein and potassium! But srsly I met this guy once who told me that he had given his ex-wife 10 000 Eur for their kid after their relationship fell apart. Not instead of child support, but just because he was saving it for the child anyway. Guess what was the first place said woman visited and racked up a several hundred euro bill.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 08:31 PM
41

Sometimes you just gotta live with the fact that some people will be intentionally malevolent no mater what and no matter how good or bad you do, nothing will change their mind. And by sometimes I mean all the time.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 10:24 PM
-1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/153omf/why_mens_rights_just_doesnt_cut_it_for_me/c7jka6h You were just a couple comments short of reading my response to that one. ;) Egalitarian doesn't mean SRS levels of blanket BE ALL END ALL humanism (ha...). It just means taking other people's rights in consideration as well. Which I think Men's Right's does. But that DOESN'T mean fighting for EVERYONE's rights at the same time - it just means aiming towards equality when making demands that affe…
/r/MensRights22/12/12 03:39 AM
0

For me there's a difference between saying "Beer is a typical guy's thing." and thinking "Ergo, no girl can possibly have a highly developed taste for beer." or in general "No girl could possibly exhibit traits that are usually ascribed to guys." and that difference is the difference between guy on the internet and guy from you story. You don't have to overturn hundreds of years of popular culture in order to be accepted as a beer lover - just know to confront the actual assholes. Stereotypes me…
/r/MensRights22/12/12 03:36 AM
8

You'd be surprised how few people actually keep on practicing that admirable level of do-no-harm decency after you get to know them a little better.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 01:26 AM
29

If we follow the original poster's logic a boy becomes a man when he can satisfy her egotistical bloated needy sense of sadistic childish entitled self-importance. So let's make up some of our own shall we? 1: When she actually starts to enjoy sucking cock. 2: When she makes a sandwich with more than three ingredients. 3: When she doesn't nag when you tell her to bring you a beer. 4: When she understands your need for her to SHUT THE FUCK UP FOR CHRISTS SAKE every now and again. 5: When she does…
/r/MensRights22/12/12 01:09 AM
-1

Your homebrew store are being sexist for assuming it's not for you but I don't understand you being offended by the suggestion that loving beer is a typical guy thing. Just because beer is Average Joe's staple drink in popular culture doesn't mean you can't enjoy it just as much if not more. Go get angry at your home-brewers, not at random people on the Internet.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 09:51 PM
18

|push to make VAWA gender neutral or something. Woah, hold on there, buddy! Even talking of the possibility of talking about discussing Male Rights issues ironically is an affront to Women's rights which are of course much more important. Makes one come off as quite the misogynistic women-hating rapist really. Have you tried the wonderful cure for all of men's issues called "Suck it up, you pussy."? It's really quite helpful!
/r/MensRights21/12/12 09:17 PM
6

Whiskey* and a book for me please, and a nice fireplace with a panoramic view of the sea in winter. Closest I've ever came to golf was a gold ball a friend of my dad's gave me when I was a kid. Also harpooning is a lot more fun than fishing IMO. *Actually I'd take any kind of liquor, wine, Martini, shots of Aftershock...
/r/MensRights21/12/12 09:01 PM
14

Don't forget golf and fishing! Oh how I love me some golf and fishing! I could write a poem about it, but I don't give a fuck about anything mentally challenging that takes more than a couple minutes to complete.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 08:05 PM
5

Being taken seriously - the only thing we need to aim for, if we want to turn into a male version of the Fempire.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 08:00 PM
9

I would be stumped too if I found out my wife cheated on me.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 07:47 PM
-1

Largest lol? 55k subscribers, SRS and the rest of the Fempire probably have several hundreds of thousands combined. /r/twoXchromosomes is maybe a better comparison and they have twice the subscribers of /r/MensRights
/r/MensRights21/12/12 11:10 AM
37

If you can find another good place where you can have it done without the bullshit, call them up and make sure they're aware exactly why they're losing your business - honestly that seems like the only thing you can do to make a point.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 06:25 PM
2

I don't know man, this whole time you've been telling me how horrible women have it and how good men have it now when we're actually comparing... Turns out that the possibility that a rape victim might not be taken seriously is worth dozens of innocent men jailed, so much so that even talking about the innocent men makes you a women-hating asshole. Think about that.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 01:09 PM
1

I don't know why you get the idea that because we often jerk about how delusional a bunch of third wave feminists such as Jezebel are we're somehow against women's rights en large. You should seriously read Jezebel to learn how the MRA should go back to writing shitty poetry because they're taking attention away from the real issues, and really who needs men's rights anyway? I bet according to her the Suffragettes should have stuck to knitting as well, maybe founded their own knitting club. Sure…
/r/MensRights20/12/12 12:48 PM
4

"[external link] Why the MRM and their attitude towards "false rape accusations" is dangerous: the case of a Sara Reedy, a rape victim jailed - while pregnant - because a detective THOUGHT she was lying" The title says it all - our attitude apparently is the cause of bad judicial procedures and bad cops. Even as much as talking about false rape allegations puts victims of rape at risk of being forever discredited apparently.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 12:29 PM
0

That's fine. It's your choice. Because of people like you who of course can't be forced to take better care of themselves, we have the concept of inalienable rights. Because a small minority would immediately sell off their rights because they want or need the money, or because their default position (like yours) is that it's their own damn fault if their rights get trampled (you justify being physically attacked by imagining yourself as the cause of the attack having verbally pissed off someone…
/r/MensRights20/12/12 12:25 PM
3

Oh yeah sure, as I said it's your choice to decide what you like to give your time to. Here's the thread I was talking about: http://www.reddit.com/r/againstmensrights/comments/14y64v/external_link_why_the_mrm_and_their_attitude/
/r/MensRights20/12/12 12:16 PM
1

Yep, no-one should be forced to consider his attackers well being. The law doesn't work like that. Self defense doesn't work like that. You know what would be pure textbook sexism - suggesting that because the attacker is a woman she should be treated with lenience(not saying that you're saying that, but just for the sake of the context of the conversation).
/r/MensRights20/12/12 12:03 PM
4

Of course men's rights will be against some of feminism's ideas, when it comes to marriage, child support laws, rape accusations, where some feminists believe that even talking about cases of false rape accusations is dangerous and should not be allowed because police might stop trusting actual victims. You see, /r/againstMensRights(comprised hugely of SRSers) had a thread recently blaming a case where a woman was accused of false-rape accusations, on the fact that Men's Rights even so much as D…
/r/MensRights20/12/12 12:00 PM
0

What because of the tramp-stamp thing? Which both male and female ponies have. Which show has a gigantic male fan-base? Definition of a tramp being a homeless person of unspecified gender. Nah, man you're just paranoid. And yes I need my right to become violent, because I'm not going to risk some crazy bitch gouging my eyes out, while kicking me in the head, for the sake of good will and non-violence.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 11:53 AM
1

I told you there isn't any COMPETITION, you don't have to choose between men's rights or women's rights or LGBTQ rights. All of those can exist together and every organization DOESN'T have an obligation to cater to EVERYBODY. There is no authority in the world that can tell LGBTQ rights groups that they should be out fighting Japanese whalers, or Greenpeace that they should be saving starving children in Africa. You're doing that right now and it personally amazes me how you can think so highly …
/r/MensRights20/12/12 11:46 AM
0

Wow you're like an MLP episode. Next time I'm in trouble I'll call on your magic tramp-stamp to save me.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 11:40 AM
1

No you're being an entitled dick, because you think you can tell people whose problems are worse, and especially when there is NO REASON for there to be a FUCKING COMPETITION. Go back to SRS, the Fempire wherever you come from. Just because SRS is a blanket organization that sees itself as the BE ALL END ALL of human rights on the Internet, doesn't mean that Men's Rights has to be one too. You have NO RIGHT to delegate whose rights are more important. So fuck off back to your Fempire brooding pi…
/r/MensRights20/12/12 11:37 AM
1

Doesn't make much of a difference, the boy on that train obviously had nowhere to run, and the people around him were completely uninvolved in helping him. The best they did was commend him for not hitting her, probably because the law would tear him a new one for it, no matter who started it.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 09:30 AM
2

I don't understand your feminist terminology and I'm not going to lie about it, but are you saying that we should first of all fix all of the women's a LGBTQ issues, before we have a right to speak about our problems?
/r/MensRights20/12/12 09:28 AM
-1

If you're dismissive of the fact that straight white men have issues with legal bigotry too, you shouldn't be using the word egalitarian, since obviously you have no idea what it means.
/r/MensRights20/12/12 09:09 AM
0

No, it's the ability to fight a woman in self-defense instead of being told that you should be sensitive to her blind outrage and fragile body and take the punches and kicks to the head until the police comes - case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBbBWYZjrSQ
/r/MensRights20/12/12 09:07 AM
-1

In the simplest of terms the reason why you're seeing that is because African American groups have decades of history of rights groups organizations, same goes for LGBTQ people. Why you see straight white male problems here is because NEVER in the history of the world have they been brought up. We've always been told to suck it up and that we're pussies if we even talk about our problems. Incidentally the straight white problems apply just the same to straight men of any other culture and also a…
/r/MensRights20/12/12 09:01 AM
2

12 years later no less. Sounds like OP fingered A'Tuin and then it took her several months before she stopped looking forward to it.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 03:51 PM
6

Mama, just killed a man
/r/MensRights19/12/12 03:41 PM
-10

In other news /u/Aerik creates troll account then when he's shot down posts intended defamatory thread on /r/againstmensrights anyway. link to /r/againstmensrights Thread in Question. Seriously an hour old acc. named Mr-Mens are you even trying?
/r/MensRights19/12/12 01:23 PM
1

She just accused minorities (other demographics than white males) of being the major perpetrators of 'shortcut' crimes. SRS would be proud.
/r/MensRights19/12/12 01:17 AM
54

Exactly, emotional purging as she describes it is painfully susceptible to just this kind of projection. "I suppress and am deeply ashamed of and made to feel inferior by the issues I can't deal with, ergo I will attribute those issues to my enemies. Surely the issues which cause me the most anguish would be the best way to cause anguish to my enemies." To be more specific for the sake of non-MRAs possibly reading this the issue being projected here would be the various false rape accusations th…
/r/MensRights13/12/12 09:34 PM
9

He has an article praising Atheism+. Need not say any more.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 09:56 AM
2

http://russiatrek.org/blog/business/russian-banya-on-the-wheels-photos/ Folk tale? Yeah right :D
/r/seduction25/11/12 06:53 PM
7

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rape Dictionary.com used to define rape as an act carried out by a male on a female, and it used to pop up on top of the Google search if you typed in "define: rape" as it would with any other word if you type "define: x". That was a few months back and it caused a huge outrage on /r/MensRights so much that people complained to Google about it. Now Google won't give you a dictionary.com definition for that search term and Dictionary.com has changed its defi…
/r/MensRights14/11/12 02:23 PM
0

Is that so? NSFW
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:55 PM
-1

Oh yeah? NSFW
/r/MensRights03/11/12 03:53 PM
0

I don't think the draft is used in any other case than an all out war on American soil. I've never heard of anyone being forced to go to Afghanistan, against their will.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 05:23 PM
7

I see this as a victory for equality. Should we instead just post stories about how men are constantly discriminated against, to fully turn this into a circle jerk with as much confirmation bias as possible? Nobody is shocked to find out that women commit rape too, what's new is that a woman actually got convicted for it. And that's a positive thing in the equality sense.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:37 PM
3

Wrong: http://i.imgur.com/oWfmA.png But good job on getting laid :)
/r/seduction22/09/12 03:01 PM
7

10/2 = 5; 5/2 = 2; 2/2 = 1; Can we make it 10,5,2,1 so the computer engineering crowd is happy.
/r/seduction22/09/12 09:02 AM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/antiatheismplus/ is working thankfully.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 06:14 PM
3

Then the social worker should be carrying a piece of paper signed by the parents. That's how it works. OP isn't a mind-reader.
/r/MensRights03/09/12 08:59 AM
3

oh my how deliciously insensitive on so many levels...
/r/MensRights01/09/12 09:04 AM
0

What female approval? Not one comment mentions her being a woman. There's one guy who said it's revenge for something else long ago, and that again has nothing to do with her being a woman. All the other comments condemn her.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 03:54 PM
152

Wait what's wrong with tips on how to get the child support you're guaranteed by law? I mean the book looks sketchy but I wouldn't judge it by the cover... And after I've read the comments it looks like she's playing both sides, but even if she wasn't I don't get what's so outrageous about it.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 03:26 PM
4

Dogs exhibit shame or awkwardness when they do something they understand is bad.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 07:25 PM
18

It's not identical, Oxford adds the word 'typically' which adds a level of political correctness to it, then utterly destroys that by omitting it in the verb definition of rape...
/r/MensRights13/08/12 07:20 PM
11

I chose the option - "I can search but something else is wrong" and wrote them a lengthy description of the insane level of sexism in that definition, and that while I understand that definitions are aggregated by a script, this has reached reddit.com and they'd better act on it in one way or another.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 06:37 PM
2

Ha! She tried to claim that she lied when she said it was a present relationship, but instead it was a relationship 3 years ago. I thought that was weird at the time, but now this explains why.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 05:08 PM
6

It's legal but as you say yourself it's still highly objectionable. Men's rights is not only or even mostly about blatant illegal acts against men. It's often about the sexism within laws/practices such as the Virgin/Quantas rules about not allowing men to fly next to unaccompanied children. I'd argue that the detriment of circumcision presents itself in the greatest degree when one becomes sexually active, hence it's at least as relevant to men as it is to a teenager. Also the article is satiri…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 05:03 PM
2

Ha, I missed that, in a way it could be interpreted as promoting early circumcision, to avoid an arbitrarily more painful/inconveniencing form of the procedure later on. http://www.circumstitions.com/MoviesM-Z.html#resurrection There's some other good ones here.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:41 PM
1

Did you refer to them as 'midgets'?
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:32 PM
3

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but if you're looking for an example of an article written on those very conventions: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-allen-anti-circumcision-activists-20120812,0,386071.story
/r/MensRights13/08/12 02:18 PM
5

If you believe in the truthfulness of the statement of the defendant, you should be able to find a source that proves it. That's how Wikipedia works. His statement is still there, the only thing that changed was that it wasn't included as an undisputed fact in the synopsis of the article. Also no reference to why the claim for 'legal precedence' was made. I'm not trying to judge who's right here, or who's telling the truth. By all means if you find a reference to those claims feel free to log in…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 01:50 PM
2

I imagine if circumcision was made illegal it would force super religious parents to use the services of laymen, which accounts for the difference in complication rates. This is in no way defending circumcision, just pointing out where that difference probably comes from.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 01:17 PM
3

I was saying that as in she can't claim self defence if he was out cold since she drugged his dinner.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 08:50 PM
48

He was drugged.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 01:21 PM
61

Manslaughter? Because, why??? She stabbed him in the neck, but they can't prove an intent to kill him?
/r/MensRights10/08/12 12:20 PM
11

I'm astounded that the judge is allowed to make frivolous decisions, about what constitutes an expert statement and what is hearsay/opinion/conclusion. I'd say the judge acted as if they were under pressure by society at large to convict him, no matter what, which is as morally reprehensible as accepting a bribe on a ruling. Public acceptance amounts to the same things money aims to provide that is - security, a job, etc. So one can argue that the judge took all his future paychecks in the form …
/r/MensRights08/08/12 09:55 AM
8

I'm surprised you haven't heard about this in pop-culture at least. :P I don't know if it was just for child support... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Louisiana_v._Frisard He was sued 10 years later, so maybe she just wanted a kid and had some tough times later on, then decided to score some paternity. A better description of the case: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=19971726694So2d1032_11486.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006
/r/MensRights05/08/12 10:53 PM
2

I was referring to 'isolating' a tincture. What you're referring to might or might not be 'college vodka' made by adding flavourings to ethanol, then ritualistically setting it on fire a few times, to justify calling it something other than flavoured ethanol.
/r/seduction05/08/12 08:58 PM
17

The issue with regards to women is abortion, with regards to men and OP's claim for 'involuntary servitude' can only be paternity. That's what I'm saying.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 07:36 PM
22

I think it's vaguely referring to the fact that if a man knocks a lady up by accident, and she decides to keep the baby, said man will have to pay peternity, whether he wants to be a part of the child's life or not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternity_(law)#Legal_concerns "Some paternity laws assign full parental responsibility to fathers even in cases of women lying about contraception, using deceit (such as oral sex followed by self artificial insemination (State of Louisiana v. Frisard) or…
/r/MensRights05/08/12 07:21 PM
-8

So you're saying that a bunch of Grammy nominated shock artists have more merit and less real-world influence than a school play? Sure the outrage will always be there when there's controversial or even plain backwards ideas at play. But I thought given our experience with Women's Rights groups' attempts at censorship we would be able to recognise the symptoms of blind outrage and distance ourselves from that particular type of crowd-mentality.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 06:54 PM
0

The question is whether there should be a limit on artistic expression based on the source of inspiration - it was a school play done by students as far as I understand. As I said I don't think it's in good taste either, but I don't think its very existence is a threat or an insult to anyone.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 06:49 PM
-8

Stuntman Mike was having tons of fun in Death Proof, although admittedly he didn't videotape himself. :P In the second half of the movie the second group of girls was having tons of fun killing him for it. The question here is not whether we have to empathise or not with the killers, but whether a man committing an imaginary movie-crime is seen as part of cinema, while a woman committing the same crime is seen as an unacceptable provocation against men.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 06:38 PM
-7

http://www.bokascum.se/ "SCUM was a theatre play that took place in Gothenburg, Sweden, in November of 2010. The play raised questions around our social patterns and gender roles . The show was an artistic experiment with a high pulse and sharp humor. The video entitled " SCUM having fun !!! " was part of the marketing for this theatre play. The video is not an incitement to violence . The inspiration for the video's imagery comes from movies like " Inglorious Basterds ," " A Clockwork Orange" a…
/r/MensRights05/08/12 06:18 PM
1

Men are stereotyped just as much as women, I think the point was, hence the need for this particular use of the term misandry. Besides that I think that show would be pretty hilarious.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 06:08 PM
11

Soak in ethanol.
/r/seduction05/08/12 04:55 PM
2

They'd be as hard/dense and just as hot.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 04:21 PM
2

I didn't even know that number existed in resistances. Guess it's good that I rolled a monk.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 03:15 PM
2

You mean spend hours grinding levels and barely scratching any elites till I have enough matts/lvl to craft myself some proper gear... Same as Nightmare...
/r/MensRights30/07/12 03:06 PM
3

If the story was about a woman, their faces would have been made of the Earth's core.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 01:38 AM
7

I've just spent the last 30 out of 36 hours playing D3 and am in the beginning of Hell. I Can confirm that it doesn't work if you put all your points in Vitality.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 12:51 AM
0

I was suspicious too when they said they were 'so successful' that they decided to cut the study short.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:27 PM
2

A lot of the controversy comes from this WHO report, that speaks of a 60 percent reduced female to male HIV transmission in circumcised males. http://www.who.int./hiv/mediacentre/MCrecommendations_en.pdf This should in no way be advertised as a reason for first world countries to adopt circumcision as a prophylactic, though. A 60 percent prevention rate is laughable, compared to a condom, when used properly.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:44 PM
3

A conservative arguing for active rehabilitation instead of jail-time, entirely based on her own experience and conclusions? Good Lord, perhaps we've found a solution to all our problems!
/r/MensRights27/07/12 04:12 PM
10

Video-game development. I promised this one girl she's going to have her own NPC in-game. :P Pretty sweet, eh? I can foresee panties a-droppin somewhere around early alpha. But honestly I think different people are interested in different things, as long as you do something well and express confidence while doing it, it should be attractive. What's equally important is sticking to it, nothing gets in the way of you feeling good about yourself, quite like switching from one thing to another every…
/r/seduction21/07/12 04:50 PM
1

I'm gonna be checking out my lady friend's wardrobe for that when I'm over. God, I never ever thought about that.
/r/seduction27/06/12 09:21 PM
1

"from objectifywomen95525 sent 1 day ago If you think building better men is a cause worth fighting for, come chime in. <3 `ph0cus" But,but he sent me a hearty face.... to clarify that website and this subreddit were hyperlinked in the text of the message
/r/seduction24/06/12 08:56 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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