TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

DemiDualism Archive

View 0 posts and 123 comments by DemiDualism on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
11

Could they actually stop it?
/r/MensRights30/03/18 11:50 PM
2

Every comment thread regarding obesity is full of cancer for sure
/r/MensRights01/03/18 03:20 PM
1

Yeah yeah man you got it
/r/MensRights04/12/17 12:01 AM
1

There you go with the snippy quoting again I didn't just tell someone to fuck off. I voiced an opinion about people needing to fuck off with the constant references to feminist agenda because it makes you sound like an idiot and discredits the actual good shit this sub is capable of
/r/MensRights03/12/17 02:41 PM
1

This wasn't a conversation. I've had no opportunity to connect with you. You've been snippy and offput from the start presumably because you disliked my original statement a lot. Which is fine if you want to carry on with your life. you talk like there was an opportunity for me to have a friendly conversation with you while dismissing anything I might have to say in the same post. I have no choice but to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you simply don't understand how conversations w…
/r/MensRights02/12/17 11:10 PM
1

I'm just not interested in having a petty argument with someone who isn't interested in coming to an agreement
/r/MensRights02/12/17 08:05 PM
0

Typical nitpick response of highlight 1 sentence and response with a paragraph
/r/MensRights02/12/17 06:11 AM
-2

There will be hundreds of bad examples in every movement. Either way it doesn't matter. They are about different issues at best, so there is no need to talk about it. All you're doing is extending the platform and furthering a division of people. So fuck off with that.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 02:14 AM
-21

Fuck off with the feminist agenda. You're not a feminist and you don't know their "agenda". Stay on topic
/r/MensRights01/12/17 07:03 PM
1

Only if you keep in mind the roots of the word and not the possible* intent of current use I agree there's no need, and i dont like that happening over by tou either but I think we have to surrender to the natural development of language on some level. Trying to control it is worthless since feelings come before words and banning words doesn't ban hate
/r/MensRights09/11/17 05:19 AM
1

Imagine you go on a hike up a mountain with your friend. You both are responsible for your own shit. Now imagine you and your friend realize that it will be easier to hike if you consolidated you resources. Your friend decides to tell you "hey man, everything fits in my backpack. I really like having a friend like you so allow me to carry the pack. Here's a legal document I am signing as a testament that this is a serious and genuine sentiment of mine and not a figure of speech or just a goodwil…
/r/MensRights09/11/17 01:27 AM
1

We definitely agree. I by no means meant to imply the negative of my statement towards people who dont put forth the effort. Theres no wrong way to feel about being mistreated, and I'm not suggesting anyone feel any shame in expressing whatever feeling that is. If you give back what the person dishes out I find it perfectly excusable. If you are able to shrug it off and carry on I find it respectable. If you are able to try to bridge the gap I find it admirable. I am only trying to shine light o…
/r/MensRights08/11/17 06:25 AM
1

The main point I want to get across is that any way you slice it, our best odds are to continue to try. You're not wrong with the gist of what you're saying, its just at a level of detail I think we are best to avoid It would be presumptuous to think we won't ever be surprised by trying help people see the bigger picture And the consequences might not be immediate. People might be too proud to admit defeat or change their way to your face but your kindness can still stick. It may alter future in…
/r/MensRights08/11/17 03:00 AM
1

I was not making any suggestions about the history of mansplaining I am just advocating for a realignment of perspective for dealing with confrontational situations moving forward so that we may avoid furthering the divide. We do not need to be concerned with converting people or personal issues with verbage. This isn't a religion. It's just about opening lines of communication and advocating for truth.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 12:12 AM
1

your last paragraph sums up the baseline for my argument/point Being on a team is a willful effort. Not everyone is going to contribute positively. We need to work around that and manage the attention of people who do. The first thing that happens when we say "they" or "feminists" or even "women" in any form is people form a mental image of the 2 groups being referenced by our perspective. This is bad. It reinforces the division.
/r/MensRights07/11/17 10:23 PM
1

I'm not talking about the past at all
/r/MensRights07/11/17 04:16 AM
1

Since I am a man and not a women I can only do my best to bridge the gap from the male side The solutions are obvious to anyone looking to do so from either side We don't need women telling us how to bridge the gap and they don't need us doing the same Just continue trying to keep an open dialogue. There are no guarantees, because if we could force them to listen then that would be an actual sign of a power imbalancr
/r/MensRights07/11/17 04:15 AM
1

Bold assumption. But yeah having a condition which may significantly effect your baseline for social skill may lead you to improperly open a conversation. Coupled with a lack of awareness by the other person and miscommunication can easily escalate. This opens the door for a host of other issues, but I am not expecting people with social skill deficiencies to lead the way in bridging the gender communication gap. And the longer it takes those of us who can do something about the gap to actually …
/r/MensRights06/11/17 10:37 PM
1

Yes those are skills a good listener learns how to use properly. Not everyone is naturally good at listening or even aware if they are bad at it. "The problem" is thinking there is a problem when all you have is miscommunication. You can't preempt that with solutions. It's putting the cart before the horse. Sometimes when you speak, people don't hear you correctly. They might be offended by what they thought they heard. The goal is still to maintain open lines of communication. If you don't have…
/r/MensRights06/11/17 10:11 PM
1

Sure to your first paragraph, though it doesn't change my point Your second paragraph is wildly aggressive. You shouldn't assume to know what's going on in people's heads
/r/MensRights06/11/17 01:56 PM
28

Sort of. I'd say it's more perceived as a rude gesture because of the assumption on the level of detail needed in order to explain it. Like if someone asked you how to play craps, you wouldn't begin by explaining what dice are and how they work. It's the perceived notion of extraneous detail which gives the impression of belittlement. Perception isn't always accurate, of course, and is subject to personal bias. So a man might incorrectly use extra detail under the assumption a woman wouldn't be …
/r/MensRights06/11/17 09:01 AM
1

There is no line. But you can do plenty of acts that would be considered sexual harassment and have them be fine if there is consent and it is wanted
/r/MensRights28/10/17 05:16 PM
1

To further simplify, here is my counter argument in short: 1) words do not come before meaning. A speaker intends something to be meant and then selects words for that purpose 2) mansplaining is a word. Whether it is a sign of sexism or not entirely depends on the intent of the speaker. 3) in the cases where a person uses the word in sexist fashion and then hides behind feminism as a defence, i completely agree with everything you're saying. 3A) item 3 isn't relevant to the original discussion a…
/r/MensRights15/09/17 02:31 AM
1

What isn't giving up? What is 'that' referring to?? I told you I'm giving up on the conversation and you still argue something. What are is your point here? I feel like I'm talking to some sort of social service desk
/r/MensRights09/09/17 09:30 PM
1

There's a difference between dismissing and giving up You seem more interested in finding mic drops than having a conversation
/r/MensRights09/09/17 06:47 PM
1

You're very dense if you don't think i was trying to explain. You speak like your approval is relevant. It's not about my thoughts or your thoughts. It's about closing the gap between genders being up in arms at each other. Efforts need to be made to de-escalate and there isn't time for people to constantly assess if someone is correctly walking the line between being sexist or not Whether he is or is not sexist is not as relevant as the overall impression that he did not seem to care if it came…
/r/MensRights09/09/17 05:48 PM
1

Because I'd mostly just be quoting half of what he said and saying "this sounds sexist" Like really, back up to where this started and look at his response. Some lady dropped the word "mansplain" incorrectly within a reasonable social context that she wasn't finding his advice helpful. The redditor is going on about stupidity and ego and a host of other shit. He doesn't say anything about the dude. Who imo said the most ridiculous thing in the thread (a bigger battery gives more charge!) . And t…
/r/MensRights09/09/17 04:01 PM
1

I said he sounds sexist. Wtf are you on about? You aren't entitled to having it explained to you, I'm not a teacher and don't have that skillset. If you don't understand what i meant after my first attempt at explaining it then you're gonna have to put in some effort too. If you want to apply a filter to what you allow other people to think is sexist language or not, good luck
/r/MensRights09/09/17 03:20 PM
1

Ahhhh I very slightly but significantly misunderstood your point. Yes I agree. By pushing this agenda it can have the side effect of actually reinforcing the narrative by making people think they need to do something active for guys. Or just generally putting the idea in their head that its common for guys to not want to talk about their feelings. Which isn't really the case as much as it's fruitless to talk about our feelings because people don't know how to handle it Still though the populatio…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 10:39 PM
2

It hasn't caught on yet. I don't think that means misguided feminists who are trying to be better about it are worth shitting on though First people need to parrot it around. Then when when there is resistance people will realize that the thing being parroted around is relevant. Then their behavior will change There will be martyrs. Men who face the ridicule for putting themselves out there and get nothing back for it. But if they collectively continue to do so while this sentiment is carried ou…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 08:13 PM
1

It sounds like you're judging the creation of words.. Which seems a bit moot since words come from the collective, womensplaining isn't a used term I am defending the neutral case. That there is nothing wrong with the way things have developed, just that there are mishappenings as there would be with any social development in human behavior. For that last part, you had talked at length about your observation of a demographic of women and used it as justification for assumptions made about indivi…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 05:30 PM
1

I'm not saying completely dismiss, I am saying extend some leniency on where the line is drawn. Being in that demographic might make you naturally more prone to condescending behavior due to very tangible reasons I'm not justifying condescending behavior, I am only saying we can't assume that they have an unnaturally high prevalence of it if we don't control for natural factors. Mansplaining is a subset of 'sexist condescension'.. I don't really care about how much falls under it. People are arg…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 04:10 PM
1

intro First off, I appreciate your response and thought. I type short due to mobile, if you read it like I'm speaking I may come off with some sort of attitude that I can assure you isn't there. Just want to clear any air about neutrality I don't disagree with you. There are some semantics we could go into to clarify that, but there's only 1 point I am trying to get across so I'll make that more explicitly clear and we can take it from there if needed. body Yes you had a good sample size and cou…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 03:53 PM
-1

(This may sound aggressive but I'm just at work and typing short) There were multiple points. Everybody got the point that the original advice was shit. A battery pack is good general advice, also a good point. The point being missed is that the audience was on the topic of hot fixes with common at home items, and if someone has a battery pack they probably don't need advice on how to use it. So he didn't offer anything of value to people only interested in that point, which also seemed to be th…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 03:04 PM
1

Telling people that larger batteries provide more charge to phones is also a stupid thing to do So if we are just bashing stupidity I don't see why we let that slide. The first half of his explanation was so good. And then he went into unnecessary detail.. Maybe he wasn't finished posting but he definitely should have been. It's possible for a conversation to have no winners, you know
/r/MensRights08/09/17 11:22 AM
1

Everyone seems to deliberately be ignoring that context. Like once they think they know what the truth is, they can't comprehend how someone might be very reasonably mistaken and still act like a rational person
/r/MensRights08/09/17 11:09 AM
1

Thank you for translating exactly what I said into acceptable mensright terms
/r/MensRights08/09/17 11:07 AM
1

I wouldn't consider retail an unbias sample size for overbearing people It could also just be that grumpy menopausal women make you the most annoyed. And people who share your opinion, which would likely be people like you
/r/MensRights08/09/17 11:05 AM
0

Not at all, you just seem to have applied a lot of personal bias to someone who made a comment that was silly at worst regarding their intelligence in a way that would commonly be viewed as unnecessary. The most prominent identifying factors that this could have come from was that the person is a woman and using a feminist term. Something you did not even remotely express for the dude in the chat.. Who very obviously also made a silly comment. I'm not putting together a court against you, just s…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 10:59 AM
-23

This sub is going to shit. You're right, although I think she was being a bit dramatic about it. She made a point about battery packs not being helpful if you're in a bind and don't already have one.. And he just assumed she didn't understand how battery packs work Going the sexist route is a bit extreme, it's more likely he just missed the social context imo
/r/MensRights07/09/17 04:05 PM
-8

You sound pretty sexist fam
/r/MensRights07/09/17 04:00 PM
-48

Mansplaining does exist. It's a subset of condescending explanation where a man is being condescending because the listener is a woman. Where the reasoning for it is sexist. It's just a shorthand phrase for claiming that. People may use it wrong. It doesn't mean you weren't explaining something obvious or unnecessary. Just that you didn't have sexist motivations for doing so. In the OP it seems like all the wonderful detail on external batteries is tangential to the point being made, which is ad…
/r/MensRights07/09/17 03:57 PM
1

I watched it and it did nothing to give me a bad time unless I was trying to have one.. In which case it did nothing to stop me. In other words, it goes all in on what it was doing.. So if it rubs you the wrong way you're not gonna get a break
/r/MensRights30/07/17 11:08 PM
0

Yes gender equality is important
/r/MensRights20/07/17 08:58 PM
-6

Stop comparing it to DUI. That doesn't make any sense and you are literally objectifying someone in order to do it. If both parties are drunk I agree there needs to be no bias towards either gender. However, if one party is sober - there is definitely some additional due diligence that needs to be done other than consent. That due diligence needs to satisfy reasonable responsibility to verify the consent. Suicidal people consent to killing themselves, and that isn't considered valid consent. Lik…
/r/MensRights20/07/17 04:44 PM
1

Your argument is really shitty and full of bait. I made the mistake of trying to explain my point to you on your terms and you clearly have a stronger interest in being defensive and dismissing my point for reasons I cannot figure out Who the fuck do you think you are to say who other people should and shouldn't express their feelings to anyway? You aren't being pragmatic, you're just being ignorant. I'm talking about the feeling itself, anyway. Just because a feeling is basic doesn't mean I'm t…
/r/MensRights22/06/17 10:11 PM
1

It's basic because liking or disliking the way something is is basic. If someone breaks up with me because my dick is ugly I'd definitely want to know. What you shame people for saying doesn't actually change their behavior.. Just what they tell you
/r/MensRights22/06/17 09:09 PM
1

Not sure what you mean by "policed with pussy" Again, I don't find it rude. You can. Factor it into the way you live, if you want. You're opinionated on the topic and are not my target audience. My message is more about "if you don't care about this topic, I don't recommend starting to"
/r/MensRights20/06/17 11:31 PM
2

Yes absolutely share that. Just don't have expectations of people rallying behind you like a victim or something. Neutral parties really shouldn't have to give a shit about any of this, and we shouldn't be made to look like assholes for not caring. "silence favors the aggressor" and all that bullshit sometimes gets wrongly applied to these kinds of situations involving speech which then targets people who genuinely don't care about the uses of speech to defend themselves. When someone talks abou…
/r/MensRights20/06/17 10:59 PM
1

I am honestly not sure what you're saying.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:06 PM
4

Not throwing someone in jail is also not the same as supporting their right to free speech. "some things" of course should not be socially acceptable. Basic expressions of people's feelings (even if they're a bit mean for you) should not fall into that category. No one controls how they feel. And I don't support shaming people for letting people know how they feel. It's valuable data
/r/MensRights20/06/17 03:52 PM
108

Yes but the solution is for men to be able to talk about vaginas freely, not further restrict free speech due to the male side having the short end of the social stick on this specific issue. It is important we remain consistent
/r/MensRights20/06/17 02:54 PM
9

Aside from the emotional appeal, here are some additional problems with your rebuttal. For starters, you're assuming the original poster meant for what they said to be taken seriously. Additionally you did at least one of the following... Affirmed the consequent -reinhard makes hate speech -reinhard commits acts against humanity -stranger makes hate speech -assume stranger supports acts against humanity Post hoc validated an association between hate speech and acts against humanity - terrible wo…
/r/MensRights13/04/17 05:05 PM
15

That 'something' sounds like prejudice, tbh fam Just remember if A then B =\= If B then A Attractive people have the right to be crazy bitches too. Your explanation is one possibility, but why limit ourselves Maybe she had a terrible ex, was abused by her father, is an idiot, wants attention, etc It doesn't matter, you don't need to take the bait of judgement.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 02:58 PM
4

Exactly.. People who fall for the bait end up supporting the comment that baited them instead of removing it. The only things that get up voted then are bad baits. It's a perfect system for a circle jerk subreddit
/r/MensRights11/08/16 07:28 PM
4

But actually, and they're self aware and self enforcing of it. The sidebar is pretty clear the sub is just for fun
/r/MensRights11/08/16 07:26 PM
5

Read the sidebar
/r/MensRights11/08/16 07:25 PM
25

There was a Walmart commercial playing with three kids each saying they are Batman on as I read your comment. Trippy
/r/MensRights24/07/16 11:44 PM
1

Why those languages specifically?
/r/MensRights21/04/16 10:52 PM
1

If you're taking my last comment at all seriously then you did not realize I stopped taking you seriously. You've obviously already made up your mind on what these movements are or are not. Ive never been able to communicate. It's a long standing problem I face with every day, constantly saying things only to be met with confused gestures and guesses
/r/MensRights21/04/16 09:09 PM
1

Yeah I'll get right on that. You've totally warranted that effort with your open mind thus far. I'm asserting not to generalize an ideology as hateful as it dehumanizes the people self identifying as it and you have no idea what their life is like, what they are about, or what kind of future they want for men and women. That there might actually be merit in the fact that vocal minorities in groups don't always reflect the intention of silent majority. But you keep doing you, ya got me. Your word…
/r/MensRights21/04/16 08:11 PM
1

You're still applying bias to this conversation and presuming I'm talking about things I am not talking about I am not saying there aren't real issues men deal with or even that they aren't the result of women advocating for themselves. I'm saying you are a bigot for lumping the entire feminist movement up into hate speech because it had some negative side effects and not everyone in it is a saint. There needs to be a more open discourse between mrm and feminism, not this dismissive bullshit eac…
/r/MensRights21/04/16 05:19 PM
1

Nice strawman. I wasn't dismissing the MRM at all. In fact all I said was that its improper to dismiss the entire feminism movement due to cherry picked quotes unless you are also okay with someone else doing the same to your movement. It's not a true scotsman situation. There are known extremists in every group. It's embarrassing to not be able to actually talk about what actually makes groups popular
/r/MensRights21/04/16 04:25 PM
0

I apologize for not realizing the cherry picked quotes and circle jerk opinions about a largely undefined and vague group cannot also be done to the group you are a part of because you said so
/r/MensRights21/04/16 04:13 PM
0

ITT: people not realizing they are treating feminism with the same bigotry as many people treat Muslims due to the extremists in the group.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 03:44 PM
0

Same can be said about the MRM to be fair It's only fair to apply the same level of benefit of the doubt that you would expect someone to apply to any movement.. i.e. Don't listen to the extremists
/r/MensRights21/04/16 03:40 PM
1

I did not get that reaction. There's actually nothing in that quote talking about men specifically.. Maybe the source is more clear on that causing it's inclusion but I was just kind of confused. A controversial opinion sure, but the children would be removed from their mothers equally as their fathers
/r/MensRights21/04/16 03:37 PM
1

I agree with your general sentiment, but that is not a parallel to what was being discussed. His stance was simply ignorant to reality in order to look good on paper, and supported his stance by being dismissive
/r/MensRights16/04/16 11:20 PM
4

The problem is how incredibly misleading it is to use Hitler as the comparison figure. That's like comparing a squirt bottle to a hurricane because neither is enjoyable and both make you wet. The appeal to generalization does not always work
/r/MensRights15/04/16 05:48 AM
1

He made a statement of discouragement towards the topic without providing any additional resolutions or even making a strong case for the discouragement. The semantics are much less relevant
/r/MensRights14/04/16 02:32 PM
7

Inaction has consequences, and is a popular way to appease things on which you do not care about. He made a clear point that the issue should not be cared about because it's subject matter is frivolous. My argument is that the more frivolous the subject matter the more you should make a point of not validating the claim because the appeal to authority should be easy, and if they are unable to do so properly then they need to fuck off. I am not saying you need to be pedantic with your principles,…
/r/MensRights12/04/16 07:56 PM
10

If you can find an actual high ground to take I'm sure people will listen. Walking away isn't taking any ground. What you describe is called appeasement. You give in on something you don't care about in hopes it will shut them up. In reality, this is how bad movements gain traction and validity. If they had grounds to get x, why is it not reasonable to argue for x+1. When something doesn't make sense you need to address it. If I claim you owe me $100 because I missed the most recent lunar eclips…
/r/MensRights12/04/16 07:07 PM
5

All characters are oppressed by plot development
/r/MensRights17/02/16 04:23 PM
2

That's a better example, as there is no crime without the consent in question. Now if i saw anyone casing bars for the most drunk people and trying to sell shit to them, i don't think I'd be okay with that. I don't know if it's illegal worthy, but it's at least not getting past my moral radar. Same goes for guys casing bars finding drunk girls to get with. It really does come down to context in many cases, but the main point is for there to be innocence until proven guilty. And as far as what co…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 02:54 PM
2

That brings another person into the picture who needs justice, which makes it its own kind of case. But if there is video evidence, say, of your friend in the passenger seat telling you you're fine the entire time and you don't really resist or try to stop the car because you trust them it could be argued you didn't really know the gravity of the situation you were agreeing to because you were drunk and being manipulated
/r/MensRights03/02/16 01:33 PM
1

Not like that at all since the person getting shot in that scenario had no say. Unless they were depressed and asked the drunk person to shoot them.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 01:25 PM
11

The counter argument is that you removed the other person from all those situations. I still agree, but the apples to apples argument is that your sober friend told you that you were okay to drive, or that the gun isn't a danger or your kids are okay. I still think it's ridiculous, but less blatant if you bring the "manipulation" back into the picture.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 06:23 AM
5

Well she'd probably want to get off first, but i won't judge
/r/MensRights15/01/16 06:40 PM
6

Systematic failings rarely have a single narrative
/r/MensRights05/01/16 11:57 PM
15

If you feel like people should die for it, either you're wildly uncreative or don't actually have that much humanity imo
/r/MensRights05/01/16 07:11 PM
7

People who use the above logic do so because it satisfies the means to their ends. They have a feeling they are trying to express and the logic is them trying to explain it. Using their logic against them "is not how it works" and is "obviously different" then when they use it. By using the logic, you arent showing them how they're wrong, but appropiating their feelings to support the patriarchy and oppressing them even further! Either way, they'll replace the logic with something else to achiev…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:11 PM
2

But that validates the logic, no?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 06:58 PM
1

Yeah, I'm not going to apply more meaning to my post than originally attended. I support the image, i think it can be viewed with different perspectives, and you and i seem to be in agreement with the empowered perspective. My beef was just with the comment i replied to which i think favored the victim perspective
/r/MensRights18/12/15 03:18 AM
1

Im part of the community here, I'm well aware of men's issues. The point i was making isn't that men don't have issues. If i was reborn and had to select a gender, I'd still check male is all. Comparably, it is the better off gender. We aren't victimized to the extent that "it's sad that something like this needs to be said". That's a victim complex perspective. The attitude we fight for is one of strength and fairness, not pity. Overcoming the failings of society and helping lead a movement for…
/r/MensRights18/12/15 01:51 AM
1

It's a great message, but i wouldn't say it needs to be said. That implies men arent pretty well off comparably. There are many men who need to hear it, but there's no need to imply too much about the state of society by it
/r/MensRights18/12/15 12:39 AM
1

Except it doesn't, generally speaking
/r/MensRights16/12/15 03:22 PM
1

Completely agree with the attitude portion
/r/MensRights30/11/15 05:31 AM
9

Is she though? What "truth" does she actually know other than what one party or the other told her. Doubt she was there, not sure why her opinion matters either way
/r/MensRights29/11/15 10:18 PM
1

I must not be explaining myself properly then, apologies. A school serve multiple function School has the objective function of education. They also have the social function of interacting with others. There is a reason kids seek bonding with peers and equal reason why adults stress education. Irresponsible management of this system leads to poor balance of these functions. Good parenting can overcome the pitfalls of uniform schooling, while uniform schooling can help mitigate issues with poor p…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 08:35 PM
-2

Right now, schooling makes up a large part of children's identities. I think that should change, but i don't think the primary social function of schools in the big picture is about what kids learn. It's that they learn it together, which helps support a cohesiveness with society. If we allow children to build bubbles from a young age, it will only further escalate problems in society through additional miscommunication. Kids absolutely should be exposed to new cultures growing up. A school can …
/r/MensRights10/11/15 05:31 PM
-5

When everyone learns on their own terms, everyone is not on the same page. Schools need a revamp, but the problem is parents/children assuming a school is supposed to provide ALL learning
/r/MensRights10/11/15 03:50 PM
6

Honestly it isn't about fairness. There's not a lot to discuss about the vet. You'd have to be pretty different to need more than 30 seconds to get the idea. The bathroom thing is something people likely have not previously been accustomed to, so they are more likely to watch it. I really don't see the problem there I DO see a problem with people thinking air time = importance and then taking action to help the fat girl get wider bathroom doors while cutting vet support programs. When people agr…
/r/MensRights05/11/15 09:13 PM
1

Source? Those stats are interesting
/r/MensRights10/10/15 06:30 PM
-3

Who cares if it's 1 in 4 or 1 in 3, what is your point? Both are terrible, and you seem to be focusing on belittling those victims because they are female by undermining the statistic for no reason. I don't see you providing any counter statistics Male victims are mistreated, the goal isn't to knock female treatment down to our level but raise treatment of men to theirs
/r/MensRights09/10/15 09:21 PM
0

I don't see anything at all about men here either way. Why exactly does that imply they don't care? Maybe this board is just dedicated to women's issues. Like how this sub focuses on male issues. Try to have a board for males put up as well. Keep the focus on supporting all victims and not gender
/r/MensRights09/10/15 06:39 PM
-7

Idk, it's almost like there's multiple studies on something that's hard to measure and results are varying due to attempts to make the results relatable, or something
/r/MensRights09/10/15 06:35 PM
3

I did not ask to be born a straight white male, nor have i reaped the benefits of treating women like shit and owning colored people. To associate me with those who did purely because of how I was born is pretty ridiculous, and contradictory. If systemic objectification is so bad, you would think they'd be the first to empathize and be disgusted by objectifying anyone, male or female
/r/MensRights08/09/15 10:10 PM
10

Adding to this, the disproportion is so large the comparison graphs are actually meaningless. They are looking at a breakdown of causes of death in the workplace. You CANNOT isolate any individual cause for comparison with this. Since the representation is dependent on ALL groups being included. This breakdown IS useful for conclusions similar to the article title: murder is indeed the second most likely way a woman will die at the workplace. It just doesn't say anything about how that relates t…
/r/MensRights28/08/15 06:22 PM
1

Yeah, a lot of people don't realize how top down of a process things like this are
/r/MensRights14/06/15 08:49 PM
49

It's not a catch 22. You can obtain evidence without being able to use it in a court of law. The spirit of the dv law imo is to allow the officers to show up to a dv case in progress and be able to enter the house and detain the aggressor without worrying that they are overreaching because the abused person is not giving them permission out of fear. They need to have reasonable grounds to assume this fear though, which requires some form of evidence (shouting, visible bodily harm, threatening si…
/r/MensRights06/05/15 04:53 PM
6

All pregnant people are women. Better just assume all women are pregnant to avoid falsely believing someone is not pregnant when they are
/r/MensRights23/12/14 06:51 PM
2

But the whole point is that male/female shouldn't be 2 categories worth separating statistics on since you can't prove causation with statistics, even if it sways our sense of likelihood. They should remain grouped and insurance companies should continue to create groups based on things that actually affect driving. Insurance companies don't seem to charge different rates based on average heart rate, or frequency with which someone drives tired (likely immeasurable) and they manage just fine. Ju…
/r/MensRights16/09/14 04:29 PM
1

If the post was 100% true, all that says is that mothers are owed love and are unable to do the very simple shit that makes the kid go crazy
/r/MensRights16/06/14 03:03 AM
0

I am aware that my solutions were out of my ass. That doesn't discredit the problem. The point is that it is there job to do everything they can to protect the citizens through use of the law. They had a lot of wiggle room with choosing how to handle that situation and I don't believe they were trying to keep the guy safe. He made some threats and they decided "fuck him" got hasty and called in a canine unit. Then allowed (not on purpose, but the negligence can't be ignored when it is their job …
/r/MensRights26/03/14 02:24 PM
1

threatened with lethal force This is why I judge them incompetent. a police officer needs to make a lot of judgement calls and claiming you are being threatened by lethal force AFTER you yourself in the risk of harm is not proper judgement. A knife is not dangerous outside 8 feet. They had 3 hours to avoid letting someone get within 8 feet of him and they failed. He was mentally unstable and they did not handle the situation as such. My problem is not with what they did in the moments right befo…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 05:31 AM
5

Your argument only says that the officers were inconvenienced. Woopdifuckingdoo. At the end of the day it isn't deemed worth it to use more resources when a situating becomes delicate due to mental illness/retardation. Evacuate the area. Keep an eye on him. Its their job to protect the citizens. The only reason they were there was because he was posted up illegally. They weren't called down to take down a knife maniac. They chose to escalate the risk involved in the situation, they misjudged and…
/r/MensRights26/03/14 05:25 AM
6

to what end The end where no one is murdered because officers got tired of waiting around. No one forced the officer to be within 8 feet of him. He would eventually want to go home. 3 hours is nothing. Cops can stake out all night for a drug bust but 3 hours in a standoff and they say "fuck it, let's escalate this and introduce more risk to the situation by putting a canine officer to close for comfort"
/r/MensRights26/03/14 04:46 AM
-3

You're telling me multiple officers could not take down 1 guy with a couple knives? They should lose their job. Justified? Maybe. . But that doesn't mean they are competent for law enforcement. Call in a medic, shoot him in a non lethal location, give him medic when he drops knives. Or fucking lasso him or something. It's not rocket science. If the non lethal methods didn't work on a single guy with knives who is angry and confused, then we need some new fucking non lethal options. If you can't …
/r/MensRights26/03/14 04:24 AM
2

Do officers lack the ability to back up?
/r/MensRights26/03/14 04:15 AM
0

To be fair, i think this says more about the term sexism than it does prejudice. The claim is that sexism is defined as the sex of higher power abusing the power over other genders. yes there are only 2 genders, but in the case of racism.. Black people cannot be racist towards Asians and vice versa (in general, in US at least) because neither holds political/social power over the other. It doesn't mean that they cannot be prejudice (as the book points out) and that they are immune from those pre…
/r/MensRights19/02/14 02:19 AM
10

I dont understand why you are being downvoted. the post is obviously infuriating, but I wouldnt say it is "solid evidence". The posts are indeed cherry-picked
/r/MensRights03/01/14 11:48 PM
1

This is so stupid. Making white males pay more for college would be justification for paying them more in the workforce. It would not only not help the imbalance of pay (assuming that fact is true), but actively motivate white males to request and reasonably receive higher wages
/r/MensRights22/04/13 07:46 AM
4

"If you argue with stupid, they will pull you down to their level and beat you with experience"
/r/MensRights26/03/13 11:47 PM
2

ah the old true scotsman fallacy
/r/MensRights07/02/13 05:54 PM
2

And everything you thought was just so important doesn't matter. this part is pretty true, I think... not that it matters
/r/MensRights06/02/13 05:31 PM
2

What about Berry picking? Joking aside, if there was a sport based heavily on subtle differences in color, girls probably would dominate. Also multitasking without heavy need for spacial awareness would give girls an advantage as well. My knowledge of female advantages are limited though
/r/MensRights18/12/12 05:32 AM
18

Men would..... Women would.... This is not the proper mentality. Either sex is capable of either crime
/r/MensRights12/10/12 12:13 PM
5

When people are ignorant, don't snap at them. Ignorance means they need to grow up, and it shouldn't take much thought to realize that attacking someone (verbally or other) isn't going to make them grow up. This girl, despite being misinformed, was interested in the topic, despite holding what seems to be the wrong position. The big point to be taken away, however, was that even though she wasn't actively pursuing it, she was open to civil discussion on the matter. I think if someone more reserv…
/r/MensRights01/10/12 05:32 AM
1

I agree it's ridiculous. But I also consent that rape isn't like other crimes and it is one of those things that will never be black and white and will need a good judgement of context for every situation that makes it to court.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 11:16 PM
18

I think there is also the question of why do you think she consented if she never did? Some girls just dont get how sex works, and if you are making moves they get scared to say anything. Its like (extreme case) if someone comes up to you on the street and says "give me your money" are you not a victim if you assume they will act violently if you do not comply? Do you need to say "no sir, i will not" which may hold up in court, but right there on the street may be taken as fighting words? The id…
/r/MensRights21/09/12 02:42 PM
1

I'm not asking whether you would prefer being rape or murdered, because that's beforehand. I would pick the same as you for the same reasons if that was the case. After the event though, no matter how you would feel about being raped (unless it is positive), you won't feel anything at all about being murdered.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 01:34 PM
2

Actually, under the presumption that life is generally meaningless, rape can be worse. One may consider it a form of life torture given certain conditions/context. Death isn't all that terrible for the victim after the fact. If you kill me, I will not be mad or upset because I'll be dead. It's an odd thing to think about really.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 05:23 AM
31

go. go to the boards and share your wisdom. more people must know
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:37 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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