TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

DerpaNerb Archive

View 3 posts and 2,792 comments by DerpaNerb on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,792 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
11

That is not really any specific man's fault Yeah... they think it's every mans fault.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 05:06 AM
10

Just to put 20 million in perspective for most people. That is the equivalent of about $800,000 USD per year for 40 years (The length of most peoples careers)... and this is assuming she is stupid and doesn't use that money to invest or do anything to grow it.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 05:44 PM
4

Do what this guy did and tell your lawyer to harden the fuck up. You aren't paying him for nothing.
/r/MensRights20/11/13 04:52 PM
10

You can't tell me organizing a concerted effort amongst fellow classmates, as well as getting the willful participation of their parents to defame a man with the ultimate goal of getting him fired (or worse) are the actions of a child. That's fucking insane. If you did something as intentionally malicious as that as a kid, then your life (or at the least, your parents) should be fucked. This isn't just some kids doing something that they are too stupid to see is actually really harmful. They kne…
/r/MensRights18/11/13 09:17 PM
22

There's a definite line between "running your mouth" and aggressively pursuing criminal charges.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 07:04 PM
24

Pick one or the other. Either assume that 11 year olds are capable of knowing what they say... meaning you actually take their initial accusations seriously, but then hold them responsible for the results of that. Or you assume their dipshits and completely ignore what they say from the beginning, so their words would have never held any weight at all. You can't pick one and then the other just because it's convenient.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 07:02 PM
0

That's a different study too.
/r/MensRights12/11/13 01:24 AM
0

I can, because I live in Canada. Are they available in the US? Maybe some private places offer them, but they aren't mandated by any government authority.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 06:46 PM
2

Which also applies to condoms... which is kind of my point.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 06:45 PM
6

I really suggest you go do some research... it seems like you are coming in here with a massive amount of (false) preconceptions.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:55 PM
3

While I couldn't find stats specifically on sexual abuse... for overall child abuse, women outpaced men by far. The mother accounts for 36.8% of all child abuse cases, while the father accounts for only 19%. "Father and Other" accounts for 0.9% while "Mother and Other" accounts for 5.7%. "Mother and Father" accounts for 18.9%. This brings us to a total of 81% of child abuse cases being done by the parent. So discounting cases where both parents abuse their child, the mother is more than twice as…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:53 PM
-1

Stupid husband, didn't he realize that he didn't actually marry an adult capable of making her own decisions? Women are to be treated as children with no responsibility for themselves or their decisions... PSh, EVERYONE knows that right?
/r/MensRights11/11/13 03:59 PM
5

Nah, we don't need to reverse it at all. Just use the exact same shit. We would get results like this: "Man initiates violent dispute with wife, wife get's thrown in jail on DV charges after defending herself". "Husband claims divorce after cheating on wife of 5 years, he then sues and gets 75% of her partners salary in alimony/child support". "Man hires hitman to kill wife with cash in hand... then claims she was abusive and only get's probation". "Sorry, this scholarship is only given out to m…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 03:57 PM
1

The removal of the beep test is something I find kind of personally funny. One of my friends (a guy) failed the beep test when applying to becoming a police officer here... this obviously didn't make him qualify. What I find funny though, is that he's actually really strong (He can bench like 300lbs). I guess my point is, in his case, you could almost argue that it would make sense to eliminate the beep test (maybe). He fails one aspect of it, but massively excels in the other half. I still thin…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 03:46 PM
1

Except women as a group are disadvantaged, so it still doesn't make sense. Though I understand that the commonly held myth is that they are.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 03:39 PM
1

Ehh, either way, it's still a government mandate that has sexist language and excludes men. Last I checked, condoms are cheaper, and also have the added benefit of preventing/reducing the risk of STI's. I don't really see the need to only offer one half birth control, especially considering that the birth control offered for women can be used for just birth control, and not actual medical reasons.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 03:35 PM
2

Yeah, I definitely realize the hypocrisy in that statement when talking about equality.... but that's the reality so might as well use it to our advantage.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 03:33 PM
1

So if you are trying to tell women that rape is such in the culture, special clothes or rules should be adhered to on a daily basis, rape is normalized to the point it effects peoples daily routine. So then we also live in a "car crash culture", and a "murder culture", and a "theft culture", and a "mugging culture". The definition has become so broad that it is now entirely meaningless, which is reason enough on it's own to dismiss it as the bullshit it is.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 06:25 PM
1

Define rape culture for me first.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 06:24 PM
2

Yeah, it's pretty sad. What's the worst about it though, is that it's incredibly fucking simple, "there shouldn't even be a debate about this" things like this where they could EASILY show that feminism MIGHT actually be about equality, and it MIGHT actually care about actual equality... but their ideology, as always, shines through and prevents them from making the obviously correct choice. I actually got banned from r/feminism and /r/askafeminist in a thread about MGM. ACtually, I'm going to g…
/r/MensRights10/11/13 06:22 PM
1

Those are all just reasons for a potential other to get an abortion.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 06:11 PM
10

Start your own fundraising event. The fact that you're a girl will pretty much make you immune to any calls of sexism/misogyny. Find a teacher that agrees with you so he can make it more "official" and credible. Make up a few posters that stress the fact that you want to help EVERYONE and not just girls, and then start collecting donations as well.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 06:05 PM
1

There are completely different, valid reasons for there to be asymmetry in the handling of childcare and rearing. No there isn't... not for anyone who is okay with abortion.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 08:03 AM
1

You don't get to redefine academic terms because you don't know what their their meaning in context is. I'm not redefining terms. I'm using their original definition. Also, the fact that you think there is a single "academic" sociological definition for that that's "normal" across that whole field is pretty fucking hilarious.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 01:07 AM
1

or that everyone consciously supports rape. Oh, so now it's just some boogeyman term used for something that people don't even know they are doing... even if they actually say "I don't think/do that". And that's the point where it just becomes completely un-falsifiable and an absolute bullshit "theory".
/r/MensRights10/11/13 01:02 AM
1

And? If he's 4,9 but is 180lbs of muscle, then he's still more than capable of passing the requirements. The only reason I included height, was as a point of reference for someones weight.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 01:00 AM
5

Whether they want them or not, they are clearly accepting mediocre recruits if said recruit is a woman. They set the minimum requirements to join without gender even in the discussion (because only one gender was even eligible). Anyone who didn't meet those requirements got the boot. THEN, they allowed women to join, except this time, if they are NOT exceptional enough to meet those requirements, they don't get the boot. Instead, unlike the men who don't meet that bar, they actually have the bar…
/r/MensRights09/11/13 02:05 AM
5

Sorry, but the average woman will not be able to carry the average man. Then she was an exception.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 10:28 PM
1

You (or your ideological sociology professors) don't get to redefine words to bullshit definitions in an attempt to mislead people. IT's not only fucking retarded, but entirely dishonest.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 10:27 PM
1

Oh, so in our definitions of the present... we only look at the past? I'll tell you what... when a rapist actually get's pardoned because "Oh, you didn't tell me her skirt was only 10 cm long" instead of even innocent accused rapists getting absolutely lambasted in the media and/or jailed with no evidence... then maybe you can suggest the idea that we live in a culture that actually condones rape. The closest example you, or anyone else has, is Stuebenville, which is a small hick town that got f…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 10:26 PM
2

That's just fantasy though. Sorry, but the average woman will not be able to carry the average man... at least not for any length of time. That's just biology. Having the will to do something (and I don't doubt that they do) is completely irrelevant to whether they have the ability to do something. But when push comes to shove, and you're expecting them to pull you up by a rope (or w/e situation would apply in mountaineering), you're average 160lb woman is simply not going to be able to lift a n…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 09:05 PM
6

I cant watch youtube right now so I'm only going off your comment (so don't take it personally if my reply seems misguided). I really dislike when people try and be gender-neutral and say "a 5'4" , 115lb PERSON can't lift you therefore they shouldn't be in the army". I dislike it because it implies that we haven't already realized this (and we have), and it takes attention away from the fact that the only reason we have 5'4" 115 lb "persons" in the military is because women apparently can't be t…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 08:56 PM
1

I don't think you understand what the word normalized means.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 08:48 PM
1

The condoning comes indirectly with "well she was doing x and y, what did she expect" sort of things. No it doesn't... not at all. Pointing out the actions that lead to someone becoming a victim do not absolve the actual perpetrator of any responsibility.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 08:47 PM
1

rape is normal enough for that advise to have entered into cultural use. No it isn't normal. The only reason it could even be remotely considered "normal" is because feminists have basically campaigned to create a hysteria over it. Obviously there's going to be naive people being taken advantage of by these feminist propaganda campaigns that say things like "1 in 2 women will be raped in this next year" and then become super paranoid because of it. If rape was normalized, you would not see peopl…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 07:08 PM
1

I think your big misunderstanding throughout this entire thread is that you think "acknowledge that something happens" and "condone that thing that happens" are the same thing.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 07:05 PM
1

There isn't a mugging street crime culture. Society doesn't condone mugging, it's kind of why it's considered a criminal act and will result in jail time if caught and convicted.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 06:55 PM
2

Normalized is a sociological term, when mra's (and most run of the mill feminists)are reacting to normalized in the context of rape culture, we generally misunderstand the meaning of the term. Sorry but fuck. that. shit. I hate this "sociological term" bullshit... words have definitions, use them. Don't fucking redefine shit in an attempt to mislead people who are unaware of all the secret definitions to a bunch of commonly used words.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 06:50 PM
2

people saying that women need to be taught that being out in the general culture partying is like being in the ghetto flashing a rolex at 5 am etc. Is it not? Considering that the majority of rapes happen to people who have been out drinking and partying... that seems like pretty solid advice.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 06:49 PM
0

but this precedent would apply equally to both genders in Canada. That remains to be seen... but I hope so.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 06:47 PM
2

It still implies privilege... which hasn't existed for a long ass fucking time.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 11:51 PM
2

So it's not applicable presently... and you admit that... and you wonder why people are opposed to that name? What is it with feminists and absolutely fucking mangling the english language.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 09:00 PM
2

Homeless? When you said shelters I was more thinking DV/abuse shelters. Anyway, you can read up on "Erin Pizzey" for feminists opposing people trying to help men. "Warren Farrel UofT" will lead you to a protest of Warren Farrell speaking about how boys are struggling in school at the U of T. There was another feminist protest at the UofT of two speakers (sorry, can't recall their names right now)... they pulled the firealarms and then held the doors shut when people were trying to leave.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 08:59 PM
12

He applies for a job, the employer googles his name and sees "So and so accused of rape". Now let's assume the employer doesn't immediately throw out the application and instead actually sees that it was a false accusation... are you telling me that this wouldn't bias the interviewer at all? All of us here hope the guy get's on fine... but the truth is, their lives are never going to be as good as they potentially could have been.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 08:43 PM
5

So why call it a patriarchy? Why not just say "gender roles". To call something a patriarchy implies privilege for the patriarchs (aka men)... which you just said yourself is at most a subjective truth, and IMO is just a lie.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:42 PM
2

If it's a version of feminism that involves patriarchy... then it's a load of shit. To put it simply... it's not patriarchy if it's not universally beneficial to men. And if you think our society does grant males a universal privilege... then I would love to hear exactly which metrics you are using to judge this.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:41 PM
5

And that sucks but is there anyone doing that? Like MRA's? Yes... but every time they try they get illegally protested by feminists.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:34 PM
4

I disagree. What has feminism done to help men... ever? What has feminism done to break the walls of male gender roles? Hell, if anything, feminism has helped to legally enforce male gender roles rather than try and help them break free from them.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:33 PM
6

Sure... but historically (past century) that is not how it has worked, so I don't see why you would automatically assume the thing that actually hasn't happened. As just one example" It's entirely common place to see women at work (rightfully so). But h ow many stay at home dads are there? What is the perception of these fathers?
/r/MensRights07/11/13 05:30 PM
20

I don't think theres anything in the law that necessitates 83%.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 04:25 PM
37

And people say slavery doesn't exist in the west anymore....
/r/MensRights04/11/13 04:24 PM
1

Yup, you're right.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 01:22 PM
4

nor should they. I really hope that what you actually mean is "no specific gender of rape victim should have the spotlight focused on them, and we should treat all genders equally".
/r/MensRights31/10/13 02:21 AM
4

So why the distinction? Rape is "sex without consent". Is a guys dick being forced into a woman not sex?
/r/MensRights31/10/13 02:20 AM
3

I think you need to reread the OP. The data puts men at about 50% of victims of rape in a 12-month period. They also say that ~80% of the rapists in cases where men were raped had female perpetrators. 0.8 x 0.5 = 0.4 aka 40% of all rapists are women. (and that's ignoring any female on female rape).
/r/MensRights31/10/13 02:19 AM
3

OR what if a guy has a weapon and forces a woman to penetrate him... is that rape?
/r/MensRights31/10/13 02:16 AM
4

I suggest you google Mary P Koss. She's a feminist who was consulted on that definition of rape. I suggest you google her up (maybe "Mary P Koss Rape definition") and find some of the fairly disgusting things she has said.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 02:15 AM
16

Except feminists deny that false rape accusations happen. Others even say that being a victim of a false rape accusation can be a beneficial learning experience.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 07:49 PM
9

Still, it's not hard to extrapolate. I mean, if I try to live a year only making $500 a month, I can write a book and say "people who make $500 a month have shit lives.. we need to give more welfare to only people who make $500 a month". Obviously that would be ludicrous, if someone wanted to increase welfare spending, it makes perfect sense to also include the people who have it even worse (aka, less than $500 a month). But to only focus on yourself and your exact "class" of people, you are mos…
/r/MensRights30/10/13 05:31 PM
6

his idea that men can't control their sexual urges? It's not the so-called lefties spreading that idea Do I really need you to introduce you to every single feminist "don't be that guy" campaign ever?
/r/MensRights30/10/13 01:55 AM
3

Maybe not liberal, but it's most definitely the left. I'm not saying all leftists are like that (they aren't, because I consider myself a leftist as well), but I'd be willing to bet that 99% of people like that are leftists.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 09:19 PM
6

I disagree with you on this... at least in this specific instance. Showing support to the "alleged victim" when it's just SOOOO fucking obvious that she's full of shit (as I said, in this case), is not okay and should not be condoned. Showing support to the woman in this case implies that she actually needs it and/or deserves it... which is simply not the case. Implying she needs it is implying that what happened to her (whether rape or not) was traumatic. If you say that said event was traumati…
/r/MensRights29/10/13 09:18 PM
7

What are MRA's doing to address male concerns in primary education? Baby steps first... When the mere mention that you're an MRA is replied with accusations of misogyny and sexism by the resident feminists who are already accepted as being "right about everything gender" by the establishment... you can't just walk in and say "Hi, I'm an MRA and I'm here to help boys". Feminism/ists have fooled people into thinking that they already have it under control, when in fact they obviously do not. The M…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 08:47 PM
6

I know that it is very important to you to turn this into an us versus them narrative, but are you aware that most self-described feminists would not see this article as a threat or a problem? We are all aware that your average person that calls themselves a feminist would not see a problem with this article... but that's irrelevant because they are NOT the ones helping shape policy in our society (from legal, to educational to whatever). It's shown time and time again that there's a fucking hug…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 08:40 PM
2

So the doctors literally whip their penis out and fuck the pregnant mothers-to-be? In all seriousness though... they most definitely consented when they went to the hospital and said "help me give birth". The hospital abducting mothers-to-be and forcing them to give birth without consent is not what the article is talking about, and that's about the only interpretation that allows the possibility of someone in a hospital for a birth that hasn't consented to the hospital helping them give birth. …
/r/MensRights28/10/13 05:07 PM
0

has the right to refuse medical treatment of any kind. Which is why they went to the hospital to have doctors help them with the birthing process... right? Or are we talking about those stupid women that aren't allowed to be responsible for any of their choices that we have to treat like children? Unless hospitals are totally different where you live, every "out of the ordinary" operation does in fact get approved at some point. But let's be clear here, this is NOT what the article is talking ab…
/r/MensRights28/10/13 01:05 PM
2

Why is that? Because they don't think a fucking medical operation that the mother went to the hospital for should be called rape?
/r/MensRights28/10/13 01:03 PM
3

Why do they need to give consent? They went to the fucking hospital while pregnant... what the fuck did they think would happen? Using the word "consent" in situations like this is just adding to the rape hysteria that feminists are constantly trying to perpetuate.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 12:33 AM
6

You're a fucking idiot. Why do you want to pick on helpless traumatized new mothers who just went through a horrible physical ordeal? Saying it's not rape, is not picking on helpless new mothers... and let's be clear, it's NOT rape.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 12:31 AM
-3

But how? Just because someone makes a bad decision doesn't mean it wasn't their decision.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 09:16 PM
1

Incapacitated in what way?
/r/MensRights24/10/13 07:50 PM
10

You know what I find most amusing about articles like this? Is how they always seem so defensive. I mean, instead of actually refuting the claims that MRA's make (as in, the issues they bring up), they seem to get defensive and then suggest that it's already being looked at (by feminism of course)... they just haven't gotten around to it yet. The reason they don't actually refute them, is of course because they are irrefutable, so they always just twist them into "because the patriarchy did it".…
/r/MensRights24/10/13 07:47 PM
0

Seriously though... how did you look at that picture and think "sexual assault"? I'm actually curious. I mean, the girl was smiling and she was surrounded by people... so unless you think "rape culture" is like the most ridiculous thing in the entire world that a girl could literally be assaulted in the middle of the street and no one would do anything... I just don't see it.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 07:39 PM
1

Correct.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 07:32 PM
5

So women having jobs is making them miserable. So fucking what? Why is this a problem? Women are either going to be equal members of society, or not. The "problem" is that they still insist that the "male way" is superior/privileged/whatever... despite actually hating it after experiencing it first hand. It's not really a problem for anyone... because they can choose to do whatever they want... but what is a problem, is if their (and I don't mean to generalize all women) hypocrisy is not being c…
/r/MensRights24/10/13 05:37 PM
4

Is this about the girl getting fingered on the street in front of everyone? If so, what's up. How is a picture of a smiling girl make someone think "sexual assault"?
/r/MensRights24/10/13 04:39 PM
1

Agree. Though that being said, it's not quite the same as feminists doing it with "Oh, you support women's rights? You're a feminist!". Feminism is the label of an ideology, not just an action. If someone were to replace "feminist" with "women's rights advocate", then I wouldn't see a problem because someone who is advocating for women's rights is in fact a women's rights advocate. Obviously the same goes for MRA. IF you advocate for men's rights, you're an MRA. That's literally the only precond…
/r/MensRights21/10/13 03:51 PM
1

I didn't deny that... I was just pointing out how the medical benefits of birth control are kind of irrelevant when discussing why they are covered by the ACA... seeing as an actual medical need isn't a prerequisite to qualifying for them.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 11:44 PM
3

has not lead to lack of potential in spending time with kids. it's not the same argument. do I need to link you custody statistics?
/r/MensRights19/10/13 08:02 PM
1

Because birth control are routinely used not only for birth control but also to help with menstrual or hormonal issues. Things like endometriosis, PCOS, hormonal imbalances, cramps and the like. And? Can they also be used for just birth control?
/r/MensRights19/10/13 08:02 PM
2

The reason it continues is that the working party is the one that has been able to advance their career and increase their salary. But as I said, what I don't get is why only one side has to continue holding up their end of the bargain.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 07:50 PM
1

Why not? The father sacrificed time with his kids during the marriage in order to provide money... just like the mother sacrificed money to spend more time with the kids. Why are reparations for one acceptable post-divorce but not for the other?
/r/MensRights18/10/13 07:49 PM
1

At least minimum wage plus overtime, so you're looking at a pretty penny. So less than alimony. I agree with you, but who cleans the house, cooks the food? Sure... but my main point is... who does this after the divorce? I'm just glad that men are far more likely to cook meals this generation. I love cooking.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 07:49 PM
1

And why would someone be less replaceable than someone else?
/r/MensRights18/10/13 07:47 PM
1

Why in the hell wouldn't you consider that the marriage wouldn't last forever? I think when most people get married, they do expect the marriage to last forever... Or maybe that's just a guy thing, which wouldn't surprise me if you look at the rates of who actually initiates the majority of divorces.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 07:44 PM
4

Alter, sure - but you seem to want to shift them entirely onto the stay at home partner, who is by far the more vulnerable and worse-off partner in a divorce. Financially? Yes. By almost every other metric? Not really. They still split the jointly owned assets. They'll presumably have lived a far less stress free life (if they are staying at home). And most importantly, they have spent the most time with their kids, and this also translates into MUCH better custody arrangements post-divorce (now…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:42 PM
1

I think 50/50 should be default (so we agree on that). But for the sake of argument, I'm talking about preferential custody. (so greater than 60% for the breadwinner).
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:36 PM
5

How much a year would I have to pay someone to be a nanny/maid for my kids/house? Once your kids are off to school, it's just you. Sounds like a great opportunity to get a job then.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:35 PM
2

That's why many parents elect to both work and send their children to daycare, which is by no means cheap. I wonder how that cost compares to alimony payments? In all seriousness though... I really wish alimony became more of an opt-in thing. It's find if both parties explicitly agree to it. I don't think it's fine when one party goes into the agreement thinking "I plan to be married forever, so this doesn't concern me", and then the other party get's bored, initiates the divorce and then starts…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:34 PM
3

I laughed at that lol. "Guys, it's not related to income... it's just related to all of these problems that would directly be solved by an increase in income!!". wut.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:31 PM
5

The reaction to this is borderline racist. But race-specific special privileges are TOTALLY okay.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:31 PM
5

It is wrong that vasectomies are not in the ACA. So do you understand why we say what we do?
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:30 PM
2

You do realize there was a story at the top of this sub like just last week about a guy who was turned down from breast cancer screenings.... Turns out, he actually had breast cancer. Fortunately, he was lucky in that he went above and beyond what any woman would have to do and got it checked anyway... it's just that it costs him thousands of dollars. Also, as TracyMorganFreeman pointed out some more things that are relevant... I'll add one more... free birth control. What's even more interestin…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:28 PM
2

But seriously, unless there's some special disease or disorder that's an epidemic for black women why would they need special provisions? Let's say they did have some special disease or disorder.... why would that warrant special provisions for only black people? Why not word it in a way that it helps people with that disease or disorder. If 99.99% of the recipients happen to be black, then so be it... but at least you aren't leaving out the occasional non-black person from getting help if they …
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:24 PM
4

To be fair... it's also a choice for men. They know that alimony exists and still choose to get married. That being said, pre-nups exist for a reason, as they allow the couple to set the terms of their own marriage. The only problem though, is that prenups often get voided, and almost ALWAYS in favor of the (ex)wife.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:21 PM
7

So... time lost with his children? Should he be defaulted custody of any kids?
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:19 PM
4

Ultimately, the person with the career is going to be far better off in a divorce, sans any sort of reparations. AT the cost of being far worse off for the entire duration of the marriage.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:18 PM
2

Not exactly. Things like spending time with your kids is something that parents often want to do. It's called loving your kids. Sure, but then that also applies to the stay at home parent.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:18 PM
1

Raising kids and keeping running a household (which includes, or should, cooking daily, and keeping everything clean, as well as maintenance, but rarely does...) is pretty fucking hard. Especially if you have multiple children. Still not as hard as a job (well, depending on the job). Put it this way: There's a reason that maids/nannies don't really ever make more than 50k a year.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:17 PM
3

Alimony is easy to avoid - just don't have a stay at home wife or husband. Not always true. But if you want to accept the benefits of that arrangement, you have to accept the risks as well. Sure... but that doesn't mean you can't, or shouldn't try and alter the arrangement so the risks change.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:15 PM
5

in theory alimony should cover the losses of not having been working Like the loss of time spent with kids? Loss of cooking experience? Think of the hours the man will lose by being so much more inefficient at houeshold tasks! This is NOT fair.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:15 PM
22

To expand a bit, this is from the article: When the marriage ends, the stay-at-home spouse will never recover the income that he or she would have had if that person had not made an investment in the marriage. The division of marital assets scarcely compensates the stay-at-home spouse for the work that received no pay, not the sacrifice of giving up a career. They aren't wrong... the person who decides to stay at home is in fact giving up on their career. It's also true that they will never reac…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 03:13 PM
2

Stop flaunting your privileges over me woman!!!! :)
/r/MensRights17/10/13 07:55 PM
1

Fair enough... but I don't think it did.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 07:54 PM
4

I think you are confused. Whether her intention was it to be a rape threat or not.... what came out does not sound like a rape threat.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:51 PM
12

I wish I could get proven guilty of illegal act after illegal act and never end up in jail.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:50 PM
20

That exact line stuck out to me as well. I mean, if blaming women for male problems is misogyny... what is crafting such a deep load of bull like "patriarchy theory" equivalent to? Secondly, this author is another idiot that doesn't understand the difference between "feminist" and "woman".
/r/MensRights11/10/13 09:02 PM
5

No, I think it's perfectly fine to demean people who are so ignorant that they have failed to open their eyes for the past several decades and see the obvious injustices occurring in front of them. Ignorance is not an excuse, and it's this exact ignorance that causes so many problems.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 08:55 PM
40

Not trying to be mean here... but i find it fucking hilarious when these fucking sexist bigots write this shit after they've apparently had some sort of "EUREKA!" moment. It's like they've had a fucking revelation: "GUYS GUYS GUYS LISTEN!!!.. What are we doing here?!!!! It's ludicrous that people have to actually go above and beyond splitting current assets equally and actually pay money AFTER the divorce... WHO WOULD EVER DO SUCH A THING!!" And it's ALWAYS when a woman finally get's affected. T…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 08:53 PM
0

I was kinda hoping someone other than me would poke holes in the arguments I supplied, I basically did... The ONLY fact that is at all relevant in a discussion about whether that sex was rape... is if she willingly participated in it. Whether she said no 20 hours before or 20 minutes before means ultimately nothing if at the time of the intercourse, she consented and willingly participated. The story isn't "She performed oral sex and then the guy forcibly pinned her down and had PiV sex". It's "…
/r/MensRights10/10/13 04:56 PM
10

I know you're trying to be neutral with the "we only have one side of the story" stuff... but doing that is just unnecessary and over complicates things. Yes it's good to try and be neutral/fair, but not at the cost of never actually being able to make a statement on something because you never have all of the facts. Make a conclusion based off of what you know, and then reevaluate it if new information rises. Now that I'm done that little rant: I know you also have an argument for "it's not rap…
/r/MensRights10/10/13 03:08 PM
16

As someone else said... this is not a tough call at all. Even if she didn't initiate a blowjob... it still wouldn't have been rape if he tried to initiate anyway and she accepted. The bold part is the ONLY thing that matters. If she did not decline and instead chose to accept and/or participate... then that is either consent, or implied consent and therefore not rape.
/r/MensRights10/10/13 02:46 PM
50

And everyone else actually acknowledges it as fucked up.
/r/MensRights08/10/13 05:50 PM
1

Again... people think they are planes. "legally demanding that a person go through puberty with a body that is not a plane is cruel".
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:55 PM
-1

It's not worth dumping someone over what's (maybe unfortunately) a common opinion. Just explain to her that you're not like that, and that she shouldn't expect sex every time she wants it from you (though if you do want it when she does, then obviously have fun).
/r/MensRights01/10/13 04:00 AM
5

so while it's accurate to say they "control it" it doesn't necessarily mean they own it or they're spending it for their benefit. It's still an obvious advantage... especially when taking into account "the wage gap".
/r/MensRights30/09/13 05:54 PM
4

Where did anything anyone said imply no longer trying? Also, I think exposing the people who so often put a block on any attempt to do something is still very much doing something.
/r/MensRights24/09/13 03:10 PM
4

Look at what happens when the MRM tries to group up... time and time again they get shut down by the local feminists with calls of misogyny, or rape supporters, or wife-abusers... as well as stuff like "feminism is already working on it". Look at the UofT protests for CAFE. Look at what happened at schools that try to start men's issues groups.
/r/MensRights24/09/13 01:17 PM
2

Yeah... no. There's nothing wrong with giving someone an extra crate. There's everything wrong with taking a crate away from someone.
/r/MensRights17/09/13 04:18 AM
1

One isolated incident != rape culture.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 10:12 PM
1

Wait so now rape culture exists because it happened to a boy? Yes, because the way female rape and male rape are treated is vastly different. Last I checked, women can be raped according to the FBI... men can't... for just one example. This subreddit will argue to no end about how rape culture is not a thing but now it is a boy that got raped and people are excusing it no one says a thing about it? Because different people have different definitions of things, and again, what exists for boys may…
/r/MensRights16/09/13 10:10 PM
2

what is good/bad feminism as they have a vested interest. And women don't have a vested interest? Your friend is a fucking retard.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 05:06 AM
-1

You could say that about literally anything.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 10:18 PM
2

Actually, by definition... it doesn't.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 08:58 PM
4

What a fucking stupid thing to say.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 07:55 PM
60

Very few people here are actually offended by jokes like that. What they are offended about is the double standard in peoples reactions to the joke. You can joke about murdering a guy and no one cares. You can beat a guy on TV and no one cares. You can even show a guy getting raped on a comedy movie and no one cares. People laugh at these situations and I think it's okay if they laugh at these situations. However, you replace any of those people with a woman in any of those situations, and sudde…
/r/MensRights11/09/13 07:54 PM
7

In all honesty? You probably have to start getting men to falsely accuse women of these crimes. Once a poor little single mom get's sent to prison for a few years on a false accusation, the media would actually pick it up and make a shitfit over how outrageous it is that someone could go to jail based on only the word of another person. But that would first require people to actually take male victims of rape seriously in the first place.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 03:30 PM
2

I would hardly call it "with intent to injure or kill".... but it is most definitely poisoning.
/r/MensRights11/09/13 01:43 PM
5

Why not rape? It's been shown time and time and time again that it's by far the most effective tool a woman has at absolutely fucking over a man, and 95% of the time there are next to no repercussions for it. This is why actually punishing false accusers is so important. If there's no disincentive, then why wouldn't people use false accusations?
/r/MensRights11/09/13 01:42 PM
1

IT's not like you just go to the level and do it once. To do a "level 5", means you just worked your way through the previous 4 levels. Which means you've ran half a Km already with 32 dead stops+ 180's inbetween.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 11:41 PM
6

I don't see the difference between the last two.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 08:18 PM
1

Yeah, I would agree with that. Saying "she deserved to get raped because she did X" is most definitely wrong. But saying "She was stupid and didn't do X and that's why she got raped" is just fact.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 05:42 PM
8

You're trying to be overly sensitive. The rapist is 100% at fault for raping. The victim could also potentially be at fault for doing things that "significantly increase your chances to be raped", or rather, not doing things that reduce your chances. Saying a victim failed to minimize risk (Especially in obvious ways) is not blaming them for being raped... it's blaming them for failing to reduce their chances/being risky. If I leave my car doors unlocked every night, I will inevitably get robbed…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 03:36 PM
5

A false rape accusation, in the eyes of the law, and I'm sure most sane people, is a lesser crime than murder. Lesser crime than murder... but what about attempted kidnapping?
/r/MensRights03/09/13 09:17 PM
62

Couldn't that be said of the punishment for any crime? "Guys, guys guys, 10 years is too much and will have way too serious of an impact on this guys children. Yes murdering that guy was wrong... but PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!". If you don't want your kids to live without their parents, then don't attempt to ruin other peoples lives and commit crimes while being a parent... it's pretty fucking simple.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 03:01 PM
5

Pretty much. It doesn't take much to see how much money goes to female specific DV shelters and rape awareness/support and all that shit to see that there is most definitely monetary incentive. We're talking hundreds of millions of dollars here... and there's a lot of people out there that need to justify their gender studies degrees.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 01:30 AM
81

To add, it happened because the feminists that make these things have an agenda... and that agenda is to paint women as the only possible victims of rape, as well as massively inflate that number so they can justify their job position and get money.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 07:08 PM
1

Yeah, that's fair. IF she has the choice to continue working or do whatever... then I don't think she should get anything. but if the guy says "hey, stay at home full-time and raise the kids", then I could understand.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 03:17 PM
6

If she gets married and has children and stays at home to care for them, there is an economic opportunity cost involved in all of that And? It's a choice. What if she doesn't get married and chooses to live in Africa for a few years? Should someone step in there to pay her for her choice to not be working as much?
/r/MensRights30/08/13 03:14 PM
3

It's an interesting concept, that the parent of a child must put the child through something someone else told them to do. IT is an odd thing to say... but you have to remember that the only time this really happens is when BOTH parents of the child are in disagreement about what to do with their own (and the same) child.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 03:13 PM
19

I'm very curious as to how these fucking people function in society. I mean, when custody was decided, any history of violence or abuse or addiction should have been brought up... and if it was, then the court made the decision to allow visitation despite that. A mother has no right overriding the courts judgement... And then we just have the inverse: "A fathers decision to steal the child away from the mother because she is abusive is the right decision"... How is that any different?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:57 PM
1

Making women register does not help men, but it does hurt women. It helps some men, because if the draft were to ever be started, some men would not go since some women could be taking their place. Again, you treat "men" as just some sort of homogeneous blob instead of a collection of individuals. The fact that you would rather see say, 100,000 men drafted instead of 50,000 men and 50,000 women. The only other difference besides those numbers, is that one is gender discriminatory, and the other …
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:27 PM
1

And then I explained why its not a womans responsibility to fix men's discrimination against men before wanting the right to vote. TIL only men can vote, and that men operate as some sort of hivemind and are all responsible for each others actions.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:23 PM
1

Then you value a women's life/freedom over a man's. The point of any social movement should be to make lives better, not worse. So you choose to keep women's lives the same at the expense of having ONLY men's lives get worse. A non-sexist person would see absolutely no difference between a male-only draft and a mixed draft.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:23 PM
1

But the draft is a male problem, as a result of a male commander in chief starting a war and male politicians choosing to draft males. Theres no reason for a woman to feel the need to take responsibility there. You're a fucking retard, and that's all that really needs to be said. Do you think ANY of that would change if Hillary Clinton was elected president? Does the gender of whoever happens to be president somehow justify any discrimination they perform on people who are that same gender? Get …
/r/MensRights28/08/13 01:22 PM
1

If tomorrow, I became president, and I said: runner64, I have the absolute power to make one decision... I can a) Keep the draft/selective service exactly the same, or b) I can expand the draft/SS to include both men and women... what do you choose? What would you do? Abolishing it entirely is not an option at that point.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:31 AM
1

I don't think child support really fits. It's not like women currently get custody, AND pay child support, and now men want custody without paying child support. Women get custody which is the privilege, but also the responsibility of actually raising the child. Paying child support is just a different responsibility... and one that is often not applied equally. So as I said, it's not like men are trying to get the privilege of something women have, without also wanting to take on the responsibi…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:30 AM
1

Oh, sorry, I didn't realize it had to be done already, like all the zilch that the MRM has accomplished. you keep bringing up the fact that the MRM hasn't done anything (yet) to try and do what exactly? When a good chunk of feminists use it as a derogative, does that really surprise you? When the idea that maybe men shouldn't be discriminated against under law if worthy of protest by feminists (and like it or not, they are currently the mainstream)... yeah, that''s not really saying much other t…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:45 PM
2

Innocent people go to prison after being proven beyond a reasonable doubt I'd argue that it wasn't "beyond a reasonable doubt" then
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:06 PM
3

The draft was always tied with someones right to vote. The draft is the entire reason the voting age was lowered to 18. People could only vote at 21, but could be drafted at 18... they thought that being able to be drafted without being able to vote wasn't cool, so they changed that. Pushing for the vote for women, without also simultaneously pushing for themselves to be included in the draft (in even the smallest capacity) is just asking for privileges without the accompanying responsibilities.…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 07:59 PM
2

A documentary... that isn't even made yet? Of all the things you could have picked... that's it? That totally makes me forget shit like VAWA or Title IX. Because you're saying feminism never helps men... but really, neither does the MRM. Not much, at least. One has power, the other doesn't. The former is the reason for the latter. When you have feminists blocking the creation of men's centers, you can't really blame the MRM for not accomplishing anything, and then use that "fact' as a reason why…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 07:09 PM
4

Were feminist organizations responsible for or supportive of the draft before it was discontinued? Can you clarify?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:58 PM
2

Yup, you got my point exactly. Some gender roles do exist (obviously), but in the end, it's still nothing actually enforced. The people they influence are still entirely capable of making choices for themselves, so it really is a non-issue . The only way for that to be fixed, is for people to make the choice and break the molds themselves... as long as it is entirely possible for them to do that... then nothing more needs to be done.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:56 PM
4

Actually, I frequently see MRAs on this subreddit and even the big-ticket MRAs suggesting that womens' "problems" are trifling or nonexistent, Example? It's one thing to call a specific issue not a problem... it's another to say that they have zero problems ever. I'd be very surprised to see the latter. And whenever feminists try to help men MRAs piss and moan about how they're trying to destroy men, Show me one example where feminism has ever helped men... ever. I very rarely see MRAs do any fo…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:53 PM
0

So we have to protect women from their own choices now? Really? Yeah, I guess women are the equivalent of stupid children who aren't capable of actually understanding the consequences of their choices/actions /sarcasm.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:46 PM
7

Please explain how women getting the vote without also getting the draft was equality?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:36 PM
2

Was this brigaded or are commenters here just turning retarded?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:35 PM
2

That's because apparently women are helpless little children that should always be looked over by big strong men.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:33 PM
15

I agree with the concerns from the other side, that decisions like this one may dissuade real victims from coming forward Only if you use their definition of due process... which is non-existent. Innocent until PROVEN guilty. If they can't be 100% proven to be manufacturing a lie... then they have nothing to worry about. If they actually were a real victim, then that's impossible.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 04:31 PM
6

The MRM doesn't claim to deal with women's problems as well (sorry if I was unclear), and it also doesn't try to say that women don't have problems that need dealing with (as in, it's not trying to make itself the "exclusive" gender rights movement). You have a ton of feminists saying "we care about men too, so don't worry about it, we got it"... and then people believe them... and then they either do nothing, or they do bad (look at how schools have changed in the past 20 years). I have much le…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:52 PM
10

There are absolutely some issues today that women face that can give them a disadvantage (on average) when compared to men In the west... what exactly would those be? And how would you propose to solve them?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:45 PM
4

Not me. When your supposed "equality" movement is titled after just one of the genders... you should kinda start questioning shit right away.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 03:55 AM
1

but wanting a little she/brown/queer in the sea of he/white/straight does actually 'say' diversity. If the only way for these groups to "talk about their issues" is to be blatantly discriminatory... then fuck em.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 12:54 PM
2

You're an idiot.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 03:53 AM
6

Going to social media?
/r/MensRights23/08/13 09:26 PM
24

Yeah, because r/mensrights TOTALLY brigaded them and there is a massive hidden IRC somewhere where subscribers here organize to upvote posts..
/r/MensRights23/08/13 08:08 PM
2

I was referring to men as a group. I know...which is why you are wrong. Whether some person in power happens to be a man or not is completely irrelevant to me and anything involving my life. IF tomorrow Obama was replaced with a woman... I wouldn't suddenly become any more or less privileged.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 08:05 PM
9

You can tell them all you want... but having a hissy-fit when the owner then says "I don't care, I'd rather be honest than 'professional'" is just ridiculous.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 08:04 PM
11

It's not "someone you work with". It's more like, you volunteering at a company I own, and then bitching and moaning and creating a media frenzy because you don't like the way I run my own company.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 07:03 PM
9

And this is basically it in a nutshell. Instead of creating their own spaces where they can have their own rules... they infect things that other people have been created and try to forcibly bend it to their will.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 07:02 PM
5

I think you are confusing "some men" with "all men". You should rethink that, and then realize how full of shit the whole "institutional sexism" thing is.... especially considering the fact that women are 50% more represented in post-secondary graduates. And this is completely ignoring the fact that all of that goes out the window the second you have a female professor or dean or president...
/r/MensRights23/08/13 06:57 PM
-1

Which i wouldn't be surprised about if it were to happen. Isn't the rate of divorce after the first one like insanely fucking high?
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:33 PM
-1

How about instead of bitching about it, you use the picture, and the problem it represents, as a starting point for actual discussion.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:16 PM
-4

Doesn't matter... Child support is for the child. You act like her spending her own money on her son is a big deal... she's the mother with primary custody, that's her job.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:15 PM
3

My son was told this year that he doesn't get a birthday party I know in the grand scheme of things, a birthday party isn't that big of a deal but to a kid (unless he's like over 15 already), they are... could that not be proof that her mother is an unfit parent... or at the very least, is not putting your sons priorities ahead of her own? I mean, depending on the judge, You could get lucky and they'll say "look, your sons father is giving you this much money... so unless you are buying him a to…
/r/MensRights23/08/13 02:13 PM
1

Does no one under 18 ever go past a magazine stand in New York that sells adult magazines? Notice how they are generally in plastic and hidden behind something... so that you actually have to purchase it before seeing anything... at least it's that way in Canada.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 04:47 AM
0

And the society that this occurred in doesn't have the same "standard" you seem to hold. so you're saying people in Australia are free to walk around with their dick flopping out (or otherwise completely naked?) Movies can have as much nudity as they want and it won't get an 18+ rating? This is a college publication not an elementary school publication. Does no one under 18 ever go to a college campus? And even ignoring the whole "under 18" thing... you still can't go around flipping your dick o…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 09:34 PM
-5

neither party should be punished. I disagree. Unless you think it should be okay for people to walk around in public with their dicks hanging out, like around schools, or playgrounds.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:35 PM
17

And? His point still stands... you wouldn't be allowed to show a picture of a bunch of dicks. They are sexual organs... that's just biology... and believe it or not, the girls you see in porn do in fact have real vaginas. They don't go photoshop every frame.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:34 PM
18

I think it's insane. First of all, we as a society have decided that stuff like that is not appropriate for people under 18. You may disagree with this, but that's what the standard is. Plastering it on the front page of a magazine where kids might see it is just in really bad taste, and I think does a lot to show the sense of entitlement that many feminists have (and you just KNOW this was some feminist doing this). Secondly, you have feminists causing a stink over a team's logo being too "rape…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:32 PM
3

I was going to say this. I mean, half of those women plead guilty and are now convicted and in jail... and it's still "allegedly".
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:27 PM
3

This reminds me of an OKCupid graph I saw once. Basically, for visual ratings (on a scale of 1-10 I believe)... the way men rated women more or less fell on a bell curve with the middle being on 5. Now for the graph of what women rated men... it was basically a bell curve with the left half chopped off, and pushed all the way to the left (I probably should know the technical name for this). Anyway, long story short... while the average women was rated a 5 by men, with a relatively equal distribu…
/r/MensRights21/08/13 08:13 PM
2

I liked your answer... but don't even bother with SRS. They don't welcome discussion, I mean, I would be incredibly surprised if you aren't currently banned/being banned from every SRS sub.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 08:04 PM
1

Get Sue to like text a confession or something to your brother... something in writing that you can have your brother bring to court that is unchangeable by the pressures that the mother is putting on Sue.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 08:02 PM
8

Interesting... but that's still like basically "The leading cause of this thing that happens 4.5 times a year... is this thing". It's misleading to even point out, because it makes people believe it's an epidemic when it isn't.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 02:58 AM
1

and this wouldn't be an issue if we offered free abortions for society's collective benefit. True. Why aren't they capable of getting an abortion? Because like it or not, some people still oppose them. I know several people who really SHOULD have gotten an abortion, but did not for reasons completely unrelated to wanting the child. Also, it's not like abortion is a 100% no-risk procedure, it shouldn't really be used as birth control for both that reason, and cost. We have people take exams to ea…
/r/MensRights20/08/13 01:05 PM
12

Those people are so fucking stupid. Sorry, but top comment from that post. The reason 'prevention measures' like this are so messed up are not because the put responsibility on women to prevent rape, but because the underlying implication is that 'rape is a normal fact of life, so try to be less of a target so it happens to someone else instead'. These ideas are excellent methods for not being a target, but they imply that there's not actually a problem in the first place. First of all.... the u…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:22 PM
1

So we expect someone to be enhanced enough to understand risks but not enhanced enough to manage them? Yes. Because even if you "manage" risks... there is still the possibility that they either screw it up, or it breaks, and a pregnancy happens... and there is just no dealing with that (other than abortion) for someone that age. I mean, an unintended pregnancy for someone who is 18+ puts a damper on their plans maybe... but it's possible for them to deal with. Someone younger then that is just n…
/r/MensRights19/08/13 03:01 PM
1

Are you saying they shouldn't due to lack of education? Would you be okay with it if there was adequate education? No, just in general. Also, by education, I meant education on why it's probably not a good idea. The risk is just too great IMO. 14 year olds can take on responsibility, but I think that is a little bit much. So I definitely don't think they should promote it. But if you don't want to promote it, and still want to educate on it, then you almost have to denounce it.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 05:57 PM
6

The reason is feminists. I mean, in some countries, paternity tests under any circumstance are illegal (or maybe just without the mothers permission... France is one I believe). Their reasoning: "the family unit". I mean, let's completely ignore the fact that the ONLY reason that a paternity test would harm the family is if the mother was lying and/or cheating... it's clearly the fathers fault for simply exposing the truth.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 04:26 PM
4

Predatory? MAYBE... I don't think every situation of 18 yo with 14yo has to be like that, but the possibility is definitely there. Regardless, I don't think the solution to this needs to have anything to do with the criminal justice system... ESPECIALLY if the "victim" was totally for it, and isn't experiencing any negative impacts whatsoever. I mean, as much as I do think it's wrong,... if it's already happened, and the 14 yo is okay with it... why force trauma onto them? I don't think there's …
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:31 PM
6

Yeah, people need to realize this. I mean, I'm Canadian, so even our most far right party is like miles left of the US democrats... so I think I would still vote democrat there for 95% of the issues, but when it comes to gender issues, the dem's are so fucking far up feminism's ass, it's unbelievable.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:26 PM
17

That's really the issue. I mean, I don't disagree with the way she was treated. The problem is the absolutely fucking MASSIVE disparity in treatment the person get's depending on their gender. It's just a shame that most of the "mainstream" are so incredibly incapable of rational thought that they don't connect the dots and say "Huh, if I'm so outraged about this 18 year old girl getting the book thrown at her for a consensual relationship, why don't I feel the same when it happens to an 18 year…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:24 PM
1

Read the other exchanges below this. I said " a lot of people", not "everyone on r/atheism", nor did I say "the majority of people on r/atheism".
/r/MensRights09/08/13 09:13 PM
-5

http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/yi4yf/ratheism_and_the_subject_of_womens_rights/ Is one in just 5 seconds of searching.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 07:44 PM
1

Yeah. Agreed.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 07:42 PM
1

Apparently the MRM does nothing... but then they also plaster the names of people? OH, and they also brought up that whole SPLC thing... and then from there it's just like reading a list of Jezebels "things we don't like about the MRM". But because they seem to think it's incredibly difficult to answer these questions, I'll actually just go through them: Why don't feminists doxx MRM people? Well first of all, what does this have to do with anything? I don't see how saying what feminists do or do…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 05:21 PM
3

I never meant most, or even the majority... just a lot. Enough that people like Myers somehow get a really big soap box. You are right though, a lot of people are very opposed to atheism+... but for a few months there I definitely noticed a lot of people getting friendly. I think it was right before Dawkins called out that movement (or at least Watson) for what it was.
/r/MensRights09/08/13 05:19 PM
9

Yeah, honestly... this doesn't really surprise me. I feel bad for the people accused, because they were the ones who tried to stop the infection that was feminism in the skeptics community (atheism+), but still. This is what happens when shit like r/atheism exists... a shit ton of people there are just sheep, and their reasons for being atheist are no better than the reasons some people are fundamentalist christians. So when people come in, spouting all of this bullshit as "fact", and then put a…
/r/MensRights09/08/13 01:07 PM
3

I've been away for the last week... what sparked this? Intortus being a hypocrite again?
/r/MensRights06/08/13 03:24 AM
10

What I find hilarious about all their "you don't even know you're privileged" bullshit... is that I could easily just apply it to them. I mean, they say I;m privileged and I just don't know it. so I tell them they are privileged and just don't know it. What's the difference?
/r/MensRights25/07/13 04:29 AM
1

No, it's solipsism... from a female. At least that's how I interpreted it.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 09:38 PM
3

That was hardly generalizing.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 01:06 PM
3

He never contacts the child. As far as his child knows, he’s a ghost. No visits, no toys, no pictures, nothing. He should also not be allowed to contact the mother. If he reaches out to the mother, she has full rights to sue him for child support, using that as evidence that he actually does want a relationship with his ex and his biological child. This is for life. If you contact the child on her 18th birthday, you owe 18 years of back child support. If you contact the child when she’s 30, same…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:13 PM
7

While everything I've read so far is typical feminist hateful bullshit... the father not being on the birth certificate is something I would agree with. IF you want the child, and you want to be a part of it's life... then you better support that child. If you want nothing to do with the child, then you have nothing to do with the child... it's that simple.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:07 PM
1

Look at the amount of funding spent on women's health vs men's health.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:01 PM
12

I actually don't agree that this disparity is a problem. Well it is, but I don't think that that is where we need to apply the solution. I think it would be far better to try and equalize the life expectancy rather than implement a bunch of sex-discriminatory policies for paying out SS. Unless they just made it individual based, but then that defeats the purpose a little bit.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 03:00 PM
8

Was going to say this... this author doesn't know what hate speech is and how it's defined.. in Canada at least. I'm allowed to say (excuse the racism) "I hate niggers" or something else really offensive. I'm not allowed to say "Let's go beat up a bunch of niggers" ... depending on if it's actually credible that people would then go out and do it.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:58 PM
6

feminists are one of the few groups in society who take the idea of men being raped seriously. Which is why it was feminists that defined rape in such a way that excludes 90% of all male victims with female perpetrators for FBI/CDC studies and such. Give me a fucking break, you can't spout that baseless horseshit here.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:55 PM
5

We already have a ton of girls that post here. Hell, I'd argue that the most prominent MRA we have is a girl.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 01:01 PM
5

Because they don't believe they are lying. They parrot the same false shit that the feminist leaders feed them. It reinforces their world view so they never actually question it... which isn't really any better but..
/r/MensRights15/07/13 10:44 PM
1

Yeah, I figured as much (I'm assuming you my second last sentence).
/r/MensRights15/07/13 04:54 PM
1

Honestly, I can't fucking stand christians who say they don't hate homosexuals but still don't approve of homosexuality. "I don't hate you, I just think the way you were born and your entire lifestyle makes you deserving of an eternity of torment in hell" And even if they personally do approve of it: "I like gays, I just follow a book that says homosexuality is an abomination and you should be put to death.. but lol j/k, that part isn't real" (and they still may think you are going to hell, they…
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:15 PM
1

They still allow anyone to post
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:13 PM
1

I disagree. Gender norms harm those who would rather not be in those norms. But then I guess you could say "just because there are norms, doesn't mean we have to expect people to follow them". And then I'll say "is it even possible?"
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:12 PM
3

Well that's a problem in and of itself.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 07:22 PM
2

Also true.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 07:21 PM
1

Yup, my bad. Thanks.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 07:21 PM
39

A larger percentage of women that have to pay child support... don't pay it, then the percent of of men that are are required to pay it and don't.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 08:37 PM
1

You're right. Thanks for correcting my wording. However, I still think him being detained over them is ridiculous.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 06:50 PM
1

Unless the guy had absolutely zero proof that he worked there... then the fact that they were trespassing is a guaranteed fact.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 06:41 PM
8

You don't just get to automatically arrest someone every time they have a random phone call against them.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 04:54 AM
2

I'm actually not sure off of the top of my head. My best guess, would be at the very least, a woman could commit rape if she penetrated a male. I don't know if forced envelopment would count.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 07:55 PM
9

I honestly doubt it.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:33 PM
5

I think the cut-off point for that though is past like, 30k. If you can't afford those things at 30k then you just suck at money management. What I would be interested in, is to see how likely each person is of messaging people above or below their income level.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:32 PM
56

I'd say it's just an outlier from the sample size being so small since most people that age won't be making that kind of money. If there's only 5 22 year olds in that group, and 4 of them are 400lb's... well, that's potentially why they aren't getting messages.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:31 PM
8

I have to say, that was a good response, and hopefully it gets as much air time as the original posters, because IMO, it really shows the true intentions behind the posters. My only suggestion is to include something like "we realize saying 'don't be that girl" could be seen as offensive... now you know how men feel all the time". BEcause if that wasn't the point of the "don't be that girl" statement, then it's just as sexist as the original posters.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:29 PM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1i272a/ctv_with_girlwriteswhat_on_the_postering_in/cb0h2fq I'd maybe think of them like that.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:26 PM
1

My only problem with these posters... is that they said "don't be that girl". Even if girls actually did make up 99.999% of false rape accusations, it doesn't matter... they were still doing the same thing feminists do. Now, if that was the point... then people have to make that known and say "What? Singling out women is offensive? I know, I intended them to be offensive, so maybe now you know how we feel and will stop it with your sexist bullshit". But if the message was actually supposed to be…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:25 PM
2

IS THAT SARCASM I DETECT? Though seriously, someone should write in an anonymous tip that this lady raped them so then she can have police knock on her door.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:20 PM
10

I've said this in another thread, but I'll say it here. I think anyone who thinks false accusations aren't a big deal, really shows their true colors when it comes to this topic. If they actually cared about stopping actual rape, then people making false rape accusations should absolutely outrage them, as it does far more harm to the plight of actual legitimate rape victims than any other thing could. The fact that they defend it (or rather, oppose people who oppose FRA's) really shows that they…
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:19 PM
1

IT's easy to say that... but do you honestly believe that the majority of people who get divorced didn't think that they knew the person really well? Unfortunately, a deceitful person was probably deceitful the entire time, and sometimes it's very hard to pick up on their manipulations.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 03:30 AM
8

Yeah, at the very least, it means that they are willing to try and fuck you over IF something happens. Even if you were 100% sure that "something" would never happen... It's still very telling about what kind of person they are to do that.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:46 PM
5

Not that I’m marrying for money, but I want a marriage to be one where we take care of each other in various ways, Well then stay married, and you won't have a problem.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:44 PM
1

Well, now you are pretty positive.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:13 PM
0

If YOU make it YOU support it. That's all fine and dandy... but that's not the logic we apply to women.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:11 PM
3

I actually just had a discussion regarding this in another thread. The arguments against it are pretty funny. One person's analogy was "If two people make a bomb together that will go off in one hour... and only one person has a button they can press at any time to defuse the bomb... who is responsible if the bomb goes off and kills a bunch of people". They actually thought that the responsibility for the explosion was shared equally despite one person having 100% control over whether it actuall…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:10 PM
6

I can't help but laugh at how defensive they get. "I don't think someone should yell rape, when a rape didn't happen". "STOP RAPE APOLOGOZING" "I'm not, I just said this was for when a rape did NOT happen". "lololfeminism". For most things I can understand the weird twisted logic they use to justify things... but defending false rape accusations, or rather, opposing people who fight false rape accusations is not one of them... I really have no words as false rape accusations both hurt the accuse…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 05:55 PM
2

I think it's very telling that they take so much offense to this. Why people feel the need to defend something that is blatantly towards false accusers I will never know. My only beef with the poster is the "don't be that girl". We disagree with "men can stop rape" because it unfairly targets men... we shouldn't be hypocrites (even though I think this example is even more one-sided).
/r/MensRights10/07/13 02:00 PM
5

I can honestly say that I would rather be tried for murder than for rape... assuming the max sentences were equal. I guess there's also the fact that with murder... it's 100% known that someone died... but still.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 01:10 AM
48

Here's what's scary. If they were going to convict him without the existence of this video... then that means that any evidence they had was simply circumstantial or hesaid/shesaid. That is nothing even remotely close to "beyond a reasonable doubt". I mean, it's fucking insane that people are now having to prove their innocence instead of others needing to prove their guilt. You guys want "rape culture"? This is it. Where nothing resembling actual justice and due process exists anything near tri…
/r/MensRights09/07/13 04:11 PM
7

That's when I'd start "accidentally" dropping all of her fucking valuable hsit on the ground. I seriously don't know how people can be so fucking heartless. I mean, even if you fucking hate the guy... he's still a person... no one should be that happy/smug about someone getting put into such a shit situation. As you said, someone like that is just not a good person. I'd seriously question my (or rather, your wifes) friendship with her.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 03:55 PM
5

And this attitude that feminism constantly promotes is for the benefit of women remember!!! /s
/r/MensRights05/07/13 05:37 PM
2

I read all of the paragraphs, but thanks for creating a strawman argument that's easy for you to knock down. Lol. Your entire response is an attempt to turn this into a contest of "who had it worse", which is completely pointless exercise I agree... except when people use "who was oppressed more" as justification for their bigotry today. In such a case, it is in fact necessary to show that pretty much everyone had a shit life in the past. So, I think it's pretty embarrassing towards men that the…
/r/MensRights05/07/13 03:39 PM
11

am embarrassed that "Define oppressed" is the top voted comment for this question. Because unlike yourself apparently, people can read past the first 2 words and see the other 7 entire paragraphs of thought. Many of the jobs and lifestyle options that were available to men were not available to women. And as I said, many of the lifestyle options that were available to women were not available to men. Said lifestyle options also happened to not involve working in dangerous jobs (pre-workplace saf…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 11:43 PM
6

I'm not talking about "certain cultures"... I'm talking about western culture. If feminism is going to be applied to western society, by women living in western society... then they cannot use the plights of women on the other side of the world to justify their bigotry (and it definitely qualifies as that ) here. As you said though... even if it was, it's not relevant at all to present day, so I don't really know why it's brought up... except by people who think they deserve like reparations or …
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:24 PM
37

Define oppressed. I mean, if "not being able to vote" counts as oppression, then yes women were oppressed. I think the problem though, is that when people say "women were oppressed"... the context is that they were the ONLY ones oppressed, or that relative to males, they were much more oppressed. So if we change the question from "were women oppressed" to "where women oppressed relatively/compared to men"... then I think I would actually answer no. Yes women didn't have the right to vote, but ne…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 01:26 PM
1

I think that if someone refuses to even try, I don't think anyone here refuses to try and judge their arguments rationally. Conceding the fact doesn't say anything about what I think should be done about it. Well that's the thing... facts are facts. Feminism isn't "accepting facts" (well, in some cases it is, but that's getting into thinking things are facts when they aren't... like patriarchy theory)... feminism IS the "what should be done about it". Capitalism is also able to make itself immun…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:58 AM
1

1) Shit parents. 2) Implying that feminism does anything for stay-at-home dads. 3) If this is a #3 issue... well... I think that says a LOT 4) So don't show your ass and buy clothes that allow your body type to fall under the schools rules. OR is this the type of feminism where we treat girls like children who can't actually think ? 5) She's the only one that gave a negative connotation to being a lesbian. 6) So women are like children who apparently can't ask a simple question. /s 7) Birth cont…
/r/MensRights04/07/13 12:29 AM
0

"affect both men and women" doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means. I mean, we're in a thread where people are saying that the patriarchy hurts men too.... That's clearly "affecting" them, but that doesn't mean it's right.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:14 PM
6

At least try to be honest. Do you or do you not believe that the only reason people are opposed to abortion is because it's a "tick" against women, and it has absolutely nothing to do with believing the fetus is a full-on person?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:12 PM
2

So do you think that if I believe in all of that... that I'm a feminist? You don't believe there is any requirement for a belief in patriarchy theory or any of the other ideological aspects of (academic) feminism?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 10:12 PM
1

you're right, that is kind of confusing.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:15 PM
2

Still? That is my first reply to you.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:15 PM
2

I still disagree with that... To even acknowledge that something like DV is a "women's issue" when men make up the majority of victims is just asinine. So while I agree with the sentiment, I disagree with the premise it's based on.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:15 PM
3

Rich is easy; but if you have to settle for "less rich", adding "straight, white, intelligent [can't forget how important it is to ace all of the standardized tests] male" does improve things as well. I disagree. It CAN improve things... that doesn't mean it will.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:10 PM
12

It's not even that "straight, white, male = lowest difficulty setting" is entirely wrong... it's just that it's incredibly flawed. One could easily say: "Being a straight, white, male offers the best chances of having a "privileged life" ". That's fine, and honestly, probably fairly accurate. As you said though, socioeconomic status is still the greatest indicator. The problem though, is when someone takes these probabilities and averages, and applies them to every single individual in that grou…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:10 PM
4

If you haven't noticed... many feminists treat women like children.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:06 PM
2

What do you think the definition of a feminist is? Why are you a feminist?
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:05 PM
5

Abortion has absolutely nothing to do with gender, beyond the fact that it happens to only affect women. If men were capable of being pregnant, the exact same people would still be opposed to abortion for the same same reason.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:03 PM
1

I think your conclusion is right (bias against men in the judicial system)... but your argument to get there is a bit wrong. People applying to jobs are a personal choice. The sentencing that someone receives is totally out of their hands.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:01 PM
2

Not everywhere.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 08:00 PM
1

Which has nothing to do with the discrepancy in representation for bachelor level stem fields. And still isn't big enough to explain the big gap their is.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:59 PM
2

Which is why affirmative action is so wrong.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:57 PM
2

Women out-graduate men by 50%. Please don't give me that "not the same type of access" horseshit. girls in high school are discouraged from taking STEM classes, Yeah, discouraged by all the extra scholarships that girls get by going into STEM classes. If you think there is more encouragement for boys than girls, you are delusional. . When you look at C-level jobs, the next step up the ladder, they are overwhelmingly held by males. Which would obviously have nothing to do with the fact that men n…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:55 PM
8

Please do not turn the abortion debate into a gender battle. Some men oppose it for the exact same reasons some women oppose it... and it has absolutely nothing to do with anything even resembling "oppression".
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:06 PM
2

The problem with that way of thinking, is that I could easily say: "But djscrub, 99.99% of men who are victims of their wives abuse don't report it... imagine the world you live in now, except the practice of wife-on-husband abuse is 10000x higher than you think it is". My statement is just as "valid" (I put that in quotes because any statement regarding stuff like this without statistics isn't valid at all... which is my point) as yours. And then you could reply with some even crazier completel…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 07:04 PM
1

Read what I said: "I wonder if"
/r/MensRights03/07/13 06:58 PM
1

I wonder if it could be caused by the fact that women are more likely to be "single-issue voters". Like "Hey, this guy isn't opposed to abortion... I'm voting for him regardless of what his other policies are". Or "Hey, Obama supports VAWA... sound's good to me"
/r/MensRights03/07/13 04:13 PM
8

the persistent pay gap It's this right here why so many people have problems with feminists. How many times does fact that the pay gap has almost nothing to do with any sort of societal bias and almost everything to do with personal choices have to be proven.... yet you keep repeating this bullshit. I mean, you are so apparently so incapable of actually educating yourself on the issue, yet you spout this stuff off as fact, while also demonizing the people who oppose it... and then you wonder why…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:54 PM
3

I know this is old, but you have a very severe flaw in your thinking. You imply that just because someone doesn't concede something, it means that they have fallen into an ideological pit. Let me address your concessions though: When I've argued that domestic violence is gender symmetrical, feminists have pointed out that wives are more likely than husband to actually end up dead from it, and the statistics bear this out. Sure... but does this mean that we should take feminisms approach and 100%…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 03:41 PM
6

Less and less I'm forgiving people for simply doing things "without thinking about it". I like to think that we as humans are at least a LITTLE bit better then that.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:39 AM
3

I think the only reason you really need is: His body his choice. You wouldn't give an infant a permanent tattoo, or any other non-reversible procedure... why is circumcision any different? The only actual benefit (and even then the studies on this are sketchy) is an STI reduction.... but that doesn't come into play until he'd be old enough to make the choice for himself anyway.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:37 AM
2

AS other people have said... keep records of it all. Get an official statement from HR that "do nothing" is their official response, and then sue the shit out of them. Alternatively, if you are really intent on quitting anyway (which I don't suggest) make a gender-flipped list and send it everywhere and be as creepy as you can be. See if they respond to that, and then also record it, and sue anyway for discrimination.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 10:05 PM
1

Nothing is proven with absolutely zero exceptions, ever I know, that's why I was so specific.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 02:08 AM
1

I think you answered your question then. Stuff like paternity fraud, most definitely causes harm.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 08:59 PM
2

If it was literally 100% proven with absolutely ZERO exceptions? Then I wouldn't really have a problem with it. As long as the company is up front about it then I don't see the issue. I guess the company would also need to have a need of wanting less productive workers for less pay. If it was 95% proven, then I would say the company should switch to performance based pay, or simply just not hire the workers who are inadequate if they don't want to pay equal money for less work.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:12 AM
3

Yeah, sorry for being unclear. That whole example was under the assumption that the pay wasn't actually based on individual performance.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 11:34 PM
3

Well it depends if the job is strictly performance based. IF it isn't, and it's simply under the assumption that a woman will perform worse than a man, and therefore be paid less regardless of what she actually does... then that's wrong.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 11:28 PM
5

And what happens when you treat someone as a person instead of just as a man or as a woman. Stop judging people primarily by their gender. It's completely irrelevant that the majority of people that have been in power are male... because the massive majority of males still have not been in power.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:14 PM
2

What I find interesting, is this line: they fail to recognize how much easier he had it than Gillard ever did. Just looking at this as objectively as possible.... if it's true he has an easier time, and we assume that he is at the very least just as competent as her... then won't he be doing a better job by definition? I mean, if you take two equal runners, yet one of them has to run uphill... wouldn't everyone bet on the one that is NOT running up a hill? A Priministers job is to do the best jo…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:11 PM
9

Almost every job is shit we don't want to do... that's why it's a job and they pay you for it.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:02 PM
19

And as ridiculous as that sounds, that is exactly what they are asking. Being a garbage man is a totally different job than working in a nursery... duh (felt it was necessary). I mean, if they wanted to argue something like "Male garbagemen get paid more than female garbage"men" because the men can carry more on average... then sure, sue away, and I'd support them 100%. But this is just ridiculous.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 07:02 PM
2

Why is assaulting someone illegal?
/r/MensRights26/06/13 06:58 PM
6

Can't you see... she's a woman... she couldn't POSSIBLY be held responsible for her own choices. Who the fuck do you think you are treating her as anything other than a child?
/r/MensRights26/06/13 01:45 AM
32

OMG that video. "Don't you think that throwing away due process is bad?" "Well, there's worse things in the world". What a cunt.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 08:52 PM
17

Why is she is your friend still? She just told you that you are an oppressor. She made no exception for "some men" or anything... she said caring about the rights of any man is caring about the rights of an oppressor. It's hard to say but, drop her. I'd have no interest in talking to someone who apparently secretly thinks I hate her and half of the population.
/r/MensRights23/06/13 08:34 PM
5

I think a lot of people here are forgetting one major difference between "Nafalt" and "not all men are like that". One is an ideology that people choose to subscribe to... the other isn't.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 08:05 PM
1

Feminists would make the counter claim that this is because "society brainwashes girls into thinking that voluptuousness is attractive". While I understand it happens, I still think it's a load of shit. If people are going to let themselves get brainwashed and not make up their own minds (even though they are in fact making up their own minds)... then what does that say about these people? Should we start telling them what they are supposed to like? How is that any different?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 04:07 PM
1

It was the same thing with Adria Richards. People were saying "She's only getting outed because she's a woman".... but that is just such a load of shit. There's witchhunts all the fucking time in the tech industry... and the majority of them are men. To even try and play the gender card is just insane and really does cement the fact that people like that NEED to always be the victim.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 04:05 PM
2

shouldn't finding these witnesses be a part of the police's investigation though? And that being said, they could still say something like "The police would like anyone who might have any information on a potential rape that happened at X location on Y time/date to come forward". As for the stuff about sexual history... 100% agree.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 04:03 PM
19

The mother is generally the primary carer. Yeah... because they always get custody. Because the kids still need support even if they aren't with him all the time, they are still his children and he still has responsibility. Then let him take care of them 50% of the time. Because often in a marriage, one partner (usually a woman) sacrifices a career to support the other partner's (usually a man's) career, and alimony is compensation for that. Also, prevents financial abuse. a) That's a choice tha…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:53 PM
6

No one here thinks that marriage has to be a lifelong commitment... obviously people change and that spark that started it all could have long died out. That being said... there is nothing about you wanting to initiate a divorce, that should also mean you are entitled to shit like alimony, or anything except exactly half of what was co-owned by the couple.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:50 PM
2

Well, if they get to decide what oppression is... and get to decide how to react to said oppression... then couldn't just anyone do that? I mean, what's stopping you from saying "you telling me that I can't comment on this is oppression, and don't you dare tell me that I shouldn't say that or act oppressed because of it"... and so on and so forth. I'd say that's the biggest flaw in that logic right there. On an unrelated note: I creeped your post history and noticed you were selling a bike in On…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 01:55 AM
1

That's what's scary about it... hopefully this serves as at least somewhat of an eye opener to some people.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 04:20 AM
3

Get a vasectomy... or wait for RISUG.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:47 AM
5

She doesn't deserve shit IMO. I'm going to assume (I could be wrong, but I doubt it) that she is the one that initiated the divorce. She made the CHOICE to no longer have anything to do with him... and now that things are looking better, she wants back in. Fuck. That.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 01:46 AM
0

Does the fact that they rule the world have anything to do with them being white or male? Would your quality of life suddenly decrease if all of those men were suddenly women?
/r/MensRights15/06/13 10:19 PM
0

nor is real feminism. Prove it Men's Right's isn't about doing to them what they do to us That IS equality. Whether it's bringing women down to men in some areas, or men up to women... it's still equality.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 04:24 PM
8

Who said we are assuming they are only out to help women? Apparently diversity for the sake of diversity is some magical thing, and a 50/50 makeup is inherently better than something else. This is what they themselves believe. To point out their hypocrisy and that they apparently only value diversity when diversity means "more women" is kind of what we should be doing all of the time. I wonder how they would react if we started campaigning for AA for men so that potentially underqualified men ca…
/r/MensRights13/06/13 01:24 PM
15

So I've read most of your comments and have found pretty much nothing that I strongly disagree with... but I just have one question for you... Why do you call yourself a feminist? I mean, you recognize that there are a lot of people who also identify as feminists, who use that label to do a lot of things that you yourself disagree with.... so why do you support them by sharing that title? I mean, simply changing your title doesn't change your own views... but it does stop you lending legitimacy …
/r/MensRights12/06/13 06:42 PM
5

I think the women you quoted is perfectly right. I mean, she's someone who actually got where she was because she liked doing it, and got good at it (aka actual merit)... and now there's this article out there telling people that she needs to be coddled like a child. It's hilarious how sexist it is, yet the people who write shit like this actually believe it's not.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 04:30 PM
1

Selective service for men was cancelled?
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:17 PM
1

That we currently have? OR that feminism has accomplished?
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:17 PM
0

I get that there are many cases where it's "men should be treated with compassion like women are"... but that doesn't mean that every single person in every single situation should be treated with understanding for things they might have done. This is one of those cases... there is no legitimate reason for trying to kill your 6 year old son... ever. No amount of "understanding" will change what she did.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:11 PM
3

That too.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 04:19 AM
3

I was gonna say something similar... maybe if they had some1 up there that was actually competent at playiong the game they were trying to display... instead of just having to have a token female... then this wouldn't have happened to begin with.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 11:52 PM
9

Would they have been allowed to do that? Doubt it. Did they even try?
/r/MensRights10/06/13 04:30 PM
8

Surely anyone who benefits/suffers from a government's decisions should have a say? Not men apparently. They actually have to register for the wars and die in them to get the privilege of having a say.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 04:29 PM
7

I take it you do think women should have the vote. Yes, but I don't think that is really a good example of equalty.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 04:29 PM
34

That's a really good point, and it's actually something I was just posting about earlier this morning. Except I'd also include that the struggles of the past also were successful because they fought just for equality. They didn't fight for "equality + a little bit of AA on the side".
/r/MensRights10/06/13 04:28 PM
2

I tihnk there's a difference between an over 21 women getting her self drunk, and an adult illegally liquoring up someone. Maybe not a huge difference, but there is one. Also, even if he was drunk... he still had to actually consent. Seeing as he can't remember anything, and that we are talking about someone who literally tied someone down and raped them... well... yeah. Not making assumptions, but yeah, it's possible.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 02:51 PM
-1

If you think someone needs an advanced understanding of any theory in order to think "hey, maybe this law that discriminates against men is kind of sexist"... then that person is beyond hope. Equality is not a difficult thing.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 02:42 AM
3

It's not an attack on women as a whole. It's an attack on the systems that privileges women in certain areas. Please show me these "anti-women" (not anti-feminist) beliefs.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 06:32 AM
38

No... they really don't. Look at the percentage of men paying CS (out of total ordered to pay CS) vs women paying CS (again, out of the total ordered to pay CS). Look at how men are jailed for not paying CS while women are basically untouched in that regard. Look at the sentencing disparity between men and women. Seriously, to even remotely suggest that there isn't a massive bias in the legal system towards women (that they take advantage of every single time they are involved in it) is just lau…
/r/MensRights08/06/13 01:07 AM
5

Yeah, it's going to have to come down to a DA or someone actually growing a pair becoming brave enough to just completely make an example out of a false accuser... and then maybe the people who consider it will actually have the thought "do I want go to prison for this?" cross their mind before trying to ruin someones life.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 08:23 PM
3

That surprises me... most games have fairly attractive looking male leads.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 08:04 PM
2

Normally I'm of the opinion that rehab > jail (or at the very least, that jail should be about rehab and not punishment)... but there's gotta be a line here. I think three separate occasions of stabbing someone kind of crosses that line.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:54 PM
4

I most definitely remember reading something similar.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:21 PM
12

Doesn't nobody in the justice system have the brains to figure out that she inflicted on them something of the same nature as a sexual assault? And not only that, but what she did had the potential to be something far worse than that. I mean, if you were given a choice between rape and 10 years in prison (where, at least in the US, you also have a way higher chance of being raped anyway)... I dunno, but I know what I would pick. And I agree with everything else you said. It's terrifying that fal…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 05:20 PM
2

It's funny that you bring up lying about their age... considering in certain circumstances, if a girl lies about her age and she is underage... the man raped her. What's even more stupid (and I know that you already know this)... she could have a forged birth certificate signed and verified by the POTUS and he would still be found guilty of rape. I realize this is actually supposed to be gender neutral... but i've read too many female teacher on male student cases in the last month or so where t…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 02:46 AM
12

"The boy is hiding from the girl...." Oh how I wish there wasn't such a stigma so she could rightfully get knocked the fuck out.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 01:16 AM
2

In all honesty, I wouldn't even mind if there was such a thing as "conditional consent"... as long as those conditions had to be entirely clear, and actually real things. Girl lied about being on BC before a guy has sex with her? That shouldn't be legal. I'm extremely hesitant to call it "rape"... because that word already is grossly over applied... but it should be something.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:18 AM
5

Here's my thoughts as I'm reading it. You can't define a word, and then in that definition say "well actually, this isn't part of the definition because I just changed the definition. Sex (aka intercourse) is P in V. If they use the legal definition of coercion then I'm fine with that... (the definition implying that the act of coercing is illegal in itself). Manipulation? Sorry, I don't trust them to define this in a not fucking retarded way. and even IF someone said "I'll give you a ride home …
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:16 AM
2

Did anyone try to take it to RSN or even ANI? to the what now? Sorry, I'm not fmailiar with any like wikipedia specific lingo.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:09 AM
8

Also, here's the deletion page of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Apex_fallacy You can see what I mean... someone even uses the term "MRA astro-turfing"... despite feminism having this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Feminism
/r/MensRights06/06/13 08:17 PM
6

I forget a lot of the specifics, but basically it was a bunch of feminist/white knight wiki editors wanting to get the article removed for "lack of sources". Apparently the harvard business review isn't a reliable source... yet Anita Sarkeesians blog (used as a source for a bunch of other articles) is. As for the actual reasons why... I'd guess that it's really the best response to feminists trying to use "patriarchy theory" to show this idea of "male privilege". I mean, technically an "apex fal…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 08:09 PM
22

If it's a signed court order... and someone goes against it... isn't there something wrong with that? I mean, wouldn't the judge /court system have something to say/
/r/MensRights06/06/13 06:18 PM
7

I'm fine with any jokes... that's why it's a joke.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 06:17 PM
13

Do you understand what an analogy is?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 06:12 PM
3

Are you the guy that was that wikipedia editor who did something surrounding the article involving "apex fallacy"?
/r/MensRights06/06/13 06:12 PM
1

Yeah, I guess it's pretty easy to say that someone who truly thinks stuff like this, isn't actually functioning that well. I mean, sure they are out there going through the motions, but apparently that's all just a massive cover.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:31 PM
2

Again, it depends on how you define patriarchy... and what implications you try and draw from that definition.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:26 AM
4

I had someone tell me that the fact that women primarily get custody is proof of patriarchy. I accepted that and then carried on that logic to 100 years ago... before the tender years doctrine (where men primarily got custody), and then therefore concluded that pre WW1 days we must have lived in a matriarchy. I was astonished when I learned that suddenly she didn't think her logic applied anymore.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:25 AM
4

I'm with MRC on this. IF we took your definition as 100% correct (and I'm not saying it isn't)... then sure, we live in a patriarchy. It's a simple fact that the majority of "positions of power" are held by men. IF that's all patriarchy is trying to say, then there's not really much to bring against it. However, as MRC said... that is never how patriarchy is defined. I'd say the massive majority of definitions I've encountered ALL include some implication of universal male privilege, or oppressi…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:24 AM
3

We have never, ever, in the 2 centuries lived in a 100% patriarchy the way many feminists describe.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:18 AM
5

I actually don't understand how some of these people function in every day society. Even ignoring the grossly sexist implications of what they say... just the sheer stupidity of it all, and how insanely bad the logic of it is just absolutely blows my mind.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:17 AM
20

Every single guy would get the death sentence... no fucking question.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:57 AM
1

Do you think those statistics could be a little misleading considering how any and all women have access to children while only a relatively small group of men are allowed? Depends on what the numbers are and if they are per capita or not. better single parents than mothers but that could be due to only around 7% of fathers winning custody, where a man needs to be from fucking Krypton to have the same odds as a woman who gets drunk in the court room. This I agree with.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 01:53 AM
3

IF it wasn't a "pedo scare"... it was probably just a mother being embarassed that someone found out how shit of a parent she was. I've personally seen a ton of instances where people step in to save a kid from a lot of hurt and then the kids actual parent get's offended because they realize that it made them look really awful.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:34 PM
1

This is why parents don’t want men looking after their children.” No... sexist bitches like the woman who said this are why there is a stigma towards men. Do I really need to bring up actual facts and show which gender is actually more likely to abuse children?
/r/MensRights05/06/13 10:32 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surgeon_Simulator_2013 I'm sure you've heard of surgeon simulator (or at least seen some hilarious screen shots)... according to wikipedia, it was done at something called "global game jam"... though this one took 48 hours. That one in particular isn't really story driven... but it's also a helluva lot more than a 2d game.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 04:29 AM
4

what's crazy is that even if he did ask for ID... and she presented fake ID. Nothing would have changed.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:07 PM
1

thanks, you were right.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:04 PM
2

One of the questions that resulted in the 1 in 4 number was: "Do you feel that someone attempted to rape you". (paraphrased a little bit... but the bolded words are accurate).
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:38 PM
1

I thought that was the Yahoo CEO? Or does she do both?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 07:34 PM
4

And that's even assuming she needed to buy like... that many games. There is absolutely no fucking way she played even 10% of them.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:06 PM
9

I actually made a youtube comment because there is one thing I severely disagree with... when he concedes "Maybe there is violence against women in games because there is more violence against women in the real world". Honestly, I shouldn't even use the word "concede" because the implication is that it's something based on opinion and not on fact. We know that in the last year men were just as victimized by rape as women were. We know that in non-reciprocal cases of domestic violence that women …
/r/MensRights04/06/13 01:07 PM
5

Yeah, I wouldn't mind if she actually made us of that budget... but honestly, all she does is sit in front of a green screen and read from a script of BS while she plays game clips... Honestly, if you already have the camera equipment... that shouldn't even cost any money. Now consider the fact that there are programming marathons where people make an entire sidescroller/top down 2D game in < 24 hours. Also consider that many of the games she criticizes (Zelda or Mario) are this exact style. Now…
/r/MensRights04/06/13 01:03 PM
2

I think his statement implies that there already is no acceptance of violence against women, and that this is correct.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:29 PM
3

There is a “third option,” however, in which both versions are in doubt, the appeal court ruled. The trial judge’s reasoning also wrongly put the burden on the husband to prove consent, when it properly lay with the Crown to prove its absence. I can't tell you how just refreshing it is to read that.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:25 PM
20

... get out of the kitchen? You misogynist... assuming she would be in the kitchen just because she's a woman! /s
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:23 PM
59

WHY DON'T YOU RESPOND POSITIVELY TO ME HATING YOU FOR YOUR GENDER!
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:21 PM
29

Could it possible be because feminism doesn't treat women like actual people? Sorry, but an ideology that actually views women as equal, wouldn't attempt to implement so many special exceptions and quotas and lowering of the bar... all of which clearly show that apparently women cannot compete on a level playing field (which I don't actually believe for all but pure physical things).
/r/MensRights03/06/13 04:20 PM
3

men shouldn't take away women's right to decide what to do with their bodies etc.) Guys, apparently there isn't a single woman in the entire world that disagrees with abortion. And apparently these women, with their majority of votes, just all keep voting in people who want to hinder abortion.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 05:10 PM
1

, if we look outside first world countries We don't live outside first world countries. The feminists that we criticize don't live outside first world countries. Criticizing feminism in the US is not the same as criticizing feminism in say Saudia Arabia.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 05:09 PM
1

I was talking about things that DO apply to both genders.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 05:01 PM
2

Feminism isn't supposed to address men's issues We know that... but others don't, and thats because feminists don't stop claiming otherwise.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 01:52 AM
2

I'm not entirely sure if it's something other than HIV tests but... Obamacare does in fact have certain things that ONLY apply to women.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 01:51 AM
8

Did you miss the fact that they were engaged?
/r/MensRights02/06/13 01:47 AM
7

This is related to the fact that the insult of 'demoting' a man from masculinity to femininity reflects a societal characteristic where femininity is seen as less then masculinity Most of the shit you say is pretty stupid... and I'll let the others dismantle the rest... but the above quoted line is just insane. Yes "feminine" characteristics applied to men is often done in a derogatory way. The reason has absolutely nothing to do with femininity being seen as less than masculinity. Masculine cha…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 02:42 PM
1

and not equate all as having the same effects? That's my point though... they do have the same effects. Someone denied a job because they were white is exactly the same was someone denied a job because they were black. If someone misses out on a job, they don't give a fuck about whether it happened to someone across the country that happened to have the same color skin as them. As I said, start treating people like people, and stop treating them as "member of race #357".
/r/MensRights30/05/13 01:49 PM
1

Don't buy it... but also no boycott?
/r/MensRights30/05/13 01:02 PM
2

It doesn't matter the chance... what matters is that if/when it happens, it's just as harmful to the individual being affected. Start treating people like individuals instead of just "member of X race".
/r/MensRights30/05/13 02:29 AM
4

To equate negative ideas on whiteness, such as they can't dance or are whatever, may make a person feel bad but it doesn't generally limit their life aspirations. While negative ideas about blacks, lazy, cheap, thieves, etc, CAN limit life aspirations. First of all... negative stereotypes are not the only thing that can be an example of racism. Secondly, are you seriously trying to say that the only negative stereotype about white and/or males is "they can't dance"? Trying to compare that to "la…
/r/MensRights29/05/13 10:17 PM
6

Not really... the difference is that it's sociology who has taken a previously held definition, and then warped it to be something different. "Flu" always was the short form for Influenza... how uneducated people use it has no effect. Racism has always been "discrimination based on race"... period. These sociology/sjw types have morphed that to include the word "institutional" for absolutely no legitimate reason... if anything, it's for malicious reasons. Notice the effect it has on policy... I …
/r/MensRights29/05/13 10:13 PM
0

Define "institutionalized"... I'd argue that being the only race/gender that doesn't have things such as hiring quotas would be far more "institutional" than anything they talk about. Besides that... all of the "institutional" definitions of this shit are stupid, because every single one is a precursor to an apparent "solution" that is extremely sexist/racist in nature, and it basically "misses the trees for the forest". They try to take such a wide, all-encompassing view of things, that it leav…
/r/MensRights29/05/13 10:10 PM
4

You can tell the massive amount of confirmation bias people like this hold. "Well OBVIOUSLY women are the majority victims of domestic violence". Except the truth is... they aren't. They just believe it to be so with no actual proof, because it reinforces their currently held worldview (or let's them continue their victimhood mentality). What's funny though, is that if you take her exact same logic of "whichever gender makes up the majority victim of DV, is oppressed and therefore not equal"... …
/r/MensRights29/05/13 10:06 PM
2

. Forcing a man to penetrate her carries the same sentence under the law as a man raping a woman. Does it? Because it certainly isn't the same charge... "forced envelopment" isn't considered rape.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 01:37 PM
16

Only when people imply that being a male is just an objectively better or more privileged position.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 03:06 PM
6

Like what everyone else said. Just go there with all your friends and tell them you identify as a woman. If you really wanted to fight against it instead of just personally proving a point... record everything (but be subtle... maybe a microphone in a pocket or something).
/r/MensRights28/05/13 03:04 PM
10

I suggest you look up "jury nullification".
/r/MensRights27/05/13 04:41 AM
2

The 3 censored words being the exact person it came from in HR?
/r/MensRights26/05/13 06:15 PM
3

What annoys me about that... is that let's say he did look. Who the fuck cares? If you don't want people looking at you, go wear a niqab. I mean, if he made a lewd remark or did anything physical... then sure, that crosses the line IMO... but you can't control peoples eyesight.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 06:12 PM
1

all of these generally stem from choices a male makes in society in which he has agency over not making. War? Sure. Workplace deaths and dying earlier? Not so much. I'll touch on this in regards to the "more funding" point but... men have a fucking tiny amount spent on them in terms of health care. Even in the recent ACA (obamacare)... there's a ton of provisions that only apply to females. These aren't things that deal with female-specific things like pregnancy... it's just "general check-ups" …
/r/MensRights26/05/13 06:09 PM
1

Rofl...
/r/MensRights26/05/13 05:42 PM
1

Not saying it's the easiest thing in the world... but it is a choice. I hate it when people make their own bed, and then bitch about having to sleep in it.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 05:42 PM
1

There's that too.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 05:41 PM
6

That pisses me off beyond belief when women go off on that "a stay at home mom is SOO DIFFICULT". Give me a fucking break. "Hey husband, please work every day to make enough money for an entire family while I stay at home where I am my own boss"... and then they say "hey husband, why aren't you showing how much you care about your children? "
/r/MensRights26/05/13 03:23 AM
7

No... what "as a whole" is there? Seriously, by almost every single fucking metric imaginable... men have it worse. We die earlier, die more on the job, die more in war, have far less funding, are more likely to go to prison, are more likely to kill ourselves, barely get custody, can't even be raped by the legal definition, are doing worse in school, are a whopping 33% less likely to graduate college, make less money (college educated under 30 years old... aka, the future), no special scholarshi…
/r/MensRights26/05/13 03:16 AM
1

Yes. 100%. (assuming this was actually more common). It would be a reaction to a problem that said minorities created... if they actually want equality they could have it at any time.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 05:19 PM
1

Uhh... do you know what redacting is?
/r/MensRights25/05/13 05:17 PM
26

Because men almost never work in HR
/r/MensRights25/05/13 05:12 PM
59

I really hope these people are just trolling,.. I mean, apparently holding doors open isn't respectful, but what's the alternative? Letting it close right in their face?
/r/MensRights25/05/13 05:06 PM
2

Well, let's say she's correct. If men are "biologically, unstoppably, wired for sexual aggression"... then seeing as women rape with almost the exact same frequency... I guess the exact same can be said about women as well.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 12:31 AM
1

Yeah, the limit there (and there definitely is a limit) is definitely very arbitrary. At the very least, the kid should have reached physical maturity... for boys though, this is a fair amount later than girls.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:48 PM
3

Well... we all know how it WOULD be treated (the boy would be getting fucking crucified)... but how do you think it should be treated? Honestly, if it's clearly consensual, I don't really think this SHOULD be a problem. Really, as long as both parties are happy about the relationship... then what harm is being caused? I mean if anything, the fact that there's thousands of people telling this 14 year old how victimized she should feel, and how the law is saying she was most definitely taken advan…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 01:36 AM
1

I think you hit the nail on the head... it's this sense of entitlement that is being pushed onto women this generation. I'm obviously not saying every single woman has this sense... but with my completely anecdotal evidence, I'm going to say it is definitely specific to the female gender. It's the whole princess culture/You can do whatever you want... AND do it better... AND in heels/ tons of shit. I mean, I could see the argument if someone was actually "pro-life". Even if I think they are wron…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 01:29 AM
1

Also keep in mind the actual reasons why the lifetime numbers are so drastically different than the yearly numbers. I guess my point is... either the rate of male rape is rising, or the rate of female rape is dropping... either way, going forward, the lifetime rates will converge if the yearly rates stay the same (and they really have no reason not to).
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:50 PM
2

So what about abortion? If the father says "I do not want to financially support this child" before the child has been born... then wouldn't the mother going through with the pregnancy anyway be a way of saying "I am choosing to be a single mother"?
/r/MensRights23/05/13 01:40 PM
1

Well then at that point, there is really no excuse. Unless you are under the assumption that people be allowed to do a "financial abortion" post-birth.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 01:38 PM
3

Your solution isn't that bad... but it still leaves wide open the problem that child support payments are very often unfair in the first place. Make the custodial parent accountable to the fact that child support money must be spent on the child... also, make both parents split it equally. If the kid needs a new shirt for $20 bucks... each parent should have to cover $10 (up to the maximum amount). The fact that a potential scenario could exist, where you have one parent paying thousands of doll…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:01 AM
2

do believe consent to fatherhood is at moment of consentual conception, Do you also believe that consent to motherhood lies at the moment of consensual conception?
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:57 AM
2

You cannot legally suggest that a father can opt out without providing the same right to a woman, A mother can opt out... any time she wishes... it's called abortion.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:53 AM
1

I think you are incorrect in assuming that we speak for every single male on this planet. If I ever had a daughter, I don't think I'd ever tell her "ALL guys only want sex". Are some guys very manipulative of women? yes. Are all of them? Nope.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:58 PM
2

If I disagree with anything (or even a few things) in this subreddit am I against MR? I'd say the only thing that you aren't "allowed" to disagree on while still being able to be with the MRM is "Should men be treated equally under the law". If you don't believe that to be the case, then I'd say you aren't really an MRA... despite that, you would still obviously be welcome to post here. Disagreement on anything else is perfectly okay. I'm not married, but I know of a bunch that post here that ar…
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:55 PM
6

I could probably like 5 different schools in the past few months that tried to make men's groups and such and they were vehemently opposed by the local feminists/women's group/student union.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:48 PM
2

Just go there with all of your friends and tell them you identify as women. IF they turn you away, bring it up with the appropriate school department since that would be even more blatant discrimination than it already is.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:47 PM
5

But isn't it also the boys mother that refused to press charges? Or am I getting this confused with a different case?
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:44 PM
1

Well at the very least, I was talking about people who believe the fetus to be a person. Still though, I'm curious as to why you care a big deal if you view a fetus as just a "useless" clump of cells. Also, you can still get abortions through drugs up to 9-12 weeks into the pregnancy... it's not the "morning after" pill, but it's still not surgical.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:10 AM
2

Still, I must say, almost every definition of patriarchy I have ever heard still implies that being a male is objectively better in the end... which is obviously something we here disagree with.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:06 AM
2

In your analogy, if they get off the bus they can't get back on. You can't disagree, if you're a male... well your opinion doesn't matter and if you're a woman it's internalized misogyny. Because of that attitude, any dissent is construed as a personal attack. Then that's even more reason to jump off imo.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 02:05 AM
2

Didn't mean to imply otherwise. Just saying... if "wanting the law to be totally equal for each gender" is an ideology... well, then mens rights is an ideology I guess.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 01:51 AM
5

No, we are defining groups by what they actually do. You tell me what feminism has done in the past decade or two that is a good example of equality, and then I'll rattle off everything they've done that is the exact opposite of that.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:39 PM
0

I'd suggest you educate your girlfriend on what feminism is doing, and maybe ask her to stop supporting a movement that is being driven in a direction that she most likely does not agree with. All feminists are not the same... but feminism is very much trending in a single direction. Either speak up and change the direction to something you agree with... OR... jump ship and stop supporting something that you don't agree with.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:38 PM
4

mens rights isn't an ideology... we have no theories.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:36 PM
2

Yeah, well, that's what happens when they refuse to believe that they have even the tiniest amount of privilege in any aspect of their life (aka patriarchy theory). If you believe that you are disadvantaged literally everywhere, and then fight to gain rights in places you are actually disadvantaged... then by definition you will become the superior class if you fail to address the areas where you do have advantages.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:36 PM
2

I think you are missing one important thing about that though... It's not enough to simply accept that some feminists are "moderates"... (and this is assuming that "moderates" just want equality and don't actually believe in shit like patriarchy and universal male privilege and bullshit like that). Here's the thing... if you identify as a feminist, then you are supporting feminism. If feminism is being ran by radicals, then by supporting feminism, you are supporting them. Even if "the moderates"…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:33 PM
7

Huh? Since when is patriarchy theory not a central tenet of feminism? That being said, I've heard thousands of different definitions of patriarchy. .. so belief in "patriarchy" doesn't necessarily mean much.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:27 PM
1

Well that's the issue then isn't it... consent. Use of the concept of conjoined twins is inapplicable because we're not talking about a shared body with each party holding equal rights. We're talking about a parasitic relationship (not a nice way to put it, but accurate). that's the thing though...we are talking about each party having equal rights. Remember that we are talking about people who, by their own admission, believe the fetus to be a person. Unless I'm mistaken, I think the implicatio…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:17 PM
2

assume the risk Assume the risk of.... having to get an abortion? Or becoming a parent. For a woman, there is a 0% risk of having to become a parent if they so choose. My stance on abortion is this, as long as its not viable outside the mother's body she has the right to refuse to support it. I agree. Even if it were a person I know you said you don't believe this... but this is where I disagree. If the fetus is a person, then killing it is murder. This is the reason why organ donation is not ma…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 08:33 PM
1

Well I agree with you... and that's exactly one of the reasons why I believe that the fetus is not considered a person. If someone were to consider a fetus a person though... would they really consider them to already be "hanging off the edge"?
/r/MensRights21/05/13 08:22 PM
3

And then we get into situations dealing with conjoined twins. If they determine that it's perfectly acceptable to (keyword) ACTIVELY kill a person in order to end the inconvenience of another person... then what's stopping one conjoined twin from legally murdering the other? And then we also have the issue of these people apparently not understanding the difference between pushing someone off a cliff, and simply not helping a person who is already hanging off of the edge.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 03:16 PM
23

That persons argument that you linked is just so incredibly flawed it's insane... and it happens in the first 2 sentences. They think that the person-hood of someone (or something) is entirely dependent on the feelings of a single person... which is simply just not the case. A fetus either IS a person, or it isn't... completely independent of anyone's personal feelings... period. So I guess what I'm getting at is, if we as a society decide that a fetus is a person... then killing it is murder...…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 01:19 PM
1

Yeah, that is a good point. I really hate the idea that diversity just for the sake of diversity is a good thing. Was this student senate body not endowed with the power to approve appointments to these positions? Are private organizations allowed to blatantly discriminate? Are there not equality laws?
/r/MensRights19/05/13 03:38 AM
5

You don't need to be of a certain minority to understand problems that said minority faces. And even if you did... using that logic, a black person would be unfit for dealing with the problems that the latino or asian minorities might face. It's racism/sexism plain and simple. Were they absolutely within their rights to do so? Of course. What?
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:51 PM
4

we all act like if we are part of different little groups Well that's the thing... the only people who don't act like we are part of little groups, are apparently the "oppressors" who cause all of this shit according to feminist/sjw logic.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:49 PM
7

That's pretty ridiculous that they don't pin medals to the women's chest... I mean, it's a highly structured ceremony and they're worried about their superior copping a feel or something? that's insane if that's the reasoning.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 12:03 AM
1

monoprice.com has a gopro-like camera that is much cheaper http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=117&cp_id=11704&cs_id=1170401&p_id=10159&seq=1&format=2
/r/MensRights18/05/13 12:00 AM
2

Is pushing someone off of a cliff the same as not helping them up if they are hanging off the edge?
/r/MensRights17/05/13 02:00 AM
6

I'll have to admit, I still think the better option is for people to simply not be forced to care for children that aren't theirs... but this is still good news. I'm curious to see if this precedent is actually upheld if it's a father and not simply a second mother.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:24 PM
6

I hope you realize the difference between opposing actions and opposing something "just because".
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:20 PM
2

That's still accepting the fact that the fetus is a person, and that the mother (and only the mother) is justified in murdering it... Murder (if it is murder... which it is if you consider the fetus to be a person) is never justifiable.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:19 PM
3

I hope you realize the absolutely massive and glaring difference between pregnancy/abortion, and the organ donor analogy.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:18 PM
8

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. If we determine a fetus to be a person, then it is a person, regardless of what the mother thinks. Are you seriously trying to suggest that someones opinion can change the existence of something? Your edit is even more hilarious... since you are the only one arguing "feelings". I mean, I get that you can't trick people into taking drugs... I would totally understand a charge for like assault (or whatever poisoning would fall under)... but murder implie…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:16 PM
1

The difference is the reasoning behind each one.
/r/MensRights14/05/13 07:17 PM
2

I'm just saying that there are situations where murdering your tormentor is the only viable means of eliminating a threat forever And that totally wasn't the situation here seeing as she apparently had 25k in the bank and was free to go out and hire the hitman. Unless you physically can't leave, then you don't get to decide whether someone lives or dies. There are people who don't calm down after a few minutes , hours , or even days. Some people never calm down and putting them in jail for ten y…
/r/MensRights12/05/13 07:44 PM
0

Well technically it is discrimination... but this is what we call "positive discrimination" Anyone who thinks the better end of this "deal" is the one that men get... is just a fucking idiot.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 07:54 PM
3

I said this in the Jodi Arias thread as well... but I think it's absolutely fucking ridiculous that being a victim of domestic violence is actually even considered as a defense to murder/attempted murder/conspiracy to commit murder. Sorry, I don't care how much he beats you... that's not justification to fucking kill someone.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 01:53 AM
-2

Okay, thanks for explaining... I agree.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 11:06 PM
9

Well, it's good strategy on his part... but I think it also shows some dishonesty on her part. I mean, simple questions like "give us an example of something negative she said about herself". All she had to say was "I don't remember any specifics"... but instead she gets incredibly defensive. Normally this wouldn't really be a problem... but before that she obviously had a lot to say about how Jodi was being abused. IF she was abused, there would most likely be negative things in her journal... …
/r/MensRights09/05/13 10:53 PM
10

You know what's fucking disgusting? That trying to show that Travis was an abuser is actually a defense? I mean, let's imagine for a second he was. Let's imagine that she was terrified and that he beat her often.... unless he like never lets you leave the house and literally the ONLY possible way you could ever escape was to murder him... then there is just no justification. This is even ignoring the fact that this was a particularly gruesome murder. I mean seriously... the fact that anything sh…
/r/MensRights09/05/13 10:38 PM
3

A few things: 1) What is the author of this trying to say? Does he think we should be supporting this? Or shouldn't be. 2) I actually don't think this would be that bad idea... however, I do still believe that there needs to be stuff in place to prevent teacher/student (or other situations where the person is in a position of authority) relations.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 01:13 PM
1

I'd say yes. You'll never change the opinions of people that hateful to begin with... but you can at least make sure they have no influence on society.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 01:29 AM
1

Then she's a hateful cunt plain and simple. Sorry, but if anyone, man or woman came to me and was explaining how they think they are discriminated against... to simply dismiss that with "i think you just hate half of the population" (even though I've known you for years)... that's just insane. Also, when explaining this stuff... don't try and sound too "preachy" or "conspiracy nut'... it just turns people off.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 01:27 AM
5

I'd say most everyone who is capable of murder (not self-defense) is by definition unstable.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 01:24 AM
3

You make a good point... except I would also add something like: "And when a black kid latches onto my leg hoping that I include him in my rescue... I kick him off back into the fire and tell him to save himself. Oh, and then when I get outside and everyone praises me for rescuing the white kids, I make sure to let everyone know that I actually tried to save the black kids too!". But yeah, you're spot on. It's why I don't ever really want the MRM to ever propose male-specific benefits... even if…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:03 PM
1

Exactly. Especially that one women who is like the "women's equality minister" or some shit. Such a hypocrite.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 03:14 PM
8

Ahh, my bad then. When I wrote the first half of my reply I thought that you had also seen that full comment in the actual article. And yup... when she said "I've yet to encounter an MRA site that wasn't a cesspit of hate speech and rank misogyny"... cotwa was one of the first to come to mind as a counter-example.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:26 PM
1

Feminism.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:23 PM
3

Well that's the problem... they are just hypocrites. I'm fine with it being "just a joke"... but if you're gonna pull that shit on #killallmen.. then you better shut your fucking mouth when someone like Daniel Tosh makes a rape joke. We all know they wouldn't though.... it's obviously different for some reason if it's about women because patriarchy or some stupid shit... so yet again they show their hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:23 PM
4

Yeah, it's definitely SOME progress.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:21 PM
5

Nobody really thinks a hashtag is a serious call to genocide Honestly... I agree with that. My problem, is that they, without fail, always manage to be the biggest fucking hypocrites. If they would 100% truly be just as fine with a #killallwomen hashtag, without introducing some sort of bullshit "Oh, but because patriarchy, blabahblahblah, this is actually credibly, patriarchy, dur"... then I'd be fine with it. It's the double standard that pisses me off more than anything.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:20 PM
2

I know a lot of folks who pay 100 bucks a month or more just for liability If I could get that rate... I would switch in a heart-beat. (Ontario here!). Right now I'm paying about 2k... granted there's collision... but if it was just liability it'd be over 100 a mo.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:16 PM
3

It does both... the new rates are somewhere in the middle.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:15 PM
1

discriminating by gender is totally fine as its an actual reason. So why not discriminate based on race? OR sexual orientation?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:14 PM
0

That's the thing though... women are actually more likely to get into car accidents. The difference is that accidents from male drivers tend to cost more, because you get douchey kids trying to race and show off, so they drive through a house (or something else ridiculous).
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:14 PM
3

Well that's why this car-insurance thing just happened... because health insurance used to use gender as a modifier, and the EU courts ruled that illegal. All they are doing now, is applying that standard across the board for all insurance.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:11 PM
2

Okay, this isn't directed specifically towards you... but you need to read it as well. The EU recently decided that it was illegal for insurance companies to discriminate based on gender for HEALTH insurance. This is despite men costing FAR less than women. They basically said "We don't care what statistics say, you can't use gender as a modifier for your rates"... and this result in women paying far less than men for health-insurance. This change to car insurance is to make it consistent with t…
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:10 PM
2

Is this sarcasm? If it is, then I apologize but... can you show me these "real feminists"? Where are they?
/r/MensRights08/05/13 01:05 PM
10

Sorry, but how can you possibly agree with that comment? Maybe if you take the part shmiteraly quoted completely by itself (and out of context)... then yeah, I'd agree with it too... but the rest of it is just hypocritical garbage. She wants MRA's to start doing things themselves... do you honestly think we aren't? I mean, we have never, ever asked feminism to fix men's problems. No one criticizes them for the stuff they don't do... they criticize them for the things they propose (and sometimes …
/r/MensRights08/05/13 12:55 PM
1

Not saying we should cite jezebel... just saying that it served as a discussion starter for a problem that does exist in the real world.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 12:22 AM
2

Have you read anything in this thread? It's actually illegal in France to get a paternity test.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 06:34 PM
1

It's important to know... the "so what" was more to the idea that it's some big deal if we got trolled or not (http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/9624/1335186127197.png)
/r/MensRights07/05/13 05:36 PM
-2

IF you have to refer to a single jezebel article as "proof" of anything... then you're doing it wrong. As I said, the idea it presented is already more than common.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 01:39 PM
5

ANY SECOND NOW...
/r/MensRights07/05/13 01:36 PM
1

OH yeah, I've read a bunch about that before... I don't know why I completely blanked when you first mentioned it.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:35 AM
1

MRA is a tightly defined term so it's possible to examine whether someone's beliefs and actions conform to a standard. True.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:34 AM
1

That's pretty ridiculous.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:33 AM
3

I don't know where you live.... but women's hockey is huge here. Granted I live in NW Ontario so... we are pretty hockey crazy up here.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:33 AM
6

Including boys in girls sports and allowing them to run rampant dominating all the girls is definitely going backwards in my book. That happens in reverse though at really young ages. At like the 7-12 ages of sports... many girls are actually far superior physically than the boys (for obvious reasons, reaching maturity that much earlier)... not that I'm against it, but the reverse does happen with no problem. The solution to this is to drum up interest in mens field hockey in the US and Canada, …
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:29 AM
3

, but if they want to play in their own segregated leagues for kids and teenagers that no one cares about, then who cares? It's not misandry to want to play in fair matches. No, but the problem is when there is no where else for the boy(s) to play, because the only team that exists is the women's team. If schools are going to only have a single team... it should be co-ed.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:27 AM
6

but I never liked the concept of blaming all of feminism by what one blog/site does We aren't really doing that. But when said blog is one of the biggest blogs on the internet... period, then it really does a lot to put a sock in the mouth of all the "but not all feminists are like that" people.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:25 AM
-4

Yeah, even if it's a troll... so what? It's still presenting an opinion that many a feminist has held... and exactly as you said... this shit exists in the real world for exactly those reasons.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 12:23 AM
28

BUT REMEMBER GUYS... NOT ALL FEMINISTS ARE LIKE THAT. NOT EVEN THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO READ THIS BLOG.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 06:58 PM
14

It's just about shifting responsibility. It's like the people who offer the absolutely empty apologies after they get caught doing something. They aren't truly sorry that they did it... they are just sorry that they got caught. This is the same. While technically yes, if a man was going to be less happy finding out his supposed kids weren't actually his... then he is in fact arguably better off not knowing. HOWEVER... that's totally ignoring the root of the problem, which is the wifes complete u…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 06:58 PM
1

Are they? I'm not so sure. I'd say that's almost like feminists saying "if you think women should have equal rights then you are a feminist". Granted the MRM doesn't really come with any "academic" theories or anything like that, so it's not quite the same... but stil..
/r/MensRights06/05/13 06:11 PM
2

How do you possibly think that a story about a man who is having his life ruined by false accusations, despite not even having a court case... is not at all relevant in any way to mens rights? This is a perfect example of the damage simple words can do to someones reputation and how that can affect their life.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 06:02 PM
4

Lulu?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 06:00 PM
1

don't agree, it depends entirely on how much strength you use. Guys who beat up women aren't necessarily going full force. Hitting someone doesn't mean you're hitting all-out. Obviously... but they have the option. Many women are simply not capable of doing actual serious damage even if they use full-force (assuming no weapons). So even if 10% of each gender ever only loses control and used 100% of their strength... it's going to be more men that are causing the injuries.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:01 PM
3

I don't think most reasonable feminists think women can't get to the top on their own So where are they? Where is this supposed majority of feminists that speak up and say "we don't need affirmative action!" against this apparent minority of feminists that think they do. I mean, I don't mean to be confrontational... but people ALWAYS say "Not all feminists are like that", but then offer absolutely nothing to actually show it. Now maybe there are a lot of people who identify as feminist who think…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:59 PM
3

Yeah, in my personal experience, that's true. And I mean hell, look at all of those celeb magazines... they have massive sections devoted to criticizing what other celebrities (95% women) wear, or how they look, or if they've put on weight. And who is the primary buyer of these magazines? Women.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:53 PM
2

It"s technically universal... but the majority of it is in North America, with some of europe.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:45 PM
2

It doesn't matter if they are easily avoided. Hell, it doesn't even matter if it's impossible to avoid. If it increases the risk of becoming a victim... then it increases the risk of becoming a victim. Period. That being said... I wouldn't ever actually blame any victim of any crime no matter what they were doing. They should be able to do whatever they want. I would think of them as naive, and maybe pretty stupid if it happened 8 times (because seriously, if it actually did happen 8 times... yo…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:40 PM
2

What?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:38 PM
3

I feel really, really stupid for not putting that thing together. I mean, I constantly argue for "prevention advice" and stuff like that and how it's not victim-blaming... and how certain actions obviously do increase your chances of becoming a victim (and the fact that people even dispute this is ridiculous... absolutely NOTHING is independent of everything else, and your actions always affect the outcomes of things around you).. But I've never put the "more likely to be raped again after first…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:38 PM
1

Beyond a reasonable doubt is still very high. If there is no physical evidence and everything is circumstantial.. I find it very hard to see how "beyond a reasonable doubt" was used.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:34 PM
0

Yeah... it always is hard to tell without knowing the exact criteria the study used... but it's not that hard to believe. The average guy probably has 50 lbs on the average woman... it makes sense that of the guy that do hit their wives/gf's... they'd havea higher chance of causing more serious injury.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:18 AM
34

Well, I'm glad you were able to take a step back and look at it objectively. Hopefully this is a learning experience for you, in that you should always wait to judge things for yourself, instead of simply taking people on their word... and not just any person, but someone who is part of an ideology that has an agenda. Here's a few comments though: On that Bingo picture: "Why do I have to pay for dinner? " I thought feminists opposed chivalry? Shouldn't they agree with this (not that it's a commo…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 05:54 PM
2

Just to clarify, feminism is more of an ideology rather than simply just wanting equal rights for women (or all). Feminism comes with stuff like "patriarchy theory" and "rape culture" and a bunch of other completely unscientific bullshit theories that have such an elevated status within the feminist movement that they are completely unquestionable. So while feminism definitely does claim to be about "women's rights", their faith in these theories means that almost everything they do in practice,…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 12:31 AM
0

Example of any of these comments?
/r/MensRights05/05/13 12:28 AM
3

He was pushing her head into his penis. That's definitely implied consent. Though as others have said in this thread... the double standard is still there. Even a girl consented after the fact, a guy would have been crucified if he went up there and pulled a girls pants down.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 12:21 AM
3

I agree that it's a double standard... but should we really be perpetuating it? I mean, call out the double standard sure... but let's not pull a feminism and call something that was entirely consensual at the time, rape.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 12:20 AM
15

Feminism is what it does... period. It doesn't matter what people say, or what they say they do, or anything... the only thing that matters is the end result of everything (actions/words/schooling/whatever) leading up to that point. The same thing applies to any movement. All it takes is one look at the actions of feminism, and the laws they have passed, the mens groups they have opposed, the fathers rights groups theyve opposed... and so on and so forth to see that anyone who claims to be a fem…
/r/MensRights03/05/13 10:11 PM
2

The whole "white feather" thing will require more than just a law change though. that shit would start up before a draft was even necessary, even if both men and women were eligible for it.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:54 PM
5

Quote mining AHOY!
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:53 PM
1

Yeah, unfortunately there is that other side of the coin. In the end though, men are still benefiting from it... and given enough time, people will forget the reason.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:52 PM
1

The laws I was referring to weren't age of consent...it was the laws surrounding whether you believe they were or not. In the US, the president himself could tell you that this girl is >18 but if you sleep with her and it turns out shes 15... you will go to jail. I don't think this is the case in Australia. You are right though... the supplying alcohol is kind fucked up.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 04:11 AM
2

the moderators handing out most of the bans are men. God damn patriarchy!! I KNEW IT
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:48 PM
3

Well, if the paper only said "equality between the genders"... But whoever truly believes that that is all it has ever said is incredibly naive.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:47 PM
3

It's apparent from the reactions to the mere mention of MRA's in the precense of feminists that the rationalist MRAs are NOT being loud enough, and NOT dissenting against the irrationals. I see what you're trying to say with this... but it's simply not true. Feminist do not dismiss MRA's because "radical" MRA's have left a bad taste in their mouth... they dismiss MRA's because they have their ideologies challenged by them. They call Warren Farrel an MRA as an apparent insult, and he's probably t…
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:46 PM
2

people who identify with it and are ACTUALLY misogynistic And? None of these people hold positions of power. None of these people have accomplished anything that discriminates. The same can't be said for feminism.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:45 PM
3

d, I'd rather be a part of the movement and rehabilitate the parts of it that are in need of rehabilitation than abandon it and let it potentially get even more out of control. IF you are actually capable of doing that. But if you aren't... then why support a movement that has views that are contrary to your own?
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:42 PM
2

I'm actually not sure.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:35 PM
7

The only thing I strongly disagree with... is: I'm sorry that my gender has successfully undermined men all over the world, You don't need to apologize for something that people of your gender did.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:14 PM
99

This is in Australia, not the US. They probably have different laws regarding this. The US is kind of fucked in this regard. Even if you check the girls ID... if it happens to be fake (and hell, it could be the same ID that she had previously used to fool even government employees) then you are still charged.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:11 PM
14

What's funny, (well not funny, actually quite disgusting), is that in feminisms attempts to promote their idea of a rape culture, and thereby elevating rape above any possible crime imaginable... they are in fact creating their very own version of something that could definitely be described by the words "rape culture".
/r/MensRights02/05/13 03:31 AM
1

Going through that list: Not north america (not that it's not important, but it's irrelevant when discussing feminism here). Nothing to do with feminist activism. I don't see this as a win. I see this is more male If feminism is responsible for that, it shows how it's harmful to men because despite being the primary victims of violence in nearly even single form... apparently violence against men should be ignored. More sexism. More sexism. Nigeria Not North America. Another highlight about how …
/r/MensRights02/05/13 03:29 AM
2

I am just pointing out that CrossHook's lamentation that the educational system ignores the perspective of men But what I'm saying (or was trying to say) is that it doesn't necessarily use the perspective of men either. The fact that they are men is just a coincidence (in terms of them being picked for the courses).
/r/MensRights01/05/13 10:15 PM
1

As I said, it's simply more likely. A single parent isn't a guarantee of having a "bad" kid... but on average, a kid with two parents will perform better. I know she wont The only problem with that, is that if she lets them know that he is the father, even if she doesn't want CS... the state will go after him for it regardless of what she thinks. That is why this situation is so sketchy.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 10:14 PM
2

Except for all those MRAs that have said women's suffrage should never have happened, because women voting makes everything worse. Source? That's pretty meaningless because the MRM has never been in a position to legislate. Lucky us then.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 09:50 PM
1

Some feminists do some things, some do others I'd say, "some feminists do some things, whole other feminists do no things". Seriously, what has "good feminism" actually accomplished in the past decade or two? Feminism is not a single entity that acts a certain way and maintains the same positions Then they should differentiate themselves and not call themselves EXACTLY the same thing: "feminism". Doing so just gives support to each other, and seeing as they apparently have totally contradicting …
/r/MensRights01/05/13 09:45 PM
1

mensrights doesn't claim to also help women. mensrights also doesn't oppose women's equal rights, and unlike feminism, has never actually created legislation that discriminates against them.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 01:00 PM
0

Honestly, tell your sister to get an abortion. Stats don't lie, and kids raised by single parents simply have a much lower chance at succeeding in life. Unless she already has a super steady job then it's just not worth it. But now to actually try and answer your question. My opinion is probably different than most people here. What he doesn't know won't hurt him. There is no magical connection between a parent and their kid, it's not like something is going to "click" in his head the instant th…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:56 PM
3

Feminism isn't women's history.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:50 PM
2

You aren't exposing men to it... this would be exposing boys, probably around the age of 16. Sorry, but most kids that age aren't exactly the greatest critical thinkers. High-school is NOT a place to be teaching ideologies. I would be 100% okay with a "women's history" or hell, even a "history of feminism"... but to a highschool kid, there is no difference between a teacher proposing an idea to be judged critically (such as patriarchy) and the teacher telling the students that that idea is fact.…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:49 PM
4

Ignoring the complete absurdity of your statement (history is about people who did great things... the fact that many were men is completely irrelevant to why they would be covered in the course)... the solution to your "problem" would be a "women's history". Feminism is not based in fact, or anything... it's just an ideology. We wouldn't have a "republican class" or "liberal class" to steep them in that bullshit... we shouldn't do it for feminism either.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:46 PM
1

Yeah, I'm also (or rather, was also) an ontario high school student. Honestly, there is very little in terms of mandatory classes. Like I think you have to take english in grade 9 and 10. Math in grade 9. Umm, general science in grade 9 and maybe 10 as well. This gender studies class will most likely be on the same level as like "home eq"... where it is 100% optional, or maybe be a part of a group where you have to take at least one of like "history" or "government" or other shit. Even then, I'm…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:43 PM
4

Because feminism never claims to only be about women's issues. Sorry, but when the primary opposition to almost anything concerning mens rights is feminism... and it's always under the guise of "feminism takes care of men's rights too"... then it's kind of important to point out when they don't follow up on that, since they make people falsely think that issues are being taken care of.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 02:59 AM
1

Yeah, I mean, I'm definitely not trying to tell you what you (or any other feminist) thinks... but as I said, feminism as a whole is moving in a general direction. IF you disagree with that direction, you either have to jump ship or try and change it... doing neither just means you are supporting people who are going against your own views.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 02:55 AM
1

It's actions are.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:58 PM
1

Also, you do realize that breasts are not the equivalent in any way of penises? They are exactly equivalent. Both are parts of the body that have (whether we like it or agree with it or not) have been sexualized. Any logic you would apply to breasts, would equally apply everywhere else. Car insurance: to get to your job in some places. Try not living in a major metropolitan area in a state/province that has a season called "winter".
/r/MensRights30/04/13 07:58 PM
4

It doesn't matter what feminists says what feminism is. IT matters what feminism does, or more specifically, what the most powerful feminists do. I don't mind your definition at all... but it's simply not reality (and this isn't getting into the differences in how many feminists aim to achieve those goals, or hell, even how they define equality.... some feminists say that affirmative action scholarships that ONLY exist for women is equality... ). As long as the people driving the bus (feminism) …
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:19 AM
11

No, it doesn't. Like MGM, FGM has a bunch of different forms. Some forms of FGM are literally a pin prick, or only cutting off the skin (much like circumcision)... while others are far more brutal.. just like MGM. Google "penile subincision", and then ask why the UN banned FGM but not even some forms of MGM.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:15 AM
1

K, well I'm obviously going to ignore all the stupid ones like "body hair"... if you let peoples opinions influence your life, then you get no sympathy from me. As long as women have to face the rational fear of being sexually assaulted every time they walk home past dark while men don’t, I am a feminist. If that truly is rational (it isn't)... then men face an even greater danger walking home alone. This is about violence, not feminism. As long as misogyny exists in any country in this world, I…
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:12 AM
14

You should post her list.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:02 PM
6

However, there are many more moderate feminists who recognise male-specific issues such as those within domestic violence. AND YET DO ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING. Seriously, listen to yourself type. You dismiss "radical feminists" as if they are some sort of minority, and then say "yeah, there are totally a lot more super cool feminists that would love to help males". So what the fuck have they done? This minority of "radical feminists" has succeeded in completely shutting down any attempt at any…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:01 PM
2

They are less likely to report, because they flat out have no where to go. Did you ever think that ONLY offering support services to women perpetuates this idea that men have to always be strong? Did you ever think that conducting incredibly deceitful "studies" that show women are 99% of the victims sends a message to men that what is happening to them really shouldn't be (even though it's actually way more common)? Also, what you are describing is gender roles. Unless you have some sort of defi…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:58 PM
8

I honestly don't understand how people who are just so fucking stupid can get jobs writing for such big gigs. I mean, Earl says the problem is that men have no where to go. Now, because they have no where to go, they often just don't go anywhere. So her plan, to somehow "counter" Earls argument, is to simply repeat the numbers of the people go "go somewhere". It's almost as if I was arguing that the president was secretly a lizard and that if you ever asked him, he'd deny it. So to prove me wron…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:55 PM
3

Agreed... a jokes a joke. Stop taking comedians seriously people.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 03:59 PM
6

I think that most reasonable feminists and reasonable men's rights advocates would agree with one another on most issues (rape is bad, assault is bad, gender should not be an issue when it comes to things like parenting, education, work, etc). The difference though, is in how each group thinks any of those should be solved... and this is where almost all of the disagreement comes from. I'd also be curious as to how you define feminist... to you, does it require a belief in patriarchy theory? How…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 01:12 PM
11

Yup.... this is just another example of feminists thinking less of woman than anyone else. It's hilarious actually... In their first breath they say "Woman are totally capable of being soldiers and firefighters and police officers, cuz woman are really strong!!!" And then in the next they say "How dare you ever touch this tiny fragile little ball of delicateness"
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:56 PM
1

've been told that I'm setting back feminism. When people say this, it's quite clear they are completely ignorant to what feminism has done recently.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:51 PM
10

then it's a very good thing we have her. She can go out and open peoples eyes to these issues without being dismissed as a "mansplainer", which will eventually open the door for male speakers as well.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:46 PM
7

Honestly, even 6 years would have been too little.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 01:39 PM
1

True.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 06:01 AM
2

You don't see a problem with that? Even if one is called rape and the other isn't? It's not about dividing it up... it's about not classifying one as rape, so that in their neat little conclusion/summary, they can completely ignore the massive amount of male rape victims (by forced penetration) because forced penetration is not rape. This allows them to say things like "90% of all rape victims are female".
/r/MensRights28/04/13 05:28 AM
1

I've seen that... but again, only some what recently. Obviously though that's from over a year ago. Am I wrong though? I mean, hasn't there been a relatively recent influx of people talking about this? (again, not that I'm saying it's a bad thing).
/r/MensRights28/04/13 05:26 AM
6

Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys... didn't you hear? Women are oppressed because of CAT CALLING (and a few other completely intangible things). Let's completely ignore suicide, and workplace deaths, the draft, college graduation rates and all that good stuff... women have to experience CAT CALLS! THE HORROR. Sorry, but does anyone else cringe when people, in their attempt to try and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that women are OPPRESSED... they use "cat calling"? I just can't take the rest of the …
/r/MensRights28/04/13 05:20 AM
18

Not that I really object... but I just find it kind of odd that this is only coming to light right now. I mean, for quite a while I've known that the CDC grouped "made to penetrate" with "non-contact unwanted sexual experiences" instead of you know... rape. Fortunately for us, the CDC, unlike many of the other feminist studies,... still includes the data for "made to penetrate", so anyone who isn't sexist can still see the truth.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:22 PM
7

Dear retard who doesn't understand what a double standard is... you're an idiot.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 08:11 PM
3

While what you are saying is true... it's really a pointless distinction to make. I mean, I can argue that the sum of power of black people is greater than the sum of power for white people. I mean, the most powerful person in the entire world (the president of the US) is black... so it must be true. Obviously to try and use this with the disclaimer "but it's unevenly divided" to say that black people "as a group" are better off would be pretty ridiculous to say the least.
/r/MensRights31/03/13 02:02 AM
7

This is what I was going to say. How does asking for something somehow imply entitlement? I mean, the very fact that he's asking proves 100% that he isn't entitled. Maybe this is how they think though... because this shares some striking similarities to the feminists who think that even asking a woman for sex is rape. I mean, if you ask for it, then you must think you are entitled to it... and the woman thinks that too, so she knows that by asking, you are telling her that you better get it... t…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 01:13 AM
13

Here's what I don't get. Where are women being discriminated against in law or writing ANYWHERE in any western society? If they were, then yeah, I'd definitely help and do what I can to get that removed... but the fact is, they simply aren't. So is it social discrimination (or what I like to call "soft" discrimination) that they are talking about? IF it is, then I think all that can and should be done is that I don't partake in it myself. Nothing I do is going to change the opinions of some 60 y…
/r/MensRights31/03/13 01:08 AM
3

Two things: 1) Straw-feminist implies that it doesn't exist... when in fact, people like that do in fact exist... it's why this sub exists. 2) Show me these other feminists that "aren't like that" that are pushing for stuff that is truly about equality. I'll even make it easier and say that it doesn't actually have to be in the past decade or two. Just one single example of big feminist push for equality.
/r/MensRights30/03/13 07:41 PM
4

Feminists do not want you to lose custody of your children. The assumption that women are naturally better caregivers is part of patriarchy. Which is why men used to get default custody no matter what in the past? THAT is what a patriarchy would do, and that is so fucking far from the case now that it's laughable that you/they'd use this as an example of "the patriarchy". This isn't even mentioning the fact that some of the primary opponents to father rights groups is organizations like NoW (you…
/r/MensRights30/03/13 07:39 PM
1

Personally, I feel it would be kind of a silly governmental exercise to have two institutions that perform the same function simply to let some people feel better about the word But on the same note... it's kind of silly to go around changing every single definition that might be exclusionary. I mean, if marriage = man + woman... then that's just what it means (note: I'm not a marriage-history nerd... so I don't actually know this). Also, for the reasons you listed in your last few sentences... …
/r/MensRights28/03/13 08:34 PM
1

It kind of makes me pity her that she (or maybe is just pretending to) totally lack the insight required that everything that happened to her, is a direct result of the choices SHE made.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 07:22 PM
1

If I was her boss... she would be gone the second I saw that she was saying shit like "straight white man: easiest difficulty setting". I mean, hell, let's ignore the fact that it's objectively racist and sexist and even assume that it is a 100% fact.... you don't fucking say that shit when the demographic you are talking about makes up 90% of your companies potential customer base and your entire job description is to bring them in. Like, if I was a basketball scout, and my job was to become bu…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 07:20 PM
2

No... it's a gay rights issue that some men experience. Most of us here also support gay rights... but they aren't the smae.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 07:05 PM
3

Well, we also let people marry and have kids who have hereditary problems... and also people with history of substance/alcohol abuse (I have enough foster-cousins with FAS to know this first hand). Also, it's not really guaranteed that siblings being married have disabled children. It's not like some magic happens and they just come out screwy... it just means that any problems that are hereditary, will have a 100% chance to be passed on (this is a very ELI5 version). As for your #3... what abou…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 07:03 PM
3

Besides, the word "marriage" is just a word. If it was called "dfjdfjkdflkdfs", but limited to hetero-ness, the same civil rights argument would be going on, in that everyone should have equal access. But words have definitions... and definitions have to actually mean something in order to mean something. Obviously marriage is slightly different, because the government decided to grant benefits to people who get married. Now my question is, if marriage was reserved for hetero couples, and a new …
/r/MensRights28/03/13 06:58 PM
1

And? Okay, so he's not found guilty. He's still probably expelled from school, and who know how long he was locked up until the trial actually happened. His reputation is also forever tarnished.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:35 PM
1

OH for sure, you're allowed to argue against it, and make your case that it would actually be beneficial for X culture to change in Y way for Z benefits. The problem is when people join a new culture and then expect the entire pre-established culture to adapt around them.. and then when it inevitably doesn't, they get mad since their sense of extreme entitlement wasn't fulfilled.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 03:33 PM
4

Am I alone in thinking that the biggest reason was her sexist/racist shit she was saying on twitter? Like, when your job is to network, and when the majority of people you have to network with are white straight males... you shouldn't be saying shit like "black people cannot be racist towards white people: racism is from the position of the oppressor" or "straight white male: easiest difficult setting". Like even assuming it somehow wasn't racist and sexist, you don't say that shit when that dem…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 01:52 PM
3

Yeah, and it doesn't really surprise me other. It's just more hypocrisy. She treats herself like the oppressed victim class... so therefore she can do whatever she wants and everyone else should just know exactly what she wants with no compromise.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 01:23 PM
14

And also... where was this "dialogue" when the people made the joke to begin with.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:46 AM
54

She also continues to try and shift the blame onto "the deep issues and problems in the developer world". What a bitch.
/r/MensRights28/03/13 04:43 AM
1

I don't think in EVERY situation, as obviously both can vary pretty wildly about happens in the end... but yeah.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:58 PM
1

"retweeted by mensrights".
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:56 PM
1

Yeah... that's why situations like these are so tricky. And it's also why I think that the current system (which doesn't really take intent into the situation all that much) is kind of flawed. Honestly though, if you don't feel raped/bad/whatever... then don't stress it. I'd rather you brush it off and just talk it over rather than having a bunch of people force you to play the horrible-feeling victim by repeatedly telling you it was something other than what you felt.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:55 PM
1

Can you clarify? Also, I think you need to re-read what I actually said, and what you are somehow inferring from what I said.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:53 PM
6

You either understand the concepts and apply it to the problem to find the solution or you don't, in which case no amount of extra time is going to help you. Ehh... yeah, no extra time will help, but someone who can do it in half the time is still better.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 11:51 PM
11

I really hate shit like this. They don't actually care about the actual accomplishments girls are capable of... they only care about making it appear that there is equality. Being able to do math faster means that you know it better... which is obviously 100% objectively better than the alternative. If girls happen to be worse at this, then fine, I have absolutely no problem with "affirmative action" at the education stage to try and help them so that they can succeed. What I do have a problem w…
/r/MensRights27/03/13 06:18 PM
2

If we go by textbook definitions... that was rape. Well actually, it probably wasn't, technically it's sexual assault. You weren't penetrated so the government doesn't classify it as rape (fucked up I know). Normally I'd say report it, but the fact that you have mixed feelings kind of complicates things IMO. Assuming your report would be taken seriously... do you think she deserves the consequences that she would get for what she did to you? I'm not trying to give her the benefit of the doubt...…
/r/MensRights27/03/13 06:12 PM
6

Can you read? Reported for being a stupid fuck. edit: before -> being
/r/MensRights27/03/13 06:01 PM
6

Although I do feel that being raped is worse than being accused of rape Really? Can you honestly say that given the choice of: 1) Being raped (and hell, in the case of Steubenville, it wasn't even violent) or 2) Being locked away against your will for potentially a decade (or more), for something you didn't do. While being locked away, you'll be treated like shit, probably beaten, and are more likely to get raped. You may very well lose friends, and family, and you will have to register as a Sex…
/r/MensRights27/03/13 03:54 PM
34

"I will not stay with you no matter what you chose, I am leaving and there is nothing you can do to make me stay. Its your body and baby, if you want to keep it, raise it yourself because you never consulted me on this issue and it is a violation of my trust in this relationship. Good day Madam" Do you live in magical fairy land? He could do this, but it doesn't matter what he says... if the girl wants child support, the state is going to get it for her or else he's off to jail.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 04:21 AM
36

You can't judge people by what they do when someone else puts them into a lose-lose situation. The girlfriend conned him into having sex when he thought she was on BC... so she got pregant, and then when he said that he didn't want it, she said that she'll go after him for Child Support. So his only choices were: 1) Stay with a girl that betrayed him, and help pay for this kid he didn't even want for 18 years. 2) Break up with the girl and still end up paying CS for 18 years for a kid he didn't …
/r/MensRights27/03/13 04:20 AM
3

I don't know if I would have just sped off lol... she could maybe at least get an explanation, but I'm glad you didn't get forced into paying for a kid for two decades.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 04:17 AM
9

this guys crimes were way fucking worse. Planning to have sex with a young girl is "way fucking worse" than actually having sex 50 times with a young boy? lolwut.
/r/MensRights27/03/13 04:16 AM
7

It depends on how you define feminism. If you go by the strict, strict dictionary definition... then sure, most definitely. Most people here though, including me, tend to look at what feminism actually does as a way to define them, instead of what someone said feminism is a half century ago.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:08 PM
4

He's still a fucking hypocrite. Everyone who defends Adria in this, and attributes no blame to her, despite the fact that almost the entire reason this shit blew up on her was because she made "offensive"/sexist/racist remarks to others.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 04:05 PM
13

This is probably one of my biggest gripes with these types of people. Criticizing A woman, or even hating a woman, or hell, even criticizing/hating a group of women (that is a group for something other than simply being women) is NOT misogyny. I swear, this shit is fucking worse than the few business classes I had to take with the amount of buzzwords they use that are used so often, and mostly all incorrectly, that they lose absolutely all important meaning. What blows my mind though, is that th…
/r/MensRights26/03/13 01:22 PM
1

While not "rapist"... I've read quite a few stories where single fathers (or just fathers without their wives present) have had the cops called on them for "being paedophiles" because they took their daughter to a park.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 08:14 PM
1

rational parties. That's assuming all parties involves are rational.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 06:05 PM
6

Well I think that's one of the biggest disconnects between these people and others... understanding the difference between what SHOULD be, and what IS. Anyone should be able to do whatever they want (assuming it doesn't negatively affect others) without becoming a victim. I mean, assuming I follow the rules of the road, I SHOULD not have to wear a seat-belt. Hell, I shouldn't even have to wear leathers and a motorcycle helmet. I also shouldn't have to lock my doors. And I also shouldn't need to …
/r/MensRights25/03/13 06:03 PM
2

I think he meant prison population.
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:58 PM
1

You think those are the same? Not that I necessarily am promoting gender based insults... but there's a difference between being called a rapist and being called a gendered insult (which men have too).
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:57 PM
2

If this is the first time you have seen feminists say something you agree with, Why don't you cite some examples? Say something in the past decade that is a good example of equality? I know the fucking difference; do you think I'm a goddamn moron? ( No, but do you think that no one has ever accused someone of rape for sex that was consensual at the time?
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:54 PM
2

That's true. But still... people of feminist culture, not necessarily just feminists :)
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:10 AM
2

And let's say there actually was an invisible "white male privilege" that SOME white males may or may not have... and that no other race/gender had any privilege whatsoever... Their solution is to introduce hard discrimination against every single white male ever? I mean, really?
/r/MensRights25/03/13 12:03 AM
8

Why do you think it's bullshit?
/r/MensRights24/03/13 07:01 PM
6

Yeah, I don't see the problem with it at all. I would be willing to bet he'd also say "we need more men in technology just like we need more white sprinters in the 100M". I think the overall point is that diversity, only for the sake of diversity is completely meaningless.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 07:01 PM
14

While obviously I agree in that it's not all women... I don't think I'd go as far to say it's ONLY feminists. I would expand it a bit and also include people who were raised in a total "disney princess" way... as I believe this has a lot more to do with a sense of entitlement (which is shared by both "princesses" and feminists) than anything to really do with patriarchy.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 07:00 PM
2

I think you mist be mistaking people talking about Playhaven (the company) being wrong in that they fired their employers about something so small... and people talking about the playhaven devs being wrong. Honestly, I haven't heard a single person criticize the playhaven developers that got fired.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 06:29 PM
2

I honestly think it's just straight up ignorant (and unknowingly sexist) people. I mean, she said it herself: "It's just unexpected"... she is probably still in a state of disbelief, so she's doing everything she can (probably not intentionally) to somehow rationalize it.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 04:19 AM
4

I can't fucking wait for Paul Elam and AVFM to dig into this.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 03:00 AM
1

at any point she can decide that in fact she doesn't want to engage in sexual activity Sure... but again, as I said, this is a he said/she said.
/r/MensRights24/03/13 12:30 AM
1

Because no one is saying that just a single piece of clothing can make up 100% consent. As I said, this has nothing to do with forced sex. No one has ever said "Well, it's completely irrelevant whether he had a gun toy to your head and fucked you... you were wearing a short skirt". The situations where clothing can have an effect (and this is all after the fact, before hand is a different reason I'll get too later) are situations where it's a "he said/she said". You have one guy saying that ther…
/r/MensRights23/03/13 06:33 PM
2

I'll just repeat: nice strawman.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:04 AM
0

That's a shit analogy.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 05:04 AM
7

So you're saying that people do not have the self control to not rape someone they see walking down the street while showing some skin? He's saying that some people (aka rapists) may not have self-control.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 03:01 AM
0

He never said that... but if it's a matter of "he said/she said", then clothing (which could potentially show the mindset someone was in when they initially left) could shed some light. Not all rape cases are "hold a gun to their head and fuck them".
/r/MensRights23/03/13 03:00 AM
7

where people are punished Please tell me where a rape victim is punished.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:58 AM
2

n where a rich man is asking for it You mean "When a rich man is increasing his chances of becoming a victim". No one asks to be a victim of a crime, but there are actions that increase the likelihood of someone becoming a victim. So nice strawman.
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:57 AM
2

Advice was given on my campus - don't buy/wear that brand/style of shoes. How dare they trigger these poor victims by attempting to save the lives of others. Those misandrist fucking bastards. /s
/r/MensRights23/03/13 02:53 AM
10

It's the whole princess attitude. I'm not saying all women have it... but the ones that do just make my head explode with the sense of entitlement they exhibit.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:36 PM
3

And that's really what makes her (and people like her) so bad... they just know that people in that area aren't really that confrontational and they abuse that.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:33 PM
4

Well I'd say it goes beyond her uploading the photo... I honestly think that whole situation is just what brought light to her hypocrisy and everything else. I mean, yeah uploading a photo is bad when you haven't even tried talking to them... but it's not THAT bad. IMO what was bad is when, instead of showing any sympathy for the guy getting fired, she showed pride... and then on top of that, started alienating the majority of sendgrids potential customer base by saying shit like "black people c…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:30 PM
4

Huh, lionized... I havent seen that word before. You raise a good point though, and it's kind of related to something I've said before. Everytime you hear a successful female in a male dominated industry say something like "I don't feel like there is any sexism" or "I don't think we need feminism any more"... they go absolutely apeshit on that person... that's why we have the whole "special snowflake" thing. What confuses me though is this: Shouldn't they be happy? I mean, that's a living exampl…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:26 PM
15

This is what I have been saying constantly. If my job was to try and woo as many people over to using my company as possible... and 90% or more of my potential customers are white males... How the fuck am I supposed to do my job by being racist and sexist and insulting every single person in that demographic? I mean, this doesn't even have anything to do with Pycon... it's just her straight up being racist.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:23 PM
1

with the conclusion that supporting men against overreactions like Adria's That wasn't the conclusion before hand?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 06:21 PM
3

She uses the account for business... potential customers see that and use that to interact with the business.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:52 PM
6

Ehhh... they still left out her racist/sexist comments, so they are still missing the most important part IMO. I did leave a comment there though pointing that out.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:52 PM
26

Sexual harassment law was weaponized in the 1980s. Women in the business world, weather they wanted it or not, were handed a loaded gun Well that's the problem isn't it? The loaded gun is there, and even though you may never use it... I still have a fucking gun in my face. What Adria showed is that some WILL use it, and all that did was remind everyone that the gun is still in fact there, it's still loaded, and it's still pointed at every single male in the workplace. Until stuff like that isn't…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:49 PM
2

SOME<sup>some</sup><sup>some</sup><sup>some</sup><sup>some</sup><sup>some</sup> That prefix is massively important. And even if we did assume that literally ALL white males are privileged and live like kings... you still don't get to disregard them because of their race or gender... because that's textbook definition racism/sexism. Obama is obviously more privileged than me, I wouldn't be correct in saying "Nah, I don't care what you say Mr President, because you're black". It's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:46 PM
29

You know? I'm getting pretty fucking sick of the medias complete refusal to mention all of the other shit she said... which in my opinion, is a far greater reason as to why she got fired. If she simply tweeted the guys picture, and then apologized after they got fired (because I very seriously doubt that she meant it to go THAT far) then she would have been fine. I would have placed 95% of the blame on the guy's employer. (well, I still do for the guy being fired). Anyway, the reason (IMO) she g…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:12 PM
3

Unless they bring it into the office it's none of their business. But that's kind of the point... that twitter is her "office". Her entire job is networking and shit on social media, and her twitter quite clearly states her position at send grid. As I said though, she quite clearly said "Sendgrid is with me on this"... or something along those lines, I'm sure you can find the picture some here.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:06 PM
1

Sorry, but I'm getting really annoyed that people say it was unfortunate that she got fired. She was being a sexist and racist cunt to the demographic that represents the majority of their customer base, while on her public twitter that she uses to represent her company, where she then goes even further and says her company supports her twisted ideology (instead of simply claiming all of this as her own personal views) when her entire "job" description is to spend all day on social platforms bei…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 02:05 PM
1

That's just the way it is. Whether it should be like that or not, is an entirely different question. HR claims and stuff like that always carry so much more weight when coming from a woman. As for why this is like this? I'm sure there are a ton of reasons... but Adria's actions simply reinforced this fact and gave every male a reminder that they can't take the same chances with women as they can with men, because the potential risk is so much greater.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 01:56 PM
2

I didn't realize you were being sarcastic at first... I started to have a twitch. :)
/r/MensRights22/03/13 01:54 PM
8

The onus shouldn't be on the victim to take that chance.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 01:46 PM
2

I agree with this... (And why the fuck are people downvoting... this isnt fucking SRS where you downvote what you disagree with) It's always about appropriate response... and the appropriate response against any PERSON that is weaker than you will always be lessened. The fact that on average, a women will be weaker is completely irrelevant.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 01:45 PM
1

Everything she said was on her twitter, where she quite prominently says "developer evangelist for sendgrid". Her job as a developer evangelist is also have of public relations/marketing. Oh, and she said "sendgrid fully supports me".
/r/MensRights22/03/13 12:40 PM
2

I find it funny too... but that's the point, a jokes a joke. It's the total hypocrisy she exhibits thhat makes me mad.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 12:39 PM
2

Should I also worry about my mother being raped by the 13 year olds that play xbox? Shit, I better call the police.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:21 AM
1

Was just going to say that... that is just such a good burn.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:19 AM
17

How is firing someone who is sexist and racist towards the demographic that makes up the majority of your customers... when your entire job description is to be nice and network and woo over as many people as possible... somehow not justified? She wasn't fired because she posted a guys photo and then it had unintended consequences. She was fired because she let her hateful personal ideologies leak into her job and then claimed that they represented the company she works for.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:16 AM
15

No, she should have been fired, as would any other person of any other gender if they were being publicly racist and sexist while representing their company (and even highlighting the fact that these weren't just her personal views). You don't get to say something as hateful (aka racist) as "black people cannot be racist towards white people", and then imply that whites (the majority of your customer base) are all oppressors... when your ENTIRE JOB DESCRIPTION, is to network and be as friendly a…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:14 AM
19

So much this... calling out a single WOMAN because she acted just plain hateful is not misogyny. The EXACT same thing would have happened if she was male. You also hit it on the head with your last sentence. Sorry, but as smart and educated as you think she may be (I doubt it)... if your job is to network and be friendly to developers, and instead you act blatantly racist and sexist towards them by completely dismissing their opinions based on gender and race... then you aren't doing your job ri…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:08 AM
4

Yeah, that's why throughout this whole thing I've always cared more about her reaction to it and the resulting racism/sexism and pride of it. I mean, if it was jsut the one tweeted photo... then the blame would rest entirely on the guys employer... I'm sure she didn't initially intend for it to happen (but as you said, the pride she exhibited afterwards for it happening is awful). But still, I'm so happy that someone actually got called out and faced real world consequences for spouting the obvi…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:35 AM
1

Well first, it's not every single other study. And secondly, considering the way VAWA funding works and who funds these studies... and considering that I can look at the definition of rape right now by the fbi and see that it excludes males, it's not really "conspiratorial".
/r/MensRights21/03/13 11:33 PM
4

Sorry, but I can't agree. IF you are blatantly sexist and racist towards your customers while representing your company (and even saying they support you) you should get fired. This has nothing to do with equality or what happened at Pycon.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 11:32 PM
1

Because it wasn't "the year of male rape"... The year before and after it were probably within +/- 10% as well. I explain other studies being contradictory because they are done by people with an agenda. Sorry, but when they don't define rape in a way that includes male victims, I kind of have to question their motives.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:14 PM
2

Agreed
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:12 PM
0

I got a pretty good chuckle out of that.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:54 PM
1

It shouldn't be hard for them to show the quite blatantly racist/sexist comments she made while representing her company as reasons.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:53 PM
8

She's still responsible for quite a few blatantly racist and sexist tweets done on the twitter profile where she represents her company. completely ignoring every single thing that happened at Pycon, you're a pretty fucking shit "tech evangelist" if you are racist and sexist towards 95% of your potential customer base.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:52 PM
1

That depends on your definition of institutional as well. And it still requires you to preface the word "racism" with "institutional" because it sure as shit isn't implied.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:50 PM
3

/puts on shades YEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:48 PM
8

When you share the exact same ideologies (male privilege) as feminists... it doesn't matter what you say. It's like me saying that I believe in god and follow the bible but I'm not a christian (or whatever the all-encompassing term is these days).
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:47 PM
9

How is she not being treated equally? If I was a public representative for my company, and I said shit as racist and sexist as she did (and towards the very demographic that makes up probably 95% of the potential client base)... then I'd be fucking fired too.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:46 PM
1

Sorry but no... there is absolutely no reason why 2010 would magically have 12312321321x more male rapes. If this was on a day by day basis? then sure, it could be a coincidence... but having it across 12 months when the numbers range over a million, that is not even remotely close to being statistically insignificant. You could argue the study is just wrong... but it's pretty ridiculous to suggest that using the same method as the CDC report, that the next year men would go back down to <100,00…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:31 PM
2

Well yeah... "Oh hey bud, you're homeless and a drug addict and your children died? That is so easy, you couldn't possibly imagine what it's like to be black and get paid to tweet like I am" It's hyperbole, but the point is that everyone is an individual and has individual circumstances... judging anyone on anything BUT their individual merits and bringing race/sex into the picture (exactly like she has) is sexist or racist.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:26 PM
1

Not at the moment... if I find it again I'll try and remember to post it back.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 09:24 PM
8

I just had someone pull this shit on me in the comments of another thread. They change definitions... some if it is this whole oppressor/oppressed kyriarchy bullshit. Another popular one is throwing in the words "systemic" or "institutionalized" to the definition of misogyny or sexism, because they think then that it doesn't apply to males.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:48 PM
21

Ehh, I'd say it's still the right reasons.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:44 PM
7

It's sad that they don't see the hypocrisy themselves, but it's spot on. Hell, look at a tweet that Ms Adria Richards said herself: "Black people cannot be racist towards Whites. One is the oppressed and the other is the oppressor". Again, 1) Attack whites. 2) Defend blacks.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:44 PM
15

I've said it a few other places but I'll say it again here... Her firing is well deserved. Actually, instead of typing it all up again, I'll just copy/paste: Honestly, I don't even agree that she be fired IF the only thing she did was tweet the guys picture. IF that was all she did, and the guy got fired, and her response was "Sorry, I simply didn't appreciate the jokes, I didn't mean for it to go this far"... then you know what? While I would have still thought she should have simply asked them…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:42 PM
14

A few things: 1) Even ignoring the stuff about SRS not wanting people to be photographed... it was actually a Pycon policy that people not be photographed and published without the persons permission. What's funny is that she broke this policy from the code of conduct while actually citing the code of conduct herself. And here's a comment I made somewhere else: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1aqlh1/adria_richards_fired_from_sendgrid/c8zwt1h The gist of it is basically, even if her a…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:41 PM
1

I don't think it is dishonest. The "last 12 months" category is the most relevant. Why do we care about what happened 20 or 30 years ago when we are trying to make decisions moving forward. I mean, there's only one of a few reasons that the two numbers are different anyway. In the past, the 12-month rate for women either actually being raped, or reporting being raped was drastically higher (resulting in the higher lifetime). This means that the annual rate has dropped to what it shows in the cur…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 07:06 PM
2

As I said soemwhere else: (actually, I'll just link the comment). http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1aqlh1/adria_richards_fired_from_sendgrid/c8zwt1h
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:41 PM
95

Honestly, I don't even agree that she be fired IF the only thing she did was tweet the guys picture. IF that was all she did, and the guy got fired, and her response was "Sorry, I simply didn't appreciate the jokes, I didn't mean for it to go this far"... then you know what? While I would have still thought she should have simply asked them her self first, I would have forgiven her. I still think it's ridiculous that the one guy got fired... having a single person tweet a picture and say they sa…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:38 PM
2

I was using "you" figuratively.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 05:28 PM
2

No, I didn't mean more, I meant equal. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf Page 19 and 20 I believe. Remember to include "made to penetrate" as rape, and you'll see that the annual number of rape victims in the last 12 months was almost exactly the same at 1.27 million.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 05:22 PM
6

She's a racist and a sexist... have you read her twitter? She posts shit on her twitter (which represents her company) like: http://i7.minus.com/ibsjtfJQi9JbnB.png Compared to two guys making a private joke amongst themselves that was direct at no one.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:47 PM
8

http://i7.minus.com/ibsjtfJQi9JbnB.png And there's also stuff like: "Straight white male: life on easy mode" and just TONS of shit like that.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:46 PM
3

Yeah, that was my thought as well. I would be glad to be given credit for outing a hateful/sexist/racist bitch.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:45 PM
19

And she is also blatantly racist and sexist on her twitter. Gems like: "Straight white male: Life on easy mode" And also posting Cards against humanity stuff like: "And the academy award for "dying" goes to: "the jews"! ". All while representing her company.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:44 PM
4

You have one, single downvote (I upvoted to make it even)... to judge >60,000 people on the actions of one is completely fucking asinine. Anyway, to your point you really have to be skeptical of studies like that. I mean, the fact that the CDC report basically states the exact opposite, at the very least, suggests that more studies need to be done in the area. I'm trying to find more of the actual report for the image you linked, but haven't been able to... do you have it? I'd be curious to read…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:34 PM
3

As I said, I think the definition has become so vague, that it could be applied to literally anything. If I use the same criteria that allows us to say that we live in a rape culture, then I could easily say we live in literally any "insert bad thing here" culture. What bothers me more, is that it's very similar to shit like the "stop child pornography" bill that has absolutely nothing to do with the title, and everything to do with allowing the government to destroy internet privacy. So when pe…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:30 PM
3

It's not trivialize rape. The very fact that it's used for shock value is because it's recognized as so bad.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:26 PM
7

you mean like the national organization of women? One of the (if not THE) largest feminist organization in the world? Who was partially responsible for reathorizing VAWA, an incredibly sexist act that excludes men from being offered equal services to what women receive? The same group that said that Sandy Hook shootings were because of masculinity? Or is the largest and most well-funded feminist org in North America not full of "real feminists". Don't even get me started on the authors that sell…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:22 PM
2

I believe that's already covered... well maybe not with all STDS, but with aids. If you know you have aids and have unprotected sex without disclosing your aids... that's illegal and you are criminally liable. I also believe that if you wear a condom then you don't have to disclose anything.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:17 PM
4

Well then, "that" definition. As for your second paragraph, then I still conclude we live in an infanticide culture. I mean, people make "dead baby" jokes quite often so, it must be true.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 01:05 PM
6

Well your definition is different than the definition used in the studies that state that women are significantly more likely to be victims of rape. The FBI and most of these studies require the rape victim to be penetrated. At first it was only penetrated in the vagina (meaning only women could be victims), but they recently made it a bit more broad to cover any and all penetration. Regardless, it still does not cover "forced to penetrate" which excludes almost every single female on male rape …
/r/MensRights21/03/13 01:04 PM
6

I think you need to open your eyes to what people who use the same label as you are doing.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:52 PM
1

Look up the CDC report on rape. "made to penetrate" is not under the rape category... it's instead grouped into a different one along with "non-contact unwanted sexual experiences". Despite the male victimization rate being equal to the female rape victimization rate if you include "made to penetrate" they use their little change in definition to conclude that the majority of rape victims are female.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:52 PM
3

As much as we often disagree... good post.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:50 PM
5

ANYTHING can trigger PTSD.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:49 PM
3

and call people out if they think rape jokes are funny. fuck... that. A joke is a joke. And a joke about rape for shock value just further solidifies the fact that rape is a terrible thing... that's why it's used for the joke in the first place.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:49 PM
5

Actually, I quite like the idea of conditional consent, if it could be applied correctly. You agree to have sex with a woman who says she's on birth control and she lied? Well that's rape, because you wouldn't have agree if she had told you the truth. As long as due process is used and it's not a he said/she said of... what he said/she said then I'd quite like it.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:46 PM
8

Pushing that rape is worse than murder can also be incredibly harmful to rape victims. You are basically telling them that their attacker should have been a bit more sympathetic and just ended their life right then and there, because clearly being murdered is a better outcome than having to live with the idea of rape. Taking counselling and trying to work past it and live a fruitful life? NAHH, just put a fucking bullet in their skull and end the never-ending trauma and damage that is so immense…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:45 PM
6

Then your definition has become so incredibly vague that it has just lost all actual meaning... and is instead used to sound like a big scary word that they can "legitimately" apply to something to justify feminism with. Shit, I have a new theory, it's called "Infant Murder Culture"... which we most definitely live in. I mean, look at Casey Anthony, this whole due process shit OBVIOUSLY is an attitude that makes it more likely to happen, because it shows you just have to cover your tracks. SO ye…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:42 PM
2

How do you define rape?
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:39 PM
1

Not you... but in general, people seem to think that, that is a solution.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:34 AM
10

It's pretty hard to prove that you didn't hire someone because of their gender. Also, "not meshing with the team", is definitely a reason to not be hired/fired during your probationary period... regardless of your gender. IF the team has created an atmosphere that jokes around a lot (such as where I work), and a new person on probation comes in and starts causing grief with everyone... I doubt they will stay around long.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 02:07 AM
16

What's incredibly sad about this situation is that it's true. Attitudes like Adria's are a major factor as to why companies may not hire women. I mean, you have all men, they make jokes about and to each other, and everyone laughs. If someone doesn't like a joke, they just say "please stop" and then life goes on. Make a joke at/with a girl however and she happens to lack a sense of humour.. then you are misogynist sexist bastard who will potentially get fired. And hell, apparently you don't even…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 02:05 AM
1

Here is my comment: Hopefully the author reads it. I just had a few comments to make about your section on rape: You say: "it wasn’t until January of 2012 that the FBI updated their definition of rape victims to include men) and the subsequent exclusivity of systems to assist all victims of sexual violence in preference for women only." Well, not really. They updated their definition to include rape victims of men... but only IF the man is penetrated by something. If I, or you, as males, were dr…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:39 PM
1

Even if this lack of interest is caused by social bias (or what I like to call "soft discrimination")... how does it make sense to solve the problem by introducing actual "hard discrimination" against males.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:14 PM
4

I think that's too broad. Slapping someones ass (which I obviously still don't support), could be classified as that... and that obviously doesn't make sense. There needs to way more classifications made. First we have actual forced sex that either includes threats (of violence) or violence to overpower the victim. The lack of consent is incredibly clear. Then we should have another for situations where no violence/threats were used and the other person didn't participate. Then we should have an…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:11 PM
5

That's exactly the point though, and that is exactly why these people define rape in such a way. If you don't include "forced to penetrate" as rape, then you get to ignore 99% of all male rape victims, which then allows you to conclude "95% of all rape victims are female", and then you use that to lobby for 95% of all funding to go to women, and then because they have such an easier time reporting rape, it further skews reporting statistics in their favour, and then the cycle continues. If you l…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:08 PM
15

You actually raise a good point... I mean, say you have a group of primarily guys (which is likely in tech areas)... A new girl hire comes in and wants to become a part of the group. This group is all friends so they joke around a lot (at least this is how my job is, we shit talk each other all of the fucking time and it's laughs all around)... So, in a normal world, this girl would probably be invited and become a part of the group, and made to feel welcome and all is good... if someone says so…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 08:03 PM
1

As someone else said... that's a very interesting point.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 07:56 PM
2

Well, the punishment isn't the important part, it's the deterrent. Fines (if they were substantial enough) could maybe do it... if the person could even afford them. If the "false accuser" registry actually meant something and prevented people from getting jobs and such then it'd be alright. As long as it serves as a deterrent... becauase right now, people can falsely accuse, succeed, sue the school for 2 million dollars, then admit that they lied... and then serve no jail time and keep the mone…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 07:09 PM
2

You mean false accusation? then yeah, I think the punishment should most definitely be changed to fit the crime. Rape is just something that people falsely accuse far more often than other crimes.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 07:06 PM
10

I would say these false-accusers are violent. They are trying to get someone locked up against their will where they will most likely be beaten or raped. I agree with rj where he says he'd go a little bit more narrow and say "victimless crimes" only.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:28 PM
6

No it's not an extreme form of slander... not when you go to the cops and press formal charges. Completely ignoring the whole social/reputation aspect of it, you are in fact attempting to have someone locked up for decades of their life, where they may very well likely be beaten or raped in prison... lose their job, their family and everything. Reading further in your comment about "stipulation for intent"... well, yeah. When most people here talk about false rape accusations, they mean intentio…
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:27 PM
5

You know what... fuck these people. They are 100% fucking psychopaths with absolutely no empathy for other human beings. "Oh, I don't want to face the consequences of my own actions, I guess I'll like and potentially completely destroy a man's life and have him locked up for decades". Wouldn't surprise me when people like this start killing their babies either. "Oh, this being a parent thing kind of sucks... better just end it".
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:23 PM
2

Nope... (no idea why).
/r/MensRights20/03/13 04:16 PM
1

She seriously said men can't be raped? Ask her what she would call it if a woman drugged you, tied you down, and then held a gun to your head before having sex with you...
/r/MensRights20/03/13 05:49 AM
1

Well that depends on if you think it is already tipped one way. If it is, then it's basically mandatory that it begins tipping the other way to restore equality.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 05:43 AM
3

So is the National Organization of Women (AFAIK one of the largest feminist organizations in the world) an example of "extreme feminists"? I mean, they pretty heavily pushed for the reinstatement of VAWA despite the text and the application being grossly discriminatory towards men. Hell, they even blamed the Sandy Hook shooting on "masculinity". I mean, we also have blogs like Jezebel that get millions of hits, authors that write some pretty hateful shit that sell millions of copies, feminists i…
/r/MensRights19/03/13 11:19 PM
1

Hrmm... I guess after thinking about it, it's probably best. I mean, I would agree with maybe bullying possibly being treated more seriously... but I guess with any other crime, you are mostly charged for the actions you do, and not how other people react to it.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 11:09 PM
2

Yeah, that's what I was thinking at least. I'm just wondering if manslaughter has ever been used, or something else specific if the victim kills themselves.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 09:38 PM
5

So what do you call feminists who act entirely contrary to your definition? What do we judge feminism by? What people say it is? What it does? What it did 40 years ago? What people say it did 40 years ago? By the actions of the majority? Or what about the actions of the powerful minority? The most funded? The most vocal?
/r/MensRights19/03/13 09:36 PM
0

but instead tip the scale in the other direction. In which direction? Towards men or women?
/r/MensRights19/03/13 09:32 PM
3

As others have said... it would be incredibly unlikely if you were NOT wrong about at least some things. The difference is in how you react when someone challenges your potentially incorrect view. You can either retreat and get all defensive (and pull fire-alarms)... OR take it as an opportunity to re-analyze your beliefs and come to a better (more correct) view on things.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 09:30 PM
3

Actually... how do laws work like that? False accusations aside... let's say I was a total dick and bullied someone so harshly (and it could be proven that I did) that they killed themselves. Is that illegal if the bullying itself wasn't illegal (although incredibly assholish)? Is there any precedent for this sort of thing anywhere?
/r/MensRights19/03/13 08:18 PM
14

Point this out to her employer.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 08:17 PM
12

But if you're going to join a culture, you don't have the right to radically redefine it at your own whim. Spot on.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 08:15 PM
2

I'm at work and twitter is blocked... can you quote it for me please?
/r/MensRights19/03/13 08:12 PM
1

Yup.
/r/MensRights19/03/13 06:57 PM
1

Oops... look like I misunderstood you. While I generally disagree with your stance on abortion I took that to mean you were pro-choice.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 11:55 PM
1

Can you read?
/r/MensRights18/03/13 11:54 PM
2

I am pro-choice, in case you misunderstood.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 10:34 PM
3

And that's exactly because they didn't arrive at their position through actually thinking it through themselves. Atheism might as well be a religion for a sizable amount of atheists... and pro-choicers are the same way. Well, to be entirely honest, critical thought is something that too many people lack in general IMO, so this shit happens with everything... I just find it slightly worse when the people who are like that claim to be the "skeptics" or the "forward-thinkers".
/r/MensRights18/03/13 10:34 PM
1

And it's like you didn't even read mine... here, let me quote the relevant part again: until they state otherwise. I guess if you really wanted, you could say I should have said : "state or show otherwise".
/r/MensRights18/03/13 10:32 PM
1

Because the bible straight up says: "if a man lies with a man as he would a woman, then they have committed an abomination and they should be put to death". IT's really quite clear cut.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 08:06 PM
2

From the standpoint of rhetoric and politics, being anti-feminism isn't a very good strategy if we want to actually win peoples' hearts and minds to our point of view. Ehh, I see what you mean... I just have a hard time caring about winning over the people who are apparently too shallow to look into something for more than 2 minutes themselves. I know it's still some what beneficial in the long run... but there's also downsides (see r/atheism). You get even more people who are just like "YEAH IM…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 08:05 PM
15

I haven't seen a single popular post on these boards that suggest women should ever be treated any differently then a man would under the law. Alternatively, I've seen plenty of posts by feminists asking for (or getting in the case of VAWA or AHCA and shit) special treatment for women... or discriminatory treatment towards men (or both).
/r/MensRights18/03/13 08:03 PM
20

As much as I disagree with people who are against abortion... what the fuck does being against abortion have to do with misogyny? These people are fucking stupid. I'm also sick of people totally misunderstanding the anti-abortion argument... or rather, not even understanding the reasons they are pro-abortion/choice. You see it a TON with the whole "my body my choice" statements, which make absolutely no sense what so ever when talking to someone who is pro-life. Honestly, not that I disagree wit…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 08:01 PM
1

Obviously the intent is good... but this is kind of stupid. For Category A: The same thing: "Gender cannot be a factor in trials" is just repeated about 37 different ways... #1 basically covers 1 through 4. A5).... Agreed... if someone CHOOSES to have sex while drunk, then it's not rape. It's kind of worded badly though... because obviously rape can still happen while drunk. A6) This is really what should be happening already. Category B) This is just stupid. The standards are standards... if yo…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 07:12 PM
1

Yes it does. If I say "Christians are against homosexuality" then I would be justified. Christians follow the bible, the bible says homosexuality is an abomination... it's perfectly justified for me to assume that christians are against homosexuality until they state otherwise. The same thing can be said with feminism and patriarchy.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:17 PM
2

Teach MEN not to rape versus Feminists (aka, people who share a certain ideology in common) are X, Y, Z
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:15 PM
0

I knew that... I just like watching people spend the next 5 posts trying to sidestep and not actually quote his (unpublished) "study" where he still concludes that he doesn't agree with it.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 04:15 PM
-2

protesting a conference made by an incest-apologise Citation?
/r/MensRights18/03/13 01:10 PM
6

The handicap system isn't used in actual competition.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 01:08 PM
2

It makes more sense than acting like it's on the victim to prevent rape. Because whether you like it or not... it is on the victim to prevent rape. Rapists are rapists because they rape. That sounds obvious, but it's apparently something you and other people seem to forget. Their behaviour is a constant...they know rape is wrong, they just don't care. Also, because we don't live in a world where stuff in "The Minority Report" is real, the police/judicial system can only do something after a rape…
/r/MensRights18/03/13 01:04 PM
2

Aren't blanket statements, that take some negative aspect of some members of a group and applying it to the entire group Please tell me you understand the difference between doing this when the group in question is a choice, and doing it when the group is not a choice (biological). I mean... just think about it.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 12:57 PM
3

So, while only about 8% of men are rapists, I think you need to read better.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 12:55 PM
1

There are clearly two separate issues here I get you're asking a different question... but that's clearly not what he was talking about when he answered the other persons question.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 03:33 AM
3

WTF is your problem? There are clearly two separate issues here... and what he said has absolutely nothing to do with that.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 05:12 PM
1

No need for hysteria. This isn't hysteria... it's a response to people and their "men can stop rape" campaigns.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 06:49 AM
3

Which is why Harvards Law review just had to make another X number of spots on it's board capable of being judged based on gender... But maybe bitching long enough to get people to create discriminatory laws in your favor is in fact "adapting".
/r/MensRights17/03/13 02:34 AM
1

Who said anything about telling this to people after the fact? It's about PREVENTING... aka, you tell it to potential (As in, they aren't yet) victims. You straw man so hard it's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights17/03/13 02:25 AM
1

Then I don't care, because they'd rather actually see more people get raped at the cost of "triggering" people who don't know how to ignore things.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:36 PM
4

I know, I just don't understand how these people think. I mean, first it's "I believe in equality for everyone" (let's just ignore the fact that she calls that feminism). And then she says that men don't care as much about their family as women... and she states this as fact. As you said... fuck this feminist bitch.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 10:33 PM
1

Because the victim is the only person that can change it. Like, if there's a rapist out and about, he is going to go rape someone... there is no changing his mind. The person he ends up raping will be in that situation because of their own choices. It stands to reason that if they had made different choices, it's possible that they would not have ended up being the victim. This doesn't mean they deserve it, and this doesn't mean it's necessarily their fault... but it does mean that certain choic…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:04 PM
2

Thank you for saying it better than I could.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 09:00 PM
1

Oh here we go... the PTSD excuse again.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 08:59 PM
5

Am I a feminist? Of course. How can you not be if you believe in equality for everyone? trolololololololololo olololol
/r/MensRights15/03/13 08:52 PM
1

How useful is it pointing out to someone what they already know? Well if they already know it, then it shouldn't be that big of a problem.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:30 PM
23

I noticed you commenting a lot in that thread... and I also noticed a lot of "non-MRAs" basically expressing the same sentiment. It's heartening to see that most people are actually sane, but at the same time it's kind of disheartening that these same people don't realize that it's becoming a problem so therefore they don't actually try and do anything to stop it.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:27 PM
1

Children are a totally different issue. For any rape where the victim was drunk... she could have simply not gotten drunk and therefore she wouldn't have been raped. For any rapes that happen in a dark alley... don't walk alone in dark alleys (I know this is a minority). As I said, it's an entirely different question as to whether preemptively doing these things is reasonable, and as I mentioned before... this is all in hindsight. But it's absolutely ridiculous to say that every victim of crime …
/r/MensRights15/03/13 04:01 PM
1

Women are partially responsible for being a victim... as bad as it sounds to say, it's the truth. You can take almost any situation ever (it doesn't even have to be rape), and there will almost always be something that could have been done to avoid it. Whether those "could haves" are reasonable or not, is an entirely different question... but everyone can almost always be at least partially in control of their life.
/r/MensRights15/03/13 03:12 AM
3

Do you know what the word hindsight means?
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:30 PM
0

I wish I could pay only 1k a year. I'm 23, have 0 accidents, 0 tickets, went to driving school and have been driving for 7 years and it would still be in the high teens for insurance.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 05:35 PM
1

NO it isn't... at least not in my experience. At 19, for me to insure a vehicle under my own name would have been over 3k a year. My friend who was playing hockey in manitoba, who was a year younger, and driving a much more expensive truck, was paying like 1200 a year.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 05:32 PM
2

Because in many cases they were careless (especially in hindsight). Like it or not, most victims of crimes could have done something to not ever put themselves in a situation where they could potentially become a victim. f you want to use driving as an analogy, you would have to include a driver who is driving into other people deliberately as the rapist, and the victim cannot be the one who is mainly at fault. Okay... let's do that. I'm a criminal driver, and I decide one day that I want to get…
/r/MensRights14/03/13 05:25 PM
1

Compensation should be the accuser's responsibility. If insurance would ever cover such a thing. Also, why not full anonymity for all people until they have been convicted? I wouldn't disagree with that.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:02 AM
1

Then give me a definition of patriarchy.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:01 AM
1

I'm not playing the game. I'm not the one trying to divert funding specifically help out men. But if I did want to, then at least I would have an actual reason to. Fortunately, I'm not a sexist cunt.
/r/MensRights14/03/13 06:01 AM
1

-->Wait until it happens to you. I don't wish that on you, but, your tune will change when you're the victim of an assault sitting in a cold jail cell after being booked for assaulting someone you loved, wondering how the hell this could possibly happen I wasn't talking about assault or DV where cops come to your door and it's a he said/she said. I'm talking about a formal accusation made at a police station. My entire point is that if we didn't make simply going to jail such a life-ruining expe…
/r/MensRights13/03/13 07:29 PM
4

Good write-up as always, but a few things in response to your "Lessons": 1) If I accuse someone of murder or another fairly heinous crime... do they also arrest first and ask questions later? I wouldn't disagree with what happened with this rape case if that is what they also do for murder/assault accusations and such. 2) Agreed entirely... and I think this is what makes #1 a problem. 3) Also agreed... and this is also what makes #1 a problem. 4-end) agree I guess my only real criticism is that …
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:42 PM
3

If you believe in patriarchy then you believe that Men are sociopaths who, throughout history, oppressed their wives, mothers, sisters and daughters in ways comparable to racism and classism. And also oppress themselves and other men just because (depending on which feminist you talk to).
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:20 PM
2

I think that's tilting a little bit more towards "kyriarchy". But still, that understanding is even scarier... because they just assume so much that the few men that are in power, are incredibly sexist for being men. They think that if all those men were actually women, that no one would ever be oppressed. Don't even ask me to try and understand how they think that implementing laws that discriminate against the "common" man somehow changes anything about the 0.0000001% of men that are in power.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:19 PM
2

It's insane how they actually make it through the day. I mean, it's NOT a patriarchy (at least in nay meaningful way as it applies to 99.99999999% of the male population) if it benefits women at the expense of men. The rationale of these people is just non-existent.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:14 PM
2

And Blackstones Formulation.... It's like these people are completely fucking unaware that society has already gone through shit like this, and have already made the same mistakes they are making now... that's why they changed.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 03:11 PM
6

What are these rational voices of feminism? Anyone that clings to any actual meaningful definition of patriarchy theory in western society is not being rational.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:14 PM
2

The funny thing is, men suffered way more during the recession.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:13 PM
5

Equality of outcome is meaningless. To even look at the gender of someone when hiring/approving/whatever is sexist.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 01:12 PM
1

So our legal system should only cater to the "apparently" highest of intellect? And just fuck everyone else and let them be taken advantage of? You should really get off your high-horse.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 10:35 PM
2

The system is exactly how it should be. It penalizes witless rubes like you for being exactly as you are. And this is where you show your true colors. A system shouldn't be so obviously abstract that it penalizes people for not spending months of time and thousands on legal counsel just to make a simple legal agreement. If it was any other contract it would probably not be thrown out.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:51 PM
5

Again, you seem very angry, and also completely incapable of understanding what this entire subreddit is about. The entire point is that everyone here disagrees with "what's really happening" and thinks that it needs to change. It's not really that difficult of a concept to understand... if you don't like it, don't come here.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:12 PM
2

You seem angry.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:09 PM
1

Oh no question it's a dick move... but that just solidifies it even further. He's going to pull that shit and she's still going to marry him? Everything about this just reeks of gold digger.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:08 PM
1

Yes. Assuming it's a two party consent state for filming such acts.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:08 PM
1

You need to understand the difference between what it IS and what people think it SHOULD be. You just sound really idiotic.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:07 PM
1

And filiming is a totally different issue. As I said... different things.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:03 PM
2

people keep saying "inherently valued" but that's just bullshit. it's not like you get ugly ladies to save in video games, it's clear that they have to be attractive to be valued. at least being the "hero" is someone the average guy can become, being the "damsel" is mostly just something that's luck of the draw. And it's not like you see ugly guys either. Games (and media in general) are generally filled with idealizations... get used to it. And shit, by that logic, I should be able to say "Well…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 07:00 PM
2

Can you link me that article by Destiny? I haven't watched him since he started playing LoL, but he actually had pretty good opinions on a lot of stuff, so I'd be interested. As for your facebook conversation... here's what I think: Well firstly, there's a lot Anita completely missed about the damsel in distress trope. For one, it's never said that they are helpless because they are woman... it's just that they happen to be female. IF someone was captured and was capable of rescuing themselves, …
/r/MensRights12/03/13 03:40 PM
-2

It's not a black and white issue. It's possible to have both parties be victims of different things.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 03:14 PM
2

She's a prostitute, no more, no less. By her own admittance, the guy "stabbed her in the heart" and was a total douchebag... yet apparently marrying him was a super fucking swell idea... oh yeah, can't forget about his money.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:25 PM
4

As I replied to someone else: What Bohica is doing is discussing a law... but when someone says "I disagree with why this law is the way it is" his response is "but the law is like this!". No one is talking about how it currently is.... most people talk about how it should be.
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:18 PM
9

He's being responded because this guy is totally missing the point. It's not exactly rocket science to say "Well duh, the prenup was thrown out because it contained unconscionable clauses". The problem is on who and how people (especially the judges) define "unconscionable". Apparently to some, no alimony is "unconscionable"... but that is probably the main focus of a prenup in a lot of cases, so for it to be considered invalid because of that kind of makes the whole thing pointless. The same ca…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:15 PM
3

I've actually never thought about that before. There is no fucking way an American judge would ever rule that way, but It'd be interesting to see what would happen with the "Well, if the prenup was void from the getgo, then I never wanted to get married and as such this marriage was never valid from the get-go... so bye bye alimony and other shit".
/r/MensRights12/03/13 01:10 PM
4

Yes it COULD be a false flag... but honestly, what's more likely? The group that already illegally/criminally protested the previous talk, and are members of an ideology where shit like this fits right in? Or a group that has almost no history of doing such thing and where it isn't condoned at all?
/r/MensRights12/03/13 03:38 AM
22

It's like that for more than just contracts though as well. Two drunk people have sex? It's obviously the guy that is responsible for his actions while drunk and not the girl, therefore the guy is the rapist.
/r/MensRights11/03/13 07:54 PM
0

This is Anita Sarkeesian in a nutshell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUKmq7UMJys
/r/MensRights09/03/13 09:01 PM
1

Yup.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 08:58 PM
1

You don't need to accept it, but you do need to accept the fact that there is nothing you can do to stop it. Rule #1: Internet + anonymity = asshole. Short of pulling a china and giving everyone a SIN for internet usage and tracking everything... you just aren't going to stop it, and that's obviously not an acceptable solution. People needs to realize that trolls are gonna troll, and they shouldn't take it to heart. Stuff like this is the perfect example of people creating offense.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 08:58 PM
5

If anyone stays on reddit despite experiencing "emotional suffering"... then they are just fucking stupid and I have no sympathy for them.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:41 PM
4

BUT GUYS, YOU ARE ONLY CALLING HER A BITCH BECAUSE SHES JUST BEING AN ASSERTIVE WOMAN!! /sarcasm Seriously, what a cunt.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:38 PM
8

Because saying they are against gender roles is just a cover. They want gender roles, and they want the traditionally male gender roles because, they, for some reason believe them to be objectively better in every way.
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:36 PM
3

Looks like pretty standard internet trolling. Have you ever even been to 4chan? I would bet that there isn't a single thread in existence where the OP isn't called a faggot and told to "an hero" (kill themselves). She is not unique in the treatment she is receiving... she is just the only person who for some odd reason takes it personally and flips out about it.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 08:07 PM
2

(such as the fact that 90% of rape victims are women And this right here is an absolutely PERFECT example of the harm feminism has done. If we exclude prison rape (which has male victims by a massive majority), then rape victims are roughly 50/50... if you actually include "forced to penetrate" in the definition of rape. When studies (done by feminists) would look at a situation where a guy could be drugged, beaten, tied down, and forced to fuck some girl... and then not call that rape... and th…
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:54 PM
0

What? Biology is sexist now?
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:52 PM
1

Yes, that's true.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:42 PM
1

Yeah, someone else corrected me to.. I really should have said : "If she chose to not get an abortion"... but in hind sight that's actually a pretty stupid conditional statement to make, because if she chose to not get an abortion, well, then that's on her.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:38 PM
1

Yeah... you're right. I guess I should have put, "It's worse IF she decides to not get an abortion"... which she would be stupid to not do if raising a child is a bad move for her.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:36 PM
4

I know, it's pretty fucking pathetic that they just can't do a "ctrl+f" of the bill and change every instance of "woman" or "man" to "person". Boom, now every single person is happy... except the misandrist feminists.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:33 PM
9

Can you please copy that sign... but then add a size 72 font message at the top... MEN ONLY, NO ICKY WOMEN and then put a little disclaimer below that says : "*Just kidding, I'm not sexist"
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:30 PM
6

OR instead of having to rely on vigilante justice... you let the police deal with the people who are illegally shitting on everyone else's parade like the police are meant to.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:21 PM
2

Someone should have phoned the police and got them fined/arrested if it was illegal.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:20 PM
3

I really, really hope there are cameras and someone finds out who... I believe falsely pulling the alarm is quite illegal. I also really, really hope that CAFE keeps putting on these "anti-feminism" talks so feminism can keep showing it's true colors.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:18 PM
2

I think you are attributing malice where there isn't any. I think he was more saying that to appeal to the sexist nature of the other judges. This is how the ruling was worded (and this is important for anyone else reading): the alleged victim must be fully aware of the exact nature of the proposed sexual activity. It was nothing condom specific or gender specific... so this will ( or at least should) cover almost any deceptive behaviour... which should include lying about birth control and stuf…
/r/MensRights08/03/13 03:45 PM
3

tried I also like how this goal of theirs, is to completely remove agency from both genders. Women apparently can't be helped to have kids, knowing full well what it will potentially do to their careers, and men should be forced to take leave, whether they choose to or not. Pushing for available paternity leave is a good thing... but it's not something that has been accomplished, and it sure as shit isn't something that is only being done by feminism. Let's look at something feminism is responsi…
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:19 AM
-3

For example, usually portraying men as the protagonist in games can serve to exclude some women from feeling that they're really welcome in the medium, which further cements the stereotype that gaming is a man's hobby and so on. Because it IS a man's hobby. Whether you like it or not, men have always been more interested in these more "dedicated" games... right from the get-go when the games were so shit that they couldn't even have gendered characters. For example, usually portraying men as the…
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:16 AM
2

Rephrase that please?
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:12 AM
3

True, but it's still not technically winning. Well, I guess you're right, you can "win"... but it doesn't necessarily make you correct.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 06:00 AM
-4

Tell me which of the many definitions of patriarchy you use, and tell me what you think it's implications are, and then we can have this discussion. I can guarantee what you use, is not what the actual "action arm" of feminism is using.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 05:54 AM
1

while the damsel in distress might as well be a briefcase full of money or nuclear launch codes as far as their agency or humanity is concerned. Well if it's not real life (by your own admission)... then what's the problem? Either these game reflect real-life or they don't,... pick one.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 01:57 AM
2

You realise it wasn't just men's lives who were shitty in those times, right? I know, that's why I don't push bullshit theories like "the patriarchy" that try and state that male "privilege" has been some universal benefit that all men experienced for all of human history.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 01:41 AM
136

appealing to emotion is a great way to win an argument. HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUE In all seriousness though, glad to see you did good.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:25 AM
1

How many people lived prior to the last century? How many became novelists? How many just died in a random ditch somewhere?
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:21 AM
-2

And that person would be perfectly right. Are you seriously trying to suggest that you would rather work in a coal mine 14 hours a day and die young from getting the black lung instead of the alternative; which is being at home and tending the house while getting to be with at least some of your family?
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:20 AM
0

Option 1) you get to get kidnapped and chill in a tower and wear nice clothes until someone saves you Option 2) Give up your home and everything you have ever loved and fight armies upon armies of enemies trying to kill you completely by yourself just to save someone (that you may not have even met before).
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:18 AM
4

You've said what I literally just commented on somewhere else... but much better. Here's the comment: http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsucks/comments/19vi3f/in_the_game_of_patriarchy_women_arent/c8rp87u
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:14 AM
1

comments sections of hers were full of rape and death threats, So... it's the internet.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:14 AM
11

I've asked quite a few times this simple question: "Show me what western feminism has actually accomplished in the past decade that is about equality?". I have yet to actually receive an answer. I think it forces people to actually recognize the difference between empty words and actions, as well as recognize which part of feminism is actually powerful.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:23 PM
3

Nope, you are spot on. And that is what's wrong with feminists having control over bills like this.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:08 PM
2

No, dont you understand... men were just raped (and reported it) 400x more than normal in that one single year but every single other year has women being raped 99% of the time. /sarcasm
/r/MensRights07/03/13 06:07 PM
1

Just tell her that her thoughts offend you and she should stop talking.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 10:57 PM
5

My father never sat me down and said, "Son, now that you're becoming a man it's time for a lesson on how to rape a woman." I see what you did there... clever deception, that's what we WANT them to think :) /s
/r/MensRights06/03/13 04:59 PM
1

Note: I'm not a lawyer and have no experience. What I would do however, is maybe try and get a record of your daughters answers to these interviews... or just some proof that you "checked out" in the eyes of CPS. If it's something that you feel your EX may do again, then it's probably not a bad idea to have some proof that this is a recurring thing and that it's false every time.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 04:57 PM
37

Don't forget VAWA and the duluth model. And all of the female-specific provisions in the AHCA
/r/MensRights05/03/13 06:44 PM
2

This is how I know I'm on the right "side". The fact that they find even the idea of someone "undermining feminism" so absolutely insane just says it all. They are completely incapable of any actual introspection and self-criticism (or just accepting criticism). They are no different than fundamentalist christians, who are completely ignorant (by choice) to any new science just so they can maintain that the earth is a few thousands years old.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 06:43 PM
6

Yeah, that's why I put it into quotes.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 06:33 PM
7

It doesn't have to be a potluck though... it sounds like it could be anything.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 02:17 PM
8

That actually makes me glad to hear. There's nothing wrong with wanting more "rights"... you just have to apply them equally.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 02:16 PM
1

there is, perhaps, a possibility of he/she being charged for perverting th course of justice ... considering the rate at which proven false accusers (self-admitted even) have had nothing done, and in some cases actually get monetary benefit... the system is clearly not working.
/r/MensRights05/03/13 02:12 PM
3

Consent is a buzzword?
/r/MensRights05/03/13 04:04 AM
2

The defence will do all they can to discredit the victim, innocent or not, in order to try and win the case Umm... that is what they can and should be doing right now. The onus is on the "plaintiff" (Is it still called that in criminal cases?) to prove the guilt... and it always has been. If it cannot be proven that she lied, but he was acquitted, then who the hell is guilty? There isn't only two options. And there's a difference between lying with the purpose to fuck a guy over, and simply bein…
/r/MensRights05/03/13 04:03 AM
2

Really? Feminist bullshit is needing to physically fight someone away just in order for them to listen to your consent? You're being pretty fucking stupid.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 06:38 PM
0

Upvotes for you!
/r/MensRights04/03/13 05:37 PM
3

This is just the typical shit with any uneducated person trying to sound intelligent in a subject and their extremely gratuitous use of "buzzwords". For my degree project, we had to deal with a medical doctor (we're software eng)... and no doubt he was smart as hell in his field, but when he started trying to talking about anything programming related, even we couldn't understand him with the absolutely fucking insane amount of buzzwords he used to describe even the most simple concepts.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 05:36 PM
9

In the same note... you shouldn't have to physically fight someone to get them to stop raping you if you are clearly telling them no. It's one thing to be saying no "in your head" and then expecting them to pick up on subtle body language... it's a completely different thing to explicitly say "no, cut that shit out" and have them continue anyway. I agree that if you truly don't want sex, it's still better to fight them if they aren't listening to your consent rather than just lay down and take i…
/r/MensRights04/03/13 05:15 PM
9

No one is saying that every single person who accuses someone of rape and doesn't get a guilty conviction be punished. This is about people who are PROVEN (in the court of law... so beyond a reasonable doubt) to have intentionally and maliciously crafted a lie about being raped as an attempt to basically destroy someone's life. And if they don't realize that it will potentially destroy someone's life, and are only doing it to maybe cover up their infidelity... then too fucking bad. If someone le…
/r/MensRights04/03/13 05:11 PM
17

I really don't get what the fuck is up with these assholes. I mean, I could totally understand arguments for protecting "accused false rape accusers", and I think we would agree, much in the same way we think people accused of rape should not have their rights diminished. I even understand some of this stuff about rape shield laws to protect the accuser (though I do disagree, but I can see how they think they have good intentions). But what I don't get is why all of these fucking people want to …
/r/MensRights04/03/13 05:08 PM
17

I think I heard it best (forget who.. maybe someone at AVFM) when someone said:(and I'm paraphrasing here)" every women in every relationship has a loaded gun and it's pointed right at the man... she doesn't have to use it, and she may never will... but no matter what, it's still there". So you're right... I think from a "everything but love" perspective, it actually is a much bigger commitment for a man as it does require him to put a lot more trust in his partner.
/r/MensRights04/03/13 01:20 AM
5

And then there's this: https://twitter.com/stillicides/status/308358079261585408
/r/MensRights04/03/13 12:45 AM
7

Yeah, I don't really care if people take advantage of other peoples good will. IT's not us that look like dicks for doing so. Thanks for getting the truth out anyway though.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 11:08 PM
1

You go to jail. Google "reasonable person"... it's a standard used in court. Basically if a "reasonable person" would believe that shooting someone in the head would kill them, then it would be murder.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 06:10 AM
1

It's not that I disagree... but I can point you to the entire native foster care system in Ontario (Dilico) for fucking examples of women that need to be told not to have kids. Sorry, but having 4-5 kids, all with FAS, and whatever other condition you'd get from having cocaine in your system at birth... all of them turned over to the province and paid for by the taxpayers... and them or their mother will never pay taxes. My point (and others) isn't that this is wrong... it's that this shit would…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 04:35 AM
18

I actually find it incredibly pathetic that a grown woman who has such an "important" job feels the need to use sarcasm like that towards a 7 year old. Like... does she feel more superior now? Geez, you sure showed him.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 04:30 AM
3

Well... intent is kind of tricky. She did in fact have the intention of hitting him in the head with a stick... The court doesn't really care if she's too fucking stupid to realize that it has a relatively high chance of killing someone.
/r/MensRights03/03/13 04:24 AM
2

I think hitting someone in the face with a giant stick is a little bit more than assault. Sorry, but whether she meant it or not, there has to be a line where someone thinks "The chances of this NOT killing him, whether I mean to or not... aren't exactly high".
/r/MensRights03/03/13 04:22 AM
3

That's actually an interesting question. I mean, if denying sex is literally a tool of oppression... then what would these people think a women denying sex is? They obviously wouldn't agree that it's also oppression for a woman to do it, so that's out. Maybe it's a whole "sticking it to the oppressor" type of deal. But if that's the case, then what is a woman who agrees to sex? Is she simply being brainwashed by the "patriarchy" or something? I really don't understand (and I'm glad for that, bec…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 12:27 AM
-1

You need to realize that number includes mobile games like angry birds or word with friends.
/r/MensRights02/03/13 04:12 AM
-2

Most magazines are marketed exclusively towards females. And there are plenty of games (I wrote a big list somewhere else) that are just as appealing to women as they are to men. Also consider that like 90% or higher of the playerbase is men... obviously games are going to cater to them. This sounds like the whole feminist argument about how the only choices in clothing they have are what makes them look "sexy". And that's it obviously men that make these clothes. No, they make those clothes bec…
/r/MensRights01/03/13 01:50 PM
7

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Feminists are probably the biggest misogynists out there. I mean, who else apparently thinks that women are so incapable of doing anything on a level playing field that they have to push for so many special exceptions.
/r/MensRights01/03/13 01:49 AM
12

And apparently to her... "improperly implied" means "directly pointed a finger". I mean, this was her actual quote: those such as Fathers 4 Justice, who made death threats not only against me, but also said they were going to kidnap my dog
/r/MensRights28/02/13 05:46 PM
2

Reality when it suits them, and fiction when it doesn't I guess. It's lose-lose.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 05:44 PM
6

Yes... because all of the female characters in DoTA2 are just shit and not actually competitive with any of the male characters. And then you have Kerrigan in SC2... basically one of the most powerful beings in the entire SC universe. And Lara Croft does absolutely nothing /s And Anya from gears of war who fights right along side with everyone else totally has no agency or power or anything. And all of the female spartans in Halo are there to just look good under inches of armor. And then there'…
/r/MensRights28/02/13 05:40 PM
1

No I do....just totally misread your comment
/r/MensRights28/02/13 04:07 PM
4

So you don't think any woman ever aspires to be any of the good-looking female characters? Both are ideal forms.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 03:04 PM
1

Like he said... berserkers were female...
/r/MensRights28/02/13 03:03 PM
3

How many women are in COD, Halo, or Gears period? It's almost as if throughout all of human history that men made up 99.99999% of soldiers. Apparently reflecting reality is sexist now. I don't agree that "you only kill men" is actually sexist... but don't pull the "they didn't put any women in the game to begin with" shit.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 03:01 PM
4

Even if what you say is true (though as TracyMF said... I doubt it)... how is that still not objectification?
/r/MensRights28/02/13 02:58 PM
0

Well tough shit for your female friends... They aren't going to make half of the games appeal to women more than men when five percent of the player base is female..... Just like I wouldn't expect fashion magazines to cover male fashion as equally as women's....
/r/MensRights28/02/13 02:53 PM
3

That comic is still dumb... If she says that male characters are like that as a male fantasy'.... Is she trying to suggest that female characters don't serve the same purpose for women? Yeah... Bull shit. This is of course ignoring the gender that the majority of the audience is... I dont bitch at Cosmo because they don't cover Male things
/r/MensRights28/02/13 02:48 PM
4

But that's the thing... the law is the law. This is a good step in the right direction because it set's a precedent (I don't mean an actual legal one... but hopefully it plants the idea in other judges heads). If you want the law judged... write your representatives.
/r/MensRights28/02/13 06:11 AM
3

I still maintain that even one single proven false accusation done for malicious reasons (and not just genuine misunderstanding... like if a 12 year old did it), needs to be punished about as harshly as someone would be if they had attempted to kidnap someone and lock them in their basement rape dungeon for a decade. I honestly don't see the difference between doing it yourself, and lying so that the government can do it for you. Hell, at least if you do it yourself, you aren't also wasting the …
/r/MensRights28/02/13 06:10 AM
3

I think it's a perfect hypothetical, because it illustrates exactly my point... verbal consent is not the end-all be-all... and that is all that matters.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 09:10 PM
0

It was a hypothetical
/r/MensRights27/02/13 07:26 PM
2

I like that response. I mean, it all goes under (or rather it should) the whole "reasonable person " standard that courts use anyway. And I would like to assume that a "reasonable person" would equate continued participation with continued consent.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 05:37 PM
2

Say I'm a girl. We meet in the bar at 10pm. We start chatting and know each other's names... and at 1 am we go home together. That qualifies as "knowing each other". When they say "the majority of rapes happen from someone you know", they don't mean that you are most likely to be raped by a friend you've had for 5 years. What they mean is that you will have met this person previously and it's not actually a stranger in a dark alley whose very first interaction with you IS raping you. Obviously t…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 05:01 PM
2

The only thing I disagree with, is her comment further on down about "timing". If someone is raped... and you go to that person and say "Well you could have done this, and this, or this"... I still don't think that is victim-blaming. Is it a totally dick thing to do? Yes. But is it technically correct? Also yes. If I die in a car accident because I'm not wearing my seatbelt... the last thing I want to hear is "you should have worn your seatbelt", while I'm in the hospital getting my head stitche…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:58 PM
1

The difference is what's in between. "No means no" implies that everything else (well, within reason), can be an implicit "yes". So you're good to go if she doesn't actually tell you no. "only yes means yes" implies that everything else other than an explicit and verbal "yes"... is an implicit no. This means that even if she initiates and is actively participating, if she didn't explicitly say "yes"... then you have no consent and therefore it's rape.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:55 PM
1

Yeah as someone else said, the logic of some of these people would make that not good enough. I mean, in this case she did initially say "no" to sex... yet obviously changed her mind and her actions (to me at least) implied a yes. You can't say that you don't consent to sex while you are the one on top riding the dude... obviously your actions outweigh your words (from the past). But let's assume she didn't say "no" at the beginning... I've actually read people say "Well, I consented at first, b…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:52 PM
0

The whole "only yes means yes" line of thinking is really fucky too... To quote myself: The other thing that bothers me is how people seem to think there is no such thing as an implied "yes"... yet also think that EVERYTHING other than an explicit "yes", is an implicit "no". In reality, it's more of a line... I mean, by their line of thinking... you could be lying down, and a girl could be on top of you riding while yelling "no I don't want sex", and they think that would be rape.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:49 PM
8

Define "some form of consent". Can consent be implied? To you, what qualifies as implied consent?
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:45 PM
21

I have always contended that the vast majority of "false rape claims" result from misinterpretations (as opposed to vindictiveness), and this is a perfect example I agree. What surprises me though, is how rape is actually ever charged when there is a very clear lack of intent in the presumed rapist. As we all know, no sometimes means no, sometimes it means yes, sometimes it means maybe and sometimes it means "you need to convince me". What I find ridiculous, is when people call it rape even if a…
/r/MensRights27/02/13 04:44 PM
6

and oneiorosgrip (she has the "breaking the glasses" blog in the sidebar"
/r/MensRights27/02/13 03:31 AM
7

Your experience is something that really confuses me. Not that what you do confuses me, but more so peoples reactions to it. I mean, if they truly think that women were oppressed, should they not be elated to hear that someone has "broken the bonds of oppression" and is having an awesome life? I dunno... I just don't see the logic for not being happy about that.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 03:30 AM
12

Fiamengo’s argument misunderstands feminism, by assuming it casts the men in the classroom as villains What a stupid bitch. Yes, she clearly misunderstands the people calling every single MAN (without even talking to them) there a rapist, misogynist incest-support fucking scum. How delusional... and just another NAFALT. Heather, who asked her last name be withheld because she doesn’t want to become a target for harassment, said she doesn’t think a talk criticizing women’s studies belongs at the …
/r/MensRights26/02/13 04:59 AM
1

Yeah, I apologize if you thought I was trying to tell you what you meant... I was simply trying to point out what I thought was what most people would have thought you meant having seen just the question and just the reply.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 09:36 PM
1

Shit, I just accidentally deleted my reply. Then you should have some sort of data to back it up. Please provide it. I am sure that the swedish government would like to see it as well. You could argue I should say "physically qualified"... but is it not true that if a man doesn't meet the physical requirements then he is no longer able to be a fire-fighter? The only situation where under-physically-qualified people are allowed to be firefighters is when they are female BECAUSE they are female. N…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 09:35 PM
1

And that is why i am so focused on not generalizing and about sticking to the actual issues. But it isn't generalizing. I can say for a fact that every single firefighter in Sweden that is incapable of actually doing their job is a woman. it does use their gender as the reason for being inferior. Because their gender IS the reason they are inferior firefighters. If you took that exact same person, and gave them a dick, they would still be inferior, but they would not be firefighters. The reason …
/r/MensRights25/02/13 08:20 PM
1

I only changed one word: "Women" became "anyone" And that totally changes the question. IT doesn't matter if it was 5 words, 1 word, or half a word. If you want to believe all women are egotistical assholes without any sense of right and wrong, then tell me so that I can stop trying. I'm not questioning your intentions, I'm explaining why what you did doesn't really make sense... unless they could read your mind and knew that you interpreted the question differently than it was phrased. I unders…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 08:14 PM
4

Just a few qualms: Do you really want people like him to be the face and voice of your movement? That's not up to anyone...
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:28 PM
3

I like that.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:21 PM
7

You need to understand that feminism != women.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:18 PM
6

That's why they have simple.wikipedia.com
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:17 PM
12

Well truth be told... "the view of women" (or rather feminism) is actually the presiding force on all of the articles that are not scientific fact. This sub has had a few discussions on it already. If you want an example... go to the "Anitia Sarkeesian" wikipedia page... and note the complete and total lack of any "criticism" section. Then go into the "edit notes (or w/e they call it)", and watch how apparently a social blog is a valid source if it's a positive thing... but if it's a massive gam…
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:17 PM
0

But i also don't believe in saying that all women are inferior because a few women have proven to be. Under the assumption that "inferior" = "not capable of actually doing the job" (such as breaking a door down in less then a minute)... No one is saying: "All women are inferior". What people are saying is that: "Every fire-fighter that is inferior, is a women". And the reason that is, is that women are not held to the same requirements... as I said, if a man wasn't able to do it fast enough, he …
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:12 PM
2

Well in this case it is men vs women... because only the requirements for women have been lowered. If the requirements were lowered across the board, so that more women could meet them (and also more men), then it would be slightly different. But as it stands right now, the only people being recruited despite not being up to the job are women... and that's just a fact. If a man was not able to meet the actual requirements of the job and took 10 min to break down a door, he would never have been …
/r/MensRights25/02/13 04:21 PM
3

Honestly, nothing. I mean, you can write a prenup... and while is is better than nothing, that's not a guarantee any more. Nothing is a guarantee. The best you can do is just be as sure as possible that she won't screw you... unfortunately it's hard to know for sure.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 02:15 PM
17

For anyone going there.... PLEASE BRING AS MANY PEOPLE WITH AS MANY CAMERAS AS POSSIBLE. That is your absolute best "defence" against anything that might happen.
/r/MensRights25/02/13 02:11 PM
39

As people have already said... it's projection. Secondly... one of my biggest gripes about feminism is that they pretend to equally care about both genders... which is simply false. Even assuming they actually did care about equal rights... it's when they say they care about men's rights too, which makes people think "oh, they got it handled, no one else needs to do anything" and then actually do NOTHING. Or worse... people see these people who claim to care equally about both genders, and then …
/r/MensRights25/02/13 05:01 AM
8

just think about the third world for example. How does that have anything to do with feminism in North America?
/r/MensRights24/02/13 10:48 PM
2

If you'd really like I could dig up studies... but it should be pretty simple to google. Breast cancer vs prostate cancer... despite similar rates of people having them, and similar rates of victimization, is like a 98-2 funding disparity or something like that. In the recent affordable health care act, women got a ton of female-only provisions that could have easily been also applied to men, (or the male-equivalent... such as prostate screenings instead of breast cancer screenings). Males are t…
/r/MensRights24/02/13 07:50 PM
23

"Shaming tactics"... She simply suggested we let them make idiots out of themselves.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 07:37 PM
1

, if one person suddenly fell unconscious you would not know how they would feel about the new situation For sure. But I mean, how long do you have to pull out? What if it takes 5 seconds to pull-out? You were still inside her while she was unconscious.. What if you don't notice for 30 seconds? Sex without consent most definitely happened.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 05:18 PM
1

. If I change the question to "Should anyone have to register for the Selective Service when they turn 18?", "If someone asks me if 1+ 1 = 4, and I change the question to "is 2x7 = 14", then I'd obviously answer yes". option a) The draft exists, and it selects both women and men obtion b) The draft exists, and it only selects men option c) The draft does not exist And you picked option b... which as I said, shows that you do not value the lives of males and females equally.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 05:00 PM
1

No, that is sort of a strawman.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 04:57 PM
6

I don't see the problem either? It's not like woman get better healthcare right? I think man's body just is made to not to live that long. Extra funding for women's health care is like 90-10 or something compare to men's health care.
/r/MensRights24/02/13 04:39 PM
1

That's actually an interesting question. Do you think if they consent before hand but then fell asleep halfway through, that it is in fact rape? IMO it still seems weird to continue, but I really don't think it's rape.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 11:55 PM
1

Because the process isn't perfectly objective, and minority candidates are often discriminated against. So you want to make 100% of the white male candidates guaranteed to be discriminated against to make up for that? I understand the problem exists... but the solution you are supporting is absolute shit. As I asked before... what is the problem with making it 100% anonymous? No one doing the reviewing knows names, races, genders, sexual orientation, anything... That would be guaranteed to elimi…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 09:38 PM
5

Well right off the bat, they can't seem to wrap their heads around that it's entirely possible that only SOME women and some men may face discrimination for being men and women. Just because someone can face discrimination on their gender, does not mean every person of that gender will be discriminated against. As for the rest, she kind of reveals her true motives when she replies to his "shoddy analogy" by basically saying that women are more important than men.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 09:29 PM
6

The truth is that an application with John S. at the top is more likely to be chosen than one with Lashanda P Completely ignoring the fact that there is no proof for that... You can't possible think the only solution is to actually actively discriminate against men/"non-minorities" because the reviewers MIGHT be sexist/racist. As I replied to you somewhere else... make the applicants 100% completely anonymous, boom problem solved.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 07:00 PM
4

IF they can't get in on their own merits without making special exceptions for their race... then what makes you think they are equally qualified? If they were equally qualified (or higher) then they wouldn't need people to look at their race in order to accept them.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 06:55 PM
3

Then why is affirmative action necessary if these black candidates can truly compete with everyone else? If they could get there on their own merits, then they would be getting there by competing against everyone just like everyone else has to. And that's not to say that they can't, and that every black person there is only there because of AA. If the recruiters go down their list of 100 people that they are going to accept, notice that out of the first 90, they have 70 white people and 20 black…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 06:52 PM
3

If the standards were lowered in order for them to get in, then by definition there were better applicants that weren't accepted to make space for them. If 100% merit is how you define deserve (as you should, and this goes against nepotism as well), then they do not deserve to be there because they were not among the top X number of applicants that got accepted.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 06:48 PM
5

it does make sense to "even the playing field" to make sure that equally qualified women aren't discriminated against. By making damn sure that equally qualified men are discriminated against. Sorry, but I don't see that as a solution. As you pointed out above where they do in fact use first names... just remove them then and make it completely anonymous if people are very sure that sexism is in fact a factor. I don't see how introducing "hard discrimination" is a solution to fighting "soft disc…
/r/MensRights23/02/13 06:43 PM
-3

I want to become president/priminister and just force everyone (including feminists) to take just one single logic/critical thinking/debate class. The amount of constant ad hominem (along with everything else) is just fucking insane.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 04:05 AM
0

The quality of living of a child is not something that can be determined by a flat rate. Would suggest otherwise. It wouldn't be hard for the government to decide an acceptable standard for the minimum a child needs to be raised (obviously above poverty) and set it at that.... which is pretty much exactly what JabCross said.
/r/MensRights23/02/13 04:02 AM
2

And some parents can suck it up if they expect their children to be raised is if they had millionaires for parents.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 10:11 PM
1

, because my principles tell me it's wrong to force people to risk their lives for something they might not stand for. And this is sexist. Here's why. You have two options: option a) The draft exists, and it only selects men. option b) The draft exists and it selects both men and women. By you answering "no" to the question "should the draft select women"... then you are stating that you prefer option "a" to option "b". So let's say the draft actually get's initiated, and their plan is to draft …
/r/MensRights22/02/13 09:49 PM
1

and take my example as a suggestion that maybe some women are actually decent people, I never suggested otherwise. Whether you agree that drafting is bad or not, you can hardly claim it's infringing on your rights as a man that I want it gone. I don't believe I said that either. I think I said that answering the question "Should women be a part of the draft?" with "no", is saying that women should not be treated equally to men. If the question was "Should men and/or women be required to sign up …
/r/MensRights22/02/13 09:43 PM
1

I think we can both agree that the question is badly phrased since it allows these dual interpretations I really don't think it is... the question is quite clear, it's just that everyone is overthinking it and changing it. you must agree that it is possible that some, even a lot, of the women who answered the poll interpreted it the same way I did For sure, but then I'd have to ask why it is only women that seemed to interpret the question differently. It probably wouldn't be hard to suggest tha…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 07:48 PM
3

So... don't give him money then?
/r/MensRights22/02/13 07:00 PM
1

the problem with that is that you aren't really answering the question. You are changing the question into something else and then answering that one.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 06:59 PM
15

I don't understand people like you. What is the harm at taking him on his work and just offering advice? He's being genuine, cool, we just possibly helped a guy who needed it. He's a liar? Well our advice won't help anyway, so why would he lie? He's a troll? Then who cares? Omg he took advantage of our empathy, we are such losers, trolololol.. /s
/r/MensRights22/02/13 04:21 PM
2

Oh I agree entirely, the majority of people don't care... but as I said, there is at least some people "giving shits" (or at least trying to look like people are giving a shit).
/r/MensRights22/02/13 03:11 PM
2

You have no problem with the gender wage gap. But you hate having to pay for dates. Implying there is a gap... which we all know the truth. You insist that it’s a scientifically proven fact that men are stronger than women. But you complain about society believing that it’s worse for a man to hit a woman than for a woman to hit a man. Not only does she not understand how averages work, but she apparently thinks that men are only capable of "on/off" motor control. I'd also be interested if she th…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 04:58 AM
6

It's almost as if people have brains and are perfectly capable of making choices for themselves.. so they can do what they want to do instead of what society tells them to.
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:29 AM
3

Slayers.Jessica? Also, I can guarantee you that if there were any girls that were of professional quality in the competitive scene they'd be gobbled up by teams. There's so much marketability there. Hell, even mediocre quality girls get picked up by teams. I know this because I played one a few times in starcraft and I fucking suck (compared to actual pros) but still won. It's beneficial for both her and the team because her stream got like more viewers than anyone else (I think the team was dig…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:28 AM
1

And? Honestly, it's because there just hasn't been any good female pro-gamers that can compete. The only one I can really think of is Hafu, a druid who played (and dominated with her two teammateS) for quite a long time in WoW:BC 3v3 tournaments. She and her team won a few MLG's and a few other things. But if you look at CS, or DoTA, or LoL, or SC2, or fighters (I think there might be 1 or 2 pretty decent pro girl players, but I don't follow the fighter scene that much) it's just no contest. Hon…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:23 AM
2

One thing that really annoys me about feminism (and sometimes men's rights when people bring it up) is all of this "social discrimination" bullshit. I understand that exists, and I understand that it's not optimal... but it is 100% possible to completely overcome it by yourself by just NOT giving a shit about what other people think. If a girl truly wants to be a software engineer, then she can... there is nothing but some meaningless words from people who mean nothing to her, trying to stop her…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 12:13 AM
8

And more importantly... we think that a woman CAN earn the right to be up on that stage, and doesn't need the bar lowered for her. Edit: I'd also like to add (and I've said this before in this sub), that the people complaining about this shit are legitimately some of the biggest sexists I have ever encountered. Most of us watch this presentation, and just see a bunch of people who are doing a good job. Or we walk into a hospital and are thankful that the nurse knows her shit. Gender doesn't real…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:55 PM
31

I think I've come to the conclusion that every single criticism that feminism has of men/mras is actually projection. It's honestly one of the only things that even makes sense any more.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:53 PM
1

I think we are misunderstanding each other. I'm not sure we are actually disagreeing.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:48 PM
3

Good thing they are in the technology business, so zero shits were given by their customers. Well, at least some shits are given by some people... that's why we are having this discussion to begin with. I got into it with some people on the verge..., the white knighting there is absolutely insane.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:47 PM
1

you are probably spot on. I mean if it was a good looking female, then they'll say that she's only there for "eye candy". Hell, even if it wasn't a good looking female, let's say that Sony actually cared about diversity for the sake of diversity and brought up some female who actually didn't know what they were talking about. So this woman goes up there, sounds unqualified (because she IS unqualified... else she'd be there in the first place), and then now you get people bitching "They just foun…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:46 PM
1

Uhh... ask feminism? We aren't the ones with the completely unquestionable dogmatic theory that states all women are privileged and oppressive to men.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:06 PM
1

I think you misunderstood him. I'm probably one of the people who bash feminism the most... but he does have a point. there's no need to bring it up when it's not that relevant.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 07:06 PM
1

You say it's common sense, but then there is apparently an epidemic of people falling victim to these bee stings. The two ideas don't exactly align.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 06:59 PM
1

Maybe the people who have already been stung aren't the people you are trying to reach? or to pretend that all bees stings are the result of people having their windows open. Except all the bee stings in that scenario are in fact caused by leaving your window open. And another set of bee stings is caused by doing X.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 06:36 PM
3

Oh my god... not this fucking shit again. FACT: IF you did not leave the window open, then you would not have been stung by that bee... PERIOD. Whether you get stung by that bee or not is 100% dependent on you leaving the window open, meaning that it is entirely within your power to make it so that you don't get stung by a bee. IF you get stung by a bee and someone says "If you didn't leave that window open, you would not have been stung" is a perfectly valid and factual thing to say. Likewise, …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:39 PM
5

get a life you MRA losers! "hi guys, i r twelve and wut is this"
/r/MensRights21/02/13 04:35 PM
1

Seeing as feminism "promotes equality", I don't see why they would need MRAs to town down the misogyny for feminism to address our issues. Man, the more and more I read about feminist opinions on the MRA, the more and more I just KNOW they are projecting. I think many feminists (especially the ones in power), are a bunch of man-hating sexist cunts... straight up. That doesn't mean that I think they should "correct their ways" before I would even consider issues that women might face. It's just r…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:46 PM
1

Well do you not think that feminism overshot? OR are you saying you disagree with that because you think feminism is aiming exactly where they mean to, and are being totally "accurate"? And everything else in the article is a bullshit argument about how it doesn't matter if men are getting screwed as long as, overall, more men are in Congress and other such BS. People like this are stupid. I could apply literally the exact same fucking logic to women and it would apply. "Men are fine because 0.0…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:37 PM
2

Say that he is 100% absolutely correct in that, that is how it SHOULD be. Then tell him that reality is not the same. Go to the COTWA (community of the wrongly accused--- check in the side bar) and you'll find a ton of examples that counter his point.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:35 PM
2

He thinks that false rape is bullshit, says a semen test will be done to prove if the woman was raped. Do you just mean false rape accusations? Just point him to the number of people who were accused, then charged, then imprisoned on rape charges weeks or months after the supposed rape happened... and then how they were released months/years later because it was false. He seems to also think that every single rapist ever will cum inside the victim... do condoms not exist? As for 2. No offense...…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:34 PM
6

Gender equality has absolutely nothing to do with wanting anonymity for those accused of rape. Would the majority be men? Sure... but that doesn't mean the law would only apply to men. The reason why anonymity would be beneficial in the case of rape trials is the stigma that has been created surrounding them by feminists/women's organization, turning rape trials into an absolute fucking shit fest. It only takes so many people saying: "100 people accused of rape with only 5 charged = 95 actual ra…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:25 PM
109

Pretty much this. Unless they can show that the only reason that none of them were female is actual discrimination... then who the fuck cares if they are all men? If we watched a nursing presentation and everyone happened to be female... who gives a fuck? And what's funny, is what would happen if they just brought some clueless "token female" up there... "OMG OBJECTIFICATION, they only brought her there for men to look AT!!!"" You can never win with these idiots.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:14 PM
1

Why?... Because it's just straight up discrimination based on sex a.k.a. sexism. It's not as funny as a 19 year old Canadian guy trying to get a job with no experience. ??
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:06 PM
2

I really think this is unfair and at the same time, I am absolutely certain that there are women out there that can roll with 'the boys' so to speak and get the same times as men can I think this too.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 02:05 PM
0

Then this happens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=zgvaMvtjJ8Y#t=37s
/r/MensRights21/02/13 05:17 AM
24

I just have to correct one thing: When you say "This is nothing to do with men or women"... you are wrong. It is hazardous to employ firefighters who do not possess the minimum fitness and strength required to effectively perform their duty If the applicants are male, then everyone agrees. A man who is not strong enough to do the job will not get the job. Simple. The problem is that the same requirements do not apply if you are female. So while it's not the fact that they're female that they can…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 05:15 AM
1

Generally though, at least when talking about weight in this context... people assume a relatively low BF % (and the same)... so a 200lb man would be stronger than a 150lb man. Either way, if you as a person are strong enough, then you can do the job... period.
/r/MensRights21/02/13 05:13 AM
1

You know what? I have absolutely zero problem with equality in ANY profession... but people (not really anyone here) need to realize that this isn't equality. This is just diversity for the sake of diversity... which means men are being discriminated against, and unfit people for the job are taking their place and as the article concludes... people WILL die, all for the sake of being "PC". Set the fucking standard, and any person, whether they be male, female, black, white, red, yellow, 4 legged…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 05:10 AM
1

Except she doesn't know if that's socially appropriate because there's all kinds of societal BS saying that women should just put up with that stuff, To be entirely honest, this is where I start losing all sympathy, and one of the main reasons why I think feminism is becoming a joke. Social bias sucks, sure... but it is 100% impossible to simply not choose to follow it. If she seriously values "what people might think" over "stopping this guy from (as she put it) sexually assaulting me".. well, …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 01:55 AM
7

One's a fight... the other is a hate crime.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 09:28 PM
1

Or maybe he just doesn't give a shit? Possible... but instead of guessing, it would still be better to just tell him "no". I don't know why she hasn't told him, presumably not for shits and giggles, most likely for things like social pressure to just give in, because she'll look prudish if she tells him to stop, or she's worried he'll get more violent. She says herself she doesn't want to tell her bf because she's worried about how he might react. She also indicates in her tl;dr that she's wonde…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 09:24 PM
8

How does it prevent due process? At least for the accused. I could see how granting anonymity to the accuser would restrict due process... that is exactly why Paul Elam is so against all of the "rape shield " laws. But I don't really see how the accused being kept anonymous affects anything... they can still call any witnesses they wish.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 08:47 PM
24

All she needs to understand is that someone being charged with a crime does not mean they are guilty. Hell, you could just tell her "I accuse you of raping me". A formal accusation will possibly result in a charge where her innocence should be rightfully proven in court. Would she agree that if she was in this situation, that her name should be plastered everywhere with the words "charged with rape" beside it?
/r/MensRights20/02/13 08:45 PM
6

If someone accused is identified, it might discourage further offences Discourage whose furthers offenses? The accused? So much for innocent until proven guilty.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 08:43 PM
0

So instead of simply saying a single two syllable word... you think it makes sense to continue to let yourself become a victim of harassment? As for whether what the guy is doing is wrong or not... I'd say it's a little bit complicated. I mean it is, but I wouldn't say it's worthy of expulsion. You have to leave some room for spontaneity, and you also have to account for intent. I mean, if this is a regular occurrence, then it's quite clear that she at least appears (to him) to respond positivel…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 08:40 PM
2

My point exactly
/r/MensRights20/02/13 04:44 PM
-1

Why dont you read one word further. "a : a promiscuous woman; especially : prostitute"
/r/MensRights20/02/13 02:42 PM
-1

And don't act like everyone doesn't fall victim to groupthink. Everybody does at some point, it's human nature. Oh for sure... but you aren't going to solve that by simply pandering to it.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 02:29 PM
3

Apparently you've never had an in-depth discussion with a feminist.
/r/MensRights20/02/13 02:07 PM
-1

Both dictionary definitions I have read say it's basically synonymous with prostitute. thefreedictionary.com and dictionary.com
/r/MensRights20/02/13 01:29 AM
-4

slut : a woman prostitute from : thefreedictionary.com
/r/MensRights20/02/13 01:29 AM
3

Here's my opinion on this... I'm not going to pull a feminism and say that these kids are completely incapable of making their own choices and deciding their feelings. I mean, if the kid truly thought it was a positive experience and wasn't forced (aka non-statutory rape) then I don't see THAT much of a problem. This is all kind of ignoring the whole teacher/student dynamic. Even with what I just said, the teacher should be fired because that's just play inappropriate for the workplace. I'm just…
/r/MensRights20/02/13 12:21 AM
1

1)Slut = A word that elicits negative emotions in emotional people who are sensitive to that word. Correction: A word that CAN elicit negative emotions just because a woman was unfortunately raised with the expectation that men pay for things doesn't mean she is inherently a malicious, gold-digging, cunt I apologize for thinking that women have a mind of their own and and should be able to actually understand the consequences of the choices they make. I didn't realize thinking for yourself was t…
/r/MensRights19/02/13 10:04 PM
3

Calling her a slut does nothing, It's not an insult... it's a factual statement. Someone who has sex for money = slut/prostitute. I swear people on this sub don't realize how detrimental this kind of attitude is towards our cause. Oh I do, I just don't care about the opinions of people who think with their emotions instead of logic and would actually be turned off by this.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 08:01 PM
2

Well yeah, it really should outrage them... it's just funny to look at the total silence in regards to policies like this that benefit women in so many other areas.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 07:59 PM
1

You gotta fix the right side of the problem. There is no reason both can't be done. I wish the draft would be removed... but until the time that it is, having an equal draft is a much better option than having a discriminatory one.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 07:58 PM
2

That does not mean I want more rights than men Except that it does. The question is not "Do you want the draft abolished?". The question is "Should women be required to sign-up for the draft?". Implying that the draft will still exist for men regardless. Under those circumstances, answering no is saying "no, I do not think men and women should be treated equally in this regard".
/r/MensRights19/02/13 07:57 PM
4

I hate shit like this. Pick the best candidate. period. If the best candidates truly all happen to be female, then so be it. If they all happen to be male, that's fine too. has outraged some female teachers But this is pretty hilarious. Like, completely ignoring my actual opinion on this, and just going with what they want... the hypocrisy they exhibit is fucking astounding. I mean, coming from people who have WAY more access to "affirmative action", well, everything (hiring practices, scholarsh…
/r/MensRights19/02/13 06:27 PM
14

If a woman won't continue a relationship because she won't be given money.... then the only logical implication is that she expects money for sex. What do we call these types of people? I mean, call it like it is... if pointing out facts is offensive, well then maybe the people being pointed at should change. You wouldn't call a man who feels like he has to pay a John. You would lament about the fact that he feels like he has to do this. The attitude should be the same for the girl who doesn't r…
/r/MensRights19/02/13 06:23 PM
1

I see what you are saying with the bullying... but that's comparable to bullying by males, not mass homicide.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 06:08 PM
1

Does anyone know how much men outnumbered women in university (if it all) in order for them to justify instating the gender quotas to begin with? I wonder if it was larger than 60/40?
/r/MensRights19/02/13 02:37 PM
3

Is that not what half of you guys do on here with regards women? With women? no. With feminists/ism? Yes. If you can't see the difference, well, stay around and keep reading.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 02:29 PM
1

You still have to explain why it's basically only women that seemed to interpret the question in that way then.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 02:23 PM
1

if a lot of women are of the opinion that no one should be drafted that does not mean that they want more rights than men Actually that is exactly what they want... at least temporarily.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 02:22 PM
1

It's irrelevant whether any of us THINK it is essential... because whatever we think, the fact of the matter is that the draft HAS always been (and still is) an essential part of whether men are fully realized US citizens or not. Wanting women to be drafted as well as men is to me fighting to take away women's rights instead of fighting to give men their rights. No. The draft will never be gone while the majority of the voting population is exempt.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 02:18 PM
3

I'd say with enough people, it's at least a good representation of the people in the movement. Stuff like that didn't start here, it's just a convenient place for discussion.
/r/MensRights19/02/13 04:03 AM
4

Let's wait and see if shes found guilty.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:36 PM
2

I saw her TEDx talk on this a while ago, it was really good.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:35 PM
12

What people are suggesting is that the "feminism" you are proposing, is not feminism... at least it hasn't been for a very long time. but I maintain that the kind of radical feminism you cite is not really representative of the group as a whole. As I've said before, show me what the "good" feminists have actually done as a good example of equality in the past 20 years. Here's what I've seen feminism do: Vawa, duluth model, tender years, hiring quotas, reduced requirements, affirmative action, bi…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:33 PM
5

It's not so much they'll attack you (well they might), it's just that you can't disagree with them or you get banned. Here are rules right from their sidebar: " Discussions in this subreddit will assume the validity of feminism's existence, its egalitarian aspect, and the necessity of feminism's continued existence." " but those questioning or criticizing feminism should direct their discussions to /r/AskFeminists" "Top level comments, in all threads, must come from feminists, and must reflect a…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:29 PM
12

. I can't change feminism as a whole, but I can speak as a feminist. Yet as a feminist, you support what feminISM does... whether you agree with it or not.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:26 PM
16

I don't know if it's necessarily fair to group all feminists together in this way, since there isn't just one kind of feminism and, more importantly, feminism is a personal ideology that means something different to everyone Feminism is a movement, that is defined by it's action. By calling yourself a feminist you support the feminists who are in a position to affect change, whether you agree with or not. As I've suggested earlier, you should take a look at what kind of people you are actually s…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:20 PM
31

Yet this very post is top 10 on mensrights, meanwhile... a non-feminist can't even be a first commenter on their posts. It sure says a lot about the two movements.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:17 PM
8

I'm a feminist, but instead of thinking men are the problem (I don't know how many feminists really do anymore) How about all of the feminists in power? I realize that "sexism" isn't about oppressing women anymore Sexism has never been about oppressing women, it has always been simply: discrimination based on gender, and it has always been something that both genders have experienced for centuries. Yes, there's rampant objectification of women in advertising and cinema, but it's also a pretty pu…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:15 PM
25

People like this fucking terrify me. She automatically assumes every single accusation ever is 100% truthful completely devoid of any mistaken identify or anything else. If you are accused, you ARE a rapist.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:07 PM
5

I love how she exposes her bias in the fucking title: LMFTFY: "Why give the accused in rape cases is a bad idea".
/r/MensRights18/02/13 11:05 PM
1

Don't you know? Women are fucking useless children that have no brain and are completely incapable of thinking in a rationale way. How could you POSSIBLY expect them to report a crime if the guy isn't executed on site when she names him? Going through such things like gasp a criminal trial is just WAY too taxing because rape is a super special crime worse than genocide. Obviously this is sarcasm, but I don't see how someone can be against this, and NOT have that mindset.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:08 PM
1

IT isn't... but when he says shit like that while in a position of power and can actually help remedy the situation, well, then he's just a hypocrite.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 06:04 PM
1

For example, feminism is not the root cause of, nor the force behind the continued practice of male genital mutilation in North America Would you call this legal discrimination? I guess yeah you could. Even in this case though, i've seen countless feminists actually advocate FOR MGM... so while I agree 100% it's not the root cause, it's definitely not helping. Our battle is not just with feminists. True.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:31 AM
2

You seem smart, so I want to ask you this question: How do you think feminism should be defined? By it's actions? Or by it's words? Or to take it further, whose actions? or whose words? Do you think there is a line that once crossed, people just have to start calling it how it is? I mean, if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck... it's probably a duck. I'm not trying to suggest that there are no individual people that are really awesome people that call themselves feminists. But what I…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:38 AM
9

Unless that very same person also said the exact same statement about men, the only thing I could possibly conclude is that they are saying that because they view women as no better than helpless children who are completely incapable of doing anything, and therefore need special protection.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:19 AM
5

No, but feminism as a whole, is almost the cause of every single source of legal discrimination that men face in North America. It's kind of irrelevant if a few people who identify as feminists hold a different opinion, if the people in power aren't actually listening to it.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:15 AM
16

I hate that excuse... because it's still sexist. AFAIK, everything the MRM is pushing for, is just to rebalance the scales so to speak... there hasn't really ever been a situation where we pushed for something new... but if we did, I would very much hope that we did it in a gender-neutral way. I mean this person sounded nice enough, but she basically just said "well, we want to go there and help the only people we want to help (females), because we don't give a shit about the guys". It really is…
/r/MensRights18/02/13 12:14 AM
16

Your post offends me. Now shut the fuck up and just stop spouting your offensive hateful bullshit. . . . . . . See how that works?
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:47 PM
1

We do sorta have to define movements by people in them Yes... but by the actions they commit. Everything else though is pretty spot on.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 08:42 PM
5

What we all want is for the accused to not be demonized before a verdict is reached. In a perfect world... yes. But do you think that's possible?
/r/MensRights17/02/13 06:01 AM
8

Yeah I kind of feel bad actually suggesting to lie that much... but I mean, that's literally the ONLY option you have. I find it hard to feel bad about "cheating" in a system/situation that is just so stacked against you.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 02:51 AM
54

I believe the accused of every crime should be anonymous. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't really work when you have media reporting "This guy is charged with X and Y crimes" and you have the entire country treating him as guilty before the trial even happens.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 12:29 AM
10

Who the fuck cares if it's a troll? Seriously, genuine or not... what he/she actually said is a situation that does happen, and it's something that everyone here can have a constructive discussion about.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 12:27 AM
51

Now if sex laws actually made sense... any and all obligation you have to that child should be voided, and hell, she should even be charged with something... I won't water down the term "rape" by using it here, but lying about something that is one of the main conditions as to whether you consent to sex or not should definitely be something. Back to reality: you are probably fucked. Considering they have forced male rape victims to pay child support to their rapist, I really don't see how you ar…
/r/MensRights17/02/13 12:25 AM
9

I still think it's odd that someone would apparently have that on their clip-board. Well actually, not really... I don't find it surprising that someone in that position would hold views like that.
/r/MensRights17/02/13 12:13 AM
3

I hate to be the one to say this but... why are you still with her? Completely ignoring who is actually right and wrong... you guys don't see eye to eye either way.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 11:27 PM
1

Ask them meng.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 11:25 PM
5

I very seriously doubt oneiorosgrip would do this.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 09:21 PM
4

Man, I loved the mummy movies (at least the first two).... I think he at least played that role well. Though admittedly, his other movies were kind of shit. Same with Eric Bana... he was really good in a few, but shit in a lot of others. Hell, even Mr Cage. HE was awesome in kick-ass, and really good in lord of war... but probbaly the worst actor ever in everything else.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 09:19 PM
4

Why the fuck are people upvoting this.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 09:16 PM
-1

What? SRS has a bot that automatically bans people if they comment on certain subs...
/r/MensRights15/02/13 09:15 PM
1

I know. Like if I took everything on XBL to heart... my mom is like the biggest, sluttiest, rapiest pedophile in the history of the world with how many 12 year old kids shes apparently slept with. I should start a kickstarter and make a few million for her.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 08:04 PM
1

I fucking love that copy/paste. Thanks for the smile.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 08:03 PM
-2

, but nobody coerced my dad into having kids and commenting on SRS is a pretty fucking weak reason to pretend I'm somehow lying I never said anybody coerced your dad into having kids. I also never implied you were lying, it's just normally "SRS-types" aren't really willing to have a discussion (which is why I threw in that "disclaimer"). I'm glad that defending a stranger who wanted children then refused to pay to them is so important around here, I do agree that after raising kids for so many y…
/r/MensRights15/02/13 07:57 PM
2

What I said? Or the OP?
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:54 PM
7

Look, I've defended peoples ability to be able to post shit like this (I literally just made a comment about 5 seconds ago for another post)... but this picture has 3 words... presents no double standard or anything... and you haven't even posted anything to start a discussion or anything else that could possibly be constructive. Just stop.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:48 PM
1

Or, instead of posting completely non-constructive shit like you just did... you can either: a) downvote and move on so this stuff doesn't reach the top or b) Try and create a meaningful discussion in the comment section where we discuss the double standard of the situation that the picture presents.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:46 PM
-1

SRS or not (as other people are pointing out)... that is a fair point. I guess the difference is that literally 100% of mothers "are just deadbeats" while for men, it's somewhere between 0 and 100%. A woman always has the final say if she ever wants to be a mother... where a man may not ever have a choice (unless you want to say consent to sex consent to parenthood... but that's stupid logic).
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:44 PM
2

You are right... but AFAIK, the law is "best interest of the child" more or less.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:36 PM
69

Here's what I don't understand about this either. Let's say we take a happily married husband and wife... and their combined income is like 20k a year. Why doesn't the state give a shit if these people have a child? I mean the total inconsistency (while not a surprise) is just absolutely ridiculous. Or even more relevant... what if Brandon and his new wife have a child? His own child is going to suffer because he is forced to pay for his ex's child. They obviously don't see a problem with that.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:34 PM
35

Notice how it's NEVER in "the best interest of the child" if it harms the woman. Like fuck, force her to get a better job, or get an education so she can get a better job... or force her to stop buying shit for herself and spend the majority of her paychecks on her child. This reminds me of that FRA where they sued the school for like 2 million and one... and then it turns out they lied but they got to keep the money. Like shit, if lying about rape makes you a millionaire... AND you get no jail …
/r/MensRights15/02/13 05:33 PM
1

35 teacher seduces 15 year old student. If the student doesn't have a problem with it, then what's the problem? Please tell me you aren't being serious with that comparison. That's just so disingenuous it's sick. Complete strangers who could easily overpower you? Why does ability to overpower have anything to do with it? No one is going to beat the shit out of you in the middle of a public place. Physical strength is almost meaningless in a society where you can't really take advantage of it (in…
/r/MensRights15/02/13 08:21 AM
13

You can tell shes a fucking fraud. I mean, just today I had someone raging at me on DoTA (which included threats and pretty nasty insults). It literally happens every fucking day to every person regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:50 AM
20

Harassing behavior is unacceptable... that's why it's fucking "reportable" in the first place.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:48 AM
3

If she didn't have a problem with it (she didn't)... then what's the problem? I've had quite a few girls run up and hug me/kiss me without asking for my permission first... believe it or not I didn't die. That's not to say I liked it, but their intent obviously wasn't to cause me any harm... so freaking out about it only hurts me. You are being way too fucking sensitive.
/r/MensRights15/02/13 06:44 AM
1

It's not that "NAFALT" isn't true... it's just that it's completely irrelevant when used as a response to someone saying "feminism is not about equality". I'm not saying every single individual feminist as a whole does not care about equality. I'm saying feminism does not care about equality. When someone says "yeah, but I know this one person who calls themselves a feminist that constantly supports egalitarian stuff"... it's not really a rebuttal, because it's a totally different question. I am…
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:45 PM
1

Feminists also say that rape and domestic violence are issues that affect women more (i.e. most rape victims are women, most rapists are men, etc.). Their reasoning then is to devote more resources towards women then men. The empirical basis for these ideas may or may not be unfounded, but it's not ideologically inconsistent. When you change the definitions and perform dishonest studies to show that that women make up the majority of victims, and then use that as justification to try and get (an…
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:39 PM
1

"in a feminist way".
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:34 PM
2

Again, actually quote it. Because you are being very disingenuous right now. He said that he found from interviewing REAL people... that not every single experience was negative. In fact, a fairly large percentage said it was a positive experience (both the adult and the child). He then says this: Second, I’m finding that thousands of people in therapy for incest are being told, in essence , that their lives have been ruined by incest. In fact, their lives have not generally been affected as muc…
/r/MensRights14/02/13 05:37 AM
6

If it's the "reality" that women are prone to cheating on their husbands, then it must equally be the case that there are men willing to be a party to that cheating. And the difference is.... Not that both aren't shitty acts.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:08 AM
2

Have you ever heard someone called a misogyny objectifying asshole for simply stating that a girl looks pretty? Because I have.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:03 AM
2

Never mind that feminists repeatedly and explicitly state otherwise When are you going to realize that what they say is completely irrelevant when their actions speak the exact opposite? "We believe both men and women are victims of domestic violence and need help... so we are going to fund a shelter that only helps women". Yeah, that shit don't add up. feminists actually acknowledge this, Like when they release study after study that defines rape in a way that men can't actually be victims... a…
/r/MensRights14/02/13 04:00 AM
2

I suggest you take that definition to any actual active feminist and have them tell you what they think about it.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 03:51 AM
1

I'd say that analogy only kind of works. A vegetarian isn't really an ideology... so it has absolutely nothing to do with what people say. It's entirely dependent on actions... so there really isn't even contention. Feminism SHOULD be judged by their actions,b ut you still get people arguing otherwise.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 03:50 AM
5

Again, actually quote it in context.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 02:00 AM
2

No, but KKK is avowedly a non-egalitarian movement. Because of what they do? Or because of what they say/say they do? What do you think is more important in defining them? I don't see any more inconsistency in the concept of an egalitarian feminist than I do in an egalitarian MRA. MRA's don't have central tenets that state that every single man, regardless of their actual situation, is privileged and all women are oppressed. Holding that view is not compatible with egalitarianism.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 01:59 AM
1

IF having parity/equality in this shit is simply a step towards having it fixed... I'll take it.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:27 AM
3

I was under the impression that "soft science" basically meant "social science". Wikipedia seems to agree as well.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:25 AM
2

"expected", judged", "discouraged", "shamed". != Legal discrimination.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:24 AM
3

Why don't you go find his actual quote and explain how you believe he promotes incest (never heard rape added to that before), when he specifically says "despite this, I don't recommend it". Inform yourself please.
/r/MensRights14/02/13 12:23 AM
-6

Lol, so... religion!
/r/MensRights13/02/13 10:17 PM
2

I know, it just get's ridiculous. even if the only ones that have any power or influence or are in the public eye are Is something that people ALWAYS fail to understand. I mean, no one actually thinks every single individual feminist doesn't truly want equality.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 10:17 PM
2

Yet they see absolutely nothing wrong with it....and again, especially coming from something that is an ideology.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 10:15 PM
6

Go to /r/feminism and read the sidebar. It's all right there. No exaggeration required.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 10:14 PM
3

If this were the case, then before the feminist movement came into being no legal discrimination against men could have existed. Is this your contention? Pretty much... except I guess the draft. Maybe slightly more accurately I could have said "every new source in the last 50-60 years". How is it possible to bring up an example disproving that not all feminists are like that? It's like proving a negative; it's impossible for you to do it so you just lazily assert it. Whereas I actually have give…
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:13 PM
36

I wish I could tell you. It's pretty much the definition of a circle-jerk. They claim it's a legitimate "soft-science"... yet you aren't actually allowed to criticize it.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 04:04 PM
9

Make note of all of this. And then if something negative actually does come from you not allowing yourself to be censored... you at least have shit to use to appeal it.
/r/MensRights13/02/13 02:09 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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