TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Disorderly-Conduct Archive

View 10 posts and 354 comments by Disorderly-Conduct on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
64

a) why are we questioning whether men would take it but not women? b) why are we not assuming the male and female partners are both independently taking birth control?
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:56 PM
2

Sorry but it's not up to you what other people consider traumatic.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 04:34 AM
7

Even if the problem is strictly gender roles, feminism is still responsible to the extent that they were supposed to be a movement for gender equality and they didn't do anything about it.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:51 AM
1

No
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:40 AM
1

I did not.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:06 AM
2

Using the extension to obtain personal information without permission could be grounds for a lawsuit...
/r/MensRights07/08/13 01:51 AM
16

"Man" actually used to be the word for "human", while werman meant male. That's where the word werewolf comes from, or man-wolf.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 01:45 AM
1

the honeybadger brigade Based. As. Fuck.
/r/MensRights07/08/13 12:51 AM
0

"Small crowd"? They're the largest men's rights site on the Internet. You don't seem to understand, we wouldn't have a reputation in the first place if it weren't for them.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 03:22 PM
-6

The "idiots" at AVfM are the sole reason the MHRM is so popular today.
/r/MensRights05/08/13 02:59 PM
11

She reframes everything in terms of sexism against women, describes the male gaming community as perverted adolescents who are mad about their "privileges" being taken away and nitpicks every tiny detail in every game she can get her hands on for how it "oppresses" women. And let's say theoretically she didn't do any of that, and her video series thus far was all reasonable. She's still a manipulative con artist who's stated for the record she doesn't think misandry is real and exploited the ver…
/r/MensRights02/08/13 02:12 AM
18

Got one right here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kHOn1UsWao
/r/MensRights01/08/13 11:41 PM
10

You have proof it was actual MRAs who did that? You can't just call anyone an MRA you please; they need to identify as one at the very least, and video flagging is all done anonymously so you couldn't even tell anyway. Feminists on the other hand have been known to actually take credit for their false flagging campaigns.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 10:13 PM
2

I agree but I think a lot of these feminist reviewers take it a step too far, where they complain out of ideological bias as opposed to just a critique of the game. To the latter I say carry on with your opinions, but to the former I second nomenimion and suggest they just find other games to enjoy.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 10:08 PM
-3

Progress!
/r/MensRights01/08/13 09:50 PM
3

It's funny how you ignore your own advice when you respond with that.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 09:48 PM
1

I think Cathy will come to once she learns of the rationale behind AVfM's "vulgarity".
/r/MensRights01/08/13 07:38 PM
6

Donate money, post links on your fb wall, show videos to friends, put up posters around your town, start a men's rights group in your area or college. Off the top of my head.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:22 AM
2

Remember there are plenty of lurkers who come by here still toting the Women are Wonderful effect, these links are helpful to dismiss this gender stereotype.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 04:35 AM
15

I don't understand how you can go from "almost all valid points" to "vulgar woman bashing" based solely on the delivery. Either what they're saying bashes women or it doesn't, presentation isn't going to change that. Regardless, the MHRM would not be where it is today if not for AVfM's choice of editorial tone - which may be vulgar, but I strongly disagree it bashes women. They found out a long time ago that society simply does not give a fuck about men, and the only way to get people to notice …
/r/MensRights31/07/13 08:10 PM
17

Some leading men’s rights websites such as A Voice for Men offer a steady diet of vulgar woman-bashing that discredits any valid points they may make. It was going great till that point.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:23 PM
2

Have you even seen anyone who actually identified as an MRA being vocal about the friendzone? Because I can't think of a single instance of that happening. I'm fairly sure the entire stereotype was fabricated and perpetuated by gender feminists.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 10:25 PM
0

Gay men and lesbians would seem to disagree.\? Don't see anything in the article about it being about gays. Wait? So the sexist objectification women experience is justified because you think it's a biological characteristic of men's sexuality? a) No, because sexual objectification isn't inherently sexist and b) I don't "think" it's true any more than I "think" evolution is a fact.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 10:05 PM
1

Gender flipping in this context is the dumbest meme ever. Men and women are attracted to each other in different ways, this is biological fact. It's comparing apples to oranges. This article is a prime example of why feminism will continue to fail in their goals, because they're confusing human biology with social constructs (and demonizing normal male sexuality in the process).
/r/MensRights30/07/13 09:40 PM
2

The flaw in your theory is that women can hunt/protect and reproduce. It's only toward the end of pregnancy that a women is in any way disabled. They certainly didn't work any less later, when society became agricultural. I disagree. Men have a distinct physical advantage over women. It's only natural that they would fall into the more work-intensive roles, they were naturally better at it. It's as simple as this: if women were just as capable as men with manual labor and other physical roles, t…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:39 AM
1

I have a problem with the idea that women are somehow responsible for men dying in war Sacrifice for women was one facet of it, which came more pronounced when the country in question was being invaded as opposed to invading. The men were protecting the women from the invaders. Regardless, neither the women nor the men can be held responsible as historically the concept of democracy has been near nonexistent, neither gender as a group were making decisions on behalf of both. It was all social st…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 12:31 AM
1

Yeah I read a study the other month demonstrating how the Titanic was largely an exception. I attribute this to an extreme manifestation of male disposability, one where men are directly and consciously committing suicide to save women they don't know. In most cases a man will only place himself in peril when he has a chance of surviving, ie, rescuing someone from a burning building. The times he does sacrifice himself is for his country or family through means like enlistment, which can be cons…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 10:53 PM
1

Okay, I'm glad we can acknowledge that both of our theories are just theories and neither are certain. My theory is that because men are generally bigger and stronger, they were more efficient at doing their jobs. I agree, and I argue that this developed in addition to my previous reproductivity argument. Men and women both fulfilled predetermined roles designated by their sex; women's was ensuring the continuity of the species by reproducing, and men were assuring it by protecting the women and…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 09:38 PM
2

The popular notion at the time was that women were simply not as smart or mentally strong as men No shit. That's because it's how society evolved as the most efficient system for a civilization. You send 90% of the men to find food, mine coal and kill invading armies and other disposable roles and leave the women at home, and the remaining men can continue reproducing with all the women and the civilization lives on. You send 90% of the women to fulfill those roles and perish, there's almost no …
/r/MensRights26/07/13 09:04 PM
1

Not feminists, but here's some info about a initiative by conservative women to shoot down an iteration of the ERA. http://www.ushistory.org/us/57c.asp
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:50 PM
1

was based not on women being more valuable but on the idea that women, like children were less able to fend for themselves. And the idea that they couldn't fend for themselves was because they had no agency, which was necessary to keep them protected from harm, which in other words meant they were considered more valuable. The same is true on modern times. You are reframing the issue. Are you srsly arguing against male disposability on /MR? early feminists Were completely different from modern f…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:41 PM
0

I don't think you understand what's really going on in the minds of alleged "nice guys", and you're substituting your assumptions in lieu of it. Specifically, the assumptions fabricated by feminists based on male stereotypes. You also seemed to both acknowledge and miss GWW's point about the unpleasantness of friendzones. You may have your own experiences about romantic feelings for the other gender, but I can assure you, for other people it is NOT pleasant. I am not obligated to sacrifice my em…
/r/MensRights26/07/13 08:23 PM
11

Women 5000 years ago were oppressed, so that means I'm entitled to special treatment!
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:42 PM
11

No. Both sides of the aisle are highly misandric in their policies. Liberals are the lesser evil as they advocate gay rights and abortion reform (both positively affect men), but again, they also both have negative policies like VAWA and exclusive rape laws.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:40 PM
0

Watch: http://youtu.be/a9XDb0nxSO4
/r/MensRights26/07/13 01:13 PM
3

You mean the one mentioning xposting to here? I think it was more due to the language used.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:58 AM
1

Jenna Marbles had a nasty video about "nice guys", she even did the 'stop acting entitled to fuck her' argument. Not a fan.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:39 AM
1

That representation of my point is so disconnected with reality I'm not sure how to respond to it. I did not say or even imply anywhere that the ad was "enabling teen girls to get pregnant". All I said was that it, and your post especially, was placing unwarranted responsibility on boys who get girls pregnant that want to have a baby.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:22 AM
1

As long as it's 100% private (meaning not government funded) I couldn't care less.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 04:03 AM
3

Ah that makes sense, it always bugged me how someone her age would be using the word "womyn" in seriousness. The only other person I can think of on tumblr even using it was Big Red. Oh well 10/10, ignitionpoint you truly are a master rusewomyn.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:50 AM
1

You have failed to address both my criticism of your post and of the ad. You are also misrepresenting my point ("big angry agenda"). It appears to me your ideological bias got in the way of understanding them. I suggest you lurk on this subreddit some more and try to understand the MHRM point of view before you post again.
/r/MensRights26/07/13 03:02 AM
-3

Leaving what, the child? Teens should not be having babies in the first place. Ever. Feminists can give teen girls the right to be abusive, irresponsible mothers and raise children when they're not ready for it, but they do not have the right to force men into it as well. Men aren't responsible for shit, and this ad shouldn't be implying that they are either.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 11:47 PM
2

Code red. AVfM's tone can certainly be construed as hateful, but calling it "hate speech" is a misnomer as it implies the hateful speech is unjustified. The main reason AVfM has gotten any traction is because of the editorial tone they chose to adopt, which drew in page views and increased awareness for the men's rights movement. You are free to find distaste in AVfM but you can't deny the movement wouldn't be where it is today without it. tl;dr AVfM's "hate speech" is necessary.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 11:23 AM
5

From Permutation of Ninjas Not to be blunt, but do you think that a steady diet of “rape is worse than murder” might have had something to do with that? In our years of dealing with this, we've noticed a strong trend suggesting that the single biggest factor in how harmful a sexual assault is to the victim is whether they were taught to view it as a criminal assault, or a world-ending catastrophe the likes of which cannot be expressed. The first type tend to suffer relatively few effects, report…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 09:12 PM
1

I get that you only blame women who believe everyone should have the same rights. Watch this video and then get back to me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM If one treats all women, and to a greater extent all people, equally, why would one make the comment "Hopefully they are not frail little "feminine" things who are made of glass?" Pardon me if I'm wrong but that sounds like someone that sees others as lesser beings. Traditional femininity encourages women to act like delicate littl…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 09:07 PM
2

As multiple people have pointed out already, nobody here is blaming women for these issues, they are blaming feminism. Nor was blueoak9 even insinuating he "treats women as if they are weaker/lesser beings". You are inserting your own connotation into people's posts where none exists. Feminism is responsible for these gender issues because it was their obligation to deal with them as a claimed gender equality movement, but they have utterly failed to do anything about them and in some cases even…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 08:26 AM
32

Misogynist (1913): a man that hates women Misogynist (2013): a man that womyn hates
/r/MensRights19/07/13 08:13 AM
2

PoN has done some excellent write-ups on this topic. http://permutationofninjas.org/post/21541767270/sexism-prejudice http://permutationofninjas.org/post/21541991470/anonymous-asked-am-i-the-only-person-who-thinks-the http://permutationofninjas.org/post/37658174203/white-people-are-not-capable-of-experiencing-racism It's all hoops designed by people who need to reconcile advocating for social justice with being a shitty person. They like mistreating others, but they're not allowed to do it if th…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:47 AM
3

Some further reading on the other replies to this http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/sycophants/a-profile-of-michael-kimmel-2/
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:40 PM
1

You were arguing that feminism wasn't sex-exclusive, but all the examples you've provided me are strictly related to women (except LGBT rights, which isn't related to gender equality in the first place). This proves my point.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 03:43 AM
4

Remember, the "grrrl gamer" stereotype is blatant sexism against women, but the "nice guy" stereotype is just calling out misogynistic men who think they're nice but not really.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 01:04 AM
17

AVfM has a huge collection of men's rights posters of varying tones and messages, if you're interested. http://www.avoiceformen.com/posters/
/r/MensRights12/07/13 01:01 AM
6

Haha that's awesome, GWW was behind this.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:08 AM
0

I don't think so. If SRS was capable of rational discourse they wouldn't consider themselves enemies of us.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:05 AM
1

+1 note if someone reblogs or 'likes' it
/r/MensRights11/07/13 01:50 AM
1

Then we have different definitions of feminism, and I would say mine is more accurate based on the actions and advocacy done by feminism.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 01:12 AM
7

Feminism isn't necessary anywhere. What we need is a transitionary gender movement that doesn't exclude the needs of either gender, one like Warren Farrell envisioned.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 04:06 AM
2

And Earl Silverman
/r/MensRights08/07/13 01:05 AM
8

Provocatively dressed characters ≠ sexism
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:33 PM
1

SRS? Rationalizing their bigotry? What is this madness?
/r/MensRights30/06/13 04:52 AM
3

I might be inclined towards that if it were coming from anywhere but AVfM.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 07:41 PM
1

But there's only like 5 posts total in /r/MRA/ and none of them are really sexist.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 04:25 AM
2

Hahahahaha he's comparing us to Hitler for deleting his manhood academy spam.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 04:17 AM
3

The most prominent activism performed by the feminist movement has primarily been in the interests of advancing women's superiority and preserving gender roles that benefited women, often at the expense of men. So regardless of how many egalitarian feminists exist, even though they're the majority, the activism actually done by the most vocal parts of feminism hasn't been towards gender equality.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 05:39 AM
1

Men's rights and egalitarianism Accept Yes Acknowledge. It should only be used as general predictions for social decisions, not an absolute basis.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 12:24 AM
2

Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM
/r/MensRights12/06/13 12:16 AM
10

I find this definition to be much more accurate. 2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:58 PM
8

I've debated with quite a few feminists who claim they support men's rights. They sound like they're on your side at first, until you dig deeper and find out they believe rape is forced penetration, or women can't be abusive because of male domination, or that misandry and men's issues is the "patriarchy backfiring on men". For every reasonable feminist I've talked with there's 10 more who can't get past feminist ideology to view men's rights objectively. You can't effectively support men's righ…
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:56 PM
3

do you think feminism and mens rights are in opposition to each other Yes, with modern mainstream feminism. The men's rights movement wouldn't exist if the feminist movement as a whole did it's job right.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 09:48 PM
3

Here's some points from various studies that cover social factors (but not biological differences between genders). http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/boys/factsheets/ed/index.shtml One thing they have learned is that boys who feel they are emotionally supported by teachers and other staff have a stronger connection to school and may be less likely to drop out. Moreover, young people, and especially boys, are more likely to be successful in school and less likely to drop out when their parents are invol…
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:14 PM
2

There's a study I can't find off hand that says men are much more likely to be nervous or afraid around attractive women than the reverse. Hoverhand is actually strongly influenced by male biology.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:09 PM
6

AVfM advocates the name "men's human rights movement" or MHRM.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 11:25 PM
13

seemingly incapable of striking up a conversation, let alone offering to buy a female a drink. Stopped reading there.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 08:25 PM
1

Here's a study about 'sexual coercion' that solved the issue by avoiding the word "rape" entirely. The data goes way over my head, but it supposedly shows similar numbers in perpetrators and victims across both genders. http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID45-PR45.pdf Feminist theory states that sexual coercion is the result of male dominance over women and the need to maintain that dominance; however, studies showing that women sexually coerce men point towards weaknesses in that theory. Results sho…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 08:24 PM
1

She wasn't able to provide a single example of an actual rape threat on the Jezabel article she wrote. They were all jokes about how she doesn't have to worry about rape, and one about her "metaphorically" getting raped. She's crying with a loudspeaker like all the others.
/r/MensRights07/06/13 08:19 PM
2

Why don't they propose to him instead and avoid the whole issue entirely? Sheesh, talk about perpetuating gender roles.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:58 PM
2

My search results: Are Single Moms Raising Losers? Single Mom- Why do I always fall for the losers? Are Single Moms Stupid? [Single mothers are stupid for choosing such losers] NOTHING prepares you for a loser baby daddy Please, No More Articles About Single Mothers And ironically the last one, and the only one actually referring to single mothers with the keyword 'loser', was a PUA blog. Why It's Good To Shame Single Moms | Chateau Heartiste
/r/MensRights06/06/13 09:54 PM
45

We, The Women Undersigned, Feel Welcome in Mainstream Secular, Atheist and Skeptic Groups Before you downvote it because of the domain name, the whole website is basically a petition for women telling atheism+ to piss off.
/r/MensRights05/06/13 09:25 PM
0

I thought she made good points in the videos I saw, but they were too emotionally charged so I had difficulty accepting them. If she presented them more rationally and even-handedly I think it would've been easier on both casual viewers and the MGTOW community.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:34 PM
2

typhonblue (who posts here too) JudgyBitch shieldwife Not an MRA, but KiteTales did a rebuttal to Anita.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:20 PM
3

He does, but they also intersect with toxic and highly (legitimately) misogynistic views about masculinity and women. It's not worth it.
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:16 PM
1

So then you agree with calling police officers 'policemen', and similar professions? Because they're blarg status?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 10:10 PM
2

Like I never see feminists calling MRAs fat virgin neckbeards. Not very feministy, it's both body shaming and reverse-slut shaming. Most of the insulting I see goes on in places like youtube comments (not here, bare insults usually get downvoted), and you can't tell if those people are actual MRAs. So nobody's innocent here.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 07:12 PM
6

AVfM's About section clearly states they are against violent protest of any kind, a sentiment I've seen reiterated by several different editors.
/r/MensRights03/06/13 07:00 PM
11

radical male empowerment community
/r/MensRights03/06/13 06:39 AM
3

Maybe it was insensitive for her to say "primary," There's no "maybe", that's the entire reason her comment was offensive. If she didn't want that context, she shouldn't have used that phrasing.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 07:52 PM
7

Yes. This article is from 1996, not even current events. Moving on.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 07:49 PM
5

You're the one reading your own context into those quotes. I don't know the Harman one well enough, but Hillary made her context very clear. Not only did she say women were the primary victims of war, she singled out women who's lives were vicariously affected by it as though the equivalent men had to take it without complaining. She insulted everyone except the lowest common denominator of the middle-age suburban housewives she was appealing to.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 07:43 PM
3

What do you expect, a daily editorial by Earl? AVfM has limited resources and men have a lot of different issues they need attended. The site began covering Earl extensively after the suicide because it's when it was in the public eye.
/r/MensRights02/06/13 07:36 PM
2

You weren't downvoted for the punishing false rape accusers part, your comment seemed to come off as an attack on someone who was identifying as an MRA.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:08 PM
12

Video by girlwriteswhat on this topic.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:03 PM
2

Christina actually created definitions for that very purpose. They're called equity feminism (the good kind) and gender feminism.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:02 PM
2

Could you find a better place to host that than a manhood academy channel?...
/r/MensRights01/06/13 08:00 PM
1

Of course they do, I never said otherwise.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:59 PM
6

There are MGTOW forums on the net that sound relevant to your interests.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:41 AM
3

You put too much stock in labels.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:34 AM
4

I know that. You're not one of them. Apparently you don't know that. Tomb Raider, the one where her big boobs were a point of advertising. Portal the silent protagonist (arguably lacks substance thugh) but you're right it's a good one. You're running out of non-customizable heroines already. Although more customization is good, wont disagree there. We already went over why sexual appeal isn't relevant, and regardless, that wasn't a point of advertising in the latest reboot. This website has 398 …
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:14 AM
3

explain why you think it's cool to deny privileges that you have to others That's literally what we're debating.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 07:06 AM
3

You said your female gamer friends? Apologies if you're agendered though. You also talk from the perspective of a guy and are in the "men's rights" subreddit defending hegemonic white male domination of video games. You should learn about the community you're posting in before you debate with it's members. There are plenty of proud female MRAs in the movement. It's a lot relevant. You said it's subjective but then try to back it up with an objective fact. Max Payne, Assasin's creed etc etc all h…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:35 AM
2

No I'm not. My issue is with most women in video games being attractive and lacking substance. They also make up 99.9% of the most interesting/fleshed out characters. So it's not really fair is it. How attractive a character is is irrelevant. How much substance a character has is subjective. How is Mario, who's personality amounts to "yahoo!" and bouncing around any more substantial than Princess Peach ("Maaaariooo!!!")? "Plenty" No. There are some. It's not even about that. It's about not reall…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 06:08 AM
3

I didn't do that. That's what all the other feminists are doing, and that's what you're subtly telling male gamers by shaming them for enjoying attractive women in games. But having a game where the female characters are nothing but eye candy is a bit alienating to half the worlds population. Men are objectified for their utility and disposability, which is 99.9% of male video game characters. Fair's fair. many of which would probably play video games if it wasn't such a boys club As I've alread…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:20 AM
2

Because you've ignored theirs. They just want some female leads, or a gay lead, or a non-white lead, instead of being supplementary or caricatured characters constantly. Sexual objectification of a majority of female characters is an actual issue though. No I haven't, and sexually appealing women in video games isn't a real issue. If someone doesn't like video games featuring women with large breasts, then it's as simple as not buying it. The solution isn't forcing your ridiculous standards on e…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:05 AM
10

Christina Hoff Sommers is a feminist who has two books being advertised on the sidebar of /MR as suggested reading material. -->
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:48 AM
0

for no real reason except white males dominating gaming circles (and roles in video games) That's because the majority of people playing video games are white males. They're catering to the market. If there were a perfectly equal number of male and female characters, women would have an unfairly high representation in video games. Same goes for non-white characters. If there's a higher demand for female and minority characters, the market will adjust to it on it's own. You can already pick your …
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:45 AM
2

The only ideologues exploiting Earl Silverman are feminists.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:23 AM
2

And some people would like the gaming community to be more inclusive and not alienate people. Are you talking about feminism doing that? They're not advocating inclusivity, they're advocating the entire gaming community and market adjusting to fit their own personal standards and preferences. It's the exact same premise as 'harassment' in the workplace, they think that men (and not women) saying words like dongle creates a 'hostile work environment'. It's female entitlement at it's best.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:17 AM
2

I dunno, I'd say it'd be a leap of logic to assume just because some news sites publish a couple feminist-oriented editorials that means mainstream video gaming supports feminism in gaming. Plus as the picture I posted shows, there's at least one IGN editor who doesn't support Anita either. I just want a news source that gives decent video game news without dumb editorials/human interest stories.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 04:07 AM
5

A Voice for Men learned their lesson a long time ago that public relations is a lost cause. By it's very nature society is programmed to disregard the needs of men, and no matter how hard we try to show otherwise there's always going to be a great deal of people who will hate anyone who advocates for men's issues. The bandwagon effect is already gaining steam, at this point there's not much gender feminism can do to stop the men's rights movement.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 03:20 AM
76

Thanks, great insight into your behavior! Don't feel intimidated by all the animosity towards feminism here, there are actually quite a few feminists who identify as MRAs as well. Christina Hoff Sommers is a bestselling author of men's rights that MRAs often quote who criticizes feminism, but still identifies as one.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 03:15 AM
0

Ummmmm elaborate? For the most part she was just giving her educated opinion on it to me.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 02:15 AM
1

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9XDb0nxSO4
/r/MensRights31/05/13 11:33 PM
4

It depends on the context. Is someone making a rape joke because they don't censor themselves on sensitive topics, or because they don't take rape seriously? Most male rape jokes today are the latter, but yeah, if you're an MRA who gets buttpained at every single male rape joke but looks the other way at female rape jokes, you've gotta knock it off.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 09:47 PM
1

SYABM covered this video. http://siryouarebeingmocked.tumblr.com/post/51746038647/clamanath-siryouarebeingmocked Patrick Stewart works with the women's shelter Refuge, which is the very same organization that Erin Pizzey founded and was subsequently kicked out of for publishing stats on male victims. He admitted his father's case was the result of PTSD (as opposed to the male domination theory) but he still maintained the male-perpetrator female-victim model in his speech. He also talked about h…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 09:29 PM
12

dat top comment fukkin saved http://imgur.com/bOj5IYk I used to frequent IGN until I got sick of their feminist-oriented editorials, then I moved on to Kotaku (imagine how that turned out), and now I'm at Shacknews. It was going fine until they published an article about the Hawkeye Initiative, which boiled down to how an employee at a game company was happy with everything about her job (her own words) except for a single ad poster on the wall of one of their games that had a somewhat provocati…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 08:56 PM
1

Off the top of my head - the majority of people in America are white in the first place, plus people tend to be attracted to their own race. As for gender, that could be a number of different factors involved, including underreporting/bias.
/r/MensRights30/05/13 05:18 AM
2

The very title is both sexist and racist. He's using his privilege as an editor to directly mock the people who commented on his original article who don't have the same platform to voice their opinions as him.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:39 PM
1

Do you have a study for that? Not that I don't believe you, I just want to confirm it firsthand.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:33 PM
4

Yeah, and 2 out of 10 aren't white females and they're getting ignored by the media. I don't think you understood my point.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 09:29 PM
18

Breaking news: local feminist group to boycott gym with private Men's Club & Shower section that excludes women
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:30 PM
2

Some articles and studies on discrimination against men and minorities in the justice system. http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2008782782_courtstudy25m.html http://ftp.iza.org/dp2870.pdf http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002 http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-12-01/news/27082827_1_gender-bias-probation-officers-probation-department
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:26 PM
2

"Damsel" cases may be the exception, but they often are the most urgent. And cases where the 'damsel' is a minority and/or aren't male? This is racial and sexual profiling, like saying since more blacks commit crimes we should arrest them more.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:14 PM
3

They should focus on the young "gang bangers" who carry guns and engage in gang behavior and not the young kids with a gram of weed, instead of identifying them by race.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 06:02 PM
8

Sounds like she has Borderline Personality Disorder. If possible you should covertly record one of her outbursts or false accusation threats, but your first priority should be getting out of the relationship. I don't know much more beyond that I can help you with, sorry.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 08:30 PM
2

That's a poor reframing, but I've seen worse stretches.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 08:15 PM
1

where the 18 year old, his family, his lawyer, and the 14 year old's family were just as willing to talk to the media This is completely unsubstantiable because my entire point was the media isn't willing to listen to them. How am I supposed to know all three parties were willing to talk to the media when the media wasn't interested in publishing their views in the first place? Here are some more reasonable articles related to your question. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/03/19/the-t…
/r/MensRights27/05/13 08:08 PM
0

omg you know how to post emoji too?? Let's be emoji buddies 👊 👬 💫
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:37 AM
1

You got my point!!! GOOD JOB ✨
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:09 AM
3

A user with 11 posts making racist comments (that needed to be explained) that get upvoted when it was linked to SRS, and an SRSer valiantly coming to correct him and show the world how racist /MR is. This isn't suspicious in the slightest.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:04 AM
2

this is not an MRA case where everyone should be upset about the law being more lenient towards women. This is a case where the law should be changed and we should be happy for everyone if this young lady is found innocent. Or both. Nobody gave a damn about the law when it was getting males arrested, but now that a female got arrested everyone is up in arms about it. It's hypocrisy at it's finest.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:48 AM
5

They aren't talking to the media because the media doesn't give shit, because people don't give a shit. She is getting special treatment, and all parties involved are responsible for it and need to be held accountable.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:44 AM
9

CNN has a history of blocking comments that don't tow the article's slant. http://imgur.com/V8fwUdM
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:37 AM
7

I like him. He says things I agree with in an angry tone.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 09:35 AM
1

All this time I thought I was treating women like my equals. I guess this guide proved me wrong!
/r/MensRights25/05/13 09:22 AM
1

This is directly related to men's rights, women crying rape because they didn't have the confidence to say no. Men can't reasonably be expected to read women's minds and confirm their consent when the women can't even confirm it themselves. Unlike these feminists, I treat women like adults the same as men and expect them to voice their opinion despite pressures to do otherwise.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 07:38 AM
2

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/11/981112075159.htm 95% of non-fatal suicides are a cry for help. When the men commit suicide, they're ready to go.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:12 AM
3

Tumblr blog Shitty Webcomics covers sinfest all the time. Here's my favorite pick out of all of them.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 06:41 PM
3

Well, in other cases if the person knows the person they're talking to they might have a different understanding.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 07:22 AM
15

Much of the time when someone addresses a male specifically by their gender, they're using emasculation to manipulate them. i.e. I want you to be a happy man, and that means raising this child you asked me to abort with me. Alternative phrasing might be a "happy person". Using the term "man" automatically brings up connotations of preserving one's masculinity no matter the context.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 05:15 AM
3

Lagging Behind the Times: Parenthood, Custody, and Gender Bias in the Family Court List of shared parenting bills major feminist organizations like NOW had shut down
/r/MensRights22/05/13 05:08 AM
1

Awesome video. If you've previously found Pat Condell's tone too offensive or aggressive, check this one out anyway.
/r/MensRights22/05/13 01:02 AM
2

lol - I thought it would turn into a downvote party, but here we go.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 09:08 PM
1

Reversals cost a fortune, $5000+. Your only other option is condoms for the rest of your life, other than trusting your partner to use protection. Women have plenty of inexpensive and effective options like IUDs.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 06:51 AM
2

I'll accept that when he gives a speech to an all-female college about not having babies when you or the father isn't ready for it.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 06:49 AM
6

Just a reminder for you folks Teenager falsely accused of rape beaten to death by gang
/r/MensRights20/05/13 06:42 AM
1

I got the pic from the interwebs. I found the source though, here. http://feministing.com/2013/02/05/a-list-of-dudes-who-oppose-the-violence-against-women-act/ I addressed your point about it going both ways in a previous post.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 03:40 AM
5

I stopped visiting NPR after the mods started blocking completely innocuous pro-MRM comments I submitted. I heard from other users they were having extremely inconsistent moderation for their comments as well that seemed to be targeting various political beliefs.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 10:38 PM
0

Aside from the dangerous side-effects, I have zero sympathy for her. Not a popular opinion, and still unethical, but there it is. I love how in the comments suddenly fetuses become unborn children who deserve the right to live again when it's the father who wants to get rid of it. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:28 PM
2

Feministing, huh? I think I've got a screencap saved from that site.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:20 PM
1

I know there are probably quite a few MRAs who hate on feminists out of ignorance, but I'm fairly familiar with individual feminists and feminism. I know most feminists don't hate men or want to take away their human rights, but there are other factors at play. This video's topic might be a bit too personal for you to consider, but here's the reason why (educated) MRAs feel justified in generalizing feminism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:08 PM
1

Haha 'foaminists'. I'm adding that to my bank of innuendos for feminists.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 08:07 PM
1

Am I the only one noticing that this thread seems to reveal that "transwomen" tend to be men who are looking for an excuse to take advantage of damselling and emotional blackmail that they wouldn't be able to as men? Are you criticizing transwomen, or people who are saying those things about transwomen?
/r/MensRights18/05/13 06:05 AM
2

You're thinking of "progressives", not liberals.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 06:03 AM
1

I hardly ever see MRAs saying that at all, but I see the MRA one all the time in feminist circles. Most of them have no clue about MRAs other than what's regurgitated to them by other users.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 05:50 AM
7

Feminists have developed a highly complex caricature of an MRA that's completely inaccurate. I think it's a cross between the caricatures of Nice Guys™, atheists and /b/tards.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 02:47 AM
5

You do have control over it, more than the woman. Women have like 10 times as many birth control options as men, including the same options.
/r/MensRights18/05/13 02:42 AM
4

Where women can have an equal chance to interface with the modern world, they equal on IQ and surpass on academic performance. sigh http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/girls-boys-and-gender-bias-in-school/ http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2013/01/20/girls-boys-and-gender-bias-in-school-part-2/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/03/elementary-school-bias-boys_n_2404898.html
/r/MensRights18/05/13 02:40 AM
4

It was my privilege 😉
/r/MensRights17/05/13 04:47 AM
7

Love that guy - he's just a few steps from being a bona fide MRA, or "male rights activist" https://twitter.com/joerogan/status/320249015113482240
/r/MensRights17/05/13 02:12 AM
2

There was another about male rape, I think they linked to it on this story, and one about Earl Silverman.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:03 PM
1

I think we're going to fundamentally disagree on this one based on economical ideology.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 09:03 PM
1

MRAs are so getting blamed when this gets hijacked.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 08:17 AM
1

It's the same premise as objectivism. Everyone is rewarded based solely off the work they do, which results in people with inherent disabilities being screwed over. Same with insurance companies, somebody being born with a condition other people don't have shouldn't mean them or their family paying out of pocket while others are free to save their money for their own pursuits. I don't mean insurance companies have to pay the entire bill for someone with a preexisting condition, but they shouldn'…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 07:08 AM
1

Why should inherent factors not come into play? Inherent factors also affect risk. Well obviously the rest of my post was to explain that. Except the cost of tracking all of that data would actually cause premiums in general to go up. Insurance companies do track all that data, and increase your fee when it shows on your record. It's expensive to keep paying for someone who gets into wrecks all the time. The black community has a much higher risk of having sick cell anemia as well as diabetes. S…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 06:52 AM
2

I think factors should obviously influence policy as insurance companies would get screwed over otherwise, but it should be based more around factors related to the decisions people make instead of inherent factors. For example, even though women might statistically get in more car wrecks as a group, insurance should only variate around individual driving record instead of gender. It's no different than charging someone based on race, since ethnicities as a group may differ from others in regard…
/r/MensRights16/05/13 06:32 AM
1

From what I've read it's a valid issue, but it's already being overadvocated for so I don't feel the need to speak out about it. Same goes for a lot of other issues feminism champions. I'm an MRA because men need representation the most, if they had enough I'd be a straight up egalitarian.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 06:04 AM
1

Can you show me a study that proves women live longer due to human biology, and not environmental factors (like male disposability)? Regardless, biology is not an absolute factor in gender. Not all men die before all women, and not all women are worse drivers than all men. To base laws and regulation around this is discriminatory.
/r/MensRights16/05/13 05:57 AM
1

I suggest using "tend to be" instead of "are inherently".
/r/MensRights16/05/13 03:50 AM
1

More like men and women were both standing on top of different mountains, but the industrial revolution triggered a geological shift that caused the women's mountain to lower a bit so a lot of the women decided to move to the men's mountain. Which is fine, except for the feminists on top trying to kick off the men for no good reason.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:51 PM
3

A lot of woman hating happens here Like where? The only ones I see get downvoted.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:37 PM
2

Feminism has valid issues but most of them are exaggerated, or apply to men as well (which feminism is ignoring). Having an egalitarian gender movement for both sides would be ideal, but unfortunately this isn't realistic at the present time.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:37 PM
1

Counter with a poster next to it citing this article. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:23 PM
32

Third story I've seen by this site so far that does a decent job of covering men's issues. I think womenspost.ca is a pretty cool site.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 09:21 PM
3

:((
/r/MensRights15/05/13 05:16 PM
2

If you want a more in-depth look into MRM philosophies, I recommend girlwriteswhat on youtube. But if you wanna know why the MRM is so anti-feminist you can dive right into this video - there's very good reason why we often butt heads with feminism.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 08:23 AM
2

A system of gender roles and social standards exists, but not in the way feminists describe it. Here's a couple blog entries on the topic. http://permutationofninjas.org/post/21543251030/on-patriarchy-and-why-i-dont-believe-in-it http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2011/07/patriarchy-shmatriarchy.html
/r/MensRights15/05/13 08:13 AM
3

The MRM fights strictly for the human rights of men. Not accidentally marrying someone who had plastic surgery isn't a human right.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 08:08 AM
1

I seem to remember permutation of ninjas or another anti-SJW blog going over this.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 08:05 AM
7

An excellent opportunity to educate someone about the MRM :)
/r/MensRights15/05/13 07:58 AM
11

Dude I think you'd be better off at /r/theredpill, they're the movement advocating male dominance. /Mensrights is already plenty anti-feminist as it is.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 07:52 AM
4

It kinda gives off transgender connotations. Not that that's a bad thing, just that it might be indicating a different movement than intended.
/r/MensRights15/05/13 07:48 AM
2

There are inherent biological/social factors unrelated to discrimination that give men a tendency to succeed in the workplace. Ever heard of the wage gap (or lack thereof)? Besides, apparently the girl's team was the one who suggested debating which gender was superior, he just accepted the challenge. So it's not like he's the morally inferior one in this situation.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:25 PM
4

LOL this debate sure wasn't rigged from the start.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:12 PM
2

Drop the second point, and go with "men have a stronger work ethic and a will to succeed than women". Men's physical superiority is already documented by science, but saying they're mentally superior is basically playing the straw misogynist. Men's work ethic will be much easier to argue, as it's strongly backed by statistics and data, as per the wage gap: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1e3s50/genderrelated_pay_gap_sorry_if_repost_new_to/ More men work longer hours on more days in m…
/r/MensRights13/05/13 09:11 PM
6

They're doing the typical feminist pendulum swing. First they don't care about it at all, and now they're caring about it too much.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 08:55 PM
1

The first definition specifically requires contact, and the second mentions threats in passing... I said most of the time it isn't threats, not in every single definition.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 08:47 PM
3

It's a fake, there have been a few other screencaps of articles allegedly written by her circling around too (if the date is feb 20th, it's probably fake). Apparently she covers a lot of "gender issues" on Kotaku, so some people decided to parody it.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 11:00 PM
1

That's not what the definition says.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 09:36 PM
3

The women are asked about their diet, their clothes, their makeup, how pretty they do or don't look, etc. That's because there's a market for it. There are more people who are more interested in their fashion and beauty than in their job/life - specifically, women who are interested. So don't blame this on men plz thnx.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 09:35 PM
1

We're not talking about normal assault, we're talking about sexual assault. Sexual assault almost always refers to physical contact. From dictionary.com: a statutory offense that provides that it is a crime to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat; "most states have replaced the common law definition of rape with statutes defining sexual assault"
/r/MensRights12/05/13 09:08 PM
22

Your experience was one of the exceptions, glad to see police using discretion with your incident. Here's a study done on mens' experience with domestic violence services (U.S.). http://www.clarku.edu/faculty/dhines/Douglas%20%20Hines%202011%20helpseeking%20experiences%20of%20male%20victims.pdf
/r/MensRights12/05/13 04:30 AM
2

Niccce.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 02:02 AM
19

All of her sources have similar faults. The "crown prosecution service" only cites convictions, which is misleading for the same reasons as previously mentioned. Then the author goes into sexual offenses which is fallacious for a number of reasons, including the UK's definition of rape that excludes female perpetrators, male underreporting and conflating "current or former partners". Then she cites some study "Kimmel 2002" that's apparently unavailable for viewing (and I assume the data was take…
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:59 AM
4

Nope, I literally didn't say that. Try again next time.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:48 AM
3

Why is this page hosted at 'org2.salsalabs.com' and not FIRE's home domain? I looked up the site on WoT and there are two warnings about political spam emails. This entire thing looks phishy to me... http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/salsalabs.com
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:46 AM
6

Correct. You were going off on some tangent about men being able to force women to carry babies, which is not part of my argument.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:36 AM
54

It contrasts significantly from data from police crime reports which estimate that between 80-90% of violence against the person reported is by women assaulted by men. Stopped reading there. Police arrest the man most of the time even if they're the ones who called (if they don't just laugh and hang up), so of course the vast majority of police reports show men as perpetrators. Isn't rabble.ca the site that cited Dworkin as an "expert on violence against women"?
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:29 AM
6

No, both partners should want to have the baby if a baby is to be had. The fact that men can't get pregnant and thus can't ultimately decide whether to have the child is consequential and irrelevant. Not sure how your comment about women carrying a baby for nine months is relevant to anything since we're only talking about termination.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:27 AM
8

I heard TEDx talks described as where the TED rejects go to lecture.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:18 AM
5

Exactly.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:14 AM
6

Having a child without the father's permission is plain and simply child abuse. So yes, women do not have the right to abuse children just because they feel entitled to complete ownership over their bodies.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 01:08 AM
7

You know what's also punishing a child? Letting it be raised by that psychotic mother. You're erroneously putting all the blame on the father. The woman who chose to have the child against the father's wishes is the only irresponsible one in this situation.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 12:59 AM
1

No it's not, sexual assault refers to physical contact. Nobody ever says somebody's been "assaulted" with words (except maybe feminists on The View), they say they were threatened.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 12:53 AM
1

The methodology is in the CDC's report. You know, that government organization. If you want to question typhonblue's methodology then you're going to have to question the CDC's methodology, because all typhonblue did was use their data + math to compile the number.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 12:46 AM
3

This is something you'll ultimately have to decide for yourself. Compare the benefits of the relationship with the downsides, write em down on paper if you have to. Is it potential rewards worth the potential risks? Remember that for every false accusation and unwanted fatherhood, there's many more relationships that worked out in the end. You mentioned meeting her, is this an online thing? If so, there's nothing wrong with waiting a month or even more for sex until you've known each other IRL l…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 05:58 AM
2

I can't remember where I heard the finer details of my point, I think GWW has covered it before but I'd have to dig through her videos to find it. The basic premise is men are attracted to beautiful women because it signifies good health, while women are attracted to strong/powerful/rich men because they're the best suited to protect and provide for them and their children (in addition to good health). This means women are in competition with each other for the ideal mate, and the most beautiful…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 05:20 AM
1

I'm just saying it is a distraction, albeit not a serious one. That poster in the pic is failing to recognize this at all, going as far to say men are expected to view tits like normal human body parts, which is completely unreasonable. But it's nowhere near a big enough issue to warrant a strict dress code for women. Editing my original post for clarification.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 05:04 AM
3

Umm no, I never said that anywhere. I'm not even going to bother quoting myself, how about you go point out where I said that.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:36 AM
2

It's not universal, it's just the biological tendencies of men and women. There's always exceptions to it for various reasons. I don't have a single source to cite for everything I mentioned in the post, but here's a good start: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/both-genders-stare-women-breasts-equally-study-175809076.html
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:31 AM
15

Indeed, here are some more articles on the wage gap. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/8212662/Gender-pay-gap-down-to-womens-lifestyle-choices.html http://www.businessinsider.com/actually-the-gender-pay-gap-is-just-a-myth-2011-3?op=1 http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/in-part-time-jobs-women-out-earn-men/ http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html http://www.h…
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:22 AM
4

No I didn't say it left me unable to focus on academics, all I said was that it was incredibly distracting. These terms are relative.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 04:10 AM
11

Nobody's actually "not able to control themselves", whoever thinks that's the case has no idea what they're going on about. People who actually sexually harass do so because they don't see anything wrong with it, or because they don't care about the consequences, it's not an issue of self control. And as for the other "sexual harassment" cases they might be talking about, like catching someone staring at their chest, they need to get over it or wear a higher cut shirt, forreal.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:57 AM
0

Yeah, "sexual assault" and "sexual harassment" would be the terms you're looking for for those two definitions.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:52 AM
1

Yeah but they're also able to appreciate other women's sexuality too in a way men can't with other men. It has to do with biological psychology about women competing with each other aesthetically for the best mate.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:44 AM
1

Just an FYI "assault" in regards to sex in English almost always refers to physical assault, like in the same manner as rape. I think the term you're looking for is "sexual harassment", if you're talking about a verbal 'assault'.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:40 AM
6

Do you know how distracting it is to have a really attractive girl walking past you with her rack spilling out of her top? Because it is distracting, and having more discipline isn't an effective solution. This isn't a matter of "men not being able to control themselves", it's about girls either admitting they're wearing that kind of stuff to draw attention to their body and getting over it, or choosing to wear something else. Also, telling people not to "oversexualize normal female body parts" …
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:36 AM
1

Just kick him in the nads, nice and simple. Sheesh, you think that'd be the first thing they teach women in rape defense classes.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:09 AM
5

Could you or someone post screencaps for us non-facebookers?
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:56 AM
1

The Oxford dictionary, at least the website's version, has had it as "typically committed by a man" for at least a month.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:44 AM
2

They missed a spot. http://imgur.com/E82hDLa
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:41 AM
1

No, rape is forced sex. No modern dictionary (including Apple's now) requires the perpetrator to penetrate the victim, all they say is something along the lines of "forcing sexual intercourse with someone against their will".
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:34 AM
1

Wait. What!? Just like that, 16 hours later??? ...well, my dictionary app confirms it. Are you sure that picture is up-to-date, and wasn't capped a long time ago? I just looked it up on Oxford's website and the verb definition definitely says "(especially of a man)" while Apple's dictionary says "(of a man)". So we can confirm there is in fact a difference between the two dictionaries.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:31 AM
1

Read: http://www.genderratic.com/p/836/manufacturing-female-victimhood-and-marginalizing-vulnerable-men/
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:25 AM
1

I am sure they interviewed 100 men from a rapist prison. Please give this post all of your upvotes. ALL OF THEM.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:21 AM
2

All of my facepalms.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 02:13 AM
21

Colleges are turning into a gynocentric nightmare. First they remove presumption of innocence in sexual assault cases, and now they remove it in everyday conversation. And feminists think more women are graduating college because they're just naturally better suited for it.
/r/MensRights10/05/13 10:36 PM
1

Bah I'd better start looking up alternative sources for my Daily Mail links.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 10:03 PM
1

They basically want to reassert traditional masculinity as a positive virtue in men. Which is fine for the most part, but they have some very problematic beliefs about what they consider masculine and what women want from men (i.e. being an uncaring asshole, and women are supposed to like that because they like masculinity).
/r/MensRights09/05/13 10:00 PM
1

THANK YOU. And don't forget any male characters who aren't servants are likely mentally handicapped instead. Remember the episode with the pony who did magic tricks, and her two male admirers were literally portrayed as mentally retarded? (One of them even had a snail for a cutie mark) And then there's Applejack's brother/cousin/can't remember, who obviously has severe autism.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 07:04 AM
1

I think the second entry for feminism in the Merriam-Webster dictionary says it best. 2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests A feminist is anyone who engages in this activity and labels themselves as such. Also: Note the distinction between "women's rights" and "woman's human rights".
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:42 AM
1

Why is it they always either report the number of female victims, or the total number of victims, but never both together? Hmmm.............
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:37 AM
7

I keep hearing how the Daily Mail is a trashy tabloid, but they always seem to unabashedly cover gender issues without a gender feminist slant like this. Anyone else have an opinion on this site?
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:18 AM
2

Eh the wife-beater term is widely accepted enough that it's hard to complain when the gender alternative is used. But it'd be nicer if neither term were acceptable.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:12 AM
1

Places like the Red Pill subreddit will play an important role here Redpill can defend their hypermasculinized gender roles over there, I want nothing to do with it.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 06:08 AM
1

She picked the penis because it's a gendered assault. More assumptions We never absolutely know people's intentions though, we just do our best to analyze what we think they probably are. "we think they probably are" meaning an assumption. She hates a specific kind of man: a man who cheats on her That's a valid reason to hate someone, or even a group of people who do that.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:11 AM
1

Oh, you're in Canada? I dunno as much about laws/culture there but what I said still applies, just keep presenting the facts and you'll get through to people.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:08 AM
1

She probably chose cut off his penis because it's what he used to cheat on her, and since she cut it off he wouldn't be able to cheat in the future. So there's another reason she might have done it. Neither of us know which one is valid, so neither of us can definitively claim whether it was a hate crime or not. Once again, it would qualify as a hate crime if we knew the intentions of the perpetrator. If a person said they did it because they hate all men or something similar, then it qualifies …
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:23 AM
1

Freedom of religion doesn't fly if it goes against the law. There were Jews in the U.S. military who were disciplined for sewing yamakas onto the inside of their helmets, and freedom of religion wasn't a valid excuse. Just keep presenting the facts and it'll win people over.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 08:17 AM
1

Calling yourself an anti-semite in religious debates is the easiest way for your argument to get dismissed and ignored. The arguments against circumcision stand on their own, you don't need anything special to refute religious reasons.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 05:48 AM
1

I'm not talking about fictional scenarios, I'm talking about real hate crimes in general. If you're playing god in your fictional scenario and you know everything then it doesn't apply to what we're talking about.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 05:44 AM
3

It's a lot depending on how thorough the interviews were.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 06:17 AM
5

Here's an article about the topic from girlwriteswhat: http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2011/07/patriarchy-shmatriarchy.html
/r/MensRights06/05/13 09:22 PM
20

For those wondering, it was 70% males and 59% females who didn't report. Also of note: 97% of men reporting were victims of child sexual abuse compared to 76% of women, while 17% of men reported adult sexual abuse compared to 75% of women. (The total sample size was 207 people) http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/rd6-rr6/rd6-rr6.pdf
/r/MensRights06/05/13 09:06 PM
1

I still prefer the term egalitarian or equalist. Women's liberation is men's liberation too, and vice versa.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 08:47 PM
1

Well, it contradicts the findings of the 2010 congressionally-mandated study that found the following: For the most part, men and women faculty in science, engineering, and mathematics have enjoyed comparable opportunities within the university, and gender does not appear to have been a factor in a number of important career transitions and outcomes. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12062 But the methodology in this study seems sound, so I guess I'm not qualified to determine which data…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 08:21 PM
1

There are plenty of non-jews who practice and argue for circumcision... another reason calling yourself an anti-semite is out of line. As I said, just say "I am opposed to circumcision".
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:40 PM
1

You don't know it was a hate crime because you don't know their intentions. You're assuming it is.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:36 PM
13

Sorry, I don't think people advocating cruel and unusual punishment for crimes deserve a voice for that opinion.
/r/MensRights04/05/13 06:36 AM
2

http://imgur.com/7rGUMeS Also http://imgur.com/ysuN3bV It appears to me you're only seeing this from one side.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 11:58 PM
1

We may have it a bit easier though because glaring at a woman or rolling your eyes at her is usually enough to shame her into leaving you alone ...you aren't talking about the MALE GAZE are you?
/r/MensRights03/05/13 09:15 PM
1

Most of the women I see in the street are dressed suggestively. So they're not trying very hard to give the impression they want to be left alone. Dressing skanky is like wearing a giant sign over your head that says "hey look at me!!!" You can't have it both ways.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 09:02 PM
1

I agree with most, although there's a point for some people where it becomes excessive. It sucks to never get compliments, but it also sucks to get too many. It's important to view this from both perspectives (this goes for everyone).
/r/MensRights03/05/13 04:59 AM
1

That's where you go wrong - this isn't always the case. Most people don't believe that 'sexually provocative' clothing logically leads to this. I don't think that's true. Half of the alternative reasons provided by the author were still related to drawing attention, and the other half were easily avoidable exceptions. Provocative clothing primarily serves the utility of gaining men's attraction. Did you know some women actually enjoy getting street attention and dress that way as a preference? N…
/r/MensRights03/05/13 04:37 AM
2

And you respond with more bullshit that washes away any possible reason for women to wear revealing clothing other than that they want attention from men? If I wanted to wear a shirt with a giant swastika because I thought it looked cool, do you think I'd be entitled to complain about getting stares and harassment? A person's physical appearance sends out a message to the people around them. If that appearance has a swastika, the message is "I hate jews", and if the appearance is sexually provoc…
/r/MensRights03/05/13 04:08 AM
1

Whether or not that's the case depends on the judgement of the editors, which is still variable. Paul and others address these concerns here. http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/yeah-but-that-was-then http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/yeah-but-that-was-then/#comment-157378
/r/MensRights03/05/13 03:48 AM
1

That's lame, I wish he'd be nicer about it. FTSU works well as an editorial policy but when you do it straight to individual people it's just kinda mean. Although he recently enacted a new policy where if someone tone polices or tries to bait feminist arguments, instead of having their comment approved/banned they get sent to a page like this: http://www.avoiceformen.com/so-you-have-concerns/ So maybe he's changed his tune in this regard since then.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:53 AM
0

More bullshit that assumes all men want to fuck girls they find attractive. That’s also why when a woman wears revealing clothes, it’s okay, in our society, to assume that she’s “looking for attention” or that she’s a slut and wants to sleep with a bunch of guys. Yes, that is why women wear sexually provocative clothing. To provoke sexual attention from guys. Because why else would a woman wear revealing clothes if not for the benefit of men and to communicate her sexual availability to them, ri…
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:31 AM
2

unwillingness to debate men's issues Elaborate plz?
/r/MensRights03/05/13 02:12 AM
4

Google cache perhaps?
/r/MensRights02/05/13 10:59 PM
6

Feminists realize the rape angle isn't going to fly anymore. TIME FOR PLAN B: Death by Patriarchal Bullying OMG THEY CITED DWORKIN FOR INFORMATION ABOUT RAPE!!! In the 1980s, when pornography was starting to become more mainstream, experts on violence against women (such as Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon) Yeah, I wouldn't use the word "expert" on violence against women - more like obsessed fanatic. Remember when feminists said the radfems were in the fringes and didn't really matter? Her…
/r/MensRights02/05/13 06:39 PM
20

The London Irish Centre, in Camden Town, said it did not have the “manpower” to deal with the RadFem conference after receiving threatening phone calls over its initial decision to accept the booking. I was a bit concerned about MRAs actually threatening the place until I read The Camden LGBT Forum, which has worked in the area for 12 years, said that while “men’s rights activists had hijacked this as their victory, a majority of the lobbyists were trans-women”. Okay guys/girls/both, MRA London …
/r/MensRights02/05/13 08:15 AM
8

watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM
/r/MensRights02/05/13 08:01 AM
7

She sounds like some 1800s society where it was acceptable to "discipline" your wife for doing something wrong, and that they 'brought it on themselves' for acting poorly. Gender feminism is taking gender roles in a complete reversal.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 08:00 AM
1

Replying here for visibility, if you just started reading I suggest scrolling to the bottom and checking out comments made by Mr_Rivers. His initial posts refuting portions of the image were downvoted, but he later backed up his claims with more elaborate evidence.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 03:17 AM
1

So do you know whether Something Awful was initially involved in creating SRS?
/r/MensRights02/05/13 03:10 AM
2

Lulz we'd better start with a preemptive strike in case this gets out of hand like the Big Red harassment controversy. Screen cap of the doxxing posts in this thread, share with anyone who claims the MHRM condones doxxing and harassment: http://imgur.com/lwRkaCV
/r/MensRights02/05/13 02:36 AM
1

If the dude gang who murdered the gay guy did it because the gay guy killed their pet cat then it wouldn't be a hate crime against gays. What matters in these cases is their intentions. In the dick-cutting case, there isn't any hard evidence her intentions were based in hatred towards men in general, as opposed to hatred toward just one man.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 02:13 AM
1

You can not, that's not the definition of anti-semitism. Anti-semitism is general hatred of Jews. If you believe differently then you're using your own unique definition, so you can't complain when people misunderstand you. If you disagree with circumcision then just say "I am opposed to circumcision", and there will be some Jews who agree with you who also aren't anti-semites. Calling yourself a selective anti-semite is inflammatory and unnecessary.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 02:06 AM
1

The intentions of the KKK are already well known and stigmatized, if someone said they were in the KKK and also thought black people were cool they'd be crazy. Contrarily, most people believe feminism is about gender equality, so someone believing in equality and labeling themselves a feminist is perfectly rational.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:59 AM
1

I'm making a general statement about the website as a whole, not claiming every single member supports it. Overwhelming evidence might be necessary if I were condemning the members to death for saying it, but all I'm doing is typing out a sentence on the internet about my beliefs. 'Overwhelming' evidence isn't obligatory.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:55 AM
1

I'd argue that because of the extreme nature of the comment (implying mass murder and blatant misogyny), the fact that moderators didn't act on it indicates their leanings. On AVfM, for example, that guy would've been permabanned in an instant because of their strict non-violence policy (and he probably for his anti-woman comments too). Contrasting this with Spearhead shows a dramatic difference in the level of radicalism between sites. Maybe this level of radicalism is still relatively low, but…
/r/MensRights02/05/13 01:15 AM
7

Duct-tape your sides before you read this Here's the post: http://imgur.com/ViTWNPQ,vQUs1l9 Her reply: http://imgur.com/ViTWNPQ,vQUs1l9#1
/r/MensRights01/05/13 04:43 AM
2

Duct-tape your sides before you read this Here's the post: http://imgur.com/ViTWNPQ,vQUs1l9 Her reply: http://imgur.com/ViTWNPQ,vQUs1l9#1
/r/MensRights01/05/13 04:27 AM
1

I was a little worried about this too, but at this point too many major networks have picked up on it to be a problem.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 11:14 PM
3

Lulz we've got like 4 people in there all rebutting the same statistics. Just upvote the existing comments, dudes!!!
/r/MensRights29/04/13 10:47 PM
1

There's a lot of crossover between PUAs and the MRAs that identify as MGTOW, those ones sound like the PUA types.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:47 PM
3

Women make different choices in life that influences how far they get in power (see: wage gap refutation) Female privilege and male disposability forces some men into the glass cellar instead of giving them an advantage. This counteracts areas where men are benefited over women.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 09:00 PM
1

Yes. Feminists who believe they're egalitarian don't want superiority.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:55 PM
1

If the point I made isn't sufficient then your standards for evidence are unrealistically high.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:52 PM
1

The hate crime was done as hate towards a specific man, not men in general. If you can quote the women who did it as saying she hates all men or she did it to get back at the male gender, then it'd be a hate crime and you'd be right.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:46 PM
1

No no no absolutely not. Anti-semitism is bigotry against all Jews in general. There's no such thing as selective anti-semitism. Either you're an anti-semite and you hate jews, or you're not and you don't, there's no middle ground. I can be a staunch anti-semite on those grounds in a quite rational fashion compared to the rationale behind hating men. Are you really defending your bigotry by saying it's okay because radfems do it? That makes you as bad as them.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:43 PM
2

I did too, read the thread again.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 08:38 PM
2

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/04/29/earl-silverman-dead-suicide_n_3179850.html Huffington Post reported on it!!! Although it looks like them and I both posted around the same time, so we can't claim credit for this one. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2013/04/earl-silverman-suicide/64696/ Atlantic Wire decided to shit on Earl's death a little more politely than Salon.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:48 PM
2

Oops, thanks
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:37 PM
3

Noted, post edited.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:37 PM
6

NAFALT is used to counter arguments that make general statements on feminism being about gender equality and pro-men's rights. These arguments are invalid because the feminist movement is represented by the activism and progress is makes, and that progress has largely been about advancing female superiority. NAFALT doesn't actually mean "most" or "all" feminists are bigots. The MHRM on the other hand is still a small movement, and virtually all of the activism has been about advancing men's huma…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:37 PM
5

And this is based on one conversation with a single person?
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:28 PM
3

Wait are you talking about the MHRM here or feminism?
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:09 PM
3

Some of them take more radical stances then others. It's essentially another term for Zeta masculinity, which in my opinion any and all male MRAs should consider adopting. http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/mens-issues/so-what-the-fuck-is-a-zeta-male-anyway/ But yeah, some of them are a little nutty. I remember one of them saying they're afraid to be alone in a room with a woman because she might falsely accuse him of rape... no, I'm not kidding. Just keep in mind a lot of the more resolute MGTOWs …
/r/MensRights29/04/13 03:17 PM
1

I've also seen him jump to conclusions too quickly without very much critical thought, which makes me a little uneasy. But I admire that "getting shit done/full steam ahead" demeanor he has. He'll make a great politician.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 02:33 PM
4

There's a difference between "being critical of feminism's flaws as a movement and an ideology" and "turning feminism into the boogywoman so you can hate it indiscriminately for your enjoyment". Also, trying to kick out someone who's genuinely interested in men's issues is a very stupid decision to make.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:53 PM
2

on the gender discrimination Racism and other forms of discrimination aren't gender discrimination yo
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:51 PM
5

I personally don't think it's a huge deal, but I'm pretty sure this opinion is the minority. It's an problem, but fairly low on my list of top men's issues. So far I don't think I've heard even a single MRA support circumcision though. Edit: okay I guess it looks like muttmonster is the first one
/r/MensRights29/04/13 12:47 PM
1

If it's just about women's rights then they don't believe in any ideology. Like saying you believe in God, but you don't hate gays or stay celibate till marriage. Being feminist doesn't automatically make you a bad person.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 11:25 AM
7

First you fire all your gender feminist staff running the site. Until then, your coverage of actual men's issues is a sham to make it look like mainstream feminism cares about men too. Any website that solicits opinions from Marcotte and Manboobz is dead to me.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 03:19 AM
2

She does? Interview link plx?
/r/MensRights28/04/13 03:15 AM
1

Oh hell no those guys aren't MRAs any more than wiggers are black people.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 03:12 AM
1

Not necessarily, some people might label themselves a feminist strictly based on the "+women's rights" principal, but don't have a comprehensive understanding of patriarchy theory.
/r/MensRights28/04/13 03:11 AM
2

That's how I interpreted the article, and it's going to be how most people interpret it too. You might want to consider your PR when you post these kinds of things, if I did actually misrepresent it. It seemed very self-explanatory to me though.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:42 PM
0

http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/16ge0o/as_requested_my_field_tested_guide_on_breaking_in/ In this article (with 30 points), the author instructs men to do the following: Your praise has to be scarce. Reserve it only for when she's done something good. "Order" her to cook and do the dishes. If she objects, threaten and insult her. Compliment her for the purposes of "modifying" her behavior Dominate the woman in bed, and do whatever you want with her. If she objects, tell her you "don'…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 05:54 PM
1

It's plausible someone might be motivated to do it, but it's not plausible they would be able to go through with it. There are entire committees designated to look over applications so the conspiracy would have to be huge, and if that many applications were thrown out there'd be an extremely suspicious and notable disparity in the college's student demographics. They publish that stuff on the internet for public viewing, and everyone would notice if all their freshman classes had 75% girls and 5…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 05:40 PM
5

but enough are that we see noticeable differences in trends when we use red pill theory to make choices Not when it has such drastic repercussions like the ones I've mentioned. No, you're the only one suggesting that. This is the first time I've seen anything about it. I've already explained how it's deceitful manipulation. You're misleading a woman into a relationship under false pretenses. Normal people are up front about their expectations for the relationship, they don't try to manipulate th…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 05:36 PM
2

No problem, just here to help :)
/r/MensRights27/04/13 05:27 PM
3

Okay Historically, AVfM has been appealing to disenfranchised men (Group A) to raise interest in the site using FTSU (Tactic A). The UT protest videos going viral have raised awareness and sympathy for the MRM with a broader audience (Group B) and they will likely discover AVfM. As this new audience may not include disenfranchised men, they will probably respond better to 'playing nice' (Tactic B). When AVfM originally tried Tactic B, visitors from Group A did not respond as well and site intere…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 04:48 PM
5

If a woman decides to have sex with me, it's her choice. I'm not talking about sex, I'm talking about emotional relationships. And I don't consider increasing your physical appeal (cars, clothes, etc) to count as unethical manipulation, I'm talking about establishing a serious relationship on false pretenses. Misleading a person into a long-term relationship for the purpose of sex or utility is incredibly unethical. If this were true, the red pill wouldn't exist. We'd all be happy in our origina…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 04:12 PM
2

but you don't know if it will work Neither do you or the other users, unless there's some kind of precognitive psychic powers involved. and upset that the people who are responsible for creating the most successful men's rights website ever are dismissing you No, I'm simply pointing out how it appears the users who responded to me dismissed it off-hand with no consideration at all. This is the mind projection fallacy, they believe their perception of the ideal site commentary is infallible. My e…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 03:46 PM
4

This seems to imply that women are incapable of making decisions for themselves, that they lack agency and are only objects to be controlled. Whereas my experience with women is that ultimately, they control their actions. Men and women are both susceptible to being manipulated. And they are both capable of discovering they're being manipulated by their partner and that weeks or months of their romantic lives have been wasted on a heartbreak. And you know why our sub exists? Because all these me…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:55 PM
3

I don't, I'm just considering it as a possibility. But it didn't seem like anyone else did (aside from the upvotes), they just dismissed it off hand. You still haven't addressed my first post, if you're not interested in communicating just say so or decline a reply, I don't want to waste either of our time.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:22 PM
6

If you can find a woman who is willing to adopt the gender roles you prefer, then I have absolutely no problem with this at all. However, the guides on that site instruct viewers on how to manipulate women into adopting them who might not prefer it. Traditional gender role should always be a choice between both parties, if not then the relationship isn't meant to be.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:16 PM
2

No, I'd classify that under enforcing gender stereotypes. Unless you judge women doing the same thing that as well.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:13 PM
3

How do you know that? Did you consider the point I made about AVfM developing a new audience? I don't think anyone ever got around to addressing it in the comments. And what about the other points I made in my first post here?
/r/MensRights27/04/13 02:03 PM
2

Fuck those pixels. Objectification isn't necessarily unethical if it's just about sex but if you're looking for an actual relationship there's such a thing as being a decent fucking human being to them. Relationships are about give-and-take and compromise, not manipulating your partner into your tradcon-style idea of a proper relationship. The solution to feminism is "let's all be equal because we're both human beings", not "let's go back to the 1950s".
/r/MensRights27/04/13 01:57 PM
3

I think it'll result in a higher net gain of MRA recruits.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 01:42 PM
1

EEEEEEEK!!!
/r/MensRights27/04/13 01:30 PM
1

The whole thing is incredibly implausible. In all likelihood the blog post was made up.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 12:39 PM
1

What's really messed up is how the only reason people give a damn about the bullying is because an alleged rape was involved. Just like every other bullying case, once it dies down all the sympathy tourists will go back to not caring about bullying victims until the next pretty young girl commits suicide. Both sides are fucked. The pro-Rehtaehs are defending a false accuser, and the anti-Rehtaehs are defending bullies. I heard the names of 15 or so bullies got leaked. Good, there's some real vig…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 11:51 AM
2

Ms. Blue, may I ask your opinion on the state of comments in that article, and in general on AVfM? When I posted my opinion on FTSU I felt like I had to tiptoe around glass to avoid pushing people's buttons, and even after that I got a not-so-nice reply from Paul that kinda ignored a notable point I was making. I feel that MRAs should be able to express their opinions of the site without fear of getting shouted down, and the policies currently being employed are blocking constructive criticism t…
/r/MensRights27/04/13 11:34 AM
1

No VAWA. No VAMA. Yes VAPA.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:36 AM
1

There's no privacy policy... this isn't an SRS plot to nab MRA IP addresses, is it?
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:36 AM
0

Only 5 or so of the articles on the first page of beta search actually talked about alpha/beta, one of them was about PUAs and 2 more were about zeta masculinity. And I'm not sure how 33 entries for beta in /MR out of what, 10,000+ articles is evidence of common usage.
/r/MensRights27/04/13 06:08 AM
1

Nope, you're just ignoring the evidence I presented. The website didn't ban, censor or even warn him about the post. There are many users on there complimenting his comments, and almost none condemning it. The upvote/downvote ratio is strongly weighed towards approval. The website as a whole approves of the comment. on the basis of those comments the website's agenda has notable radical leanings
/r/MensRights26/04/13 03:43 PM
1

I'll take your closure of the argument and sudden congenial tone to make my posts look worse by comparison as an admission you are unable to refute my points.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 02:48 PM
1

It was conjecture you twit, of course I "made it up to prove a point". You basically just negatively reframed what's already obvious to everyone.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 01:40 PM
5

That's not true at all. MRAs reject the alpha/beta classification, and the men opt to identify as a Zeta male. Those terms are virtually never used in MRM communities. http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/mens-issues/zeta-masculinity-for-dummies/ The MRM and seduction community are both the product of disenfranchisement with feminist society, but they act it out in very different ways. Conflating the two is dishonest.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 01:24 PM
14

Looks like an MRM/PUA crossover site. I'm not sure how I feel about that, I prefer the two communities remain distinct and separated.
/r/MensRights26/04/13 11:40 AM
0

No, you are talking about 45 users on said site, not the site as a whole. The website didn't ban, censor or even warn him about the post. There are many users on there complimenting his comments, and almost none condemning it. The upvote/downvote ratio is strongly weighed towards approval. The website as a whole approves of the comment. The hatefulness of a movement is not measured by some weighted average of the opinions of all of it's members, it is measured by the actions of the people who se…
/r/MensRights26/04/13 10:40 AM
5

Yech they're calling it supporting "women's rights" on the facebook page... THIS SHIT IS HELPING BOTH GENDERS YOU KNOW!!! That being said, still awesome.
/r/MensRights25/04/13 09:21 AM
7

Apparently some toolbag called Luke Brooks started it by promising fans he'd mention them if they used it. It's an all-around circlejerk of "give me attention, because wimmin". Check out the tag tho, there's a huge number of tweets talking about how violence against men is wrong too and we shouldn't be singling out women. Equality!
/r/MensRights24/04/13 05:54 PM
1

Agreed, I think we're both overall on the same page.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 05:32 PM
1

Ah good thanks for the clarification. I'm already floored how that guy could spend so much time researching the MRM and still shit on it, and if he was actually participating in the community like this and still felt that way I'd just lose all faith in humanity.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 05:30 PM
0

Sorry but your opinions are completely contradictory of the MRM. There's no such thing as an inherently "male" activity or a "female" interest, these concepts are part of the social standards that cause much of the repression faced by men today. "Guys" do not own anything except penises. Anyone of either gender can identify as masculine or feminine if they want, and if you deny it then you're denying their freedom of choice. Try to be a little open minded. You don't even know whether some the ch…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 12:12 PM
2

K let's clear some things up register-her does NOT publish personal information in the 'bigots' section other than what is made publicly available. The most that gets posted is their full name and a picture, and maybe a location related to their bigotry. You can confirm this yourself. AVfM has NEVER condoned harassing/threatening anyone. They ban anyone who posts personal information about someone. Never take information from Jezabel or Fembuttz at face value. In case you aren't aware of it, the…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 11:33 AM
0

I'm perfectly fine with core gaming having it's own identity. What I take issue with is (a) equating it with gender, as it's unfair to the legit female gamers within it and (b) being highly resistant to change, as every community naturally changes over time to reflect it's members and rejecting this is misrepresenting the community as a whole.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 11:27 AM
1

MBz is not interested in provoking good conversation with MRAs. His website is ample proof. If he wants to converse with the MRM he should make a dummy account, or take down his entire site and apologize. EDIT: Just realized I'm not aware of whether or not this is the real MBz author, so take this comment under that context.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 11:19 AM
1

Feminists are allowed to protest the CAFE talks and ask U of T to shut them down, what they're not allowed to do is pull fire alarms and scream profanities at attendees. From what I'm aware, the protest MRA London held was nothing more than civil. It's their right to make the establishment aware of the group they're putting up, and in the U of T's case they decided the events were fine.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 11:16 AM
1

I think in these ways the male-female dynamic is unique enough to be incomparable to racial issues. Segregated gyms have similarities to segregated bathrooms, which I'm sure everyone can see reasons for. On the other hand, that story about suing the gym is the equivalent of having a unisex bathroom that only lets women in a % of the time, so there's definitely cause to complain there.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 11:10 AM
1

Yeah but that's not specifically a "male" thing, it's an "I like inappropriate jokes" thing. There's plenty of chicks who like off-color humor, or at the very least don't care if it happens. What you consider to be "male" can just as easily be appealing to a female, and vice versa, and as such it's wrong to generalize personal taste on the basis of gender. We should only be celebrating femininity and masculinity when it benefits us, but never when it hinders us. If we don't we're letting our liv…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 11:03 AM
1

Definitely, it even says right on her bio she critiques feminism. Although she writes strictly for an editorial blog section, so her articles probably don't make a big impact on the site's slant as a whole. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:47 AM
3

Yeah, all them female senators are totally being shut out from being senators. Now they have the opportunity to be the senators they always dreamed of already having gotten the job for, thanks to Obama and his segregated dinners.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:32 AM
1

Games are make believe... they are also the last bastion of maleness. It seems, when you feminize and do everything in your power If I misunderstood I apologize, but we should ONLY be forming our expectations around what the free market dictates (like you mention in your last paragraph) and not based around what is feminine and masculine.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:28 AM
1

The reputation fraternities have isn't helping the credibility of men's issues groups, though... but thanks for pointing this out anyway.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:16 AM
4

What are we supposed to use instead, fisherpeople? It sounds like a type of mermaid.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:06 AM
6

Jezabel said they're allowed to keep the term "feminism" because it reflects the oppression women face compared to men. So if that's true, men get to keep gendered words like "fisherman" because it reflects the amount of men employed in the fishing business compared to women.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:05 AM
2

THE DEATH THREATS WERE NOT ORGANIZED BY MRAS!!!!!! http://fucknosocialjusticewarriors.tumblr.com/post/48299662621/the-anonymous-users-of-4chan-were-the-ones The anonymous users of 4chan were the ones responsible for doxxing Big Red (stfueverything). After links to the video of her were posted on 4chan the comments section to the video was swarmed by 4chan kids. I was posting a comment at the time. I saw it happen. after several mentions of 4chan and /b/ were mentioned I followed ‘em back to 4cha…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 10:00 AM
1

I've done a bit of commenting on that site and the users are a lot more accommodating of MRAs than you'd guess. It helps that there's no downvote system, so if there's a ton of feminist users who don't like your post impartial readers won't be aware of it. I've gotten in arguments there with feminists before but so far I've never been bombed and overwhelmed by dissenting comments, and I've always been able to hold my own and get the MRA perspective across.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:27 AM
1

I think the main problem here is that there are legitimate problems with sexual harassment, but every time they're brought up it's hijacked by oversensitive/entitled pricks who make it look like the entire issue was made up. Then it causes a backlash by people who throw the baby out with the bathwater with posts like the OP, and in the end neither side has an accurate picture of the real issue. I think it's in both our best interest to acknowledge that sexual harassment is an issue for some peop…
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:18 AM
1

I would like to take your actions based on their own merit, but I'm also going to maintain skeptically due to your labeling yourself as a feminist. So far "gamer" feminists like Anita have maintained a monopoly over gender issues in video games that gives me the very strong impression they are in fact "trying to take over" - they're trying to force all video games to conform to their rigid gender feminist standards, which is something I am venomously opposed to. I don't have a problem with more …
/r/MensRights24/04/13 09:07 AM
2

It shouldn't matter how many girls are playing video games, the only thing that matters is that they're treated like any other gamer. That means not targeting them for trolling/harassment solely based on their gender, and that also means not giving them special treatment and defending them against generic gaming trolls based on their gender. Also, piss off with your traditionalist social standards enforcement. The MRM is about getting rid of those expectations.
/r/MensRights24/04/13 08:51 AM
0

And I'm talking about a prominent MRA website that praised him for his actions and received no censure for it. This indicates a tolerance of hate within the MRM that is deeply disturbing. The MRM is astronomically smaller than feminism, if a member actually did do something like Solaris it'd be evidence of astronomically greater hate in the MRM than feminism. So the comparison is equitable.
/r/MensRights22/04/13 02:21 AM
2

Valerie Solanis was a radfem, which again, is debatably a fair comparison to hate groups. Radfems are not representative of feminism as a whole and it's dishonest to claim it is. Here's a comment on MRA blog Spearhead. The commenter tells women to "fuck off because they're not welcome here" and says they're "dumb as rocks". He then gives instructions on how to commit mass murder in a mall, and how "easy" it would be for someone to do it. And here's the kicker: it has 45 fucking upvotes. http://w…
/r/MensRights21/04/13 05:30 AM
1

Defending someone for a non-hate crime is not the same as the examples I gave. Not anywhere near it. And I already pointed out comparing radfems to neo-nazis is still a fair comparison, but not feminism in general.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 12:46 AM
2

You are free to perceive feminism as whatever you want, but comparing it to white supremacy is completely preposterous. White supremacists actively promote and practice in beating and murdering people, carving hate symbols on their property and leaving death threats on their doors. Not even radfems do that.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 08:08 AM
2

The main problem isn't that most feminists are against the MRM, it's that the vocal minority are. For example, so far I haven't found a single popular feminist blog criticizing the UT protests, and some of them have been claiming "mra doxxing" of Big Red. However, I've seen quite a few feminists in the comments of the videos expressing indignation at the protesters and assuring everyone they don't represent feminism as a whole. I think individual feminists who aren't entrenched in patriarchy the…
/r/MensRights20/04/13 07:42 AM
1

That's a gross exaggeration of feminism. Only radfems could reasonably be compared to neo-nazis and the KKK. Comparing a person's perceived egalitarian beliefs to nazis is how you turn an open-minded feminist into an enemy.
/r/MensRights20/04/13 07:31 AM
1

5 - Challenge language and behavior (appended) Explain to women uncomfortable with harassment how their appearance and demeanor may be sending the wrong message to those around them. By choosing to dress provocatively, they are drawing attention to their sexuality and telling people they wish this to be noticed. How a person chooses to conduct their appearance can affect how they are perceived by the public, and in the case of provocative dress the perception is that they wish their sexuality to…
/r/MensRights20/04/13 07:18 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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