TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

DrewFlan Archive

View 0 posts and 457 comments by DrewFlan on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

Their people are by far the most successful in America but still gotta protest against whitey's evil system holding them down. What a dumbass sentiment.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/09/21 04:17 AM
1

No one said it does. And I'm not trying to be funny, just directly quoting you to point out the hypocrisy.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 06:00 PM
1

"You can do all the mental gymnastics you want, but at the end of the day, you’re defending an abuser."
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 05:38 PM
1

Wait, he didn’t abuse her at all or he did and she just was worse? You’re going back and forth here.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 04:54 PM
1

You would think wrong then. Read the deposition.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 04:46 PM
1

Just jumping in to say that here is the entire deposition for the civil case. TLDR is that they were both abusive assholes.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 04:13 PM
-2

Try doing a modicum of research yourself instead of just parroting what you want to hear from Reddit. A judge found enough evidence to say that there were at least 12 incidents where Johnny beat her. One of them is outlined below. Depp was so drunk/high he didn't even remember kicking her until his manager told him how bad it was. Then in the deposition he described that kick, which he didn't even remember based on the texts, as a "playful tap". According to the texts between Heard, Depp, and De…
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 02:49 PM
-2

"Drug use" meaning drinking too much wine and smoking weed. Nope Further texts from Depp to Bettany, apparently referring to a flight, read: “I’m gonna properly stop the booze thing, darling … Drank all night before I picked Amber up to fly to LA, this past Sunday … Ugly, mate …. No food for days … powders … half a bottle of whiskey, a thousand red bull and vodkas, pills, 2 bottles of Champers on plane and what do you get??? … An angry, aggro Injun in a f–kin’ blackout, screaming obscenities and…
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 02:41 PM
2

Here is the link to the court documents and all the evidence, including the texts. There is only one news article that I’m aware of, that really addresses Depp’s attempts to derail her career, and specifically his texts to that effect. That is the Hollywood Reporter article, which can be found here. Depp also admitted to hitting Heard at least a dozen times. A few of them during blackout episodes he didn't even remember. According to the texts between Heard, Depp, and Depp’s assistant, Depp had …
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 02:39 PM
-2

he needs to be reinstated to all of his roles. Did you read the deposition? He ain’t innocent in all this. Amber may be a piece of shit but that doesn’t mean Johnny was the opposite. They both were largely abusive to each other.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/02/21 02:21 PM
7

"I would love to see women held to different standards, other than the superficial ones." IDK that seems pretty appropriate in my opinion. Judge people for the content of their character, not the way they look. That's a good thing, no? I mean, of course L'Oreal is proving that they're literally doing the opposite here but that's a different discussion.
/r/MensRights28/05/20 05:20 PM
-4

This subreddit has gone way downhill. This isn’t even close to belonging here.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/12/19 10:53 PM
1

This is not quality content for this sub. In what was is she trying to use the fact that she is a woman to get out of something?
/r/PussyPassDenied15/06/19 02:19 PM
1

No, I know.
/r/MensRights08/04/19 01:14 PM
-1

It really is though.
/r/MensRights06/04/19 05:29 PM
0

Sounds like you associate yourself with shitty women. That has not been my experience at all.
/r/MensRights06/04/19 05:13 PM
0

You've been doing nothing but excusing and defending women this thread. No I haven’t. I said women are allowed to have a preference, which is objectively true. Are you fine with mutilating women too since their genitals are so ugly and stinky? No. You think female genitals are ugly and stinky? Weird. If a woman prefers circumcised penises to uncircumcised penises is it just too bad for her? She has to accept guys no matter what or else she is sexist and supports circumcision by default?
/r/MensRights06/04/19 05:12 PM
-1

Not a female apologist. What I was is objectively true.
/r/MensRights06/04/19 02:31 PM
1

That’s exactly what having a preference is. What do you mean?
/r/MensRights06/04/19 02:30 PM
10

Men are responsible for perpetuating this stuff too. Maybe even moreso than women. I've never had a women tell me to "man up" but I've heard it more than a handful of times from men.
/r/MensRights05/04/19 09:06 PM
-12

Women are allowed to have a preference.
/r/MensRights05/04/19 09:04 PM
1

Is that relevant? Yes. The difference in professions helps explain the difference in earnings (aka the supposed "wage gap") Are certain degrees unavailable to women? No. I never said they weren't. That's not the discussion we're having though. Men tend to chose degrees/professions that pay higher than the degrees/professions that women tend to chose. That's an objective fact. Therefore men tend to be the higher earner in relationships meaning they tend to be the stay-at-home parent less often. T…
/r/MensRights04/04/19 01:12 PM
0

Cheeky.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 07:51 PM
1

Work ethic has zero to do with it. What degrees do men get versus women? Do the professions of the degrees men generally get pay higher than the professions of the degrees women generally get?
/r/MensRights03/04/19 07:37 PM
0

that choice has to be given by the other partner. I don't agree with that. It usually comes down to financials. The lower earning partner generally is the one who stays home. Men tend to be higher earners based on their chosen professions.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 07:11 PM
-4

ever heard of man who 'made the choice to be a stay at home dad" ? Yes. Browse /r/relationships, it's more common than you think.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 05:47 PM
-6

That it exists is irrelevant though. Yes it is. It gives a potential reason why women don't work as many hours as men. People bringing it up in a wage discussion implies that they think it should be factored into the equation somehow. No it doesn't. Full stop.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 05:45 PM
-3

But the comment doesn't say women should be getting paid for that "unpaid labor", just acknowledges that it exists. I think you're not being objective about this comment and are filling in dots on your own that aren't there.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 05:36 PM
-1

Why is this comment "retarded"? OP isn't saying women who do housework and child rearing should be paid. Just explaining the basis for the study's conclusions.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 03:46 PM
4

Seems like pretty reasonable discussion so far.
/r/MensRights03/04/19 03:42 PM
8

Where, specifically, are you seeing those posts? Just asking because I've seen dozens of threads on reddit about this and literally no one is defending her. I've seen a few on my Facebook feed and no one there is either.
/r/MensRights29/03/19 03:36 PM
-5

https://hiphopdx.com/news/id.50837/title.man-admits-to-lying-about-cardi-b-robbery
/r/MensRights29/03/19 03:29 PM
-10

Show me the article.
/r/MensRights29/03/19 03:22 PM
-9

Because it would require those men to come forward? C'mon, use some common sense here.
/r/MensRights29/03/19 03:20 PM
11

Sooo.. the trailers are pretty much the same as action movies with male leads?
/r/MensRights05/03/19 05:54 PM
1

I like how the original comment did the same thing. EDIT: In case you do want numbers: ~65% of judges are men. https://www.nawj.org/statistics/2018-us-state-court-women-judges ~75% of politicians are men. https://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/current-numbers Who, specifically, "made women the most powerful people" in your opinion?
/r/MensRights05/03/19 03:44 PM
-11

Uhh, what? No we haven't.
/r/MensRights04/03/19 06:13 PM
1

Reverse the roles, and people would be pissed at the guy but there would be no outcry at a woman who does this. Who says no one was pissed at this girl? You surely were. Why didn't you say anything?
/r/MensRights16/01/19 08:16 PM
1

Both genders have some shitty individuals. Not sure what this has to do with Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 05:43 PM
1

That’s what I said.
/r/MensRights13/01/19 05:57 PM
1

So if someone is sexually assaulted at work going to HR is not the right thing to do? If someone says the gender pay gap exists the right thing to do is to give anecdotal experiences to discredit it (rather than facts)?
/r/MensRights12/01/19 07:47 PM
-5

So if someone is sexually assaulted at work going to HR is not the right thing to do? If someone says the gender pay gap exists the right thing to do is to give anecdotal experiences to discredit it (rather than facts)?
/r/MensRights12/01/19 07:46 PM
-7

Perhaps I am right in all of those instances you linked to...
/r/MensRights12/01/19 06:12 PM
-14

To be fair there is definitely some women hate in here. I call it out whenever I see it but its not like it doesn’t happen at all. Also, IMO /r/TwoXChromosomes is not a men hating sub. I can’t speak for /r/feminism because I never go there but TwoX is overwhelmingly not about that.
/r/MensRights12/01/19 03:49 PM
1

Yes really.
/r/MensRights07/01/19 02:31 PM
2

Re-word your title, OP. Call it what it is.
/r/MensRights04/01/19 04:31 PM
16

So the victim penetrated without consenting. Seems to work just fine IMO.
/r/MensRights04/01/19 04:30 PM
2

Okay okay, relax. I used that word but I am well aware that the votes aren't stolen. It's common parlance.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 09:56 PM
4

it was created to ensure the people couldn't elect an idiot, a populist, or an obvious national security threat And it didn't work. Would a popular vote be more or less likely to prevent this from happening again? You realize that 100 million more people could have voted in Washington Weird because Washington doesn't even have a population of 100 million. but votes just literally going to the wrong candidate is an acutal election problem. If I live in Texas, why should my vote go to Trump? ​It w…
/r/MensRights03/01/19 06:07 PM
5

For the record: I voted Democrat and do not support Trump. Stop assuming shit. I fixed that for you. No you didn't. Our system has other safeguards to ensure you aren't just plowed over by New York all the time. Yeah, the Electoral College being one of them. you don't seem to care about people's individual votes being applied to the wrong candidate. No, I just don't think the Electoral College is the problem. I think voter apathy is. I don't want the Presidency to become a popularity contest bec…
/r/MensRights03/01/19 05:32 PM
10

If only everyone's vote counted. Well yeah, obviously. Corruption is not a good thing. There literally is no good reason to not utilize the popular vote for presidential elections. I don't agree with that one. The Electoral College prevents the Presidency from becoming a popularity contest and gives smaller regions a real voice. If it was only up to the popular vote candidates would campaign exclusively in 4-5 states and not care about anyone/anywhere else.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 04:50 PM
7

Absolutely. Everyone should vote.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 04:35 PM
-7

Democratic turnout was roughly the same as it has been for many elections now. It's just that Republican turnout went up significantly. The Republicans got people to come out to the poll who haven't come out to the polls in a long time (if ever). The popular vote shows these numbers. It is relevant.
/r/MensRights03/01/19 04:21 PM
34

A woman who uses every resource available to her to make the world a better place - I'd certainly call that admirable.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 10:35 PM
0

Who said women? This applies to everyone.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 04:47 PM
2

I speak only for myself, not an entire gender. Women should do what they feel is needed. I'm acknowledging that the proper thing to do is make HR aware.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 04:46 PM
13

100% agreed. I assume that's what happened here.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 04:29 PM
1

No, probably not.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 04:24 PM
-4

Have you ever worked in a corporate environment? Do you know why HR exists?
/r/MensRights27/12/18 03:20 PM
-3

Only if, after a confrontation, he's unapologetic. Nope. Nope nope nope. So much nope.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 03:18 PM
-1

The woman should tell him she's not happy about it, and he should apologize. These things get escalated way too much. No they should report it to HR, which is exactly what they did.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 03:10 PM
7

Maybe there was an adult conversation and it made the guy realize he was wrong and was going to be faced with consequences. the ladies didn’t report anything to the police. It was just a complaint registered with the law firm. What exactly do you find weird about this?
/r/MensRights27/12/18 03:10 PM
58

Or maybe he patted one of them on the bottom. That's sexual assault.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 02:31 PM
22

8) it actually happened and now proving it will be harder. That's a possibility too.
/r/MensRights27/12/18 02:31 PM
0

also, the example you gave directly supports what i originally said, she was aware of her pregnancy in the first trimester A not-insignificant amount of women have very light periods that don’t last many days. I go back to what I originally said - you don’t know a lot about the female body. There’s and entire television show dedicated to true stories of women who went full-term without even realizing they were pregnant for Christ’s sake. your comment about texas is completely moot It’s really no…
/r/MensRights18/12/18 01:33 AM
0

Tell that to my brother’s girlfriend who was two months pregnant and told if she waited another week they would have refused her for it being too far along. Perfectly healthy girl, in a relatively progressive state (California), with the man by her side supporting the decision and all the necessary reasons/desires to abort the fetus. Now imagine a girl alone in a place like Texas. What’re her chances? Especially with a ton of fake abortion clinics popping up to trick young girls until it’s too l…
/r/MensRights18/12/18 01:11 AM
0

*first trimester.
/r/MensRights18/12/18 12:58 AM
0

Yeah - you definitely don’t know a lot about the female body.
/r/MensRights17/12/18 11:55 PM
1

Who pays for the medical costs associated with the birth of the child? 100% comes from the state?
/r/MensRights17/12/18 09:35 PM
-1

What if the women doesn't want to have a child either but through no fault of her own (didn't find out about the pregnancy until too late, didn't have access to abortion clinic, abortion would have put her at risk of medical complications/death, etc.) she was forced to carry to term? Does she get to sign away the child the same way the man did? Does the man help reimburse her for any of the costs associated with having the child (hospital stay, days of work missed for birth/recovery, etc.) or do…
/r/MensRights17/12/18 06:58 PM
3

It's not that cut and dry. Sometimes women can't chose. Sometimes even if they can the process of aborting a child puts their health and life at serious risk.
/r/MensRights17/12/18 05:41 PM
2

No and I did not imply that in any way. I am of the opinion that a parent should not be awarded custody if they will (in the future) be away from their child for extended periods of time.
/r/MensRights14/12/18 04:16 PM
1

Me: “The sky is blue.” You: “Yeah but the grass is green.” Okay? That’s basically this conversation.
/r/MensRights14/12/18 03:27 PM
1

This has nothing to do with reading comprehension. I pointed out that being in the military has nothing to do with being a fit parent. Your reply had absolutely no correlation to my initial statement. Why did you even bother doing that?
/r/MensRights14/12/18 03:20 PM
2

As such, this decision was made because I was in the military, No. It was made because you have a career that will cause you to constantly be separated from your child. It happens to be the military but if you had a different career that similarly required you to be away from home for extended periods of time it'd be the same.
/r/MensRights14/12/18 03:16 PM
1

So being in the military has nothing to do with it, right?
/r/MensRights14/12/18 03:02 PM
1

the least our governmental/judicial system can do to reward that loyalty is to seek to determine IF in fact he IS a worthy parent, They very well might have done that...
/r/MensRights14/12/18 02:28 PM
2

Agreed. Serving in the military doesn't necessarily mean you're a fit male parent though. That was my point.
/r/MensRights14/12/18 02:27 PM
1

Yeah that just not true. Courts generally favor women. Being a veteran has very little to do with it.
/r/MensRights13/12/18 07:26 PM
10

Agreed.
/r/MensRights13/12/18 05:00 PM
189

What do the first 6 lines have to do with anything? Being a veteran doesn't automatically make you fit to be a parent.
/r/MensRights13/12/18 01:49 PM
-2

The main discussion should be discussing facts, not anecdotes. The top comment, and all of the subsequent comments, do not do this. That is my main point as said in my very first comment: Anecdotal experiences, for either gender, should not be used as part of the "wage gap" discussion.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 08:00 PM
-8

I'm not going to search through 200 comments and will instead assume they aren't there. Congrats, you win the minor side point argument. The larger point remains - this thread is not productive to disproving the wage gap myth. It is useless anecdotal experience.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 07:25 PM
-8

So 5 that could loosely be grouped as support vs. 8 criticizing, insulting, or questioning. And 0 citing the actual facts and statistics, which is the most important part of this discussion.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 07:18 PM
58

Agreed. That is not what I said though. When a woman says "I get paid less then men doing the same job as me" the response should be "that is atypical and can probably be explained by your specific circumstances." Now in this thread the top comment is a man saying "I get paid less than women doing the same job as me" and the responses are all saying "see, this is the problem. We all knew it."
/r/MensRights11/12/18 05:52 PM
220

Anecdotal experiences, for either gender, should not be used as part of the "wage gap" discussion.
/r/MensRights11/12/18 02:23 PM
-1

Have you come across women who specifically say it is okay for women to have a height preference and simultaneously say it is not okay for men to have a weight preference? I have not. I have seen the same Tinder screenshots of shitty individuals a million times though. I don’t think pointing out shitty people, who aren’t specifically pushing the feminist agenda, is helpful discussion in this subreddit. This group is (or should be) aimed at changing societal norms. I don’t think complaining about…
/r/MensRights08/12/18 06:18 PM
-1

I don’t consider having a height preference discrimination though. I also don’t consider having a weight preference discrimination either. If some uppity feminist wants to call me a bad person for having a weight preference I would just walk away and wouldn’t use the example of height preferences as a counterpoint.
/r/MensRights08/12/18 05:53 PM
-2

How is this a MensRights issue? Women have weight preferences too.
/r/MensRights08/12/18 03:14 PM
1

No, the 2% came out of something that cannot be even called a study. How do you figure? If that is the case than I don't think you could call a single one of these studies since they're all presented in a similar manner (as scholarly articles with documented methodology).
/r/MensRights06/12/18 09:04 PM
1

According to many of the things I've read regarding this topic so are all other numbers though. We simply cannot know what the true number is. It's somewhere between 1.5% and 90% depending on the source.
/r/MensRights06/12/18 08:58 PM
2

So it ranges from 1.5% to 90%. So based on that and the logic from /u/JaxJags904 then I think saying 3%, 50%, or basically any number for that matter, is irresponsible. We simply don't know the true statistic. We shouldn't throw numbers out there and present it as fact. Also, The 3 studies you cite are the three studies all feminists cite I believe you're just saying this without any backing. There are studies within the ones you listed that show the percentage lower than any of the 3 I linked t…
/r/MensRights06/12/18 08:46 PM
2

Do you have any studies/reports that back up that number? This report cites 3 studies and finds the percentage to be between 2 and 10 percent.
/r/MensRights06/12/18 07:23 PM
12

If you're going to call them out for being hyperbolic, don't be hyperbolic yourself.
/r/MensRights06/12/18 06:29 PM
-2

No.
/r/MensRights06/12/18 04:52 PM
1

True. Should I use DuckDuckGo instead?
/r/MensRights20/11/18 04:41 AM
-18

They know exactly who you are. Don't kid yourself.
/r/MensRights19/11/18 04:38 PM
-19

they also sell your data. So does Reddit yet you're on here. In fact, if you use the internet or a cell phone in any capacity your data is being sold.
/r/MensRights19/11/18 04:35 PM
-2

100% agree.
/r/MensRights19/11/18 04:17 PM
-78

the fuck? No it isn't.
/r/MensRights19/11/18 04:16 PM
1

Ya don’t say?
/r/MensRights19/11/18 01:07 AM
1

How’s that going for us?
/r/MensRights18/11/18 08:06 PM
-2

Wow you infer so much about a person based on so little information. Tell me more about how I think.
/r/MensRights18/11/18 08:06 PM
1

because there is some truth behind this meme. Yeah, agreed. That’s exactly what I just said. Not sure why you are being defensive towards this post since it is an obvious joke. Because I don’t think jokes belong in this subreddit.
/r/MensRights18/11/18 07:59 PM
6

It comes off as whiny. I think content in this sub should be such that it sparks a discussion between men and women and the different challenges each gender faces. While there is a kernel of truth in this post I think it is over satirical and would put any women who reads it immediately on the defensive. Putting people in that position from the get-go is not, IMO, conducive to a meaningful discussion.
/r/MensRights18/11/18 06:00 PM
14

Jesus Christ this subreddit is getting pathetic.
/r/MensRights18/11/18 02:34 PM
1

How is this a Men's Rights issue? An individual made a decision and now has to live with it. That's life.
/r/MensRights13/11/18 02:32 PM
4

Were the kids alone when he left? Possibly, yes. The facts are undetermined as of yet. The word "accused" implies uncertainty.
/r/MensRights05/11/18 06:53 PM
3

How are they painting him as a bad father? The headline is entirely objective and only states facts.
/r/MensRights05/11/18 06:20 PM
1

It's not socially acceptable for women to do that though? They do it and some men and women give them shit for it. Similarly, if men put "no flat chested women" some men and women would give us shit for it.
/r/MensRights26/10/18 05:06 PM
1

I hear about it?
/r/MensRights23/10/18 01:52 PM
2

My mom used to beat me with a wooden spoon when it was deserved. I love her to death and have no bad feelings towards her for it. Punishment isn’t a bad thing. Being a manipulative, abusive person is.
/r/MensRights09/10/18 10:53 PM
1

Since when have men been called those things for not wanting to change for a woman? The people I grew up with and know would call someone weak for changing who they are just for a woman.
/r/MensRights20/09/18 11:53 PM
1

A discrepancy in what? Criminal sentencing or tennis officiating?
/r/MensRights19/09/18 07:30 PM
1

Do you think the disparity in sentencing is sexism? No. it would be a curious reversal of how men and women are treated by, say, the criminal justice system, where it is proven that men receive harsher sentences. Agreed, that is curious.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 03:05 PM
1

The statistics in this article do not disprove my claim. They simply show men are fined more in total.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 02:20 PM
1

I did read the article. I don't care if NY Times generally has a different opinion. That is not relevant. We are discussing this individual article. The article gives total fines. It does not comment on what constitutes a penalty for men versus what constitutes a penalty for women. My statement is anecdotal based on watching a lot of tennis. In my opinion male players are allowed to rant for a solid minute or two before being given a game penalty. In my opinion women are held to a different stan…
/r/MensRights19/09/18 01:12 PM
1

Entirely untrue and quite the opposite. Men have outbursts way more frequently than women. Men are given more leniency during their outbursts. That is my opinion based on watching a lot of tennis. Do you disagree?
/r/MensRights19/09/18 01:07 PM
1

I realize that. I have no problem with Serena being given a penalty in this situation (although a male tennis player has cursed at Ramos before (another clear violation) and not gotten penalized. Different situation and way less severe of an outburst so I am also okay with no penalty there). I am talking about tennis in general. In my opinion men tend to get away with more than women. Women are held to a different standard. Multiple tennis pros, both male and female, have said the same thing.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 01:05 PM
1

How is this sexism? Because men generally are not fined for similar outbursts. It had nothing to do with who she was playing. Men are given longer leashes generally.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 12:50 AM
1

Literally everyone does it though. It’s a known thing.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 12:49 AM
1

This has been posted many times before. The data does not prove it the other way. It proves that in total men have been fined more. Does it say if men have outbursts more? Does it say if when men have outbursts they are given the same leniency as women? I watch a good amount of tennis. Anecdotally I will say that men have outbursts way more often than women. Also, IMO women are given a much shorter leash than men (e.g. a man can rant for a solid minute or two before being issued a game penalty w…
/r/MensRights19/09/18 12:48 AM
1

No. My assessment is anecdotal form watching a lot of tennis.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/09/18 02:55 PM
1

Holy fucking shit how are you missing the point so hard? DO MEN HAVE OUTBURSTS MORE OFTEN THAN WOMEN? This data shows totals, not percentages. It does not say men are penalized 4 times as often then women. It says men have been penalized 4 times more than women in total. It does not investigate WHY. Multiple professional tennis players, both men and women, have said that women and men are treated differently in tennis matches. Yes, I realize penalties are the judgement of one individual and that…
/r/PussyPassDenied17/09/18 03:01 PM
1

The data isclear: men are penalised four times as much as women are. It's misleading though. Does it say if men have outburst more often than women? I never said they don't! I said they used to get away with it! They used to. And they still do in many cases. I'll ask again, do you watch tennis?
/r/PussyPassDenied17/09/18 01:01 PM
1

Bro, that is flat out wrong. Players still do this shit today. Do you even watch tennis or are you just talking out your ass?
/r/PussyPassDenied16/09/18 02:23 PM
1

Well how are you supposed to do that? Watch the matches? This data shows totals, not percentages. Anecdotally I will say that men have outbursts wayyy more frequently than women. So basically, this data is useless and should not be used as in any arguments. Multiple male pro-tennis players have said that men are judged differently than women.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/09/18 02:57 AM
1

The data shows totals, not the percentages. Men have outburst way more often than women and multiple male tennis players have agreed that men and women are held to different standards.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/09/18 02:41 AM
1

This shows total numbers, not percentages. Annectodally men have outburst way more often. Also, men seem to get away with more. I've said far worse', McEnroe admitted. 'She's right about the guys being held to a different standard, there's no question.' John McEnroe I will admit I have said worse and not gotten penalized. James Blake I’ve regrettably said worse and I’ve never gotten a game penalty. Andy Roddick
/r/PussyPassDenied16/09/18 02:39 AM
1

How about totally false? As the BBC pointed out twice as many men as women got called out and penalized by umpires in that same tournament let alone ever in the history of tennis. That's the total number, not the percentage. I'm willing to bet that men have outbursts more often than women. Has Roddick done worse? I doubt it. Why do you doubt it? He himself said so. He's lying?
/r/MensRights13/09/18 03:30 PM
1

Serena is not the best woman tennis player of all time? It is not understandable to have an outburst on the court during a match? It was correct to take a game away from her because her coach gave her pointers from the sideline? Despite the enormous backlash Serena is getting from this children are still being led to believe Serena acted appropriately?
/r/MensRights12/09/18 11:50 PM
1

Do you disagree with me?
/r/MensRights12/09/18 11:05 PM
1

She made herself the spokeswoman and the media are endorsing it. No she didn't. You are endorsing it rather than just ignoring her. I don't give a shit about her credentials. Got it? You didn't answer my question. Is she no longer the best women tennis player of all time because of this? No it isn't. Stop putting her on a pedestal please. Not putting her on a pedestal. I've just played sports before therefore I understand that a frustrating match can lead to outbursts. It's understandable. Have …
/r/MensRights12/09/18 09:14 PM
1

It's a step back for women the more the media and WTA keep latching on to this toxic person. How do you figure? Serena is a tennis player, not the main spokeswoman for Women's Rights. I believe everyone who beleives in advancing Men's Rights focusing on her is an act of barking up the wrong tree. This is a distraction, not a discussion. Then threw it all into the toilet during the final. 95 career titles and 3 Olympic gold medals are undone by this one match? Calling the umpire a 'Thief', compla…
/r/MensRights12/09/18 08:18 PM
1

"He's never taken a game from a man because they said 'thief.' For me it blows my mind." I don't really see that as "doubling-down". She's making a relevant and somewhat true point. Men do get away with a lot worse. Retired US tennis star Andy Roddick tweeted, "I've regrettably said worse and I've never gotten a game penalty."
/r/MensRights12/09/18 07:30 PM
1

She's doubling and re--doubling down on it. Has she doubled down after the match or are you strictly referring to her behaviour on the court?
/r/MensRights12/09/18 07:18 PM
1

I agree completely. This is being blown way too far out of proportion.
/r/MensRights12/09/18 07:15 PM
1

whether everybody does it is irrelevant. I completely disagree.
/r/MensRights12/09/18 07:12 PM
1

but as long as she says she's fighting for women's rights she's somehow right. When and where did she say her outburst at the US Open was a fight for Women's Rights?
/r/MensRights12/09/18 07:07 PM
1

Holy shit this is being blown so far out of proportion its ridiculous. The fact that this subreddit is jumping all over this is a step back, IMO. She got to the position she is in on merit through her own hard work. She has consistently been a humble and gracious role model for girls and boys for over a decade. One stupid outburst in a moment of frustration during a match is not indicative of her as a person. Has no one ever played sport competitively before?
/r/MensRights12/09/18 07:05 PM
1

Then it's time to stop demonizing successful men that have a momentary lapse of judgement and bang the maid. Are you seriously saying this is comparable to an outburst on the tennis court? No one is saying her entire career is trash ... Serena is what happens when you think you are gods gift to the sport. She is NOT in the conversation for being the best ever. When people are constantly telling you how amazing you are just because you're a woman and black, why would you grow up? She clearly feel…
/r/MensRights12/09/18 03:21 PM
1

But how many times do you think the words "woman", "african-american", and "mother" HAVEN'T been used throughout the years when referring to her? By who? Men and women both use those words and it isn't Serena's fault. She doesn't control the media's narrative.
/r/MensRights12/09/18 03:14 PM
1

An asshole sticks to the bullshit and keeps defending it and that is exactly what serena did. Is it? I have not heard her address the situation publicly at all yet. If I am missing something please show me her statement.
/r/MensRights12/09/18 01:04 PM
1

I am unaware of anything Elon Musk did. I do not follow his life. Can you please explain?
/r/MensRights12/09/18 01:01 PM
1

Or, ya know, a momentary lapse of judgment due to frustration in a career that has lasted over a decade and been mostly respectful and gracious. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PA9_ICjSCts But go ahead and ignore all of that because of one single phrase she used. That’s clearly indicative of her person moreso than the countless other times she has been a true role model for millions of young girls.
/r/MensRights12/09/18 03:34 AM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/8t1lyd/comment/e17ptat I don't feel like typing it all out again. Read my reply to the other. "She can just have an abortion" is a myopic view.
/r/MensRights27/06/18 01:59 AM
3

Why is this getting downvoted? He's asking a question to try and understand how this could happen. The only way to alleviate ignorance is to inform the person, not call them an asshole for asking questions.
/r/MensRights25/06/18 02:33 PM
1

Do you really think an teacher who is having intercourse with one of her underage students should be legally entitled to child support? You're jumping down my throat when I'm literally just asking a question. I do not think men should be responsible for children they do not want. I do think they should have the option to legally and financially abdicate themselves. However, I think people grossly underestimate the severity and ease of having an abortion and/or giving birth. It's not like taking …
/r/MensRights24/06/18 03:29 PM
9

Why the fuck do people think we need female reboots of good movies? No one thinks that. This is just Hollywood trying to squeeze a buck out of dead franchises because they realize people are willing to spend money on shit movies simply because it is all women casts.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 12:35 PM
10

Possible but doubtful. No one had any interest in another rehash of the “Ocean’s” franchise. It was just Hollywood trying to squeeze a dime out of the name. Whoever they chose as director really wouldn’t have mattered much.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 12:33 PM
1

Abortion isn’t like taking out the garbage. It can be a traumatic procedure that threatens a woman’s ability to bare children later in life.
/r/MensRights23/06/18 04:33 AM
1

What does that have to do with paying taxes that fund enducation even though you do not have children of your own?
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:26 PM
1

I still don't get what you mean. What about cases on unexpected pregnancy? Neither the man or woman wanted to have a kid, but want it or not it's coming.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 06:35 PM
1

she needs to prove that the father consented to initiating the pregnancy. What do you mean by this? Prove that she wasn't raped?
/r/MensRights22/06/18 06:28 PM
1

Because life is not fair and it is a net positive to the entire population when everyone makes small sacrifices for the greater good.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 06:28 PM
0

Can you take your anti-abortion agenda somewhere else? Bruh, that is a terrible attitude. Challenging one another's opinions is what leads to progress. If everyone surrounded themselves in a bubble of like-ideas no one would ever learn.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 06:22 PM
28

The fuck kind of people is she hanging out with where she'd be rich for every time she heard this? Not saying it doesn't happen but it's not something that's openly talked about commonly. Maybe instead of posting about it on Facebook she should tell those women in person that their words and actions aren't acceptable. Public shaming and confrontation is the most effective way to make someone reflect on their actions and consider changing.
/r/MensRights07/06/18 12:10 PM
2

Fantastic idea.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 05:56 AM
2

And if a woman/man actually was sexually assaulted but through no fault of their own the person was found innocent or the case was thrown out for some reason? What then? Until someone has a objectively good solution for these instances then no, they(men and women) shouldn't.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 05:55 AM
2

Being innocent until proven guilty and being falsely accused of something you did not do are not related.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 02:05 AM
1

All people are innocent until proven guilty. How exactly does that make this a false allegation?
/r/MensRights19/05/18 01:06 PM
-7

When a woman gets her ass grabbed nowadays she cries sexual assault Why wouldn't she cry sexual assault? It is sexual assault. Just because men fail to speak up when it happens to them doesn't mean women should stay silent or downplay when it happens to them.
/r/MensRights09/05/18 09:36 AM
1

This headline is trash. There is nothing and no one stopping you/me/us from holding a rally or using hashtags.
/r/MensRights30/03/18 12:59 PM
1

to prevent that girl from being abused Maybe she deserved it.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/02/18 01:20 PM
1

This only got attention because the Establishment people on both sides can add it to the list of pseudo-legit accusations they can lump on Trump. I don't agree with this at all. People just love catching hypocrites in the act.
/r/MensRights29/12/17 10:37 PM
-6

The video solely shows panhandling as a man vs panhandling as a woman. No mention of resources or shelters for either gender. I understand they're related but why can't we keep the focus on what it was intended to be? Why do women get more from panhandling than men?
/r/MensRights12/12/17 08:50 PM
7

And her coat looked more old and used than anything he had on. Did we watch the same video? Her coat is white with no stains or rips in it. Neither of their clothes looked old.
/r/MensRights12/12/17 08:24 PM
-15

There are vastly more shelters and resources for homeless women. Men's shelters do lotteries for beds and half or more of the men end up without a bed each night. You're not wrong but what does that have to do with the video?
/r/MensRights12/12/17 08:22 PM
1

You realize they can both be in the wrong at the same time?
/r/MensRights07/12/17 02:48 PM
1

The function of an anatomy textbook is not to teach you how to care for people with mutilated body parts. I started this whole conversation talking about medical textbooks AKA books designed to teach you how to care for people. You started going on about how those are different from anatomy textbooks AKA changed the subject. But that thought causes you cognitive dissonance, so you keep ignoring it. Cognitive dissonance, kind of like when someone ignores the fact that most men are circumcised and…
/r/MensRights28/11/17 02:29 PM
1

You want medical students to think that infant boys are born without foreskins, or that they magically drop-off after a few days. Nope, I want them to be able to provide proper care to the patients they will see. To quote my own comment (that you conveniently ignored): They should show both. They should show both circumcised and uncircumcised penises. . And the very best way they can be "prepared for the patients" with mutilated penises, is to learn not mutilate them in the first place, Incorrec…
/r/MensRights28/11/17 01:03 AM
1

"Why do USA medical textbooks on Anatomy illustrate penises with part of their anatomy missing"? Incorrect. The debate is "should medical textbooks show circumcised penises?" I say yes because unfortunately that is what doctors will see in the real world so they should be prepared for it. You have yet to answer the question. You want medical students to think that infant boys are born without foreskins, or that they magically drop-off after a few days. Incorrect again. How many times do I need t…
/r/MensRights27/11/17 09:48 PM
1

Being evasive again. I did not ask if they should teach future doctors what is normal. I asked whether they should be taught to how to treat circumcised penises.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 07:49 PM
1

Stop being evasive. Answer this question: Considering that an overwhelming majority of men in the United States are circumcised, should medical textbooks teach future doctors how to treat circumcised patients or should they omit that physical condition from the curriculum?
/r/MensRights27/11/17 07:34 PM
1

One rule for MGM and another for FGM. Nope. "Prepare doctors for what they will see while in practice." I have been very consistent on that viewpoint for both genders. Typical crazy SJW political correctness. Nothing in the sentences you quoted is edited for "political correctness." Making things up when you can't come up with a rebuttal - typical immature reaction. You've totally failed to follow though with your bizarre logic, and you can't cope with my questions, so you just stick your finger…
/r/MensRights27/11/17 04:09 AM
1

Don't put words in my mouth. You're making enormous leaps here. Nothing I've said indicates my position on any incidences like these at all. Doctors should be as best prepared for handling the patients they will see while practicing. Medical schools should not have an agenda. End
/r/MensRights27/11/17 02:45 AM
1

OK. So you don't think that "medical schools" should be "against" FGM or rape, because that would be "pushing an agenda". And you don't think the World Health Organisation should be against FGM, because that would be "pushing an agenda". Nice. 1) You're using quotes when you don't need to and 2) I don't think medical schools should be for or against genital mutilation. I think they should prepare doctors for what they will see while practicing medicine.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 02:10 AM
1

I think medical schools should teach doctors how to treat a majority of patients. If a majority of patients are mutilated, teach doctors how to treat mutilated vaginas. This is where you started having a discussion that I was not having. All I ever said is medical schools should prepare students for what they will see. I agree that medical professionals should not have an agenda. They do, I realize that. But that is not the discussion. If you want to have the discussion of "should medical school…
/r/MensRights27/11/17 01:50 AM
1

There is no difference. It would be a disservice to purposefully under-prepare doctors for what they will encounter in the real world. A majority of men are circumcised, therefore doctors should prepare for handling circumcised penises.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 01:29 AM
1

Well, by your view point — then yes! Anything else would be hypocrisy. No. It would be a disservice to the general population. and that neither should be labeled "normal"? Correct? .. It should not be labeled anything subjective. . The "best medical care possible" is not normalising male genital mutilation. Correct. I want doctors to stop mutilating the genitals of infant boys for money and crazy "reasons". Me too. But that is a different discussion than one about preparing doctors for what they…
/r/MensRights27/11/17 01:22 AM
1

What does the AAP have to do with a doctor's ability to treat grown men? Genital mutilation, whether it be wrapped in culture, religion or “research” is still genital mutilation, and it needs to stop NOW. Agreed. That has nothing to do with preparing doctors for patients they will encounter in the real world. You are having a different conversation than I am.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 01:12 AM
1

That's what the text books are trying to do. No they are not. They are showing the anatomy of as it stands for an overwhelming majority of the population. They are preparing doctors for what they will see in the real world. They are not taking a stance on anything or pushing an agenda one way or the other. Shouting doesn't make you right. Calm down. You're right. Providing fact-based evidence does though. I did that. Regardless whether you like it or not a majority of men are circumcised, fact. …
/r/MensRights27/11/17 12:59 AM
0

Ohhhhhhh... so now we've changed our tune eh? LOL I have not changed my position at all. If you had bothered to ask my opinion on the matter before jumping down my throat I would have told you I am against circumcision. So let's be clear, when illustrating a "normal", "healthy", "disease free" human male body, you agree that it should show a fully intact penis, complete with foreskin; plus the body should be of a normal, healthy weight. There should be no missing limbs, ears etc. Yes. However, A…
/r/MensRights26/11/17 10:10 PM
1

It's what you are promoting that counts. I'm not promoting anything. I am stating a fact. Lying to people, and promoting genital mutilation by "normalising" it, is not "treatment". They are not lying to anyone. They are not promoting or endorsing one side or the other. Medical textbooks are preparing doctors for the conditions they are most likely to encounter in the real world. Lying to people, and promoting genital mutilation by "normalising" it, is not "treatment". No. I never said the word "…
/r/MensRights26/11/17 09:11 PM
1

Only illustrating mutilated penises in medical text books is de facto "normalisation". I can't even think of anything that is more "normalising". The people that write these textbooks honestly think that a penis with an amputated foreskin is "normal". Incorrect. I stated a fact. Do a majority of men in the United States have circumcised penises? Yes or no. That does not mean it is normal. I did not say it is normal. Normal is a subjective condition. YOU are putting words in my mouth. YOU have an…
/r/MensRights26/11/17 07:56 PM
1

Please quote the comment in which I said this is normal. You cannot. In fact, the first comment of mine you replied to started out by me saying "they aren't showing it as normal". You are a pathetic troll and detrimental to advancing MensRights.
/r/MensRights26/11/17 03:26 AM
1

Why are you avoiding the question?
/r/MensRights26/11/17 12:03 AM
1

lol you are pathetic. Are a majority of men in the United States circumcised or are they not? Notice how the answer to that question (whatever it might be) is not an opinion, someone's agenda, or a quote. It is a verifiable fact.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 11:11 PM
1

No, misunderstanding is when something thinks I quoted a child abuser when I didn't.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 10:55 PM
1

No no, this is the part where you're supposed to say your sorry for misunderstanding. Nice try skirting that though.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 10:26 PM
1

You're new to this game of pushing genital mutilation on un-concenting infants aren't you dear? I'M NOT PUSHING ANYTHING. I'M NOT IN SUPPORTING OR OPPOSING EITHER OPTION. I AM SAYING I WANT DOCTORS TO BE AS CAPABLE AS POSSIBLE OF TREATING THE GENERAL POPULATION. I ONLY POSTED THAT LINK BECAUSE OF THE ACTUAL NUMBERS, NOT ANYONE'S OPINION ON THE TOPIC. 81% OF US MEN ARE CIRCUMCISED, FACT. END OF REFERENCE. You are fucking dense, dude. You are the one with an agenda here and you're clearly not read…
/r/MensRights25/11/17 03:48 AM
1

That’s an absurd tautological argument that denies scientific reality, and clearly illustrates the cognitive dissonance at the heart of the circumcision madness. []81%](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/circumcision-rates-declining-health-risks-rising-study-says/) of US men are circumcised. I consider that an overwhelming majority. You don't? They are exactly showing it as “normal”. To them, illustrating a penis with a foreskin, would be equal to illustrating a grown man with his umbilical cord still…
/r/MensRights24/11/17 10:47 PM
-2

You should not be getting downvoted. We need to change the norm, not the way doctors approach treatment. If 90% of American men were not circumcised medical schools would adjust their teaching approach. Changing schooling is not going to change societal norms as the schooling is reactive to population trends. EDIT: Medicine should reflect society, not dictate social norms to it. Doctors need to be able to provide care to their patients to the best of their abilities. If 8 out of 10 men do not ha…
/r/MensRights23/11/17 07:07 AM
1

They aren't showing it as normal - they're showing it because an overwhelming majority of the population has that anatomy. Think a little before you react.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 07:01 AM
1

I'm talking about the morons that started NO FAP NOVEMBER Why? Why are you talking about them? Why even bother drawing attention to something so stupid?
/r/MensRights15/11/17 05:41 PM
1

What the fuck does no fap have to do with this? What are you talking about?
/r/MensRights15/11/17 04:53 PM
1

No it isn't. "Movember" is literally changing one letter and has zero indication that it implies not shaving or growing a mustache. Basically, it doesn't make any sense.
/r/MensRights15/11/17 04:52 PM
1

'No Shave November' is a better name than 'Movember.' Don't @ me.
/r/MensRights14/11/17 05:19 PM
1

Why too bad? THe internet's opinion doesn't come into play in court.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/11/17 07:59 PM
1

I bet you feel so good about yourself right now.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/11/17 04:58 PM
1

I'm a white knight because I want to fuck her?
/r/PussyPassDenied03/11/17 03:17 PM
2

Okay. Still not "all the time."
/r/MensRights02/11/17 02:49 AM
3

All the time.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 04:21 PM
1

This happens fairy infrequently, not all the time.
/r/MensRights01/11/17 02:12 PM
13

getting someone to commit sex acts against their consent? Yeah it's a bit confusing. I assume they were underage therefore couldn't give consent and this is the legal definition to classify the crime without using the term statutory.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/10/17 12:24 AM
5

Ehh, while the first sentence you made is not wrong I think you could find a better example than Harvey Weinstein to make your point. He did a lot more than just simply exposing himself.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 09:28 PM
–

I can imagine that which is why I didn't include the sentence "Dk what the hype was about".
/r/PussyPassDenied26/10/17 01:19 AM
–

Some people don't think she looks like a rat with huge fake tits and instead find her attractive. Imagine that.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/10/17 12:53 AM
8

This has nothing to do with MensRights.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 02:15 PM
2

Very helpful and insightful comment.
/r/MensRights25/10/17 02:14 PM
2

No I mean the same altercation that he jumped into because he wanted to fight the guy in green, not because he wanted to defend the girl. They would have fought even if the girl wasn't there.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/10/17 01:30 AM
–

Because why would he run across the aisle to jump in the middle of an altercation he isn't a part of? He didn't stop the fight when the male aggressor started swinging either. He also didn't say anything or try to stop the guy in the green sweater after the altercation. Wouldn't a "white knight" be trying to stop the guy in green, not the guy in blue? EDIT: Just realized you're calling the guy a blue the white knight. What the actual fuck? How stupid are you? HE WAS THE AGGRESSOR. HE WANTED TO F…
/r/PussyPassDenied25/10/17 12:05 AM
–

What white knight? What are you talking about? Some bystander stepped in when it was clear these two were just going to continue taking a beating.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/10/17 09:00 PM
6

Gotta love Jersey.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/10/17 08:59 PM
1

Harvey Weinstein is not "moderately successful" and 2) how do you coordinate all of them to come out at once? Shit even now that it's becoming public knowledge I guarantee there are still a ton of actresses who refuse to speak up.
/r/MensRights20/10/17 01:13 AM
1

But you're suggesting top-tier Hollywood actors aren't starting their own production companies (which isn't correct BTW) because of the risk. Have you considered that they simply don't want to? I'm sure a lot of them got into the business to be actors, not producers.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 06:48 PM
1

they are just too comfortable with their fame and moral high ground. You realize a vast majority of A-List actors have to work their way to the top and don't start there?
/r/MensRights19/10/17 05:57 PM
1

You're experience is also not universal.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 03:17 PM
0

Whoops. You are correct, sir.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 03:16 PM
1

I posted me too got no shame or rad fems attacking me. Terry crews was part of this whole movement and males certainly had there place. I want to see proof that "rad fems" attacked you for using the Me Too hashtag. I think you're making it up.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 03:12 PM
1

Any reason why that is? Because they will get blacklisted and lose their careers if they name names. That's a fact.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 02:01 PM
1

Show me screenshots of you getting attacked.
/r/MensRights19/10/17 01:59 PM
1

You thought wrong.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 04:43 PM
1

That is no funny. Have you ever considered filing charges for sexual assault? The onus is on you to do so, bud.
/r/MensRights15/10/17 06:43 PM
2

I think the following gif accurately encapsulates the entire ordeal: http://gifshd.com/r/de80ddd.gif
/r/PussyPassDenied14/10/17 05:03 AM
–

Some people like it rough Yes, I am aware. And when someone says stop because you're being too rough you stop.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 02:42 PM
–

The fuck are you talking about? Fondling someone's breasts and grabbing to the point of bruising are radically different things and it was never "the norm" to injure a woman during sex.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 02:38 PM
–

"Don't grab my breasts to the point of bruising" seems like a very reasonable mid-sex request in my opinion.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 09:45 PM
1

Interesting anecdote. I have seen posts in /r/relationships involving men being abused by women and the advice was for him to leave and contact authorities if she persisted.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 07:05 PM
1

I sometimes wonder how people as soft as you actually make it in this world.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 06:33 PM
3

No thank you.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 01:37 PM
1

Uhh what threads do you read in r/relationships ? That has not been my observation at all.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 01:08 PM
3

I don't think % of millionaires is a very relevant stat. Most people who make it there come from money - it's not really a stat that applies to the average person.
/r/MensRights12/10/17 02:40 AM
3

Sorry you're being downvoted. Brock Turner is a rapist and this woman is also a rapist for doing the same thing.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 09:54 PM
2

*In Australia.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/10/17 03:36 PM
0

Uhh what? Do you live under a rock?
/r/PussyPassDenied11/10/17 01:22 PM
6

What are you talking about?
/r/MensRights06/10/17 04:54 PM
6

What does clinic have to do about it...? Require signed documents to be notarized.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 04:53 PM
1

Being allowed to chose whether or not to use an outside facility for convenience is not sexual humiliation. Men have the option to go inside to a traditional, private urinal.
/r/MensRights05/10/17 05:21 AM
-5

Why is this posted here?
/r/MensRights28/09/17 11:55 AM
1

Not in Amsterdam, which this article is about.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 08:06 PM
3

You're a tool.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 04:29 AM
1

Men do have the ability to use the toilet in a proper facility. Bars, restaurants, cafes, etc still have toilets in them and can be used by men. The urinals that pop out of the ground are in addition to those toilets for convenience.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 04:34 PM
1

The urinals you found on google only pop up at night and are in addition to normal toilets in bars, cafes, restaurants, etc. Men can still go inside to use a proper facility if needed. Being pragmatic is not sexual humiliation. Peeing outside is not public humiliation. You are too sensitive.
/r/MensRights25/09/17 04:33 PM
1

Peeing outside is sexual humiliation? The victim complex is strong in you.
/r/MensRights24/09/17 05:10 PM
1

Not really. Depends where you are in the world.
/r/MensRights24/09/17 04:49 PM
1

It's not an even space though. Urinals pop out of the ground in Amsterdam at night then rescind into the ground in the morning. They cannot be used by women.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 03:43 PM
2

I don't think you know what they mean by Amsterdam urinals. They're metal urinals that pop out of the ground at night and descend back into the ground in the morning. They do not have bathrooms like that for women.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 03:41 PM
20

Why would ou ever get yourself involved in that situation? It is 100% lose-lose for anyone involved - just stay out of it.
/r/PussyPassDenied22/09/17 03:04 PM
-5

Blah blah blah blah blah. That's all I'm hearing out of you.
/r/PussyPassDenied16/09/17 03:25 PM
1

You are absolutely playing the oppression Olympics.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 04:49 PM
1

cool story, bro.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 03:21 AM
1

Why?
/r/PussyPassDenied07/09/17 02:22 AM
1

I dunno man I live in NYC and I see it quite frequently.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 02:31 PM
0

Yes.
/r/MensRights30/08/17 03:18 PM
3

We do know they're all conforming to a common identity. No we do not. Stop, just stop. You don't know a single thing about these professors except they look similar. Stop making shit up to fit a narrative. That compromises any legitimacy the MRM has.
/r/MensRights30/08/17 02:32 PM
9

Yes, let's judge people based on appearance. That's what MensRights is all about and is how we bring legitimacy to our cause. /s
/r/MensRights30/08/17 02:31 PM
3

Most people on that subreddit were upset that it became a default. It's not like they asked for it so let's not direct anger towards them for it.
/r/MensRights28/08/17 10:25 PM
-1

There is always always always doubt.
/r/MensRights25/08/17 05:05 PM
1

Uhh she is not a box-office flop. Like her or not her Trainwreck brought in $140 million on a $35 million budget.
/r/MensRights24/08/17 02:50 PM
1

Also, Dave Chappelle and Chris Rock have been in the industry doing comedy for over 50 years combined and they still have huge audiences. Amy has been on the scene for like 6 years at most.
/r/MensRights23/08/17 02:27 PM
1

The legal age of consent in Ohio is 16.
/r/MensRights05/08/17 06:34 PM
0

I can't even imagine how proud of yourself you must feel right now.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 01:00 AM
0

Also, if anything you should have pointed out the missing comma in this post: Nice one burn boy. Regardless, keep doing what you're doing home girl. It's clearly working for you.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 12:51 AM
1

I'm pretty sure people who miss the occasional comma aren't viewed as nearly as stupid as people who use the phrase "LOL!". Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
/r/MensRights28/07/17 12:47 AM
1

Please tell me where a comma belongs in this sentence: This doesn't belong in this subteddit.
/r/MensRights28/07/17 12:37 AM
1

Damn dude you really got me. You must be so smart. Typos on mobile are totally an indication of someone's intelligence.
/r/MensRights27/07/17 12:57 PM
1

Nice one burn boy.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:23 PM
1

This doesn't belong in this subteddit.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 03:21 AM
–

Forgetting Sarah Marshal
/r/MensRights21/07/17 02:25 AM
–

I like to stay so I can point out the absurdity of this subreddit in hopes that someone realizes it's not supposed to be /r/WomenGettingBeaten
/r/PussyPassDenied22/06/17 06:31 PM
–

How in the ever loving fuck is this the denial of woman who is attempting to use a pussy pass? Jesus christ this subreddit sucks.
/r/PussyPassDenied22/06/17 05:17 PM
–

There is probably no judge in America that wouldn't hit her with an assault and battery charge. lololololollol. You spend too much time on this subreddit.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/06/17 01:09 AM
–

That is not physical assault.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/06/17 06:53 PM
–

No one is downvoting you. Relax.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/06/17 03:23 PM
–

Physically assaulted? Did we watch the same video?
/r/PussyPassDenied19/06/17 12:35 PM
–

This is shitte. She did not get destroyed at all and it's not even a PPD.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/06/17 03:24 PM
3

I don't see the irony. Is it wine/whine? Seems like a bit of a stretch to call that ironic if that is it.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 02:46 PM
34

I think the correlation is glaringly obvious.
/r/MensRights17/05/17 12:45 AM
2

Brock Turner.
/r/MensRights16/05/17 08:43 PM
39

Brock Turner.
/r/MensRights16/05/17 08:42 PM
–

Shut the fuck up you fucking retard.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/05/17 12:20 PM
2

You realize she didn't run over the presiding judge, right?
/r/PussyPassDenied12/05/17 12:19 PM
1

It has been a pleasure discussing this with you. Thank you. For what it is worth I fully agree that it is very unlikely the boyfriend did anything and she is playing the victim. As for UK driving laws I admit I am pretty ignorant on the subject. I will take this as a learning experience.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 12:42 AM
3

Only on this subeditor. I feel like for the Mensright's movement to be taken seriously it is imperative that we do not embellish or create false truths in an attempt to sell a story. What this women did is horrible but OP stating something as fact that cannot actually be proven a fact is entirely unnecessary and it will create a cloud of doubt behind on any MRM claim in the future.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 09:14 PM
2

What evidence is there that he did pull the wheel? None. Therefore OP should not have stated it as fact one way or the other.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 09:07 PM
2

What evidence proves he didn't pull the wheel? Lack of evidence is not proof that something happened. EDIT: Also, I am not talking about the court's ruling here. I am talking about OP's statement claiming it is fact that he did not pull the wheel.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:45 PM
2

We can say with conviction he did nothing wrong because he starts off with that presumption No no no no no. You are mixing up the legal precedent with the comment that I initially replied to. You can say there is nothing proving he did something wrong. You cannot say he definitively did something wrong. I am speaking about this comment that states he did nothing wrong as fact. The only people who know that are the two people who were in the car. OP, me, you, or anyone else besides those two do n…
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:25 PM
11

Not pussypassdenied. She will either get a suspended sentence or spend the bare minimum amount of time in jail with a few years probation afterwards.
/r/PussyPassDenied11/05/17 07:20 PM
2

Way to switch the subject. This argument doesn't stem from a "guilty until proven innocent" mindset. It stems from OP claiming that a lack of evidence is equivalent to actual proof in the opposite direction. That is incorrect. I'll make this simple: how can OP say with conviction that the boyfriend did not interfere? He can say the guy probably didn't do it. He can say there is no evidence that he did it. Be he cannot definitively say he didn't do it.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 05:59 PM
1

Its the same damn thing. No it is not. Lack of evidence =/= proof/fact in the other direction. If I claim you murdered my family but theres 0 proof that says you murdered them, then the fact is you didnt murder them. You would make a terrible prosecutor. If there is 0 proof I murdered your family that does not make it fact that I didn't do it - it makes it unable to be proven. There is a difference. Also, unrelated but your grammar is horrendous. Work on that.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 05:18 PM
2

Judges make determination of fact No they do not. They make determination based on the evidence presented to them and reasonable doubt is enough to dismiss certain claims and/or pieces of evidence. Reasonable doubt is not fact. In this case there is zero proof that the boyfriend interfered so that claim is inadmissible. But OP is saying there is proof that he didn't interfere. How is that possible?
/r/MensRights11/05/17 04:09 PM
2

Explain to me exactly what you mean by that.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 04:07 PM
1

I sound like one of those people who doesn't fill in blanks when we are incapable of filling in blanks. This is a he said/she said situation and OP is saying definitively that she said is incorrect. He simple does not know that. There is literally no way to know that. What tangible evidence, not word, is there that he did not pull the wheel? I'll wait.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 01:53 PM
1

There is no tangible evidence that allows you to say with confidence that he did not interfere. Period.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 01:51 PM
-1

Do you have a CSI level monitor or something? How can you see who is controlling the wheel from this resolution?
/r/MensRights11/05/17 12:20 PM
-1

That doesn't mean anything. The only person who knows if those claims are true or not are her and her boyfriend. I'm all for this woman going to jail but don't fill in the blanks to make your narrative more convincing.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 12:10 PM
-17

*(he didn't). *(he'd never once touched her). *(more bullshit). You have no idea whether any of this is true or not.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 03:36 AM
1

Shut your stupid fucking face.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/04/17 12:31 PM
2954

That farmhand better earn six figures too.
/r/PussyPassDenied24/04/17 03:38 PM
7

How does this add to the discussion?
/r/MensRights12/04/17 01:17 PM
2

How did he know I was a condescending asshole from my first comment?
/r/MensRights05/04/17 12:23 PM
1

Why not? It's just downvotes.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 12:20 PM
1

Calmer than you are.
/r/MensRights05/04/17 12:20 PM
-1

You could have said "this was taken in Australia, not the USA" or "you are mistaken on the country" or something less cheeky in your original reply to me. Being condescending begets the same in return - you are not without fault here.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 09:21 PM
-4

But then how would people like you get that warm fuzzy feeling that comes from pointing out other's mistakes? I am willing to take one for the the team.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 09:10 PM
-6

Thanks Captain Obvious! I guess simple misunderstandings/oversights aren't allowed on this subreddit. Maybe we should add that to the sidebar.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 08:32 PM
-8

No.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 06:29 PM
2

Good catch.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 06:28 PM
-15

Uhh, my 5 minute Google search shows that this is flat out wrong: It is estimated that 26,120 deaths from this disease (prostate cancer) will occur this year. . It is estimated that 40,890 people (40,450 women and 440 men) will die from breast cancer this year. Source: http://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/breast-cancer/statistics http://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/prostate-cancer/statistics
/r/MensRights04/04/17 04:12 PM
0

Just going to interject here because I don't know what is going on but what is with you and the multiple accounts thing? I only have one account and it's my real name to boot. I have nothing to hide.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 09:00 PM
1

How am I trolling this sub? How am I hiding my downvotes?
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 08:29 PM
-1

Calling me out for what - assuming this was an attack on women? Considering the material that typical reaches the top of this subreddit that is an extremely reasonable assumption to make.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 08:28 PM
0

I would not be crying. I am an adult who can rationally deal with people not liking the same things I like.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 08:07 PM
-1

Your post just wasn't funny, mate. Don't go too deep on this one.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 08:07 PM
1

Gender studies isn't women exclusive I never said it was. I said this subreddit is /r/womenhate.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 07:51 PM
20

It's not. This subreddit is actually just /r/womenhate.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/04/17 07:21 PM
-2

The bill in question which would put legal repercussions to Jordan's actions seems very unlikely to ever pass. That is why I put "serious" in parenthesis.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 02:50 PM
1

Should it be illegal for me to call you an asshole or Mr. What is the purpose of this question? It is not illegal to misgender someone and as far as I know there has never been a (serious) bill to make it such. This question seems irrelevant.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 02:16 PM
1

This is not the face of "modern" feminism as you put it OP.
/r/MensRights28/03/17 02:13 PM
8

Well that is damn convenient for you.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 09:51 PM
7

Show me where i made an assumption about her contribution to the business. I'll wait.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 09:27 PM
11

No and that's why I didn't comment on the situation. See how that works?
/r/MensRights26/03/17 09:24 PM
2

http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybeast/articles/2013/04/04/roger-ebert-s-10-best-reviews-and-10-best-zingers/jcr:content/image.img.2000.jpg/1365117903916.cached.jpg
/r/MensRights26/03/17 06:41 PM
12

I've got 1.4 times more link karma and 73 times more comment karma than you. But even with that I would never brag about imaginary reddit points or pretend like that is a measure of success. Not only are you idiotic, you're pathetic as well.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 06:36 PM
35

So you're just assuming. That is not sufficient evidence. You'd make a terrible lawyer.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 06:27 PM
64

Can you prove she didn't contribute? If not maybe you should stop talking out of your ass.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 06:22 PM
5

You're the only one saying men are slaves. You seem to have very little knowledge on the situation you're posting about. That is why you're being downvoted. Blindly throwing around criticism without knowing or appreciating the context is not an good look for the Men's Rights movement. Think before you speak next time.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 06:18 PM
27

I know, that is your only point, which is the problem.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 03:08 PM
32

This is the stupidest thing I've heard so far today.
/r/MensRights26/03/17 03:04 PM
5

Being a millennial has nothing to do with it. She's just dumb and dumb people have existed in every generation.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 02:57 PM
1

I'm not letting this die. You are being a coward. Instead of answering straightforward questions about this event you are being vague and speaking in hypotheticals. This is a real world example of sexism men face and you were very critical of OP. I want to know how you would react differently in this situation. After the police talked to you would you have stayed or would you have left? If leave, what would you have done differently than OP? If stay, what do you think would happen? If you think …
/r/MensRights24/03/17 12:46 PM
1

If you knew anything about how police operate you know that's bullshit. There are quite an amount of videos out there of police asking to do a search and then arresting someone who refuses. That is flat out wrong - 4th amendment. Any video you saw on the internet the officer had reasonable suspicion to search the person/vehicle/home. A guy walking in the park being complained about by soccer moms does not count as reasonable suspicion. That would never hold up in court - you are flat out wrong. …
/r/MensRights23/03/17 08:56 PM
1

They searched his phone so they had no evidence in the slightest to suggest he was taking photographs of the children or anything like that. I guess I was giving you too much credit for being able to work that out for yourself. Yes. AFTER they investigated him they knew he wasn't a pedophile. No shit. How would they have known that BEFORE investigating him as you suggested? Sure, but normally you need a warrant or 'reasonable' suspicion to do it, I think he fucked up in this area but then they m…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 07:02 PM
-1

You keep using this word "forced." I don't think it means what you think it means. Why would they have any right to ask him to leave in the first place? Uhh, the first amendment? You can ask anyone to do anything - doesn't mean they have to do it. They asked him to leave, not forced. As to why they showed up in the first place - someone called and reported suspicious activity in the park. They came to investigate and found nothing wrong happening. Police have the right to detain people under inv…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 06:44 PM
1

That is flat out wrong. What charge would he have been arrested for? Being a man alone in the park is not illegal. They asked him to leave, not forced. Also: and I'm talking about the other people around who would be rational. You mean the ones who already know he isn't a predator?
/r/MensRights23/03/17 06:07 PM
1

It wouldn't stop the women but it would make people realise there are consequences from thinking you can go around beating people up or harassing them just on the word of deranged imbeciles. What people? Who, specifically, would see and feel those consequences? Because I highly doubt OP raising a fuss is going to affect any of those women, or "deranged imbeciles" as you call them, and those are exactly the kind of people who think this way. Not rational people like you or I who are actually capa…
/r/MensRights23/03/17 05:24 PM
3

Please answer this yes or no question: Would suing the police department stop those women from labeling him a pedophile? Edit: Also, suing and/or creating a big scene here is not how you affect change. Changing this kind of behavior/belief is accomplished by teaching our children that not every man is a predator. You cannot force people to change by simply telling them. All you can do is encourage in others (especially children) the types behaviors you want to perpetuate.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 05:09 PM
5

You sound like the ultimate internet crusader right now. Think about what you're actually saying. "Why avoid conflict when you can go out of your way and take up a ton of your time to prove a point that will go right over all of the soccer mom's heads?"
/r/MensRights23/03/17 03:19 PM
1

Ahh you're right, they wouldn't have been paying $2 million from the start. My mistake. The college had two options, act lawfully or act unlawfully. They chose to act unlawfully and were punished for doing so. This is what they did wrong. My whole point was that I'm sure if you asked anyone from the school "is it rape when a teenage boy is forced to have sex with an older man?" they would all say yes but if you then asked "would you lie about it to protect the school?" they would (and did) say y…
/r/MensRights21/03/17 01:17 AM
0

In the way in which the crime committed was irrelevant to Penn State's actions. They would have done the same thing if the crime wasn't rape. Imagine the crime wasn't rape and instead was repeated terrorist threats. Penn State has 2 choices: 1) downplay the number of threats made, maintain the schools reputation, and pay $50 thousand dollars with the potential to pay $2 million if someone investigates or 2) properly report the threats that occurred, ruin the school's reputation, and pay $2 milli…
/r/MensRights20/03/17 09:12 PM
1

Kidnapped. Kidnapped. Kidnapped. Kidnapped. Kidnapped. Kidnapped. Anyone not intellectually capable of making the decision to leave home cannot be considered a run away. A 15 year old is not intellectually capable.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 06:18 PM
1

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Still kidnapped.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 06:14 PM
7

You sound like such a bafoon and you are contradicting so many posts on this subreddit. "She's 15 now but imagine if she was 18, it'd be a different story." Okay, cool, but shes not fucking 18 so that is irrelevant. 15 year olds, legally and socially, are not capable of making the decision to run away with a lover. This is kidnapping, through and through. When a female teacher rapes a 15 year old boy would you say "well he said he is her lover so it's okay"?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 05:58 PM
2

Okay? That still doesn't address my initial issue which is why is "They [Penn State[ didn't consider boys raped on campus "real" rape victims" acceptable in the headline of this post when there is nothing in the article to suggest that? The men's rights movement should promote objectivity, not sensationalism.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 05:52 PM
1

Aren't you just assuming that the motive was financial Yes, I am. Aren't you just assuming the motive was political? And since it isn't proven one way or the other shouldn't the headline be neutral?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 05:09 PM
4

Where in the article does it say "Penn State didn't consider boys raped on campus "real" rape victims."?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 01:18 PM
2

Why was the Clery Act investigation done in the first place? Because Penn State didn't want to pay a huge fine and so under-reported crimes. They tried to avoid paying in the first place, not now.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 01:09 PM
5

All those quotes seem to indicate that makes who were raped weren't classified as such. Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure how it would suggest otherwise. That is not how I read those quotes at all. "University tries to avoid paying fine." Has nothing to do with dismissing rape victims and everything to do with saving money.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 12:19 PM
9

Where in that article does it say "Penn State does not consider boys raped on campus "real" rape victims."? They tried to get away with not paying a fine. It is all about saving money, not dismissing rape victims.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 12:18 PM
370

Misleading headlines are not productive to the men's rights movement.
/r/MensRights19/03/17 10:18 PM
-1

Not sure why this is here. Shitty people are shitty regardless of gender.
/r/MensRights19/03/17 06:46 PM
26

I live right around the corner from where this happened. He also hopped a barrier to cross the highway not in crosswalk.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 04:22 PM
-13

No, I don't. But this isn't the place for satire. Those fringe feminists will take that and run with it.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 06:05 PM
-14

Which is the point I was trying to make, Sure didn't come off that way.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:55 PM
-1

Incorrect.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:54 PM
1

Challenging an institution that has systematically oppressed people for millennia is not a bad thing, regardless of the name of the cause attached to it.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 11:09 PM
-2

Why is this a bad thing?
/r/MensRights12/03/17 03:32 PM
3

Casey Anthony drowned her daughter...
/r/MensRights10/03/17 05:36 PM
5

Then they still would have jumped in to defend their friend. That had nothing to do with her being a girl.
/r/PussyPassDenied07/03/17 09:06 PM
0

Yes. You did. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5vdehc/15_of_women_have_slept_with_their_bosses_and_37/de185u0/
/r/MensRights21/02/17 10:08 PM
0

You said explicitly that men cannot sleep with their bosses to move up. That is not a fact. That is an opinion.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 10:06 PM
-1

I won't bother - this is about a larger sentiment. Strictly stick to the facts if you want MensRighst to be taken seriously. An opinion, stated as fact, has adverse affects.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 10:03 PM
-1

Don't present things as fact if they aren't fact and/or cannot be proven as fact. That's irresponsible and has no place in serious matters.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 09:57 PM
-8

Then how can you definitely say it isn't true?
/r/MensRights21/02/17 09:52 PM
-13

You first. Since you brought it up.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 09:46 PM
-12

Yes it is.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 09:43 PM
1

Why must we be aware? I'd much rather ignore stupid than validate them by acknowledging their existence.
/r/MensRights16/02/17 09:28 PM
6

They chose to go there. Correct? They got paid to go there. Correct?
/r/PussyPassDenied15/02/17 04:57 PM
2

Yet again, another post that is not a women being denied a pussy pass. Jesus this sub has turned to shit.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/02/17 02:54 PM
–

Linda spoke in Washington - 500,000 people. Remind me again how many women and men marched in Los Angeles, NYC, Chicago, Philadelphia, Seattle, Denver, etc. You know, the places where she had zero involvement. Also, did you miss the part where I said the "organizers" of this event were irrelevant? Donna Hylton's presence at the rally means nothing.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/01/17 10:37 PM
–

They weren't cheering her. That's the point you're missing.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/01/17 06:44 AM
1

Turn away now. These comments are rubbish.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/01/17 09:15 PM
–

This is a stupid statement. 1) I bet 90% of the women who marched have no idea who Linda Sarsour is and 2) the women's march would have happened even without a "leaders" organizing it.
/r/PussyPassDenied28/01/17 09:13 PM
-1

More like "more than half the population would consider this an essential item so maybe it should get special consideration."
/r/MensRights27/01/17 09:18 PM
-1

Comments like this are why people dismiss the Men's Rights movement.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 07:11 PM
1

Good thing you pointed that out.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 07:09 PM
–

The point I was making is that taxes on the items you listed are paid by men and women. Taxes on tampons are paid exclusively by women and that is why they care about tampons, obviously. I never indicated in any of my comments whether I thought women should or should not pay a tax on tampons.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 04:00 PM
–

Okay? What point are you trying to make? Women pay taxes on those items too, just as men.
/r/MensRights27/01/17 03:18 PM
0

What narrative? I'm confused. Was it a Women's March or an Anti-Men March? Is there something stopping men from organizing a march to protest razor taxes?
/r/MensRights27/01/17 01:22 PM
2

Please explain why that is arrogant in the context of my full comment.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 11:40 PM
5

I really can't follow your train of thought here. Specifically the last two sentences. I'll go back to your original comment. It doesn't have to be men vs. women at all. So why even include the part about Selective Service in the article? The Tampon Tax is a legitimate concern and it has absolutely nothing to do with Selective Service. Using Selective Service to dismiss the Tampon Tax is a terrible argument. Why do that? Can't we listen to women's concerns without turning it into a pissing match…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 10:31 PM
3

The men in a given society care more about the women and children in their society, followed by women and children in other societies ... followed by themselves, followed by men in other societies. You are delusional if you believe this. People care about themselves first and foremost regardless of sex. If men cared more about women than they did about themselves why would there be any opposition at all to their march? This is why the feminist movement has been such a smashing success, whereas a…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 09:16 PM
2

You jumped into an argument halfway through and the question I posed was intentionally ridiculous to highlight the person I was responding to's silly logic. I agree with you.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 09:10 PM
–

The argument is that tampons are an "essential item." Whether or not you believe they are is up to you.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 09:06 PM
3

It's a simple question (that I arrived at using your own logic) which you keep dodging by bringing up the tampon tax. If men in the US protested Selective Service would that be narcissistic and geocentric considering 87 other countries currently do have required military service?
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:52 PM
2

Holy fucking shit. The Tampon Tax has absolutely zero to do with the question I asked. If men in the US protested Selective Service would that be narcissistic and geocentric considering 87 other countries currently do have required military service?
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:49 PM
1

Because they run the risk of being violently murdered if a large war breaks out. Seems pretty simple. You didn't answer the question.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:38 PM
–

The issue of men being forced to die for the state, whether in the US or elsewhere, is orders of magnitude more important than a few dollars. You keep bringing up the few dollars line. Ignore that, please and answer this simple question - why are men in the US allowed to protest the possibility of Selective Service when there are 87 countries that already require it? Again, ignore the women's issue here and just answer that question. No, that's not "human nature". It's female nature. Men care ab…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:20 PM
–

But it's incredibly narcissistic and gynocentric to be whining about a few bucks when men are legally obligated to die for the state. By that logic isn't it fairly narcissistic and geocentric of US men to protest the possibility of Selective Service when there are dozens of countries around the world that currently do require military service. There are 87 countries in the world that currently require military service for men, including 32 countries requiring it for more than 18 months. Would it…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 08:04 PM
–

One is profound institutional oppression, the other is a few dollars. See the problem? You're more worried about a few dollars than men's lives. I am not more or less worried about one or the other. They're not comparable and should not even be mentioned in the same sentence is my point. Women shouldn't be allowed to complain about the Tampon Tax until Select Service is repealed? Is that your point? I'm confused here. Do you care about equality? Are men not allowed to protest?
/r/MensRights26/01/17 07:24 PM
–

I do recognize the absurdity of Selective Service. But what does that have to do with the Tampon Tax? Why is it one or the other - can't we be against the Tampon Tax and be against Selective Service? Also, why is it women's responsibility to protest Select Service? If men were to protest against Selective Service would we face the same criticism if we didn't also include the Tampon Tax on our signage? See, I understand the major difference in weight of these two things, but I don't understand wh…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 07:11 PM
–

So they're only allowed to protest for the things they desire if they also include the things we desire? Or it's women's fault that men don't protest? The women marching didn't make it men vs. women - this article did.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 06:40 PM
–

I agree entirely. The author points out that women do in fact pay $7 more than they should due to the Tampon Tax and basically says "whoop de doo" because men have to sign up for selective service. Why does it have to be men vs. women? Why is women's gripe against an unnecessary tax invalidated by something completely unrelated? Also, I bet 95% of the people who marched last Sunday have no idea who Linda Sarsour is. Her misguided comment on Sharia Law has no bearing on the things women personall…
/r/MensRights26/01/17 06:12 PM
–

This is garbage. The author of this article didn't address Planned Parenthood at all, which was a major point of contention for many of the women who marched.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 06:03 PM
-1

Lol look at the comments, "FEMINISTS WANT THAT TOO" no they don't. Yes they do. You're confusing true feminists with SJW's. A true feminist wants equality the same way a true MRA does. It's the very vocal fringe minority that has distracted you.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 04:56 PM
19

This has absolutely nothing to do with a pussy pass.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/01/17 02:21 PM
3

Holy shit can you imagine the outrage if the genders were reversed?
/r/MensRights29/12/16 07:28 PM
1

A: Women get preferential treatment in STEM. B: In my experience that hasn't been the case. C: Well your experience isn't typical so the original statement should be taken as factual. That's the gist of my replies in this thread. Don't know how I'm putting words in people's mouths when you're the one who said "every other poster" agrees with A.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 09:52 PM
2

If I were to believe everyone (except me) that would mean no women has been discriminated against in STEM, ever. Do you truly believe that?
/r/MensRights28/12/16 09:02 PM
0

Your anecdotal evidence points one way. My anecdotal evidence points a different way. Where does that leave us?
/r/MensRights28/12/16 06:42 PM
-1

1) The comment I replied to implied it to be universally (always) true and 2) it is not an objective truth.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 05:36 PM
0

For things like applying to CS and Engineering schools girls always get preferential treatment. Sometimes? Yes. Usually? Debatable. 100% of the time? No.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 05:30 PM
0

Because she is a woman? Is it really that hard to understand?
/r/MensRights28/12/16 04:32 PM
-1

I don't think you know what "opinion" or "fact" mean either.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:59 PM
-1

Finally, thank you. The second study I find particularly interesting. Seems to suggest that the bias is inherent and not learned or forced.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:57 PM
-2

That is your opinion - mine happens to be different. Good day.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:44 PM
-1

Do you no understand the definition of "universally." It's fact that some women are treated less harsh.. All of this is undeniably true, which makes your opinion that some women don't receive preferential treatmant in tech fields objectively wrong. Some women do get preferential treatment. Yes, I acknowledge that this is true. Some women also get discriminated against. EDIT: Whether or not you believe my statement above is up to you but I am simply pointing out that I have seen both scenarios pl…
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:36 PM
-6

You're the one starting the argument. You find me peer-reviewed studies proving your point.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:32 PM
1

What, specifically, has been bollocks?
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:30 PM
1

Fair point. I too have seen "women of X" groups and the like. I've also seen a lot of minority-focused groups and courses so I don't attribute it to gender necessarily. Moreso just the reality of the situation - there are objectively less females in STEM so they tend to stick together. The fact that upper management not only condones but encourages this is a problem in your view I take it? And I still do not agree with you on the second point. Not trying to debate or fight you here, just saying …
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:30 PM
2

And there is for the comment I replied to?
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:18 PM
-20

The truth lies somewhere in the middle. It is not universally true that women always get preferential treatment in CS and engineering. It is also not universally true that they get discriminated against in those fields. But sometimes both of those scenarios do happen. To claim it is objectively true one way or the other is, frankly, stupid.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:15 PM
-10

I am an engineer. I've seen it happen both ways. Some women don't get jobs they're qualified for because their is a preconceived notion that they are not capable. EDIT: > female only email groups, What does that even mean?
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:06 PM
-51

No it is not, but okay - whatever makes you feel right.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 03:05 PM
-73

Women already receive preferential treatment in computer science and engineering because there aren't many of them. I don't find that to be true.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 02:41 PM
-1

Radical feminists are about attacking men. Radical MRA's are about attacking women. But an overwhelming majority of people lay somewhere in between and mostly* want the same thing.
/r/MensRights28/12/16 01:27 PM
-8

No.
/r/MensRights27/12/16 11:59 PM
7

Except his points are completely legitimate. Outrage over this is counterproductive.
/r/MensRights27/12/16 11:41 PM
-2

Do you know what the word accused means?
/r/MensRights24/12/16 03:16 AM
743

Fake. Proof: Am hater.
/r/PussyPassDenied14/12/16 03:37 PM
–

You thought wrong.
/r/MensRights07/12/16 01:41 AM
–

Despite what the loud, outspoken minority say true feminism is about equality the same way MRA is.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 07:16 PM
2

"These days". A man would have been laughed at for the same aspirations in past also. Women have made made progress in that area and men have not. I would never blame women though, I am happy they have made strives for themselves. I just hope we/society can continue to be progressive.
/r/MensRights24/09/16 06:38 AM
-11

It doesn't seem that way to me at all.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/08/16 08:36 PM
–

What is wrong with you?
/r/MensRights26/08/16 08:45 PM
–

He is saying that even someone who works in a university eventually needs to go grocery shopping, to the hardware store, out to eat, etc. Doesn't matter what job you have, you will need to enter the real world at some point.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 05:02 PM
–

Colleges are supposed to prepare you for the real world. "Safe spaces" don't exist in the real world. Good on the university for this move.
/r/MensRights26/08/16 02:01 PM
-3

So he didn't "get screwed over the entire show." Not at all actually.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/08/16 06:47 PM
17

I'm pretty sure the point of the show is to win $250,000.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/08/16 03:22 PM
9

So not hooking up with anyone = getting screwed over the entire show?
/r/PussyPassDenied25/08/16 12:50 PM
-18

Nailed it, Nailer.
/r/PussyPassDenied22/08/16 01:16 AM
-25

I don't like you.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/08/16 10:03 PM
-76

Just because Urban Dictionary says it doesn't make it so. No one has ever actually used the term "male tears" when talking about cum.
/r/PussyPassDenied21/08/16 09:26 PM
-1

Not even close actually.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 04:02 PM
-17

its about equal, maybe worse, No.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 01:46 PM
-29

Does this video really need to exist? I mean seriously, the only people who would ever even consider watching this are people already well aware of the shitshow that has already gone down.
/r/MensRights25/07/16 07:39 PM
24

That is not at all what I meant with my comment.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/07/16 01:00 AM
50

Posts like this lower the quality of this subreddit in my opinion.
/r/PussyPassDenied23/07/16 12:43 AM
1

Not to mention it is sexist to think that he has an obligation to stop the fight just because he is a man.
/r/PussyPassDenied13/07/16 03:04 PM
–

Yup, been saying this for years. Women call each other sluts then blame men when a women isn't allowed to express her sexuality. There are billion dollar industries dedicated to making sure women compete with each other rather than work together and the fact that women don't realize this and instead say it is all men's fault is baffling.
/r/MensRights08/07/16 04:13 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4gditw/right_on_fw_important_message_from_a_dad_to/
/r/MensRights30/04/16 04:37 PM
–

Now, I'm wondering who the fuck needs 2 mg of Xanax because I do just fine with the half I'm prescribed. Believe it or not but not everyone's body chemistry is the same as yours. Some people need a higher dosage. How the fuck are you going to get 2 mgs unless you actually really need Xanax? Lie about needing it. And if you need it, why are you going to sell it? Money.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 04:20 PM
-4

Whether or not it is controversial is irrelevant. This: she thought she'd get away with it because she was a girl is not true. Everyone thinks they can get away with things because they are on a stage. It has nothing to do with gender.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/04/16 07:38 PM
-18

This is not PPD - the exact same thing would have happened if it was a man.
/r/PussyPassDenied12/04/16 07:20 PM
0

No you didn't but okay.
/r/MensRights11/04/16 12:41 AM
0

Let's simplify this: how does stating that breast cancer gets more funding and more exposure prove that this sign is not creating a competition? And your welcome for coming up with arguments against me that you could not come up with on your own.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 09:03 PM
–

That is not making it a competition, I guess we simply disagree on this point then. which I've been very clear about and has been my only point. But you really have not been clear about this. Your initial comment says it's not a competition - okay. The next few sentences do not prove that at all though. You explain how much more publicity and funding breast cancer gets compared to prostate cancer. That is just spouting facts. If you had said "breast cancer is simply used on this sign so that the…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 08:57 PM
–

because it's potentially deadlier than a type of cancer you see PR about everywhere you look. AKA is it being compared - so your initial comment is wrong. It is being compared to breast cancer. Why breast cancer is being used as the comparison is irrelevant. It Is being used. That was my only point. How many prostate cancer awareness ads and campaigns do you see in comparison? Very little/none. Or does that not matter either? It does matter. But I am not and was never talking about whether or no…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 08:41 PM
–

I absolutely did. You said this sign isn't making a caparison of the two issues then went on to explain how much more money is spent on breast cancer awareness compared to prostate cancer awareness. In your comment you are doing the same thing the sign is doing: making it a contest. Again, why make the comparison if it supposedly doesn't matter?
/r/MensRights10/04/16 08:25 PM
–

where did you come up with that? Because it is being directly and unnecessarily compared to a women's cancer statistic? The sign could have just as easily said "3,300 men die of prostate cancer every year." Why does it matter that it is more or less than the number of women who die of breast cancer every year? Why is that even mentioned?
/r/MensRights10/04/16 08:13 PM
–

so I expect it will be bankrupt or incredibly quiet in user activity within the year. No.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 05:49 PM
–

Are you trying to make a point here? Your comment is rambling and doesn't make much sense.
/r/MensRights19/02/16 04:38 PM
4

No it doesn't.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 06:35 PM
–

For the same reason women generally tend to get what they want. See this is where I disagree and go back to my original point. No one generally gets what they want, and that's okay - that's life, it isn't fair. The problem is that there are very specific areas where each gender gets screwed regardless based on gender. Divorce court? Men always get screwed. Math and science professions? A woman's opinion is discredited immediately - women get screwed. Feminism and MR should be about creating a cu…
/r/MensRights13/08/15 03:19 PM
–

Nonetheless, we must also acknowledge the uncomfortable truth that women are in a better position to change these things. How do you figure?
/r/MensRights13/08/15 01:11 PM
–

It is not caused entirely by men but overall I would tend to agree in the sense that they're certainly not caused by women. It is a societal issue and I think us men do need to take some responsibility. Feminists and MRA shouldn't have an "us-vs-them" mentality. We need to acknowledge that both sexes are roughly equally responsible for the current state of society.
/r/MensRights12/08/15 09:07 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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