TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Edna69 Archive

View 2 posts and 230 comments by Edna69 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

The /r/nofap sub is a load of BS that has a grain of truth at its core. The small truth is that "PMO" (porn, masturbation, orgasm) in excess is bad. Just like absolutely anything in excess is bad. There are people who masturbate more-than-daily, for 30 minutes or more per session. That is not healthy physically or psychologically. People who do that should reduce the amount they masturbate and like any addiction, they made need to completely stop to beat it. /r/nofap have taken this to the extre…
/r/MGTOW05/10/14 12:38 AM
5

This subreddit is no longer about men's rights. It is about mocking perceived double standards and inventing sarcastic reasons why they occur. The amount of bond is not determined by presumed guilt. It is not about the perceived seriousness of the crime. It is all about encouraging people to appear in court when they're supposed to. To a millionaire $5000 is nothing. To a poor person $5000 is a lot. Consequently the poor person has a lot more incentive to come to court to save their $5000 than t…
/r/MensRights14/07/14 11:19 PM
-2

"Hey, I'm not being racist. I'm just stereotyping black people!" Doesn't quite pass the test, does it?
/r/MensRights03/07/14 11:50 PM
5

Sounds like a gendered Jim Crow!
/r/MensRights03/07/14 11:48 PM
38

I feel that the second one is just encouraging white knights.
/r/MensRights03/07/14 11:45 PM
7

This is a blatant Title IX violation. At the very least, girls are being provided with "important" self defence training which boys are being denied.
/r/MensRights30/06/14 02:24 AM
-14

A woman can earn my respect by sucking my dick. Because when I "invest" in something, I expect a return. That was the point being made, right?
/r/MensRights28/06/14 12:25 PM
8

Alright everyone. Ya'll gotta post this shit on every kind of social media you have under the hashtag #bringbackourboys It took months for that African girls shit to go viral so we can't complain about anything just yet. If anyone has the First Lady on Facebook could you please ask her to help out? Her tweet is what really got the girl thing going. We can make a difference here men. We can bring these boys home.
/r/MensRights28/06/14 12:21 PM
1

The confession treats guilt. Both college-bro and abusive-wife know what they do is wrong and feel bad about doing it. When they confess they get reassurance and comfort from people. That makes them feel better. So in future they associate the poor behaviour with the positive feeling and they don't feel bad about doing it ( until after). It isn't as blatant as thinking "I'll do this bad thing and then I'll confess and it will be okay". It's just that they have been trained to not feel bad about …
/r/MensRights28/06/14 12:56 AM
0

Well ordinarily there's no way someone who has been found guilty of a crime of dishonesty would be allowed to practice law. They'll probably make an exception because she's a woman, though. Victimhood has it's benefits.
/r/MensRights27/06/14 02:09 AM
1

Bitches gonna bitch.
/r/MensRights23/06/14 01:33 PM
15

Military wives are scary. They get a sense of entitlement about them. Like they are more special than anyone else because their husbands go to war. Kind of like that statement about how women suffer more than men from wars because their husbands die in them. Zz
/r/MensRights23/06/14 05:52 AM
11

The situation described is exactly the situation that the law was designed for. Provide a defence for women who murder a male partner, ostensibly as self defence, even though there was plenty of opportunity to seek help elsewhere. It wasn't designed for situations where the man was beating the woman and she lashed out in an instant and accidentally killed him. It was meant to excuse women who plotted to kill men over a period of time when they weren't in imminent danger. Any reasonable person wo…
/r/MensRights23/06/14 03:15 AM
-3

I see you've read my comments in that other subreddit. ;)
/r/MensRights22/06/14 07:28 AM
2

That narrative in inconvenient for my argument so I choose to ignore it.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:22 PM
2

And yet there was no tradition of celebrating valentines day in America until the corporations starting pushing it in the 20th century. You may as well say that cinco de mayo isn't corporatised because it has legitimate Mexican roots. Yet I doubt you'll find many Mexicans wearing rainbow sombreros and shooting tequila to celebrate.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 10:05 PM
153

What dafuq? Their profile for a rapist is essentially a description of the kind of guy that gets laid a lot in college - smart, not poor, physically fit. they're equating all college sex with rape, essentially.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 10:52 AM
3

I've been gay-for-pay before. I can be gay-for-no-pay this time.
/r/MensRights12/06/14 02:21 AM
19

In many states a man cannot have a vasectomy without his wife signing a form saying she gives permission. No wife, no vasectomy. Imagine a woman needing a man's permission to access contraception? Imagine the outrage!
/r/MensRights08/06/14 02:08 PM
5

You know that, like, there can be multiple articles about the same thing, right? And that, like, those articles will each have different URLs? Here's 5 links from a month ago (a month is longer than 6 hours): http://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/23vk85/university_of_wales_men_launch_sex_discrimination/ http://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/23yezz/men_win_sex_discrimination_pay_case_against/ http://np.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/23f0dw/male_university_workers_sue_over_alleged_sex/…
/r/MensRights08/06/14 02:31 AM
5

Yes. This is at least the 5th time this has been posted here in this sub.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 01:25 AM
4

The excuse is no vaginas.
/r/MensRights08/06/14 01:17 AM
9

Are they? Do you have details that aren't in the article?
/r/MensRights28/05/14 08:58 AM
36

What do you mean? Did you read the article? The law is genderless. Both the boy and the girl commit a crime. But only the boy is charged. That is the fault of the police or the prosecutor.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 08:43 AM
6

Theoretically, if they aren't posing a threat they should be taken prisoner. Just like any soldier that surrenders. Theoretically.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 11:18 AM
17

Yes. Any physically fit adult male in a war zone is classified as a combatant and is therefore not a civilian. Therefore, when children are counted separately, the only male deaths that can be counted as civilian deaths are men who are handicapped or very old.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 03:59 AM
5

Well I think if women are feeling ill because of their period they could take regular sick leave. But I think if you're going to make a blanket " I cannot work for two days every month" then that leave must be unpaid.
/r/MensRights21/05/14 03:51 AM
0

Eew but that's dirty and yucky! As a woman I should be paid just as much to work in a comfortable office. /s
/r/MensRights19/05/14 12:10 AM
1

No. That may influence the decision, especially if the person is a citizen of the country doing the extraditing. But there is not fundamental principle which says it must be a crime in both countries in order to extradite.
/r/MensRights17/05/14 12:08 PM
-3

Provided you aren't deliberately targeting a person because they're married, sure. I mean if you're not raping them, they consented. That's their choice to cheat on their partner.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 09:39 AM
-1

She can't impose restrictions. She can ask him not to, and she can impose consequences if he does. But he is fundamentally his own person who chooses to either respect his wife's request or not. Blame for the breach of trust lies with him and him alone.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 06:02 AM
1

I'm not excusing cheating. Responsibility lies with the person doing the cheating, not the person they are having sex with.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 06:00 AM
-6

I don't know what culture you are from so maybe it is normal for you to make judgments about other people to their face. But in many cultures what you did would be considered very rude. Sure, it may not be sexist and that was the wrong thing to accuse you of. What she should have said was "mind your own business, asshole".
/r/MensRights13/05/14 04:41 AM
-13

The boss's wife has no right to "own" her husband in the same way that no man "owns" his wife. Two people can choose to be in a monogamous relationship but it is up to each of them to keep their word. It is unreasonable to demand other potential sexual partners help to enforce it.
/r/MensRights13/05/14 04:37 AM
-1

Wait what? The NFL has never had an openly gay player? I'm sorry but this is 2014. It's just mind boggling. I thought Australia was backwards but holy shit.
/r/MensRights11/05/14 11:21 AM
2

You can't say paki anymore?
/r/MensRights11/05/14 11:07 AM
0

That anytime concern is shown for a female or females it is met with cries of oppression of men. The complaints are always full of conjecture like "if it was 200 boys kidnapped and sold no one would care" or false equivalences like "well boys have X problem and no one says anything". 200 girls were kidnapped and sold. That is bad by any measure. If 200 boys were kidnapped and sold, would the response be the same? Maybe, but who knows? Are there other issues on a seemingly equal scale that effect…
/r/MensRights11/05/14 12:33 AM
7

Is... Is that an actual quote?
/r/MensRights09/05/14 01:39 PM
-5

And people wonder why the MRM isn't taken seriously.
/r/MensRights09/05/14 01:30 PM
6

I identify as female.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 03:46 AM
2

Uh... You don't think it's possible that women in that age group are being impregnated by men outside of that age group?
/r/MensRights07/05/14 08:45 AM
0

Can we stop it with the posts that assume what the situation would be if genders were reversed? Did anyone ask for a men's gamer group to be created? No? Then stop complaining about what you assume the response to such a request will be.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 02:10 AM
4

That poor woman. She earns only 75c in the dollar and the men in her life won't share any of their $1.25. Feminism warned us of the oppression that all women face because of patriarchy and no one listened. Now this poor woman might go to jail. /s
/r/MensRights06/05/14 05:14 AM
56

He's a boy therefore he's expendable. I'm more worried about the mother. What awful things has the patriarchy done to her to make her stop conforming to social norms? /s
/r/MensRights04/05/14 11:08 AM
3

Why didn't the police charge him, then. Are you saying the university influenced the police?
/r/MensRights02/05/14 01:50 AM
7

Sure, there are circumstances where "check your privilege" might be okay. Say if a white girl said that racism isn't a problem anymore. Or if a rich kid said it was easy to afford college - just get your parents to pay for it. Yet in both those examples, you didn't need to counter the statement with "check your privilege". You could have easily refuted the statement by pointing out that people do still experience racism, and that not everyone's parents can afford college. But I'd excuse the use …
/r/MensRights01/05/14 01:11 PM
10

And that would be totally fine for you as an adult to choose to have a cosmetic surgery on your penis.
/r/MensRights01/05/14 10:35 AM
14

So he hasn't actually refuted the concept of "check your privilege" at all. All he has done is say "Guys, I'm one of you! I come from an oppressed background too!" He is part of the problem. He is claiming he is not privileged and that his opinion should count because his grandparents were oppressed. He grew up in what he admits was a reasonably affluent home. Certainly affluent enough to send their son to a highly regarded University. Is that not a kind of privilege? Surely the only way to deal…
/r/MensRights01/05/14 07:45 AM
2

You've been mislead. That may be how some french people choose to shower but it is not because of the cost or shortage of water.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 11:45 AM
6

Only when using a condom. Certainly not for masturbation or bareback sex. Anal is obviously a different story.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 11:43 AM
3

/r/thathappened
/r/MensRights30/04/14 11:40 AM
1

If he didn't consent then sure. Although I'm wondering how sex can occur if neither participant consents. An interesting legal question to be sure. But the mere fact that someone is drunk does not necessarily they don't consent. So just because both participants are drunk does not mean that both are either guilty or innocent of rape.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 12:29 PM
1

And none of that means that being drunk is a defence. You're talking about sentencing. By that stage a finding of guilt has been made. i.e. There was no defence.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 12:26 PM
1

Generally speaking, being drunk is not a defence to any crime
/r/MensRights29/04/14 05:38 AM
4

Many feminists would ban men having sex with women. A not insignificant portion of feminists believe that it is rape any time a penis penetrates a vagina no matter what the owner of that vagina thinks about it.
/r/MensRights29/04/14 01:58 AM
1

Go for it mate. I wouldn't make a big thing about you being male on the flyer. But don't try to hide it, either. It's a legitimate job to do and I don't see why anyone would criticize you for it. There's certainly nothing wrong with putting up a flyer.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 02:43 PM
2

What does criticism of a college party have to do with Men's Rights? Just askin.
/r/MensRights27/04/14 02:41 PM
5

Don't give them the views by linking to it or watching it.
/r/MensRights26/04/14 12:22 PM
31

Are you sure you weren't banned because of the high quality of your contribution?
/r/MensRights21/04/14 06:19 AM
5

Arousal is not the same as consent. Many women's vaginas become lubricated when they are raped, yet no one says that they must have wanted it because they were aroused. You're effectively saying that if a man finds a woman attractive then he wants to have sex with her and automatically has consented to sex if she wants it.
/r/MensRights21/04/14 02:34 AM
1

I don't know? I doubt it. But if so, I'd happily support the females' request to be paid the same as colleagues in the same pay grade.
/r/MensRights20/04/14 04:16 AM
4

But don't you understand? If a man denies being a rapist he must be a rapist! Only a rapist would lie about that!
/r/MensRights19/04/14 10:42 AM
7

This is a repost so ill comment here what I commented in the original. The university classified both types if workers as pay grade 3. Consequently they should both be paid at the grade 3 rate. If both jobs aren't the same and one should be paid more than the other then they should have been classified into different pay grades. These men have every right to demand the pay they are owed - the same as what other grade 3 employees are getting.
/r/MensRights19/04/14 10:28 AM
3

Mate you just doxxed yourself by posting a link to your article. That in itself is reason enough to delete this post because it is against the rules. But seriously, do as everyone is saying and delete the post. You don't want them to have anything on you. People are afraid of the internet and as soon as the other side say you were posting about them on the internet everyone's going to think you are crazy.
/r/MensRights18/04/14 11:26 AM
7

Not sure if you've ever worked in a large organisation like a university or government department before, but they often classify all the different roles into pay grades. Employees doing roles in the same pay grade are meant to be payed the same. That's what the employee agreement says. If the university in this case thought that the female dominated roles were worth more than the male dominated roles then it should have classified them into pay grades accordingly. Either make the females grade …
/r/MensRights18/04/14 11:09 AM
3

You know why it seems like being rude is normal? It's because you're rude to everyone so they're rude back. In turn, you continue being rude.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 01:36 AM
9

You don't perceive the war on "non-PC" expression to be censorship. That doesn't mean it isn't. It may be a good thing that non-PC expression is censored. But that doesn't mean it isn't censorship. By definition, the removal of posts and comments because of their content is censorship.
/r/MensRights17/04/14 01:25 AM
17

By recording the bullies and therefore producing evidence of bullying, the student is producing evidence that the principal is not doing his job. That is why the principal blames the student. You can imagine the scenario which led to the student feeling the need to record in the first place. The school would have been denying that the bullying was taking place. Because if you have a no tolerance policy for bullying, it looks bad if people are reporting bullying. So you say "no no that can't be t…
/r/MensRights16/04/14 03:35 AM
2

This is just a bandaid solution for shitty police work. Months of investigation and they still don't have a suspect.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 02:49 AM
1

Unfortunately there is no easy way out of this for the boys involved. They must take the test. If they don't, they will be targeted by classmates as having something to hide and being a rapist. They will be ostracised. That is hard enough to deal with for an adult, let alone a school child. I hope there are counsellors on hand to help boys deal with this difficulty if it does arise.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 02:48 AM
3

Are these boys' parents being asked to give their consent? Because as far as I an aware, school children cannot give such consent themselves. "Don't worry kid. There's nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide." Yeah, right. Because it's not at all possible that when swabbing 500 boys that samples get mixed up, or even worse that the perpetrator manages to switch samples to give someone else the blame.
/r/MensRights15/04/14 02:45 AM
5

I think any perceived lack of aptitude for science among females is due solely to a lack of interest and participation in it at high school. There is no biological reason why females should not be just as good at and interested in science as males. It is purely societal pressure that says that females should not do science. If girls don't do science at a high level in high school then even if they decide to study it at college they will be behind and have the perception that they don't have the …
/r/MensRights12/04/14 10:57 AM
1

If it's erect it's implied consent, right?
/r/MensRights11/04/14 11:19 AM
1

Yeah man. Three times. I don't go to that beach any more which is a shame because it is real nice.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 10:24 AM
5

It was more than public masturbation. I did not simply see these people hiding in the bushes while they pleasured themselves. They jumped out from the bushes deliberately to get my attention, blocking my path and looked at me while masturbating. It is not just a matter of me disliking what I saw. I feared that they may attempt to ejaculate onto me, and was disgusted that they were taking sexual pleasure from my presence. Neither of those is likely to be dangerous to me, and yet I most definitely…
/r/MensRights11/04/14 09:33 AM
5

Your reasoning is faulty. A regular assault does not require a physical attack, just the threat of one. I think it follows that a sexual assault does not require sexual contact but only the treat of it. A person masturbating at you with reasonable proximity should be considered a sexual assault IMO because you can have the belief that there will be sexual contact.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 02:23 AM
15

"This concept does not align with my worldview, therefore it is insane." Pretty clear evidence of privilege if you ask me.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 01:03 AM
5

Men have jumped out of the bushes at the beach and masturbated at me. There was no physical contact, but I did think it was gross. Was I sexually assaulted? I suspect that's the sort of thing they count as a sexual assault.
/r/MensRights11/04/14 12:16 AM
3

You've obviously never been to Australia then. There's a big push to get girls into "blue collar" and military jobs. Blue collar jobs are where the big money is over here - in coal and iron ore mines. And the military will actually pay for civilian women to have a personal trainer so they can get fit enough to pass the physical test and join the military.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 05:11 AM
7

I think the point is though that if someone suggested in say a STEM field that they should hire more women, and a man responded that "of course it's mostly men here, it's STEM" then that man would be criticised. Rightly or wrongly. If gender equalisation is expected in one field it should be expected in all fields, regardless of which gender is in the majority.
/r/MensRights09/04/14 12:01 AM
29

Or the fact that at the end of the film, Rose makes Jack get into the water and die even though there was enough room on that floating thing for both of them.
/r/MensRights07/04/14 06:18 AM
3

Did you have sex with her or not?
/r/MensRights05/04/14 09:52 PM
1

How can Medicare be sold? It spends money giving people health care. It has no source of income.
/r/MensRights01/04/14 11:19 PM
-1

So basically you're saying you are unable to have an intelligent discussion and instead you feebly attempt to make fun of people. I understand.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 06:58 AM
-1

I note you refuse to address the part of my post that was actually on topic.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 06:48 AM
-1

You're talking about a legal system that allows the South Park style "he's coming right for us" defence for shooting an innocent teenager (as long as he's black). And I suggest you have a read of that Supreme Court decision. It isn't saying what you think it is. It says you can't bring up new evidence in an appeal against the severity of a sentence. It just so happens that in this case it was a tough upbringing, but the ruling applies equally to any sort of new evidence. It says nothing about us…
/r/MensRights29/03/14 06:39 AM
3

I'd be interested to know how a US Supreme Court decision is relevant to a crime committed in Australia.
/r/MensRights29/03/14 06:14 AM
1

Hmm I'm pretty sure if your daughters are at risk of getting raped by your sons then you have a problem.
/r/MensRights13/03/14 10:20 AM
1

Only if the "victim" is under 18. An adult can fuck who they want.
/r/MensRights08/03/14 03:31 AM
3

The way they get around this is by advertising for applicants who can speak (whatever ethnicity of the restaurant is) fluently. Ostensibly it's because some of the other staff, owners or customers have trouble with English. In reality they want someone of a particular race and the chances of someone not of that race being "fluent" is very low.
/r/MensRights07/03/14 08:51 AM
9

Unless there is a constitutional ban on conscription, you are not safe from the draft. It would take barely a few hours for the government of your country to make a law to conscript people. That is what happened in my country for the Vietnam war. There was no law in place allowing conscription. But one was made to randomly select birthdays. When one was drawn every male with that birthday was conscripted and sent to Vietnam. Vietnam war was no threat to my country. Yet young men were still force…
/r/MensRights04/03/14 10:32 AM
2

The only one I disagree with is the batshit ex.
/r/MensRights02/03/14 11:19 AM
2

You're getting the down vote but you aren't wrong. This isn't men's rights per se, it's peoples rights.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 01:38 PM
6

You'll be happy to know that both girls have been charged and only one has been given bail.
/r/MensRights01/03/14 04:54 AM
42

You mean the stereotypical male prison inmate. The stereotype that society wants you to believe - the on where men are aggressive and uncontrollable, without emotions or the ability to think properly. Kind of like a more extreme version of the male stereotype from the outside. It might surprise you to know that many prison inmates are just regular folk. At least when they enter. Many are forced to be hyper aggressive because of the drug and rape culture on the inside.
/r/MensRights21/01/14 01:15 AM
3

Yes but the age of consent for a teacher and student is generally older, correct?
/r/MensRights17/01/14 05:06 AM
2

I have noticed this. That Americans are very scared of STDs. I think it has something to do with the prevalence of abstinence-only sex ed there. "Don't have sex or you will DIE OF STDs!!!!" Really, STDs are nothing to worry about if you take the proper precautions. There are plenty of first world countries that are far more promiscuous than the USA but no one there is scared because they have proper sex ed. It shouldn't matter that a woman might lie about being on the pill in a short term relati…
/r/MensRights17/01/14 05:03 AM
1

And this is exactly the attitude that is stopping me getting justice. Go on, shame the victim. Tell them it never happened, or that they consented. Because if I didn't want to get assaulted, I shouldn't have put myself in a situation like that? Right?
/r/MensRights13/01/14 10:19 PM
5

I went to an information session on this. Female protesters pushed me to the ground and kicked me, rupturing a testicle. Now I need surgery and may lose my testicle. To literally add insult to injury, the protesters are ridiculing me on a Facebook page about how I am not a man because I got assaulted by girls. I'd hate to think what they'd say if I lose a testicle.
/r/MensRights12/01/14 09:48 PM
-1

I think women in particular do actually learn life lessons from commercials. Look at what they do with makeup and fashion.
/r/MensRights11/01/14 12:22 PM
1

When the program is designed to give one gender an advantage in a zero-sum game, the other genders are by definition disadvantaged by it. It is therefore discriminatory against those other genders.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 11:04 PM
1

Any program designed to give one gender an advantage over another in any field is discrimination.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 10:38 PM
2

And this attitude is exactly the problem. "Oh it's just a little bit of discrimination... It doesn't matter. We should concentrate on the big discrimination." I guess Rosa Parks should have just ridden in the back of the bus, right? I mean it's just a little bit of discrimination to give up her seat for a white person. She should be happy she got to ride the bus at all. Am I right? Of course not. The only way to stop the major discrimination is to change society's attitude and the only way you d…
/r/MensRights09/01/14 10:26 PM
2

There have been scholarship programs to get men into teaching that were sued and consequently shutdown because women couldn't get the scholarship. Even men who had already been awarded the scholarship lost their money.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 02:19 AM
1

That link talks about it being a boys program that has been started as a companion to a girls program. So effectively a co ed program. We're supposed to jump for joy at one example of a co ed program and ignore the other examples of blatant discrimination against boys? Imagine the reverse situation. Would if be acceptable to feminists? Of course not. So it isn't acceptable to us.
/r/MensRights09/01/14 02:15 AM
1

They exist in many places in Europe.
/r/MensRights08/01/14 05:46 AM
12

But that is my point! An organisation to tackle the much bigger problem of overall college admissions for men does not exist because it is "misogyny". But instead you're allowed to advertise these narrow-focus groups only for girls to target the single area where college admissions favour boys. This is evidence that feminism strives to have women dominate every facet if society. That is outrageous and that is why I am outraged. The fact that you as a man are defending it proves that it is workin…
/r/MensRights08/01/14 01:36 AM
12

I am offended that there is no equivalent organisation for boys. Don't forget women outnumber men in college by a significant amount. Yet we still have programs aimed at getting girls into college. Why is that? It is because young men are not seen as important. And as someone who was once a young man, I am offended by that.
/r/MensRights07/01/14 11:46 PM
1

Do you know what that word means?
/r/MensRights06/01/14 10:43 PM
11

Yep. You've killed people, mate. Sure thing. And the world is collapsing because of equality. Sure.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 07:26 AM
12

You're a person with very deep rooted self esteem and identity issues. You believe that you've chosen to be this way because the world is against you, but I'm pretty sure the world is against you because you are this way. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. But that's cool. If you want to be this way then good for you. One more man who continues to be a real asshole means there's one less man the play assholes like me have to compete with for women's attention.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 06:20 AM
10

No no. Plenty of men act like assholes to women to get laid. Myself included. But you actually are an asshole. There's a difference.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 06:00 AM
14

I can't tell if you actually believe you think this or whether it is an SRS troll. Your post is full of such vitriolic sentiment that you can't possibly be a nice guy. You're an asshole.
/r/MensRights06/01/14 05:46 AM
8

It isn't that older women become more comfortable with dating friends. It's that the type of men she wants to date has changed to be closer to the type of me she wants to be friends with. Women always want their male friends to be nice guys. When they're younger they want excitement from the men they date. Exciting guys can be assholes. This means they don't see their male friends as dateable because although they are nice, they are not exciting. If she considered one of her nice male friends to…
/r/MensRights06/01/14 05:18 AM
4

If a woman is friends with a man then she is obviously not repulsed by his personality, right? In fact she probably quite likes him. If she was attracted to such a person, she'd date him. She wouldn't use excuses to find a reason not to date. She would try and find excuses why it's a good idea to date him. Outside of the malicious examples provided by other commenters, the idea of a friend zone is bullshit. A woman doesn't want to date who she doesn't want to date. She's not saying you're ugly. …
/r/MensRights06/01/14 03:58 AM
15

irapewomenforfun? Dude, you aren't even trying.
/r/MensRights05/01/14 11:31 PM
1

I said wisdom teeth that require general anaesthetic. There is no way a dentist is going to put you under general anaesthetic in his office.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 03:45 AM
1

Oh okay. In Australia it's done under local.
/r/MensRights31/12/13 03:43 AM
2

No, me neither. Circumcisions are not performed under a general anaesthetic for a start. Also, even if it was, it would have been obvious before he went under that they were preparing his penis, not his mouth. They even ask you what you're there for as they wheel you into the OR as a triple check they've got the right person! Also, you have prior appointments with the surgeon before you go in for an operation. Even if he thought that that particular operation was for his teeth, he would previous…
/r/MensRights30/12/13 12:17 PM
1

Wisdom teeth that require general anaesthetic are done by a dental surgeon in an operating theatre.
/r/MensRights30/12/13 12:10 PM
1

90% of men are already at odds with her expectation of men. That is the problem - she holds a strong opinion and is outspoken about it despite strong evidence to the contrary. The only way for OP to behave in a way that meets her approval is to simply stop existing or become a woman.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 09:36 PM
5

You sound like a feminist troll. Fishing for SRS material, perhaps.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 12:38 PM
16

So men are supposed to modify their behaviour so it meets the approval of women? Imagine what feminists would say if we turned that around and said women should behave in a way that meets the approval of men. They would be outraged and rightfully so. We should not tolerate what feminists won't tolerate.
/r/MensRights29/12/13 12:27 PM
0

Get dem titties out!
/r/MensRights29/12/13 08:00 AM
3

I live in south Australia. I the same city as the University of South Australia. (Adelaide). I know it's an online course so the actual location of the university doesn't matter. But I feel like I should enrol to show support for such a progressive course. I already have an undergraduate degree in gender studies so I feel like a certificate in male studies would compliment this well.
/r/MensRights27/12/13 09:57 AM
1

The several deaths in Australia could have been mothers killing their kids. Presumed shared parenting cuts both ways. It results in deadbeat mothers (drug addicted, unstable, mentally unwell etc) getting access to their kids just as much as deadbeat dads. I think as MRAs we need to make sure that in advocating for presumed or mandatory for shared parenting we don't end up letting legitimately bad parents getting access to their kids.
/r/MensRights25/12/13 04:42 AM
1

Except for South Australia, where it's 17. Learnt that one the hard way. :(
/r/MensRights23/12/13 06:27 AM
4

I believe the correct term is neckbeard. /s
/r/MensRights23/12/13 12:37 AM
7

It's funny when feminists claim that being a housewife is a hard job. Betty Friedan (a second wave feminist who I have a lot of respect for) basically said that women allow the work of a housewife to expand until it fills their entire life. If a man is a househusband, he does all the tasks that needs to be done and can then relax for the rest of the time. Her argument was that being a housewife was so unfulfilling that women were making it far harder and labour intensive than it needed to be and…
/r/MensRights23/12/13 12:36 AM
1

Please don't make assumptions on how I've been employed. I've worked more 60 hour weeks than I care to remember. Many of them were while I was studying at university as well. How can a gym teacher at a school possibly have a "crunch time" that requires significant amounts of night and weekend work? If there is an ongoing need for someone to be there during those hours then more staff need to be employed. And an employee can refuse to work unreasonable amounts of unpaid overtime and can't be fire…
/r/MensRights20/12/13 11:09 AM
0

Yes, but in most jobs there is a reasonable expectation that someone has nights and weekends to themselves. I am a single man who loves alone but I would certainly be kicking up a stink if I was asked to work nights and weekends on a regular basis. It seems in this situation, the single employees were more accepting of working nights and weekends, whereas the guy with the family was understandably hesitant to miss out on time with his family. So strictly speaking he was "putting in less hours th…
/r/MensRights20/12/13 06:32 AM
1

You must be American if you are using "progressive liberal" as an insult. In almost any other country, to call something progressive indicates that it is good. It doesn't surprise me that a person raised in a culture where progress is a bad thing can't see any problem with victim shaming. After all, if you shame the victims enough the problem goes away, right? Because in your view the actual problem is that victims are complaining. But don't worry, I don't hold it against you. "It's how you were…
/r/MensRights20/12/13 06:20 AM
5

What you are saying is that not only does OP have to suffer the humiliation of what was done to him, he is also placed under an obligation to do things that make him feel uncomfortable. You are ridiculing him by calling him weak for being hesitant to do this thing. That is the very definition of victim shaming. OP has no obligation to do anything. He has our support in dealing with his difficult experiences in whichever way he wants. He owns those experiences. You have no right to shame him into…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 11:52 AM
5

I respectfully disagree. Feminism is what we are fighting against. Our cause will not be served by becoming them.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 08:51 AM
1

No this is not right. This is victim shaming. It is not up to the victim to be strong. They did not bring this upon themselves. It is up to authority figures to be strong enough to act on a complaint.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 08:43 AM
4

I think the men's rights movement would be better served if we didn't call people names.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 05:03 AM
14

Disabled toilets are your friend for that. They are designed to be accessible to people living with a disability. They are not for their exclusive use.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 03:35 AM
0

But by the time she cries rape it will be too late. Your life will already be ruined. The girls you know are the biggest risk. Most false rape accusations are made by girls known to their victim.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 01:16 AM
21

Thinking about it, I don't think she was even there for the sexual pleasure of seeing attractive men naked. She gets off on the power of doing something so wrong and getting away with it. It's the same reason many women make false rape accusations - they get off on the power trip of having society turn a mans life upside down and crucify him simply on her day so. It is a power trip for them. The problem with taking any action is that it is exactly what she wants. She wants you pissed off and ups…
/r/MensRights19/12/13 01:14 AM
0

This is the world we live in my friend. You're lucky that she didn't try and claim you gang raped her. Be very careful with what happens next. She already has one witness that she was in a locker room with a group of naked men.
/r/MensRights19/12/13 01:04 AM
75

As a father I know that I am allowed in a family room, but that does not mean I am always "welcome" in one. There was a case here in Australia a few years ago where a mothers' group went militant. They actually blockaded parents' rooms and prevented males from entering claiming it was inappropriate for them to be there. Now all signs on parents' rooms operated by Sydney City Council say that fathers are welcome. It's a lot easier to deal with an abusive mother if there is a sign to back you up.
/r/MensRights18/12/13 11:55 PM
1

This is because of the patriarchy. The patriarchy sets up a society where women are exploited so women have no choice but to exploit other women. Therefore, even the upper class woman is being exploited because she cannot pay her nanny a proper wage and must instead keep that money for herself. God guys, it's so obvious!!! Patriarchy!!!
/r/MensRights16/12/13 12:02 AM
0

I would still think that a single request for sex in the workplace could reasonably be considered sexual harassment.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 02:53 AM
6

It really depends on what an "unwanted proposition" is. If it's just an invite to have coffee, that's quite harmless. But if it is constant requests for sex in the storeroom, then that's another thing. But then it's just another example of how who says something matters. If another woman says "cool dress" then that's okay apparently. But if an unattractive but well meaning man says? Oh hell no! He's a pervert!!
/r/MensRights06/12/13 12:55 AM
9

The practice of "ladies' nights" has been found to be illegal in many states, but It has not been litigated in Nevada yet. Nevada attorneys are advising clients to be very careful about it, because they expect that if it ever is litigated then it has a high chance of being found illegal.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 12:40 AM
1

A club is not a club in the strict sense - it does not have members, it has customers. It is illegal for a "club" of this type to discriminate. But as has been pointed out it is easy for a club to covertly discriminate if they use the right words.
/r/MensRights06/12/13 12:38 AM
10

Sorry, but referring to a male employee as Penis is incredibly degrading. You are reducing him to nothing more than what is between his legs. You don't see him as an individual, only a gender.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 04:28 AM
-1

I think the title is a little misleading - sex trafficking is not a myth.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 01:11 AM
3

Racist against their own race. :p
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:38 AM
1

So now because I am a white male and choose to grow facial hair I am called racist. Isn't that racist? I note that many African-Americans have curly hair. Am I racist for having straight hair? Probably.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:18 AM
2

That's hot.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 12:13 AM
2

It's all relative, mate. You haven't seen the bush pigs that I have.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 01:24 AM
-4

Damn, I wish girls that pretty went dogging near me. I only ever see fat and old ladies.
/r/MensRights29/11/13 12:02 AM
2

That's not how the 5th amendment works. It only protects you from incriminating yourself with your own words (in court, police interview etc). If police want video that you have then they can get it with a warrant.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 01:00 PM
3

No. Even if a pros takes da money she can still refuse. Sure, it's fraud or something she takes money without providing sex. But at all times if she says no but you do it anyway that is rape. Sorry if that offends but it's true.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 12:54 PM
6

Yes, this. A prostitute does not consent to sex with anyone who pays her money. She has the right to choose. If she doesn't consent it is rape. Although it sounds like this woman was just killing customers and stealing from them. I don't think you steal if you kill in self defence. The "rape" she was defending herself against was the feminist kind. I.e. the kind where all women are victims and all men are perpurtrators.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 12:16 AM
1

Pretty sure it's old male bosses like to work in an environment full of pretty young females. Just sayin.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 08:39 AM
7

The sexism is that men aren't being employed, right? I mean this could actually be a rare example of how the patriarchy really does harm men, but not in the way feminists often suggest.
/r/MensRights18/11/13 03:28 AM
7

Clearly she lost credibility with the other lesbians after consensual sex with a man (a BLACK man). I understand that "lesbians until graduation" (I.e. girls who are only lesbians at college because it is edgy and rebellious) are ridiculed within lesbian circles. The only way she could save face was by accusing him of rape, and get extra points for fighting the patriarchy at the same time. It doesn't matter that he wasn't found guilty, that was just because the patriarchy protects its own.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 01:56 AM
2

I'm not saying the two are equivalent. I'm using an extreme example to make a point.
/r/MensRights12/11/13 12:38 AM
2

And in some countries an adult can legally marry a 12 year old. Just because its legal somewhere doesn't mean it's right.
/r/MensRights12/11/13 12:24 AM
3

To be fair, you asked me if I knew it for a fact. The answer is that yes I do. Whether or not you choose to believe me is up to you. I would note that this sub reddit is full of actual research showing a bias against men in the family law system.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 01:34 AM
3

I have been intimately involved in thousands of family court cases and have seen many times where a man tries to subvert the court process and gets in trouble, while the woman not only gets away with it but gets her position improved because of it.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 01:23 AM
0

This gets posted here all the time. It is the definition the FBI uses for generating statistics. It is not their understanding of the law. It's bad, but not as bad as it first appears.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 01:12 AM
2

Yes indeed. My point is that only a female could get away with. A male would be accused of harassment of the psychologist and be declared a bad parent.
/r/MensRights08/11/13 01:08 AM
3

I agree that many of the articles posted here have nothing to do with men's rights and are just examples of people (who happen to be men) winding up in a shitty situation. I think this one is a bit different though. I'd say the dad did screw up by not giving the kid dinner, but should not be deemed an unfit parent because of it. I also think the fact that a mother can phone a psychiatrist and report the fathers activity and that activity is taken into account in the psychologists report is deplo…
/r/MensRights08/11/13 12:58 AM
1

Would the TSA object to a female with a pair of big ol' titties? Doubt it. Let the man be proud of what god gave him.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 04:12 AM
3

Maybe parents should teach their children not to do that stuff. Not just boys but girls too. I mean, none of what the article describes is what I call decent behaviour. I just object to the notion that boys are the only ones responsible.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 04:00 AM
6

I don't understand what the point of this post is. A person uses a banned weapon and is charged with possessing that banned weapon. This is a men's rights issue because...
/r/MensRights06/11/13 01:12 AM
7

There probably is a decent argument to be made about gender roles with the naked lady and suited man images in the store. But this article completely misses it. Women are depicted as being vulnerable and needing to be protected and cared for. Feminists (knowingly or not) use this when advocating for their causes. If women are disadvantaged then society must protect the women by changing social norms to care for them. Not enough women in the boardroom? Make rules to enforce quotas! Men are depict…
/r/MensRights04/11/13 11:53 PM
0

I agree. This company is set up to benefit from "rape culture". The company has a self interest in perpetuating a fear in women that they are constantly at risk of rape because that is how they create a market for their product. It can only be bad for men if a company is telling everyone that men are out to rape women all the time. It won't stop regret-rape. Women will be conditioned to feel that they are at risk of rape when they aren't wearing the special clothes. They willingly take them off …
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:54 AM
4

The United States of America, sir. The rulings have only been made in some states so bars in other states may feel like they can continue. However, no court has ever ruled that the practice is legal as far as I am aware so it is just a matter of time before it stops completely. I know in Australia it is definitely illegal.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 02:35 AM
2

Which courts rule is illegal.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 02:29 AM
1

Definitely not in my country. You cannot discriminate like that legally. I am not talking about the chance of getting caught or punished. Clearly a small scale operation like this will not attract much attention.
/r/MensRights29/10/13 02:17 AM
4

What country is this? Isn't there a right not to be discriminated against on gender?
/r/MensRights29/10/13 02:05 AM
2

So shouldn't they just protect all workers from lead exposure? Men and women? What sort of factory is this where workers are exposed to dangerous chemicals?
/r/MensRights28/10/13 11:54 PM
5

Racist!!!!! And therefore, replacing whites with women is sexist.
/r/MensRights28/10/13 10:34 AM
11

No. Just no. I am a man with a STEM degree but I can recognise that people in other fields make a huge contribution to "the economy" and society in general. Please stop making the MRM look bad.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 12:40 AM
5

The first step is being attractive.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 11:37 PM
-4

Care to explain how this is a men's rights issue?
/r/MensRights23/10/13 03:38 AM
6

This is typical of women. They will demand to be let into West Point but then refuse to go to war. I ask what happens when everyone at west point is a woman? Do we have no one to lead our troops into battle? Women can't have their cake and eat it. They can't demand to be in the military and then refuse to fight. There should be a draft of all women in the United States to be sent off to war. See how they like it. I bet they'd be screaming equality then.
/r/MensRights23/10/13 02:01 AM
2

You're somehow equating the number of viewers with the amount of "work" female tennis players are doing. How else can you turn it into an "equal work for equal pay" argument? I also find it interesting that you persist with the 5 sets argument when men only play 5 sets in 4 tournaments each year. It is truly puzzling that you expect women to fight to give up what you perceive as advantages. Who on earth would do that? Would you tell your boss you want to work 12 hour days from now on because tha…
/r/MensRights22/10/13 01:22 AM
3

I don't admit this to many people but I'll admit it now just to make a point. I used to experiment with bisexuality. I've had anal sex with quite a few men and women. Without exception, the female anus is a lot more pleasant than the male one. That is all.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 10:45 AM
35

An excellent example of this is when women in Wimbledon Tennis demanded equal pay to the men, despite the fact men played 5 sets while women only played 3. the women complained of "inequality" and ignored the other half of the equation (the men worked more hence earned more) and eventually the women got their equal pay. when the women were asked to play the same 5 sets, the women refused. This is based on a fallacy. Female tennis players did not refuse to play 5 sets. Female tennis players were …
/r/MensRights21/10/13 10:37 AM
3

The irony was intentional!
/r/MensRights21/10/13 06:28 AM
11

Women see all men as a single entity. If one man is suspected to have done something then all men are assumed to do it all the time and must be held accountable.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 03:38 AM
22

Yes, this is what I'm getting at. All I can think of is that women feel violated if they sit on the same public toilet a man has used. I know a lot of women will say it's because men make a mess by standing up to pee, but I often strike up conversations with the cleaners at work and they always say female toilets are far worse with piss and poop everywhere.
/r/MensRights21/10/13 03:20 AM
62

This used to happen to me all the time. I have sensitive skin and I need to get cosmetic treatments quite frequently to stop breakouts. Now, most of the businesses that offer these treatments don't deal with men too often. Much less a straight man like me. Before getting a treatment you need to change into a robe they supply. The first 10 or so places would outright refuse to let me change on their premises. Definitely not in their bathroom which was "ladies only". Just a one-person-at-a-time ba…
/r/MensRights21/10/13 01:28 AM
5

What if I am offended by censorship?
/r/MensRights17/10/13 11:50 PM
3

If the industry is the problem then girls are going to be scared off regardless of whether there is a girls-only place for them to study. I've never heard the college environment blamed for girls lack of interest in computer science. Always something else. I'm not necessarily saying those complaints are correct, I'm just saying that they aren't disproved by low numbers in all-girls CS courses.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 12:39 AM
3

Clearly the work of the patriarchy.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 10:20 PM
3

Why are colleges even considering evidence of sexual misconduct? That should be left to the police and the courts. Colleges should not be punishing students based on allegations alone. The only evidence they should consider is a conviction by a court.
/r/MensRights16/10/13 12:16 AM
1

Hey, hang on a minute! What do you mean your movement? I'm a man. My movement is meant to be the Men's Rights Movement. Well done on the name calling though. You're really doing the Men's Rights Movement a great service.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 12:14 PM
-1

If you're asking if it is degrading for a man to get sexual fluids on him while taking part in an activity that is pleasurable for him, the answer is no. However, I disagree that the two situations are equivalent.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 03:15 AM
-1

Is this related to the discussion at all? I thought we were talking about mainstream pornography?
/r/MensRights15/10/13 02:58 AM
-1

Ejaculating onto the face of the female. It is no more physically pleasurable than ejaculating into a sock. Yet it is depicted as an ultimate goal. Why?
/r/MensRights15/10/13 02:42 AM
-7

I don't think men want either of those things. I'm saying pornography depicts those things as being desirable or pleasurable for men. You're trying to defeat my argument by attributing opinions to me so you can attack them. Do you have an actual response to my argument?
/r/MensRights15/10/13 02:15 AM
-7

Not at all. I've just spent a bit of time thinking about the pornography I use. I choose to keep using it but recognise the harmful messages it is sending.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:59 AM
-10

Females are depicted as objects available to satisfy male desires. Acts that are uncomfortable or painful for the female are depicted as desirable even though they bring no additional pleasure to the male, except the pleasure of establishing dominance over her.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:46 AM
-8

Her argument was not about BDSM porn. It was about mainstream pornography where there is a notable absence of the depiction violence towards or degradation of men. The adult industry exploits and degrades males - both participants and consumers. But it does not depict or glorify it the way it does with females.
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:36 AM
8

To be fair, the term "faceless men" has connotations in Australian politics. It comes from a political crisis in the 1970s that saw the ousting of our prime minister. "Faceless men" were blamed, being a small number of elected representatives with links to spy agencies (both our own and foreign) that had a disproportionate influence. The emphasis being on the "faceless" rather than the men. Now whenever there are back room deals done it is said to be the work of "faceless men" even though some a…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:19 AM
3

Why don't we wear ribbons and as humans pledge not to be violent against humans?
/r/MensRights11/10/13 04:28 AM
0

Pretty sure this is a joke, guys.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 06:01 AM
1

Women are on average shorter than men
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:13 AM
15

They don't focus on male depression. They have material that targets all sorts of "groups" in Australian society - men, women, indigenous, young, ethnic, gay etc etc It's just great that they aren't afraid to include men, rather than just focusing on non-white-heterosexual-males like many organisations do.
/r/MensRights15/04/13 11:49 AM
2

Then clearly those sites should be banned, too.
/r/MensRights09/02/13 12:17 PM
6

To be completely honest I don't think it matters what is said after the quoted passages. They are not safe for children. A child is not capable of determining from the context that this language is meant to be a parody. Is quoting them without context misleading? Most definitely. Is the linked article lobbying for the continued ban doing it for the wrong reasons? You bet. Does that mean the ban shouldn't stand? Hell no.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 10:54 PM
26

Sex in exchange for payment is prostitution. But apparently payment in exchange for sex is dating?
/r/MensRights19/01/13 10:30 PM
10

I actually got a significant amount of compensation (in the form of free travel) from an Australian airline (which I won't name) because of such a policy. Not only was I discriminated against, I was embarrassed in front of other passengers. I quite liked my seat, so when asked to move I questioned why it was being done. The flight attendant quite loudly said within hearing of a dozen passengers "I'm sorry Mr <Edna69>, but <airline> has determined it is inappropriate for you to sit with an unacco…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 11:12 PM
1

Someone already tried it and failed.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 02:57 AM
3

Probably not. But no is forcing any woman to breast feed in such a place. The option is there if they want it. They are welcome to do it in rest of the parents' room, or in any public area. They will be visible to other people including men if they do. If they wish to breast feed away from home then they have a private option available. If they don't like that option then too bad.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 12:25 PM
16

Not a specific "mothers' rights" group as far as I recall, just a mothers' social group sort of thing. Just a bunch of lunies, really.
/r/MensRights07/01/13 06:51 AM
37

Yes your hypothesis is correct. There was an almost-militant mothers' group that that tried to take public parents' rooms for the exclusive use of women. It got to the point where they would have "playgroup" near the entrance to a parents' room and move to physically block and intimidate males who were trying to enter. Their argument was that it was a place that mothers used to breastfeed and they should be able to do that without being leared at by men. Somewhat ironically, around the same time…
/r/MensRights07/01/13 06:39 AM
6

Learn about probability. If "one in four" women are raped in their lifetime it does not mean there is a 25% chance a particular woman will be raped in any given time period. You're also comparing apples with oranges. You're comparing one statistic about all American women over their lifetime with another statistic about a particular subset of women during a particular time in their life. I'm pretty sure no one is claiming that one in four female college students are raped while they are at colle…
/r/MensRights31/12/12 11:37 PM
1

Sorry, some of the definitions have multiple parts and I have only posted the parts which refute the claim made by OP that rape of a man by a woman is not considered rape. The other part of the definition in Victoria is about rape by penetration. Crimes Act 1958 s 38 if you're interested.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 02:17 AM
3

So let's just say person A has an anus or vagina or mouth. And assume person B has a penis. If person A causes person B's penis to enter person A's anus or vagina or mouth, and person B does not consent to this, then person A has raped person B. I know that's not really clearer. The definition in the Criminal Code is quite wacky. Put simply, a woman who has sex with a man without his consent commits rape in Victoria. The definition is deliberately vague to cover every possible combination of man…
/r/MensRights21/12/12 01:12 AM
4

Now imagine that if you can 100% prove that you were raped, you get jailed to a couple of years. That isn't true and you know it. If that was the case then for every person accused of a crime who is found not guilty, every witness that testified against them would be found guilty of perjury. It is truly absurd.
/r/MensRights21/12/12 12:08 AM
12

Hi guys, Downvote me all you like, but what I am posting here is the truth. The article, or at least the interpretation of the article that is being bandied about here, is incorrect. A woman who has sex with a man without his consent rapes him and commits the crime of rape (or whatever the crime is called in that State). While penetrating the victim forms part of the definition of rape, it is not the whole definition. There is an "or" between each part of the definition. Having carnal knowledge …
/r/MensRights20/12/12 01:30 PM
8

Also pointing out that the women's shot put record was set by a Russian in the 80s (Natalya Lisovskaya), with two East Germans holding the record before that. These countries were notorious for having Government run doping programs for female athletes at that time, so these "women" were probably pumped up with so much testosterone that they were more masculine than an average man. Lisovskaya has made the four longest puts of all time and no woman has gone even close to her record in the post-dop…
/r/MensRights18/12/12 08:17 AM
12

Also pointing out that men throw an 800g javelin while women throw a 600g one. The world record for men is still over 25m further than the one for women.
/r/MensRights18/12/12 08:11 AM
1

NO. In Virginia it is against the law for a woman to rape a man. It is called rape by State law. If the OP's picture is referring to an actual event, then it would be WRONG for the police or courts to tell him it was not a crime. It is a crime under both State and Federal law. State law calls it rape, Federal law calls it a sexual assault. That is the same whether it is a man raping a woman or a woman raping a man. It is not a mens' rights issue.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 01:15 PM
1

No. The OP pic says rape of men isn't illegal. But it has been shown that having sex with a man without his consent is illegal. If you accept that "having sex with someone without their consent" is rape, then rape of men is illegal and the OP pic is wrong. Whether something is illegal and whether breaches of the law are treated seriously are separate issues.
/r/MensRights11/12/12 07:01 AM
1

Perhaps. But the description could have easily been read out in court.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 01:21 AM
1

Agree completely.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 12:45 AM
2

Court documents might describe what is happening on the video? They would be accessible to the public.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 12:45 AM
1

Some quite rude things were said, but I never approved her choice to move out. You should not have to approve her choice to move out. You should not even feel like you have the right to. Your (ex?) wife is not your slave. She needs no reason to move out. If she was unhappy and your only concern is that she didn't have some other reason to leave you, then it's quite clear why she was unhappy. Yeah, it's awful if she deliberately got pregnant before moving out. But the fact that you're taking her …
/r/MensRights27/11/12 01:40 AM
0

Once again, that is only the case if believing there was consent is a defence. It is the defence that is then up to the defendant to prove, not the element of the offence. In Washington, belief of consent is not a defence. Therefore, consent only plays a part as an element of the offence and it should solely be up to the prosecution to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The case you quote is from a different state where presumably the law is different and belief of consent is a defence. Also, i…
/r/MensRights23/11/12 01:53 PM
3

What? That would only make sense if "sex" was the crime and "consent" was a defence or excuse. That is not the case. Rape is the crime. "Without consent" is an element of rape. The prosecutor must prove all elements beyond reasonable doubt. If they can't, then the accused must be found not guilty (at least they should be). It doesn't matter what else the accused admits to, if there is one element they deny and the prosecutor cannot prove it beyond reasonable doubt then they are not guilty. A dis…
/r/MensRights23/11/12 04:53 AM
0

Except by deliberately provoking the poor girl by text messaging her after every argument, just so OP can "gather evidence", OP is making it a self fulfilling prophecy. If it wasn't already "worst case scenario" then the advice given here will quickly make it so.
/r/MensRights31/10/12 11:15 PM
8

Shhh.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 12:26 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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