TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Froztwolf Archive

View 0 posts and 245 comments by Froztwolf 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)
14

Inaprobes
/r/PussyPassDenied27/07/17 11:22 AM
3

I have never given up my seat for someone just because they're female, tired or not. Is that a thing some people expect you to do? I mean sure, if she's pregnant or carrying a bunch of stuff, elderly or otherwise infirm. But then I'd do the same for men.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/09/16 12:09 AM
1

It would make sense to prioritize funding based on death count, but if the point is more to get people to care and be vigilant, then I agree, comparisons are less useful.
/r/MensRights04/06/16 03:11 PM
1

I've still not been able to wrap my head around the idea of "rape culture" in the context of men raping women. In what world has this been normalized? I don't know anyone that doesn't think rape is a terrible crime, as long as the victim is a woman. Rape still happens way more than anyone would like, but societal attitudes are hardly forgiving. For every stupid comment of "what was she wearing" I see ten thousand saying "it doesn't fucking matter". In a "rape culture" I would expect those number…
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:52 AM
1

Yeah. Sterotypes hook, line and sinker.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:46 AM
1

Try turning that on its head. What would you think if a bunch of 17 year olds were at choir practice singing about a guy who killed his girlfriend because she abused him / cheated on him?
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:42 AM
2

I think what you meant to say is that women are not generally improsoned in the same place as their rapist.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:37 AM
2

Depending on where you live, you may need to be very careful about reporting domestic abuse as a male. Some states in the US have a policy of arresting the man in all domestic abuse cases, even when he calls in as the victim. When there's a young child present, I'm betting that's not what you want.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:34 AM
2

If I was taking that article seriously, I'd probably be pissed. Thanks for the warning, it helped. There's a lot of things I'd like to nit-pick at, but overall I'd just say that I'm glad not all women are as petrified with fear of being in public as this guy seems to think. My favorite part was when he likens men to snakes, to show that they all have to be treated like potential rapists, with total disregard for the fact that the same logic means that all men should treat all other men as potent…
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:31 AM
4

Those people need to read up on some statistics. "In terms of gender, males were more likely to become crime victims than were females,[32] with 79% percent of all murder victims being male. Males were twice as likely to be carjacked as females.[32]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States Also, I can't find the source atm, but men are about 4x more likely to be assaulted than women, even when sexual assaults are included. This is from the US, but the numbers are similar in most…
/r/MensRights26/11/15 03:05 AM
2

Haven't read the article yet, but to comment on what you said, I think both are correct at the same time: Men are at more risk of being the victims of violence; Women are more afraid that they will be the victims of violence. Maybe society teaches them to be afraid and us to not be. Maybe it's more traumatic to be raped than to be stapped or beaten; I don't know what the reason is, but both are true.
/r/MensRights26/11/15 02:58 AM
13

And if women were disproportionately the victims of violence that would make sense.
/r/MensRights25/11/15 09:57 PM
6

It's been picking up a lot in the last few years, which is great to see. :)
/r/TheRedPill08/02/14 08:03 PM
1

A decent assumption for the most part. From wikipedia: "In the United States in 2002, approximately 2% of all firefighters were female." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_firefighting#USA
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:41 PM
1

I try to treat everyone with respect and dignity. Women just as much as men, but not more.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:38 PM
3

Obviously women that open doors for men just want to get in their pants
/r/MensRights03/07/13 12:32 PM
0

Ah right, that makes more sense then. My own theory would be that it seems safer to do this with women because the perception of the sterotypical woman in prison is not as connected to violence as that of the stereotypical man in prison. So if it's a women only thing you are less likely to have people kill your program out of fear of putting violent offenders back on the street.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 11:00 PM
1

I went to that blog they are talking about and man that's creepy, nothing but pictures of men's crotches with their legs slightly spread. I remember a subreddit posting less creepy images of women that got closed down because of public outrage.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 08:00 PM
6

The headline? "In Oklahoma, an alternative to prison for nonviolent women" Or maybe most of the text in the article itself "breaking the cycle of incarceration by focusing on rehabilitating young mothers is a sensible alternative" "The foundation has provided key funding for an alternative prison program called Women in Recovery that began in 2009"
/r/MensRights26/03/13 07:49 PM
1

I honestly don't know. What I know about it is bits and pieces and assumptions from various articles and vitriolic blogs on both sides of the table.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 03:13 AM
4

Oh absolutely. It exists and men and women can both act in ways to reduce it. But the very existence of the problem of Rape Culture hinges on it being normalized by mainstream culture, not of it existing despite a culture that demonizes it.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 12:02 AM
1

We must assume that women are already doing all they can and that when they keep silent it's because they are afraid of a man's reaction. Men however should speak out, lest they need to "man up".
/r/MensRights20/03/13 11:52 PM
2

Our culture doesn't "normalize" doing drugs, running from the cops or killing babies either. These things are generally looked on with disdain, and are decidedly not a part of our mainstream culture. The fact that something exist doesn't mean the culture normalizes it.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 11:48 PM
1

Of course. The women are scared into keeping quiet, whereas the men give complicit approval by not speaking out.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 11:37 PM
1

That's fine because you can't rape men anyway.
/r/MensRights20/03/13 11:34 PM
3

I agree. Getting away with this 10 times is preposterous.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 07:59 PM
3

If you could absolutely prove that they were false and intentionally so then yes. But I suspect that most of the time all that is known for sure is that there is insufficient evidence to convict the alleged rapist. At that point we call them innocent, but we can't know whether the claim was actually false. We don't want to punish victims that actually did get raped, when there's insufficient evidence to convict.
/r/MensRights27/02/13 02:36 AM
1

I still don't understand why they are less likely to leave spouses.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 11:14 PM
1

Just to make sure I understand the underlying assumptions here: Old men are less likely to have a spouse than young women? Aren't men that get prostate cancer more likely to have children than women get breast cancer, if the sufferers of breast cancer are generally younger?
/r/MensRights08/02/13 07:54 PM
1

Yeah, I can't help but ask myself: If men were encouraged as much as women are to get screened regularly for gender-specific problems, would they be going to the doctor more often, and staying on their regiments better? If there was societal pressure to go, it was made more convenient and cheap, I think we'd see these trends reduced.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 06:28 PM
2

So by curing prostate cancer we are helping women, right? Maybe that's how we need to spin it.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 06:24 PM
1

So I guess what we need to figure out is how we market prostate and testicular cancer to wives. Something tells me they are no more interested in losing their husbands to cancer than men are losing their wives to it.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 06:23 PM
6

Maybe if you get a high enough fine, you won't do it again because then you operate at a net loss? No I really have no idea.
/r/MensRights08/02/13 06:15 PM
10

Been done. Nobody cared
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:41 AM
-2

Her acting career ruined her for me :P
/r/MensRights28/01/13 05:59 PM
0

They are so redundant anyway. Feminists are already fighting for equal rights, just join them.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 05:42 PM
4

This. As a jury member, I would rather risk releasing someone guilty than locking up someone innocent for life.
/r/MensRights28/01/13 05:30 PM
2

Yes, you can absolutely teach them that, and it's great to work towards that goal. Where I'm skeptical is in the effectiveness of signs that say "don't rape".
/r/MensRights23/12/12 04:41 PM
2

India has a fairly low rape-rate, or 1.8 rapes per 100'000 inhabitants in 2010. For comparision the US and UK had around 27. Of course, these are just reported cases. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#UN_Rape_Statistics
/r/MensRights23/12/12 03:34 PM
9

Unfortunately, thinking you can stop rape by telling men not to rape is equally ridiculous.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 03:30 PM
7

Women have more frequent accidents but men cause more financial damage.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 03:28 PM
3

I think hers was just a complex way of saying "We don't wanna"
/r/MensRights06/10/12 03:46 PM
1

The "Insanity defense" is actually quite rare outside courtroom drama shows. Prison is a much nicer place than asylums for the criminally insane. If a sociopath commits a crime, can he claim insanity? He knew it might hurt the person, he knew society was against it, but having no moral compass he did it anyway. Is he responsible for his actions? Some studies indicate that one person in 25 is a sociopath, and the ratio is almost certainly higher among violent criminals. Yet, they get punished the…
/r/MensRights29/09/12 03:14 AM
1

Remind me never to piss you off :P
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:55 PM
1

I don't want to assume about the intentions about whomever created the poster, but I sure hope that's not what was was meant by it. Decision making processes can be explained, in theory at least. If we understand why people do certain things, we might be able to find ways to prevent them.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 05:39 PM
6

Yeah, that part threw me off a bit. It seems to me that he brought up the topic to see if it met with her needs and desires. It didn't, so end of story.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:58 PM
13

He may have been serious about it. If he truly broke up with a fiance because of libido mismatch and he needs to make sure that his next partner can keep up with him sexually then it's a good strategy to bring it up fairly early. Whether he should have done so as bluntly as described in the article is debatable, but he may have been dead serious.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:56 PM
2

We should, but a lot of the time we don't.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:53 PM
8

Yes, it does.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:53 PM
1

So your argument is that if you see the whole person, it's not sexual objectification?
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:21 PM
11

Because we punish people that commit crimes, no matter why they do it.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:19 PM
3

I'm not saying normal people can't become mentally ill under persistent hostile conditions. But what they choose to lash out against may not end up being logical.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:14 PM
69

To be fair, she seemed shocked and surprised, but not outraged. 1) The man expected not just regular sex, but 300 days a year, which is too much for many, and just weirdly specific. 2) She seemed mostly shocked at the directness with which he expressed his wish. I can't fault either of them really. The men brought up an issue that's important to him in a relationship, and had the tact to wait until the third date to mention it. She was unable to accept it and terminated the relationship. Seems l…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:13 PM
5

Mass shootings are usually not committed by mentally healthy people, based on valid logical reasoning.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 01:56 PM
4

I'd sooner go to jail for it than to be pay the child support. Of course if I had the third option, I'd take that. (Self-imposed exile?)
/r/MensRights28/09/12 01:54 PM
9

Explaining is not excusing though. You could portray someone as a vile monster, but at the same time believe that he couldn't help himself. Case in point: Pedophiles. It's commonly known that being sexually attracted to children is not a choice, any more than homosexuality is. Yet pedophiles are seen as vile monsters that deserve no human rights or dignity. When people do things so disgusting that we can't understand the urges or thought processes that led to them, we tend to simplify and consid…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 01:52 PM
12

As rape posters go, I think this one is refreshingly fair and balanced, though of course one could take offense to the subtle implication that all men have an urge to rape women and most just decide not to indulge it. I can't know that it will never happen, but in my 32 years so far I have never gotten an urge to rape someone that I entertained seriously enough to call it a decision not to do it. The idea to rape someone never enter's most mens' mind in any serious way.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 01:46 PM
6

Yeah, I'd like to see more data, specifically who initiates the divorce in each case. My knee-jerk reaction is to assume that men that do more housework rely less on their wife and feel more empowered to divorce her if things get rough.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 01:35 PM
1

So what should happen when neither partner legally consents?
/r/MensRights28/09/12 12:21 PM
5

I'm assuming it has something to do with women being discriminated against constantly or something like that. Just wanted to see their reasoning.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 10:08 PM
1

There are a few things it won't change, including your voice, your facial hair, and bone structure. Darn, I was hoping to be able to use this to get out of shaving my face every day.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 08:57 PM
4

I wouldn't be surprised if everything she's saying is true for people that design and make women's clothing. Makes a lot of sense that women would be more passionate about it, and when you are passionate about something, you'll work harder on it. But generalizing it is just silly.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 08:51 PM
8

Can you elaborate?
/r/MensRights13/09/12 08:49 PM
1

Yah, that's a good way to look at it
/r/MensRights13/09/12 11:46 AM
1

That makes sense. Thanks
/r/MensRights13/09/12 11:46 AM
1

OK. I can't say I haven't learned a number of surprising things here that technically can't be taken back. I guess I resist the term because I've made no commitment to this subreddit
/r/MensRights12/09/12 11:05 PM
1

I get the reference but I don't see how it applies to this sub. Neo taking the red pill was something that couldn't be taken back. I dip in and out of this sub and don't call myself an MRA. Yes, I learn things I didn't know before, but that happens in all my subs.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 08:31 PM
6

I've seen this term thrown about on this sub, what's a red pill?
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:58 PM
1

Are you assuming separate shelters? If not, would the woman with children be safe in a shelter where a man is not?
/r/MensRights12/09/12 03:21 PM
0

Probability "affording grounds for believe" isn't mutually exclusive with assumption. Did you read the definitions before you linked them?
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:05 PM
39

homeless and disadvantaged women presented with a far greater, and more complex, range of needs, including safety and security, mental and physical health, disability, drug and alcohol dependency and childcare. Do homeless men not need the same things? I don't get the reasoning here. The majority of people who are reluctantly turned away by homelessness services each night are women and their children. An astonishing 50 per cent of people seeking assistance are turned away due to high demand and…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 12:28 PM
1

Haha thanks for the info. Interesting things to ponder.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 11:38 AM
0

Nice, thanks for being respectful. We don't like it when people assume men deserve it when they get treated unfairly. Perhaps we shouldn't assume that they deserve it when they get treated preferentially, even by using the magical qualifier "probably", which somehow makes assumptions into...something better. If we don't want our concerns to be dismissed as baseless whining, we should show others the same respect.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 11:35 AM
4

They are both biased assumptions. The fact is that we have no idea why he got paid more, nor how much more he was actually paid. Anything else is an assumption.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:48 AM
2

Optimal for what? Work efficiency? Income? Not rubbing people the wrong way?
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:43 AM
-7

Let's not make biased assumptions, ok?
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:41 AM
8

Great explanation of how feminists infiltrated and change groups from within. Thanks. Still doesn't explain why they are intertwined with atheism specifically though. I haven't seen feminist hacktivist groups splintering from mainstream feminism, or feminist mathematicians, football players, etc.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:35 AM
9

Does the OP even have kids? I don't see him saying that anywhere.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 02:20 AM
5

The article I read about elevatorgate made it sound like femtheists (or sceptifems or whatever they called themselves) existed well before that event though. I guess they don't need an actual incident to feel unsafe, but as is constantly mentioned, feminists aren't a monolithic group any more than we are, so I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why atheistic feminists need their own identity. By the same logic, shouldn't there be a movement of socialist feminist atheists and another with…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 11:26 PM
3

Tough work raising a family by yourself.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:54 PM
10

Can someone explain to me the connection between atheism and feminism? I don't get why they would join powers.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:52 PM
8

Some of his posters do have http://www.avoiceformen.com on them. Click the "posters" section on his site. The first poster pictures has it.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:51 PM
11

But fear leads to anger and anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:49 PM
1

Even the future?
/r/MensRights10/09/12 07:50 PM
3

What's the largest?
/r/MensRights10/09/12 07:48 PM
13

Weren't you reading the last paragraph? Women were holding back so we'd feel better. Now they apparently don't care any more.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 12:02 PM
1

If the video doesn't include the part where they say they'll sue him for a sexual assault, then they are right. All the video shows is that neither party did anything illegal.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 01:29 AM
7

To me the radical part of MRA's philosophy is that "Man can have their rights violated"
/r/MensRights09/09/12 02:34 PM
-8

To be fair, she didn't explicitly say anything about him being creepy, and the way he was staring at her could have been seen as threatening, which would make her uncomfortable too.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 02:25 PM
1

Since it's people's reaction to the story being criticized more than anything else, that's only marginally relevant.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 12:20 PM
5

Some people are overly sensitive, or just hateful against men, and they get away with it because hate speech against men is OK in most circles. Many dislike MR because of subjective opinions or misinformation that prevent them from seeing our side of things. If the statistics we use conflict with the statistics other subs use, it's easier for most of them to believe we are lying or cooking the numbers than for them to be doing the same. Recently there was a new story about a man that got asked t…
/r/MensRights07/09/12 10:34 PM
2

Men aren't victims
/r/MensRights07/09/12 02:02 PM
2

Sure for libel. Seriously.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 12:09 PM
8

Brevik ate bread in the week before his killings. Therefore anyone that has eaten bread this week is about to kill children.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 12:08 PM
2

If I had to guess, I'd say it's considered ok because of the common claim that female sexuality is restricted. Women are "breaking free". This will have no such effect on men, as their sexuality is considered too much on display already, which is why we have to hide it. Don't forget also that male porn is graphic and disgusting. What I will grant is that someone is reading a book is less likely to force bystanders to witness sex scenes against their will than if someone is watching porn. If you …
/r/MensRights07/09/12 11:53 AM
6

True. It would have been interesting to see if the reaction would have been the same had the headline read "Woman kills and decapitates a father of two, claiming rape as her motive". Instead the headlines left no doubt to people's minds as to whether she was raped by her victim or not.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 02:10 PM
2

I don't know about that. It's pretty hard to prove that you kick puppies. How about we just assume you did it ok? People never lie about someone kicking puppies
/r/MensRights06/09/12 12:28 PM
6

Safest way to make sure you don't have a bad time is to not exist.
/r/MensRights04/09/12 01:31 PM
10

Me and whoever created this sign have completely different ways of thinking about this. When women take precautions to ensure their safety, it is so that a rapist doesn't choose them as their victim when they are about to rape someone. Much like not going into dark alleys prevents you from getting mugged, but the mugger hiding there will still mug someone. The creator of the image seems to think that it triggers rapes by guys that otherwise would not have raped anyone if women dress a certain wa…
/r/MensRights04/09/12 12:07 PM
0

Is it possible these people are just being over-zealous on a new job, and want to be able to tell their bosses and the kids' parents that they followed through as much as possible? Not that I'm condoning their action, but there's nothing in your post that directly indicates that she thought you were going to abuse the kid. There's definitely a reason to keep tabs on these incidents as they continue to happen, and to root this behavior out, but it's hard to call something a pattern of discriminat…
/r/MensRights03/09/12 01:31 PM
2

There's a gestalt effect though. Your body could be said to be just cells interacting, or just molecules and energy interacting, but it would be a huge oversimplification.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 02:25 PM
5

Thank you. I now understand why people that are anti-MRA like to use the "You are just upset because you can't get laid" argument from time to time. It's because of bullshit like this.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 02:21 PM
3

Don't know, but it sounds evil!
/r/MensRights01/09/12 01:02 PM
2

"conserves" is just me brainfarting. Meant to write "reserves". :P Thanks
/r/MensRights31/08/12 12:47 PM
1

What's the difference between selective services and the draft?
/r/MensRights31/08/12 11:49 AM
1

So it's like being drafted into the conserves?
/r/MensRights31/08/12 11:48 AM
3

Don't be angry, but do what you can to change it. Works better and feels better.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 11:46 AM
1

He's not asserting that at all. He's asserting that some women will be uncomfortable with being filmed, because they imagine the cabbies will do something creepy with the recordings. Unless you are talking about DavidByron and not the comment you replied to.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 08:41 PM
5

Women that expect men to pay on the first date aren't exactly a small minority. While what the OP describes isn't common to all women, it does fairly describe general societal expectations of men in relationships. These are the things they will feel pressured to do.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 12:50 PM
4

You mean that we should relinquish our expectations of how other should treat us, and not be attached to outcomes in our dealings with others? Sage advice, I just have too many darned attachments left :P
/r/MensRights30/08/12 12:48 PM
6

I'm shutting down, becoming depressed and ALMOST suicidal. I strongly urge you to seek a counselor or therapist if you aren't seeing one already. Your post is colored by your depression more than anything else. Men in your situation that have been able to lead happy lives and seek out further relationships, but if you let the depression fester, it will never allow you to do that and could bring you worse things. If you are willing to admit on a public forum that you are almost suicidal, I can on…
/r/MensRights30/08/12 12:23 PM
8

I'm confused. The article states that the offense was probably related to her depressive illness, and then later goes on to say that she got of lightly, because factors were taken into account such as her being unlikely to re-offend. If she has a mental issue that can cause her to become this violent, isn't she extremely likely to re-offend?
/r/MensRights29/08/12 05:04 PM
2

The frequency at which people do might depend on gender, and if I recall they've been demonstrated to do so. The criticism here is that it's so expensive to train doctors, that if they work for less than a certain number of years as doctors, it's a net financial loss to society. I'm not in favor of using this as an argument to say women shouldn't become doctors mind you.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 03:11 PM
2

Thanks a lot. I'll admit that it's pretty hard to believe. I almost wish it was less, because there's no chance of me convincing anyone that this is true.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 03:08 PM
1

He did say it in a way that implies they are separate events. If he meant what you suggest he should have said "violently raped" or something like that.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 12:17 PM
1

Ask her to back up the claims with some evidence and see how much is left.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 12:12 PM
1

It isn't mentioned in the original article, but there is a way to fertilize an egg with extracts from any kind of cell. What this means is that strictly speaking two women could have a baby without a man ever being involved, and keep genetic variety
/r/MensRights28/08/12 12:00 PM
10

What's the quit rate for men? The 60% figure is meaningless unless you compare it to something.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 11:58 AM
2

I've been discussing this article with some people after it got first posted on /r/nottheonion. I made a comment there that it's shocking how many people think men never get raped by women, and I got replies asking how exactly women would rape men, and how often I thought it happened. The how was fairly easy to deliver, but I can't find any numbers for how often it happens. Anyone help me out?
/r/MensRights28/08/12 11:44 AM
7

Wait, so if I treat waitresses as only being there to bring me food, I'm objectifying them? That's bad because why?
/r/MensRights26/08/12 01:18 AM
2

It's hard to take the proper meaning of a word back when it's been stretched so thin as to lose all relevance.
/r/MensRights26/08/12 01:16 AM
1

Depends on whom she wants attention from I guess. Not that I have any idea on which day of the week that is taken. EXIF data offered no clues
/r/MensRights26/08/12 12:55 AM
28

Let's not over-assume here. How do you know it's not taken on a weekend?
/r/MensRights25/08/12 02:01 PM
1

I agree that there are more tactful and more successful ways to do it than the example originally given, but we can't assume that all men have the confidence or social skills to be tactful and successful at reading the situation all the time. It's simply unreasonable to say "You need to gauge the situation, and only invite us out if we want to". Most men won't invite you out unless they think there's a reasonable chance that you will say yes. They do the best they can, for some that's not very g…
/r/MensRights24/08/12 09:34 PM
3

"Women can be abusive and destructive too transfers some of the attention on the fact that men can be abusive and destructive and opens the door for turning it into a pissing match. "Yeah, but men can be more abusive and destructive" - that kinda thing. It's not meant to be a comment about the video at all, just the words you use to describe it.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 06:57 PM
7

Your title just helped me figure out a pet peeve of mine with this whole discussion. It's your use of "too" that tipped me off. Consider the difference between: "Women can be abusive and destructive" and "Women can be abusive and destructive too".
/r/MensRights24/08/12 06:04 PM
3

There's a visibility issue as well. Men know they can be assaulted, but it's rare that other men act threatening to them on the street. At the same time women are told they can be raped, and many of them get sexual attention from men constantly, which reminds them of the fact. Most men are vaguely aware of false accusations, divorce and paternity law, but it doesn't get real for them unless it happens to them, or someone they know well, so they don't feel disadvantaged in these areas, even if th…
/r/MensRights24/08/12 06:01 PM
1

When it's "us against them" it becomes easier to get people angry and disgusted at what you see on the surface, than to dig into the deeper causes.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 05:51 PM
1

By whom? I don't understand how you can say that oranges are prettier oranges than apples are apples. There's a different criteria used to judge physical attractiveness for each sex, and a lot of that criteria shifts based on cultural expectations.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 05:45 PM
1

If she's a little drunk, and people have seen her drinking, it's your word against hers whether she was too drunk to consent.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 03:46 PM
1

I'm not entirely sure to be honest. Are you saying men are more attracted to women than vice-versa and because of that women have more control? Or that men are less attractive because they are less likely to take care of their appearance and personal hygiene? Either way, straight women compare men to other men, not to themselves, when gauging attractiveness, so I doubt it's a factor.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 03:43 PM
1

You should be psychic and know whether she wants you to talk to her before striking up a conversation, got it.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 03:39 PM
1

It's not quite a fair comparison though. Women are not afraid of men in social situations where there are other people around them. Women often are afraid of men if there's just the two of them together, and nobody else to defend her if the guy gets any ideas . I.e. Women have more social power, but fear mens' physical power. (edit: punctuation)
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:23 PM
3

I have never seen this happen in my whole life. A couple of my friends are regular Casanovas, few women every say no if they ask the woman out. Neither of them has ever been asked out by a girl. I'm not saying it never happens, but it's rare enough that I have never witnessed it, nor do I know anyone who's had a girl ask him out.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:18 PM
4

So you should never ask out a stranger? That seems horribly restrictive.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:16 PM
9

Something tells me half the women out there are still under average attractiveness.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:14 PM
6

It is quite remarkable that people don't connect the social expectation of men always initiating sexual connections with their experiences of unwanted sexual connection. Their demands than men stop pestering them seems very poorly thought through :P
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:13 PM
7

Easier to side with people that hate you than people you hate.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 12:03 PM
3

I'm assuming "they" here refers to whomever can ban the show.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 11:27 AM
7

If they are drunk enough to affect their decision making, or feel threatened, without any overt threats being made, they can often successfully sue for rape. Then there's statutory rape, but I'll admit I don't know if that has it's own legal category.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 09:20 PM
6

I purposely avoided putting it like that so the definition would include women that aren't that drunk and call "rape" in the morning when they regret having had sex with the guy.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 08:18 PM
3

Even if we call it rape, it's definitely not the same as just picking someone up from the street and forcing them.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 08:01 PM
7

Year examples are both still something I'd consider the use of force. Let's try comparing someone raped in an alley with someone just tipsy enough to give consent to a guy she normally wouldn't have slept with.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:58 PM
4

I assume it means a situation where no physical force is used or threatened to force the victim, and they are not incapacitated.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:56 PM
1

Advertising is about changing how people think about your brand or product, buy having people on the screen doing or saying certain things. If that works, why wouldn't seeing specific social groups doing certain things change how we think about them? Triggering people to "consume right now!" is relatively rare in ads today. Branding is so much more profitable.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:50 PM
1

Did you actually read these articles? None of them cites any sources other than other blogs and news articles for the 75%-85% figure they use. There was one self-reported study cited, which might be halfway credible, but it wasn't available in full online.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:47 PM
3

lingerie or normal?
/r/MensRights20/08/12 12:51 PM
1

But by the same logic, advertising would have no effect on people. If seeing people doing things doesn't form your opinion, what's the point of ads?
/r/MensRights20/08/12 12:42 PM
2

I was going to make this claim the other day, but couldn't find any solid data to back it up. Instead I found a number of sites claiming it was an urban legend. Do you know of any studies? Edit: the claim being that women control 80% of household income, not that that's why men are shown as stupid.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 12:39 PM
1

I'm a computer scientist myself and while I'm sure most teachers couldn't make it through that degree, there's no way I could make it through an education degree. :P
/r/MensRights19/08/12 05:17 PM
1

Seems to have worked for CEOs :P
/r/MensRights19/08/12 05:16 PM
1

Absolutely true for those few professions that generate quantifiable profits. Most professions don't generate profits however and aren't that easy to quantify. HR, accounting, janitorial staff, teachers, even engineers and product designers. None of them create profits directly and yet their wages vary wildly.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 12:52 PM
1

It enters into it of course, but it's just one of many factors. There's also expected utility, possible government or union rates, sometimes education enters into it, of course risk and environment, etc. Since I remember, there has been a shortage of teachers in my area and a plentiful supply of engineers. One could argue that the teachers work for the government and thus have a controlled wage, but then again so do some engineers.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 12:47 PM
2

Engineering is a safe cushy indoor job.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 12:42 PM
2

No, a capitalist society explains why the profession that is perceived as more valuable pays more. It doesn't explain why the profession is valued more.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 03:05 AM
8

Nice. do you have another one for when women replay with an assertion that it's discrimination that jobs that are popular among women pay less than jobs that are popular among men? (I.e. they why is childcare less valuable than engineering? argument)
/r/MensRights18/08/12 10:56 PM
28

Because Patriarchy.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 10:23 PM
2

Yubb, as a fan of sarcasm, this happens to be quite frequently.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 12:57 PM
5

Wait, what is the horrible truth about Santa Claus? He gay?
/r/MensRights16/08/12 12:29 PM
6

Confused me too at first, until I saw the word patriarchy. :P
/r/MensRights16/08/12 12:27 PM
1

And this is a quote from the airline's spokesman "We're trying to prevent child victimization," he said. "We know the overwhelming majority of sex offenders are male, so by removing that situation you're lowering the risk." I'm not defending the policy, as it's barking mad. But saying women are more likely to abuse children is irrelevant. They are specifically trying to prevent sexual abuse.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 01:00 PM
7

If I'm not mistaken, women are more likely to abuse children, though men are more likely to sexually abuse them.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 04:16 PM
3

I would still back him up in that "women acting like women" is a poor choice of words that does imply that all women do this. It may or may not be exclusive to women, but you won't win any converts by over-generalizing it to ALL women. Pointing out women who use their "morally superior" position in society to abuse men is absolutely fine by me though. Just don't do it in a way that implies all women do it.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 11:34 AM
1

I'm not sure if more damage in a crash counts as being "more effective" :P
/r/MensRights12/08/12 07:05 PM
1

In my area men get into fewer accidents, but still manage to cause more property damage on average
/r/MensRights12/08/12 02:22 PM
2

That's a bit of an overgeneralization. I'm quite happily, and recently, married and yet I'm here. Never been badly burnt by misandry, but often annoyed by it.
/r/MensRights12/08/12 04:50 AM
1

Of course we are. It's the patriarchy meetings.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 10:02 PM
1

Well it's pretty crappy if we can't be ourselves in mixed company and don't have the option of socializing exclusively with men at times.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 08:30 PM
6

I don't think men hold a lot (if any) of privilege today. There are advantages to being a man, but the advantages to being a woman seem similarly good, if not better. There are clear advantages to being white however. Unfortunately, they are largely invisible to those of us who are, and they are definitely less than a century ago. For one thing, employers tend to assume very different things about young black kids than young white kids. (less education, less discipline etc.) When I say privilege…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 12:01 PM
8

White men have it better than black women on average. This is far from meaning all white men have it better than all black women, or that white men can't have serious problems.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:48 AM
-2

I don't know how it works there, but in most places the age of consent is only valid when the age difference is less than 2-3 years, otherwise 18 is used.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:23 AM
-3

I don't know how it works there, but in most places the age of consent is only valid when the age difference is less than 2-3 years, otherwise 18 is used.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:22 AM
1

Investment bankers and engineers provide something that can be easily quantified and that returns value back to the economy very quickly. "What gets measured gets managed" Not to say that it's the right way to do things, but professions whose output can't be quantified easily tend to get lousy pay.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 12:24 PM
7

If she weren't pregnant, that would have been my suggestion as well. With the situation being what it is, I'd advise him to hang in there the best he can, and hopefully she'll return to her old self when she gets back on the meds after the pregnancy.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 12:18 PM
1

It's an occupational hazard.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 11:13 PM
6

No, you are lucky. You are so privileged that you don't even know it.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 10:02 PM
18

I always find this extremely offensive. Telling me not to rape equates to thinking I am likely to rape someone, or that I am somehow complicit in rape. Rape is a violent crime, committed by sick people. I don't take kindly to be placed among those individuals. Edit: I wonder if this "rape shaming" strengthens the alleged normalization of rape in society. If rape is something normal guys like me do (and I know it's true, because women keep telling me so), then surely rape is no big deal, right? I…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 09:54 PM
5

I understood the toplessness to be a reaction to the Islamic "symbol of female oppression", i.e. that they cover up their women. By running around topless, they force the image of a near-naked woman on those that would cover them up. Or maybe it was just to show "See what you can do when you throw off the shackles of patriarchy". If so, it only adds to the humour value that they were arrested.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 04:33 PM
3

I'm pretty sure that women being topless in public in the UK counts as indecent exposure.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 04:30 PM
5

Same here. You didn't actually have to use violence; just had to seem ready to do so when necessary. The statement that masculinity is intertwined with violence to the point of invisibility is obviously exaggerated , but if one sex is responsible for the physical protection of the other, why would anyone be surprised when that sex is more likely to resort to violence? Edit: changed wording after reading the article better.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 05:12 PM
2

Oh I'm not saying we shouldn't try to improve it. We definitely should. But we also need to behave in accordance with how things are now, not how we are trying to make them or wish they were.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 10:15 PM
2

I live in a very safe city (Montreal), but I still wouldn't recommend walking around by yourself, dead drunk, after midnight. Don't parts of Sweden have a serious refugee crime problems? Like Malmo.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 07:20 PM
2

I mean, men are three times as likely as women to be the target of a violent attack, so I try not to walk around by myself late at night, let alone drunk. And I live in a very safe neighbourhood. If I were attacked I wouldn't consider it exclusively my own fault, but I still take precautions.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:46 PM
5

I for one am quite happy every time I come by a woman that sees our point of view. Her posting here brightened up my day, sorry if it ruined yours.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:44 PM
2

If you leave yourself incapacitated among people that are drunk, or even drugged up, you have to expect that bad things can happen to you. Obviously "fault" lies mainly with the perpetrator, but you can't expect to be able to go anywhere at any time in any state and be safe. That's just not have the world works.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:37 PM
1

Rape Culture is a major topic of feminism, and the MRM is concerned with most feminist topics.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:34 PM
1

It's very hard to warn women about the rape-related dangers of getting drunk without it seeming like you are blaming them. If you leave yourself incapacitated among people that are drunk, or even drugged up, you have to expect that bad things can happen to you.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:32 PM
2

A lot of people think it's ok to use drugs, or even to drink and drive. I don't know anyone that thinks raping is ok.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:29 PM
2

But while that hasn't happened, wouldn't it be sensible to take precautions to try to increase one's safety?
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:28 PM
1

I don't think it would have mattered much though. Even if the poster that was targeted towards women would have been gender neutral, people would have read it as if rape only happened to women.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:24 PM
2

I almost lost it when this exact list got posted up and down Facebook by various women I know. Extremely offensive.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 11:22 PM
15

Agreed. Retaliation isn't necessarily stopping a fight though and "I would've beat the shit out of that bitch" doesn't imply that the commenter just wanted to stop the fight.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 01:38 PM
8

A real woman would have known to throw a tablecloth over them and voila!, can't tell the difference any more.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 12:46 PM
3

Funnily enough, the "men-only" tasks in the home (handywork mostly), are not considered household tasks, and women should not be expected to partake in those.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 12:44 PM
35

IMO, the better version of equality is not to root for anyone getting beaten. Besides, he had only one downvote and 12 upvotes when I came along. You both now have 1 more.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 12:29 PM
2

Society is nothing more than the individuals it consists and the interactions between those individuals. You lose a lot of information if you look at it that way. You need to consider the gestalt effects. By the same logic you could say that a human is just a bunch of atoms, and the interactions between them, which is strictly true, but not very useful if you are trying to discuss why he likes chicken so much.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:09 PM
1

I've only started reading up on those matters recently but I thought Patriarchy just referred to our power-structure (and therefore somehow our culture) being male-dominated. Thanks for enlightening me :)
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:07 PM
1

Love it!
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:04 PM
1

Read: If men would just do what we tell them, everything would be better; for them as well.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:03 PM
1

You can get a messenger bag without people giving you a hard time. I use one all the time, especially in summer when I don't have a lot of pockets available.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:39 PM
1

I'm basing what I say on the research provided by the op. Based on that and what you said earlier, women are getting injured in DV twice as often as men, so I said I understood why the system would prioritize preventing injury to women, since it prevents a higher overall amount of injuries. Of course I would rather prevent all injuries, regardless of sex.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:21 PM
1

I'm suggesting a legal situation that minimizes injuries, regardless of sex or who initiates the DV.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:10 PM
3

I'm not sure I care as much about who initiates as who could get injured. I'd rather the law protect than punish. Of course, the law should protect both sexes equally. It seems the statistics are saying women need the protection more than men though. Small comfort for the men in the 30%, I know.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:03 PM
2

for the first year of use Does that imply the odds go down as you learn to use it?
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:44 PM
4

If that's the case, then it's reasonable that DV laws would be somewhat biased towards protecting women, though maybe not at as severe a cost to the man as is the case in some places now. Preventing DV in general is desirable, but I do understand if the law prioritizes DV that leads to injury.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:40 PM
1

Ah, that changes quite a bit. Isn't it on a per session basis for condoms though?
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:36 PM
2

Absolutely, I just want to make sure we aren't turning a blind eye towards it if more men are causing injuries than women, in absolute terms, as that would give strong cause to people that believe it's mostly men responsible for DV.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:31 PM
1

It's a clear case of FWM: Fraternizing While Male
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:25 PM
1

Get a Merce!
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:23 PM
5

Statistics are scary though. Someone that has sex once per session and has 100 sessions over a year has more than 18% chance of the birth control failing if the failure rate is 0.2% Over 10 years, the odds are 87% that it will fail at least once. Of course that doesn't make you automatically pregnant, but 0.2% is a big number for an activity that you do regularly.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:23 PM
3

Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women Does this mean that male non-reciprocal perpetrators are more likely to inflict injury, or that men overall are more likely to inflict injury, despite a lower likelihood of being the perpetrator? Edit: Formatting
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:10 PM
1

I'm perfectly fine with there being gray zone, though to me police counts as civilians until they are armed with firearms. The problem I have with the more inclusive definition of terrorism is that the word itself has become completely meaningless. Let's check out the one from dictionary.reference.com: "1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes" By this definition, all the countries that participated in WWII are terrorist states.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 10:00 PM
5

Or they could just expunge it from the record as soon as your name is cleared. Recording it as a "normal arrest" seems silly to me.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 09:57 PM
1

Thanks
/r/MensRights01/08/12 08:05 PM
1

I looked up the definition online, and it's changed quite a bit since only two years ago, when I last looked it up. The current definitions generally say nothing about civilians, where two years ago almost every single one did. Personally I'd consider the attack on USS Cole a guerilla strike, rather than a terrorist attack. I can't really equate people that attack military targets with people that attack civilians.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 08:05 PM
9

Two perfectly acceptable replies :)
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:48 PM
5

Seems like a rational response to me to arrest them both, at least while they establish what happened. The reasonable response to violence isn't always the intuitive one. If someone is attacked at a club, a good bouncer will ask the person that was attacked to leave the club, but keep the attacker inside. This seems odd until you consider that you don't want the attacker to be waiting for the victim outside. You want to give the victim a head start to get out of there.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:46 PM
2

Can you cite something to back that up? I always figured it was due to mero physical labour and workplace deaths.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 01:53 AM
3

the threat and use of violence against civilians, just to be clear. The use of violence against a military target is not terrorism, regardless of the purpose.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 01:47 PM
5

There was a video flying around yesterday that demonstrated this quite nicely. It was set up like a hidden camera show. In the first part, the man was physically intimidating a woman (both actors), and laying his hands on her, all in public. Bystanders got involved multiple times and tried to stop him. Next they switched the parts. The woman screamed at the man, hit him and generally abused him. With a single exception, people just walked past without paying any attention to it. When interviewed…
/r/MensRights31/07/12 01:45 PM
6

Personally I don't mind if a woman I'd be starting to get serious with threw me a shit test or two. I get it, she wants to make sure to end up with a guy that can handle himself when shit goes down emotionally. But the examples mentioned in the article are just nasty and bizarre. Why would you shit test a guy you've already just married? Isn't the point of the shit test to find a desirable partner? This implies a huge amount of insecurity with the relationship. And throwing a shit test at a guy …
/r/MensRights31/07/12 12:15 PM
0

The phrase "making a guy feel creepy" is still meaningful. The implication being "I think you are not going to accept that I'm not interested in you, and I don't respect you enough to think you'll be civil or appropriate about it." At least that's the feeling I have gotten on those occasions where I've been made feel creepy.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 03:31 PM
0

Because most of them wont. The 99.9% of women who would never do a thing like this will (rightfully) hate you for assuming they would. Just like I hate feminists that maintain that I rape women, or turn a blind eye to rape.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 12:32 PM
10

That's true. He was just asking for it.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 12:29 PM
4

If society expects men to physically protect the rest of the family, it shouldn't be surprised to find that they are more prone to violence.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 12:29 PM
2

What is the argument for keeping the system as it is? Why do women get anonymity and why don't the men?
/r/MensRights30/07/12 12:25 PM
1

Evolutionary speaking you protect yourself and those that share your genes.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 04:43 PM
4

Fair enough. The op keeps referring to them as her kids though, not his, so that wasn't clear
/r/MensRights28/07/12 02:28 AM
10

What should we do when men flip the script and tell us no? I don't know. Accept it? Asking for what you want is a good policy. Assuming you'll always get it because you asked is not.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 10:51 PM
9

Haha, already written a comment about that and was about to hit "save" when I saw this. Now she knows what single men feel like most of the time
/r/MensRights27/07/12 10:48 PM
0

Would you slap your girlfriend if she ran out ahead of you? Or just friends/family members/etc that are male?
/r/MensRights27/07/12 10:27 PM
1

I'd refer to the comment you replied to and assume that either she panicked or her kids did and she had trouble getting them out by herself.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 10:26 PM
48

HER kids, not his. There's a world of difference. I agree that you should protect your children at any cost, but most people feel no such obligation to protect other peoples' children.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 10:26 PM
3

More than welcome. I like to take reflexive thinking like that, blow it up and put it in the spotlight. I imagine others have similar thoughts they try to suppress and I like to think this will help them realize it and perhaps start to admit it to themselves. Or if it's just me, that's also an interesting thing to realize.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 02:13 PM
4

Myself mostly. This is where my thinking instinctively goes. I'm sure I could make a lot of assumptions about why that is, like societal conditioning, genetics or whatever. But all I know is that this is where my thinking instinctively goes.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:53 PM
4

That happens too. Being a white male can be irritating sometimes.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:06 PM
6

Of course I'm not trying to blame the girls for getting raped, but to me there's a pretty big gap between going to a guy's home and lying under a blanket with him on his bed, alone with him or smiling at guys on the street. Fear of rape isn't unfounded, but there's no reason to have it take over every face of one's life.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:05 PM
9

Yes, but when a man is a victim of a violent crime, that's fine. He should just suck it up and get better fast so he can get back to work.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:02 PM
13

I see something along the lines of "They were horribly abused by men earlier in their lives, and now they are getting payback from men as a group"
/r/MensRights27/07/12 12:11 PM
2

Because it smells like...no I won't go there.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 01:30 AM
1

Thanks
/r/MensRights26/07/12 10:13 PM
1

Like so often, evolutionary game theory has the answer: You need more women than you need men to create babies, so a culture where men sacrifice themselves for women is more likely to survive. Then of course we dress it up into all kinds of cute clothes like codes of honor, being a good man, yatta yatta
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:56 PM
1

Are these actual statistics, or did you make them up just now? If they are true, I'd love to be able to quote them, but I won't without being able to cite something.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:35 PM
2

There's truth to that. If a man's role is to protect women, surely that implies that women are not as capable of protecting themselves as men are.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:31 PM
2

And in the same vein some women DO feel that their lives were worthless until they had babies. It being common doesn't make it any less bad to generalize based on it.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:30 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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