TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

FukRPolitics Archive

View 0 posts and 326 comments by FukRPolitics on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

I'm willing to bet that they disregarded a number of completely valid signatures.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 08:40 PM
0

The bill is very clearly aimed only at men. I don't give a shit about your nonsense defense of the indefensible.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 12:37 PM
-1

And if you think that this counts as 'equal', then you're just a fool. I have no respect for your opinion, because it's a shitty, bigoted opinion. Obviously I feel no need to mince words here. This bill was clearly written with an immense amount of gender bias, and you're dishonestly pretending not to see it. Because nobody could possible be as stupid as you're pretending to be and still have the ability to use a keyboard.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 12:34 PM
0

Most of them aren't gay, though. They like cock, they just hate the creature it's attached to.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 12:31 PM
2

Concern troll, apparently. Who the fuck else says this in response to feminists acting like crazy people?
/r/MensRights27/05/15 12:29 PM
19

Dworkin was a fucking lunatic. That doesn't absolve feminists -- worse, it compounds their sins, as they stood by and used a raving psycho to espouse their ideology through, because they knew she'd have no shame in doing it. Dworkin is the spirit of modern feminism.
/r/MensRights27/05/15 12:28 PM
1

Only because reddit is full of college-aged liberals. The real world will be a very educational place for you. And no doubt, you'll complain about conservatives treating you exactly the same way you've treated conservatives here all throughout life.
/r/MensRights26/05/15 03:29 PM
0

Tiqr is a troll. We are not on the same side here.
/r/MensRights26/05/15 03:28 PM
0

Men get insulted on this site every day over their looks. Do you post this in reply to every statement of 'neckbeard' and 'fedora' you see on here?
/r/MensRights26/05/15 03:27 PM
-7

She worked at Planned Parenthood. Such a fucking shock...
/r/MensRights26/05/15 03:14 PM
11

I'll have to take your word for it. But there is definitely an air among some left-wing sites and shows that being gay makes you somehow superior --more clever, more insightful, even funnier -- than being straight. When in reality, gay people are mostly the same assholes as everyone else.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 02:28 PM
1

If it were up to me, both would hang.
/r/MensRights23/05/15 02:26 PM
1

There's a shock: a lot of people don't like being preached at.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 11:25 AM
1

It is in the broader society. No radio station would be permitted to post something similar about fat or small-chested women.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 11:20 AM
1

You didn't, but it was the logical result of your statement -- you have to admit that.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 11:18 AM
0

The real world is a war of attrition, not a war of honor.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 11:18 AM
1

Most men don't give a shit about height.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 11:16 AM
1

Fewer than 15% of the male population is 6' or over... These women should take a good, hard look in the mirror and ask themselves if they're really in the top 15% of women.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 11:14 AM
1

You're just a stupid cunt who will never be anything but someone else's doormat as far as I'm concerned. A man stands up for himself. He doesn't take it like a little bitch.
/r/MensRights14/05/15 10:58 AM
3

And the woman who laughed at castration didn't take it a thousand times farther? A joke about sex vs. a joke about sexually mutilating someone. Gee, which of those is too far?
/r/MensRights14/05/15 10:57 AM
14

If this had happened to a woman, this would be all over the national news and the frontpage of reddit.`
/r/MensRights13/05/15 10:03 AM
-6

I'm not interested in a feminsit Mad Max. I wish these people would stop trying to make everything theirs. Some things are not for them.
/r/MensRights12/05/15 11:18 AM
3

Most people here are Democrats. Most men vote Republican. I doubt that most people here actually want men to vote. This has kind of been a problem for this sub in general.
/r/MensRights12/05/15 11:11 AM
1

A shit-ton of people are saying that they see these frequently...
/r/MensRights08/05/15 09:29 AM
1

Yes. Any resources dedicated solely to women cannot also be used by men. But there are no resources dedicated solely to men. Unless the regular resource center is solely for men (which it isn't), you're giving women something that men do not get, which is obviously wrong. Resources are a zero-sum game. So you are disadvantaging men. There is no medical need here. Stop being a prick.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 09:23 AM
-1

So you're going to make men wait in line, too, instead of just accepting that nature is nature? Then men deserve to get paid more, because we can lift more weight. That makes us flat-out more valuable than any woman can ever be at 80% of all jobs.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:09 PM
7

Respect is a two-way street. If you demand that men respect women, you better demand that women respect men, or why the fuck would any man listen to you?
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:07 PM
2

When nature privileges men, women want to cut men's legs out from under them. But when nature privileges women, women expect men to just accept it.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:06 PM
0

I think pissing is too important a bodily function to pretend that this is minor.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:05 PM
11

Why the fuck should I have to piss in front of a woman? Women would scream fucking murder over this. Open both bathrooms, or keep separate bathrooms. I am sick and fucking tired of scum like you saying that 'equality' means that women should have more than men.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:04 PM
10

Why can't women do that, then?
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:01 PM
3

Those are the same arguments they made to 'keep' alimony when I was a kid. And now, thirty years later, that's still the argument they make to keel alimony. It's pretty clear that it's just bullshit -- they will always be in favor of alimony because it helps them, but they will never be honest about the reasons. In 100 years, they will still argue that they have to keep alimony 'just in case'.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 07:00 PM
3

eh, it's always been that way. It;s just that a lot of otherwise decent people pretended otherwise because they wanted to make it work. And the people who attacked it were mostly just clowns. But UN has never been worth a damn.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 06:54 PM
2

I don't believe you, and I don't think that what's 'standard' in family court should considered what is just or right. And your personal track record is atrocious on this kind of thing. You always bend over backwards to justify the horrendous actions of family court. You always go well out of your way to defend the indefensible.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:43 AM
3

Poll numbers this far out are 100% name recognition. They have no predictive value at all. I don't get how so many people claim to understand politics, but don't really seem to understand this. You can literally go back to any election, look at the numbers two springs before that election, and laugh your ass off at the difference between the predicted outcome and the actual one. Parties don't win third terms without a very significant reason for that win. In both cases in the last 100 years wher…
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:41 AM
1

It's a mix, really. Women are far, far, far more likely to insult a man for having a small penis (even if they have never actually seen his penis), but as for people who seem to care about the size itself beyond its use as a hurtful cudgel, you get a good mix of people. Men who are satisfied with their penis (that is to say, mostly those who believe their penis to be above average) and women who don't particularly care so long as it's not too small don't give it a lot of thought. Men who are uns…
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:32 AM
7

This is why I won't vote for Democrats. No way in hell a Republican-appointed judge finds this way.
/r/MensRights26/04/15 10:24 AM
2

So? Registered Democrats make up a smaller portion of the electorate right now than at any other point since the Great Depression. Not doing anything about the economy crippled their party in ways that most liberals have not begun to come to grips with. They will not hold either house of congress again for a good 20 years. But it won't likely be until they lose the White House that they finally start to work on the economic issues that would actually win them elections. Until then, they'll keep …
/r/MensRights25/04/15 11:21 AM
4

I'm voting Republican. and so will most people who don't want a HRC Presidency. Make no mistake -- this subreddit is not representative of the broader men's movement politically, or even men in general. Men are overwhelmingly conservative -- there is not a single study ever conducted on gendered voting preferences that has even come close to claiming otherwise. So keep that in mind when you watch this sub. This sub is a creature of reddit, with reddit's political biases. It does not share the op…
/r/MensRights25/04/15 11:18 AM
3

She'll get maybe 1 or 2% points more of the female vote than a male Democrats would. Most of those will be drawn from women who otherwise wouldn't have voted. Republicans and their Leaners are not going to vote for Hillary under any circumstance. Almost every Democrat wins the female vote. And you're on reddit, so don't think for a moment that your left-wing biases are universal or even common among the broader electorate. If your hatred of Republicans was the norm, they wouldn't win half the el…
/r/MensRights25/04/15 11:16 AM
0

She's a foot-stomping child who just wants attention in any way she can get it.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 11:10 AM
1

Then do a web search. I see no reason to support a shit-stain like the Guardian.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:45 AM
1

Why would anyone link to the Guardian? It's the Daily Mirror of the left at this point -- making up BS headlines to get leftists worked up, rather than making any real attempt to illuminate.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:44 AM
1

Tell me again, liberals of this site, how The Daily Mirror is an absolute piece of shit and the Guardian is a trusted news source.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:42 AM
6

Eh, it's no worse than the rest of your papers. It's just conservative -- and that, plus the demographics of reddit, is the real reason it's looked down upon here. The Guardian is an absolute piece of shit, too, but none of you like to point that out. Mostly because it agrees with you.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:39 AM
6

Not in America. If you can prove something true here, it can't be slander or defamation. Honestly, most of us view the rest of the anglosphere's policies on this to be a corrupt remnant of the nobility you all refused to kill -- the belief that the wealthy and the powerful should be immune from the consequences of their own actions.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:38 AM
57

There's a lot more evidence than that, including proven collusion between her and the two other individuals who made false accusations against the man.
/r/MensRights24/04/15 09:35 AM
11

Does anybody but stuffy old rich men who want to pretend to be liberal while still voting against the working man vote for them? I mean, honestly, after what they've done in the last couple of elections, who the hell would give them the keys to anything? They pretended to be a left-wing party... and then handed the government to conservatives.
/r/MensRights22/04/15 07:48 PM
1

Not in America, they aren't.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 05:02 PM
5

Then the prenup is useless. I'm not giving half of what I own to a fucking cheater. If she cheats, she shouldn't get a fucking dime.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 04:59 PM
1

Honestly, it barely exists in America. Canadians should be terrified of this, though.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 04:58 PM
3

No, judges still regularly toss them. your feminist push-back is bullshit. There is nothing to do to guarantee that a prenup will be followed. 'Grossly unfair' is in the eyes of the judge, not any common-sense test.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 04:57 PM
2

In all honesty, this isn't a message most men of our generation need to hear. Marriage has dropped of a fucking cliff.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 04:56 PM
7

I think that they'll find that the number of men willing to go see a movie that day will be much, much, much smaller than they think it will... Especially since the next day, you can go for a fucking quarter. SJWs are idiots.
/r/MensRights12/04/15 04:55 PM
2

It's illegal. so... no.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 11:18 PM
-7

And this is another problem with this shitty sub -- you pathetic idiots look for any excuse to justify your own discrimination.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 11:17 PM
4

Reddit is full of idiotic twenty year-olds who think everyone's situation is the same as their own.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 11:17 PM
2

It's pretty obvious you only got upvoted because people followed the 'other' links here. And yes, you're a shill. A left-wing shill. Hillary is the most hawkish Democrat around, and more hawkish than most Republicans, but you pretend to be voting for her on anti-war grounds. She's the most economically conservative Democrat in Obama's Cabinet, sat on Wal-Mart's board for years and spend her entire term in the senate fellating Goldman Sachs -- but you claim not to want your wages lowered. You're …
/r/MensRights10/04/15 11:00 PM
0

He's a shill. He will literally say whatever it takes to 'win' an argument
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:57 PM
3

Hillary is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the banking establishment. Quit. Fucking. Lying. You goddamned hack.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:57 PM
5

That's the kind of insane leftism that gets upvoted here. Which is one of the big reasons I won't subscribe to this shit-show.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:56 PM
6

So you lied about your actual reasons. Because Hillary will go to war with Iran. There isn't a mainstream politician running more likely to take us to war with Iran than the war-queen of the US Senate. If it was up to here, we'd already be there. And if you know anything at all about politics, you know that. So you're a fucking liar.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:56 PM
6

So you didn't really mean it. You just want us all to vote Democratic. I will be voting against Clinton, for whoever has the best chance of beating her. This isn't some 'D-' politician. This is a politician who hates men, and who certainly hates MRAs. If you want to be retarded enough to vote for a politician who hates you, go right ahead. But don't pretend to me that you're doing anything else, and don't pretend to yourself, either.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:54 PM
2

He wants us to ignore that, and vote team blue for reasons completely unrelated to the purpose of this sub. He's shilling here, plain and simple -- probably the only reason he hangs out here.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:53 PM
2

So you don't really believe in men's rights. If you won't vote on them, you don't really believe in them.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:51 PM
-2

Nope. The people here are actually quite pathetic. They will always put liberalism ahead of men's rights. That's how they can be such a big forum, and still have no impact whatsoever on the broader movement, while much smaller forums have a more influence.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:50 PM
-1

This guy doesn't want men to vote, if men won't vote Democrat. I can guarantee you that.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:49 PM
2

No, selling out the cause for the same of Democratic politics is extremely popular here. Tagging as Democratic party shill. Edit: Can't help but notice your 'edit' at about the same time the DNC brigade showed up.
/r/MensRights10/04/15 10:49 PM
2

tbh, both sociologists and economists are equally useless. Seriously, Economics is the astrology of the modern age. They literally get paid to tell rich people what they want to hear -- and that is why they get paid so much. there are some honest scholars out there, but most are just ideological hacks pretending to do real math.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 07:24 PM
1

Who knows? Given that the cop turned out to be a murderous psychopath, I'd wager Scott knew something about the man that we don't. It's unlikely that this was the cop's first day in the neighborhood, after all.
/r/MensRights09/04/15 03:33 PM
5

I think that most people do. Feminism's approval rating is massively underwater. I think that the elite simply refuse to give the dominant position -- that feminism is bad -- a hearing, because too many reporters and editors are feminist.
/r/MensRights05/04/15 12:42 AM
2

Abused people do stupid things.
/r/PussyPass04/04/15 01:57 PM
-5

No, the people here don't. They repeatedly defend their rights to run their mouths here... and then vote against everything they pretend to believe in under the guise of not being 'single issue' voters. In reality, most of them are just full of shit.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 12:51 PM
5

At some point, there will have to be a class action lawsuit against the DOJ for their blatantly illegal 'interpretation' of Title IX.
/r/MensRights03/04/15 12:49 PM
7

Downvoting, because agreeing with censorship for political reasons is extremely disgusting.
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:47 PM
9

She induced the abortion with pills that they have proved she bought, and which they have text messages from her claiming that she took. And despite what known trolls above us have said, this baby was third trimester. Every last ounce of opposition to this case comes from lies.
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:44 PM
6

It was a third trimester baby. Edit: Also, it's not a miscarriage if you induce it using illegal medication which you admit to having used in your own correspondences. There is not one valid reason to oppose this conviction unless you think that women shouldn't have to follow the rules and regulations regarding 1) abortion, 2) the use of controlled substances and 3) the disposal of a body. Edit 2: Perhaps you people should get your news some place that isn't DailyKos?
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:43 PM
12

The article lacks those facts because of how massively negative those facts are. For starters, the baby was in the third trimester. She bought illegal medication not cleared for use in abortions. The medical examiner proved that the fetus was viable. And she illegally disposed of the body in a restaurant dumpster. This conviction will stand. There is literally not one legal leg for the defense to stand on here. That's why they're beating the political drum so hard on this one. Edit: they have re…
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:41 PM
-4

This won't get the upvotes it should because it criticizes a left-wing party.
/r/MensRights01/04/15 12:38 PM
5

That's /r/Relationships for you. That place is a man-hating shithole that screams /r/thathappened! any time a man goes in there with a tale of woe, but will believe even the most obviously made-up bullshit about men.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:28 AM
3

Mozilla is shit, and has been losing market share for years now. So at least there's that.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:26 AM
6

Yes. But there are a lot of concern trolls who don't think that feminism -- or any other leftist ideology -- should ever be criticized. Mostly because this is reddit.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:25 AM
5

Given the modern feminist movement, yeah, it kind of does.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:23 AM
3

There is plenty of basis for the argument. NPR is a horrifically politicized entity.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:22 AM
3

Women have problems. But NPR only talks about women's problems, while bashing men's.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:21 AM
1

I wouldn't really trust any such series conducted by that feminist shithole of a station.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:20 AM
1

NPR should have its funding revoked, in all honesty.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:20 AM
3

I don't know why you got downvoted for expressing what seems to be the universal sentiment of all mankind...
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:19 AM
5

It's very popular. It's just that women shriek and scream whenever men say it, trying to bully us into not speaking.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:18 AM
3

It's creepy the way so many women in the media have refused to judge this case on its merits, and have instead gone full-on gender solidarity on it.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:17 AM
17

So, she's the reason Reddit's admins and mods have been trying so hard to ram feminism down our throats? She's the reason SRS, SRD and AMR get a free pass?
/r/MensRights31/03/15 11:17 AM
8

People will fuck without getting married, so no, it doesn't depend on people getting married anyway, which you seem to be implying.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 12:23 PM
1

It's pretty close to 50%. Don't act like it's 40% or 30%.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 12:23 PM
13

We kind of have it in a few states. But in none of those states can you be said to enter a common law marriage without holding yourselves out as married to both your families and the state. Don't file joint taxes, basically.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 12:22 PM
3

It's a made-up word first popularized by Sister Shakes, Amanda Marcotte and Jessica Valenti when they were all a part of the liberal blogosphere (tumblr's larval state, basically) in the mid 00s. I was on their side up until that point. Then I realizes that they were full of shit, because they threw a fit over random things like breast-shaped pillows, but saw no problem in genderizing assholishness.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:56 PM
2

I don't care if you're consistent -- your belief that we only have rights to protest this as consumers is simply undemocratic and in defiance of everything my country, the USA, stands for. And maybe we don't always live up to their ideals, but that isn't a good reason for me to personally abandon them now.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:54 PM
5

We have every right to criticize the comic, it's writer and any belief it advances. You don't seem to 'get' free speech -- it covers me talking shit on them just as surely as it covers their right to talk shit on me.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:53 PM
5

That's the reason I don't own the Pre-Sequel. If you piss in my face, I will not buy your shit.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:52 PM
8

I. Don't. Care. You don't get to call it mansplaining. I know a shitload of women who condescend to men like we're their fucking six year olds. Edit: You're a bigot for using the word. That's the end of it for me and a whole lot of other men. So fucking drop it. You people have demanded that we stop using all kinds of words for far fucking less.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:50 PM
3

Mansplaining has never been a useful word. If someone disagrees with you -- even assholishly -- you don't get to genderize it. You especially don't get to genderize it when you people throw a fucking fit every time someone suggests that any wrongheaded behavior is 'typically' female. You're bigots. That's all there is to it.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:49 PM
4

I would, but I never really read much beyond the bat-books. So... yeah. Thor is a much bigger disappointment. This has at least historically kind of been Wonder Woman's MO. She covers women's issues. She's hot-headed and often resorts to violence where it isn't appropriate. What they've done to Thor is a fucking travesty -- not even a flanderization, but a straight-up rewrite of the character.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:47 PM
4

They picked a fight, and you're complaining that the other side showed up?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 10:45 PM
3

But it isn't being applied to everybody. so what you're defending is really just the right of them to speak, and their right to silence us. I play the game by the rules in play, not by some idiotic twenty year-olds idealistic interpretation of what the rules should say.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:56 PM
3

They won't publish a response. You seem to be missing the massive censorship of men's issues at places like this.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:55 PM
5

No, if you want to say something like this, you damned well better stand by what you say.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:53 PM
1

We aren't allowed to have our opinions in paper. Tit for Tat. Edit: Actually, I wasn't going to sign it because I don't usually sign pointless things. But now I'm going to sign it just to spite this pointlessly contrarian bullshit.
/r/MensRights29/03/15 01:53 PM
1

A lot of people on here aren't going to believe media sources. Not shocking, given how we've seen the media treat Gamer Gate and the Men's Rights Movement. Honestly, did you forget all of the times they've lied in the past?
/r/MensRights29/03/15 12:14 PM
-18

I am downvoting both of you. There is a difference between criticizing someone, and censoring them. That this sub refuses to see any difference is one of the biggest reasons why you all have no real-world impact. You refuse to hold politicians accountable if they're democrats. You refuse to criticize feminists because somehow, that's a violation of free speech. You refuse to do anything for pointlessly libertarian reasons, and then wonder why nobody ever takes any of you seriously. This is why.
/r/MensRights28/03/15 09:36 AM
1

Then you punish the boys for it, like we do here in America.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 12:01 PM
4

Ish. You still have a thousand rules meant entirely to cater to feminists. And feminists are clearly given greater leeway to violate the rules. Also, the feminists there refuse to debate. They pretend that common feminist positions are so rare/absurd as to not be considered. When they're willing to take part in the discussion at all. Which is never -- not if the discussion reflects badly on their ideology. Then they ignore it and wait to swarm another thread.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 11:50 AM
2

Teacher's Unions. So they won't be.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 11:29 AM
4

And you've been concern-trolling for a long time.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 11:28 AM
2

So? I'm against punishing people because someone else said something. Can you not understand that?
/r/MensRights26/03/15 11:27 AM
2

I'd take this more seriously if you didn't constantly bend over backwards to defend feminists.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 11:27 AM
1

Yes. We can.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 05:15 PM
4

Feminists like when they say that they want to eliminate gender roles. All of their rhetoric indicates that they want to maintain the primary gender role for men -- that of protect and sacrificial lamb. Thinking men should be able to wear skirts is not eliminating male gender roles.
/r/MensRights25/03/15 05:14 PM
2

This isn't the time for semantics, you aspie fuckwad.
/r/MensRights22/03/15 09:04 AM
3

On reddit. There should be no doubts about this: feminism has 10x the credibility on reddit that is has in the real world. IF you talk about feminism in the real world, most people despise it. Most men despise it. Most women despise it. It's only online, where they can use brigading tactics and sockpuppets to make it appear as if they're a majority, where it seems beloved.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 12:28 PM
1

These people think that their feelings are a legitimate reason to strip others of their right to speak. That is what makes them dangerous.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 12:25 PM
1

It is. But dismissing what someone has to say because they used a phrase you don't like is outright childish. As I said, you've got some growing to do.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 12:24 PM
1

You can't stop humans from being humans. You can only mitigate the harm they do to one another. What you're saying sounds suspiciously like 'Raper, don't rape!' to me.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:32 AM
3

TIL is the most corrupt sub on the site. That's one of the first things you notice when you frequent /r/undelete
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:28 AM
80

They said the same thing about food distribution in Haiti. It turned out to be a lie there -- they gave only the women food, and the women kept it only for themselves, their husbands and their children. They didn't 'distribute' this food equally, and as a result, young men had to resort to theft and mugging to get their fair share of the food. And then these same people started screaming bloody murder that those young men didn't just lay down and die. So fuck your bullshit explanations. I don't …
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:21 AM
-5

I don't believe you. You've all been known to lie in defense of your bigotry before.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:17 AM
3

I don't believe you. I remember how Haiti went down, and you people are willing to lie your asses off. Edit: They literally gave the same exact lie when asked why they were only giving food to women in Haiti. But it turned out to be just that -- a fucking lie. And men had to choose between robbing and stealing, or just plain starving to death. So I don't believe you. I will never believe you. This is the same exact lie you used last time.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:16 AM
-18

Fuck off, and take your brigade with you. Edit: A history with not one post in here. Suddenly they show up just to defend discrimination? This is a fucking brigader.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:13 AM
14

We don't know that. I'm not just going to trust you. Also, I don't believe in letting single people perish, and I am sick and tired of parents getting special treatment in general. Edit: they give it to women, so women will get this no matter what. But men have to be married, or they get to die a terrible death. So much better...
/r/MensRights21/03/15 11:13 AM
0

Testosterone makes you jittery. Of course men have worse handwriting. Women have stronger control over minute movements than men do. Your average man simply cannot ever have the handwriting of the average woman.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 01:01 PM
6

Honestly, even if they could make men 'obsolete' in practical terms, you'd still run into the problem where we're strong, faster and braver than they are. If they want to push men into some kind of 'final showdown', that won't exactly go well for them. It will turn their most histrionic, warped views of history or society into realities. They won't be given any rights again for a thousand years. Women simply cannot defeat men militarily.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:58 PM
3

The smartest members of society are also men, so...
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:56 PM
2

It will get settled when someone sues the DOJ. The schools don't want to be doing this. Dear Colleague is making them. And there is no way in hell the current Supreme Court upholds that extremely iffy interpretation of Title IX.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:50 PM
4

Because Link has been male for thirty years now. Go make up your own fucking characters.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:42 PM
9

No. What kind of retarded shit is this? In the real world, ignoring your problems will not make them go away. Buzzfeed is read by too many people to be ignored.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:40 PM
1

When facebook censors anything anti-feminist, it's kind of meaningless to look at facebook comments as representative of anything but what facebook's censors like to hear.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:17 PM
1

So, you're the kind of idiot who thinks that only people who say the kind of things you like to hear deserves to have rights and privileges? You'd fit right in with the SJWs, then, wouldn't you? You have as much growing up to do as this guy does, kiddo.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:16 PM
3

Eh, the way the powers that be acted in regards to 9/11 and the resulting investigation was so shifty that I'm inclined to give people with this belief a pass. They sure as shit acted like they had something very big to hide. You can't blame people for assuming that they did, in fact, having something very big to hide. When your only understanding of something comes from authority, and that authority gives you reason to distrust it, you also distrust that understanding. It's very natural.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:15 PM
1

Buzzfeed. Where baby SJWs go to learn the ropes. It's a complete fucking shitshow over there. That's the kind of place young liberals go when Daily Kos get's a little too critical for them.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:13 PM
1

This is an absurd view. So... you believe in logic and everything. So tell me, how and why did emotions evolve if they were never to be used in argument or decision making? A wizard did not make us. Our instincts and emotions matter a lot more than logic or reason when it comes to our personal survival. There is not one aspect of our being that is not required to be there to make the system function.
/r/MensRights20/03/15 12:11 PM
0

First and most importantly is that Joss Whedon gained recognition for creating work that was actually good. It also happens to please feminist views, but he is not a one-trick pony who is solely propped up for political reasons. Unlike someone like Literally Who, who hasn't contributed to their industry in a positive way at all. tbh, I get the feeling that the only reason he isn't known for being a SJW, is because he's smart enough to keep his fucking mouth shut.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 10:11 AM
1

And these piece of shit liberals upvoted him for it, while downvoting every conservative in the thread. Fuck Liberals, and fuck this piece of shit sub.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:48 AM
1

Thats why it's leftists like you downvoting everyone who disagrees with you on here. Because only conservatives think that they got everything right and that anyone who disagrees with them is wrong.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:48 AM
1

The way liberals act in this sub is a big part of why I will never subscribe to it. Or listen to any of their BS about not holding the Democratic party's policies against them (I mean, WTF, these hackish pieces of shit don't want me to judge a party based on their policies, so you know what their real motivation is).
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:47 AM
3

And then they wonder why conservatives see them as stuck-up elitists and ignore everything they have to say. In all honesty, if this was your experience with liberals or so-called 'well informed' people, wouldn't you throw out everything they had to say? You've already seen them lie about facts and treat you with partisan dishonesty. So of course you assume that Climate Change is likely a lie -- the experts are the same kind of people who have been lying to you and pissing in your face your enti…
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:44 AM
0

Just because both are biased, doesn't mean that one isn't more biased than the other. And he has a citation. You've just got bunch of upvotes from partisan liberals who think yelling 'BULLSHIT!' actually constitutes an argument.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:42 AM
2

They're all jokes. I'm sure that you think MSNBC is awesome, but most people see no difference. And CNN is very often just full of shit.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:41 AM
0

I don't agree. And I think that such a position will be a non-starter outside of a fairly leftist space like this one.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:30 AM
9

None of us is suggesting that rapists be let off 'just because', which seems a more realistic comparison to what's going on here.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:29 AM
13

You see, it is blatantly unconstitutional. White Knights have just decided that it's okay to ignore the constitution.
/r/MensRights19/03/15 07:23 AM
3

Jury Nullification is too rare to be invoked as a reason for anything. Outside of self-defense cases, It barely exists at all.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 05:14 PM
3

Some spoiled little rich girl is going to teach me about privilege? Lmao.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:52 AM
3

I miss the days of people automatically downvoting the trolls who asked this question...
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:50 AM
1

This is blatantly illegal under Title IX.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:46 AM
35

I wouldn't bother. Just stick to the facts at hand. He doesn't have to prove any kind of systemic bias against men, merely that this teacher was biased against him for whatever reason -- which can easily be proven if identical answers yielded a different grade.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:45 AM
1

They regularly play executioner, so I don't find this to be a remotely convincing argument. They clearly have no problem killing men.
/r/MensRights17/03/15 07:38 AM
2

Feminists argue like this, because feminists have the mental capacity of children.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:36 PM
1

I don't see the pedo joke?
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:35 PM
1

Which is irrelevant. It's like saying you hate chicken when someone tries to serve you beef. It may be true, but what the fuck does that have to do with anything?
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:33 PM
3

It is common. And disgusting. The way female teachers acted when I was in school is a big part of the reason I have always been dismissive of feminism.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:30 PM
7

Again, reddit is not the place to get legal advice. No matter what a sub is named.
/r/MensRights16/03/15 01:29 PM
1

A homeless shelter... that help cops catch poor people who couldn't afford to pay fines. This place needs to be shut down. It's a fucking trap.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 10:59 AM
2

They constantly advocate for women's-only programs. That's what's wrong with it.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 10:57 AM
1

Not in the US, and this is a US-centric site. I didn't mean to belittle whatever political system you're in.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 10:56 AM
1

It's more that they would have been condescended too, than that they've actually be denied rights. Watch Mad Men or Agent Carter. Those women had rights, they just didn't get much respect. There's a huge difference between not having rights, and not being treated respectfully.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 10:55 AM
2

Both seem like legitimate fears to me. Why do you left wingers dismiss the idea that other left wingers might use the government to try to enforce ideology? That is entirely possible, whether you want to admit it or not. There are 'bad' left-wingers, too.
/r/MensRights13/03/15 10:42 AM
54

Feminists have this thing where they pretend that nothing ever changes. That's why you can regularly find them talking about 'Thity years ago!' as if that puts things in the 50s, rather than the 80s. Why you hear them constantly act like they have no options in the workplace. Why you regularly see them act like feminism is some kind of unspeakable word -- whereas it's an ideology advocated by one of the two major parties
/r/MensRights12/03/15 10:50 AM
17

I'm pretty sure that what most men fear most are castration and death.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 10:11 AM
1

They've been known to wrongly label things hoaxes before. So I don't really take their word for it.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 10:09 AM
0

No, the problem is people like you won't demand that they 'prover' anything at all. You'll demand that we just take their word for it. I now what you people are. We have 'Dear Colleague' here in America, so I know exactly what kind of 'standards' you advocate -- or at the very least, the standards the people you carry water for here advocate.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 10:06 AM
1

Yes. but I don't believe that's what's being talked about here. A lot of people don't. We think it's the typical feminist tendency to stretch the definition of rape and rely on vague rhetoric to cover up their bullshit. And honestly, given the behavior of your typical feminist, which of us is likely to be right?
/r/MensRights09/03/15 10:04 AM
1

Ad we don't trust feminists to talk about this honestly, or in a way that is respectful to men and wont damage young men's sexuality.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 10:03 AM
3

Scumbags like you are the reason fewer than 1-in-5 women are willing to call themselves feminists.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 10:02 AM
4

I don't accept your distinction. The only people 'qualified' to be there are the best people.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:57 AM
10

So, you don't care if they're the most qualified. You'll take any woman over a certain bar... but men have to be supermen to make the cut. And you think that's equal? I have to downvote a statement this dishonest. there is no way you're anything but a shill, pissing in people's face like this and then inquiring about the rain.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:56 AM
2

Anyone saying that is simply lying. There is no statistical way (you can make a theoretical argument, but it wouldn't happen in the real world, and certainly wouldn't happen every year, repeatedly) it happens like this.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:54 AM
2

They haven't changed their position, though. They've just hidden it until it the scrutiny has passed.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:51 AM
4

This sub -- mostly because of the political opinions of the average redditor -- goes to great lengths to deny this very obvious fact.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:50 AM
3

Illegal shit happens all of he time. I've seen worse stories reported in the media. People on reddit really need to cut the crap and stop acting like they know better than other people what happened in those people's lives.
/r/MensRights09/03/15 09:43 AM
-1

In real life, date rape drugs are rare. Most instances reported to the ER turn out to be nothing more than heavy alcohol poisoning We've all been there. You down a few beers a little too quick. You aren't feeling it much, so you start working on a few more. But you're a kid -- you don't know about the absorption phase. You don't 'get' that there's a heavy lag time between feeling a little tipsy and when the alcohol really hits. So by the time it starts to hit, you've had a whole six pack in two …
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:44 PM
-1

It is a moral outrage. I'm sorry that you're so broken that you think there is such a thing as an 'acceptable' victim. There is not. No one should be made a victim. I would suggest that you meditate on that for a while.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:39 PM
1

Putting them on the default list meant scrutiny. Scrutiny can mitigate away a lot of the toxicity that comes with 'safe spaces'.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:38 PM
2

The in-group bias of of women is why most men naturally distrust female leadership -- and with very good reason. Women only look out for other women. Men look out for the good of the group as a whole. I don't expect people to like it, but that's what available research indicates.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:31 PM
0

You know, Britain, it's as simple as forcing any restaurant or bar with public seating to also open their bathroom to the public. That's how New York solved this little problem.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:28 PM
0

Holy fuck, the Guardian is a piece of shit jizz-rag of a newspaper.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:26 PM
3

So, you're okay with the economic exploitation of men, then? Good to know. I'll tag you as such.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:25 PM
8

In all honesty, given how rare it is for even an office job to require a three-piece suit, it's hard to give a shit at all.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:22 PM
4

I didn't used to believe this, but it's pretty apparent that no matter what the original intent, quotas and affirmative action-style programs exist entirely to reward 'good' voters for voting the way liberal and progressive parties want them to.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:17 PM
6

That's only reassuring if you don't realize how many people this is true for.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:14 PM
0

In the way he compared them (irreversibility of effects, not moral relativeness), it is a valid comparison. It is notable that the word 'comparison' also holds in it's meaning, 'to contrast'.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:12 PM
9

My problem with this kind of utilitarian argument is that I've seen too many feminists argue something like this... and then turn around and argue that we have to maintain male gender roles still, because (sadly, or so they claim) male gender roles are still necessary. More often than not, it's a self-serving train of logic.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:10 PM
12

It says that they are likely to cheat on you. People don't just suddenly change their behavior when they enter into a relationship. If she was quick to hop on a lot of men's dicks while she wasn't in a relationship, she'll be quick to hop on one (or more) while she is in the relationship. And that is how you end up with a kid that isn't even yours.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:09 PM
13

What you're suggesting is impossible. There is no way the other party is not going to feel shamed. So their feelings are irrelevant to the process. They have to be. To me, what you're saying smacks of the 'put others first' part of the male gender role -- he is supposed to put his needs behind her desire not to even feel shame. And that just isn't acceptable.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:06 PM
5

Canada is a bigotted shithole.
/r/MensRights06/03/15 02:04 PM
1

What makes them honestly think that this will end any differently than when they tried it in the 70s, or in the 90s? Political correctness reaps a whirlwind of a backlash,
/r/MensRights04/03/15 01:27 PM
2

You are doing your best to prove the case that liberals are obnoious and intollerant. And all of the people upvoting him are pieces of shit who would rather burn the entire MRM down, then allow it to be ideologically inclusive (which you all claimed in the early days when you were the ones who were outnumbered). Lying. Fucking. Liberals. They demand tolerance for their views, and then downvote anyone who disagrees with them.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:13 PM
-1

Joking or not, you're flat-out wrong. Unless you have no idea what the geographical region known as the 'mid west' consists of (note: it is not the entire middle of the country between California and Pennsylvania, which you clearly believe to be the case), you are outright lying. Even if you count the Great Lake region (some do, some don't), the population of the Mid-west is nowhere near 50%. It doesn't reach 50% of the American land mass. And it doesn't represent 50% of the house or the senate.…
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:10 PM
0

No, the midwest makes up less than 20% of the American population. What's the point of arguing with people who at most pretend to know what they're talking about?
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:07 PM
1

I think the disparity in downvotes between the comments perfectly proves the point as to which group is currently more obnoxious.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:05 PM
0

You're just explaining why the bias exists, and trying to make excuses for it. You're not even claiming it doesn't -- you're just pretending to do that, which I find massively dishonest. You make no acknowledgment of the fact that the underlying dynamic is real, and that it is wrong.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:04 PM
0

He might be bullshitting about life in general, but you're outright lying if you're pretending that conservatives don't get shit on a whole lot more on reddit. You're a fucking liar to claim that. No reasonable human being could look at, say, /r/politics and claim that conservatives are welcomed to the political discussion here on reddit.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:02 PM
1

I've been both. There are assholes on both sides, but it seems like it's increasingly obnoxious liberals who feel emboldened to act like this due to cultural trends, whereas the Republicans calmed down in the mid to late 00s. There was a time, pre-Obama, when I was still a Democrats, and when there didn't seem to be any significant Republican opposition in my real life at all, where nobody was willing to defend Bush or the party. I think Katrina marked the turning point, where it went mostly fro…
/r/MensRights04/03/15 12:01 PM
0

We get what you're saying. We simply reject it. It's an argument designed to absolve them from guilt. It's too self-serving to be taken seriously, and it isn't remotely accurate given the degree of electoral and economic power women wield. This is a trick feminism regularly plays: Pretending that women had no say in setting up the gender system. Like when they only point that women had it bad in the 1800s, ignoring all the boys who got sent off to die of black lung in the mines at the ripe old a…
/r/MensRights04/03/15 11:55 AM
1

It's a bullshit argument designed to make women into angels and men into beasts. I don't care how well argued it is, I reject it as victorian bigotry. A smart man can make a good argument for anything. That only proves him smart, it has nothing to do with the merits of the idea.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 11:53 AM
3

There are many feminisms. Until that bullshit accountability dodge backfires, then there is only one feminism, and if you disagree with it, then you're an apostate.
/r/MensRights04/03/15 11:38 AM
0

Wait, they punished her for breaking a completely separate law, and not for being raped. So what's the fucking beef here? Yeah, it's a bullshit law. But these people are flat-out lying when they try to pain it like this woman was punished for being raped. Is their position that rape victims should enjoy legal immunity?
/r/MensRights04/03/15 11:36 AM
0

You can't really say that for sure, particularly when statistics say that it's a lot more likely that a woman will get off vs. men.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 05:46 PM
1

Wikipedia should never be mentioned without also mentioning how shitty a source they are. It should be turned into a object of ridicule. Wikipedia cannot be saved. IT can only be burned to the ground.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:31 PM
1

But it is a crime. So what you're actually saying is that she shouldn't be punished for breaking the law because you don't agree with that law. And there are times when that's acceptable -- when the stakes are way, way, way higher than this. But not over this. She helped a man die out of malice. She has to be punished for that, and I am very sickened by people like you who put your idiot 'ideals' ahead of justice for the dead and the protection of our society from deviants like this.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:28 PM
-1

No, at the absolute least it was criminally depraved homicide -- allowing another to die by not acting to prevent it when you could have without putting yourself in danger, or contributing to an already dangerous situation.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:26 PM
1

It's not even a matter of 'just disagreeing'. He's flat-out wrong. That's not what a thought crime is. Did anyone but me actually read the fucking book?
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:25 PM
1

No, she's being punished for the action of telling a suicidal man to get back in the car and finish the job. She is not being punished for thinking that people should be allowed to commit suicide. She is being punished for her actions, not her ideas.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:24 PM
2

This happened in Massachusetts, so what the fuck does Minnesota have to do with anything? Edit: Let's be clear here -- you are saying that the police and the prosecutor should ignore the law because you don't think it should be a law.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:22 PM
5

In a general sense, yes. But if you encourage a specific person to commit suicide, that is entirely different -- particularly if they're of a diminished capacity thanks to a mental disorder like depression. Saying 'People should be allowed to kill themselves' is protected. Saying, 'You should go kill yourself, and this is how' is not. That is a crime, and that is the crime she committed by telling him to get back into that car.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:21 PM
1

She didn't merely promote. She gave a specific instance in a specific moment. If she had said, 'No, don't do it!', he wouldn't have. He wasn't looking for anything beyond proof that someone gave a shit about him. She wanted him to die, and he did. She deserves to fry for that.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:19 PM
3

He made an offhand remark to someone who seemed to be playing purely for sympathy. The underlying facts and intentions are different. Being a thoughtless dick is quite a different thing than being a cold-blooded manipulator. In this man's circumstance, there was no intention that the girl kill herself. This girl intended for the boy to kill himself.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:18 PM
3

Not likely. He thought she was being histrionic and wouldn't actually go through with it. This girl knew for a fact that he would, and wanted to encourage that. Different circumstances. Intent is the heart of law.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:16 PM
1

You may or may not be a white knight, but you are clearly an idiot. I get what you're saying, but a man is dead because of this girl's actions. Someone has to pay for that, and she's the only one who deserves the bill. Edit: I would have to no more about the specifics, but no. Your friend said that as an offhand remark without the obvious intention that she do it. This girl new that her friend was actually trying to commit suicide, and told him to do it knowing full well that he would. There is …
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:14 PM
2

She broke the law. There is no way to argue that her actions were not illegal under the law. The law was written specifically to cover events like this.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:13 PM
1

Not really. Nobody is talking about putting viewscreens into people's homes that can't be turned off. Did you actually read the book, or just kind of hear about it?
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:09 PM
5

In all likelihood, they understood it just fine, and are posting this in the hopes it will cause people not to bother with the article. There are a lot of cop shills on reddit.
/r/MensRights02/03/15 02:08 PM
2

Fuck cracked. Funny is funny, and Cracked.com stopped being funny on a consistent basis years ago.
/r/MensRights01/03/15 03:45 AM
0

I have no sympathy with people who are willing to help ruin this country for a pay check.
/r/MensRights27/02/15 09:07 AM
11

There's a lot of hypocrisy on them when it comes to how they want people to judge the behavior of feminists (nothing any one of them should ever be blamed on the rest of them, and even policies pushed by them for decades cannot be blamed on the movement) versus the way they demand people treat their critics (if one of them does something bad, all of them are evil hateful misogynists, if there is an even slightly foreseeable downside to a policy MRAs push, that becomes 'the real reason' why we wa…
/r/MensRights25/02/15 01:43 PM
1

Being a good lawyer isn't easy. There are a shitload of incompetent boobs who either fail to even get hired, or who do and go on to a long career of failing their clients, who prove that being a bad one is quite possible.
/r/MensRights20/02/15 03:29 PM
1

Because politically motivated feminists, most of whom hate men far more than they care to help women, wanted it this way, and raise a bloody fuss through their political operatives any time someone tries to change it. And they pretty much own an entire political party (The Democrats, who have no actual political strategy beyond screaming 'WAR ON WOMEN!!!!' and hoping for the best).
/r/PussyPass19/02/15 08:38 AM
3

If this were true, then why is every major feminist website just like them? Why do all of these invisible feminist seem to have such little sway within feminism, given how often I've been assured by people like you that they are totally a majority?
/r/MensRights19/02/15 08:19 AM
1

At this point, anti-male rhetoric and policies have become red meat for the Democratic party base.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 09:42 PM
2

It is unethical to ask men to donate genetic material anonymously, and then to rescind that anonymity. That is far, far, far more unethical, because that group had something promised to them. You're arguing morality, not ethics. There is no ethical duty to the child.
/r/MensRights09/02/15 11:03 AM
2

I'd look the other way on an ass-kicking. And that's why you shouldn't be in charge of enforcing laws. You shouldn't look the other way because you think someone has it coming. Because what happens if that kid's father shoots the girl's father for assaulting his son? Legally, if it's during the act, he's entitled to do so. And a lot of parents will go after someone who hurts their kids regardless of any legal entitlement at all (as you're displaying). I would certain kick the ever loving shit ou…
/r/MensRights04/02/15 11:26 AM
1

No it doesn't. The 'intoxication' would have to be fairly severe to trigger the clauses in sexual assault legislation. A little slurred speech won't cut it.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 11:22 AM
3

Not really. They have to prove that they told the truth. You only have to prove that they caused harm to your life -- after you show that, the burden of proof is on them to prove that they told the truth. Truth is a defense against slander, but you don't have to prove that someone lied to sue them for slander. It's an affirmative defense, meaning that the burden of proof is on them for invoking it.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 11:05 AM
2

Ah, the old 'Separate, but equal' argument. Did you actually think that last line through?
/r/MensRights04/02/15 11:03 AM
1

I stopped reading when they stopped being funny. Or more accurately, when the 'funny' bits were basically just the sugar they used to make the feminism they were forcing into your throat go down.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 03:09 PM
0

The snotty condescension of liberals who think they're enlightening the rest of us with psalms from heaven...
/r/MensRights31/01/15 03:07 PM
1

it seems as if we do ignore female victims. That's because we're a men's group. That isn't our place, or our purview. There are an endless number of groups that already look after women, and almost none that care about men. So basically, fuck off. With that one line, you prove to me that you care far, far, far more about women, than you could ever care about men. You don't go harassing feminists into caring about men. I know this, because I looked through your comment history.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 03:06 PM
2

It doesn't really sound like you do... I don't expect this website to take our side. There is literally nothing that the KKK could do to get black America on its side, and that is exactly how it should be. They will never be on our side. Anything that looks otherwise is simply an attempt at reframing the debate in their favor so that they can fuck us even harder. You, my friend, are destined to fall into a great many traps.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 03:02 PM
7

Plus, the DA most often simply lies about serving papers like this.
/r/MensRights31/01/15 02:56 PM
1

This study is full of shit. Any study that has women on average performing better than men at math is likely to be full of shit, in contradiction to everything we know about cognitive differences between men and women.
/r/MensRights28/01/15 11:12 AM
1

Tell me again how liberal politicians aren't hostile to men's rights?
/r/MensRights27/01/15 12:30 PM
1

That's what happens when you only hire from one single city in the country. You end up with all of the cultural biases of that city. And when that city as is far out of the mainstream as San Francisco is, you end up with the inevitable time bomb Reddit is currently sitting on. Also, no real room for demographic growth. This site is extremely hostile to anyone who isn't far left as judged by the political spectrum of America. It has maxed out on liberals. There is no more room to grow here.
/r/MensRights24/01/15 12:50 PM
1

Ah yes, the rights of men thrown away for the sake of 'convenience'.
/r/MensRights24/01/15 12:44 PM
2

Feminists don' care. They only care about their 'right' to use men as a walking wallet.
/r/MensRights24/01/15 12:43 PM
-1

What? You want mods to censor a post?
/r/MensRights23/01/15 01:01 PM
2

That they run the entire thing, tbh. The whole 'GamerGate' page thing has made it fairly obvious that a clique of hardcore ideological feminist admins and editors is pushing a thumb down very hard on the scales overthere.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 01:01 PM
1

This is the most widely distributed feminist opinion maker in the world. And yet we're always told that she doesn't actually represent them...
/r/MensRights23/01/15 12:39 PM
2

'Progressive' is the new 'Christian' -- a badge you wear that declares you to be a good guy, mostly so that you don't actually have to be one.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 12:38 PM
3

I get being okay with tofu, but how do you 'really like' it? That's like saying your favorite food is lettuce.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 12:35 PM
16

Despite feminists on reddit claiming that these types are rare, they clearly aren't. They run ever major or minor feminist institution, either nationally or locally. You can't do that if you're 'rare'.
/r/MensRights23/01/15 12:34 PM
1

You're not allowed to criticize women in this society, though. It's extremely forbidden.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 10:01 PM
12

That is a huge problem on that sub. Women regularly tell obviously tall tales, and anyone contradicting them gets banned. But when men tell storied of fairly banal sexual interactions of relationship drama, half of the sub starts shrieking '/r/thathappened', and none of the mods say a word. Watch them either downvote this or brigade it.
/r/MensRights22/01/15 05:44 PM
2

Feminism is popular among the elite, particularly the so-called 'creative' class (which isn't anything more than a wank-a-thon of a term). Reporters love it. Move makers love it. Indie video gamers love it. Most people -- those people who have to function in the real world, mostly -- fucking despise it. There are far more anti-feminists than there are feminists.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 09:00 PM
2

Any adult that hits you, deserves to get hit back.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:53 PM
2

Stop defending the indefensible.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:52 PM
1

Then it's time to follow them to their homes and start putting bullets in their heads.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:51 PM
-4

Oh, so obviously we should just throw our hands up and stop caring! how retarded are you, exactly?
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:50 PM
-3

Oh look, another shitbag cop defender who doesn't give a shit when citizens get murdered.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:49 PM
2

The only good cop, is a dead cop.
/r/MensRights19/01/15 12:47 PM
-1

It just isn't true. For most prostitutes, it wasn't their 'last' option. They took it because they were sexually nonrestrictive and didn't want to take a real job. Or because it fuels their drug habit. Most prostitutes are simply women who made bad choices, or perhaps even good ones (for them). They are not victims.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 03:26 PM
2

Look, it's one of those crazy straw feminists that reddit always insists doesn't actually exist.
/r/MensRights18/01/15 02:55 PM
1

Yeah. Sorry, dude. You're pretty well fucked. Society is well and truly out to nail your ass to some wall or another.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 10:08 AM
0

Not really. This is something people trying to sound clever on the internet say, but it isn't accurate. The first amendment only applies to government action (and even so, it applies here because these schools all accept federal funding and must all abide by constitutional dictates), but the broader concept of Free Speech predates the constitution and does not necessarily limit itself to government functions.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 10:07 AM
2

Their responses are realistic, especially when compared to the typical reddit attitude of 'You're not supposed to notice that, or talk about it if you do'.
/r/MensRights17/01/15 09:56 AM
8

Feminism is massively unpopular among all men. And among women.
/r/MensRights10/01/15 03:45 PM
3

This is my experience with feminists. They may say, and even believe on some intellectual level, that hitting is always wrong. But they still feel and act as if hitting a girl is a billion times more wrong. They don't really live up to their bullshit.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:52 PM
1

There is a huge range of options between 'doing nothing' and 'beat the shit out of'.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:50 PM
1

I don't care if men are stronger than women. Women are capable of understanding why hitting is wrong. They are capable of understanding that actions have consequences. So if they hit you, hit them. These are not 'just' rules. They are rules because people made them rules. They aren't even written down.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:49 PM
0

Feminism seems to be reinforcing it.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:45 PM
2

This is obviously not true. If it were true, then this is what would be happening. But this isn't how it's happening. So it's not true.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:44 PM
1

Yeah, I'm not totally against this. I'm not really doing that well at the moment. Cash for not doing something that's very easy not to do would really help out.
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:38 PM
0

So you're just talking out your ass, then. Because you do claim to 'know' some things about this case -- enough to mount a so-called 'defense'. As if you've been trained and given talking points. Because the wide gaps in your knowledge indicate that this is not an actual area of expertise for you.
/r/MensRights06/01/15 03:40 PM
2

No, this is why people hate feminism. And most people really, really hate the fuck out of feminism.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:18 PM
1

Use the 'All women are feminists!' line to threaten politicians into giving them whatever they want. That is, after all, the end goal of every political movement.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:17 PM
1

Rape is forced sex. Either coercion is force, or it's not. You don't get to have it both ways.
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:16 PM
0

Lmao, is this really the pathetic fucking excuse you all have created for her behavior? This is idiotic -- the equivalent of 'why don't you stop hitting yourself!'
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:15 PM
-3

So, you hate her for living the dream? You hate her for managing to be a good wife and having a good career?
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:12 PM
9

Not even a housewife, really. Just a good wife who cares about her husband enough to see to his needs the way he sees to hers. That's it. If you genuinely manage what these people claim that they want -- to 'have it all' -- then they will punish you. Because that means that their failure to have it all is not some innate problem, but rather a personal failure on their part. Because no small amount of these women do suck at relationships, choosing to care far more for their career than the man in…
/r/MensRights04/01/15 01:12 PM
8

Feminism is losing a lot of ground among the younger generation, though you wouldn't know it simply through exposure to pop culture. This generation is far less feminist than the last one. They are trying to make it appear as if everyone woman has to be a feminist. Because most women don't want anything to do with the movement.
/r/MensRights03/01/15 01:40 PM
1

They should take action. Kick students out after they are convicted at trial.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 01:46 PM
3

This is why I hate feminism. In practice, it generally means leaving boys out, not including girls in.
/r/MensRights30/12/14 01:32 PM
3

Reddit loves to say this, but good luck proving 'assault' without a 'battery'.
/r/MensRights29/12/14 03:32 PM
1

Say what you want, but this would never have happened in the US. It looks to me like each system has it's flaws.
/r/MensRights27/12/14 02:47 PM
1

Thought by crazy people known for thinking crazy things.
/r/MensRights26/12/14 10:50 PM
1

They don't 'need' this. They want this. And they want it because they are petty assholes who feel the need to tell everyone else what we can and can't do.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 06:07 PM
9

Feminists corrupt everything they touch. They refuse to allow any movement to go forward without feminist dominance -- not even simply influence, but outright dominance.
/r/MensRights25/12/14 05:56 PM
3

I would be fine with this if every man who ever stated that he won't date a feminist wasn't met with the wrath of every fire-breathing dragon-lady without 500 meters.
/r/MensRights21/12/14 02:57 PM
0

Oh look, another of the 'Obama can do no wrong' crowd.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 09:16 PM
1

The crime rate is low -- the lowest it has ever been in all of recorded American history. You are a fucking liar.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 02:28 PM
1

Think Progress is a leftist rag.
/r/MensRights19/12/14 02:27 PM
30

Given how negatively this is being downvoted for no obvious reason, I'd say yes.
/r/MensRights18/12/14 03:03 AM
6

Well, I guess I'll be voting against her
/r/MensRights18/12/14 03:01 AM
2

Cutting a man's dick off goes further than simple 'disfigurement' or a disability.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 05:27 PM
6

Five years in jail? What a fucking joke.
/r/MensRights17/12/14 05:26 PM
1

Oh, how responsible, simply decertifying someone for anal rape. That is obviously the full extent of the repercussions they should have suffered.
/r/MensRights14/12/14 04:18 AM
0

You're the one defending a torture apologist.
/r/MensRights14/12/14 04:17 AM
4

Fucking shill. This is not what the report says. The report says specifically that there was no medical need.
/r/MensRights14/12/14 04:17 AM
1

It is statistically rare, but numerically common. That is a very common situation in a nation with 350,000,000 people, where even 1% of the population amounts to 3.5 million people.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:49 PM
2

I don't think that 'weak' and 'sensitive' are the same thing here. Even if a man angrily denounced an unfair position he's been put in, he will be seen as 'weak' simply for admitting that he isn't an unconquerable demi-god capable of rising above every fucking challenge put before him. That has nothing to do with sensitivity, and everything to do with the unrealistic standards society (and honestly, women in particular) hold men to. We are not allowed to fail due to circumstance, so any failure …
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:44 PM
2

As your own numbers prove, we get more allies bashing feminism, than not bashing it.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:38 PM
1

Well, you see, feminism is a boutique issue of upper-class women -- the kind of women who hold powerful media positions or are married to men who do. As a result, their interests are pushed regardless of how rare they are. You seem deliberately obtuse with this one.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:36 PM
1

They didn't. It's just that liberal feminists in the media started to excommunicate everyone who disagreed with them during the Bush years.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:25 PM
2

I don't know, but as a rule, anything with a 'plus' after it is rabid-dog crazy.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:22 PM
1

This is why I don't by the 'only a tiny minority of mostly under-age feminists on the internet!' argument. It's clearly bullshit. A lot of men have stories just like this about feminist classes and feminist instructors.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:16 PM
1

Because a very narrow economic elite is shoving feminism down our throats in order to distract us from class issues. And the feminists seem to fucking love it.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:08 PM
4

If he'd tried that with me, he'd be counting the teeth on the ground.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:05 PM
1

Honestly, if someone did this to my boy, I'd beat the ever loving shit out of him no matter what age they were.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:04 PM
1

It was that. But he's still bragging about it in his senior years, so it's safe to say he can be criticized for this.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 10:03 PM
-1

MakhSC always bends over backwards to excuse feminist action. That seems to be his primary, and possibly only, reason for being here.
/r/MensRights12/12/14 09:53 PM
11

How fucking insane do you have to be to suggest that a 'culling of males' is an acceptable thing. This isn't sub-Saharan Africa 100,000 years ago, bub. We used to have slaves and kings and all sorts of other shit, too.
/r/MensRights10/12/14 11:43 AM
2

Economics is mostly junk science anyway -- unproven bullshit with no prescriptive or predictive capability that mostly breaks down into telling rich people what they want to hear. Feels over reals is already set in stone when it comes to economics -- the feels of the ruling class already triumph over actual data.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 10:39 AM
1

even likely, this is a claim on the better part of 18 years of child support the father neglected to pay. This seems more likely to you, despite not being mentioned at all in the article? Honestly, what makes you think that?
/r/MensRights09/12/14 10:28 AM
2

That appears to be the fig-leaf the feminists are clinging to on this one. Despite the article saying nothing -- absolutely nothing whatsoever -- about this being child support, they have decided that this man simply must be a deadbeat. Because all men are deadbeats in their eyes, and this woman simply can't be a bad person -- because women, in their eyes, aren't capable of being bad people.
/r/MensRights09/12/14 10:27 AM
2

Discrimination by private businesses is not general alright in most countries, either.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 08:15 AM
4

I don't accept that discrimination becomes okay just because someone can make money off of it. That is an insane thing to believe. Edit: If you think otherwise, you may as well give up any effort toward equality whatsoever.
/r/MensRights08/12/14 08:14 AM
4

I hope the actual lawyers involved take this tack. 'Your honor, I acknowledge that the law is on the side of the plaintiff. However, I want you to rule against them anyway, because they are great big meanies!'.
/r/MensRights05/12/14 12:53 PM
2

Someone doesn't know the actual history of the Russian Revolution...
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:37 PM
8

Gee... it's amazing how anything that counters feminist arguments gets mysteriously downvoted here...
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:36 PM
2

Then don't allow it against anyone. Don't point to a small cadre of people and say, in effect, 'These people can commit violence against you with impunity'. The problem here isn't that you can't shoot women, it's that a woman can shoot you -- and you won't be allowed to do a damned thing about it.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:32 PM
6

Which is how I know that reddit is nothing like the real world. The Democratic party has fewer fans than at any point in the last 50 years. Yet if you even offer mild criticism on many subs here of that party, you get tarred and feathered. Reddit is one giant circlejerk when it comes to politics.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:27 PM
15

I have spent enough time on DailyKos, Eschaton, etc., to know that the Democratic party base hates men -- and they especially hate any man who sticks up for his rights. I don't see the point. It's the party of women, minorities, and a few big business interests, primarily in the financial and entertainment industries. Plus... well, in all honesty, that party needs to stop focusing 100% on identity groups, and maybe do something about the absolute shit-show of an economy we've had for like a deca…
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:24 PM
0

Generally, if the other party is being an asshole in an argument, you've got no real choice. Not being an asshole will only embolden the asshole party.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:00 PM
2

Don't worry. The US constitution explicitly bans laws like this for this very reason. They can't lower the retirement age of one gender. They cannot raise the retirement age for one gender. Unless you're in Britain. Those people don't have any real rules at all.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 01:00 PM
1

You should probably tell the feminists this. They most definitely do constantly claim to represent all women. That's why they don't generally call the people who disagree with them 'anti-feminist' unless those people are women. Any man who does it is a 'misogynist.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:58 PM
2

Lmao, yeah... you're much less likely to be accused falsely of rape by a 16 year old who knows what sex is, vs a ten year old who has no idea... I get the feeling that you didn't really think that one through.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:55 PM
3

No, you don't understand! Women deserve to live perfectly stress-free lives (while, on the other hand, men deserve to be afflicted constantly with the judgments of women). Any deviation from this universal truth is, to the feminist mind, 'misogyny'. Simple expecting a woman to deal with shit the same way you would a man is 'misogyny' to these people.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:49 PM
0

No, not really.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:40 PM
22

No... the law once said that black people couldn't drink out of the same fountains as white people. That was still discrimination. Passing a law doesn't make discrimination, non-descrimination.
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:40 PM
8

And too many people here will see no problem in it, because they think discrimination is perfectly alright so long as someone can make money off of it...
/r/MensRights20/11/14 12:38 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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