GenderEqualityBatman Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
0	Replacing "men" with "Jews" in feminist Anita Sarkeesian's tweets is quite revealing... I get you point but really anything will sound racist if you change the pronouns to "jews." For example here is a paragraph from the AVFM article linked in the MensRights sidebar ("On the difference between the Feminist MOvement and the Men's Rights Movement") with "Feminist" replaced with "Jew." There can be no common ground. I say this because there is only one way common ground can be reached between the MRM and the Jew movement. Jews will have to first acknowledge that their movement has spr…	/r/MensRights	26/01/15 05:01 PM
1	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. So if that's such a great lifestyle why not give up? Why not just let feminists "win." Why not just let them win and then they have to work and you can stay home and be "protected" and enjoy all that "privilege."	/r/MensRights	16/01/15 07:11 AM
2	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. Oh you're right, I was mixing up Saudi Arabia with Boko Haram, which is the nice group that everyone's happy in and no school girls are mass kidnapped and raped. Because Al Quada loves women and they are so lucky. You're right.	/r/MensRights	16/01/15 05:17 AM
1	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. Ok just to be clear, women in al quaeda, they are better off then men. That's your position right? I just want to be clear that you think that because the al quaeda gunman didn't kill one woman, then women are better off in al quaeda controlled territory.	/r/MensRights	16/01/15 05:15 AM
1	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. Flip the genders? So you're asking would men be privileged in a world were they were women's slaves? Who could be executed for disobeying women, had no right to vote, own property, or even drive. A world were women would keep a harem full of men who were not allowed to leave the house without a female chaperone? Who literally could do nothing more than cook, clean their wife's house, and raise the daughters? No I would not say those men were privileged...I doubt that that's really the kind of li…	/r/MensRights	15/01/15 11:56 PM
2	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. umm...they do? Burka, captive in separate rooms of the house, no rights, can't drive, can't vote, can't own property, stoned to death if disobeys husband?	/r/MensRights	15/01/15 11:16 PM
1	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. I think the point is that it's awfully patronizing to be "helped" when you don't need it, and in fact know how to do your job without help/may even be better at your job than the person "generously" "helping" you. In that case it's not a privilege, it's pretty fucking irritating. Like when your parents keep "helping" you by trying to get you a real job cause the "internet is just a fad."	/r/MensRights	15/01/15 11:15 PM
1	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. or you could talk about how woman are killed if they don't wear burkhas, they aren't allowed to drive or be in public without a man present, and they have to enter through other doors than men... Just saying...	/r/MensRights	15/01/15 11:12 PM
2	While so many feminists claim that women are the victims of misogyny, a woman's life was spared during the Charlie Hebdo killings, because the terrorists said that they 'don't kill women' - only men. and we all know that Terrorists are a representative slice of humanity? I'm sorry but Al Quaeda gunman are not first on the list of people I would interview when trying to determine the political viewpoints of the average westerner. Especially on sexual equality. Just saying. Edit: cause I wrote "sexuality equality" :p	/r/MensRights	15/01/15 11:09 PM
1	"Calling out male privilege" absolute non-sense. Need help responding properly please. I understand your sentiment, and that could be a factor but it is not a rule to any degree. Entrapment is a very nebulous concept and it's ultimately up to the jury to decide if it exists or not (we had on case where the defense attorney successfully argued entrapment because the police officer was so attractive, and so flirty, that the client was just tryin to get her drugs so he could go on a date). The central test is if the client is made by the police to act against their normal way of acti…	/r/MensRights	15/01/15 02:59 PM
2	"Calling out male privilege" absolute non-sense. Need help responding properly please. You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means. lol	/r/MensRights	14/01/15 05:17 PM
2	"Calling out male privilege" absolute non-sense. Need help responding properly please. Ok you're being awfully acerbic for no real reason. "overbourne will" is one of the standards, that absolutely is "against their will." evidence and proof are, legally speaking, the same thing. The Jury judges the evidence and says is this enough evidence to convict, the justice system very rarely uses the term "proof" because it misses the point of the system. Also court's don't "find entrapment." They decide what the jury will be told about the law in effect, and then the jury will decide if t…	/r/MensRights	14/01/15 05:15 PM
1	"Calling out male privilege" absolute non-sense. Need help responding properly please. The US, I practice in Arizona. They absolutely can offer drugs and then arrest people for possessing them. The standard is can't do something that causes a 'normally law-abiding citizen to break the law against their character,' another way to put it is if the person would not have engaged in the criminal activity absent police encouragement. Most courts need a very high level of police "encouragement" to find entrapment, up to the point where practically speaking the police encouragement is aga…	/r/MensRights	14/01/15 05:02 PM
2	"Calling out male privilege" absolute non-sense. Need help responding properly please. As a criminal defense attorney I can tell you this would not qualify as entrapment. Entrapment means that the police make or encourage the person to commit the crime AGAINST THEIR WILL, it is very different from giving someone the opportunity to do something and then catch them doing it--which is perfectly legal.	/r/MensRights	14/01/15 04:38 PM