TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Gilthanass Archive

View 1 post and 105 comments by Gilthanass 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)
7

Gilthanass/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:15 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

granted I'm only a "white man", but I genuinely don't understand the "woman of colour" language that seems so prevalent. If anyone does understand it, please explain it to me (And this isn't sarcastic, I honestly would like to know). I mean, what is the purpose of it? Why is being non-white a group to identify with? I mean, I grew up in a predominantly Chinese area, and let me tell you, the older Chinese immigrants were probably the most racist people I've ever met (just ask their embarrassed ch…
/r/MensRights13/10/16 06:36 PM
10

very true, you get the men going there that are really offended (people who are passionate about things like men's rights), and the women who go there that really support (SJW types) but no one in the middle who think's she's dumb, but it isn't worth commenting (most people in the world).
/r/PussyPassDenied19/08/16 03:44 PM
27

Try something for me (which I did after noticing a trend). Scroll through the comments, and only read those made from women. I would say they are 95% in favour of the senator there. This isn't just about SJW terminology, it seems to be about how men perceive that interaction vs women. Not good.
/r/PussyPassDenied19/08/16 02:55 PM
3

No, since neither can give consent it's actually DOUBLE rape.
/r/MensRights01/06/16 07:45 PM
13

What I find interesting about this quote from Hilary, is how non-controversial the statement seems to be. I don't talk about anything related to Men's Rights most of the time in real life (mostly because it only serves to completely alienate people it seems). I have thought (a few times) that bringing that quote up was a pretty easy win, I mean, surely almost anyone can agree that it's ridiculous to say that women are the PRIMARY victims of war, right? Nope. I've brought it up twice (to people I…
/r/MensRights21/09/15 07:16 PM
2

The point of the cards is only meant to impact financial consequences. So, let's say a woman has a "will have abortion" card, but decides not to go through with it. Not a problem, she can have the baby. The difference is, the man won't have to pay child support, because he didn't consent to it. If the man wants to keep the baby and the woman wants an abortion? Too fucking bad. I in no way am looking to reduce a woman's right to choose, only adding a MAN'S right to choose as well (and at that, on…
/r/MensRights26/08/15 03:36 PM
2

I think the easiest answer (easiest being not taking into account human emotion or behavior) is to have either men or women carry a card around indicating what they would do in the event of an unintended pregnancy. Let me give you an example: If Women carry the cards (meaning no financial abortion): Women have cards that say "if pregnant, I will get an abortion" or "give it up for adoption" or "keep it". The man signs off on that, and if she gets pregnant, has to support her up to the that decis…
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:49 PM
3

As someone who recently had a child (a man, so I guess I didn't have the child, but you know) I will say this: You are absolutely correct that men (at least this man) doesn't have the kind of connection to a child in utero that women have. My wife was living with our daughter long before she came out. She knew her sleep cycles, knew when she was active, and how she responded to different foods. Me? I just knew what it was like living with a pregnant woman. Yes, I went to ultasounds, I felt the b…
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:41 PM
3

Yeah, discounting semi-permanent solutions (like getting the big V or tubes tied) here are the choices males have vs females on parenting: Females: BEFORE: Take contraceptive pills BEFORE: Use a contraceptive device (ring, under skin, etc) DURING: Use a diaphragm, have man use a condom AFTER: Plan B AFTER: Abortion AFTER: Safe dropoff AFTER: adoption Males: DURING: Condom Yeah... that's it. Basically, it requires a single mistake (or accident) for a man to have an unwanted pregnancy that can lea…
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:31 PM
2

Alright, then give the man an option. If the woman wants to carry the child to term, he can help financially support her during that time (so she can potentially take time off, pregnancy leave in some countries). I am sure 10/10 men who didn't want children would take the option of financially supporting an unplanned pregnancy over supporting a child for 18 years.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:21 PM
5

Yep, feminism is about mainly white, upper-middle class women desperately wanting to feel oppressed so they lobby for laws that unfairly target members of actually disadvantaged communities while believing they are going after the "big bad white man".
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:31 PM
1

Thanks, I've posted this above as well. The fact is, both stats can be true, so the 4% stat is in no way contradicting the 50% stat. My question for things like this is always "ignorant or malicious" as in, do the people posting these answers not understand statistics, or are they just trying to "lie for the greater good".
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:25 PM
2

When viewing feminist stats, I find the following helpful: 1) Look for statistics from both sides. As in, many feminists will use a single statistic ("1000 women will be the victims of domestic violence this year") without a comparative statistic on male victims. This allows them to create gendered issues where none exist (if male and female are the same, there is no gendered issue, only a societal one) 2) Look for unbalanced statistics. This is a trick they love to pull. They will give you stat…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:24 PM
3

It's those stats that some feminists use that piss me off the most. I don't know whether people throwing those stats around are manipulative or ignorant (or some combination) but it's really fucking dumb. Let me try to explain. The OP on facebook was saying that half of domestic violence is perpetuated by women. In order to refute that, the responder pulls a completely different stat out that SOUNDS like it supports her position, but doesn't actually do anything of the sort. What her stat is (wh…
/r/MensRights29/05/15 01:16 PM
2

Sexual dimorphism has distinct advantages No, it CAN have advantages. It's more of a case of advantages coming later, and not that sexual dimorphism developed because of those advantages. Think of it this way, sexual dimorphism existed before social animals. The only way for sexual dimorphism to be a benefit on a population is if it exists in social communities. So yes, you're correct that in certain species sexual dimorphism itself can be an advantage; however, that was more of a "using what's …
/r/MensRights19/05/15 04:23 PM
2

it could be that sexual dimorphism is an advantage to genetic survival Yes and no. Sexual reproduction is absolutely an advantage genetically. It means that different genes and combinations of genes can be combined MUCH more quickly than asexual reproduction. That means that if there is a change in environmental factors, a species with sexual reproduction will "adapt" much more quickly than one using asexual reproduction. Over time, this means species that reproduce sexually will out-compete tho…
/r/MensRights19/05/15 03:06 PM
17

It's actually a really poorly written scientific article though, written by someone who, I can only imagine, has no idea what she's talking about. There is no great question about why sexual selection exists. It's not something that has biologists scratching their heads. It's a very powerful force for genetic "mixing", that is to say, it's a great way to experiment with different genes and gene combinations (since mutations can occur in multiple lines, and be combined through sexual reproduction…
/r/MensRights19/05/15 02:50 PM
1

Now all we need to do is find out why a professor with a public voice appears to lack the capacity to exert power in their eyes. That's the brilliance of it. They don't actually acknowledge personal power AT ALL. To them, there is no spectrum, there is no personal ability to exert power. To them, it's a systemic issue (and one that they don't have to defend), which means that personal power doesn't play into it at all. If you are black, you are oppressed. If you are a woman, you are oppressed. T…
/r/MensRights15/05/15 05:09 PM
6

But without a qualifier, "women will take advantage of you" means all women, or at least most women. How about these statements: "Blacks are criminals" "Gay men are paedophiles" or even "Men are taller than 6'2" How do those statements strike you? They are all true by your definition, but if you asked people if those are statements were true, you would get a pretty solid "no" answer.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:57 PM
3

I'm not sure if you're trying to get attention, of if that's your actual opinion. Option 4 is probably the worst option possible. You can't have the government decide who can and can't have children, that would be... a disaster.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:46 PM
3

Ok, I'll give you the opportunity then, show your evidence that what you're saying is reality (and since it's a fairly extraordinary claim, it requires pretty solid evidence).
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:41 PM
6

saying "women will take advantage of you" is akin to saying "men will rape you". If you don't accept the argument "I didn't say ALL men" from feminists who say it, you shouldn't accept that argument here either. Language is important here. Right now, men's rights is already pretty poorly regarded. The only thing we can do is be careful in crafting our messages so that they are factual, and clear. "Women will take advantage of you" is unclear and unnecessarily inflammatory. Don't make a trait gen…
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:40 PM
6

Though an interesting suggestion, it would be political suicide. Even if you could get around the perception that you're attacking mothers (good luck getting elected on that platform) you're NEVER getting around the perception you're attacking children. The "won't somebody think of the children" argument is the oldest and most powerful in politics. There is really no good answer to all of this to be honest. Nothing that doesn't leave a very bitter taste in your mouth. Here are the options as I s…
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:36 PM
21

Okay, SHE committed a genetic crime against HIM. SHE should be the one giving money and HE should be the one with custody (if he even wants it). You're missing a huge component here. Paternity laws are not in place for the sake of fairness. They are in place because without child support, the state has to pay more benefits to single mothers. So, there is incentive to find SOMEONE to foot the bill that ISN'T the government. It's why all of these cases as so ridiculous, because there is incentive …
/r/MensRights08/05/15 12:19 PM
27

Women will take advantage of you, they will betray you, and they will get away with it, because the legal system does not recognize a man's right to reproductive choice. I think we have to be careful how we frame that (to avoid the common label of misogyny). From my perspective, I would say there is nothing unique about women that makes the want to take advantage of men. It isn't an inherently female trait. The problem is, it is a HUMAN trait. All humans (or at least a percentage of them) will l…
/r/MensRights08/05/15 12:15 PM
3

Just watched 4 of them. They are quite interesting and bring up some decent points. I would suggest he is too harsh on women (stupid, greedy, etc) though. Many people (men and women) fall for ideas that don't have the substance they think it does (communism is one example). It isn't a unique quality of women that makes them prone to this, it's human nature. Other than that though, I find the theory of "getting women to work" actually very interesting. At its core, all women had to be convinced o…
/r/MensRights07/05/15 04:57 PM
4

This is my absolute favourite part: When you’re poor, disabled, queer, non-white, trans, or feminine, 'no' isn't for you. So basically, she is once again saying that the only group of people that are actually responsible for their actions are straight, cis, white, males.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 05:35 PM
9

Also, I'm pretty sure the "Trained cold blooded killer" aspect was why she referred to herself as a monster more than the "can't have children".
/r/MensRights05/05/15 04:59 PM
4

Women on average maintain a much better work-life balance than men do Be careful about value statements on things like this, because there usually is no universal "right" and "wrong" way of doing things. It's also how most feminist arguments ensure you are on the right side. Think of this: "Men have had the freedom to go out into the workplace, while women have been relegated to staying at home with the kids" Immediately that places a value judgement on both of those activities. That argument is…
/r/MensRights27/04/15 06:00 PM
1

The point isn't the type of equipment. Let me give you a relevant example: Let's say my city has 2 highways that run parallel. Both are identical in lanes, and in exits. One is open to everyone, the other is white people only. Would you say that white people have an advantage here? Well, of course they do. I mean, sure, there would be no advantage without any other traffic (it would be weird, but everyone would get to their destination at the same time) but the key is, when it's rush hour, sudde…
/r/MensRights24/04/15 02:11 PM
2

First of all, we need as a society to come up with a way to differentiate between types of rape (like we do with Murder). It doesn't help anyone to conflate "we were hooking up and consent wasn't mutually understood correctly" with "a stranger grabbed me on the street and pulled me into an alley". The problem is, the two types of rape have vastly different ways our society can combat them, and by conflating the two, we ignore half of the solutions. For Example: Stranger/First Degree Rape (assumi…
/r/MensRights24/04/15 01:31 PM
2

I don't hold with the idea that boys should 'embrace their feminine side' See, I don't either, but perhaps for a slightly different reason. Personally, I think there is a lot of STRENGTH in masculine stoicism. The ability to control emotions and not just react can be a positive in many situations. I am greatly (and here I think you agree with me) opposed to the feminist and societal view that masculine traits are all inherently bad. I'm not saying that feminine traits are bad, but both certainly…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 05:45 PM
0

On an objective level, you would say murder is surely worse (ask anyone if they'd rather be raped or murdered). The problem is, from a taboo/societal perspective, we definitely treat rape as much worse. That said, there may be some confounding factors here. Most notably, that rarely in my examples above do protagonists murder/assault WOMEN. That is to say, when a good guy does some murdering, or kicking ass, he is almost always doing it to another man. This is because we (as a society) don't hav…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 03:33 PM
9

The truth is, it pretty much is regarded that way by society (which makes "rape culture" even more misguided). Think about this: 1) List characters in TV shows who are regarded as heroes/good guys who have murdered someone? Stole something? Assaulted someone? Did illegal drugs? Cheated on taxes? Now list those who have raped someone? 2) List games in which you, as a playable character, are allowed to murder an innocent person? Steal stuff? Assault someone? Now do the same for rape. In our societ…
/r/MensRights07/04/15 02:41 PM
5

Yeah, the problem is, if they artificially create a 50/50 split by lowering the standards on female students, they are caught in a trap. So, let's say they grade all students fairly. Naturally this means more female students drop out than male (since they artificially created the 50/50 split). Now, if that happens, the university is going to be hammered because they've obviously created a "hostile environment" towards female students (because why else would they drop out more?). The university i…
/r/MensRights09/03/15 05:06 PM
1

The problem with most of the "x% of accusations are false" claims is that they are put together by someone with an obvious lack of any kind of understanding of statistics. The problem is, we have a bunch of numbers that can be compared. 1) The number of rape accusations ending in conviction 2) The number of rape accusations that go to trial 3) The number of rape accusations that are reported to police 4) the number of total rape accusations (report + unreported) 5) the claimed number of rapes (i…
/r/MensRights04/03/15 03:10 PM
1

It's funny, because I was trying to look up Australian stats for domestic violence (since every number given in this "article" was about women only, with no indication of the number of male victims). Well, as I tried to look up domestic violence stats in Australia, I found a funny thing. Every link I went to had no comparative stats, only stats about women as victims. Is that something normal in Australia? I found it very strange. Anyway, I did eventually find numbers for Canada (which I can onl…
/r/MensRights25/02/15 06:03 PM
2

That's what a lot of people seem to be missing here. It is not the case of "either he goes to jail, or she does". If someone is brought on charges for rape, and is found not-guilty, that does NOT mean the accuser is automatically guilty of lying (nor even that she's immediately brought up on charges of false accusation). Basically it would happen like this. Person A goes to the police and accuses person B of raping him/her. The police look into it, determining if there is enough evidence to proc…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 02:38 PM
2

Victim get killed in prison or kills himself? Murder charge. That's a little unfair here. Let's say you broke up with a girl and she killed herself, is that murder? Let's say you stole someone's wallet and they killed themselves over it, is it murder? You should only be held accountable for the actions you actually did. In the case of (willful) false accusation, you should be charged with (effectively) attempted false imprisonment (scaling with the number of years the person you're accusing COUL…
/r/MensRights09/02/15 02:33 PM
1

Yeah, what I want to know is the timing of all of this. As in, was this a project that had already been assigned, or one that she suggested after the incident? If it had already been assigned, what was her original plan? Effectively, if she was taking a course with a large "performance art" project as part of her grade, and she had no original plan on what she was doing, this seems terribly convenient. That's not saying nothing happened, but it is saying that the timing is quite fishy.
/r/MensRights06/02/15 02:32 PM
2

The problem with rape statistics is that they are pretty much DESIGNED (or at least how they're presented) to convince you of their conclusion, instead of just presenting the data. What I mean is, usually when those stats are presented, they count only those proven to be false as false, and everything else, INCLUDING rapes never reported, or rapes never even admitted by the victim, as true. That way they can say things like "99% of rapists never go to jail" and show you those nice infographics t…
/r/MensRights05/02/15 02:45 PM
3

I agree. In general I think this sub is very good for not falling prey to the "they're on my team, so we should agree" fallacy, but some things could be improved. One specific example are blanket "feminism" statements. I think it would be more helpful if specific groups/organizations were cited instead (for example, if a feminist group shuts down a men's rights talk, try to be specific about WHICH feminist groups were involved). Heck, even changing "feminists shut down men's right's rally" to "T…
/r/MensRights22/01/15 06:14 PM
4

What is important to me is this: False rape accusations should be treated the same way other malicious false accusations are treated. I don't want one rule for rape, one for other crimes, because that makes no sense. The only differing factor should be the length of sentence should the accusation work (as in, accusing someone of stealing a candy bar would be treated with the understanding that the maximum penalty is a fine). So, I guess what I'm saying is the penalty should be in line with the r…
/r/MensRights22/01/15 06:02 PM
25

Ashburn said people can get upset with this approach, because they have to give up some privilege, a topic the forum discussed throughout the first panel of speakers. Holy fuck me. This is how they're doing it (and going to do it). For those that may have disagreed with the whole concept of "privilege" but thought it was harmless, this is why you're wrong. "Privilege" is being used as a stick to beat men into line. It is designed as something that's impossible to argue with "you are so privilege…
/r/MensRights16/01/15 04:17 PM
1

... How did you get that impression? I am as sensitive as anyone to men's issues and societal expectation, but that's a pretty far reach friend. Let's not abandon impartiality to support our point.
/r/MensRights15/01/15 03:03 PM
14

I agree, and that's where patriarchy theory completely falls apart for me. If a theory is virtually immune from falsification, it holds no predictive merit and can be thrown out without further thought. Basically, Patriarchy theory doesn't predict what WOULD happen were it true, it just explains WHY things happen we already know happen. Because of this, anything can be used to support the theory by doing enough mental gymnastics. Even things that are demonstrably anti-male are still somehow desc…
/r/MensRights15/01/15 02:10 PM
1

The end game of these laws seem to be bringing back the glory days of sexual purity and chaperones! Sorry guys and gals, you are no longer able to spend time with members of the opposite sex without a chaperone present. You understand, it's the law!
/r/MensRights12/01/15 05:36 PM
1

Thank you for including the comparative stats for men. It's one thing I've been incredibly frustrated at with a lot of feminist statistics is they never put things in context. Really, it's only a gendered problem if there is a difference. Anyway, I appreciate it.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 05:27 PM
1

I think most people here agree with you with a few caveats: 1) Pro-choice. I think almost everything here can agree that abortion has to be legal, and that it has to be ONLY the woman's choice. No one wants to take that choice away, because there is no good way to allow the potential father to have an opinion on the matter without rendering the woman's opinion irrelevant. That said, a lot of people here support legal paternal surrender. That is to say, men should have the right to sign away all …
/r/MensRights12/01/15 05:20 PM
2

Holy shit I hate unbrellas. I will NEVER use one, I have that much of a hatred for them. I am 6'5. Unfortunately, that puts me squarely into eyeball range for MORE short people. Do they notice they're about to take my eye out? Hell no, they just walk along as if they were wielding a deadly weapon. So yes, fuck umbrellas. Get a coat with a hood.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 04:56 PM
1

Which is where they get this retarded "men don't move!" thing from. They don't notice when they DON'T move over (unless someone hits them), they only notice when they DO. That means they will always think they are the only ones that move over.
/r/MensRights12/01/15 04:51 PM
2

The great thing about this "experiment" is that it's based off of people's perceptions (that they always move out of the way) that are pretty much necessarily wrong. Here's the truth of this "problem", nearly 100% of people (men and women) will think they move out of the way for other people more than other people move for them. Why is this? It's actually rather simple. When you are walking down the street and paying attention to where you're going, you notice people in your way and move around …
/r/MensRights12/01/15 04:50 PM
1

They're right, it would take a morally repugnant individual to do such a thing. Of course, it would take a morally repugnant individual to rape someone as well... so maybe we should just trust men not to rape? No need for laws anymore!
/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:56 PM
2

Since it's not a law (and appears to be the case that the doctors who do it, do it to avoid a law suit) there seems to be only one solution here: Go to a doctor to have a vasectomy. If the doctor insists on a signed form to do it, refuse, and insist they perform the procedure anyway. If they still don't perform the procedure, get that documented, go home, and get your wife pregnant. Now turn around and sue the doctor for child support. You might not win, but at least you have actual damages you …
/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:45 PM
1

Oh for sure, I love the headlines about women making up more than 50% of university students. Almost every one of them seems to be reporting it as a WIN. As in, 60% of university students being female is much better than 50, and if it gets higher, that would be even better!
/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:25 PM
2

This is my favourite part: Women feel excluded from sport and physical activity for a variety of reasons. Our women’s only sessions are effective in increasing participation and improving health. I've rarely seen it so blatantly spelled out before like this. Effectively, women FEEL excluded (even though they aren't) so in order to rectify the situation, they actually make RULES to exclude men. That seems to be a common thread in legislation pushed by feminist groups right now. Fixing feelings wi…
/r/MensRights08/01/15 05:04 PM
1

It kind of underlines exactly where they are coming from (that it's a women's movement, not an equality movement). When you view it in that way, it's all totally internally consistent. By trying to get sex from a woman who doesn't want to have sex, you are making the woman feel badly. By rejecting a woman who wants sex, you are making a woman feel badly. Effectively, it is the distillation of the "feels are more important than reals" philosophy. Many of the arguments are not based on equality, o…
/r/MensRights08/01/15 04:50 PM
23

Hmm, I bow to your superior logic
/r/MensRights08/01/15 04:39 PM
126

Yeah, that list is bullshit. It is really playing into the (toxic) societal expectations of men. Men must be perfect. They must never sulk, they must never get angry, they must be happy and "consistent" at all times. They must NEVER rely on their partner for anything. They must do their share of the housework, no matter what kind of arrangement you have. They must do half of the child raising, no matter what kind of arrangement you have. In short, a man must be everything a woman wants/needs, an…
/r/MensRights08/01/15 03:57 PM
3

Sorry, my comment about "men have the capacity for violence" was more directed at the person above you. The gist of my argument, I would say, is this. I am not arguing that it should be more acceptable for men to hit women. I guess I am arguing that we treat them the same from a young age. That being: teach BOTH men and women that they cannot hit anyone. If it is every acceptable to hit someone, it is acceptable to hit BOTH sexes. Right now, the problem is that we really DON'T teach girls not to…
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:23 PM
6

So, just to be clear, if a woman in public takes a picture of my (a man) butt, I can slap her?
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:07 PM
3

Humans, to varying degrees are, so that's not a valid statement, read psychology. I don't think it's right to say that men aren't violent. In fact, men (as a whole) certainly have a large capacity for violence. What had happened, though, is 2 things. 1) Boys are taught from a very young age NOT to react physically to things. Girls, on the other hand, don't seem to be taught that at all. It's like dogs (if I can get away with that analogy). When people have doberman puppies, they will (tend to) t…
/r/MensRights07/01/15 02:04 PM
2

This is a brilliant example of an ideology without any sort of merit. So, here's what happened. They performed a social experiment. Ok, sounds good, what are you testing? What's your control? What's your null-hypothesis? What do you expect to happen, or how will the experiment support or contradict your theory? Oh, that's right, they didn't have any control or experimental design. They didn't show differences in gender (which is the ONLY way to support any kind of gendered philosophy, you can't …
/r/MensRights06/01/15 02:55 PM
3

It's just another in the long list of "men are actors, women are acted upon" our society for some reason embraces. Think of it this way, you have 2 couples. In both, one person is 25, and one person is 65. In both, the 65 year old is wealthy. The only difference is, the sexes are switched. Now, tell me, which person in each relationship is most vilified by our society? It's the old man ("how dare he take advantage of that young girl! He's using her for her body!") and the young man ("how dare he…
/r/MensRights06/01/15 01:31 PM
5

Careful with that interpretation. To make the point, look at the "35-39 hours a week" section. What do you see? That women make more than men in that range. Now look at the rest of the breakdown. For every category, the percentage is higher than 82.5%. Why? Because of the distribution of workers. Women are more highly represented at the lower hours, which is obviously correlated to lower pay. This is important, because the way you represent that data changes the message you're sending. For examp…
/r/MensRights18/12/14 08:28 PM
1

Circumcised male here. With I wasn't. I understand why my parents did it (cultural pressure) but I still feel angry and upset that it was done to me. Should I have a son, he will NOT be circumcised.
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:57 PM
3

I wonder how they would feel if a woman had her life ruined by a false rape accusation? The problem is, this doesn't really happen. Even in actual rape cases, the women accused are never vilified the same way men are. The women are given the benefit of the doubt, and the men are just told "they were lucky". I can't find a single instance where a woman has had her life ruined by a false accusation of rape (though if you know of any, I'd be quite interested in reading about it).
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:29 PM
28

That depends on the laws. In fact, unless there are strict "50/50" laws for hiring, you will see increased unemployment in women. The fact is, if they have to pay women more than they pay men, they will take men every time (it would be the same in reverse). If they have to give women x days off a month, but pay them the same, they will hire men. If the pool of male candidates is too low, they will pay men MORE than they will pay women, because they are paying for productivity (and a man is more …
/r/MensRights03/12/14 03:12 PM
6

The problem is though, that boy scouts (used to be) one of the few male spaces left. When I was in scouts, it was males only (both leaders and kids). It was NICE to be able to have a space where "boys could be boys" so to speak. There was nothing anti-female about the space. In fact, girls/women were not really mentioned there at all. It was about a space you could feel more comfortable in. It wasn't about romance, it wasn't about crushes, it wasn't about who liked who, it was... simpler. The pr…
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:27 PM
2

The problem is, you need to take into account the number of employees in each of those careers as well. Obviously there are more kindergarten teachers than there are boilermakers for example.
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:18 PM
1

Honestly, whether a profession "needs more" of one sex or another really depends on what it is. For teachers for example, there is a good reason why you should try to have more men (since you're dealing with children of both sexes, and it may be important for them to have a same sex role model to look up to). The thing is though, some jobs who you are is completely irrelevant. If you are a roofer, or a machine operator, what sex you are (or race, or background, or really anything else) is not re…
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:10 PM
4

You make an interesting point. It seems like some feminist groups/voices have always though that "the patriarchy" was a real thing that existed in spaces they could not see. So they thought this group in power in society met in male only spaces to further the goals of oppression. The problem is, as they dismantled male space after male space (country clubs, board rooms, etc) they were hard pressed to find anything of the sort, and "the patriarchy" somehow didn't come to an end because of their p…
/r/MensRights01/12/14 05:30 PM
16

Though I think you have a point from a biological point of view, it's also a minefield to actually defend from a PR point of view. If the MRM actually held this up as an issue worth addressing, it would be a field day for everyone who doesn't want the MRM to exist ("They just want an excuse to fuck underage girls!!"). Anyway, I would suggest you stay away from topics like this, and stick to other examples of society criminalizing masculinity.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 04:41 PM
4

In Canada, it would be March 11th, or 10 weeks past the new year to catch up.
/r/MensRights13/11/14 02:46 PM
1

Most of these are completely made up bullshit. The only one that has even a BIT of a point is 9 (about male feminists). That's the only one I've even seen a little bit of (though possibly in a joking manner) in the men's rights groups. The rest is just ridiculous, and seems to be conflating entirely different groups of men.
/r/MensRights11/11/14 05:18 PM
4

My biggest problem when these stats come up is they never give any comparative stats, which makes them meaningless to me. Here's what I mean. Let's say we're talking about Murder. If I said that Toronto has a huge murder problem, because our rate was 3.3 murders per 100,000, the first logical question is "how does that compare". As in, if I'm trying to make the point that TORONTO has the problem (and not Canada, or North America, or the world) I need to see how our number compares to everyone el…
/r/MensRights03/11/14 05:05 PM
1

Not just feminists. I think women in general believe that men feel safe walking at night. This is probably because when men walk with women at night, we have to exude false confidence (it's what's expected of us). So, women just feel like we're perfectly at home walking around at night. Here's the truth. Whenever I'm walking through a somewhat sketchy neighbourhood, I'm very much on edge, watching everyone around, looking for places I can be surprised, etc. What many women don't know is that I f…
/r/MensRights14/10/14 02:35 PM
1

Theoretically, if all females were on the same page, they could do something pretty close to that given enough time. All it takes is a network of female abortion doctors, and the will to do it. If all females started to abort all (or most) male babies, they could drastically alter the sex ration of the human population without raising a single gun. edit: Before anyone takes this out of context, I do not think such a thing is REALISTICALLY possible. I don't think there is some female conspiracy, …
/r/MensRights07/10/14 05:25 PM
1

Well, Canada hosted the U20 men's world cup on turf already, and I don't remember the U20 men threatening to sue. The problem is, the women's world cup is just a LOT smaller than the men's, brings in less revenue, and is less worth while to build entire venues for (which is where the grass comes in). Let's compare 3 world cups. 1994 Men's World cup 2003 Women's world cup 2007 Men's U-20 World cup I picked these specifically so we can look at world cups in the same part of the world (USA and Cana…
/r/MensRights29/09/14 06:19 PM
1

It's very true, and it's happened in my lifetime. When I grew up, boyscouts was a male space. Now it has to allow females (thought girlscouts do NOT have to involve males). I played hockey, and in the last year I played hockey, the league was forced to let in females (though again, no female sports league was ever forced to allow males). Basically, it has quickly become evident that we view male spaces as exclusionary, and female spaces as empowering. We have decided that the ONLY reason to have…
/r/MensRights29/09/14 04:06 PM
1

Yeah, it's super misleading (especially when they talk about reasons to go out with a short guy). Here's the thing. Tall guys on average make more money. According to this study, short guys on average make more as a percentage of household income. Basically, that can be driven by 2 main factors. 1) Short guys tend not to get married as often (possibly due to selection). The ones that do, have been able to find a mate because they made more money than average. Basically, if this were the case the…
/r/MensRights29/08/14 03:25 PM
1

This is the problem. It actually happened (to a lesser extent) in the workplace as well. The problem is, male spaces have ALWAYS involved good natured insults. I've heard that to women, a compliment can be an insult, and to men, an insult can be a compliment (obviously an oversimplification). So, when females started entering male spaces, many started taking normal male "ribbing" as picking on them BECAUSE they are female. (and yes, I'm aware there was some actual crossing the line shit as well)…
/r/MensRights26/08/14 01:13 PM
2

The third being fear it would get out by accident. Personally, I would be uncomfortable knowing a videotape of me existed, even if I trusted the person. Hell, I would be uncomfortable with a video of me existing on my own computer.
/r/MensRights15/08/14 01:10 PM
1

Yeah, it really depends on what "type" of rape we're talking about (as a side note, I don't know why some people seem to be opposed to defining rape in degrees. We do it for murder. Why not have a first degree (pre-meditated), second degree (heat of the moment), and non-consensual sex (I don't know, things like problems with consent)?) Sorry, got off topic for a second. What I mean is, there are certain types of rape that robots won't fix. Rape as a power fantasy mostly. Attacks in the street, t…
/r/MensRights15/08/14 12:42 PM
1

I have a question for you (that won't help this situation possibly, but may help others). Did you discuss with your GF what would happen if she got pregnant? I know it's not something that you usually bring up with a short term relationship, but if you're with someone for any length of time, that SHOULD be discussed. If you have the discussion and she says she would want to keep the kid, then you either break up with her, or take the chance and if it DOES happen, you can't blame anyone but yours…
/r/MensRights15/08/14 12:35 PM
6

If she refuses to have the encounter documented, she is probably up to something and you don't want to have sex with her anyways Sorry, I assume you're being facetious? You can't think of any other reason someone wouldn't want a videotape of themselves having sex?
/r/MensRights15/08/14 12:06 PM
2

Actually that's a false etymology. There is no evidence that homosexuals were burned at the stake in that way. Most likely it came from calling old women faggots as in "a burden to be carried". It transferred over to homosexuals in the same way that all female specific insults did.
/r/MensRights15/08/14 12:01 PM
0

It's the same thing with college demographics. Most of the articles I've read about it, seem to present the fact that 60% of people enrolling in college are female as a VICTORY!
/r/MensRights14/08/14 04:32 PM
1

I think the key point has to be to understand that society isn't dictated BY Hollywood, society actually dictates TO Hollywood. People don't see men as disposable because they saw it in a movie, society views men as disposable, which allows Hollywood to use them like that in a movie. Entertainment can be a good litmus test to see what values society has. For example, anyone arguing for rape culture (a culture that specifically glorifies or allows rape) need look no further than entertainment. Ho…
/r/MensRights14/08/14 04:29 PM
7

I have never seen a single MRA try to ban any words, can you please link me somewhere that supports that? I am legitimately curious, it sounds... odd.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 05:09 PM
14

I think the problem comes from these groups wanting things both ways. On one hand, every time a men's rights group tries to form feminist groups say they are not needed because feminism is fighting for both genders. On the other, if you actually try to bring up an issue men face, they tell you it isn't the right venue. Basically, if mainstream feminism accepted the fact that MRM groups were valid, this wouldn't be a post at all.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 04:38 PM
1

Look, all of that is true. It's perfectly possible that it happened exactly as you're imagining it did, that she withdrew consent, he attacked her, she pretended it didn't happen. That is possible. The problem is, it isn't PROBABLE. And, more importantly, there is 0 evidence for it happening that way. If there is NO evidence that a crime occurred (other than he said she said) and a bunch of evidence it didn't, there is no way it should even make it to court. Sorry, but that's the way the system …
/r/MensRights13/06/14 03:32 PM
1

Nope, then we're all misogynists because we "don't think women are even worth acknowledging as human beings". Don't worry, it's a no win scenario.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 03:23 PM
1

Not good enough. See, "no means no, yes may mean no, even if yes means yes it only means yes for a microsecond before it can mean no again". So, even if you get consent, even if it's signed. Even if 10 people see her say yes and sign the form, it doesn't matter. She can withdraw consent at anytime without telling you. Boom. Rape. Sorry about that lad.
/r/MensRights13/06/14 02:40 PM
7

The high school I attended (way back when) had a school uniform. I actually liked it. Not the uniform per se (grey slacks and a golf shirt) but it made dealing with the social pressures of high school easier. You didn't have to worry about what you wore, about what that said about you, about what clique you would fit into, etc. You just put on your uniform and go.
/r/MensRights03/04/14 04:09 PM
3

First of all "men" didn't decide anything. There has never been a council of men getting together to decide what the gender roles would be. Society developed based on need. Why were men originally hunters? Because the women had to stay home with the kids (this wasn't a sexist thing, this was a "pregnant women would be shit at hunting, and infants require milk to live, which doesn't come from men" thing). So sexual dimorphism developed. Men became stronger and faster because that was what was nee…
/r/MensRights03/04/14 03:06 PM
37

The problem really is that the MRM is kind of damned if they do, damned if they don't. Let's say they take your tactic. They lobby to reduce punishments on men who have had sex with underage girls. Tell me how that plays out? Do you not see how often men's rights groups are accused of being rapists and rape apologists already? If they suggest that some rape claims may be false, or that someone accused of rape deserves some respect until proven guilty, they are crucified. Basically, either they a…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 03:43 PM
0

yeah, it's true. There are often some crazy decisions that come out that make you question where they come from. That said, I'd rather a 60 year old CEO than a 25 year old (at least of an established company).
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:42 PM
10

I know this is irrelevant, but: which I feel is stupid what does a 65 year old dude know about running a company selling technology? is kind of disingenuous. The fact is, the CEO and executive usually lead from a strategy point of view, not a technical one. They are also surrounded by advisers who ARE technical experts. The truth is, if the company is large enough, you have to know more about running a company than you do about what that company does.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:36 PM
2

Actually, I ended up finding the study I believe you're referring to: Fisher, Cullen and Turner (2000) - https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf It's an interesting study, and one I actually read the whole way through. You're right that the questions seem to be well worded, so I have no issue with them. I do have a few issues with the study however: 1) The "25%" figure seems to be extrapolated in a sloppy way. Basically, they took their sample, determined that 2.8 percent of the responden…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 02:48 PM
1

I do not advocate the changing of rape to mean "both people are aware" for the very reasons you said. I think the point that was trying to be made was that it is possible for the victim to believe she/he had been raped, without the "rapist" knowing. It's a very complicated situation, and one where I think more education is needed both for men AND women. As for your 25%, do you have a link to that study? I'm interested in seeing how the actual questions were worded. Thanks,
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:47 PM
2

I can see how this logic can be tempting, but frankly there's no scientific basis for claiming that this assumption is true. Science demands that we make as few assumptions as possible (Occam's razor), so I don't think this line of reasoning really leads anywhere useful. This is true, but the problem is, I think that occam's razor demands that we either discount those 75% entirely (still landing us at 24%) or assume the distribution is similar unless we have a valid reason not to. The problem is…
/r/MensRights12/04/13 01:44 PM
1

Yes, I completely agree, and think that the conflation of all forms "un- consensual" sex is damaging to society, and to rape victims. You cannot say "rape is rape", because then it makes violent rape the same as drunken sex (defined by some as rape by definition).
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:52 PM
1

I know, which is why you see so many people playing so fast and loose with the stats about rape. The problem is, using stats that don't line up, you can support any argument and make it sound relatively true. That's why I tried to compare apples to oranges to try to get some sense of the reality. It does not seem outside the bounds of reality to think that 25% of reported rapes are false accusations. It does seem ridiculous that 25% of all women have been raped. Unless, as is the case with many …
/r/MensRights11/04/13 06:34 PM
1

"I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a bitch. If I get loud, I become perceived as scary. I'm not allowed to get loud. A man who raises his voice is a threat to all of society." Holy fucking shit! I know I'm a little late on this one, but after reading through this retarded list, that one made me actually pause to consider how FUCKING RETARDED THIS STATEMENT IS (not yours, the one in the list). As a male, I cannot be angry. I canno…
/r/MensRights11/04/13 05:36 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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