TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Godspiral Archive

View 11 posts and 964 comments by Godspiral on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

South Park made a different "AI dating" episode, where AI was used to deal with high volume messaging from "girls". If you want a video game/virtual dating experience, then it's up to women to offer more.
/r/MensRights27/03/23 09:46 PM
6

Not sure about US, but Chris Foley in Canada (not positive of name) (Kids in the Hall) had his child support payments based on his highest earning years while married on the grounds that "Keeping the children in the same state as their most luxurious years is the standard". So, a drop in income/wealth is not a relevant argument in family court.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 04:15 PM
0

Can I just say I'm a transwoman and still wear pants, not always shave, and have shortish hair style... and a penis?
/r/MensRights11/10/22 02:45 PM
4

Aren't there enough women around to watch a show if its good?
/r/MensRights06/10/22 05:57 PM
1

Should bring back witchcraft accusations settled by drowning test.
/r/MensRights06/10/22 10:48 AM
6

Movie also had gender equal front line military with coed showers.
/r/MensRights30/08/22 01:55 PM
2

Perhaps a better analogy is can a drunk person voluntarily pick a fight such that the drunk person clearly wanted, irrationaly it may be post soberness, whatever benefits of the fight at the time. That would necessarily cause more damage/harm than the voluntary use of their vagina. Whether or not, post soberness, it turned out to be the optimal use/disuse of that vagina, there is no clear and obvious harm that necessarily occurred to it. I appreciate protecting the drunk from their own decisions…
/r/MensRights26/08/22 10:26 PM
13

When having eyes open while male is criminalized, they will be stared down to catch them looking up instead of presenting the due level of respect to their superiors.
/r/MensRights15/08/22 12:35 PM
1

They should be registered on some list that is available for similar access as sex offender or credit report registry. Lying pigs should get exposed as broadly as possible, but that doesn't mean sex offender registry officials should be in charge of maintaining that list, or worse, including lying pigs on same list.
/r/MensRights12/08/22 04:36 PM
2

Just talk to and look at women as if they were police officers and you should have no problem, if their authority has not corrupted them. I can generally read dogs well and pet them without getting bit. Laws and police practices that say "the pitbull is always right" simply empowers abuses by pitbull owners.
/r/MensRights12/08/22 10:44 AM
3

Wouldn't surprise me if Sweden is "that advanced" already. I would be somewhat surprised if UK became the first country to do it.
/r/MensRights11/08/22 06:31 PM
58

A catcalling "law" basically criminalizes talking to women, because they give the power for someone offended in any way, including being offended by the presumptuousness that you might entitle yourself to engage the princess in conversation. This is an expansion of women's power to summon violence, by a state eager to serve their supremacy, against all of their (male) enemies.
/r/MensRights11/08/22 11:37 AM
0

A difficulty would be auditing/bookeeping is something someone wants to be paid for. If the basic math skills are beyond the child's grasp, one solution would be cryptocurrency, or something like a "foodstamp account" (electronic now) where stores can whitelist items for payment through "child support account"
/r/MensRights25/07/22 03:48 PM
-4

Generally, an immediate report is indicative of a rape. Except if the event is an excuse for an absence or infidelity. It is also possible for a successful rape lie to embolden further accusations. Someone on the street daring to smile at her could empower implicating someone innocent but racially representative of a source of anger. Anger could simply be more motivating than the truth, and welcomed by police forces appreciative of closing cases, also, over truth. Judicial system helped her lie,…
/r/MensRights28/11/21 07:30 PM
3

The lovely bones movie (didn't read the book) spends all of its focus on the 12 (14?) year old victim, sexualizing her.
/r/MensRights28/11/21 07:00 PM
7

Luckily for the tot this means she will get twice as much as other children from the same economic background. She should have had a gangbang with 30 guys so she could get 30x as much child support, cuz ain't nobody got time to test for who the real father is. Put all the men in my city in jail for life bc there are some unsolved murders,
/r/MensRights11/06/21 12:33 PM
12

"Hey lady, hotdogs just $1 today!" You better pay me $1000 if you don't want to go to jail for harrassment in the street.
/r/MensRights16/04/21 04:10 PM
35

There needs to be a chilling effect on lying cunts and the filth that side with them.
/r/MensRights09/04/21 11:30 PM
1

Bitch, taking 12 vitamin C then calling 3 ambulances and an uber to handle your OD might not be a "real" suicide attempt. It's perhaps focused on manipulating those around you to be more supportive rather than body disposal considerations.
/r/MensRights18/03/19 10:08 AM
0

It is a forced savings program. Not quite. If it were, your payout would be based on the SS taxes paid in (not a sliding scale of income). Its partially a pension. But its also partially a redistribution towards those who don't pay in as much.
/r/MensRights16/03/19 10:35 PM
0

If I came to you and took out $100 a month from you with the promise that at the end of the year I'd pay you back the entire $1200, but then in October I gave you a "gift" of $1200 and then said in December that I don't have to pay you back for the money I took Stop acting like I'm the one who'se retarded here, and do some reading of your own. The government has previously promised you $100/mo or $2000/mo in entitlements. With UBI, no one has less in entitlements. Part of your argument now is th…
/r/MensRights16/03/19 12:59 PM
0

When you talk about reducing SS for the 1k payout, that isn't UBI That is still wrong. The reduction of other social assistance benefits is an accounting convenience for avoiding the elimination of other programs. The elimination is possible if the benefit were $3000, or if it only applied to those under 65/retirement age. But the reduction allows the few/many who get under $1000/mo in SS benefits to get topped off. money that was taken by force from people should be reduced because some politic…
/r/MensRights16/03/19 03:31 AM
0

f you are earning an income while receiving Social Security benefits, you may have some benefits withheld if you make enough money. Until you reach full retirement age, earning more than the Internal Revenue Service income threshold reduces your benefits by $1 for every $2 earned in excess of the minimum. These dollars are not lost forever; rather, your Social Security income is increased once you reach full retirement age. Sorry was skimming this, though not positive what happens. There is a 50…
/r/MensRights16/03/19 02:58 AM
0

It's not UBI then Yes it is. Just because there's the option of cancelling all other programs is not taken doesn't make basic income conditional. What fails to qualify as UBI are large earned income clawbacks, and conditionality on earned income levels. 50% of their earned income is clawed back under SS. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/102714/how-are-social-security-benefits-affected-your-income.asp
/r/MensRights15/03/19 11:03 AM
1

OK, I just want to make sure I have this right. You're telling me that you believe there is a large portion of people on social security that never made more than $9 and hour for the entirety of their lives? Because that's what you just said, $1500 a month is about $9 an hour. That worked the full 35 years. The $9/hr FULL TIME is the average wage needed including all of the $0 hours. But anyway, if they are getting more than this, than it doesn't get topped off. One reason they might want to cho…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 10:08 PM
1

Uh what? No, you don't have to stay where you are. It's a voucher that allows you to rent up to the limit that they provide for. You were saying section 8 housing vouchers get "bundled" with welfare. If there is a welfare case worker that you need to beg for benefits to, then you are forced to stay within commuting distance of them. Cash lets you move somewhere more affordable (ie rural), and in turn, those that do help make urban housing more affordable. What? No, even the cheapest of homes wou…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 09:35 PM
1

I linked to savings. Its $800B in new revenue/cost cuts needed.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 08:11 PM
1

I don't think you understand what section 8 is. They aren't houses bought by the government that you live in, it's a voucher that you can use anywhere that accepts them. This means that especially in most areas, you are going to get a much bigger benefit on a voucher for housing that you would in a cash payment. Part of the condition for welfare is staying where you are. I'm not sure if everyone accepts section 8 vouchers, but if you had cash, you could rent a mansion with 20 cohabitators if you…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 07:45 PM
1

states are just going to pick up welfare and foodstamps. Those programs won't go away. If people are getting more than they currently do, they can use it as an excuse to eliminate the programs. I'm not sure that states kick in any money for foodstamps, btw. Remember that welfare includes a payment for rent, which for most families in any major metro area is going to exceed 1k a month. Not sure about that either. Section 8 housing is separate from welfare, afaiu. And, there's a waiting list that …
/r/MensRights14/03/19 06:34 PM
1

Food stamps and welfare is much lower than $1000/month. Its only social security that is a program that can be much higher than that amount.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 06:10 PM
1

a regressive tax that will hurt and complicate small business. A regressive tax is ok if a progressive flat freedom dividend is given out. Overall progressive, and net tax cut if you spend under $10k/month in VAT-impacted items. Doesn't hurt small business with a tax increase as it is on top of existing prices. People having more money will let them pay 10% more. If you can create a successful business, you can get a loan, then use that to create a business which becomes profitable. Loans will s…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 05:50 PM
1

foodstamps is a federal program that in some states get "block granted" such that the sates can skim off the top of it to enforce slavery conditions.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 05:37 PM
1

$3T is headline cost, but there are many savings included: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/b0rcgx/2020_us_presidential_candidate_andrew_yang_just/eii6xce/
/r/MensRights14/03/19 05:36 PM
1

This would require completely stopping all welfare and replacing it with UBI. That means no section 8 housing, no Medicare/Medicaid, no anything other than the $12K a year in government handouts. Medicare not affected, but SS, disability, welfare are not on top of UBI. People receive whichever is higher, which is how those large savings occur. Payroll taxes are income tax payroll taxes are separate from income taxes. They are the SS and medicare deductions off your paycheck. Income taxes vary by…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 05:10 PM
2

Wait, so he wants an across the board 33% income tax rate? No. That is current tax rates including 15.3% from payroll taxes (including employer contributions) Higher education attainment doesn't translate into higher income unless there are high income jobs avaliable. The absolute best part of UBI is that it empowers people to create their own job. To pool together talent to pursue opportunities that take longer than weeks or months to pay off. Many such opportunities just require "home" compute…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 04:13 PM
1

Reduced to 2.9T (2,998,200,000,000 Meant to say reduced by $1.2T. B was typo. Yes $3T original cost, but without typos reduced to $1.8T This is also being extremely generous with how well the US working population would take an income tax of 33%. That is current revenue taken from people. Including employer contributions, payroll taxes are 15.3%. So this is just with an average 17.7% of income taxes = 33%. Your inflation rant was incoherent, and the syphlitic delusions of a piece of shit that ha…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 03:18 PM
-1

National budgetary savings are relevant. You might have a 1% federal tax increase offset a 1% state tax decrease. federal spending in programs like foodstamps wouldn't decrease, Yes they would. They would go to 0. The freedom dividend is not on top of other social programs. Its opt-in. People would receive the higher of $1000 or other social aid. That's the main reason it costs so little.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 02:03 PM
1

the math does add up with 10% VAT: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/b0rcgx/2020_us_presidential_candidate_andrew_yang_just/eii6xce/ Retailers would have to deal with the reality that the VAT goes all the way back to the manufacturer so their prices would be going up 100% to 200% VAT accounting does not amplify prices through the supply chain. Retailers get full cash credit for any VAT they pay suppliers. "True socialism has never been tried" UBI is not socialism. Its capitalism witho…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 01:52 PM
1

There is no monetary (budgetary) limit. Or its far away. Trump is creating record deficits. Irresponsible defense and wall spending, and tax cuts for the rich that they just hoard. So there is plenty of sanity money available to reign in. https://www.naturalfinance.net/2018/12/deficit-adjusted-gdp.html
/r/MensRights14/03/19 12:58 PM
-1

Bernie says polite things about UBI, but isn't smart enough to understand that it is a better solution to everything he knows is wrong with US. Yang is smarter than Bernie, while both are genuinely in this to create a better future.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 12:52 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/b0rcgx/2020_us_presidential_candidate_andrew_yang_just/eii6xce/
/r/MensRights14/03/19 12:41 PM
1

$3B headline cost from 250M adult Americans each receiving $12k/year. Reduced by $1.2B because UBI is not on top of existing social programs. Opt-in that allows individuals to choose whichever amount is higher. $400B in new tax receipts as a result of growing economy. This implies with a payroll and income tax rate of 33%, a $3T economic growth which is credible with $1.8T democratic cash injection + new employment income related to collecting that $1.8T in new spending. Middle and upper classes…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 12:41 PM
1

He supports M4A. I think UBI is the path to fair wages. ie. Your wages go up if your neighbour opts out of work, if there are less than 10 competitors for your position/job itnerview, and if you get called several times a week by recruiters.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 01:55 AM
21

It only needs $800B in new revenue. His plan is a 10% VAT. Dude, I'm so broke. And, I'm tired of not being able to say where my money goes. unless you are spending over $10k/month on VAT applicable items (rent and raw food likely won't be taxed), then you will be less broke. Not doing math may be contributing to your money problems.
/r/MensRights14/03/19 01:52 AM
-3

He's the best democrat candidate even when ignoring identity politics. UBI/freedom dividend as a gender issue promotes both independence and mutual dependence. ie. You can leave bad relationships in a way that would support alimony/child support reform (rely on UBI instead of ex spouse). Prevent extreme-desperation excuses for murdering your spouse (claiming you were trapped in relationship). But UBI also permits forming partnerships (business and personal) where all the parties can bring someth…
/r/MensRights14/03/19 01:45 AM
2

This is very big. Thanks for the attention.
/r/MensRights20/01/19 01:53 AM
3

How did she get tied to the bed? The only highlights from her testimony I was exposed to had her saying "the worst part was the disrespect afterwards".
/r/MensRights08/11/18 03:40 AM
6

I wish Democrats would have focused on this GOP shill's perjury during bush43 times, and his involvement in torture policy, even if that somehow also wouldn't have changed the eventual confirmation.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 09:07 PM
5

Just making the false statemen to police is enough to be charged with that. If it was only a media fabrication, then slander rules would apply. But that a lie was used to derail a high profile judicial appointment might fit obstruction of justice language
/r/MensRights07/11/18 09:01 PM
7

I actually don't know the specific act Ford accuses Kavanaugh of committing. My understanding of the "no corroboration" for Ford's account is that no one remembers that far back. That Swetnick is a known exaggerator also doesn't prove that whatever the fuck she says (don't actually know that either) is false. That 3rd girl, though, is essentially admitting to making it up, and should be prosecuted.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 08:55 PM
2

Is the divore percentage down? (Usually that is what is meant by rate)
/r/MensRights25/09/18 06:15 PM
1

Joe Biden raped me 50 times while forcing me to read this article.
/r/MensRights19/09/18 05:13 PM
19

Yes. In the same study (appendix) there are 2 follow up studies with same methodology that had 50% false rate. The large airforce study had a 61% false rate. Basically all honest disclosures from areas or studies are 40%+.
/r/MensRights05/08/18 08:00 PM
103

Most exhaustive studies find the false allegation rate around 50%, where the standard is having the complainant admit that no rape occurred. Kanin is the author of the most famous of such studies.
/r/MensRights05/08/18 01:42 PM
4

Its not for the child's benefit. Its the parents deciding what it should look like, much like they decide what clothes "it" and their dog should wear.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 12:37 PM
61

but we aren’t doing it because we think they are whores by nature who cannot be trusted with their libidos. Besides "making it look like daddy's", a "benefit" of circumcision is that it reduces the ease of masturbation. So it is controlling boys/mens' sexuality.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 02:50 AM
1

feminism empowering everyone women's opinion no matter how baseless is a problem for society. I have the right to think whatever I want, but stubbornness in my idiocy (idios is rooted in greek for "my own world") is objectively bad, but objectively worse if society encourages my stubbornness.
/r/MensRights18/05/17 03:01 PM
1

Tiger Woods should be forced to marry me (or I guess another man) for his next spouse.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 01:40 PM
2

watch it, its good and fast paced. alibis and revenge are the main reasons though.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 09:23 PM
2

India may move to r/BasicIncome as social policy which is good for equality period, but good for men's equality too.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 02:54 PM
7

Very good summary of the baseless Kanin study bashing that's been done. part 2 also well done. http://www.datagoneodd.com/blog/2015/01/27/how-to-lie-and-mislead-with-rape-statistics-part-2/
/r/MensRights22/11/16 05:31 PM
1

Forget distribution/retail. That'd remain the same (per unit of trade) whether the goods were manufactured domestically or imported. The thing that gets wrongly assumed away is that just as many products get made/sold when they double in price. We don't start making a ton of shoes/clothes/electronics overnight. People in both countries get poorer, and so overall lower economic output results. I can write-down investment losses in exactly the same way I can write down bad debts, but write-downs a…
/r/MensRights17/11/16 06:50 PM
1

greatest beneficiaries of medicare, how likely do you think it is that the GOP will cut that? Ryan has a plan to voucherize Medicare so that seniors get partial support towards private insurance. He must have comfortable plans in the event he is not reelected. the profit margins of Apple especially would take a pounding. I'd expect they raise prices, people buy less, and profits just go down a modest amount. Your point about the stock market is valid. The only thing keeping the economy up is the…
/r/MensRights17/11/16 02:31 AM
1

Your 4 hypotheticals are all things Republicans have vowed not to do. There is some elimination of loopholes, but the Ryan plan (fully adoopted in Trump platform) is overall a net decrease in revenue. Cuts in medicaid/medicare are not going to make the poor richer. If Trump introduces a sufficiently protectionist foreign policy (he can't and won't), GDP might go up enough to make tax cuts revenue neutral That's the main absurdity. First, it requires that all foreign countries agree that this is …
/r/MensRights16/11/16 07:13 PM
1

I like you, but you are a fucking tard on this issue. At best. Again, other explanation is you know what you are talking about, and being intentionally deceptive in order to destroy society and the world. JFK bringing tax reform at a time when rates were 90% does not justify every future tax cut for all time. Reagan's economic success has more to do with controlling inflation and oil costs (in part by illegally bribing Iran). If you want deflation, tax cuts gets you there. When the world economy…
/r/MensRights16/11/16 06:46 PM
1

I can agree that Trump is more sympathetic to MR. The GOP overall is less susceptible to enhancing female privilege, and adopting feminist persecution agenda. But the election is not a single issue. The evil of GOP is the intentional destruction of the economy, and handing it over to multinationals and other wealthy to destroy and rape the economy through desperation and prisons. There might be higher employment. People will be forced to suck dick for blankets. Tax cuts for the wealthy and corpo…
/r/MensRights16/11/16 06:07 PM
1

The loss can only be blamed on one thing. Low turnout. Absollutely, HRC was the worst possible candidate for dems, and low enthusiasm depressed turnout. Media projections of dem victory compounded the low enthusiasm into a "then why bother". But suppressing the black vote specifically was the only way for GOP to win. Still, the only reason to vote GOP remains evil or stupidity. That there is no polite way to point this out, doesn't change that you have to push back forcefully that a tax cut agen…
/r/MensRights16/11/16 04:46 PM
6

Absolutely. The olympics are proof that there do exist women with the physical capabilities to do physical jobs. But they are less common than men, and so very normal that fewer would be qualified and hired for those positions.
/r/MensRights29/09/16 04:07 PM
0

To be fair, the mandatory crossdressing of children was just one school.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 09:52 PM
0

You have a feminist party that has a whopping 4% support! That party is only there to say that Sweden is not feminist enough. You have mandatory crossdressing day in elementary school. You have a fascist state that wants to prosecute Julian Assange for rape over a complaint about him seeing a different girl.
/r/MensRights25/08/16 04:23 PM
1

They mentioned part of the reason for her suspension includes past behaviour. I think 6 months for just demeaning opponent's tactics is a lot, but media focusing on her comments blows that out of proportion. It doesn't bother me that the Federation did not explicitly refer to domestic violence accsation, and to be fair, the accusation is unresolved, though I don't know if there is clear evidence. What did bother me is her playing the sexist card in saying "a man would not be suspended".
/r/MensRights25/08/16 04:17 PM
12

Its obviously a privilege if society cares about protecting your gender. Its furthermore a privilege to be a gatekeeper (permission granter) in inter-gender relationships.
/r/MensRights11/08/16 01:20 PM
1

They count the ones reported to police. (trials are decisions by the police hierarchy)
/r/MensRights04/08/16 12:57 AM
3

A person with a narrow data base trying to manipulate numbers to prove a point Complete BS. First Kanin had strong feminist credentials, and went into the study believing the koolaid. Believing that a rigurous test would still uphold feminist myths. Part of the protocol needed an exhaustive and systematic system that takes time to find the truth. The explanation for the 8% stats is entirely that no one cares to uncover the falseness of accusations. They get paid to put people in jail. Not to tak…
/r/MensRights04/08/16 12:50 AM
4

The actual rate of proven false, when there is an investigator committed to proving them false, and a false classification occurs only when the complainant admits that no rape occurred is in this 41% to 50% range. http://sf-criminaldefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/KaninFalseRapeAllegations.pdf The likely false category would be a fair bit higher. The BS that false accusations aren't equally common to true accusations is kept out of wikipedia.
/r/MensRights04/08/16 12:39 AM
-1

I don't think the book has much of anything to do with his actions. Instead group membership (loosely based on book), and self-sacrificing avenging of actions committed against that group.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 09:49 PM
1

Blame the shooter for sure. If you want to extend blame to others though, you should include what he might be angry about, and who is responsible for those issues.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 06:58 PM
-3

The west never Invaded Saudi Arabia, is one of the main reasons it exists on the first place, and yet SA leads a lot of anti western movements. The US is best friends with SA. The main motivation behind OBL/Al Quaeda is/was opposition to US-backed SA power. The theory is US isolationism would allow better governance to overthrow the SA royal family. But this is all very complementary to SA strategy of destabilizing the rest of the middle east (to keep competing oil production down). Its been ver…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 06:28 PM
2

If your apologia was true then they would be targeting military personnel, not gay guys in a club. The military is well protected. No one is suggesting giving them F16s to make it a fair fight. The core issue is that people are fairly stupid. Those who are out of power in the mideast, use a political attack vector that those in power (supported by US: SA, Jordan) must be corrupt just because they are supported by US. The leadership's true faith can be questioned by being supported by the US whic…
/r/MensRights13/06/16 05:53 PM
-5

And also, the only relevant motivator is our war on islam. Someone claiming to be the shooter called to express sympathies with 3 unrelated muslim "groups" Islamic leadership may disagree with many of our "ideals", but they only call for killing us because we are killing them, and intervening in their rulerships.
/r/MensRights13/06/16 05:35 PM
9

His best movie, blow (true story adaptation), has one of the more extreme spousal abuse examples in it, and this story brings up similar sympathies.
/r/MensRights30/05/16 03:29 PM
30

We need to be deliberate about understanding the different paths that can land women in prison, be more attentive to women's unique needs while they are incarcerated The 2 case examples she used were frank uncensored complaints regarding how shitty prison is. But, I believe men would be able to describe shitty prison experiences as well. The selective empathy is problematic.
/r/MensRights28/04/16 01:36 PM
1

so she was harrassing this huge guy, and then I turn to her, and I say... I say (pause looking around to make sure room is clear)... I said, biiiitch, sit your fat ass the fuck down.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 05:51 PM
12

For sure she stirred shit up, To be fair, though, the last thing her bf said was for her to chill, and he turned to walk towards her, and got attacked while the situation was "self-diffusing". Basically, the attacker deserves a lot of blame here.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 05:46 PM
3

One of the main causes of false accusations is the same reason for road rage. Someone else may do something rude such as not angle their shoulders when walking past you, but having access to jack booted thugs to enact your revenge provides a similar impulse control issue as having a gun or a beat up hummer when someone rudely cuts you off on the road. The problem with cops and prosecutors is that they are guns that are motivated to shoot.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 07:52 PM
1

I prefer Sanders to Clinton. I specifically said in the context of a Presidential race. I guess though you are describing Rubio. Clinton's government would be Obama-lite, except for feminist issues. I don't think she'd do any significant left reforms, but she wouldn't drive right. Feminazism is a concern though. Clinton would murder far less than any republican candidate. Rubio may be the most dovish Republican candidate but so was GWB. He would absolutely accelerate the destruction of the count…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 09:39 PM
1

I agree somewhat less from Rubio.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 05:34 PM
3

The thing about bloomberg is that he'd take more (or at least as much) from Trump or Cruz than Sanders. High potential for 3way race.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 03:54 PM
3

Except for this issue, if the nominees turned out to be Clinton vs. Rubio, I'd unenthusiastically pick Clinton as the lesser evil. But this "vote for me because I am a woman", and these "support tactics" are seriously going to be an extreme problem for me, and men who have predetermined that all republicans are evil slime, but fear that Clinton could impose an even more strict form of fascism if elected.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 03:15 PM
8

"Most"? No. Feminism is based on the projection that women are inferior/disadvantaged, and so must be lifted up and protected. It is a natural male instinctive mating/role playing strategy to assume/offer a protective and sacrificial role. So I would say that most male feminists ignore the legal and systemic advantages women enjoy, and take the view that "Of course women are worthless cunt rape holes" and so of course they need their white knight protection services. The disconnect is not notici…
/r/MensRights15/01/16 03:39 PM
13

Hillary is a relevant problem to our movement starting with the "real victims of war are women", but then extending to "I'll be better than Obama because I'm a woman" and these types of endorsements from hateful liars that do rely on endorsement due to feminism. I don't think its right for this sub to criticize her tax plans or whatever, but when playing stupid feminist cards, its on topic.
/r/MensRights11/01/16 03:43 PM
2

What is her rape-hoaxing background?
/r/MensRights11/01/16 03:36 PM
9

I'll add that asking help from CAFE on how to overcome anti-male bias in the application process is reason to deny application. Your 2 main points are the best though. There's no history of violence in MRM movement. Violence against the CAFE sponsored lecture was entirely perpetrated by misandrists. The biggest lie of all, that continues to be a main feminst tactic is to equivocate anti-feminism with misogyny. The same tactic is used by zionists to equivocate urging Israel towards peaceful coope…
/r/MensRights10/11/15 06:44 PM
9

Wasn't her role relatively minor compared to say Bradley Cooper?
/r/MensRights13/10/15 08:40 PM
1

the tldr, if you are straight, then men choosing to marry other men, instead of staying in the closet, leaves more women available for relationships.
/r/MensRights27/07/15 11:28 PM
1

Are you saying the movement towards legislated legalization is just driven by lawyers, rather than genuine demand for the opportunity of marriage?
/r/MensRights27/07/15 09:55 PM
-3

If there was a patriarchy, bitches would better always be having our money. bitches would be the ones drafted for war. the pussy cowards can hold and point a fucking gun can't they? bitches would learn to shut their worthless cunt fucking mouths instead of giving opinions. would not be able to vote. would shut up and raise whatever baby we shove up them. would shut up and spread to receive whatever baby we want to shove up them. would get police oppression whenever we want them the fuck out of o…
/r/MensRights27/07/15 05:41 PM
1

Interesting... while there wouldn't be gender bias in divorce proceedings, are you saying there would be bias towards the least economically powerful party? Maybe you meant to say rich gay guys don't want to marry poor gay guys?
/r/MensRights27/07/15 05:23 PM
1

Though not explicitly addressed, civil unions should also be understood as contractual relationship agreements that can make the default state laws innapplicable.
/r/MensRights27/07/15 04:23 PM
39

It's eerily totalitarian: a sort of blanket mandate convenient for targeting undesirables and threatening suspects. That is the absolute critical problem with affirmative consent. Its easy to accuse you of a crime you have no way you can remember committing or not committing 10 years later. Its always allowed to prosecute you because the accuser may not provably be lying. The accuser may make a false allegation of rape, but include an allegation of holding hands or shoulder touch that is not pro…
/r/MensRights07/07/15 07:33 PM
4

it's different when the target is a public figure During the fappening, why did the media not comment on more flattering angles Jennifer Lawrence could have used? They were obviously not the most flattering pictures of her possible. John Oliver wanted to show Anthony Wiener's dick on air every day for 2 weeks, and make hateful comments about him each time. Every fucking starlet from the fappening still has a good career, that might have been enhanced by it. Not so for Wiener.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 05:37 PM
2

He even referenced the destruction of Anthony Wiener that he did not let the world forget for a couple of weeks. Really shitty piece where he intentionally did the fox news treatment of digging for nothing anecdotes to support violent fascism against men.
/r/MensRights23/06/15 05:30 PM
4

The biggest issue for why this is wrong is that the context is more "what issues come up in mixed gender labs" rather than "what draconian laws or university policies must be imposed in order for humanity to survive" We should demand the resignation of everyone who becomes indignant when a fairly harmless truth is uttered. If a female researcher suggested segragation because of all the rape and harrassment she has to endure when male colleagues are not caged, the university would be bending back…
/r/MensRights15/06/15 04:01 PM
1

The duluth model and rape culture are not related to equality but rather to establishing a narrative that violence in society should be a problem when it affects women. Its far more important to have access to the state's guns than a physical advantage when establishing power and authority.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 06:05 PM
1

equality is a nonsense that no one is actually working towards In my view, MR is an equality movement the same way the suffragettes were an equality movement. Once women got the vote, there were probably suffragettes who joined other women empowerment movements, but you can't deny that they were an equality movement prior to obtaining those rights, even if some may have had "stepping stone" ulterior motives.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:42 PM
9

Men have advantages in jobs No basis to see such advantages. Men are more willing to move to North Dakota for a job, but there is no social movement to increase men's paticipation in STEM fields, much less scholarships.
/r/MensRights11/06/15 05:37 PM
1

What I'm saying has the equivalent mathematical proof as 2 + 2 = 4. Logic is a mathematical field. Even though logic is not formally thought in school curriculums, those with enough IQ are still capable of spotting the logical abuse. You are defending a hate group that is claiming 2+2 = 5 in order to manufacture hate, and you are doing so only because the lying supremacist filth seems like a nicer bunch of people than I do.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 05:20 PM
1

It does. You have an IQ problem that means you have difficulty following logic. They as an organization have access to at least one person who can understand the basic logic. There are people who are able to understand the following sentence: If we assume that all interpretations of rape are true then 97% of rapists do not go to jail. Its only with that assumption that their stats have any value. Its only because a reader is too stupid that she can believe the headline without the explicitly sta…
/r/MensRights10/06/15 03:13 PM
3

There is no excusable stupidity that allows them to keep such a blatant unsupportable lie prominently displayed on their site, and not fully deserve to be labelled a reprehensible hate group.
/r/MensRights10/06/15 05:35 AM
1

One of the first talking points made is based on this hate speech from rainn.org https://rainn.org/news-room/97-of-every-100-rapists-receive-no-punishment Its hate speech because its a logical fallacy that can only fool the stupid. The obvious presumptive falsehood is that every rape accusation is true. With the same data, and the opposite presumption, we could conclude that 91% of rape accusations are made by lying cunts. The critically important inference is that RAINN.org is a hate group that…
/r/MensRights10/06/15 03:56 AM
1

My problem with those laws is similar to false abuse allegations. If there is a $1200 fine for paying for sex, then there is extra risk of seeking police assistance for being ripped off or victim of violence. legalizing (and regulating it if politicians hate it) prostitution has the same benefits as legalizing drugs: removing violence surrounding it, and not ruining people's lives through prison.
/r/MensRights04/06/15 01:34 AM
1

No. Taxes doesn't take money and burn it. You don't model the economy by picturing the money flowing back to the king's coffers because the government spends any revenue faster than it comes in. Its always giving money away... just usually to cronies. and giving it to people who didn't earn it. That disincentivizes work and rewards sloth. No. current welfare system or charity rewards staying dependent because you only deserve/qualify for aid if you stay poor. UBI lets everyone do anything. If th…
/r/MensRights03/06/15 10:55 PM
-1

government give-away programs are notoriously inefficient conditions is what adds administrative costs to programs. conditions means hiring people to deny applicants and prosecute fraud. $3,750,000,000,000 per year There is an estimate (Charles Murray) that current welfare systems (all govt levels) cost $10k per adult. So $2.5T savings if those eliminated. $1.25T left, means an average tax increase of $5k per person. Lets say not all welfare is killed and we need $7500 per person. But every pers…
/r/MensRights03/06/15 07:48 PM
4

It does look more like a setup for how do we ban those evil political parties that men are favouring, rather than address issues of feminist supremacism. Though I do think the current Swedish policy for promoting families is reasonable, and surprisingly generous.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 04:31 PM
1

Not so balanced language, but addresses the issues In America, a single mother with two children who earns $15,000 a year would typically receive $5,200 in food stamps, which would fall to zero if she were to marry a father who earned the same This is a good reason for /r/BasicIncome . If we had a basic income of $15k per adult citizen, its enough to raise kids without conditional programs. But it also means $30k per couple, or $30k per cooperative child raising pair. It allows couples to split …
/r/MensRights03/06/15 04:14 PM
10

She's allowed to consent if you marry her... and that is not prostitution, somehow. In Sweden though, prostitution is only a crime for the man, and reform proposals look to Sweden.
/r/MensRights03/06/15 02:11 PM
5

If I were voting with my Penis, it might be for someone like Scarlett Johanson for president... So the voting with my Vagina reference doesn't ring true. Voting to empower Hitler so that he can benefit us pure Germans more by oppressing the less pure would be voting with my brown shirt... That's it... she's voting with her beige pantsuit.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 06:27 PM
1

I got that. As a gender issue, maybe we could say that she assumed female gender virtue. There is after all an outright overcurrent that women are better than men, and so this will necessarily affect some people to genuinely believe it. It is a normal common reaction to hear and accept what you want to hear. To get back to the main point of gender virtue, I think women are at least capable, if not outright gifted with special general aptitude, to feel out what they can get away with. If you assu…
/r/MensRights03/05/15 08:45 PM
3

Equality is not using gender as an excuse for not working. Obviously women use gender privilege in "coed" environments too, but I think this shows that if you remove "male attention" as a source of complaints and excuses, it doesn't make complaints and excuses less frequent. I feel bad for her, but its hard to say if she was faced with the impossibility of herding cats, or just let her employees manipulate her into treating them as unaccountable cats. She complained that men in the industry are …
/r/MensRights03/05/15 02:34 PM
5

The best that feminism can come up with as an excuse to deny that they are a supremacist movement against men is that "under the fempire, men will be allowed to play with dolls and act faggy", and the perhaps honest but absurdly misguided belief that " if men just had the opportunity to have a good cry about how their government coerces them to die in war, and persecutes them in civil/criminal conflicts with women" then the cleansing cry would make all their problems go away. Personally, I don't…
/r/MensRights14/04/15 05:19 PM
2

This is also an /r/BasicIncome issue. While there is no justification for the gender innequality, a bigger issue is the generational theft that takes place when you adjust retirement ages upward. http://www.naturalfinance.net/2012/09/should-we-vote-to-end-civilization-in.html The social contract is that you work and pay taxes (and pension funding) mostly for the "privilege" of retiring and obtaining that safety net one day. OP is correct in measuring expected total dollar benefit. (I don't think…
/r/MensRights05/04/15 02:57 PM
256

You should keep the pictures, but attribute it to the author instead of hitler.
/r/MensRights27/03/15 03:07 AM
0

appologies for insensitivity, but a pawn no matter how good hearted, good intentioned, and well meaning is still in service of the king. Support for the pawns is support for the king.
/r/MensRights19/02/15 05:42 AM
0

Freedom bombers? Oil policy pursuading technicians? Hadji wedding and funeral efficiency planning specialists?
/r/MensRights18/02/15 10:04 PM
0

While I appreciate that soldiers are effectively combat slaves, and are exploited for it, and so I apologize for their service, I feel that they as a group get significant recognition as it is, and they should bear some responsibility for being agents of murder. So, I think only promotes murder and violence and war to support veterans as a group, and so encourages recruiting and viewing service as honourable. I was hoping to see some social or justice services for men.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 09:51 PM
2

Fortunately this is not quite a new law, just a nazi with a lot of power giving guidance to police and prosecutors. While it can certainly ruin many men's lives to face such accusations, its not quite an immutable law. There is room to protest and change this abusive advice if police and prosecutors don't ignore the nazi.
/r/MensRights29/01/15 05:54 PM
39

The first problem is that you need to point a finger at a father to qualify for welfare. I don't understand why she wouldn't have named the real father, but the second problem is that naming the real father probably doesn't qualify for as much welfare as some other guy. The 3rd problem is why would whatever name I put on a form between me and the government impose any obligations on the named 3rd party that doesn't know anything about this form. The 4th and worse problem of all, is your name pla…
/r/MensRights23/01/15 09:49 PM
2

In the same article is also the point that more women are privileged enough to receive government employment.
/r/MensRights21/01/15 01:41 AM
1

what is the book about?
/r/MensRights16/01/15 08:08 PM
6

Keeping women afraid/ashamed to report real rape does not help the men's rights cause. First, let me say that there is no organization discouraging women to report rape. With that said, in an equal society, making an accusation does deserve the judgement of the merits of that accusation. A predisposition to believe and support invites lies. So making a rape accusation is an extremely serious act. The considerations that you need to make as an alleged victim is whether the rape makes you mad enou…
/r/MensRights02/12/14 11:23 PM
5

Berkowitz says, we also must 'educate victims on the importance of reporting.'" This is saying that women are too stupid and worthless to have their own opinions on whether they should make a rape accusation. They must be pressured into doing so. Why invalidate reasons for not reporting, instead of supporting RAINN's corrupt agenda?
/r/MensRights02/12/14 06:25 PM
2

the pdf is really interesting. More police officers die of transportation accidents than from personal violence. Probably because they can outfire most violent confrontations. Limo and taxi drivers die more frequently of violence than transportation accidents. Possibly they are better drivers than their reputation gives them. I could not find a flight attendant classification. 63 commercial pilots died from transportation accidents. Transportation kills a lot of people, is the biggest takeaway f…
/r/MensRights01/12/14 06:35 PM
1

There are 3 occupations where women have the majority of workers and deaths are above 1/10k. I would assume healthcare is the top one. What are the other 2? (is teaching one?)
/r/MensRights01/12/14 05:21 PM
2

How do you defend against the statement "I know several women who have been harassed by you" No names, times, or even stories.
/r/MensRights26/11/14 07:46 PM
11

You can always make the argument that the POTUS is unable to get enthusiastic consent from anyone, because saying no could get you in gitmo, or have other negative consequences such as tax audits or blacklisted from something. I like "Only yes means yes." The problem is that it gets too easy to revise. Someone who doesn't like the President could convince this woman she was "raped", and then the question that she asks herself is "Can I look back on this incident and find any supporting technical…
/r/MensRights22/10/14 05:57 PM
7

Well written piece. Another analogy is that it is better to shoot 10 innocent unarmed hoodied niggers than it is to let any of them think they can walk around freely. I would suggest that these laws are even worse than that. Men fearing rape persecution as a result of being alone with a woman, is a harsher consequence than the harm of potentially unwanted or regrettful drunken sex. Giving one class (gender) of society the authoritarian power to jail others is inappropriate.
/r/MensRights17/10/14 04:08 PM
2

One of the biggest problems with the myth of patriarchy is based on most historical rulers are men, that they serve men's interests. Men have always cared about women far more than their fellow man, and rulers in general concern themselves with how to enslave men as much as possible. (poverty and misery is necessary to recruit soldiers and beg favour to benevolent kings). Women, by nature, tend to feel entitled to the suffering of men. Hilary Clinton would ask for more sympathy for women as "the…
/r/MensRights29/09/14 04:25 PM
3

An unfortunate feature of our society is that for his own safety, no man should ever get into a living relationship with a woman with previous children. A Canadian study showed that when sexual abuse allegations are brought up as part of divorce proceedings, of those who are clearly settled, 2/3 are proven false, while 1/3 result in a guilty verdict (or plea). Those excluded are those whose determination is inconclusive one way or another. While this is terrible for all husbands, it is even wors…
/r/MensRights15/08/14 05:24 PM
1

I think that is the more important issue as well. We should not assume that any teenager is incapable of wanting sex, regardless of gender, and not provide special protections to girls for being too stupid to decide. We should protect teenagers from coercion, which is basically what "position of trust" implies as the special circumstances for regulating behaviour. But coersion implies a threat to say grades based on any request. There is no need to put sex above any other coercion, and more impo…
/r/MensRights06/08/14 05:04 PM
1

It shows the incredible lag between the law and culture. I think even 40 years ago, Oral sex would at least be considered normal foreplay (natural) as preparation to intercourse. Perhaps centuries ago when bathing was rarer, could there be some understanding that oral sex was unnatural.
/r/MensRights06/08/14 04:47 PM
5

Its easy to imagine with exaggerated luridity. Its a major problem with sex charges. No one ever seems to imagine "it was just a finger less than 1/8th inch in."
/r/MensRights06/08/14 04:42 PM
3

If there was a group "Aryan Germans against Naziism", they would be attacked with "Some of their words sound much like jews."
/r/MensRights30/07/14 12:52 PM
2

The point of the paper is that there is no chemical basis for differing death rates. There is already a pro-female bias in fertility-sex-selection-procedures. I doubt this means that parents are murdering male children. Neither of us knows that. We don't know the opposite either. Because SIDS has the potential for misdiagnosing murders, it is normal that any difference in the desire to murder based on gender would be picked up by these stats. Of course, even better gender difference stats would …
/r/MensRights27/07/14 04:55 PM
6

Without suggesting that it does not exist, (my point was that some deaths are likely misattributed), I think you would also find that statistically white infants are more likely to be diagnosed with SIDS, while black infants more likely to be diagnosed with infanticide. Both rape and SIDS are likely to exist. In every individual accusation/possibility however, a conclusion is reached based on circumstantial clues and even motivation that a certain conclusion is more polite and favourable, and so…
/r/MensRights27/07/14 04:37 PM
-2

An interesting thing about SIDS is that it possibly does not exist, similar to ouija boards, loch ness monsters or UFOs. It is possible that all attributions are in fact disguised intentional suffocations, or it is at least possible that a significant portion of SIDS diagnoses are overlooked or innapropriate favoritism to the parents. That would suggest that male infants are more likely to be murdered, or the politically correct version of the headline, "more susceptible to be placed in at-risk …
/r/MensRights27/07/14 03:54 PM
0

The answer that society would give dates from antiquity: "our daughter is not some whore with a sex drive who would ever engage in dishonourable premarital sex... at least not with a groom we have not preselected for her" There is also a belief that one child one day older than another child is able to mind control the other into whorish self-destructive premarital sex acts. Only girls can be victims of this. The laws and persecution bias have not been updated as social norms have moved away fro…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 02:48 PM
1

90% might be harsh, but it would still be ridiculous and offensive for those rich enough to have the freedom to make any realistic life choice to claim they are being oppressed by taxes. For science, they should learn real oppression. The incentive to earn more, is that they will have more after tax regardless of the tax rate. The greatest incentive to work is the over $10T in consumer spending in the US economy. If no one else wanted to work, you'd be able to collect all of that for yourself. E…
/r/MensRights24/01/14 01:48 AM
1

they collect the same money they paid in taxes. UBI paid through taxes creates an incentive to work because customers that have money are an incentive to work.
/r/MensRights24/01/14 12:31 AM
4

there is no reason for anyone not to want UBI implemented. The very rich who might face extra taxes benefit significantly too, by having more money to collect back through their or their employee's work. Only stupidity and misapprehension is a basis for objection. minimal disruption or resistance means negligeable.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 06:50 PM
2

There is a requirement/need to fund it. $15k is fundable with minimal disruption/resistance. $1M is not.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 05:20 PM
3

The funding comes from elimination of programs, extra revenue form those earning well above $100k and earning investment income, and extra tax revenue resulting from economic growth.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 04:42 PM
1

That's why I replied to chocobat's post. This was the state "abusing" its power by intervening. Its an interesting perspective that they view children as parasites that must be discouraged, if there is any chance that the state might have to pay for them.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 03:48 PM
2

You'd pay higher taxes. And there'd be some inflation. Maybe. Even with a 30% flat tax, the effective tax rate (under 15% after receiving UBI) would be lower for those earning $100k or less. Regarding the maybe inflation, if there is inflation, then those with work income would make more too, and so be better off.
/r/MensRights23/01/14 03:46 PM
-1

This happens to be another issue that /r/BasicIncome can solve. The problem here is that there are special social services available to mothers, and the state prefers an expensive lawsuit to recover $6000 primarily on the basis of female supremacism. We can easily afford to give every adult $15k/year without significant tax increases, as a substitute for welfare and other social services. Not only does it eliminate poverty, but it eliminates the need for the state to intervene in domestic relati…
/r/MensRights23/01/14 02:22 PM
1

I agree its still bad. It would be extremely upsetting to be accused of rape, and the accused would not assume that the accusation is being consdered worthless except for the educational seminar he is forced to attend. One day, RAINN.ORG will create an info graphic that all accused rapists under this scheme get no jail time, and so "get away with rape", and will make a call for tougher consequences for anonymous accusations.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 07:31 PM
-27

If you are certain that actions will never exceed the stated face value, then its not so bad to "sign up a friend for a free rape prevention/education lecture" Why we should doubt the face value though is that so many details are requested and recorded. The details are completely unnecessary to provide rape education.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 04:07 PM
-1

This creeeeepy person totally eye raped my cookie stash. I could totally imagine all the sick things they wanted to do to my cookies.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 03:59 PM
7

If the claimed restricted consequences for being accused on this form are true, then its not a huge deal. The consequences are hearing a lecture about how rape is wrong and if you are raping you should stop raping. It would be much more troubling if an anonymous accusation can cause anything more severe to the victim of the accusation.
/r/MensRights17/12/13 02:24 PM
7

using eugenics to attempt to conceive Using voluntary eugenics which may relieve the scare quotes surrounding that word. Any person looking for a sperm or egg donor, or just a coparent, is applying voluntary eugenic principles. Our disapproval of allowing a deaf child to come to term is our desire to impose our own eugenics on them.
/r/MensRights04/12/13 03:24 AM
3

The article had little to do with the headline. My problem with the headline is first the minor point that real victims are independent of false accusers. Even if we never caught any false accusers, it should never imply that accusers are truthful. The major problem is the concept that only women's suffering matters. When we have to resort to fictitious theoretical harm to an unnamed future accuser, we are missing the tangible and real harm done to an individual accused male. Rape and sexual cri…
/r/MensRights11/11/13 12:34 AM
4

MR has nothing to do with conservatism. MR is a fundamental human freedom movement compatible with the purest anarchist philosophy. Anarcho feminists are worthless subhuman facist slime and proven by your thinking and line of argument. They are facists feminists first, and anarchism is seen as a secondary means to create a new fascist empire by overthrowing the existing empire. The way you are proving that position is by attacking MR just because some MR proponents might have wrong economic view…
/r/MensRights07/11/13 12:10 AM
-3

This is feminist thinking for what men's rights should be, and I wouldn't call it feminists greatest evil, but it still has huge problems. Mainly, it views social perception of gender roles as the problem that needs addressing. Of course we can all support men's freedom to get buttfucked in pink tutus and women's freedom to pursue sports or other counter-gender norms, but these are completely NON-ACTIONABLE goals. Society will continue to think whatever it wants gender norms to be, and the only …
/r/MensRights06/11/13 11:50 PM
6

If I understand the legal issues, its that legal costs are allowed to be awarded as part of a judgement. I didn't know that this was common practice in family law, and there is usually extenuating circumstances of abuse of law ( no reasonable defense) and/or process to award "maximum" costs. It might be that he is ordered to pay $5k or $10k costs, and that his wages will be garnished 20% until he does.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 03:19 PM
8

That seems like the weirdest part. Why can't her attorney be paid by her?
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:31 PM
1

There is no disqualification for EI eligibility based on alimony. Pour que no los dos?
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:29 PM
50

It could get worse for him. Canadian Law bases alimony/child support on earning potential (highest past earnings. See Dave Foley from Kids in the Hall as an example) for the explicit intent of preventing men from "going on strike" or earning less than the slavery conditions he was willing to endure to support family while he was a member of it.
/r/MensRights04/11/13 01:28 PM
11

voluntary licensing could apply even to fields where almost everyone values that the service is accredited (law/medecine). If you are licensed/accredited, it provides you with a basis to charge more, and many people will agree to pay more because of the accreditation. Licensing hair cutting is a small step away from fining your mom for cutting your hair without a license.
/r/MensRights03/11/13 01:40 PM
4

and most sex selective abortions in North America are aborted males. you don't need any other proof for which gender faces the most oppression than that.
/r/MensRights19/09/13 07:48 PM
14

is there another source that confirms that?
/r/MensRights11/08/13 07:40 PM
50

The "These are not real feminists" apologist people should notice the cheers she gets. It was pretty obvious manufacture of sexual grievance, and it was done to commit assault. Fortunately for him, that is a much lesser harm than being arrested for touching her boob. Do any feminist apologists want to explain why there are zero real feminists in the crowd?
/r/MensRights07/08/13 03:38 PM
3

feminist voting brigade following your posts here An innocent explanation is that it was crossposted. She doesn't need to be a sockpuppet to have alerted them to the thread, and you don't have to be a feminist to be downvoting you.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 10:16 PM
2

she is dumb. That isn't an insult, that is a fact. I don't see how you get that for her post history
/r/MensRights20/07/13 10:03 PM
1

not voting for the 'harsher sentences for everyone' politicians might be a better start. Tough on crime grandstanding would have a counterargument other than "my rapist coddling opponent's bill to reduce mandatory minimums to 50 years is rapist coddling. We will make them 70 years!" To have the argument that jurors will refuse to convict people when the sentences are that harsh would infuse some common sense into the grandstanding. If this week a politician proposed that "following someone who i…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 02:15 PM
1

in my view (http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1ihxig/woman_gets_life_sentence_for_making_13yearold_boy/cb56u0h), giving jurors knowledge of the sentencing guidelines is precisely how to start refining abusive laws.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:22 PM
1

or mandatory minimums are wrong it means just that - not that the underlying law has something inherently wrong with it. The sentence and law are completely intertwined. We can all understand that jaywalking or casting witchcraft hexes are wrong. But they are just a little bit wrong. If the sentence for being found guilty is a stern warning, then the law is reasonable. If its harsh (including 3 strike minimums) then its not. The circumstances of the crime make a big difference. If there is a min…
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:20 PM
1

They are not. They typically offer it when their case is weak. Basically if the accused is innocent, he'll be offered to go to jail for just a little while to save time and expense of defending.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 12:35 PM
0

It would almost always result in "nullification" when the punishment is too severe (rather than "guilty because accused will just be in jail a couple of weeks" anyway) but that kind of common sense discretion is useful and valuable. If the sentence guidelines are evil and fascist then so is the law behind those mandatory minimum sentences.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 09:59 PM
0

And its a "bad rule" if you believe the jury should know about unfair laws, or should know about jury nullification. Where it is obviously unfair is in situations like this case where mandatory minimum sentences apply, and the judge cannot use his wisdom/responsibility to set the "right/fair" sentence. Consider a 10 year old girl accused of putting a hex on her sister, and charged with witchcraft. She may be obviously guilty, but as a juror I should be aware if the sentence will be something lik…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 08:37 PM
11

the sexual abuse her client experienced as a child, this only goes to suggest that she is likely to be a victimizer herself. As such, I think we can infer that this 13-year-old boy was not her first venture into acting like a sexual predator. I'm aware of research suggesting that "rapists" are likely to have been (or just often are) victims of child abuse. What you're saying though is that victims of child abuse are likely to be rapists, and we should give the pieces of shit 20 years in jail for…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:44 PM
6

the jury didn't know the crime had a life sentance when they convicted her of it Its apparently either illegal or against bar association/court rules (pretty sure its former) to let the jury know what the punishment for the crime they are deliberating is. That doesn't make sense to me, because we all assume that the penalties for the more serious crimes (murder) are pretty severe. I'm guessing that the thinking for forbiding it, is that it could cloud juror's judgement if they think it is too se…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:36 PM
21

There's no reason to believe she was a repeat offender, and in either case had nothing to do with the sentence. The problem is entirely minimum sentence rules. Your first point was right on. If a sentence is retarded when being applied to a woman, it should be considered equally retarded when applied to a man.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:24 PM
1

when you're 18 say 100k. 100k+ they think you're lying. When 19, its the opposite. Its weird how for several age groups that 80k seems to have more positive impressions than either 100k or 100k+
/r/MensRights11/07/13 09:17 PM
5

hmmm... If I had to answer yes to "do you want me to give you $1M" 100 times, my enthusiasm might wane around the 70-80 mark.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 01:33 AM
2

That is a good point. There is still the issue of funding and support, but the gap of 260k to 140k survivors should not be fully explained by the funding and support imbalance. There is a very big gap to explain, and your point is much better than anything the article brought up.
/r/MensRights12/06/13 09:17 PM
0

I identify as a woman. I believe I should have all the rights that they do. This also works at "ladies nights" promotions, but people will generally not take up your offer of fingering you for proof, and if they do, you can scream sexual harassment and attempted rape.
/r/MensRights28/05/13 07:52 PM
5

Rape is the most morally and physically reprehensible crime in a society, as it is an assault on the body, mind and privacy of the victim. While a murderer destroys the physical frame of the victim, a rapist degrades and defiles the soul of a helpless female. This is an absolutely disgusting exaggeration and perversion of rape. A vagina getting used for intended purpose, cannot come close to murder or other bodily harm in terms of damages. Rape can also occur without the knowledge of the rapist,…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 05:54 PM
8

If any 1 man is making 7% more than any other 1 woman, then he already pays 7% more income tax. Nothing gender specific needs to be implemented. I would like to be able to have the choice to work at home unpaid, while my wife has a real job. The fact that I would make that choice doesn't mean that I have equality of opportunity with women to make that choice. There are a lot more men willing to (choose to) take on the sole provider role to support a family, than there are women who are willing t…
/r/MensRights14/05/13 01:49 PM
17

This article has more detail for the BS reasons http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20130503/ARTICLE/130509901/-1/news?Title=Veto-of-alimony-bill-brings-relief-outcry the bill's provision allowing retroactive changes to long-settled alimony deals as a primary reason for his veto. Then at least have them change the bill for just future divorces. ?
/r/MensRights04/05/13 05:26 PM
11

the images were illegal because they encouraged people “to migrate from there to the real thing” They should put everyone that buys lottery tickets in jail then. Lottery purchases prove that people are entertained by the thought of having millions of dollars, and so we can assume that they lust over money. This encourages people to migrate towards bank robberies. or.... the risk of being caught committing a crime is actually sufficient deterrent to that crime, such that we don't need to imagine …
/r/MensRights21/04/13 03:37 PM
0

chess club or math club or what not then it shows me this person is not interested in a diverse environment. Obviously he made no effort in integrating with minorities or to sympathize with them Most of those clubs would tend not be dominated by whites, and whites are often a minority, to various forms of asian ethnicities.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:39 PM
8

Keep in mind that the Nazi-Arian goals were simple peace. If you were against Nazi-ism, and its cleansing efforts, you were against peace. Germany's invasion of Poland was a necessary retailiation because Hitler claimed that some Polish peasants made some attacks against German citizens. While feminists will take offense to being compared to Hitler, even Scandinavian countries should recognize that some pro-feminists are in fact supremacists, and some of them say very stupid ideas, that are much…
/r/MensRights25/03/13 05:16 PM
3

don't have to pander to an incredibly loud, offense-faking minority. That's the good thing about firing her. She should have no influence in the world. Post modern discourse (faking offense to "prove" that the oppressed are oppressors) is generally what is wrong with feminism, and needs to be punished more.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 10:10 PM
3

By comparison, over the same timespan, there were only 35 prosecutions for making false allegations of rape, six for false allegations of domestic violence and three that involved false allegations of both rape and domestic violence. And its usually because the crown refuses to prosecute the complainant when their case falls apart. Prosecuting the complainant is an admission that they were retarded to go forward with the case in the first place.
/r/MensRights13/03/13 08:57 PM
-2

You don't really need to talk to a lawyer until you are arrested or questioned. Though you might want legal advice regarding whether to report her crimes. Get a conversation recorded for the extortion thing.
/r/MensRights10/03/13 08:22 PM
35

Also included in that quote is the term "unwarranted" crime. Its saying that if the victim is male, it shouldn't be a crime.
/r/MensRights08/03/13 12:58 PM
1

I don't want women to have guns, no matter how sure Hannity is that they will only be used for the right purposes. Its not obvious how random men having guns makes me more safe either. If a grown man can kill someone out of fear because they are wearing a hoodie, there is a hysterical woman who will think she's about to be raped when she is not.
/r/MensRights07/03/13 03:03 AM
4

Someone in the other discussion pointed out that he was mutilated during circumcision, not that its much better. Its a gender issue in that the thought of penis size or penis mutilation as something horrible and worst than death has crossed some person's mind.
/r/MensRights06/03/13 08:56 PM
0

Hannity's idea is pretty stupid though. Encourage women to kill men if they say they felt they might be raped. Sure its insulting to suggest that men need to be taught not to rape, but the worst harm is the expanding definition of rape, and in that sense, men can be subject to more harm if they are unaware of the current or presumed defition of rape. In the sense that women's magazines are allowed to describe un-gentelmenly behaviour, even if the propaganda is insulting and harmful, its less har…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 03:11 PM
2

Here's what's wrong with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape : There should be a disclaimer that the page is not trustworthy on the basis that research/claims in the field, and editing of this page, are highly politicized. The Kanin study should be the first source for the best guess of false rape claims. There needs to be a way to inject that the process of finding liars is difficult, and the rate that any study/process uncovers liars is directly proportional to the time spent…
/r/MensRights03/03/13 02:41 PM
4

Your list is quite comprehensive for the 99 problems all men have. Feminism's false strawman of MR is that it is a conservative group that advocates women in the kitchen and conservative homophobia and intolerance. Its a propaganda tool that reinforces willful ignorance. Feminists do like to pat themselves on the back for pointing out that men's real problems is that they were not allowed to play with barbies as children.
/r/MensRights21/01/13 04:44 PM
2

That does add a relevant twist, but there was reasonable compensation offered to accept the deal. I would guess that her husband would not have received money/inheritance if they didn't both accept the terms.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:55 PM
3

“How could the wife possibly have refused to sign under those circumstances?” The thing is that $7M + a house that is likely worth that much is probably a lifestyle she would have accepted 30 years ago. She could still afford the private pillates instructor. Why shouldn't it be unconscionable to think that he would accept marriage to her if she planned to contest the agreed separation amount.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 10:49 PM
1

Actually no, although we should both understand that we are dealing with an extremely technical exaggeration of rape either way. Its definitely not rape, because pre-agreed limits on sexual activity 1 hour ago, has no bearing on what you are consenting to this second. We don't allow consent/intent of pregnancy to affect any men's rights to parenthood, and so I don't think we'd allow them to influence women's right to abuse rape technicalities. Only very demented people could view empowering wome…
/r/MensRights10/01/13 10:49 PM
1

the accuser recanting does not necessarily mean it was a lie. I outlined multiple scenarios above where an alleged victim might recant. You listed a bunch of scenarios that might cause various misinterpretations of recantations, but they simply had nothing to do with the Kanin study, which controlled very specifically what was counted as false vs. not false. You had some interesting views on Canada vs. US. the idea of treating half of alleged rape victim like crazy lying bitches makes me deeply …
/r/MensRights09/01/13 05:49 AM
1

he gets his 50% statistic based off of reports that were classed by the police as false or unfounded Not true at all. Every false classification is false if and only if the complainant says it was false. 10% being deliberately false accusations is an incredibly enormous number, and nothing to roll your eyes at or dismiss. While that number would indeed be huge, as you say, the real number is closer to 50%.. wikipedia says there are 29/100k rapes in the US, and only 1.4/100k in Canada per year (s…
/r/MensRights09/01/13 04:54 AM
1

Its common to use your own personal experience with rape as a basis to deny false rapes, but: false rape accusations are serious as shit. Accusations of brushing against your tit is serious as shit. Both are MUCH more serious than most typical date rape interpretations or the event you explained happened to you, because that harm is a socialized mental process that should be blockable. (I don't mean to imply that it is not deserving of sympathy as well) Siding with every other rape complainant, …
/r/MensRights09/01/13 03:02 AM
1

Did the perpetrator of the assault and the murder act under free will? Some idiots have murdered sikhs because they hate muslims because of 9/11, and hate propaganda manufactured to drum up support for war. You could say those idiots have free will, but you could also argue that they are programmed, and that those actions are collateral damage from their programming. Cultural presumption that rape claims are true is similar programming.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 02:25 AM
1

Good. Hopefully you can feel good about not resorting to abuse, and not bearing the responsibility of his extreme punishment, as a happier high road in dealing with any disappointments he may have caused you.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 02:11 AM
2

The panel of experts approach was used in the McDowell study to "bump up" the total false rate to 60%. It boils down to the skill of the investigator. Getting liars to admit lies is a difficult, very high skill cap, task, and no matter how good you are, you will not discover all of them. I unfortunately don't know any of the studies you listed. I can tell you about the shameful Lisak study that is on the wikipedia page. He found an 8% false rate, but not only did the investigation protocol show …
/r/MensRights09/01/13 01:54 AM
3

Did any of those girls say so openly to you, or were their stories all just too full of holes?
/r/MensRights09/01/13 01:32 AM
0

Its true that lie detectors are voodoo, but they were used properly in the Kanin study. A lie detector test was simply an intermission in the investigation, and used to get the complainant to admit to her lie. If I say I know you are lying, and your response is that I am right, its because you are a liar. Not because you are tired of the process. At any rate, Kanin also discusses in his report a study covering 2 other police departments where no polygraphs were used, and a 50% false count was ob…
/r/MensRights09/01/13 01:24 AM
-2

I side with the cops on that, even if its technically rape. You have every right to terminate a relationship for that reason or any other reason, but invoking the full force of the judicial system over it would be an abuse on your part. The reason for my thinking is based on replacing "was it rape" with "was it something he deserves 10 years in jail for" which is basically the same question from the legal system's perspective.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 01:14 AM
0

First, Lisak is a worthless piece of shit liar. On the issue of polygraphs in the Kanin study, the results of the polygraph (when it was used... sometimes it was just offered) were never used to determine that a complaint was false. ONLY the complainant admitting that no rape occurred counted as false. A polygraph as an investigation tool is about saying "the magic box and the guy in white coat behind it think you are lying... is there something you want to tell us now?" If you say I am a lying …
/r/MensRights09/01/13 12:50 AM
2

That argument was used to wipe it from wikipedia. I'd say its evidence to speculate the study was suppressed on political disagreement with its conclusions. If you research what McDowell has published, and how pro-rape-complainant it is, there is no reason to assume he'd lie in the other direction.
/r/MensRights09/01/13 12:31 AM
2

Violent people will be violent. Liars will be liars. We're educated to be suspicious of lending people money on their word. We're not educated to be weary of rape claims. Feminist propaganda, in fact, demands that we believe all of them, and that every rape destroys every women in the outer-most limits you can imagine it harming them. Yes, some people are more gullible and violent than others. But that gullibility and over-sympathy is enhanced by the feminist propaganda machine, and the conseque…
/r/MensRights09/01/13 12:14 AM
1

I think part of the point that OP was trying to make is that these beatings happen in part because people buy in to the bullshit statistics often invoked by feminists and their ilk. Because they believe the frequency of false accusations is so low--and also that many/most rapists get away with it--they feel compelled to act. That's right. If you buy into rape culture and 1 in4 women have been raped then 40M American men deserve to be in jail, or receive vigilante stabbings. Its easy to think tha…
/r/MensRights09/01/13 12:01 AM
1

Its not anecdotes. all of the new laws that have been implemented that protect/encourage women to falsely accuse a man of rape. It would be a major effort to list all of the funding initiatives and legal changes that have occurred over the last 30 years, but too many resources have been thrown at increasing conviction rates, women's shelters and hate groups such as RAINN which manufacture rape claims, and post blatant false hate speech such as the original graphic in order to obtain funding and …
/r/MensRights08/01/13 11:53 PM
2

Which is more likely to be raped a 50 year old or a 20 year old? Does a 20 year old not grow as a person, in 30 years? Then and now, 20 years olds are more likely to be raped and to make rape complaints. The key issue is has the cultural mentality of 20 year olds changed in the last 30 years. I don't think there has been any social awakening that treats rape claims more suspiciously. I posted this elsewhere, but here is a quote from Kanin's report: No evidence exists to suggest that something un…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 11:35 PM
3

The FBI numbers are worthless because they have no methodology associated with then, and are heavily influenced by politics and the number individual police forces want to report. In order to find out liars, you have to make a significant investigation effort, and you probably have to want to discover liars. If one police department takes a complaint, and then arrests someone if that complaint sounds like a crime, it will never find any liars or false reports. What we can tell from the FBI stati…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 05:34 PM
1

the Kanin study is also a bad joke The Kanin study has the right protocol, and replicated by McDowell. You have to ask difficult questions to a liar in order to find out liars. Results tend to depend on how good the investigator is. his methodology is to just trust the police department of a small Midwestern town to accurately record when rape allegations are false That is outright false. The methodology relied on only the liar admitting that no rape occurred. The results undercount the number o…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 04:26 PM
9

and sex under the influence (since in these cases, substances impair one's ability to give informed consent). The history of the 1 in 4 claim is pretty fascinating. They asked a women's studies class if they felt they had been raped. 1 in 16 said yes. But they also asked a bunch of other questions including "Have you ever had sex with someone you didn't want to because of drugs or alcohol", and the researchers counted everyone who said yes to such questions as having been raped. In case its not …
/r/MensRights08/01/13 04:09 PM
16

Since the two men you posted there weren't in fact confronted by the system, but rather by vigilantes, wouldn't you agree that it's completely useless? The social problem is presumed belief of rape claims. That affects both authorities and individuals. Its also the fundamental reason for rape lies. If they are believed, without question (because the questions would be too delicate), then they are powerful manipulation tools. Keep in mind that our species was capable of reacting to witchcraft acc…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:55 PM
3

The real problem with false-rape accusations, and the problem with any study that attempts to determine a percentage of rape accusations that are false, is that frequently people honestly believe that they were raped when then alleged perpetrator honestly believes that no rape occurred. I believe that such incidents happen. It is a real problem, in that we should not tolerate any social coddling and presumed sympathy that harms the reputation of men, and should in fact encourage responsibility i…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:42 PM
2

if a large number of reports were recanted, does not necessarily mean it never happened, more so that the pressure of trial was just not worth it. Its a silly assumption though. You can choose to stop cooperating without recanting your story. A false recantation would be a prosecutable crime, and an unnecessary admission of one of the most despicably shameful acts possible. was probably to encourage more women to report their rapes There is no reason for such a policy. If anyone has a preference…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 03:24 PM
12

the inclusion of the Air Force study. Personally I think it seems a bit dated The first thing to understand is that there are few proper studies of rape allegations because the real results are politically oppressed. Both Kanin and McDowell are/were prominent feminists that advanced the rape culture agenda, including oversensitive treatment of complainants and duluth model advocacy designed to maximize the number of men harrassed and put in jail. The lack of repetition is directly related to the…
/r/MensRights08/01/13 02:55 PM
5

This article did not give the real reason why Conservatives blocked the bill I don't know that the politicians are enlightened about the real reasons this bill is crap. I don't know that conservatives understand fathers rights, or the rights of men not to be put in jail easily.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:33 PM
18

The problem with his statement and, in fact most of mainstream society, is the presumption that feminism has a valid reason for existence: That women lack privilege and equality. Its pretty easy for the world to believe it, if they just hear their side. Its obvious to agree that they should have equal rights, but it takes genuine effort to investigate whether they've already obtained that standing, and feminist power like any other power, is in no rush to delegitimize their power.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 10:14 PM
1

That is right. You could hopefully go scour the edit history of wikipedia topics, and then form at least a balanced "shaddow wikipedia" version of topics if not a pro-men's rights version.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 09:46 PM
2

That is very empty, but if you attempt to edit wikipedia, you should definitely paste the edit there.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 07:45 PM
3

the false rape page is indeed one of the worst. The section on criticism of Kanin is longer than the section on Kanin. The McDowel study which showed 60% false result was also edited out for BS reasons.
/r/MensRights02/01/13 07:43 PM
-1

That's fair. It's disturbing to see here a post here that applauds a judicial panel smacking down a judge for statements evaluating the harshness of a rape during rape sentencing. Its unfortunate that people have limited intelligence, but its still no excuse for their stupidity, and applauding and celebrating here feminazi-shaming derailing honest discussion of rape is disappointing to see here.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 08:55 PM
1

There's a lot to d) and e). The big point of e, is that of course you would see rape culture and rape as a huge problem against women if 1 in 3 were raped and 2% or less of rape claims were false. The problem is that those statistics are complete lies, that go unquestioned in mainstream propaganda.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 06:38 PM
-2

The judges thinking at time of sentencing is actually completely appropriate even if insensitive. Rape culture as defined and fabricated by feminists is "all rape equally awful and happens all the time to 1 in 3, etc..." is confirmed by this absurd 10-0 PC bashing of insensitivity.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 06:19 PM
0

because the same judge found rape, it implies that all of those things didn't necessarily occur at the same time.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 06:16 PM
-8

This is sensationalist crap that shouldn't be here. Discussion was during sentence phase It was decided that there was rape, but it was a matter to decide how big a rape it was. For you worthless fucking pigs to show outrage over this, you worthless fucking pigs have to know that all rapes are equal. That means you worhtless fucking shits think that drunk sex = actively resisted sex in every fucking way. There is in fact a difference, and it is appropriate to be allowed to speak and evaluate tha…
/r/MensRights14/12/12 06:00 PM
4

rainn i s undeniably a hate group because they continue to include the 97% fairy tale http://www.rainn.org/news-room/97-of-every-100-rapists-receive-no-punishment From the exact same stats, if we assume that all rape claims are false instead of Rainn's claims that all are true, then 97% of rape accusations are correctly resolved as baseless.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 04:22 AM
24

next time you see bs from srs that r/mr is a SPLC hate group, you can add that not only did SPLC never say that, but r/feminism says srs is a hate group.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 04:12 AM
2

Its like the term anti-semite that "used to" be thrown as a response to any criticism of Israel. Its too easy to do.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 12:59 AM
-1

There are only one type of people who are more annoying than people who don't understand depression, suicidal thinking and other mental disorders and that is people who think they do I apologize to anyone who wouldn't find my advice helpful> I hope that it is still helpful to some, and I'd warn you against being so sure that only you understand what to say. No I didn't misunderstand you That is surprising because you attacked me thinking that "don't despair" = shut up and man up
/r/MensRights12/12/12 09:48 PM
4

I'm complaining about downvotes to you, not because you made them all, but because my post was helpful, and your misunderstanding seems to be (the only thing available for me to respond to that is) responsible for burying it. Telling, and hopefully convincing, someone not to despair is obviously helpful since despair is the precursor to suicide, and the post shows clear empathy to those at risk of despair. Also, any contrary advise (to despair) would be harmful to those at risk.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 07:35 PM
7

Not despairing is different than not allowed to be angry. Despair means to basically give up in the face of adversity. To accept the BS that has been inflicted upon you. I agree with all your statements about unfairness, and agree that you have every right to fight against that injustice, and should be angry at everyone that tolerates or stands by as that injustice is inflicted upon you. Despair is basically the opposite reaction to injustice. ace whatever happens to you with vigor and strength …
/r/MensRights12/12/12 04:12 PM
2

What does Juliar mean? I find the term misogynist to be extremely offensive hate speech, and definitely should be implied to be an abusive defamatory lie. Calling someone a dick or cunt though would be devoid of an implied meaning, and probably doesn't cross an offenssive threshold.
/r/MensRights12/12/12 03:12 PM
-11

Sad story. Obviously you have a right to tell it, and it's important to underline the unfairness involved, but I don't like reading these because it may cause suicidal thoughts and encourage despair. Don't despair over an arrest. If the right resolution doesn't occur, the worst outcome is prison. Don't despair about friends and family and society reactions. No one's opinion is important. Remind any one that insults you what garbage they are for presuming rape accusations are true in the face of …
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:59 PM
1

can you/we read the wiki?
/r/MensRights12/12/12 02:08 AM
10

I would be, sure. I wouldn't hit her or damage the car though.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 09:03 PM
6

Its the description that I guess brings the point home. Its an amazing commercial though, and pretty clear, without writing down the interpretation. With that said, its impossible to correctly call this hate speech.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 09:01 PM
3

The most interesting thing about this ruling is that it admits that child support is not based on the father's (or non-custodial parent's) ability to pay, and rather based on the number of children. An easier way to fix this, not mentioned in the article, is this guy could afford 20 more children if he had custody, and all of the mothers were forced to pay him child support.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 08:27 PM
1

Courts in western countries (English and roman descent) that I know of are separated in criminal vs civil jurisdiction. Family law is a civil matter. Failure to pay a civil award is still a civil matter. Being jailed or having an arrest warrant for contempt of court is a civil matter whether the original court order was either criminal or civil.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 04:55 PM
34

There is no crime committed, and so no extradition process I am aware of. Family support is a civil matter.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 04:29 PM
3

You should be able to sell your house even after leaving the country, or at least transfer it in your parent's name, but get formal advise. You can offer your child to visit you summers, or assist with college. Its not a crime to not pay spousal/child support, as it is a civil issue.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 04:28 PM
2

Another way this manifests itself is worker's compensation qualifying mental dissabilities or PTSD civil claims. The more victimized you make yourself feel, the more qualified for compensation you can convince other people you are. Playing the role of a victim elicits simpler support from friends and familly as well. Its hard to "recover" from something if there are both internal and external pressures that encourage you to stay damaged.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 12:47 AM
1

The rule against too many links from one site is not supposed to be a hard rule, but it is abused. The policy has 10 or so mitigating factors that are supposed to be considered.
/r/MensRights08/12/12 12:03 AM
1

pique means itched, pricked, pointed, aroused. The french rarely use the term together with interest.
/r/MensRights07/12/12 11:58 PM
3

let me try again, Should you accept an invitation up for coffee after a date with THIS OP? Not unless you confirm on doorstep that coffee means sex. Its not enough to feel that sex is in the air, because she feels entitled to control your sexuality. I understand the importance or benefit of ideal/written consent, but life doesn't happen that way, and the downside of perfect consent is that it gives THE sexual power and control to women. You can argue that this is how it should be. But you can't …
/r/MensRights01/12/12 07:12 PM
2

OP feels unlovable precisely because of her entitlements. Her feeling of a lack of security is complete BS that comes from fabricated feminist rape culture. There are extremely few rapes that occur to genuinely insecure women that protect their security. Rape overall is down significantly in last 20 years, but the proportion of stranger rape abductions is especially down. The other grey area rapes can all be substantially prevented by cautious women. Don't invite dates you don't want to have sex…
/r/MensRights01/12/12 04:35 PM
9

Her good point is that men will demand equality too, and probably shun marriage until they receive it. I'm not sure that we are, or ever want to, go back to home care roles, but it was never such a bad deal. the anti-communist propaganda was funny though.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 02:50 AM
1

There's one big advantage to not negotiating... You get to have the job. There is a lower unemployment rate for women, and it would not be discrimination, and rather a normal tradeoff, for higher employment at lower pay.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 07:42 PM
1

For those that read the protocol, where participants given the impression that they would only be paid if they followed through with all instructions?
/r/MensRights27/11/12 07:03 PM
5

Taken for questioning doesn't imply he was arrested, but it does sound like they want to know if this affair is true or not, as if that has any relevance to whether the beating was justified. Taking the wife and her family in for "questioning" would have been more appropriate.
/r/MensRights27/11/12 06:57 PM
1

2 trips to his apartment sounds possible. I doubt the first trip carried the expectation of "just a handjob". I'm not disputing his relationship with her was wrong. But it was about a 6 wrong. She's going along with it on first visit, a woman whoring herself out is hard to treat as an extreme tragedy when 90% of them do it in some form or another... maybe that goes up to 7. Then she goes to 11 is what disturbed me. The pieces of shit voting here, and I think the audience, critically approving, o…
/r/MensRights27/11/12 02:08 AM
1

I understand that violence is not advised, and will cause you legal troubles if you resort to it, but just as you'd plead for a lower sentence for hitting some weirdo that followed you around calling you a pedophile for a while, 'misogynist" is equally as provocative.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 03:27 PM
0

She went to his apartment believing that she would have to give him a handjob, as had occurred in the past We're both basing things on our impressions rather than the book's intent, but this is the only part of your impression that seems completely wrong to me. Her calling him out of the blue to suggest that she come over implies a booty call. The point both is and is not whether that is her true intention. Her giving him the impression that it is her intent is a deception used to invite sexual …
/r/MensRights26/11/12 03:21 PM
4

I personally feel like physical violence is semi-excusable at such accusations. Certainly, the accusation makes me angry. Its as inexcusable as calling someone a pedophile or rapist. So I don't know how PC it actually is, just that it should not be PC.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 03:16 AM
-1

I'm not 100% clear on details, or the book. There was just one office encounter, I remember. I'm foggy about the details at his place, but I think you are right that he initiates "rough" sex, but her suggesting to meet at his place has strong implications that she was indicating consent to that likelihood, and feigning consent was obviously part of a premeditated plan to rape him.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 03:05 AM
-5

I didn't see super, but I found girl with the dragon tattoo offensive because her response to being extorted for sexual favours (blowjob) by a social worker, is to then pretend to consent to a sexual encounter, so that she can videotape her assraping him, tattoing rapist on him, and then control his future sexuality. While I recognize that extorting a blowjob, isn't nice behaviour, its a lot closer to extorting $100 than what he got. There is an over-reaction to mistreatment with a sexual compon…
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:29 AM
5

If you want to stop gender innequal tax policies, bring up taxiing tampons and cosmetics.
/r/MensRights26/11/12 02:16 AM
1

Its a great point without relying on "men pay most of the taxes". Its blatantly unfair even if gender taxation is equal. The most obvious unfairness is unequal age qualifications for benefits. In countries where it is equal though, we need to look into the disparity of life expectancy. Is it because men are more likely to work within long term cancer/respitory risky areas that causes them to die sooner, or is the life expectancy of those that reach 65 fairly equal? Let retirement savings and hea…
/r/MensRights25/11/12 05:04 PM
9

That is a good point. A lack of consent is what should be proven. How that got twisted around is a disturbing story.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 04:52 PM
4

Pretty sad in their setup they say "300000 children are at risk of exploitation", and then fake a link by "most are victimized...." I'm sure that 300M Americans are at risk of murder.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 05:54 PM
0

There is a lot of stupidity in this article, but there is also an important valid point that starts it. Without reasonable father's rights, reasonable divorce laws, and reasonable presumption of innocence in domestic and sexual accusations, there is an extremely strong disincentive from associating with women. With those disincentives, much simpler and affordable lifestyles are more attractive than worrying about economic status for the purpose of attracting a trophy. Contentment with simplicity…
/r/MensRights03/11/12 10:51 PM
0

If republican and nazi ideologues got to write their own dictionary entries for their ideology, they would sound quite reasonable too.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 02:02 AM
-4

Something to that... Even if the word humanism was taken and means too many things, it is obvious from its name that feminism is not humanism.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 02:01 AM
2

I'm not sure if this is a lone whacko like the splc crap, and not an aclu position, but... its pretty disturbing when the ACLU starts supporting witch hunts.
/r/MensRights02/11/12 01:26 AM
0

I was referencing the probable cause standard as well. There (should) needs to be probable cause for the intent component of a crime and not just the facts that an eggshell skull got crushed. My last analogy referred to accusing you based on my eggshell feelings and paranoid delusions as to the motives of your statement. Before arresting you, the police should think that it was probable (not just possible) that you intended to threaten and insult me. that is not enough for me to presume that he …
/r/MensRights26/10/12 07:21 PM
3

If the genders were reversed, there would obviously be a loud and widespread clamouring to call this statutory rape, and in that sense, if its rape for one gender it should be rape for the other gender. On the other hand though, it would be a lot better for society if common sense rather than technical definitions for rape were used. One common sense definition, is "If there is no victim, there is no rape." Even upon reflecting in adulthood on the situation if the "victim" does not consider it r…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:39 PM
1

Giving the girl here the benefit of the doubt I don't see the reason to. Paranoid delusions should be assumed. Shouldn't he get the benefit of the doubt for using the stairs for a legitimate reason? Why assume an "abnormal"/malicious reason for how they got closer? If there was a rude/scary tone in how he asked her the question, why assume that he wasn't receiving a rude/scary stare that begged the question? it would seem there is at least a possibility that this is assault There is a possibilit…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:03 PM
-1

because his actions would put a reasonable person in apprehension of imminent bodily harm. So then there was something about the way he said "Do I know you?" that could be "scary". If you are going up stairs, and the person in front of you stops, you will get closer to them. If they turn around with a weird expression, you may very well ask what their expression means. The police would do the community a favour by also charging the woman involved with 3rd degree assault, because her behaviour wa…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 05:01 PM
-4

They make an interesting logical error in the very first paragraph. Not to say that what you point out isn't interesting, but the real problem has to do with the upfront presumption in rape allegations. We could reword the exact same data as, out of 100 lying cunts that make rape complaints, 54 limit their lies to self, friends and family, 32 get laughed out of the police station, 3 get caught by the prosecutors, 4 get laughed out of court, while still 5 too many have their BS stick, at least 2 …
/r/MensRights25/10/12 03:47 AM
1

How about co-ed prisons instead? Its obvious from the article that prison is unfairly tough on people. If prisons were co-ed, prison rape could become an issue worth attention.
/r/MensRights24/10/12 01:43 AM
3

not mra points, but "real rape doesnt result in pregnancy", and "we should all get to watch sandra fluke fuck if were paying for it." Compared to the attention they got, the substance is not any worse (mroe wrong) than Clinton's " the real victims of war are women"
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:07 AM
5

I don't know if you are suggesting some form of action by that statement. I cannot think of any mainstream media shitstorm that involved someone making a too radical feminist statement.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:50 PM
-2

Its apparent you have no idea what institutional oppression is compared to what cultural inconveniences are. Institutional oppression: Force. The state decides what happens to you. If you fight back, the state will win. Cultural inconvenience: Expectations. You still have the free will to go counter them. If a man disagrees that he should be expected to pay for dates, then he can only go on dates under conditions that he approves of. STFU to him, if he's going to complain that the world doesn't …
/r/MensRights15/10/12 09:36 PM
-4

It's illegal to rape or beat men. There is a large segment of MR that advocate for male victims as well, but let me ignore that for a moment. rape is brought up as a female oppression issue, when in fact it is a reasonably balanced system when you consider victims and rapists. When you consider innocent accused rapists, the system is far more oppressive to men, because the accusation is incredibly damaging, a corruption of the process that shifts the burden on proving innocence rather than the s…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:30 PM
-8

Stating that women are more oppressed than men is actually completely absurd. Its illegal to rape or beat women. The state and other males will come to women's beck and call if she accuses anyone of it, and far more serious (or arguably at least equal) harm will be inflicted on the male she accuses. Other institutional state sponsored biases against men include paying for children they don't want or are prevented from seeing or denied primary caregiver status, and being forced to fight in wars. …
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:50 PM
-1

I didn't downvote because you made a balanced case... but I think r/SRS is a really good sub to have around. Reddit can be a pretty disgusting place from time to time and it's right someone steps up and says, "This right here? This is unacceptable" That's a lot like arguing Hitler has his good side, because some of those jews do some pretty greedy/bad stuff. SRS oversteps onto the supremacist side of feminism, and militant supremacism should never be tolerated.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 07:26 PM
3

I didn't notice any reasons you think the charges are made up on your site. You definitely need to play up the angle that the accusers are all friends. Very often a source of exaggeration or outright lies comes about because out of sympathy, each complainant thinks that "if something happened to their friend, what happened to them must be more serious" I understand that there is reason to be upset about flakey arrest procedures or treatment by police, but you need to understand why all the compl…
/r/MensRights13/10/12 09:21 PM
1

While that makes sense, the state currently likes to have the fuckers pay. Usually the male fucker, of course. The choice of one parent carrying a child to maturity while the other parent renounces parental rights and obligations (though may still seek negotiated permission to have some input/care/visitation/assistance) makes a lot more sense. We could push it even further and always just have the courts assist in custody disputes, while keeping support a social/negotiated arrangement where the …
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:07 PM
3

Can't blame that on feminism, IMO. Its an ethical exposition that simply says that the line at birth is fairly artificial. From that, you can just as easily argue for putting the line earlier as you can later.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:47 PM
1

It would suck even more for you when gender reversed pregnancy fraud occurs. The courts' defense for why it all makes sense is literally "the fuckers" must pay.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:42 PM
2

but when the tables have turned it starts to not make sense It can still makes sense and suck for you. Something that also makes sense when both genders can be "victimized" is to have more social funding for child support. That might feel like it sucks to non-parents, but would still make sense.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:39 PM
2

neither men nor women would be able to be forced into a child they don't want. Actually, with this, women might be forced into a child support obligation they don't want. The same situation men are faced with now. The fact that abortion is a lot closer to murder than +1 life, certainly would affect the procedure chosen/forced when one parent wants to have custody of the child.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:28 PM
3

As far as I know, not a single one has been purchased. Its a fantasy product designed by feminists that objectify women, and want to control other people's vaginas.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:23 PM
1

The most interesting change this would bring is choices from unplanned pregnancies. A father could prefer having custody to an abortion, and if the mother is willing to undergo an operation to terminate a pregnancy, then there is no real argument for not accepting the similar operation of embryo extraction. She might then be liable for child support payments.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:13 PM
1

Very smart, as usual. I liked the part about when lost in a forest the best strategy is to act like a passive object.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:00 PM
8

The author's paranoid psychosis about being "almost raped", and then being glad the man is in jail for malpractice should certainly be part of that debate. Feminists should fabricate less rape culture and fear of rape. Doing so would prevent the trauma of having a pass made towards women becoming an almost rape trauma instead of something easily brushed off.
/r/MensRights09/09/12 03:08 PM
14

very awful, but she was sentenced to over 6 years of prison. It should be a life sentence or whatever is the harshest penalty for murder because her "mental impairment" statement is absurd. If a man killed a woman because he feared that she would control him by getting pregnant, no one would even consider that some people think he's a nice guy, and he probably wouldn't murder again. The harshest possible sentence would ensure that society's only sanctioned behaviour when you are concerned about …
/r/MensRights29/08/12 04:08 PM
0

Female circumcision would probably "cure" masturbation, promiscuity and prostitution.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:30 PM
1

Your election views are clouding some pretty absurd views. Sure, not every teenager is self-centered, but the majority are. The majority doesn't resort to false rape claims, but the majority of false rape claims are made because of self-centered importance of any personal problems being much more important than other's catastrophic problems. As far as the election is concerned, we both agree that republicans are not a viable choice. Tying abortion to rape is just another reason they have no usef…
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:01 AM
1

Equating rape accusations to failed homework completion or missed curfews is disgusting, I'm sorry. I have never, ever met someone that frivolous or self absorbed Nearly every teenager is super self absorbed. They're also told all their lives that the biggest danger that could happen to them is getting fucked and pedophiled. They're not shown PSAs that explain the serious harm they can do to victims of false accusations. Rape is a serious charge, but mom and dad finding out what a slut you are i…
/r/MensRights26/08/12 01:59 PM
1

Abortions are frequent for the very young without any income other than parental support. Already, pregnancy provides an accountability issue that involves explaining something to parents. A rape accusation solves that accountability issue, and the young don't appreciate the seriousness of a rape accusation. To them, its just a continuation of their normal manipulation process to excuse failed homework completion, and missed curfews. Adding the rape accountability excuse not just for sex, but fo…
/r/MensRights25/08/12 06:42 PM
1

this link upset me as much.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 03:32 PM
3

They don't actually believe in the hateful sexist, bigoted dogma that is at the core of "feminism" but don't really know what else to call themselves VAWA is belief in the hateful sexist part.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 03:20 PM
5

The UK has had several false rape claims motivated specifically by seeking payments from its survivor fund. There are already horribly petty motives for some false accusations in North America (avoid paying $10 cab fare, cabbie asked you to observe non smoking law, etc...). So absolutely backing women into a corner where rape accusations must be made is horrible, and certain to result in more false accusations. skyrocket granted, that is a poor choice of adjective.
/r/MensRights25/08/12 03:18 PM
4

I think this is lame and stupid too. But giving it any attention is going to enhance its popularity.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 12:47 PM
11

I don't doubt there are ex-MRAs turned feminists I would be surprised, because I don't see an evidence basis for feminism. Just a historical one. It would be like round-earthers becoming flat earthers, or going back to objectivism after you understood that its wrong. Its possible in the sense of picking a team. But not from a philosophical perspective.
/r/MensRights19/08/12 02:26 AM
0

A core problem not brought up is that its an outright lie that 2% of sexual abuse allegations are false. The expert did point out that divorce is a major cause of false allegations, but in those circumstances more allegations are proven false than probably true and 77% are not probably true. The core issue with child allegations is a refusal to investigate. The 2% figure comes from spontaneous recantations rather than the confrontational interrogation necessary to uncover liars. The other proble…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 02:32 PM
2

I definitely would be raped or shanked rather quickly Those beliefs are based on propaganda designed to cause fear. There is some risk of violence, but "defiinitely" and "quickly" is your imagination scaring you from swimming after seeing Jaws.
/r/MensRights29/07/12 02:38 PM
80

leaving with your daughter to another country is criminal kidnapping.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 09:08 PM
67

extradition treaties only apply to criminal matters. Child support orders, and even contempt of court (for failing to pay an order and jail time served) are civil matters.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 08:42 PM
5

I'm sorry it sucks. There are less drastic solutions. Leave the country for one. While that might seem to require some capital to get started, withholding support payments is a good way to fund that. Perhaps waiting till tax refund time is another way. I'd suggest that even being in jail is a better life than death. So before considering suicide, you should consider making your abusers pay. Though leaving the country is a much bettter path to eventual happiness.
/r/MensRights28/07/12 08:37 PM
0

Fastest people first is actually a strategy that would let the most people get out in any time limit. The "lets move out together, and make sure the kids have their teddy bears and snacks" not only slows down the whole group, it slows down the slowest in the group.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 09:08 PM
-2

Surely this would have happened a long time ago if it were such a natural dynamic? Telling girls to be non-sexual is nothing new, and wouldn't need guidance if there wasn't a natural impulse for it. The recent post of not being able to find children's shorts that were conservatively long is possibly an escalation in corporate fostering of a permissive culture, but being more obvious doesn't make it new.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 08:23 PM
-8

Actually, what she is saying is,tl;dr, that young girls are naturally "whores". She is saying that children sexualize themselves despite parental disapproval that they do so. Children might not understand sex, but they like attention, and people to think they are attractive. So, 3-4 year olds lifting their knees above their heads, 10 year olds craving breasts, and general flirtation is sexualization. Greer is blaming culture/society for making the kids behave that way, and not parents for kissin…
/r/MensRights19/07/12 07:22 PM
3

Rape culture is about the (false) pervasiveness and fear of rape. Not whether it exists. The feminist fabrication of rape culture is the hysteria and propaganda they create exaggerating rape incidence, severity, and credibility of women making rape claims. I thank you for the write up, but every single one of your arguments are a bit strange. Your first argument sounds a bit like its "normal to rape", the second one presumes again that men are rapists and its no use teaching them anything, and t…
/r/MensRights15/06/12 04:49 AM
11

There is no vast feminist conspiracy suppressing /MR content on Wikipedia There is on the false rape allegations page. Every single study is distorted until it doesn't appear to be a legitimate concern. One Study (McDowell) suppressed because he published it in a book rather than journal, Kanin study littered with idiotic baseless rebuttal that is not only longer than the Kanin description, but makes baseless speculation on points he addressed, but are excluded from the description of his study.…
/r/MensRights12/06/12 04:06 AM
1

she is assuming that the only 4000 births (1.3%) that were not another man's child were all determined by this one company's test.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 03:42 PM
10

Cystic fibrosis is a genetic disease that requires both parents to transmit the gene to a child. 10% of children are not fathered by the man they think is dad, so the 1% "real figure" pulled out of this article's ass is not credible, and simple female-liar-denialist propaganda. What the article is useful for, is that if you think you might not be the father, then you are not 30%-40% of the time.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 03:35 PM
3

Interesting non-survey points about the study: up to 12% of california teenage girls give birth. 44% of those were conceived intentionally so about 6% wanted to and did give birth. Since religious/moral objections to abortion never apply to your own knocked up teen daughter, the full 12% didn't mind that much having a child. It makes a 20% desire pregnancy number credible.
/r/MensRights03/06/12 03:00 AM
16

From the same study, however flawed, was 54% of girls having sex without protection, which could mean without birth control. But admittedly that is not a clear number. The point though, is that more than 20% would "not mind" getting pregnant.
/r/MensRights03/06/12 02:41 AM
3

the one item I found surprising or new is if you are a minor, and a dad (with an adult mother?) you have no standing for a custody claim. is there a source for that? Which parts of the scenario give you no custody rights?
/r/MensRights03/06/12 02:31 AM
2

In the US, you also lose the rights to any social assistance services.
/r/MensRights31/05/12 02:26 AM
4

Lots more real rapes go unpunished, so it doesn't really compare That is an extremely common excuse for it. But its thinking entirely based on war of the sexes. "It's ok if some men have their lives ruined because some other men may have raped." The justification can only be based on hatred of men. A different disturbing argument for punishing false assault complaints, is that it is only important because it harms real assault victims' credibility. While true, it should be more disturbing that i…
/r/MensRights31/05/12 01:58 AM
12

Old, but the sadest part about that is that whichever girl started the accusations was sure that her friends would go along with it, and she was right.
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:33 AM
2

the point is that swimming with sharks or playing with strange pitbullsm even if you think you know what you're doing can turn out very bad for you. Predicting women's behaviour during divorce/separation process is difficult even if she shows no psycho signs prior to that event.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 08:02 PM
1

There's probably no law for performing dental work on your spouse either, but that doesn't mean a punch to the face should be interpreted as dental work. This was quite obviously vandalism, and not a paint job.
/r/MensRights21/05/12 07:54 PM
-1

While I'm not informed on that sub, I'm not ready to declare that they cannot possibly have a valid point or complaint. Similar closed minded prejudice affects MR, so its understandable why they would link to us. I'm not suggesting we should link to them.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 02:25 AM
-6

My theory is that it is an srs affiliated troll subreddit.
/r/MensRights13/05/12 02:12 AM
3

oh wow... that was my point too. there is no apparent goal posts to women's rights even though it should look to most of the audience as though they're already past the endzone.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 12:19 PM
2

...but then if we're done with women's rights in the west....
/r/MensRights11/05/12 11:55 AM
5

Seriously, when will they possibly be done with women's rights? There is no known remaining legal or systemic oppression being faced by women.
/r/MensRights11/05/12 02:02 AM
0

you (someone) should submit that.
/r/MensRights01/05/12 02:34 AM
3

The author isn't convince by the wrongness of "its the interests of a child vs some poor guy. Screw the guy" The unfairness is obvious to him, but the wrongness isn't. Men are human too. Its obviously wrong to arbitrarily persecute one man for some general goal, or even for the advantage of one specific other human. That is especially the case when the child's needs could be satisified through social costs (welfare state payments to mother).
/r/MensRights01/05/12 01:52 AM
1

the opposite of x is always not x. Though its understandable to conceptualize love-hate as extreme points on a line.
/r/MensRights28/04/12 02:15 PM
2

They should ideally seperate 4 groups. Female and male supremacists, Gender equalists who identify as feminist, and gender equalists who don't identify as feminist. The latter group would typically consist of those who don't believe that organized lobbying is necessary to achieve/maintain gender equality.
/r/MensRights28/04/12 02:13 PM
7

Assuming hateful crap is ok if it is from some random irrelevant tard, should Yahoo news support it?
/r/MensRights08/04/12 08:47 PM
2

Its mainly out of ignorance. Feminism coopted women's rights, and during the period that women had a legitimate claim to innequality and more rights, those opposed to them were conservative and religious, males. Its willful ignorance to propagandize that MR is about keeping women in some narrow roles. MR is entirely about restoring legal and judicial equality for men. Even if you surprisingly believed that feminism hasn't won yet, a post feminist world certainly won't stop attacking and lying, b…
/r/MensRights07/04/12 02:00 PM
-1

Completely disgusting. it is a well accepted fact that a vast majority of rape claims (by either gender) have some or full truth to them Whose fucking job is it to find out if a rape claim is true? It was a well accepted fact that there were witches in 17th century. These guidelines could be paraphrased exactly for witchcraft accusations, focusing entirely on what those crafty witches do to hide their witchcraft. All without a single sentence for why someone would make it up. It is not at all a …
/r/MensRights04/04/12 05:18 PM
-1

An investigation is supposed to look at every possibility. Their job is to gather facts objectively from the point of view of the complainant. No they aren't. Plus treating them like a victim (complaint is true) is only appropriate if the goal is to put men in jail.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:56 PM
1

http://theiacp.org/About/tabid/57/Default.aspx its membership are police executives/ high ranking officers. They provide police training. They don't need to change laws to affect policy. They affect it through training or lack thereof.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:43 PM
1

international association of chiefs of police. So authoritative/relevant to influencing police procedures world wide.
/r/MensRights04/04/12 04:06 PM
1

Basically rape kits are usually forced on people by police to confirm/verify their story. So its likely the control group is just rape claims, and includes those who wouldn't have thought far enough ahead to pass the test.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 11:33 PM
-5

My point isn't that rape isn't wrong, but that its not usually 10 years jail wrong, or 20 jail-years wrong if statutory. If you have an argument over condoms (Assange), or something else unrelated, before or during sex, there may be a mental effect from your views not being respected as much as you'd prefer, but the justification for your anger is independent of whether you can technically invoke a rape charge. Those "huge mental effects" can be social and self amplified well above the actual le…
/r/MensRights30/03/12 04:36 PM
-10

One of the possible conclusions from this study is that the criminal penalties for rape should be drastically lowered. If premarital sex doesn't lessen your desirability for marriage any more, and if rape doesn't cause physical injuries, we should be seriously re-evaluating whether it is worth putting someone in jail for 10 years over it. Especially cases where there is no restraint, abduction or threats made.
/r/MensRights30/03/12 02:57 PM
-7

A different conclusion from the data could be that there are so many false rape claims, that the overall data matches. My understanding of the biology/physics is that consensual sex involves a vagina/anus "fucking back", and injuries occur because of clenching or other "counter-fucking" moves. Minor lesions could still occur when an unanticipated thrust occurs. If 50% of reported rape claims are knowingly false (shown in many studies), and of the other 50%, half were more of the "no means yes" (…
/r/MensRights30/03/12 02:52 PM
9

I'm pretty sure most white males don't feel as though they can snap their fingers and get a senate seat or fortune 500 CEO job.
/r/MensRights26/03/12 11:51 PM
1

First is that the article isn't calling for "sexual coercion" to be a crime or other punishable offense. Actually, if all sex "against women" is rape, then it is justifiable to be angry at all sex, and justifiable to get revenge by any means necessary including embellishing a lack of consent.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 07:15 PM
2

Didn't read the author, but the trope used to be all penetrative sex is rape. Lesbian sex was ok, but I don't really understand why. Wouldn't one lesbian be seducing the other? If a woman can freely choose sex with a woman, why can't she with a man. I'm pretty sure there exists women who seek orgasm/sexual pleasure. I don't see why people complying with those desires should be made to feel like rapists.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 06:45 PM
1

wikipedia has a pretty horrible feminist bias already, though. the false rape page has a long history of false rape denialist vandalism, and still downplays Kanin and McDowell's research, including a longer paragraph devoted to criticizing Kanin's study than the actual Kanin study. Furthermore, including Lisak's study is a joke because his methodology not only covered a single Northeastern university (with potential, if not likely, disregard for the accused) but also required multiple witnesses …
/r/MensRights24/03/12 05:53 PM
1

This is a good reason to support the free right to abortion, even if you think it is more a little bit like murder than not at all murder. If you make abortion conditional upon rape or incest, then necessarily, it creates more claims.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 01:15 AM
4

Such a horrible case. I hadn't heard the supreme court result. The fascist crown appealed despite the fact that the lady didn't want to press charges, and admitted that she initially reported the event because she was angry over something else. Totally despicable that they are abusing a family this way.
/r/MensRights24/03/12 12:17 AM
25

it comes from web 2.0 and social site marketing. The users are the product to be sold to advertisers or IPO money.
/r/MensRights22/03/12 10:56 PM
2

the headline has surprisingly little to do with article. But, there is no condition or explanation required for the mother to decide what a father's rights are, only her decision.
/r/MensRights22/03/12 03:59 PM
4

Are all women pedophiles? One of the basis from the trailer is that fashion models are super young. Models are chosen entirely to target women, and what women will find hot.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 10:55 PM
1

I think you are confused (in a very common way). The doctrine of implied consent used to apply for rape cases such that if there was no clear indication of non-consent, then consent was implied, and thus no rape. It was an exceptionally good standard because it meant that a rapist could only be a rapist if he knew full well he was raping. Even more importantly, it was a good standard because it was feasible for a judge or jury to distinguish rape from imperfect or regretted sex. Its of no use to…
/r/MensRights21/03/12 08:30 PM
1

Its definitely not the literal sense of socialism. More anti-socialism, and the convenient persecution/scapegoating of men. Following a socialist ideal would involve willingness to financially support children. true free market economy with a sound currency, either family or charity would pick up the tab Overly optimistic. That could happen or people could starve or do other desperate acts.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 05:40 PM
4

The standard is entirely "your sperm, doesn't matter how". In addition to (statutory) rape, a woman is entitled to full child support allowance if she lies about birth control, or goes to the bathroom to spit sperm out of her mouth and inserts it into herself.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 04:11 PM
1

It seems like a no-brainer fairness law to allow men a defense against paternity to be non-consent to paternity, and fraudulent pregnancy. the existing tort of fraud could/should also be applicable, and allow the semen provider to recover from mother any support award she has won from him. The problem with this common sense, is that society and the state could then bear financial responsibility for raising the child. This, together with the view that any small child advantage is more important t…
/r/MensRights21/03/12 04:08 PM
17

In a perfectly fair world, he would need to assert consent again after the separation. A bit like there might be implied consent for sex during a marriage, that is no longer implied after separation.
/r/MensRights21/03/12 04:05 PM
2

I did see one irresponsible after-SPLC article there, but I wouldn't call the whole site bad. Its not jezebel-level misandry. But, what am I missing?
/r/MensRights20/03/12 09:11 PM
0

Keep in mind that lawyers will always say that you need a lawyer for everything. Its not quite anything you say that can be used against you. Its any lie or admission of a crime that can be used against you. Technically in this case, an admission that sex occurred prevents a later defense of not knowing her. But the issue is the great benefits of avoiding arrest. If you say nothing, then they have no reason not to arrest you, because its her word against nothing. The best advice, IMO, is find ou…
/r/MensRights20/03/12 09:02 PM
2

is muffpo huffington post?
/r/MensRights20/03/12 08:36 PM
0

Call the national suicide hotline I'm unaware that they keep records of alleged suicide tendencies by first or 3rd parties. I'd be surprised that they do.
/r/MensRights20/03/12 08:18 PM
-3

Don't talk to police is a double edged sword. Definitely never lie to police. But if you are sure what you say does not admit to a crime, and you are able to offer evidence/proof that no crime occurred, you can save massive lenghty hassle (arrest, trial) by providing them that evidence. Police only go full retard after they've decided to arrest.
/r/MensRights20/03/12 08:12 PM
-14

The negative is that it allows politicizing victimization. We can be pretty sure that the subreddit would insist on a coddle-only policy, and so would become a vehicle for both personal manipulation and politicizing ever expanding definitions of assault. Its also false to assume that stories would always be genuine. As there is a common IAMA troll that posts fabrications of sex slavery rings every few months. A much more common post is "tell me im not slutty". You'll basically become vulnerable …
/r/MensRights20/03/12 02:33 AM
1

The girl herself said she wasn't sure what happened. The best we can do is offer her advice to find out what happened and then come to conclusions after that. I'm not so sure. The point of her first post was "am I a whore or not?" I can understand the temptation to be supportive and say no, but there is a serious problem if the initial allegation of highly upvoted posters suggesting she conspire to call it rape occurred. It should always be disturbing when perverted people fill in vague details …
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:24 PM
1

its not in our best interests to criticise these posts a good point, but much of the damage of a rape allegation is caused by the accusation/persecution. Politically, creating a rape culture where everything is imagined to be rape is more harmful to men then the fear of being raped in most everyday situations. So, imagining and interpreting rape should be discouraged. that's different than: "Ah hell, I have no reason to be suspicious. I'll just have to conclude that I wasn't raped". That rape po…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 02:41 PM
1

You missed the part where I actually attacked the poster and caller her a liar. Attacking the demented lynch mob forming baselessly is different. Choosing not to believe is different than disbelieving. What's truly despicable here is the demented fucks crusading to show there is a real rape victim on the internet, and that this is proof of it. It genuinely can snowball into harming a real person. Its a totally intolerable abuse of logic to declare opposition to the victim fabricating lynch mob a…
/r/MensRights15/03/12 01:45 PM
1

criminal convictions help make civil suits more "automatic" (actually, IANAL, and not positive its admissible though I think so), but they aren't strictly necessary to make a civil claim.
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:14 AM
-2

No. fuck you. From what weh ave to go on Your assuming her account is true, and that somehow if its on the internet and its not naming an accused, then there is no reason for it to be invented. The reasons for it to be invented include convincing herself that it is true, as well as to illicit sympathy, and practice the lie. The reasons to suspect its false, is that a whole bunch of retards tried to convince her she was raped, and the named drug is unlikely to be known that quick. Its also quite …
/r/MensRights15/03/12 03:11 AM
5

Of the 8% who didn't say yes, its false to presume that all of them would say "sometimes". Some don't know, or didn't answer question. Also, a woman making him angry could be because she is hitting him. If the result was 5% or 3%, would the headlines be different?
/r/MensRights14/03/12 08:43 PM
-2

Just a theory, since a very high percentage of pregnancies are fathered by someone other than who the mother says it is, and in fact doctors often help cover up such lies, getting the wife's consent, is protection from future trauma to the husband, or a false accusation against the doctor for improperly performing the vasectomy.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 07:56 PM
-2

not this. Someone posts about a situation they know nothing about. There is no basis for you to start assuming the worse. The followup post's timing is more likely than not an attempt at fabricating "evidence" for a story that she would be pleased with. Keep the lynch mob in check.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 07:32 PM
2

while $750 is low, the important aspect/deterrent is that it result in a criminal charge/conviction. It doesn't matter if the penalty for child abuse were a $750 fine, because the embarrassment of the accusation/conviction is the primary deterrent.
/r/MensRights14/03/12 02:50 PM
3

15-30 years ago there were 0 women in the top 1000. Judith Polgar became first as a teenager.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 02:02 PM
4

Weren't there mainstream media reports? (Thomas Ball is man who set himself on fire over judicial system unfairness towards fathers) The Spearhead is about 4th rank on google for this man, but top 3 seem unrelated. I'm a bit bewildered why wikipedia would block a page on the incident.
/r/MensRights12/03/12 02:15 AM
1

though manboobz has denied writting it, whoever did consulted him because the list of "hate sites" is a list of sites that hate manboobz
/r/MensRights10/03/12 11:30 PM
2

In case you forgot the outcome of the duke lacross scandal there was no rape or sex involved at all, so the proper treatment of Marcotte is a disgusting piece of shit.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 07:20 PM
3

Great history bit on the Valerie Solanas murder.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 06:52 PM
3

Does the Southern Poverty Law Center receive government funding?
/r/MensRights09/03/12 03:59 PM
1

don't want to become r/feminism or r/SRS. They encourage banning for disagreement, and look what they've become Only hate groups need to create "safe spaces" and ban dissent, usually because hate must be protected from truth.
/r/MensRights09/03/12 03:53 PM
5

The recantation of the girl is not credible That's the biggest problem with this case. Recantations should always, 100% of the time, lead to a non-guilty verdict because it always creates sufficient reasonable doubt for the guilt. The hysterial paranoia behind giving longer sentences to accused who are considered more dangerous because say they are innocent, or use witchcraft to mindcontrol "victims" into recanting
/r/MensRights02/03/12 04:32 PM
5

The test is ridiculous because how long you look at a photograph provides no information on the sexual basis for the interest in the subject, much less any information on whether you desire to or would abuse the subject. If there were any relevance to this test, then police should follow babies in supermarkets and arrest all the women who give it creepy smiles and waves for their obvious danger in abducting and repeatedly fisting it.
/r/MensRights02/03/12 04:15 PM
12

Also in this case, the murder participant who used the knife announced that it was what he was going to do because of her story. If she did anything other than beg him not to do it, then she is fine with it, and should be a co-conspirator. Its disturbing that a society is so quick to excuse mental health issues that cause women's roles in such murders, but not excuse the gullibility of the hitman.
/r/MensRights01/03/12 02:51 PM
3

I don't understand why the 'extremely young looking but technically 18' subreddits are still allowed. That's the type of reasoning that has led to the latest incoherent ban. There are no victims involved, just disgust with what seems perverted. Its normal to find money attractive, but the harsh consequences prevent almost everyone from robbing banks. Pretending that 17 year olds are necessarily disgusting is pretty absurd. Also nonsensical to claim they are disgusting based on the age of the vie…
/r/MensRights13/02/12 06:19 PM
2

if that doesn't count as rape then I don't know what does. That it is as bad or worse than most rapes doesn't make it rape.
/r/MensRights04/02/12 03:02 PM
2

The VAWA funding they are requesting is primarily destined for shelters that are frontline feminsit indoctrination camps with mandates to convince women they have been abused. Even with a new gender neutral posture on domestic violence, it would take a cultural shift for men to seek help, and for feminist indoctrinated staff to lose their sexist in creating victims. Fundamentally though, domestic violence shelters aren't needed because divorce is a perfect solution to domestic violence. Signific…
/r/MensRights30/01/12 01:22 AM
4

ignatiusloyola and AnnArchist are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses. r/mr doesn't use ban happy tactics against speech because it has truth on its side, so doesn't need to.
/r/MensRights29/01/12 04:28 PM
15

There are thousands of documented cases of women making false rape accusations based revenge or mental illness The most common reason for false accusations is actually escaping accountability for actions. Fidelity is the most common of these, but excuses for failure or missed curfews are also common.
/r/MensRights20/01/12 07:01 PM
4

while 8% of rape accusations are false. 40% - 60% of rape accusations are false when the environment has special accountability factors (curfews, drinking rules, excuse for performing duties/homework) such as Schools and military, and when the complaint is aggressively investigated/challenged. The 8% figure is a BS joke. The usual FBI source is not based on any study, and instead refers to amalgamating unfounded classifications across police departments. Political factors (feminist pressure) can…
/r/MensRights20/01/12 06:49 PM
10

the baby doesn't feel it anyways the baby feels it. Cries in pain. The argument is made that because he doesn't remember the incident, then it doesn't matter.
/r/MensRights31/12/11 09:21 PM
2

The non religious argument for circumcision is actually that it looks better to those who have a preference. That's just as poor an argument for genital mutilation for any gender.
/r/MensRights31/12/11 09:18 PM
9

To address moderate/egalitarian feminism another way. You can't truly be moderate if you believe: only 2% of rape accusations are false, there is a patriarchy, there is a sexist explanation to the pay gap domestic violence complaints should be presumed true, and one sided, and females should have the excuse that their violence is a man's fault. You simply can't believe any of the above and not fight for more female privileges. You can claim to be an egalitarian as long as you forever deny that e…
/r/MensRights16/12/11 05:42 PM
1

so. shutupandtakemymoney... we can therefore go at it without a condom for a bit extra money.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 02:36 PM
0

Were talking about decriminalizing prostitution, then comparing regulated vs unregulated service. I agree that every decriminalized activity should be less expensive than its persecuted version.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 04:09 AM
0

You never have perfect information on these matters even if you have the impression the girl "doesn't normally do this type of thing". Choosing regulated prostitution would make you more likely to risk going without a condom due to impression that it is safer (for example, policies for regular testing).
/r/MensRights12/12/11 02:44 AM
3

I don't agree with regulated prostitution for the same reason I don't agree with regulated hair cutting. It increases the cost of the service. I'm fine with the option of regulated sex service, which would appeal to some customers and some "high end" service providers, so long as unregulated sex services aren't criminalized. A harder proposition for you to accept is that of the over-demonization of pimping. Sales, promotion and protection services are useful to the business, and the presumption …
/r/MensRights12/12/11 12:47 AM
1

The reason for a man to buy sex from a woman is, without a doubt, because he desires pleasure without having to give anything in return. no. that's craigslist.
/r/MensRights12/12/11 12:15 AM
11

30 helens agree with Mussolini's point that promptly arriving trains are a good thing. There's a certain way you can tell that a girl wants to have sex . . . The way they dress, they flaunt themselves. Eyes and smile mostly. If this weren't true, no one would ever have sex, except through random propositions, and then contractually written sequence of activities.
/r/MensRights11/12/11 04:59 PM
1

Why use 'slut'? Its an all encompassing word that is probably used improperly here. The main criticism of her character is that she had to be arranging several dates in the future while going on first dates. She's going into her subsidized meal and entertainment plan for what it is, and is unlikely to be telling her dates before they pay the motivation for their date. Where the word slut might be appropriate is if the traditional expectation of paying for dinner entitles the date to expect/be en…
/r/MensRights09/12/11 02:49 PM
6

Most countries you'd actually want to live in have extradition agreements with the US Its my understanding that extradition is limited to criminal matters. Child support is a civil judgement. Even if a jurisdiction allows for jailing fathers who are behind on their support payments, the jailing is still for "civil contempt of court"
/r/MensRights30/11/11 10:19 PM
0

I bought him condoms and to this day, I make sure he wears them ewwww gross. :P ... I mean, what a hot sister.
/r/MensRights30/11/11 10:03 PM
0

He stupidly trusted his girlfriend and I don't see him as a victim. Everyone I trust to lend $100 without paperwork is stupid of me? I'm not a victim if I trust them and they refuse to repay me? Or are you saying you should never trust your girlfriend? wife?
/r/MensRights30/11/11 10:00 PM
0

and he only got out because his parents ponied up some $2000 I guess the law starts to make sense in a perverted way. Fathers should beg for the money from family or loan sharks if they want to avoid jail :(
/r/MensRights30/11/11 09:48 PM
8

you (OP) could insist that she pay for a paternity test. She may get offended by both suggestions, and a likely resulting compromise after the drama is that you will either both pay half, or you will pay. The more offended she is by having a paternity test, the greater the likelihood that it may not show you as the father. In your "negotiations" with her, be prepared to pay and support her in any way for an abortion.
/r/MensRights30/11/11 09:35 PM
1

What you don't understand is that friendly grabbing of adult boobs or butt is not likely to result in prison for a man either. Though the defense is not as sexist, the result is the same. Your outrage that this deserves prison just fuels more stupidity over misunderstandings. and... Women must get better treatment than men do because otherwise we would be making men get worse treatment. I complain about the abuse of men as strongly as anyone here. I wan't men to stop being abused. Not for women …
/r/MensRights29/11/11 01:18 PM
-5

I don't know why you guys would be upset about this. If you got your flirting signals crossed and touched a woman's breasts or ass, and she complained about it, would you deserve prison? She was arrested, and paid for a trial. If she ever makes a similar mistake again, she will be punished with prison. All of that is very severe punishment. Much more severe than the harm committed. I'd warn against creating a reactionary hysteria against female sexual predators because it reinforces the existing…
/r/MensRights28/11/11 10:57 PM
6

I will grant you the point that feminism is a core part of the liberal political alliance. But just as social conservatives have little in common with the corporatist overlords that tell them who to vote for, the fact that radical feminists have corrupt influence over the democratic party (and other leftist spaces) doesn't automatically make republicans the lesser evil. Joe Biden is a completely worthless piece of shit for VAWA alone. Its not that far from what was already practiced in Universit…
/r/MensRights22/11/11 10:55 PM
1

I really have no interest in going as it's just a box to check off to say, "Oh well, I tried that." A box for her to check off or you? Is it part of her pre-divorce checklist? Anyways, if you want to make the marriage work, you can try the alternative of talking to her directly about it.
/r/MensRights17/11/11 05:19 PM
3

CHILD SUPPORT: Split child custody 50/50 and end mandatory child support payments. Each parent shares 50% of the DNA. Why should one parent get more time than another? End of argument. Not a bad solution. An other option, I'd like to see is to let each parent bid on the financial support they would accept for custody, where whichever parent bids less would get custody. That would at least prevent unfair support awards.
/r/MensRights16/11/11 11:58 PM
0

first, the kanin study didn't use polygraphs. Just threatened to use them. The kanin study did not rely on polygraphs for the answer. It was always the liar's admission that determined a false accusation. There was also followup wherever it was possible that the recantantions matched the accused's version of events in every case. mcdowell's 60% number is based on taking the extra step of investigating those claims where no admissions of lying takes place. All 3 feminists had to agree that it was…
/r/MensRights14/11/11 04:09 AM
2

Young women do not lie any more than young men it was a comparison to mature women source for 41% is kanin. 60% is mcdowell. Both are or were prominent feminist rape policy advocates. http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume6/j6_2_4.htm unfounded rape reports is about 2-8% that bs comes from the difficulty of determining a liar. If you implicitly trust/believe a complainant, then only 2-8% of the time she will either get her story so mixed up you can't overlook it, or, much less frequenly, vo…
/r/MensRights14/11/11 02:22 AM
6

very helpful, ty.
/r/MensRights14/11/11 02:00 AM
0

I was trying to tell you that you don't understand the point of rape. It's about power, degradation, and anger. That's the common characterization of rape, but it has nothing to do with the legal definition. Forgive my impatience, but reading that off a feminist pamphlet doesn't make you an expert on rape. 40%-60% of reported rapes by women are false reports. The great majority of alleged rapes don't involve anger or violence. They involve acquaintances. In some cases, the accused can credibly c…
/r/MensRights14/11/11 01:32 AM
1

there's a contradiction in feminist studies when the provide the same rate of lifetime rape for women when they only interview young women as when (if?) they interview wider age ranges. An alternate explanation is that younger women are more batshit insane and so believe their own lies, or want to claim a hearsay rape as their own. But the narrow rapeable age range helped your case. 5% is 1/20. 1/16 lifetime over 20 years is 1/320. 1/16 over 45 years is 1/720 or 1/36 times your 7.65 number = 200…
/r/MensRights14/11/11 12:45 AM
1

2.79 million 140k is 5% of that. So believable. on per year basis, considering that prison rape is practically encouraged in the US. go with the statistic that 1 in 6 women has been raped its bs statistic. 1 in 16 lifetime is believable though (actual self-claimed rape instead of feminazi researcher exaggerating and making up rapes from ambiguous answers). amazingly statistics on women give equivalent life time rape rates when asking college aged and all aged women, but assuming that doesn't pro…
/r/MensRights14/11/11 12:19 AM
3

I hope to god that he went to prison for Domestic Violence and that he learned his lesson and the couple can get back together again, soon they will discover they have more in common than in the past. is he, the offending wikipedia editor? - and was that a joke about they will both understand being fucked in common?
/r/MensRights13/11/11 11:56 PM
4

I agree that the source of that report is unreliable (signed former prison guard). Some items in there are quotes from American History X. Prison rape must be serious because its joked about so often as innevitable. But that source can easily be disinformation that is based on the reason for "popularizing" prison rape. The US is very deterrent focused in its social policy, and so wants to appear as punitive as possible in its jails/prisons. Prison rape is considered good if it makes jail scarier…
/r/MensRights13/11/11 11:53 PM
1

keep in mind that human rights international says 140000, while "official" reported allegations are 2200. human rights international is known for exaggerating female rape. They may not be biased in favour of women but they may be biased in favour of making sure their rape tallies are not too low. One source of bias, as an uninformed guess, could easily be "do you know anyone that was raped last year?" If every prisoner says yes, it doesn't mean that every (other) prisoner was raped. They could a…
/r/MensRights13/11/11 11:37 PM
3

does FAB stand for feminist/female/femme at birth?
/r/MensRights12/11/11 02:05 PM
1

this is because its based on the same bs as the 1 in 4 claim. Which counts answers as yes to: "have you ever had sex because of drugs or alcohol" as being raped. The exact same survey(s) found that 1 in 16 women considered that they had been raped. Its the corrupt "researchers" that decided that women were too stupid to properly understand what rape means, and decided they were raped for them.
/r/MensRights07/11/11 04:59 PM
2

all these facts are lies that have come from feminists
/r/MensRights07/11/11 04:54 PM
2

Yes. Obama and Biden's promotion of feminist legal abuse is disturbing and reprehensible. Even if you are likely to end up voting for him in the most likely eventual election race, you can bring up the issue with letters to the white house, the democratic party, and support someone else in the democratic primaries (not positive there will be one).
/r/MensRights06/11/11 03:46 PM
1

An important change in the law is needed. Its not of immediate help to your friend, but no one should ever be in jail waiting a rape trial if there is no strong evidence that he is guilty. This case is one that should find hard evidence if the prosecution is to go forward. Though on the other hand, if you can't come up with $1800 then it could be even more difficult being free, but burdened with paying for food and rent while its practically impossible to get a decent job due to all the court ap…
/r/MensRights20/10/11 09:13 PM
10

I didn't care that much as I was reading... batshit paranoid ranter should be free to be paranoid... then I got to the part where the school caved and changed its policy :(
/r/MensRights20/10/11 04:06 AM
1

I can see this leading to a dramatic increase in false accusations when everyone who regrets a drunk hook-up absolutely. this is a feminist led redefinition. Nothing good can come of it. This is about calling everything rape. Then again, the new definition would mean that if both parties were drunk than both parties report a rape wording of a law is irrelevant if arrest and prosecution remain biased. I have no problem with reclassifying forced anal intercourse as rape, if there is actually some …
/r/MensRights19/10/11 11:20 AM
3

You're actually screwed. In every jurisdiction I know of, reproductive rights are entirely the mother's, and the child has the right for financial support from you until it reaches adulthood. You could try longshot approaches such as charging her with rape (doesn't absolve you of support obligations), or suing in attempt to change the law. (Been tried and failed). The most realistic option would be to attempt to get custody, and collect child support from her. You can claim that she is an unfit …
/r/MensRights15/10/11 05:27 AM
6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape is also in permanent defaced status. In that criticism of the kanin report is not only invalid but longer than the space given to the kanin study. the criticism is invalid because the use or threatened use of polygraphs was only a tool to get a liar to admit being a liar. If someone breaks down and cries admitting to be a liar because an officer suggests she should take a polygraph, or says the machine thinks this is not entirely truthful, th…
/r/MensRights14/10/11 04:16 PM
2

I don't think the examples shown are so offensive as to deserve bans. The 3rd link anyway isn't. The 4th im ok with ban. The first link, admitted troll aside, seems discussable to me. Disrespectful overlap with amr probably should be banned.
/r/MensRights13/10/11 02:06 PM
1

I'm not sure that sarcasm is the best approach here, but its novel for your blog, so won't hold it against you much. [rape culture] "is defined as 'a complex of beliefs that encourages male sexual aggression and supports violence against women.' Our view is that rape culture is a feminist fabrication, and that it is defined as the proselytizing of women's fear that men are undisuadably sexually aggressive and that there is pervasive sexual violence against women.
/r/MensRights11/10/11 03:31 PM
0

r/anarchism is run by misandrist fascist pigs shouting out sexism as their instrument of fascism. Sexism/mysogyny is a very severe insult in my opinion. It shouldn't be thrown out lightly. I'm not the slightest misogynist or sexist, and was smeared out because your all too pathetically retarded to defend your positions. I believe in the politically correct mandate of feminist equality. That doesnt make all feminist, especially radical femist, opinions not hateful or retarded Subhuman supremacist…
/r/MensRights27/08/11 09:19 PM
2

diminished consent is used by colleges to persecute rape. And yes 3-5 beers lets feminist pressure a woman to complain or force a case even if she doesn't think she was raped, but still has something negative to say about the encounter. The other aspects of the rape redefinition attempt are pointless in that forced anal or oral penetration is still a crime, and forced anal has naturally more serious sentences (when inflicted on a female). The other insidious aspect of the proposal is admitted in…
/r/MensRights24/07/11 03:25 PM
-6

women in their 20s look better than those in their 40s. Universally and objectively: compliment to be told they look young. Modeling/acting career are ageist. The modeling industry goes further and tells us that 14-17 year olds are not repulsive, but there are good arguments that having sex with them is probably taking advantage of them. When they reach 18 though, we shouldn't presume that every man over 25 is repulsive to every 18 year old, or even if they are, that an 18 year old isn't entitle…
/r/MensRights23/07/11 09:28 PM
1

4:40
/r/MensRights17/07/11 08:16 PM
0

I don't agree with emphasising the "he wasn't even cheating" part. It wouldn't justify the extreme violence even if he was.
/r/MensRights17/07/11 04:51 PM
0

Short answer is no. There is no formal or organized legal favoritism of men. No possible credible argument claiming the opposite. There are informal social norms such and chivalry and gender role expectations that tend to oppress men more, though can cause resentment by women too. In terms of life limiting constraints, men arguably face more. Calling social norms patriarchy is corrupting an organized rationale to fight patriarchy. Its feminist linguistic manipulation clinging to terms that appli…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 02:21 AM
-4

that's what's happening here. There is usually too low (arguably) a standard of evidence for a trial (just take complainant's word for it). There's already a practical justification that her word in future rape claims should be worthless. Its totally fair. There should be a way for defense to have guaranteed disclosure of past dv/sexual assault complaints, without needing private investigators/high lawyer billings.
/r/MensRights04/07/11 01:46 PM
8

Proven liars should have a difficult time making rape allegations, and prosecutors should refuse to follow through and damage the life of accused men by having a time consuming and expensive trial the prosecution should necessarily lose. Past rape liars deserve an especially critical skepticism, because their next rape lies are likely to be better prepared and sophisticated. Its definitely possible that she was still attacked. There is a ring of truth to the cirmcumstances it was reported and ve…
/r/MensRights02/07/11 12:33 PM
-2

The supposed timeline is a little strange. http://www.businessinsider.com/dominique-strauss-kahn-video-footage-used-in-trial-2011-6?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+clusterstock+%28ClusterStock%29#12-pm-the-housekeeper-reportedly-enters-the-open-door-of-suite-2806-at-the-sofitel-hotel-as-a-bell-waiter-is-leaving-she-starts-cleaning-1 She accidentally barges into his bedroom (suite to find him naked) at 12:10. (is it normal to clean suite while guest is in bathroom showe…
/r/MensRights01/07/11 03:50 PM
1

To be fair, the poll options are actually would you trust someone else more than you trust yourself. Its certainly possible to trust a partner is truthful in wanting to prevent pregnancy (though some doubts are normal too). Though you will always trust yourself more, if you are not flakey.
/r/MensRights26/06/11 04:12 PM
-1

Its a very good article. But a more neutral headline would help, even if the sentence appeared very close to the top.
/r/MensRights23/06/11 03:38 PM
-1

At least, crazy charges have been dropped. Her deceptive facebook behaviour should be relevant to custody/divorce/visitation issues. But you have a lawyer. I don't know how we can help, in large part because you have not asked us what to help with.
/r/MensRights23/06/11 03:00 PM
-1

Its mostly the corrupt criminal persecution of men on domestic and sexual violence in liberal countries. That poor and baseless complaints are not challenged aggressively for potentially malicious acts. That makes relationships with a woman with kids completely impossible (Even if happy relationship, You will be vilified after breakup, and kids will explain delinquency (avoid accountability) to psycho mom as past abuse that helps ex-wife get what she wants to hear). It makes relationships with w…
/r/MensRights21/06/11 03:05 AM
-2

A weird thing about feminist or hipster/liberated mothers is that they can encourage their sons to be gay. Just as the preferred baby gender in liberal society for women is girls, I believe that a very significant proportion of women who end up with boys instead, beyond encouraging them to adopt feminism, can encourage them to be gay. So this boy's free expression of his self-identity could easily be an expression of the identity conditioned by his mom and internalized by him. Its fine that he's…
/r/MensRights18/06/11 05:14 PM
13

But by 1992 five more addition studies similar to the MPE became available. Lawrence W. Sherman reviewed all five studies. Then once again he wrote that the police should not use arrest. In two of the five studies, they found the same result as they did in the MPE, that an arrest cut down the odds of a future assault. But in the other three studies an arrest actually increase the odds of a future assault. Pretty amazing, but not the best reason not to have a mandatory arrest policy. An arrest is…
/r/MensRights17/06/11 12:12 AM
0

At this point it's all I can do to stop from yelling at this woman. I told her, as calmly as I could, that would inform her supervisors if she didn't at least let me ask if the mother would permit me to view the birth. Excellent response. My gut reaction would have been: "How bout you shut your tour guide face, until and only if I whip it out and start fapping in there." After we finished for the day I called the programs administration office and filed the complaint anyway. In a way, its too ba…
/r/MensRights13/06/11 02:57 PM
-1

Rape isn't taken seriously by the police in most cases You don't speak for canada or sweden, where complaints are taken much more seriously than they deserve (for instance when a basic investigation would discover their falsehood or at least impossibility of fair conviction). I obviously can't speak to where you are, but most of the US is not far behind. Except for trafficking, the rest of your list seems pretty meh. It's still seen as acceptable for men to cat call I doubt that this is universa…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 08:26 PM
3

upvote for very comprehensive attempt at providing an answer.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 07:14 PM
1

You could ask any sane person acquitted who has been raped acquitted is a legal word meaning found not guilty of your charges. It makes no sense the way you used it. I agree that you are totally uninformed and totally incapable of discussing this topic, but simplifying for you: the consequences of rape are less severe than the punishment for many sexual abuse charges less than rape. An accusation of sexual abuse never makes it true. In my view, and any informed view (which you obviously don't ha…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 07:01 PM
-3

Women are economically inferior to men False. Employment rates and salaries are higher for women under 30. Which means in 10 years, it will be higher for those under 40, and soon upper management and top political positions will be dominated by women. There is no more need for women-targeted economic stimulus. the rate that women are assaulted and raped is repugnant completely irrelevant. It is illegal to do so, and there are significant police resources available to women to abuse (or seek genu…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 06:40 PM
-1

You don't need direct experience. If you were someone who could prove your innocence (or at least non guilt) of a sex crime, would you prefer to have a sore but for a few days, and have even minor charges dropped, or go through 2 years of trial dates (hard to get/keep career-type jobs if you have to have time off all the time), and pay 10s of thousands in legal fees? You could ask any sane person acquitted of sex related charges specifically, and I doubt a single one would look back on their lif…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 06:27 PM
1

upvote for answering the question. How many more centuries must men endure repression, if none of those elements have been around for 40+ years now? Any culture which sent women to war instead of men would be swiftly defeated simply because men tend to be bigger and stronger We can send them in addition to men on the front lines. Modern war tends to be trigger pulling based, and throwing more bodies at the problem is better than fewer bodies.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 06:10 PM
-3

The idea of a patriarchal view on women, that is "women are caretakers of children and shouldn't pursue careers or their own income", is completely compatible with these injustices in the court system. That's somewhat fair. But it defines patriarchy to include men's chivalrous sacrificial impulse to protect women, which when you think about it, does not count as a male advantage: "I have a duty to risk my life so you don't have to", or worse, "I promise to support you forever even if one day you…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 05:57 PM
-2

the discussion is devolving into something similar to 100% taxation vs 0% taxation. There is no patriarchy today. No one has ever made a case for it when asked. That there are significantly more legislative and state financial support for women, doesn't make it a matriarchy either. Both sides are over-reaching by claiming patriarchy or matriarchy.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 05:34 PM
-2

Noone called anyone insane for pointing that out parent of reply was clearly derisive. the problem is that family court seems like your only example ever of how women have "power over men" Its not at all though. First, I agree that feminism is not responsible for family court bias. Women's groups (with some overlap with mainstream feminism and less so anarchism) are. However, rape culture significantly disadvantages men more than women, and is entirely the product of feminist fabrication. Accusa…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 04:24 PM
0

Almost all of MR accepts the politically correct definition of feminism. We just think that their equality has been achieved (or will be without additional pushing) in every important sense, so they should stop pushing. Post feminism is still feminism. Its against any army's nature to stop if they have the power and opportunity for more gains, just because unfairness that was the basis of forming the army has been redressed.
/r/MensRights12/06/11 03:49 PM
2

Anarchism has been around for a while, and like any political movement encompasses an alliance of groups. It attracts childish nihilists followers. In the context of university and younger school settings, its easy to see privilege in rich kids and authoritarian rule setters. For the last 40 years the only authoritarian message in child school settings has been "girls rule boys drool", "girls are better and there wouldn't be wars if they were in charge", "girls feelings are important", and at th…
/r/MensRights12/06/11 03:28 PM
4

Being openly gay gives you a defense that sticking your dick in her would make you vomit. So you might not take the threats seriously. You'd only get stuck with a year or so of trial dates that inconvenience finding jobs, and only 20k-30k in legal bills, so no biggie.
/r/MensRights10/06/11 02:37 AM
3

84 percent of those men who committed rape said that what they did was definitely not rape. shows 3 problems. First, it exposes the bias of the study where the experimenter is secretly judging rape when men do not. You can be sure that questions were worded much more innocently than the conclusions. (this is exactly how bs of 1 in 4 women are raped has been spread) Second, the quote confirms on its own that most men don't want to rape. The obvious presumption is that they would not commit acts f…
/r/MensRights09/06/11 09:24 PM
1

Dorothy Dixon, 29, is charged with one count of child molestation, authorities said. and she's waiting for trial behind bars. Can't really say she's getting off easy.
/r/MensRights08/06/11 01:44 AM
3

he did a good job of comparing it to other minorities. Its a substantial minority comparable to being black in the US. The submitter's headline is not as good as articles though.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 06:15 PM
2

That is higher than some surveys of just-women (and so people) who consider themselves to have been raped, btw. Before you believe any dv/sexual violence story without evidence, as a start, make sure its a really good story.
/r/MensRights05/06/11 03:41 PM
1

is there a membership fee for ihatemen.org? is this just an advertising gimmick any site can put up for their members?
/r/MensRights05/06/11 03:09 AM
19

Aerik has been retarded for a very long time. Unashamedly retarded though. 2-3 years ago, he was active in MR, shouting out the most blantantly stupid and evil feminist positions. He's not grown any sensibility over the years. Yellowmix portrays more shame in its misguidedness. I have not seen recent postings from either, but would be surprised that they are the same people. Aerik is the most stereotypical white knight suck up, that its normal to presume he can't be an independent mind, but he's…
/r/MensRights03/06/11 02:38 PM
2

I'm not sure I understand the downvotes. Of course its extremely high. Ridiculous to have minimum sentences for anything actually, but especially when the standard of reasonable doubt gets shifted to "No concrete proof that it is false", there should be a weighting of potential huge mistake in any sentence. Even if it was certain he did it though, 10 years is still extreme when considering that waking your boyfriend up with a blowjob is considered the most romantic gesture possible for a woman"
/r/MensRights01/06/11 03:08 PM
2

In that scenario, he's every bit as much a "victim" as she is. That's kind of unfortunate wording, in that it implies that sexual contact causes people to be victims, but the equality point is true: They both have equal negligeable impact to their marriage-value. They both face equal risk of std or consequences of pregnancy. There shouldn't be such a sharp distinction between physical and sexual assault. Both are violations of personal integrity
/r/MensRights12/05/11 08:01 PM
1

the law looks at the best interests of the child as its foremost principle. But the law also tries to be as simple as possible, and arbitrary and stupid is simple. It wants to consider simple questions like "is this person a parent?", and not "what percentage of fair parenting responsibility should this person have?" "Was this parent real raped or date raped? and what impact does this have on the percentage formula?" I offered what I think is real practical legislative solution to resolve these …
/r/MensRights12/05/11 04:08 PM
1

So you are OK with a mother keeping the money she got from robbing a bank since it is in the interest of her children, then? no. but it was too irrelevant to bother addressing.
/r/MensRights12/05/11 01:53 PM
1

your first argument regarding sperm donation analogy is the best one. Courts have taken seriously mothers changing their mind, despite contract, about not seeking child support from sperm donors. After thinking about it more, the best solution is probably a crime of insemination theft (or tort called fraudulent sperm acquisition), where any purposeful insertion of sperm in a vagina without the male's consent. If it is a crime, then returning any proceeds from the crime (child support payments) w…
/r/MensRights12/05/11 01:07 PM
1

Does the child still have a mother and a father? Maybe rape victims could get a special status of inflicted-parent, that absolves them of any parent responsibility? The courts already try to view everything in terms of best interest of the child. Certainly forcing a child to call a parent inflicted-daddy is going to have some academic screaming "traumatic experience!" sometime. Though the courts have feminist bias, they really just want the parents to pay for everything instead of the state.
/r/MensRights12/05/11 02:57 AM
-2

the courts look at it that way. Your theory is that only one parent should be responsible? Or is it that no parents owe anything to their children? If you are raped, can you kick your child? I have been committed to MRA movement a long time. So you are probably just stupid and unable to read. Rewording very slightly what I said: An effective strategy to get the bitch to abort is to ask for custody and include a request that an additional punitive amount be paid by the bitch in child support. Tha…
/r/MensRights11/05/11 09:01 PM
-8

To be fair, parents responsibility to children is absolute. That either parent never intended to have the child does not absolve it. It is an injustice to men that they have no say in abortion options in the case of rape, but a fairly simple way to correct this would be to guarantee custody to male rape victims, and force child support payments from the mother, with a punitive surplus to it. Effectively, that would strongly encourage her free choice to an abortion.
/r/MensRights11/05/11 05:01 PM
3

spectacular writing and thinking.
/r/MensRights29/04/11 11:26 PM
1

i doubt there is one. It wouldn't be effective.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 10:48 PM
1

an excuse is not a defense. just a self-justification for why somone commits an evil act. man who was defended(or aquited) for attempted murder or murder on the 'your honor she just made me really mad' defence. It takes the woman in this case to try that defense. very mad = extreme emotional distress.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 10:22 PM
1

Why did you kill him/her? The answer you receive can both be a motive and an excuse. You are more likely to hear an excuse = justification of the motive, but an excuse usually plainly explains what the motive is. very very angry is an obvious common motive. The excuse is just a wordier version that throws in specifics as to why they're angry.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 04:32 PM
2

excuse = motive. Do I really need to explain how spousal murders usually involve anger? Sorry I didn't make obvious that it should not be a defense. If you are angry, file for divorce. period.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:58 PM
-1

Being very very angry is generally an excuse even in premeditated murder.
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:04 PM
12

If you carry the world view that false witchcraft allegations are commonplace, then don’t do anything that would make a man want to file one against you. They don’t just come out of the blue. Think about cutting down on manipulative bullshit. Maybe reduce the number of sexist insults you use whenever you get in an argument with a romantic attachment. If we're gonna make men prove consent or that sex didn't happen, I say we make women prove they aren't witches. If empowering one gender to make fr…
/r/MensRights20/04/11 02:26 AM
4

genital mutilation would seem to be an obviously more horrendous and severe crime than rape to anyone that thinks about it. Her motives stem from from self-entitled sexual control over her victim, which happens to be the same motives society wants to punish rapists so severely for. "I merely intended to sexually mutilate him" just should not be a defense for murder. There should not be sympathy for circumstances that justify sexual control over another human being. If judge wants to excuse the m…
/r/MensRights18/04/11 05:13 PM
0

my opinion is that it is unlikely to have police involvement or arrest in this situation. he and you are right to be concerned about going to the police, as I mentioned as well.
/r/MensRights17/04/11 05:28 AM
0

if they are about to arrest you, you may want to talk them out of it. Especially if they are retarded to arrest you. Because you are unlikely to have the patience to win a wrongful arrest lawsuit.
/r/MensRights16/04/11 11:49 PM
-1

You don't need a lawyer until you are charged or possibly interviewed by police. Documenting everything as much as possible while it is freshest in your memory (as you are doing now) is perfect. There is a 70% (jon kyl number) chance that you going to police will not result in your arrest. If you do go to police, you should prefer to stay away from domestic violence units, or carefully inquire philosophy and statistics regarding male victims from department. I am not a lawyer, but the crime she …
/r/MensRights16/04/11 03:13 PM
1

well said, and thank you for your patience in explaining your point and views. It is entirely true that empathy is both a powerful political technique, and the genuine basis for sensitivity and preventing harm to men. As you listed, prejudice against the accused is already present in organizational and national judicial procedures despite standards that contradict allowance for prejudice. There is already creep for judicial officials to replace standards with their whim. I retain my right for sp…
/r/MensRights14/04/11 11:14 PM
2

The point you may not be seeing is that Joe Biden witchcraft might be arguable to a group that wants to hear it. Probably a better example though is rumors that gwb had homosexual sex in coffins as part of Yale society innitiation rituals. You just need one person to say it happened in general at the Yale society, and one person to claim gwb did it, and that should be good enough for anyone who would like to believe it, despite the obvious political motives that could be involved in the person a…
/r/MensRights14/04/11 09:01 PM
1

I really think the only way to win this is to make it personal That's fair Accusing people of witchcraft would drive home to men and women how it would feel to be accused and tried under loose standards.
/r/MensRights14/04/11 07:41 PM
1

I must be being too clever again. Having trials decided on loose rather than strict basis permits whatever political biases exist to support a prejudice to be used more easily to rule based on that prejudice. The standard of I believe her a little more than I believe him never has to be justified in review. On the other hand, the standard that his story is unbelievable has to be justified. The standard complained about in article is one of "decide what you want." More specifically, punishing som…
/r/MensRights14/04/11 06:51 PM
-4

A useful countercampaign: Joe Biden (or school official) is a witch! His duties should be curtailed until a hearing determines by balance of probabilities whether this is true. It is critical that judicial committee have adequate representation of tea party members since over 9000 tea party members know of someone who's taxes will be affected by Joe Biden's witchcraft.
/r/MensRights14/04/11 03:16 PM
4

There's 2 possible explanations for this type of comment Stupidity. Not understanding that her or her friends rape doesn't change the possibility that other women may manipulatively lie, or that the system can fabricate sexual assault out of an unrelated complaint. Us vs them. Fighting rape is all that matters, and putting innocent men in jail is as useful as putting any men in jail. Putting men in jail or having friends harm them is being pro-women, and acts as a deterrent to anyone who is not …
/r/MensRights09/04/11 05:43 PM
2

I don't understand how it is possible to create GenderEgalitarian while not distancing yourself from female-supremacists.
/r/MensRights04/04/11 03:07 PM
2

The only reason its a bad idea is that lies are not a sex crime the latter involves forcibly, through violence and/or coercion The justice system is pure and simple violence. It is permitted authoritarian violence, but confinement and obligations to show up, pay, and defend yourself at trial is violence. Women using the justice system to punish a victim, is a similar violent act as convincing anyone else to harm the victim.
/r/MensRights02/04/11 03:22 PM
0

While false accusations of sex crimes are more evil than most sex crimes, it doesn't make it a sex crime. You can start lyingcunts.org and publicly shame them. Its an obvious service to society to warn them from interacting with false or suspected false rape accusers. It would also motivate public authorities to treat accusations more seriously, and verify them more closely.
/r/MensRights02/04/11 03:15 PM
1

I do think you have to come up with something more brilliant and more original. Bacon and narwalls are both so 2008 and 2000 and late. I think the project, even if you come up with something brilliant and original, is too much of a long shot to make a full time career. I wish you the best of luck, but I'd advise pursuing a day job to supplement whatever art ventures you want.
/r/MensRights20/03/11 03:08 PM
1

Since so many grey/date rapes happen without the accused's knowledge, you would think there would be some obligation on "victims" to communicate they are being or about to be raped. Would be an obvious and effective means to prevent rape, instead of "imagined telekinetic no means no" or morning after regrets means rape.
/r/MensRights20/03/11 01:23 AM
0

if I can guess, from the first article, its to mock the self-absorbed "good-men" rhetoric, which includes propaganda to make men supportive of rape complainants, and reinforces their duty to prevent rape.
/r/MensRights19/03/11 07:16 PM
7

This is the saddest and most disgusting case I've ever read here (and I've read most). It was a he-said-she-said case during a custody battle A canadian study showed that as many abuse claims during custody battles are proven false in court (not simply leading to not guilty verdicts), than are shown to be probably true. Its disgusting to believe such accusations made in that context without strong support for their truth. The rape charge was prosecuted simultaneously with the custody case, and t…
/r/MensRights09/03/11 02:35 PM
9

WTF??? that doesn't change the completely disgusting nature of this case.
/r/MensRights09/03/11 02:15 PM
1

It is admittedly suggesting to be condescending to "crazy bitches". Not suitable to sustainable relationships. Given that crazy bitches exist, there are really only 2 options, condescendingly ignore craziness or not tolerate them. There is no polite and politically correct strategy.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 05:11 PM
5

Scott's message was basically "politely ignore crazy bitches so that you may continue to gain their sexual favours" That actually seems like workable life advice and has been historical advice. But, ignoring crazy bitches' craziness doesn't protect you from being victimized by them so it is wrong advice unless you value sex more than your human rights.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 04:51 PM
2

it might be an editorial bias in favour of women, or just subconcious prejudice in understanding police/newspaper policy regarding naming women.
/r/MensRights08/03/11 04:28 PM
4

Arguing for elimination of male leadership based on evidence that corrupt warmongers have historically been male is the same logical fallacy as punishing jews because corrupt bankers tend to be jewish. Imagining a patriarchy is the same crime as anti-semitism.
/r/MensRights07/03/11 04:18 PM
3

HAS REASON TO. Affairs are obviously attempted hidden. Pregnancies that can't be credibly attributed to the presumed father have reason to be blamed on rape or toilet seats. Because of the strong motives to lie, police should aggressively investigate a complaint before arresting, and thus avoid charging the complainant for false rape claims as well.
/r/MensRights01/03/11 09:31 PM
1

DUI hit and runs are a very human story and in a way understandable. Split second judgement while intoxicated can result in fleeing. Better, more aggressive, police investigation techniques are needed before making arrests. Every woman has reason to lie about cause of pregnancy and affairs. Especially, when a date rape complaint is made, every woman has a reason to distort consent from regret.
/r/MensRights01/03/11 04:51 PM
1

very good piece, with good suggestions.
/r/MensRights24/02/11 09:07 PM
-1

I largely agree, but men are criminally victimized by women also, and prosecuted and punished more harshly for cirmes. Still, I think the focus should be on elimnating frivolous prosecutions, and lowering presumptions of harm inherent in many allegations, is far more important that making sure women are punished as harshly as men.
/r/MensRights24/02/11 04:25 PM
0

The laws against charities are surprisingly strong. Not sure about US, but in Canada, you may not set up a charity that gives financial benefits to the needy. Legal defense funds thus cannot be a (tax deductible) charitable donation on the part of those helping. Furthermore in Canada, instead of a public defender system, a legal aid system exists, but unless you are destitute, they merely offer zero interest loans for your defense or family court matter.
/r/MensRights17/02/11 04:05 PM
2

He's completely against it because it's another man's sperm and another man's baby. I don't get it either. Adopted would also be another man's baby.
/r/MensRights16/02/11 03:50 AM
-1

The crucial point is that I'm hearing this stuff from various people who aren't connected - women who don't know each other are talking about the same bad experience. The commonality is the interviewer. "Are you a whore, or did he prey on your drunkedness to spoil your precious gift?" is going to have commonality in answers without conspiracy. There is a conspiracy, and you are leading it. You could best help by disuading the girls that they have a legitimate complaint. Do similar things happen …
/r/MensRights16/02/11 03:42 AM
1

Let's say for the sake of argument that it is true -- 1 in 3 women worldwide are sexually assaulted. First, its an absurd statement in general. So let's not say its true. Second, the statement said assaulted in some way, and not sexually assaulted. The statement "1 in 3 women have been assaulted, often by..." is merely saying that 1 in 3 women have been assaulted at least once in their life. At least the same proportion of men have been assaulted. So amnesty international is a piece of shit for …
/r/MensRights16/02/11 03:17 AM
2

The case is indeed messy as hell. Instead of a false rape complaint, the complainant may well have just complained about the accused, mentioning imperfectly enjoyed sex. It is the idiot listeners of her complaint that imagined rape. Feminist rape culture encourages empathizing with complainants, advising its only important how she feels but simultaneously assuming that when she doesnt want to pursue charges, that she is wrong, insufficiently indoctrinated in the political purposes of persecuting…
/r/MensRights13/02/11 02:01 PM
1

does that mean staying away from statements that would be disparaging in general of judges and prosecutors?
/r/MensRights11/02/11 07:42 PM
1

Deproprovera is a 1 every 6 months shot. Any relative advantages/disadvantages?
/r/MensRights08/02/11 05:04 PM
3

thanks because that was just too long. A sad thing about ontario is that indeed, child support is based on your income potential not actual income. Measured by your best year ever.
/r/MensRights05/02/11 01:42 AM
1

One of the core problems with duluth model is the pro arrest (of men) policies. When police go on a dv call predisposed to think that dv has or is occurring, they ask leading suggestive questions to confirm their theory, and any answer similar to "kind of" becomes total confirmation of their theory. No investigation of whether or why she might be lying is generally pursued. This sub should probably be voted higher, as it is at core of MR issues, and probably the single most important breakthroug…
/r/MensRights27/01/11 01:46 PM
3

She consentented to going to his hotel room after meeting him that night. She now claims she was shocked that sex would be involved. Being married, she has an accountability issue to explain her behaviour. The standard should be that she has to prove she is not a lying cunt trying to explain away infidelity/bad judgement. The standard should be that no arrest or prosecution is made, because they are unable to.
/r/MensRights25/01/11 09:44 PM
0

afaik, lawsuit payments came from police's insurance company. The argument that government should never pay for abuse of society on the grounds that society is the ultimate payer, means that government should always abuse society, bc there are no consequences. There is no court that is charged with firing government officials for abuse. Your constitutional rights are reasons (technicalities) that you should not go to jail if they are violated. Violating them is not a crime. There are no laws pro…
/r/MensRights13/01/11 02:58 PM
4

Since when do people, and above all, institutions learn through punishment? Its the only way they learn. "Hey guys, getter1 wrote on reddit that we should get all our heads out of our asses" or "Holy shit! You fucking retards cost us 1.8M. I'm gonna have to fire or let go most of you retards if you keep fucking up." which one is more likely to get institutional understanding of: "Some of this feminist BS is BS. Stop just imagining abuse or believing complainants."
/r/MensRights12/01/11 08:29 PM
5

the damages are punitive. They actually should be much higher. Its important for authorities to understand their duty to do no harm, and that understanding only comes through chillingly large punitive damages.
/r/MensRights12/01/11 04:51 PM
3

People imagine ghosts and UFOs all the time. Its easy for intuition to runaway with you, and imagine that any behaviour abnormalities are the result of rape or abuse, and then latch on to the theory. Police and prosecutors constantly latch on to their own perversions of what might have happened to arrest and prosecute against the will of the complainant. That's one of the first areas of reform that are needed. The argument is that the complainant might be coerced so lets always assume that she i…
/r/MensRights12/01/11 04:49 PM
19

The reason you can be 100% sure that Assange did not rape the complainants is that the reasons they went to police was in order to "force" him to have STD tests. That is the behaviour of someone who is sure she wasn't raped. Its probably police and prosecutors that fabricated the rape claims, most likely through ambiguous statements and questions to the complainants. One of the worst effects of feminism, and the mistraining of authorities under their political power, is the perception that all w…
/r/MensRights11/01/11 05:18 PM
2

the odds of a dna match depend on the procedure, but can be not that high. this example says 1/7000 which would mean over 35 people would be expected to match if they tested 250k. Even if its 1 in a million odds, its high enough that if u buy 250k lottery tickets, its not unusual that many would "lose" this lottery.
/r/MensRights09/01/11 11:05 PM
4

a better question, is it ethical to demand a man sign a birth certificate without a paternity test. its a bit of a moot question, in that the name on the birth certificate is whoever the mother says it is. btw, from the medical profession's prespective it is UNETHICAL to tell the man that the mother is pointing to as the father, that he is not the father. It is unethical, because it deprives the child the best financial support possible.
/r/MensRights07/01/11 03:51 AM
1

imposing religious views being enforcing their version of morals. They needed to have more political support than opposition to gain power. They lost power due to US money and weapons.
/r/MensRights03/01/11 05:37 PM
1

First, it was. Taliban is a moral position primarily against mob drug lords. The most important thing to avoid, is any stupid presumption of a culture having a "wrong" or incoherent social order based on a few propagandized press releases. That a Hofstra student was reportedly either gang raped or engaged in gang sex, certainly would ellicit opinions from other cultures as to what should be done with our women, but there's no justification for military correction, and its simple delusion to mist…
/r/MensRights03/01/11 03:19 PM
3

Muslim countries have had 3 female heads of state. While they have a different social order than us, don't ever presume that they would choose ours. Despite Franklin's quote, people can choose security over liberty.
/r/MensRights03/01/11 03:36 AM
1

Its an afghan people's choice what they want women's social roles to be. We can't impose lipstick and mini skirts for all.
/r/MensRights03/01/11 01:39 AM
1

All marriages promise until death do them part. People can change their mind before actually marrying just as easily as the seem to choose to break such promises after marriage. and calling this rape is entirely different than recognizing false promises of marriage as a separate, but significanltly less serious, crime.
/r/MensRights02/01/11 09:07 PM
2

She won't be kicked to the curb if she keeps repeating the 2% false rape lie, but I am impressed with her argument. Specifically, victorian era rape views need to be modernized to reflect the lack of importance of virginity and chastity to a woman's "value". Anonymity is one reform. Sentence guidelines another.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 11:33 PM
3

You can tell a bit by the pattern you experienced. Women scorned or escaping accountability. Avoiding any personal interaction or taunts to repair person is not likely to result in you being abused. Its a lot like avoiding getting bitten by dogs. You could, as an extra precaution, have someone on the phone while she's there.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 10:55 PM
1

afaik, only child support dues are forced regardless of ability to pay. General lawsuit damages are not. He's faced with suing judicial authorities as an alternative, but lawyers shy away from these cases possibly due to judicial bias against giving decisions against authorities, or just as favours to other lawyers.
/r/MensRights31/12/10 10:43 PM
3

Most insist on a retainer that covers all expected future costs. They will bill costs on top of that, and have a duty to keep representing you without demanding future up front payments.
/r/MensRights29/12/10 09:39 PM
6

this is poor :( especially the economics intro. You can't blame feminism for economic offshoring. Women participating in labour force doesn't make a country poorer. That 2 incomes have same purchasing power as one income of yesteryear, is not feminisms fault. Just natural siphoning off of people's money by those that can. It's insulting to point to a country with high prostitution rates as the only one where women make a contribution.
/r/MensRights24/12/10 07:26 PM
1

doesn't make a difference in whether she was raped or not. correct. But if a woman who was not raped claims roofies, then she automatically was raped (if roofies are true).
/r/MensRights23/12/10 09:41 PM
3

Female intuition is a process where you imagine something and then believe it. Its fairly common. And a source of many MR problems.
/r/MensRights23/12/10 08:38 PM
1

i don't think anyone else brought up the 95% rapists go free myth. That comes from rainn.org. Their statistic is 89%. It is a lie because it is based on 11% of rape complaints result in conviction. And so is assuming that every single complaint is true.
/r/MensRights23/12/10 02:23 AM
0

encouraged by the sexual trade union novel. There simply isn't the nexus to establish conspiracy. Feminist scholars are the ones defining rape as anything a woman feels may be rape. They're the ones used to fund shelters and educate therapists/police to convince the confused of rape. Sex trade issues divide strongly feminist and non-feminist womens groups. I'm unsure what conservative feminism means, btw.
/r/MensRights22/12/10 02:59 PM
2

We need to start with a little blunt "victim blaming" for both genders. That's fair. The real solution has to filter down to police and prosecutors though. Standards such as the complainant being sure (beyond a reasonable doubt) she was assaulted, and vetting likelihood of fabrications both on complainant's part and through police's lurid imaginations embellishing their story for them, and locking them into lies they encourage or make for them. Because sexual assault charges are serious, all tho…
/r/MensRights22/12/10 02:39 PM
1

but, but... she wants to do it with me. Surely her judgement must be impeccable.
/r/MensRights22/12/10 01:19 AM
2

Pretty much everyone here would like it to be treated equally. There's a sharp divide between equally abhorent, and equally overdramatic prudishness. There's a small detail that 14 is an acceptable age of consent in many jurisdictions, so "jail rape for life for the bitch" attitudes can refer to a non-criminal event a few miles away. If virginity and chastity are outdated values in our culture, then there is no reason to treat girls as incapable of consenting/acting on desires, if its obvious th…
/r/MensRights21/12/10 08:29 PM
6

Child services organizations have direct political and funding ties to feminist groups, and not only do they typically make no effort to verify abuse claim stories, they elicit them, and help fabricate allegations from vague stories.
/r/MensRights20/12/10 07:35 PM
2

Another suspicious aspect of the vague academic reference is that men's studies is an outgrowth of women's studies faculties. Its purpose is to define and assist men's roles in overcomming base patriarchal impulses and end feminist defined rape culture. So, to OP, no one here is interested in harassing you. I'm absolutely willing to entertain and engage your moderate comments. There's no reason to shy away from standing behind your opinion, and you provide us with no way to help without doing so…
/r/MensRights19/12/10 08:14 PM
0

An easy definition of establishment is any group with "established" power. There is no need to structure a hierarchy with the most powerful at the top, even if they do exercise powre and influence over other establishments.
/r/MensRights18/12/10 09:38 PM
2

in defining the establishment, you have to decide if cosmopolitan magazine and the fashion industry are the establishment. They are, and hold influence. Women's rights is important in providing the illusion of autonomy and freedom for people. Women's participation in work force has obvious economic benefits. That today's 2 income couples are not truly better off than yesteryear's single income couples is not anyone's fault but the markets. Bigger (or just more expensive) houses and better cars s…
/r/MensRights18/12/10 06:46 PM
1

made by a complainant who may have been under pressure, or in an abusive relationship The problem is that it is always possible that they are under pressure or abused. Prosecutors justify special court room protections (screens, cameras, special interviewers) for DV complainants by asking them to confirm that the process is intimidating to them. Court is intimidating to everyone. Of course they say yes. Absolutely no evidence is needed to conclude that there may be pressure. Often, evidence that…
/r/MensRights16/12/10 07:02 PM
2

Rape culture is a product of feminism started essentially in 1975 by Koss's corrupt research claiming 25% of college aged women are raped. (corrupt because rape defined as answering yes to "did you ever have sex with someone you didn't want to because of drugs or alcohool" The primary influence of rape culture on false rape claims, is that women feel a right to interpret rape any way they feel like it, and if almost all other women are being raped all the time, then charging an asshole or an inn…
/r/MensRights15/12/10 02:42 PM
7

ooh... that would be self rape, if she complied! She'd have to prove she didn't consent to it, or go to jail.
/r/MensRights14/12/10 09:25 PM
3

Before clicking through the velenti piece, I thought some aspects of swedish law could be useful. But valenti denies the existance of "sex by surprise" laws, or that Assange's accusations involve broken condoms. What I would change in our laws, is make imperfectly consented sexual exchange a misdemeanor punished by a restraining order protecting the complainant. No record, no sex offender status. No expensive trial if the defendant doesn't care about the outcome. It would give prosecutors leeway…
/r/MensRights14/12/10 06:33 PM
1

I agree. They are useful, however, in heightening anxiety such that a liar admits lying. Kanin and other proper studies, defined a proven false rape claim as one where complainant admitted it was false. Not polygraph results.
/r/MensRights13/12/10 07:42 PM
6

You're assuming that stories of rape to friends and family are all true. The assumption that the false claim rate is at least as high as police reported ones, because the story has the same manipulation value, without the risk of the truth coming out. Even in cases where the person says she never told anyone other than the survey, falsely identifying as a rape victim for either self-image or feminist agenda promotion is possible. If a survey asks a business owner "will you hire anyone if your ta…
/r/MensRights13/12/10 07:14 PM
4

No. She might refuse polygraph, or might withdraw the complaint or cooperation. Police should then press her to admit it was false, because of the serious consequences resulting in believing her. A truthful woman might resent a polygraph, but would argue the results are interpreted wrong, if conducted and confronted with a lying accusation. Its outrageous to suggest that anytime a lying cunt is pressured into admitting that she's a lying cunt, that her admission is one of convenience and minimal…
/r/MensRights13/12/10 07:03 PM
4

kanin study is the only correct approach. spontaneously recant a completely absurd standard. Liars don't spontaneously recant. They need to be pressured and confronted.
/r/MensRights13/12/10 06:26 PM
6

Kanin and other studies have found proven false rape claims are 41%-60%. This article doesn't explain the best reason for why this study is wrong: You only find out lying cunts are lying when you interrogate them persistently and aggressively. Its much like a study finding out how many homes have roaches. If you want to not find any, you walk into the kitchen don't notice any and leave. If you empty the kitchen until you either find some or don't find some, then your study methodology is necessa…
/r/MensRights13/12/10 06:24 PM
0

google would be sued ahead of reddit. Each is deeplinking to a site that is actually publishing this. Furthermore, r/wtf and reddit frontpaged outside of r/mr.
/r/MensRights10/12/10 09:29 PM
-2

I agree the ban was borderline unwarranted. I support the mods though. this is a media link. feminist controlled judicial officials have more to blame in the Assange case than the complainants. They are definitely not completely innocent, but they basically went to the police and said by analogy "my stuff is missing from my house, and I saw this sketchy black dude walking by." They're not lying, but manipulating prejudiced idiots into arresting someone they don't like.
/r/MensRights10/12/10 09:25 PM
1

No case should be prosecuted without the alleged victim's insistence that it does, provided they are able to consent to the prosecution. The stereotype that a victim is reluctant because she is controlled and manipulated is frequently presumed automatically even when there is no evidence for it, or strong evidence against it. Reluctant complainants are a sign of police and prosecutorial abuse. Often, complainants are pressured by family and friends to make police complaints into turning a person…
/r/MensRights27/11/10 05:51 PM
0

What exactly are we "excusing" here? Excusing behaviour that creates plausible deniability of consent. And then encouraging the denial.
/r/MensRights27/11/10 05:16 PM
1

Polygamous harems seem to be an effetive breeding technique. Cultural norms become natural too? They reinforce instinctive impulses. Pair bonding is more natural than harems, in that school environments where each kid is on a relatively equal power and financial footing, pair matching is an implied ideal.
/r/MensRights27/11/10 02:09 PM
3

the argument against women being more necessary to survival of the race was best addressed by George Orwell. paraphrasing: That assumes that humans breed like cattle, instead of the actual pair bonding that takes place ideally raising kids with 2 parents.
/r/MensRights26/11/10 09:54 PM
-1

If women said "get the fuck off me" and "I want to leave", then many frivolous rapes would not occur because most men do not want to rape anyone, and failing to use those words can lead to misunderstandings. There needs to be a responsibility to assert non-consent to sex, and discourage the myth that speaking out will make it worse, and reinforcing delusions of rape. Drunk passed out women cannot consent. I accept that sex with them is wrong and rape. But drunk not passed out women can easily cl…
/r/MensRights25/11/10 05:10 PM
2

sure. Any movement must evaluate whether its objectives have been met, and whether victory has been achieved. Its members allowed to conclude for themselves that victory is here.
/r/MensRights25/11/10 02:30 PM
1

wth do u mean?
/r/MensRights25/11/10 03:17 AM
1

I have never heard anyone advise women to do so. what you do hear is that you are not accountable for anything that evil rapists do, and that if you think you might have been raped, then you were. Excusing it is permitting interpreting regret or outcome according to her idealized character view. Excusing is permitting. Excusing is saying we will support your delusions of rape, if you make them to further our political agenda.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 11:08 PM
5

Its a fine word. You're right that it can be used for motherhood. Usually though pedestalization is prizification of women being pursued. Treat women like people, and sex like a transaction instead of a sacred ceremony and grand gift/prize she is to grant only to you from her pedestal.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 10:31 PM
0

I'm pretty sure this is spam. But maybe 5% on topic too.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 10:25 PM
1

When you ask a woman for help, you do not have to be concerned that she will decide that since she helped you, you owe her a date, or sex Interesting. It is defining privilege as asking a favour in return for a favour. I'm not sure that is privilege any more than the privilege to label any such request as lewd and creepy, or that asking for sex or a date for any reason is a privilege. As to your other points, I strongly disagree than anyone has the privilege to rape.
/r/MensRights24/11/10 10:00 PM
8

feminism is about equality Then I am a feminist too. In the politically correct, uniformly socially acceptable, and human flourishing definition of promoting gender equality. As a feminist, I am allowed to conclude that social and legal oppression of women in my society has either ceased, or that sufficient pressure has already been exerted on society such that equality, and non-oppressed status, will eventually be achieved without additional social pressure. To deny that right, is to deny any p…
/r/MensRights24/11/10 07:27 PM
6

There are areas in which men have privilege No there aren't in my society. "Listen to what I say or I will use superior strength to beat you" is not a privilege, since there are significant judicial consequences deterring men to do so. "Don't say anything I disagree with because it could make weak women cry, and be emotional abuse of a strawwoman" is feminist privilege. There are no formal or informal programs aimed at giving handouts or privileges to men. There are privileges for women. The onl…
/r/MensRights24/11/10 07:25 PM
6

was going to post the same quote. expression of frustration and rage and exasperation how is that not the same as control and get things?
/r/MensRights24/11/10 06:21 PM
12

the logic is brilliant. He was left destitute and despaired such that only lottery winnings could get him out of it. Therefore, it is profit from divorce.
/r/MensRights22/11/10 07:59 PM
21

What possible contribution could she have made in her marriage that would have increased his chance of winning the lottery 10 years later. Through I disagree with the argument that someone earning increased employment income 10 years later could have some indirect cause, support received during earlier marriage, I at least understand the argument. That is completely irrelevant to lottery winnings.
/r/MensRights22/11/10 05:23 PM
0

they get a lot of "this is what my girl friend told me how do I help her with dealing with rape" posts. The advice received is 90% of the time "go to rape culture promoting organization (RAINN) for councilling". This organization is the same one that says 86% of rapists go free under the logic that 14% of police complaints don't result in conviction. RAINN is co-responsible in pro arrest policies, frivolous rape interpretations, and a funding benefactor from the rape culture they promote.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 11:27 PM
-1

have a look at other comments, chivalrous stereotype of women, and their aversion for sex, leads the chivalrous to imagine rape from any confusion. Co-conspiring in a fabrication comes naturally in conceivable rape scenarios, whereas sympathy for someone in an unfavorable prostitution transaction is less forthcoming.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 07:40 PM
-1

there should be a different term for too obvious to be a troll
/r/MensRights21/11/10 07:17 PM
-2

well he obviously only wanted to pay $20 for sex. Paying $100 to a hooker is out of character for him. That's like going all the way. $20 is like light petting or something. It was probably her fault that he was drunk enough to be seduced by her.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 07:05 PM
-2

[sarcasm mode on] The responses in that linked thread all seem pretty sure that the gf was raped. I don't see the difference in analogy where that doesn't make my bf robbed?
/r/MensRights21/11/10 06:42 PM
-6

poor reading comprehension?
/r/MensRights21/11/10 06:38 PM
1

Mensrights already is painted as a rape approval subreddit by certain detractors and the sickening perversion of logic necessary to disparage mr that way is innexcusable and not to be tolerated. If a rape accusation is as serious as rape, then one side of the story should not be given credence, just because that side has been heard, or makes puppy eyes is in front of you. In this case, its much simpler in that the side presented, even if true, is not rape.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 06:31 PM
-2

I appreciate that. But think of it as a financial advice forum, where someone posts this great deal where bernie maddoff promises me 20% returns, should I take it. That subreddit takes the position that you are not allowed to warn him of potential scams. In cases where boyfriends are telling us the story they want to believe, even though its clear in their own words ("she never said no") that no rape occurred, then the victim that exists in the case is the boyfriend being duped. There is a duty …
/r/MensRights21/11/10 06:22 PM
3

since 99% of the ultrafeminists on r/a are male, best response... Is that a picture of you?
/r/MensRights21/11/10 04:54 PM
1

Actually sounded like somewhat responsible simple flirting to me.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 04:36 PM
1

I mean, is this common? Has anyone ever actually done this? What in the hell just happened? Its common for men to have been exposed to girls making up rape stories to cover up their own accountability. He probably assumes all girls do this out of convenience. Which is hopefully false. He's unlikely to have thought it through, as such stories have the potential for vigilantyism or arrest.
/r/MensRights21/11/10 04:33 PM
1

people that wouldn't get married without alimony aren't necessarily the ones that get married to get alimony. you might be wrong there. hard to prove. The orignal point that alimony contributes to divorce is easy to accept. You can consider Elin Woods. Assuming marriage as a purely economic partnership. She'd probably choose both initial marriage and to stay married if there was no alimony. Alimony is just a cashing out option. You can still choose investments that have no cash out option. It ju…
/r/MensRights19/11/10 05:49 PM
8

anarcha-feminism is just another name for radical-supremacist-feminism that no longer has any relationship with anarchism. Feminist rock throwers have simply coopted a movement sympathetic to feminism. I was one of the first to object to the icon. I did so because it represents the valerie solanas (scum manifesto) and dworkin (all hetero sex is rape) wings of radical feminism, and is incompatible with normal human relations you expect from idealists, in your post. The mods there view equality-fe…
/r/MensRights14/11/10 11:57 PM
3

lyingcunt.org is probably available domain. Could be used to publish the names and contact info of those who lie to judicial authorities.
/r/MensRights11/11/10 08:09 PM
1

I don't know your experiences are wrong. But its pretty easy to blame disappointments on either structural or social biases. If special shifts had gone to you instead of him, why couldn't he assume that you provided sexual favours for it, just as you assume you were naturally superior and entitled to the special shift. People attaching blame for disappointments happens whether their perceived blame is accurate or not. If you are under 45, you went through schooling that treats girls as superior …
/r/MensRights11/11/10 01:39 PM
6

there is no male patriarchy. the male created system is irrelevant if it does not serve to advance males. or does not anymore. Tell me what benefits I receive, as a generic male, from this "patriarchy", or the oppressors.
/r/MensRights11/11/10 01:04 AM
3

What about being against unfair distributions of wealth and power because they are unfair? The IMF is pro IMF/US. Not pro male patriarchy. I don't believe you can make a case that women are prevented opportunities they should reasonably have even if you could make that case 50 years ago. Just because you stereotype your oppressors as happening to be male, doesn't make males your oppressors.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 11:31 PM
20

being against wealth and power because it is and has repeatedly screwed you, doesn't justify resenting men any more than it justifies resenting jews. Unless being a man, is a free pass to having wealth handed to you, there is no justified resentment of male patriarchy.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 10:28 PM
2

Using your logic, we can't say republicans want to cut taxes on the rich. Rand Paul wants to consider cutting military spending, but we can't say that republicans want to increase military spending because there's an exception?
/r/MensRights10/11/10 03:05 AM
4

fair. 50% of rape complaints to police are false. This is not an evidence based case, but rather her story without injury. A story is always a coin toss. But there are good stories and weak stories. Specifics of her story includes that she had sex voluntarily with husband shortly after alleged rapes, which is a clear weakness a story of rape.
/r/MensRights10/11/10 02:59 AM
2

a girl saying she was raped is always a coin toss as to whether she was or not. There should never be a presumption/blance of probabilities assumption that she was, without evidence. Evidence is rare in historical accusations.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:48 PM
3

keep in mind that her saying the retraction is false instead of the complaint was false, is a tactical choice of choosing the lesser crime punishment. OP is simply angry at the assumptions that the husband is a rapist, and that she was raped. I agree that it is fascist and idiotic for the government to persecute people for making a false retraction, because it is people making the choices with best social outcome: no police/judicial intervention. It is retarded to waste government resources to p…
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:41 PM
2

This is not strictly true. The feminist point of view is that if a woman claims rape, one should believe she has been raped unless there is evidence otherwise. This is not the same as saying that if a woman claims rape, one should believe that the alleged rapist is guilty. There is no subtle difference at all, other than the possibility that the accused is the wrong accused. False rape complaints are specifically non-rapes which are extremely common. And implied belief in complainants the root c…
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:33 PM
3

the feminists that speak to the issue are either brainwashed or attempting to brainwash listeners with the presumption. Corrupting the power balance in rape culture is the only remaining political action of feminism. That a statement applies to every person who identifies themself as feminist is irrelevant, because most of these people, like you and me, are irrelevant politically. Its entirely fair to generalize feminism based on its political advocates.
/r/MensRights09/11/10 10:27 PM
0

this case shows how despicably retarded and feminazi controlled ontario's attorney general is. Feminazis testifying in court is the least of it. This case should have been dismissed a long time ago, because the complainant recanted. She got pissed off about some unrelated matter with her bf, and went to the police. The crown/attorney-general believes, through sterotype, that when women recant stories, it is because they are being abused and pressured by overbearing men. So, they are persecuting …
/r/MensRights08/11/10 11:58 PM
1

2 months harrassment is considered getting off easy, minus the public exposure and probable legal expenses. If you do sue, you can try to include the police department. Investigation standards demand that all possibilities be considered, so if they displayed any implicit belief in her story in how they questioned her, then they are liable for negligence. Courts may very well likely cover up police negligence though, so there is no guarantee of being successful.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 11:00 PM
5

I'd downvote because it is a ridiculous supposition. Its equivocating that a vote against Ferraro, Clinton or Palin is a vote for sexism, rather than a vote for someone else. Its decrying a lack of equality of outcome, as an excuse for continued and increased prioritization of female opportunity.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 03:11 PM
1

society is like steering a tankership. Feminist revolution in the 70s doesn't make 50% female congress in 1970. in 2010, women have better employment rates, salaries (for young women), university admission and graduation rates. In 20 years, those women are the age to consider politics. Continued steering in the feminist direction is not appropriate, despite the somewhat recently posted complaints of a feminist decrying that art in the Louvres and other museums were still dominated by men (give i…
/r/MensRights03/11/10 03:05 PM
3

The argument for lesser of 3 evils is fair. I think though the extremism should be denounced. And influence of the green party is easier than others, and worth doing so before accepting the choice of lesser evils.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 02:58 PM
4

I'd like equal opportunity to marry Tiger woods. That is one of the top occupations in the country. Congress should pass a law that Tiger woods next spouse should be male.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 02:37 PM
2

Feminism is easily able to scare men into adopting retarded views, because all it takes is for people not to investigate claims of oppression and patriarchy, trusting their gut that the complainer really believes she is being oppressed. A common phenomenon for most people is to have a more extreme position on any issue the least they know about it. It doesn't take women in office to advance feminist agenda. There are plenty of corruptable white knights willing to pervert society in their name.
/r/MensRights03/11/10 02:34 PM
10

He happened to be factually correct in detailing the legal persecutions on the matter. I didn't follow the links to kids getting beaten which I find offensive, but don't contravene youtube policy. I think denouncing overly harsh laws, and sentencing, based on administrative cutoffs rather than harm done was the point of that post, and not cp advocacy. I understand your point that any appearance of tolerance for cp can discredit mr, but this is still a legal area that persecutes men. Political di…
/r/MensRights03/11/10 05:19 AM
1

Society doesn't care. We've decided that it's impossible to create child pornography (which an adult would have access to) without being exploitative of the children (and adolescents are children). while it is true that we have decided that as a society. It doesn't actually reflect the mentality of kids sexting for free. I think you are confusing wrong and should be discouraged, with so horrible as to merit years of jail and drive accused to suicide. The OP is right in bringing up 17 year olds a…
/r/MensRights03/11/10 03:52 AM
1

that's pretty good. has there been incidents of cp posting before?
/r/MensRights03/11/10 02:10 AM
-2

laws that made rape of a wife illegal were unnecessary. But this does not imply a husband's right to rape. They were unnecessary because marital rape doesn't happen. Laws against spousal abuse and torture are sufficiently inclusive of rape. No fault divorce entitles anyone to leave a marriage without any reason or proof. Its unnecesssary because an accusation of rape against a husband that did not involve a spousal abuse allegation would be an accusation of persistent sexual advance or other gre…
/r/MensRights02/11/10 01:56 PM
-2

upvoted begrudgingly. Somewhat interesting recent history. Laws against marital rape are a definite feminist conspiracy, but are rarely invoked. It is like laws against liquids on airplanes or shark with laser beams. The purpose of the legislation is to pretend there is a problem so that you can be made to fear it.
/r/MensRights01/11/10 07:05 PM
1

I just wrote this about why we don't orchestrate ban policy committees. Spam and abuse that is obviously not a tenable (or attempted to be defended) opinion can be banned freely. "Nazi patriarchist" without reason for example. (incidentally, I would love to read an actual example/interpretation of patriarchy substantiation which is never made). When a user is being bullied by another user and asks for help, what should we do? That gets tricky. Obviously a central basis for false-rape claims is t…
/r/MensRights01/11/10 06:48 PM
1

simply and circularly, we're not afraid of detracting posts. Not busily conniving banning policies that attempt to define speech that is derailing of our propaganda. Those acts are obviously only necessary when propagandists know that information and truth contradicts their message.
/r/MensRights01/11/10 03:58 PM
2

Even if gender identity is subjectively instinctive and subjectively natural, isn't all that's saying is there is a choice to act on that instinct/impulse/compulsion?
/r/MensRights31/10/10 09:32 PM
-2

how is this link transphobic? You're obviously using disingenuous feminist-style politics to imagine persecution, and taking advantage of the fact that sensitive people who don't understand language will just agree with sensitive people they assume understand language. The project is not about exposing genuine transphobia, but advancing political agenda. You have a right to political agenda and action, but it makes you look bad to call out anything you disagree with as transphobic.
/r/MensRights31/10/10 07:40 PM
-1

misandry we all agree to be misandry is not deleted or banned if it is a commonly held view, even by corrupt scum-fems. Unlike r/feminisms or r/a, we know we are right, and don't need to hide counters arguments.
/r/MensRights31/10/10 06:38 PM
5

2nd'ed
/r/MensRights30/10/10 03:35 PM
18

absolutely right on yellowmix. linking to r/feminisms is simple way to rebut the once a week post that feminists are human beings who just want gender equality.
/r/MensRights30/10/10 01:45 PM
8

I'm banned from there for pointing out, politely and delicately, that their sidebar policy that patriarchy always has and does exist together with labeling any counterpoint "derailment" means that patriarchy will always exist according to them. Feminism can never achieve any goal, because the feminists who ever think so will be banned from feminism.
/r/MensRights30/10/10 01:25 PM
5

keep in mind that medical and legal institutions intentionally propagate this "empowerment" of women. It is most medical associations policy not to inform men they are not the fathers, or even to point out to the mother thaat the father she wants to claim cannot be. In canada, the courts take the view that every man who believes he is the father or has acted as a father to the child owes child support. A mother can collect child support from every man she remaries/common laws with. This is think…
/r/MensRights30/10/10 03:17 AM
2

queercoup is a definite agitator. it has mod powers by proxy in r/a, and used to be a mod there until the purge.
/r/MensRights27/10/10 11:46 PM
1

t's akin to someone in a fiduciary relationship exploiting a disadvantaged or unequal partner that type of exploitation should be proven rather than implied. The laws are written such that all people under 18 are completely innocent virgins and have full trust in teachers.
/r/MensRights21/10/10 05:43 AM
2

debatable, put probably to a lesser extent than feminist complaints. no more female oriented than not. As 1, debatable.
/r/MensRights16/10/10 07:18 PM
1

That is very different than saying: we are against men's rights. not at all. By insisting that women are underprivileged, end of discussion, it explicitly says that mens rights are irrelevant.
/r/MensRights16/10/10 07:15 PM
4

why can't there be a men's rights movement and a women's rights movement? You should be asking that to feminists.
/r/MensRights16/10/10 07:13 PM
7

that's not the case here though. feminist-legal-persecutors are bitches. Girl has apologized to boys, and is only guilty of mentioning she let boys touch her.
/r/MensRights14/10/10 01:16 PM
24

This is not a false abuse claim. Boys admitted to touching her consentually. This is a frivolous abuse claim. She is too young to consent, even though the act is similar enough to kissing to be consented to by nearly every child below 14 in the last 100 years. Its frivolous in that there is no reason to believe the girl is complaining. Girl has apologized to the accused boys. This is another case of feminazis purposefully intimidating weak idiot bureaucrats into persecuting men/boys. Principal s…
/r/MensRights14/10/10 01:12 PM
-2

this is basically a blanket response to your complaint. I don't blame everything on feminism. Rape culture though is feminist fabrication. You're right in being offended at the few "shut up and like it" comments, and that this is male culture and unrelated to feminist corruption. I don't think this post was trying to focus on the feminist-responsible problems with the AMA: Rape is the only term known to express this type of offense.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 04:13 PM
0

Unfortunately closing that loophole gives the accused who are actually guilty of rape a way out. It would seem that this sort of situation requires some serious consideration by judges, I don't think it's even possible to legislate consent and prior-intoxication in any meaningful or effective way. That is a bit contradictory. I agree with most of what you said, except for the implied assumption that frat boys are evil rapists. A culture of consent and debauchery is more prevalent at a kegger or …
/r/MensRights13/10/10 03:48 PM
1

But there are actual people purposely lying to them that he's a muslim (and it may be more than 20%). The example is literally people who have gone their whole life never considering or caring about the answer. -- They all saw solar system pictures in high school too.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 03:22 AM
1

while that may be true for as much as 50% of women, it's still irrelevant, IMO. The bad boy good boy distinction especially. Its unnecessary to say why. Just don't enjoy/go along with sex and then call it rape when you later regret it, or need to escape accountability for something. I don't think that any rape fantasy or play is common at all in such false rape claims.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 03:10 AM
12

to be fair 90% of them got it right. -- Maybe 80% know for sure the sun is larger, and the other 20% guessed. Its just that of those smart enough to use a computer on a dating site, its twice as likely for someone to be this clueless about our world to be a woman rather than a man.
/r/MensRights13/10/10 12:35 AM
12

The whole thing might be elaborate troll fiction. Though that would be the best possible news, and any suicide possibility is far more worrisome than any trolling possibility.
/r/MensRights12/10/10 12:46 PM
2

Sounds like marrying your fiance would more likely than not be a problem. 70% of marriages end in divorce. means 70% of people that think it will work out during engagement period turn out to be wrong. Of course she is more likely to act sweet and compromising at this stage. There is no way to predict her attitude/personality 5 years (or months) after marriage. Your doubts and concerns at this stage probably are insurmountable, but being convinced your fiance is the one and trustworthy should be…
/r/MensRights11/10/10 04:01 AM
2

the rape fantasy tangent is irrelevant, but you're right about the first part. "Implied consent" (if she doesn't say no, or obviously object, then its not rape) used to be the standard for rape. And it should return to that. The world will continue to think of rape complaints that don't pass the implied consent standard as being made by crazy cunt whores. The standard benefits the "victim" by not exposing their sordid incident to public trial, and not making their conscience responsible for hars…
/r/MensRights11/10/10 03:20 AM
2

Would be interesting to see a "controlling spouse" defense. Note that the prosecutors have explicitly decided that the male is the big fish criminal of the 2, by dealing with her to testify against him (instead of the opposite).
/r/MensRights11/10/10 03:10 AM
3

none of them is sufficient to show that rape hasn't happened its a bit of a strange request. there is an implied leading "if you are not raped, and " to each of the points. I guess you want to see potential rape credibility in the scenarios. (no downvote included)
/r/MensRights11/10/10 03:00 AM
0

The main point in educating women on not being raped is to say "get the fuck off me" and "I want to leave". Most men don't want to rape you, and there is never a reason to imagine it will be worse if you make those statements. The advice will save you from imagining being raped. Instead of feminist claims that everything is rape, which lets you imagine and interpret rape as most convenient for you, feminists should be teaching women to avoid rape with this simple method, or at least help clarify…
/r/MensRights11/10/10 02:50 AM
1

You're suggesting feminism should win the linguistics battle. The scum-fem do claim that anti-feminism is misogyny. You're suggesting that the mainstream has internalized this, and so linguistically, the mainstream filter shuts out any MR position that is critical of feminism. It boils down to which problem is worse. Allowing feminists to dictate that criticism of feminism is misogynist derailment (sidebar) based on nothing more than feminists have decreed it would allow feminists to be right on…
/r/MensRights11/10/10 01:15 AM
1

You can think of feminism as a liberal reaction to conservative female roles. The views are essentially incompatible rather than one being right or wrong. The inherent supremacist evil of feminism can be argued from the same liberal framework of feminism. Men's rights are equal to women's rights. Strong legal protections for property, personal development, and physical integrity make chivalry unnecessary. Its not that conservative chivalry cannot create happiness. Sexual power from providing pro…
/r/MensRights10/10/10 02:11 PM
1

The post at the top of that link is a self reply by fluk I would also have downvoted or non-voted because it used the word masculist. First, its the first time I've ever seen the word, and I presume the intended word was masculinist? -- The entire thread repeats that word at least 30 times. Anyways, I think masculimism is as hateful and objectionable supremacism as feminism. But is this an attempt to take over the meaning of the word using the same hypocrisy as feminism? weirdly enough, masculis…
/r/MensRights09/10/10 10:10 PM
2

even if it would also benefit the least able everyone benefits most individually by being first in line. Even the slowest. As a group, fastest first benefits the most collectively. But that assumes that the most able don't assist the least able through some kind of sexual harrassment liable touching.
/r/MensRights09/10/10 08:50 PM
2

my job is "Naturalist" brain pause distinguishing from Naturist. title 9 should entitle a men's hiking team?
/r/MensRights09/10/10 06:10 PM
6

If you were a relative of the children, would you report another relative for sending you those pictures, or accept jail for possessing them? Would any of those/you people be sick fuckers?
/r/MensRights09/10/10 05:54 PM
0

it was a fairly obvious counterexample for oppression the OP may feel. "suck it up" is endorsing that oppression.
/r/MensRights05/10/10 06:24 PM
1

probably the most important study is the kanin one. Thanks for doing a very good job on your 2nd link.
/r/MensRights05/10/10 02:17 PM
5

a silly article suggesting that men get a lawyer before having sex because women will screw them over That was a good article. The fact that only 1%-5% of men would be frivolously or falsely accused of a sexual or domestic crimes in their lifetimes doesn't change the absurd standards empowering lying or crazy cunts to victimize them. Its not the slightest bit misogynist to denounce the standards that systemically oppress men with such devastating pain. CantPutOnMyBigBoyPantsAndDealWithMessyReali…
/r/MensRights05/10/10 01:44 PM
1

warmongering used to be a liberal "white man's burden" argument, that got brought back out as "they will great us as liberators" backup plan to weapons inspectors not finding anything. Making them feminist like us becomes part of the warmongering rhetoric. (and ignoring that women were educated and working under Saddam, giving Iraq an economic advantage to scare its neighbours in the first place).
/r/MensRights17/09/10 02:35 AM
1

bomb afganistan because they have burkas. Maybe its not feminists, but warmongers selling the war to feminist sympathizers. But its the feminist journalists selling the argument.
/r/MensRights17/09/10 02:19 AM
1

Playing 'who suffers more' is a useless game that wasn't my intended point. MR is completely legitimate social justice here. crap that happens to you should be important to you, because few other people will care. Rather, the point was feminism imposing western concerns on cultures with bigger problems.
/r/MensRights17/09/10 01:56 AM
1

just poor 3rd world country at random. trying to show they have bigger problems than gender politics. Hopefully, the fact that I didn't try to fake an accent minimizes any offense I may have innadvertently caused through perceived stereotypes.
/r/MensRights16/09/10 07:58 PM
2

The way I see it, Feminists can either go 'Holy Shit, they're right we screwed up!' and work towards fixing it... WRAs I'm not feminist. I will personally do everything in my power to make sure anyone sharing the name 'Feminist' now, will share the consequences later. Most are just stupid. There's evil organizations everywhere with members that ignore their evil. Yelling at them they are stupid doesn't really convince them much, but still education is always the first choice.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 05:19 PM
2

I think it's much more likely that people just don't know that these arguments are being made, there. I certainly didn't. hard for me to prove not, but the atmosphere was genuinely radical feminist there over the last couple of weeks. My downvotes (inlinked side reply) can be explained by other factors, but his/her upvotes cannot.
/r/MensRights15/09/10 03:13 PM
2

to be fair, they were more passing comments than massively upvoted headlines... but let me go dig up links. http://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/comments/dchci/one_of_the_basic_principles_of_anarchism_free/c0z65w4 noted prior to link moderation of it and our replies: 7,-6,6,-4,9
/r/MensRights15/09/10 03:00 PM
6

I think purging socialist thought from feminism, by marginalizing feminism is the more correct approach. You are probably against socialism and trying link them as a way of attacking both, and socialism isn't free from criticism. I think its fair to say that feminism has strongly infiltrated socialist circles as well. Its wrong to dismiss socialist ideals with freeper smearing rethoric like this, though. Its a fairly naked attempt at plutarchist corporatist appology whether you realize it or not…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 02:14 PM
1

the bottom up explanation didn't work for you, so lets look at adding a little anarchy/disempowerment top down How would this voting process go? Who would collect and count these votes? To me, who heads the FEC, and what its mandate is, is one of the most important issues in an election. Its retarded that the organization would report to POTUS or to a cabal of republicrats. No one even knows who the candidates intend to appoint to the FEC or what they will direct them to do, and even if I got 10…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 01:43 PM
0

You're completely right that s.c.u.m feminists hypocritically claim equality seeking while believing in supremacy, and right that there are more scum feminists than equality feminists, where I define scum feminists as anyone who is inclusive of anyone that tolerates Solanas. You're right also that academic and social positioned feminists are the ones that matter most, as they shape or control legal and social oppression against men. But parent is right that 1. feminists are individuals, and 2. e…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 11:57 AM
1

the front page seems always tea party'ish, and obama/anti-deomcrat specific. It was good when bush was in charge. Is there a larger alt sub than libertarian-socialist?
/r/MensRights15/09/10 03:54 AM
3

first, I don't get why you are mad. I'm not trying to force anything on you. the braincrave link links itself to a fuller description of a book by a westerner that lived there 15 years. Explain to me how police work in anarchy? How can you have authority to enforce laws (which is what police do) when there is no authority? First the concept of non-oppressive police is my own version of anarchist principles. You just start by imaging there are 2 or more of you that want to hire me as the police o…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 01:28 AM
1

I understand that most media propaganda portrays somalia as a hell hole, but read this http://www.braincrave.com/viewblog.php?id=289 If you think that's a better alternative to our current system then you are straight up evil. I understand its hard to accept. When the police go on strike do you go invade your neighbours? You can probably walk into any rural farmhous and murder the whole family if you want... prob won't get caught. When somalia isn't being controlled with prizes for the winners o…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 12:40 AM
3

its more of a bottom up approach. no authority to issue or back currency. can use pot or barrels of oil. Let systems. or agree with other "tribes" on forming non-oppressive currency. Civil order is impossible in anarchy as there is no authority to maintain it Somalians have a great legal system based on compensation as punishment rather than jail. It is fairly family centric though, so unclear how communes or communities would be held responsible for their members. But laws against murder and th…
/r/MensRights15/09/10 12:15 AM
3

an association is highly democratic in that you vote for everything important, you don't grant anyone the power to oppress you, and have the right to leave/sell your share as a last resort. I used highly democratic instead of free association for reasons I'd choose again, but can't make a strong case for.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 10:47 PM
4

Humans crave structure and seek authority (whether to be in it or to follow it) That is Dostoevski's view which he does a great job in explaining why man chooses god and religion. Though a lot of men crave leadership, why not leadership towards human values? Leadership to form egalitarian associations where each is free to leave instead of leadership to accept hierarchical authority and the right to send man to war. Would you choose a structure that was highly democratic over an authoriatian one…
/r/MensRights14/09/10 10:17 PM
2

First link kicked off the rapid decay towards a solution.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 10:10 PM
1

I agree with the non-interference advice. "anarcho-masculinism" is as bad an idea as masculinism or feminism. anarcho-gender-equityism would sound good , but if its not 80 years old, then it can't get a name :P (and its actually not that catchy) better still anarcho-somethingRelevantToAnarchism such as the other anarcho-somethings if all anarchists seem to agree that sexism is wrong.
/r/MensRights14/09/10 10:08 PM
-3

this post has just been linked there, by their head crazy, btw. The head crazy uses anything he imagines as proof that MR is destroying r/anarchism though. So by linking to this, with absolutely no obvious relevance to r/A, he is acquiring more imaginary ammo of unanarchist MR demons justifying his next move. r/anarchism has mostly been fixed as of last night. In a very exciting way. There was a complete mod purge, after the founder posted a ban complaint and it was exposed that the scum feminis…
/r/MensRights14/09/10 10:02 PM
1

I agree that the male afghan child concubine story was overblown. The reasoning for the story starts with lists for "why should we kill them or destroy their society." Its close to the state's feminist narrative (burquas) for interfering in their county, but it's cultural interference that begins with ignorance and looks for solutions from there. Its not so fair to look at upvotes as a measure of how big a problem is, because we upvote based on how good a troll a submission is. How controversial…
/r/MensRights12/09/10 11:58 PM
8

WRAs and female supremacists both use the feminist label. Militant feminists when caught in hate speech or anti-social advocacy will try to back down and claim they are mere equalists. I agree there are many women who genuinely believe in gender equality, and who fall under the umbrella, but there are hate filled feminists who move the meaning of the label for convenience as well. Its up to the feminists to relabel themselves, but I think the equalists/WRAs should move away, and let feminism mea…
/r/MensRights11/09/10 04:59 AM
17

And feminists declared that the liar did not deserve to be branded as a criminal because "rape culture" made her do it. A link for this would be huge. Rape culture is a mostly feminist scare tactic invention. That it causes false rape accusations, and that feminists excuse that it does, makes rape culture srs bzness.
/r/MensRights11/09/10 03:49 AM
1

there is some leeway, but earning potential is the operative criteria. If you can convince judge that earnings from 3 years ago should be irrelevant, then ok, but judges live in a world where earnings just go up with inflation every year, and only go down (rarely) if you do something stupid. It can be hard to make a convincing argument for it though. Ageism or crappy economy doesn't affect their world.
/r/MensRights07/09/10 02:36 AM
4

family law is written that way though. Support is based on your earning potential, not your earnings. If you worked a bunch of overtime one year or 3 jobs, to support your family, you should continue to do so after divorce. Otherwise, you might slack off out of spite to your deserving ex wife.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 01:07 PM
4

plus it's ok cause he's russian.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 12:30 PM
5

$1,000/m for cleaning for her one room apartment does she use a nude maid? :) I guess the numbers in an alimony request don't get challenged? Is there no court time to do that?
/r/MensRights06/09/10 12:23 PM
2

child support payments I understand. I thought Alimony was to allow a spouse to continue maintaining a lifestyle she had become accustomed to. So if any alimony is paid, it would always be from the highest earning spouse.
/r/MensRights06/09/10 12:03 PM
6

some simple solutions: uphold existing supposed standards that investigations have to be investigative and not therapeutic. That means treating complainants as potential liars, examining their motives to lie, and challenging their story and credibility prior to making an arrest. The other needed change is to revert back to implied consent for rape charges (if conscious). An accused rapist should have the right to know he is a rapist during the rape. The importance is that non-consent is unprovab…
/r/MensRights05/09/10 10:49 PM
7

Something like 20%-40% of all rape complaints end up being unfounded. That's just the women that recant their stories and admit they are false that's not what unfounded means. 41% are proven false according to kanin. unfounded means there is no reason to believe the complaint. A much higher percentage.
/r/MensRights05/09/10 10:27 PM
2

on surprising thing in article I doubt is true: men are ordered pay alimony even when their wife earns more than they do. is there a legal basis for this?
/r/MensRights05/09/10 10:09 PM
3

doesn't the report button work like an IM to mods?
/r/MensRights01/09/10 11:39 PM
2

this idiocy happens every day to the anonymous.
/r/MensRights29/08/10 08:04 PM
1

twit: I was raped. Guy broke the condom. idiot: why do you think he broke it on purpose? twit: he screwed my friend the next day idiot: I'm really sorry you were raped. We'll charge him for rape. If the twit is honest about disclosing facts, it is the idiot cop's fault for not tyeing them together and dismissing the complaint. Sure, there is probably exaggerations in her complaint, but they are mere delusional conclusions of a twit. Her record should show making an unfounded complaint, her legal…
/r/MensRights29/08/10 04:31 PM
2

These women should be prosecuted for making unfounded allegations Can't or unfair. You are allowed to be too stupid to understand if a crime occurred to you or not. You're even allowed to misuse the word rape in describing frivolous complaints. It is the fault of police and prosecutors whenever they interpret and embellish the crime they wrote at the top of their notebook. Twits may be intentionally misleading for accountability or revenge purposes, but the error is primarily with the investigat…
/r/MensRights29/08/10 02:36 PM
-3

I wouldn't ban anticapped. This was probably from the time kanuk was modding.
/r/MensRights28/08/10 09:19 PM
-2

policing doesn't need to be centralized. There was always revenge based justice before central authority.
/r/MensRights28/08/10 03:56 PM
1

I was assuming some intended connection to MR. The rainbow sprinkles wording... I don't know why I'm not attracted to cupcakes. Someone could make a gender roles theory that explains it, but I would doubt it without careful examination of a study on it.
/r/MensRights28/08/10 12:28 AM
1

I am not drawn to rainbow sprinkled cupcakes. I am not aware of repressing anything. I like fruity drinks though. If I walked past this place, I would be intrigued, and would probably try their boozy chocolate. I don't believe there's much sense of male victimization for not being able to openly enjoy cupcakes. Most boys never wanted to play with barbies either, except maybe to socialize with girls.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 11:42 PM
2

there are some child related credits, but filing single returns is an advantage if both earn income. In canada, there is no marriage tax penalty, because of the option to file single returns, and collect child credits. Is that different elsewhere? also, lamest link ever.
/r/MensRights27/08/10 07:20 PM
6

I'd point to the author that in sex selection procedures in North America 75% are choosing girls. Your points are very good, but you know feminism has jumped the shark when they claim under-representation in excellence of human achievement. For whatever reason, there are more exceptional men than women. Even in fields where there is no political correct basis to expect differences in performance (or even driving where light weight would be advantage). Unless they are denied opportunity, they can…
/r/MensRights27/08/10 12:58 AM
1

not necessarily new, but well written sub.
/r/MensRights25/08/10 11:46 PM
4

Sure Tiger had already been crowned the world’s best golfer but it was the image of wholesome family man off the course that also helped with advertisers. They loved seeing him cuddle with his kids and even if it was not used in ad copy, it still helped sell Buicks, watches, golf clubs, Nike merchandise, whatever. I probably haven't seen every media appearance from Tiger by a long shot, but I've also never seen his kids. Don't remember seeing her at many golf tournaments either, and the camera w…
/r/MensRights25/08/10 11:36 PM
5

crazy bitches exist without the CIA's involvement: her revenge blog
/r/MensRights25/08/10 08:34 PM
1

you could try that too. Nothing in the agreement stops you from compromising at time of separation either. The purpose of a prenuptual is not explicitly stating the fairest solution to general marriages which should be followed without a prenuptual. It is to outline the conditions upon YOU will enter into marriage. Saying custody should be 50/50 is basically assuming a court would decide the same because that seems fair. When, in fact custody awards to mothers are much higher than 50/50. The pur…
/r/MensRights25/08/10 04:34 PM
0

wife would only have agreed to it under duress how can a prenup be signed under duress? Its a human right for her to marry you? What possible basic rights could be infringed by you foregoing marrying her? I believe the basic common law challenge to prenups are that the party failed to understand the rights she was giving up. They are generally written in such a way as to be palatable and signed, rather than in such a way to guarantee its terms. By making the basis very clear and stretching the l…
/r/MensRights25/08/10 02:33 PM
2

There are a lot of more practical alternatives than going gay advice being repeated here: If you partner up with someone, she should have roughly equal assets and/or income to yours. Prostitutes are generally honourable, have no legal credibility if not, and are more attractive and easily exchangeable than most of our gf prospects. You can try alternative arrangements to marriage such as a border paid for housework, and sex if legal (probably not). But if you have sex piror to boarding relations…
/r/MensRights25/08/10 01:38 PM
5

it doesn't work though. Her behaviour when she loves you says nothing about what her behaviour will be when she hates you or views divorce opportunities as a retirement plan.
/r/MensRights25/08/10 01:09 PM
1

accident its an accident because its the wrong guy. "innocent until proven guilty" she admits it. she is pleading sentence. there is no basis to speculate on a false confession.
/r/MensRights23/08/10 01:20 AM
5

There used to be a better short summary on the internet, since scrubbed by a canadian attorney general, but if you scroll to section 4.3 from this link: 86% of child abuse allegations (that make it to trial) brought up after separation have no basis for conviction. And 45% are unfounded. ie. should not go to trial. 23% of all cases (45/196) were intentional fabrications which is more than the 14% that were probably true. To bring up a recent theme here, if murdering someone over abuse allegation…
/r/MensRights23/08/10 12:45 AM
2

i'm guessing you did not read past my first paragraph. One note, is that the reason she is being publicly sorry is that it will lessen her sentence and parole time.
/r/MensRights22/08/10 01:03 AM
8

She is sorry. Knows it was a mistake. I have sympathy for her because of that. What I have no sympathy for, is thinking that when a vagina gets fucked without its enthusiasm, that murder is a justifiable revenge. While her saying she hit the wrong man, suggests there was some incident (why say he's the wrong one), she looks like a meth addict, and selling cd players in dark alleys is pretty shady.
/r/MensRights21/08/10 09:03 PM
2

a baseless claim is different than a false claim. afaik, this is a press release saying the claim is baseless (no evidence, and no reason to assume it is true yet).
/r/MensRights21/08/10 08:03 PM
3

anger management MAKE HULK ANGRY
/r/MensRights17/08/10 12:17 AM
1

i agree with your criticisms, but for #10. First, alimony is separate from child support. That your mother doesn't have an easy job opportunity, doesn't mean she has none. Without the opportunity for alimony, she could reconsider divorce, for example. Marriage shouldn't be a retirement plan.
/r/MensRights17/08/10 12:12 AM
2

The right to not be arrested for sexual assault or domestic violence without preferably evidence, but at least a thorough investigation including examination of motives to lie of the accuser. The right to have an accuser's potential lies and exaggerations treated as an equally serious crime to the accusation, investigated as seriously, and punished as a crime, and not forgiven as a mental health issue. I'd say that and child custody issues are the major injustices facing men. Your list dilutes t…
/r/MensRights17/08/10 12:01 AM
1

stereotypes aren't evidence of truth, but truth usually influences stereotypes. The way to measure better drivers is with race/competition. Women have a natural physical advantage over men in driving due to on average being 50lbs lighter. Yet, an overwhelming majority of top pro and amateur drivers are men. It's not sexist to say men are stronger, faster or better drivers, if you can back it up. I'll agree its sexist to imply that it means superiority of gender, or deserving of more rights.
/r/MensRights16/08/10 03:11 PM
8

stopped reading after 2nd sentence: men are 77% more likely to die in a car accident than women is supposed to support that women are BETTER drivers. It supports that they might be safer drivers, that speed less. But better drivers would be measured by number of accidents not deaths. Or the way stereotypes are formed... # of times they aggravate other drivers.
/r/MensRights16/08/10 01:53 PM
1

not all 12 year olds are emotionally, rationally, and sexually mature probably most aren't. You can argue that all pre-marital sex is a wrong choice, and more strongly so, when its at 12. That wrong choice is a lot closer to choosing beer or a joint, than it is to choosing to be murdered. But the penalties for consenting with her are closer to those for murder. I'm all for your right to preach abstinence to anyone. You can make the argument without treating those that would consent with her as e…
/r/MensRights07/08/10 04:29 AM
3

Intriguing but misses the point. Executing as humanely as possible is completely the same argument as conducting war as humanely as possible. But, firebombing or nuking 50K people dead is relatively just as humane as shooting 50k dead. More humane than ice pick stabbing 50k dead, or submitting 50k to spanish inquisition techniques. Orwell's point is really that men are human too. That they've been coerced into wearing matching pantsuits and ordered to run at the tanks and gun batteries, doesn't …
/r/MensRights06/08/10 02:56 PM
0

I agree with lower age of consent rather than abolishing it. see other post. I want to make the teens responsible. During and after puberty, the value of parental approval drops significantly. One of the critical benefits of 2 parent families is that you need the extra numbers to fight the strong urge to rebel. The best you can do is educate and indicate parental approval standards. Choices you think are wrong are still choices. If you're a mature person soliciting kids, is there really nothing …
/r/MensRights06/08/10 02:39 PM
0

good point. The age of consent is below 18 in many places still though. Risk of it moving up to 18 everywhere, if the world is too afraid to challenge propaganda techniques.
/r/MensRights06/08/10 01:51 PM
0

enemies will dig up this article and paint you as a "child molester" before you get a chance to say "hi, my name is Jay". Not false. war questioners are traitors, non-zionists are anti-semites. Fighting against such propaganda techniques is necessary though, or the age of consent will move to 25.
/r/MensRights06/08/10 01:30 PM
1

It certainly doesn't mean one is actually prepared to deal with those consequences. I'm all for telling kids from 12 year's old on 4 times per year, that their lives will be over if they become pregnant or catch an std. You can even tell them that if they aren't abstinent, they will go to hell, and their parents and friends will shame them as a filthy slut whore. That's a completely different policy than criminalizing those they choose to have sex with. You want your daughter to make the right e…
/r/MensRights06/08/10 01:12 PM
-1

I think your point is "how can justice know that she chose to have sex?" First, I don't think younger than 7-8 year olds can make the choice. Age of reason is around then. 3-6 year olds may be flirting for attention by lifting dresses over their head, but have no idea why they are, and no real sexual awareness until 7-8. From 7-10 though, they can consent to playing doctor with each other. That they wouldn't do it again, doesn't mean they didn't enjoy or consent to it. A lot of one time fingerin…
/r/MensRights06/08/10 12:50 PM
8

Jay, too harsh. I'd try to make the point without "game, beta". I agree with the youtube link below part against calling women inferior. The excellent points you make though are that if a girl wants to fuck, she is old enough to choose to fuck. There shouldn't be a major crime based on the age of who she chooses to fuck as long as that person wants to fuck her too. I'm ok with discouraging it though. but as a misdemeanor, or just with social disapproval. There is no need to victimize a child wit…
/r/MensRights06/08/10 03:22 AM
2

I agree with the criticism up until the 4:40ish mark when he starts addressing the article, at which point he misinterprets it entirely, and so stopped listening. There's no mention of desire to sleep with teenaged girls in the article, and no reason to infer one.
/r/MensRights06/08/10 02:45 AM
3

Its relevant whether the claim is to camp management or the police. There is no crime described, afaik. Lawyer will confirm for your jurisdiction. His usefulness depends on whether he specializes in employment or criminal law. Police can be extremely stupid on these matters, and are commonly mistrained to interpret crimes based on leading questions, and a thereapeutic sensitive interview with the "victim". Its unfortunately in your lawyer's interest for you to be arrested :(, but I can't guarant…
/r/MensRights05/08/10 09:44 PM
5

A good solution would be to cap spousal support at half of the welfare rate. Custody should go to whichever parent bids less from the other parent in child support. If one spouse has chosen to live life so as to be useless outside of marriage, it was her choice to do so, and she might have made a better decision to make the marriage work. Parents with useless skills shouldn't be awarded custody by default. Giving them the freedom of single life, and very small stipend at maximum, will give them …
/r/MensRights28/07/10 10:13 PM
1

could it be that most people who become interested in men's rights get a direct link to it from other media/blogs? "How do I search the web" probably has decreasing search interest as well.
/r/MensRights25/07/10 05:21 PM
1

I don't understand the problem with the lyrics. bad generic advice? so misandrist because its generic? This is quality music and production, but the lyrics don't resonate, even if I overthink them. The criticism feels like the church group protest wing of her PR campaign. "Oughta know" would probably resonate and affect attitudes more. It's seen as more art than anti-social.
/r/MensRights24/07/10 12:52 AM
6

Woman bends over to show breasts down her shirt I look woman keeps position to show breasts I keep looking I might want to make a "federal case" out of this if my wife catches me looking, but I'd still have to answer the obvious question: "Why didn't you stop looking or move?"
/r/MensRights23/07/10 06:19 PM
3

I married someone smart, rational who made more than I do. Basically sure I had screened as you have. You can never predict their psychological state at time of breakup. Women are socialized to feel entitled.
/r/MensRights23/07/10 05:34 PM
5

You're right in your other post, that there is bias in favour of supporting lower court rulings. A more apt analogy though is asking the cop's boss (who told him to go out giving tickets like candy) that your ticket is unfair.
/r/MensRights23/07/10 05:12 PM
2

the test for one juror is one reasonable juror. its not a typical jury where 1/12 might be misandrist. I'd focus on challenging the basis for the legislation that she needs financial support of some kind. As a single person, she could support herself on 3-4 blowjobs per week or minimum wage work without having to provide daycare, and so gain an honourable position in society that doesn't require her to resort to despicable harm to her children.
/r/MensRights23/07/10 05:08 PM
2

Sure she is supposed to pay for my legal fee's but she can't! I assume that you'd have a hard time trying to deduct amounts owed to you from child support?
/r/MensRights23/07/10 04:36 PM
7

would be the same judge at the appeal. That is extremely surprising to the point where I'd assume you've been misinformed. It violates natural law/common law which even Florida subscribes to. Appelate courts are (should be) always seperate, and I know the US has them.
/r/MensRights23/07/10 04:34 PM
2

First, thank you for submission. Heartfelt and touching. Just as womens' rights were allowed by men, mens rights needs good women to gain equality. Second, don't mind atomicparrot. It is always behaving like that. Last, why a throwaway account?
/r/MensRights22/07/10 08:42 PM
1

If the sex is consentual, but she forces you to cuddle...?
/r/MensRights22/07/10 06:24 PM
3

hopefully, the standard is prove it or fuck off where you live too.
/r/MensRights22/07/10 06:06 PM
-2

Your point about being hateful is fine The OP doesn't know he was raped and is guessing. Helping people guess they were raped won't make him happier. It won't help future victims of false, frivolous or guessed rape accusations, and in fact directly causes their pain. I see no importance to validating emotions of a different rape victim. The pain of rape victims isn't more important than the pain of the wrongly accused.
/r/MensRights22/07/10 06:02 PM
2

actually, the line my other car is a mercedez (from 1978, that doesn't run, I bought of CL for $83.06 when I told the guy I'd pay $200 for it) counts as rape, if she presumed you were rich enough for relationship material based on only the first part of the line.
/r/MensRights21/07/10 03:02 PM
16

There is also a false rape allegation at the root of this. Kashur was originally accused of violent rape and indecent assault, but later accepted the lesser charge under a plea-bargain after prosecutors received evidence suggesting the encounter was consensual. Either police were stupid and presumptuous and negligent in investigating aggressively what was innuendo by the complainant, or she is a lying cunt that told them it was a violent rape. Whatever absurd technical crime racists or misandris…
/r/MensRights21/07/10 02:51 PM
1

its not completely unsourced. they give 3 recent examples naming the cunts. Politicians measure their language. Why would you doubt their use of epidemic? Why wouldn't you assume it must be extremely serious?
/r/MensRights19/07/10 10:22 PM
3

Since it's imperative that real rape victims report to hospitals immediately, anything that makes them doubt themselves for even a minute should be frowned upon. That's honest, but actually poorly though out. Why would they doubt themselves? The answer to that is that they probably weren't raped, but might prefer to explain it as rape. For every blatant rape lie, there is an exaggerated account that crosses into technical rape. The latter tends to be very difficult on police when it includes tru…
/r/MensRights19/07/10 10:10 PM
8

should post to main reddit. This example of a professional police department can help bring rationality to other jurisdictions. This is their attempt to make the issue mainstream. Police press conferences come with political support for them.
/r/MensRights19/07/10 06:57 PM
0

There is a danger in having serious positions about cultures you know nothing of, because of propaganda. North Korea could be skimming our headlines, and easily blame every evil that occurs here on the government sponsored culture. So while I appreciate that there could be some evil done to some woman somewhere, it has no relevance to our laws and policies, and you need exceptional cultural understanding to presume being able to suggest laws for others.
/r/MensRights19/07/10 03:07 AM
-6

While I agree, its not productive and impolite, most contests would favour men.
/r/MensRights19/07/10 02:43 AM
1

he's new to issues, and theorizes that polite moderated discourse (somehow led by someone fairly ignorant/himself) will reconcile MR/feminism, because the problem as he sees it is that we haven't heard their crap before.
/r/MensRights19/07/10 02:22 AM
0

Nothing may be the right answer, though camplight's answer is different than nothing and maybe right too. There's definitely equal opportunity in careers. No rational fear of rape or DV, or there is at least significant opportunity of retribution when it occurs. Women should fear that men will shun or fear relationships with them. Avoiding trust or expectations of them. Especially, if they could ever be single with children. Destroying social happiness and its value of children.
/r/MensRights19/07/10 02:07 AM
2

cryptogirl, afaik went into trans rage over politically incorrect criticism of trans idols of mens studies pretending to advocate male perspectives to the world, but she's smart and honest on most issues.
/r/MensRights19/07/10 12:09 AM
0

While I would probably downvote such a comment, how concerned would you be with "gutting rapists"? I'm extremely offended by, what I consider retarded imbeciles at best, but recognize to be a dominant social delusion, that don't disrespect life destroying liars at least as much as rapists. There is a complete equivalence between those that destroy lives though F16s, press of a button, dagger, by paying some guy $2000, or deceit of government officials (police). Politicians and the law do not rec…
/r/MensRights18/07/10 11:24 PM
3

why would I be a troll? seriously: source please
/r/MensRights18/07/10 11:05 PM
3

what you aren't allowed to ask about is any sexual activities that don't involve the accused. That includes any previous complaints she may have made. That is the rape shield law. anything about the alleged incident/wetness/orgasm/dress is already permissible. Rape shield laws should be revoked, even if publication bans are allowed. When making a life destroying accusation, it should be because the victim's trauma justifies the harm. The relevance of her sexual history is that it could indicate …
/r/MensRights18/07/10 03:24 AM
3

what you are calling bias is actually professionalism. An investigation is supposed to consider all possibilities. Including that the complainant is a lying cunt. Sure, a polygraph is an intimidation tactic designed to trick liars. Their admission of lying is of pristine legal reliability. PH was commenting on a 2nd study by Kanin mentioned in the article, where a female investigator professionally determined a 50% admission of false statements from complainants. I attribute the higher lying cun…
/r/MensRights18/07/10 01:36 AM
3

There has been a couple of incidents past 2 days that throw an interesting light on rape lie apologists and deniers. First, I speculate that shrine effectively slipped that she has either personally falsely accused or encouraged someone else to make a baseless accusation with such a misandrist statement. The patriarchy must be brought down by fabricating rapists. Second, yesterday's slutshame OP, as I linked in that thread, was herself whoreshamed when she cried rape after being caught cheating …
/r/MensRights18/07/10 01:16 AM
2

there's a feminist push to make honor killings a special crime to deculturalize muslim and west asian immigrants. That is a response to a couple of incidents where men did the killing.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 10:58 PM
1

where does scorn for lying cunts = hating women? Its one thing to be misinformed and post ignorant propaganda clinging to misimpressions. Its a piece of shit that responds to a rebuke of your propaganda with this crap. Disingenuous cunt.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 10:36 PM
1

I'd be inclined to be suspicious of the article as well, but that suspicion was lost after reading the example news items.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 10:21 PM
1

apologies for not caring enough to follow your link. 42% police stupidity is still too much.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 09:21 PM
2

prosecuted means going to trial. convicted means guilty. shame on you for not being disgusted by the police abuse and stupidity that necessarily occurs 94% of the time.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 07:46 PM
5

Kanin's study has never been repudiated, and has been reproduced by other thorough investigation studies.. Feminist denials of it makes them a hate group. They then proceeded to evaluate each case using the official criteria for establishing a false allegation, which was that there must be either “a clear and credible admission by the complainant”4 or “strong evidential grounds” (Kelly, Lovett, & Regan, 2005). On the basis of this analysis, the percentage of false reports dropped to 2.5%. The re…
/r/MensRights17/07/10 07:30 PM
7

Even faced with a ludicrous accusation of rape that you can effectively prove false if only idiots will listen, virtually everyone would choose, if the option existed, to be raped in turn, and be sore a few days rather than face defending the accusation. Ending false rape accusations means ending the massive rape rate. False accusations exist because idiots want to believe lying cunts. Its an easy lie. A lie feminists encourage in grey areas. Ending false accusations only happens, and with compl…
/r/MensRights17/07/10 06:53 PM
3

41% source that is 41% or women rape complainants "admitting that no rape occurred." The 60% figure comes from an Air force study where even more persistent police investigation was done. Shame on you for supplorting lying cunts. all accusations deserve a thorough and professional investigation. before an arrest is made.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 06:14 PM
2

you improve the prosecution rate by prosecuting smartly. Aggressive screening of complaints before a decision to go to trial, instead of throwing up liars and weak cases to trials for the benefit of law society, and to the detriment of complainants.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 04:40 PM
1

Isn't a more important question: how big of an issue is rape You're comparing a vagina being used for intended purpose without its owners consent, and often without confrontation for fear of being actually abused, to an accusation that risks reputation and lengthy jail time, not to mention time, money, stress in fighting the accusation. Rape is a comparatively negligible harm to an accusation of rape.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 04:24 PM
2

absolutely the right decision. The current social environment makes no vulnerability in women or children worthy of intervening, and risking whatever intuition she uses to explain her life outcomes.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 02:37 PM
6

if you're a sex assault complainant ftfy
/r/MensRights17/07/10 02:31 PM
3

first, its a huge problem. 41% to 60% of properly investigated rape claims are proven false. Many other false claims are unproven. Denial of this exposes feminism as a social cancer and a hate group. Results of feminist lobbying (lower police/prosecution standards and insane resources given to them to support feminist agenda: pro-arrest/prosecution) since those studies have necessarily made the problem worse. Anonymity is a side issue, IMO. The deeper problem is taking women seriously without ev…
/r/MensRights17/07/10 02:26 PM
1

yes I need a hug. your bridge or mine?
/r/MensRights17/07/10 02:58 AM
0

I did go looking for answers to wtf is wrong with OP. Whole thread is getting downvoted for responding to her retarded bs
/r/MensRights17/07/10 02:58 AM
-1

actually, OP is a cunt that cries rape after her BF walks in on her claiming she was too afraid to say no or trying to leave. The problem she sees with slut shaming is that it forces her to account for infidelity, and so indirectly forces her to make a rape accusation.
/r/MensRights17/07/10 12:25 AM
-2

the opposite of slut shaming is slut encouragement. And a lack of discouragement is all that's needed to encourage natural impulses. A call to stop slut shaming is a call to parents to encourage daughters to sow wild oats. A call for boyfriends to encourage gf's to accept others advances. While virginity has no relevance to marriage prospects anymore, social groups that appreciate traditional sexual fidelity are completely entitled to shame those that don't conform.
/r/MensRights16/07/10 10:47 PM
-10

Even if slut shaming is a bad thing, it actually reduces frivolous and false rape claims. Speicifically the ones where the lie is about consent. With slut shame, the girl that denies consent but admits to going to his hotel room, and flirting/fondling STFUs about a rape allegation. Without slut shaming, she is perfectly willing to admit to slutty behaviour, to serve whatever vengence or accountability purposes of making the rape complaint. A key to reducing sexual assault complaints, and almost …
/r/MensRights16/07/10 10:18 PM
1

sueing people with money left over after paying lawyers is usually the only productive strategy. I think the government should have to claim that the prisoner chose to be in prison before it could claim the money though.
/r/MensRights15/07/10 12:15 PM
-2

You should treat everyone you know as if they are strangers. This is a ridiculous statement you make a good point relating to life strategy for maintaining strong relationship bonds, but an utterly and completely irrelevant point. I said the very obvious Adverse results of a fact based trial should weaken support groups/society's trust in the complainant with the caveat that support groups did not investigate, and lack facts the court considered. It is intellectual/rational weakness to seek clas…
/r/MensRights12/07/10 01:15 PM
-3

presumptive belief and comforting is the typical attitude friends and family ptu out towards a complainant. More often than not, questions they are afraid of what the answers could be are not asked. The belief is not based on facts but on loyalty. The trial process will have gone through those questions. Baseless accusations tend to be judged on who is most believable. A very sad risk for accused. There is no conviction when complainants are not believed by impartial people drawn from a heavily …
/r/MensRights12/07/10 01:41 AM
-6

loyalty > judgement.
/r/MensRights12/07/10 01:30 AM
-7

A lack of conviction doesn't prove she's lying. A normal person should suspect her of lying anyway. Reason for victim not to come forward on crap allegations. I agree complainants shouldn't be charged/convicted without proof of fabrications, but they should be charged for exaggerations they make.
/r/MensRights12/07/10 01:04 AM
-12

Getting a victim to come forward to the police when she has a very sketchy, unprovable, story and will be accused of lying by the accused if the police fails to, does the victim no favours. Her friends and family should suspect she's lying as well, if no conviction results. The sexual grievance industry has declared it a monstrous problem that some victims don't come forward, but there are entirely rational reasons not to. No one should ever influence a victim to come forward, and the practices …
/r/MensRights12/07/10 12:34 AM
1

I support the last paragraph in byline as written. It's a defendable opinion, and its stated as an opinion.
/r/MensRights11/07/10 09:37 PM
1

its not so tiny that you can't say 99% sure that the real number for that type of population is between 36%-46%. Its only worthless if you know that women where you want to measure them are completely different than those a midwest town. But the results have been confirmed twice in different populations. You're basically worthless for denying the obvious.
/r/MensRights11/07/10 12:30 PM
1

I don't know enough about the air force study to know if it involved military victims or accused, but it's not an unreasonable guess. Younger women are naturally more prone to lying, but also more prone to making rape complaints. Kanin is the best estimate for the general population barring new studies/information. The problems extrapolating are that the rest of the country is diverse, and there may be cultural differences, expectations of police gullibility, and so on. The basis for not extrapo…
/r/MensRights10/07/10 12:22 AM
1

the kanin number (linked) should be preferred over the FBI number because it controls investigation techniques to ensure they are challenging. You only find out liars by challenging them. The FBI number exposes the disgraceful and incompetent police investigations in this country. The sample size (especially of the 3 studies together) are actually adequate (sample sizes above 30 converge on population estimates slowly for each additional sample). Estimates from the Kanin study are at least the b…
/r/MensRights09/07/10 10:21 PM
1

not specific to first time complainants, but: 41% of properly investigated rape complaints are proven false. Take a conservative portion of the remaining 59%, to get at most. From the same link 50% of properly investigated rape claims in a college town are false, and an air force study found 60%. The average of the 3 also meets "most" criteria.
/r/MensRights09/07/10 08:49 PM
1

You're making counter-assumptions to probability. Accusations against family members are frequently delayed, and if so don't have any evidence. If there are witnesses or evidence, then these trials go very well for prosecutors. You're wrong in assuming there needs to be. It boils down entirely on whether complainant is more believable than accused in most cases, and prosecutors are comfortable rolling those dice. as far as complainants getting frequently laughed out of the police station, that's…
/r/MensRights09/07/10 02:17 AM
3

There should be a sexual complaint registry. You should avoid aid, comfort or relationships with its members. this poster thinks she has been raped twice. One of which is conscious memory of unconscious sex, with someone who she thinks should be murdered for his act, but wasn't causing enough discomfort for her to assert that he stop. Unacceptable levels of victimization are awarded by society to sexual assault complainants, and given that most first time complainants are lying, serial complaina…
/r/MensRights08/07/10 04:56 PM
13

There has been other reasearch in this area: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/94/3/A48-a A videotaped doctors exam made professionals interviewing the child conclude that 70% of the time, there was sexual abuse of the child despite the video proving there was none. What's exceptional about this (submitted) specific research is that they strongly controlled for interviewer bias in how they asked questions, and just focused on kids having no reliability whatsoever. But co…
/r/MensRights04/07/10 11:40 PM
0

my post was deleted? The proper response to any rape claim, is to make the complainant prove she was raped, and is not avoiding accountability for her poor character and behaviour. Over half of rape claims are false, and false rape claims are far more harmful to the accused victim than rape. By suggesting that a complainant should be treated as if she was victimized, you empower vile criminal filth to continue their predatory manipulative ways, and perpetuate the victimization of those that give…
/r/MensRights29/06/10 10:51 PM
1

The proper response to any rape claim, is to make the complainant prove she was raped, and is not avoiding accountability for her poor character and behaviour. Over half of rape claims are false, and false rape claims are far more harmful to the accused victim than rape. By suggesting that a complainant should be treated as if she was victimized, you empower vile criminal filth to continue their predatory manipulative ways, and perpetuate the victimization of those that give the manipulative fil…
/r/MensRights29/06/10 02:58 PM
0

there is no market for this device, though it makes the news once (now twice) per year. Had not been field tested 3 months ago. There is no woman, no matter how paranoid, who would buy and wear this instead of avoiding situations where fear of rape exists. This is a fantasy chastity device you want to impose on your daughters and sisters.
/r/MensRights21/06/10 05:27 PM
1

my guess is that police maybe misunderstand the law, and side with women in vague situations, rather than the law says "it is a DV crime if...[one of the above]" is alleged/committed
/r/MensRights20/06/10 03:30 AM
4

Definitions of violence include calling your partner a naughty word, raising your voice, causing "annoyance" or "emotional distress," or just not doing what your partner wants. is there a source for that?
/r/MensRights19/06/10 06:51 PM
5

I wonder if that reporter has ever repeated that 1 in 4 women are raped. Not only is that statistic based on self reported answers, but the self reported opinion is actually ignored, and expanded with such questions as "did you ever have sex with someone you didn't want to because of drugs or alcohol"
/r/MensRights18/06/10 06:56 PM
1

that's offensive. Even if all men should know they are pedophiles until proven innocent, 14 year olds should have the benefit of the doubt that they are too young to have learned that.
/r/MensRights18/06/10 12:54 AM
12

Frivolous rape claims are as bad as intentionally false rape claims. The police fill in the details in frivolous claims to satisfy persecutory politics that fit feminist hatemonger agenda. Its hate speech, even if its politically correct and fashionable. Women make frivolous abuse claims because feminists exaggerate the problem. They are doing it to save other women, because they are told other women need saving, and aren't comming forward. You probably have regrets regarding your first car purc…
/r/MensRights06/06/10 06:27 PM
1

no idea what you're talking about. (haven'r read comments in a while here) i have a lot of respect for both tomek and ignatius.
/r/MensRights06/06/10 04:33 PM
4

Apologize to her. She must be right again.
/r/MensRights01/06/10 02:45 AM
0

until society discourages young women from escaping accountability by making serious allegations, or at least doesn't bend over backwards to involve police and prosecutors, then it's an unfortunate ticking time bomb. probably safer in mexico.
/r/MensRights01/06/10 12:00 AM
1

until society discourages young women from escaping accountability by making serious allegations, or at least doesn't bend over backwards to involve police and prosecutors, then it's an unfortunate ticking time bomb. probably safer in mexico.
/r/MensRights31/05/10 11:59 PM
1

if you search for "men's rights movement" or "men's rights movement issues" you get a "did you mean women's ....", but at least you see search results you were looking for.
/r/MensRights31/05/10 10:27 PM
1

the correlation is pretty strong including regional internet penetration correlationg with regional rape statistics. http://www.impactlab.com/2008/01/06/internet-porn-shown-to-decrease-incidence-of-rape/ David Westerfield Some of the computers and loose computer media in Westerfield's office contained pornography. His attorneys, however, claimed that police once reported not finding child pornography.[13] According to the prosecution computer expert, James Watkins, 100,000 images were found, inc…
/r/MensRights18/05/10 12:56 PM
2

Because the fucking children are still real in the fucking movies. Firstly, go fuck yourself. You shit eating child rapist. Kids who are filmed in sex acts would still have had those sex acts or comparable ones inflicted on them without the camera. Society confuses disgusting behaviour that should rightfully be discouraged with evil that causes harm and trauma which needs to be punished. Some prison time for viewing a picture might be arguably justified. Histeria that it deserves longer sentence…
/r/MensRights18/05/10 12:38 PM
11

What is sick is that they applied this to people possessing child porn. The argument that consuming child porn causes child abuse is a false one. It only causes the videotaping of child abuse. It is inherently a (relatively) victimless crime. 39 months jail for possessing videos is pretty harsh as it is. The offender understands the state is serious about punishing such conduct. Even if you can prove the offender gets aroused when you show him child porn, that doesn't prove that he wants to risk…
/r/MensRights17/05/10 09:09 PM
0

i gave example already, but yes slap on the butt if you want.
/r/MensRights17/05/10 05:40 PM
0

A lot of technical rape and sexual assaults cause no harm or trauma whatsoever. "oh that offended you? im sorry, may I buy you an ice cream" could be a reasonable problem resolution for some offenses that technically violate the law. Harm and trauma is reason to go to a DV shelter or lay DV charges, or to just fucking leave as an adult human should be trusted as responsible enough to choose.
/r/MensRights17/05/10 05:32 PM
-2

i did, but with the rise in funding for special DV police and prosecutor units with not enough crime in the area, then example bullshit they are motivated to prosecute: wife agrees to let husband have 5 minutes. After 5 minutes wife withdraws consent, but husband thinks she's joking. Some years later during divorce proceedings, lays a rape charge over incident. Forcible confinement and battery are already crimes. If some serious spousal abuse occurred, there exist appropriate criminal charges.
/r/MensRights17/05/10 01:03 PM
-5

every single high rated post in this thread has nothing to do with the connection between slut-shaming and false rape accusations, which is the topic we are being trolled on. so nice job going around upvoting everything that says slut shaming = bad.
/r/MensRights16/05/10 08:49 PM
-9

To me, it sounds like she might be offended that he thrust faster than the setting she would pick on the man dial, rather than a crime that deserves to ruin his life, and may put him in jail for years. When you heard stories about him, were they of raping others or beiing an asshole? Is there a chance to leap easily from concluding he's an asshole to a rapist? Your account is girlfriend rape rather than acquaintance rape. Wife rape was considered impossible a few years ago, and while viscious vi…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 05:06 PM
-8

Why TF should you have told someone???? A 3rd reason to lie about rape is to ellicit support. But this story has accountability issues as well. Consent is prone to revisionist mental processes. Whether you believe her or not, why would you ever be so sure of yourself as to go against her wishes? Apparent psychological trauma is usually part of the lie, but can also be self-inflicted/amplified through revisionist self-convincing.
/r/MensRights16/05/10 01:55 PM
-7

Actually, I would say that society values chastity much less than it once did. Perhaps even not at all. What percent of men expect prospective gfs to be virgins or to have never been touched by semen? After a fairly young age, practically none, afaik. Because chastity isn't important anymore, then the worst case scenario for claiming rape, and not being believed, is that it makes your sexuality a little more explicit than you'd prefer, but no one in the west is not going to marry you over it. Es…
/r/MensRights16/05/10 12:56 PM
1

You can try proposing a room and board arrangement, but its unlikely to be well received.
/r/MensRights15/05/10 06:37 PM
7

Should you not be shaming these individuals to try and delineate men who do not rape from those who do? shame those accused of rape???? Then determine who deserves the accusation and who doesn't?
/r/MensRights14/05/10 01:14 PM
1

it's normal for people not to know/understand the specific legal charges against a friend. He was probably initially charged with rape, but the evidence didn't prove that so he was convicted for "being in the room". That would explain why they don't care about the DNA. He could be likely innocent of rape, and maybe innocent of any other crime. It can make sense without you understanding it. Publicity could affect his safety, and he mentioned that he doesn't know of any media coverage anyway.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 12:47 PM
1

usually when someone close tells you of an assault, she's describing something in the distant past. If an incident just happened, there's usually more cues to believe or tell if it's real.
/r/MensRights14/05/10 12:31 PM
1

Find out why she is telling you. ask the questions necessary for you to know if its true, if its important whether or not you believe her. If its not important for you to know the truth, and just want to be supportive, then I have great news. I am pregnant and you are the father. I have a child support figure in mind, but we can just discuss that in court if you don't have time at the moment.
/r/MensRights13/05/10 10:12 PM
4

the trial continues ?
/r/MensRights13/05/10 06:07 PM
4

If the 2% false rape claim myth is based on charges or convictions, then 0.0000001% of population engage in sodomy? (rates are based on political motivation to prosecute) The damage that the 1/4 raped myth or 1/3 sexually assaulted myth causes is that women who are not raped or assaulted are compelled to come forward anyways in order to support the silent phantom sisterhood that is being raped/assaulted. The Elon representative in your article with her extremist definition of rape understands th…
/r/MensRights13/05/10 04:52 PM
1

This is a good proposal. Another canadian legal change that should be done is to recognize the concept of imperfect consent. (currently defined as yes and not yes). The old definition of implied consent was better overall, but there has to be a new class of crime that is a lesser crime if implied consent (assertive no or attempting to leave was not done), or at least shift responsibility from "any claim of perceived discomfort" is valid to is there a possibility that actor "thought act was appro…
/r/MensRights12/05/10 02:46 PM
0

that was your 2nd point which I was conceding. Still a civic duty to inflict pre-emptive violence. There are evidence rapes, where semen, injuries torn clothes... I'd be curious to know what percentage of rape complaints (police) are that stereotypical forced violence requiring hospitalization the word rape primarily conjures. I'd guess it's a large minority. When we're talking about grayer rapes, it's possible for the sisterhood's duty to discourage discourteous male behaviour to be more promin…
/r/MensRights09/05/10 01:49 AM
3

"Your honor, I told her she could get punched in the face or fucked, and she chose fucking... so these rape charges are BS."
/r/MensRights09/05/10 12:03 AM
0

your second point is a fair bracket to mine. But to the first, the only reason for an assault victim to go to the police is to inflict the full violence the justice system can on the accused. It is legal violence, but that is what it is, and society accepts that such violence is legitimate. That violence is much preferable to vigilante vengence, because it can pretend to consider due process in determining whether it is deserved. There is no reason other than the infliction of violence on the ac…
/r/MensRights09/05/10 12:00 AM
9

its considered a mental health issue for women. Instead of a crime.
/r/MensRights08/05/10 09:30 PM
1

Facing charges for a false allegation that I could prove false after a 2-5 year trial process, and so hope that I would be found not guilty, I would choose as an option if available to be raped in the ass assuming my bum would hurt for 2-5 days, but then could go on with my life.
/r/MensRights08/05/10 09:28 PM
-1

That men's denials aren't believed, we all agree is a problem. I agree that its a bigger problem than rape victims not being believed. Mostly, because the consequence of the justice system disbelieving a rape victim only denies her vengeful hatred opportunity, while men's liberty, career, and happiness are denied. The real problem is that anyone can put someone else in jail, if they are believed, without any evidence, and often when their story isn't that spectacularly well thought out and expre…
/r/MensRights08/05/10 09:14 PM
1

from the cabbie stories, asking for $15 fare up front, or asking them not to smoke because he could be fined, is worthy of a rape allegation retaliation.
/r/MensRights30/04/10 03:08 AM
1

the story is made up, but a good hypothetical. He doesn't owe her anything. He's a jerk. That's still not deserving of a rape accusation. Its debatable that most "rape" is deserving of a rape accusation (not an easy argument), but it should still be a requirement.
/r/MensRights30/04/10 03:05 AM
1

well put, the golf study was interesting. Another bit from that study is that Kerry states had a narrower difference in distance than Bush states in 2004. I wonder if they are measuring the difference in tees from white to red. Study said it was 50 yards on average. In Ontario, I'd say the average is closer to 30 yards.
/r/MensRights29/04/10 04:38 PM
8

bitches are entitled not to have to pay cab fare http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/05/20/9510021-sun.html In canada, of course, they don't bother to charge the drunk pigs even when they have video proof of a lie. Amazingly, crying sex abuse is normal enough to do in front of your 3 girlfriends, and expect them to go along with the lie.
/r/MensRights29/04/10 01:59 AM
-2

It's possible this is an appropriate sentence? I read elsewhere that husband got away in altercation. Is it possible that this was a painful practical joke in poor taste instead of an attempt to crack his skull open?
/r/MensRights26/04/10 01:57 PM
1

thanks for link I'm not sure male studies is what I'd hope it would be, but men's studies: this denial "rejected the tenet that men's studies must be guided exclusively by feminist principles" pretty much proves where it comes from, but this helps too: "AMSA’s origins started in the National Organization for Changing Men"
/r/MensRights26/04/10 04:13 AM
4

interesting. You probably know that social policy is to reinforce whoever the mother would prefer the father to be. The moral choice is considered to help lie to the named dad under the preference that the child receives financial support from him. Hospitals/gynegologists view the mother as the customer. Courts in canada allow mothers to collect child support from every man who has "acted" (father, duped father, all step fathers) as parent to the child... Yes. simultaneously. I don't understand …
/r/MensRights25/04/10 11:26 PM
1

the way we rationalize everything. Foremost, we would like the convenience of choice. next we argue: male masturbation and female menstruation aren't murder even if they destroy babby batter. Some cutoff has to be determined. Picking a term where there is a possibility of living outside the womb seems appropriate to me. But then, where the life of the mother would be in danger, there would be no way of deciding which life is more important, so until birth, a foetus is less than a life. We should…
/r/MensRights25/04/10 09:59 PM
1

I will see offensive things too. It's their right to offend me. It's too high a bar to try and find media misandry that is so pervasive you will be able to make a conclusion about anything but the author.
/r/MensRights25/04/10 09:06 PM
1

/makes you take one. :P most births are chosen because the parents make promises to each other. The traditional promises place unreasonable support obligations on the father due to support awards based on his highest potential earnings rather than actual earnings.
/r/MensRights25/04/10 08:56 PM
3

can you get out of the fee if you claim you witnessed the child eat shellfish?
/r/MensRights25/04/10 07:10 PM
1

great post. For reasons you stated, #2 will never be effective. It should always be fair for the media to highlight or portray a slut or douchebag whether or not they exist. There shouldn't be a political correctness mandate on all media portrayals.
/r/MensRights25/04/10 06:46 PM
1

I mostly want the right of a prenuptial agreement to predetermine first right of custody to one partner. The scheme I mentioned above, can be negotiated without the courts. But one, I'm not sure such a contract is legal (recognized as enforceable) if it includes no post maternity rights to the mother, and two, it would be useful for courts to arbitrate any irreconcilable differences in the contract. As far as fathers rights to the unborn, a common argument for insisting on father's duty to suppo…
/r/MensRights25/04/10 05:37 PM
5

IMO equality feminists are socialists equality of opportunity is different than equality of outcomes. There is feminist crap complaining about pay gaps which is misleading, but don't think its fair to say for most the primary motive isn't equality of opportunity.
/r/MensRights25/04/10 04:15 PM
6

Even if its a lot closer to murder than not murder, I've always supported the dominnant feminist message for the right to choose, including adequate services to provide abortions. The anti-rights argument is dismissed as would you prefer your daughters shove coat hangers up their twat? The one MR objection I respect, is that those rights forbid men who would like to keep the child from having a relevant voice. My solution for that would be to allow fathers to apply to court to pay half the mothe…
/r/MensRights25/04/10 03:10 PM
2

it doesn't match the 12x figure... if 32% of dads don't pay (seems incredibly high), then there's no way it could be 12x. To match your article's stats, deadbeat dads would have to be in the 3-5% range.
/r/MensRights24/04/10 10:27 PM
1

Deadbeat Mom” as a percentage outnumber “deadbeat dad” something along the lines of 12:1 I assume that is saying that when custody is awarded to father, the mother is 12x more likely to fail to pay child support? Does it include as deadbeats when no child support is awarded? - source for statistic?
/r/MensRights24/04/10 10:06 PM
3

You framed this as libertarian vs socialism. Its a wrong framing, IMO. Its fair to compare feminists to white supremacists or AIPAC in that they will/are lobbying for as many rights/gains as they can. On the issue of sex relations/crimes, they argue strongly against personal responsibility of the female, and blame men for all dissapointments. I don't see your point with the rest of the headline, and I assume you're trying to target tax and spend liberals by trying to make an association.
/r/MensRights24/04/10 09:52 PM
2

There's nothing in the piece that suggests to me she wasn't raped. I would guess she was. In the last paragraph, she appears to ascribe motives to her rapist that he raped her because he thought women were oppressing him. Basically, then trying to convince him that he's wrong. Is this based on a simplistic generalization that rapists hate women and need to punish them? If so, and even if partially true, its a massive stretch to explain where that hate came from.
/r/MensRights24/04/10 09:13 PM
3

From the example questions you mentioned, there is a simple explanation for why misandrists would score less hateful than non feminist women. Feminists are more likely to be exposed to gender issues from misandrist sources. That rhethoric includes "its not man hating that [insert misandrist statement]" and "feminism strives for equality not superiority". So there is an ingrained defensiveness to deny stereotypes, to recognize them as ugly admissions to avoid, and give the "right"/PC answers inst…
/r/MensRights23/04/10 04:27 AM
2

date rapes can still be violent/coercive. The victim can be trying to get away/fight back/crying to stop. What is a non-crime IMO, or at least a trivial if any, is if there is fucking or other sex play but something coincidentally offensive such as a finger up the butt, verbal disrespect, or some other event that made the sex not meet expectations. Yes, ideal relations has both partners communicating that every action is being well received in a caring and considerate manner, but if the encounte…
/r/MensRights23/04/10 03:32 AM
-3

The fact that I have "discomfort with the role" I was born into does not make me misandrist. We know you're not. But the sheeple would presume that a man is unlikely to be misandrist. That's what would make him an effective misandrist spokesperson. I don't think its transphobic to be upset at the propaganda tool that is abusing the use of a secretly trans spokesperson. I don't know that you are arguing that she is not misandrist. I'll listen if you think she's not. The organization she speaks fo…
/r/MensRights22/04/10 05:52 PM
2

If you follow links to NOMAS from kloo2, I understand he's a spokesman/speaker for their events. That comes close to dismissing his opinion on its own. Being a man gives credibility to feminist opinions, the same way that being spoken by a woman would heighten the credibility of any opinion on women. If you learn that the leading authority on negroes got his fame and annointment by leading "blacks against crime/gang violence" conferences that were sponsored by the KKK, and learn that he's underg…
/r/MensRights22/04/10 05:14 PM
9

he got what he deserved for not cuddling afterwards ftfy
/r/MensRights22/04/10 04:02 PM
10

tldr summary: It appears as though she was convinced to have sex, then later regretted it. I applaud the prosecutors for dropping the case. One issue that bothers me is the innadequacy of the law. There can be technical rape that causes no trauma, or expectation of trauma, to the victim. Or more specifically less or equal trauma that would be experienced, whether or not there was sex, if she was told to get her skank ass the fuck out of his room. Rape laws were designed in a time where chastity …
/r/MensRights22/04/10 04:02 PM
7

penis cut off is a bit more wtf than has a sex change. To be annointed the leading expert on masculinity, is presumably annointed by feminists. Men would tend to be unaware of the need for a spokesman, much less the conference they should attend to adulate such a spokesman. Masculinity is a women's studies topic. Even when its renamed gender studies, its still feminist studies with relatively exclusively female students. Feminists shouldn't be telling us what masculinity is. Apparently they have…
/r/MensRights22/04/10 03:11 PM
1

in terms of advice, you don't want protracted litigation, so its about negotiating a better settlement? or should he give her everything and run from the psycho? I can't say that threatening her with the potential of losing custody because she's a manipulative psycho with a criminal record who is manipulating her children will get him a better settlement. There was a media post here fairly recently how custody was given to father due to poisoning by mother.
/r/MensRights21/04/10 11:32 PM
4

its a dam good point that people are less likely to intervene/tackle if two hot chicks are crushing a skull open, then if it was a man on woman violence. I suspect the police would be likely to charge the rescuer if stopping the murder caused any discomfort to the women.
/r/MensRights21/04/10 08:50 PM
4

I didn't read that. He got knocked down by a man, then murdered when he was unconscious.
/r/MensRights21/04/10 08:38 PM
1

The police in the US may be much better than in Canada. You at least hear of false rape complaints in the US. Canadian police use a note taking approach to hearing sexual assault complaints, and let the courts figure it out. Victims of abuse are given a horrible disservice. A complainant is either a sub human lying piece of shit, or a victim that has experienced trauma and deserving support. The problem with the legal system is that often not enough consideration is given to the former possibili…
/r/MensRights21/04/10 08:16 PM
11

A common source of police false rape complaints (maybe even most common) is to explain infidelity. A lot probably start with reporting to bf, and then bf pressuring her to go to police. given that 50% of college age rape complaints and 43% of general rape complaints are false , statistically, if your gf tells you she was raped, in a way to would excuse her for something, she is more likely than not lying to you
/r/MensRights21/04/10 04:57 PM
1

this story is misleading. This is a union contract negotiation, not a government service. Not legislation. Your rant makes similar mistakes to suggested headline. Against you also though, I doubt union members need proof of DV to take advantage, just an accusation of it. There is recognized legal recognition of victims, and services for them, legislated throughout all english speaking developed countries. The UK, has a very generous government DV accuser compensation fund, which has factored in …
/r/MensRights21/04/10 04:23 PM
2

looks like this links to a front page that doesn't appear to have the story you are refering to visible atm. Is there a better link?
/r/MensRights21/04/10 03:48 PM
1

would MRA's do a b or c? Is the premise is that men would be the ones most harmed by the hypothetical? Or just that there would exist an important issue that all other social issues in the world (or just the feminist ones) must be ignored? There is no obvious point behind the question, though you may actually have one, if you just referred to a problem with specific feminist issue(s)
/r/MensRights20/04/10 01:46 PM
1

I wtf'd on the commercial before the video. "This pen packs a mighty wallop..." followed by stabbing motion. I understand the reaction is an oversensitive one, but its still an insensitive commercial placement.
/r/MensRights20/04/10 01:27 PM
4

leniency is not in their interests. They have special task force departments who are funded just for this and DV. Justification of budgets is based on arrests. Arresting child pornographers sounds like the police are doing their job. Interesting commonality in such cases (as it appears somewhat superficially to me) is that they all involve downloads. I expect that the reason is that prosecutors have to prove that you intentionally accessed it, and IP is not good enough to identify you. I've hear…
/r/MensRights20/04/10 02:35 AM
0

I agree for "regular dates" First, the part that jumped out at me is that she feels better than all of the whores that do this, because she knows her date. The assumption is that he is her boyfriend or otherwise paying for this because she's an amazing person. This is an elaborate date. The expectations seem normal. Women are of course allowed to accept the date, but not sleep with him, but college social circle, and expectations, are such that she is allowed to be branded "useless". The traditi…
/r/MensRights19/04/10 11:32 PM
6

you're paying for the promise of sex too.
/r/MensRights19/04/10 09:18 PM
9

its actually a partial explanation. Part of their training is feminist courses that explain why all men are guilty.
/r/MensRights19/04/10 04:44 PM
8

Good piece, Pierce The historical pattern of women being sluttier drunk than sober, and disapproving when sober of their drunk behaviour, should give grounds for reasonable doubt on its own, especially when there is no evidence. (I don't know facts of this specific case) EDIT: if we allow stereotypes/historical patterns to presume guilt, we should allow them to presume innocense. It is evil to submit an accused to trial, for any reason other than you can prove he's guilty. Its can't be about cor…
/r/MensRights19/04/10 03:15 PM
1

collective liberty is simply the sum of individual liberties. when you oppress based on gender or race, for example presuming a group is abusive, then assuming an individual of that group is abusive without any evidence, infringes on the collective right to liberty/due process. If it can happen to him it can happen to you. where we agree is that individuals rights to pursue liberty are essential/beneficial to society. Collective liberty is the sum of individual liberties, and simply recognizes t…
/r/MensRights19/04/10 12:48 PM
1

its possibly a more dangerous thought than you think. murder is wrong because of social priority. Children the only real value we create. To place individual rights above societal good is to say a child need not be fed unless it can threaten to kill you. My point though is that you don't need to cry that unjust laws are trying to put social benefit over individual liberty. Unjust laws hurt society by infringing on collective liberty. Oppression of men is not going to make them supportive of marr…
/r/MensRights19/04/10 10:16 AM
1

I would because you can hold them to their ideals. feminists will tell other women that they deserve to get every penny they can from the implied abusive child molester they tell her to leave, but they are more likely to internalize that they are independent human beings capable of entering contracts/agreement that does not presume their future dependence on a man. edit: i'll let you know how that is workin out for me.
/r/MensRights18/04/10 05:09 PM
1

I disagree that the good of society, including love and children need to be secondary to personal autonomy. However, a legal framework that favours one gender over the other hurts society, by discouraging family units, and the supporting of existing children (single mothers). Even if most of the population is stupid and ignorant, the disadvantaged gender victims do eventually clarify the disadvantage to the others. Chivalry, or weighing the pain of women as greater than the pain of men, is insti…
/r/MensRights18/04/10 04:48 PM
2

i will love you always, storyofit all. I promise. Why do we have to get married? marriage is about the legal framework behind that promise. I think that marriage can be whatever the two people involved believe it should be. Stay-at-home dads, working moms, separate bedrooms, open relationships. But divorce laws are laws...and sometimes they are the cause of a lot of additional pain in what is already a hard decision. ... the legal framework for when it ends. There's no legal framework/concerns f…
/r/MensRights18/04/10 02:44 PM
3

There are other institutional arrangements prostitution - has the legal advantage that both are in criminal jeopardy. maid/employee - legal disadvantage of sexual harrassment law. Partner can blackmail you that she was a helpless slave forced into demeaning behaviour. cohabitation agreement/room rental. - sexual harrassment liability again for room rental. cohabitation agreement can be interpreted as common law by courts if monogamous conjugal relationship. separate official residence - basicall…
/r/MensRights18/04/10 02:38 PM
-1

its not puritanism. Its the current state of "gender equality".
/r/MensRights18/04/10 01:41 PM
0

Don't make Judith take away your masturbation priviledges. (--saving silverman)
/r/MensRights18/04/10 01:41 PM
2

according to wikipedia, no. it absolves the male of any responsibility for the woman, but he is responsible for children.
/r/MensRights18/04/10 01:09 PM
1

50% of people who marry. 70% of marriages. quiz after school on what explains the difference.
/r/MensRights18/04/10 12:54 PM
1

Not sure there is an actionable point in there. Advice for women on how to be happy? I don't believe eliminating emancipation will be greeted enthusiastically by women. I don't resent misandrists for imposing/requesting emancipation of women. emancipation is simply not the cause of any social tension, IMO One issue the author might be touching is whether women are happier in mini skirts than burkas (or veils). Our opinions for other societies are worthless, but even so, the act of women voting b…
/r/MensRights17/04/10 04:54 PM
1

Police (actually its apparently some grand jury) did their job mostly. Applaud them for that. Sad outcome of course. Some false allegations are in large part the fault of the police wanting to interpret a crime, or wanting to interpret who can be arrested. There is apparently no law/regulation for informing the accused a case has been dropped :( The law has to be revised such that sexual crime accusations recognize that the victim may be the accused, and investigate accordingly.
/r/MensRights16/04/10 08:56 PM
1

speak to mr hansen for signing up, guys :(
/r/MensRights13/04/10 12:31 AM
4

This is a good question for the submitter. Hard to understand why he submitted this. A spouse that spends all of your money, and doesn't bring any in, is going to suck. Having a bigger place than you need alone costs more. Kids of course. But it doesn't take very much extra spousal income to pay for the extra. the submitter might be trying to ask how much poorer are you because of divorce than if you had remained single, but who knows.
/r/MensRights10/04/10 12:44 AM
7

the 2nd one seemed worse in details... 5 seconds. There is a defense of automatism which argues for reflexive action without intent. 5 seconds is about the time it takes to read facial expression to see if she is serious or not in wanting to stop, and the case clearly shows that he stopped when he understood she said/meant no. At this rate, society is going to progress to women begging men to sleep with, or allow themselves being alone with, them.
/r/MensRights06/04/10 03:15 PM
1

She should be given a double mastectomy and hystorectomy, without appeal, for promoting hate crimes.
/r/MensRights05/04/10 01:22 PM
2

there's a lot of child deaths that happen because kids are left alone for a few minutes. Parents are WARNED never to do that. So if you are headline hunting, you could point to harsh sentences for mothers in those circumstances.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 12:55 AM
1

a good analogy is a pitbull. experts/paranoids will say don't leave it alone with a child. Its a simplistic generality. The pitbull owner may see it is apparently friendly, and notice that it's not aggressive with the child. 5 seconds to go to the kitchen doesn't lead to dead child. 30 seconds to go to the bathroom, no dead child. Its probably ok to leave it alone longer... experts will simplistically tell you that you will die if you go swimming after eating.
/r/MensRights03/04/10 12:49 AM
4

if the genders were reversed, someone would consider the possibility that the mother has suffered enough as a result of her child being dead. The judge's comments seem disturbing. "He's a narcissistic prick who doesn't show remorse". Its a normal defense to think you didn't do anything illegal in this situation. regardless of what clinical diagnosis your wife has, no one can possibly presume that your judgement that she probably won't kill her child if you leave her alone with it for a few momen…
/r/MensRights03/04/10 12:36 AM
1

bites.... "WIIFM?"?
/r/MensRights31/03/10 06:27 PM
1

Your first paragraph is especially astute at the political level. portrayed pro rapist and anti mother legislation will motivate a large voting block it is a crappy article. Mens rights is like womens' rights (or what it should be). Removing oppression. Not a desire to return to traditionalist roles.
/r/MensRights31/03/10 06:19 PM
-6

Specifically, the article is saying our benevolent insurance overlords will be forced to rape young men with higher premiums than they need to be profitable, because they will be regulated in the difference they are allowed to charge older, prone to be sick, people.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 05:44 PM
2

young males will typically choose to pay the tax penalty instead of getting insurance then. $3000-$5000/year is way more than expected medical payments should be for a man in his 20s.
/r/MensRights30/03/10 05:38 PM
4

The judge might sensibly understand that having porn on your computer doesn't mean you are likely to act out on any of it, much less abuse your children. I can presume you get gratification from money, but why should I presume you would risk getting caught robbing a bank? or if your children were banktellers there, harm them to get the gratification?
/r/MensRights29/03/10 06:35 PM
4

having 2 of them and an adult there is protection for him too. He's in a situation where any allegation would have a high degree of presumptive belief, even if that appears to apply to all men.
/r/MensRights29/03/10 06:14 PM
1

Actually, there is no real prediction of behaviour in divorce. Someone may be reasonable in one situation, but can also be stubborn, and not realize their actions are emotionally abusive, and not be understanding that you prefer to seperate rather than continue to put up with her. Although beyond reasonableness, your criteria for looking at past relationships would have helped me. If she victimizes herself, even if it appears entirely rational by her one sided version of events, it's likely/poss…
/r/MensRights27/03/10 05:11 PM
2

Do not categorise all women as evil, manipulative people who will take you for all you're worth. I can tell you right now, if I met a guy who believed that, that would be the end of that relationship. if they believed all women (presumably other than you) were evil or manipulative? or did you mean something about diamonds? If you are good, rejecting someone because he thinks you are better than most is woody allen behaviour.
/r/MensRights27/03/10 05:10 PM
1

no upvote because of lack of reference/focus on appalachian trail :P
/r/MensRights27/03/10 12:21 PM
10

the episode does a good job pointing out the falacious stereotype. its a pretty clear case of harrassment where the victim's job is threatened and he is forced to engage in demeaning duties.
/r/MensRights22/03/10 02:41 PM
2

http://www.anandaanswers.com/pages/naaFalse.html
/r/MensRights16/03/10 07:54 PM
4

reform of rape laws is needed. But this is the wrong direction. Police, prosecutors and juries must take a foremost awareness that young women may be manipulative, and that presumptive belief in complainants facilitates false accusations. So does cash rewards for accusations. In the only scientific studies of rape allegations, close to 50% are proven false when the police investigates thoroughly (where false = complainant recanting). The proposed reforms want to prevent police from questioning t…
/r/MensRights15/03/10 01:58 PM
11

irony mode: yeah the slut asked for it (slut = OP) To the OP, I noticed you f'n left out how unbuttoned your manwhore skanky shirt was. If you dress and act like a piece of meat whose only use is to be sexed up, then stfu and take it you stupid manbitch
/r/MensRights20/02/10 01:10 PM
5

its pretty ugly stuff. I think its unfair to call him MRA, and so don't like headline, even if him going to jail could cause problems for MRAs fighting injustice.
/r/MensRights03/02/10 05:22 PM
2

I'm not sure your examples favour women more than men. It bothers me when this subredit starts advocating throwing the accused in jail because they are accused, when if any one should be sensitive of overly eager and oppressive imprisonment, it should be MRA.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 11:16 PM
-5

its as unfair to complain that she is released without bail or not jailed prior to trial, as it is to complain when men accused of DV are not immidiately jailed.
/r/MensRights13/01/10 03:29 PM
1

to correct what I said... You continue to pay the same child support payments you did before the child was 18 if they continue on to university.
/r/MensRights08/01/10 08:25 PM
0

that's been the law in canada or ontario for a while
/r/MensRights08/01/10 04:03 PM
3

Society cannot function with men in fear of abuse by women through divorce, dv and sexual crime laws. While, an oppressive environment for women is undersirable and unfortunate, society has functioned under such oppression. Women can choose suffering in a dependent relationship. Men cannot rationally decide to pursue an oppressive social contract, and should not risk sexual assault allegations by interacting with women and children. Women seeking the power to "rape" men is as offensive and damag…
/r/MensRights03/01/10 12:41 AM
2

booo
/r/MensRights15/11/09 12:47 PM
2

There were matriarchal societies (don't make me research it :P). Maybe, failure to euthanize most of the males, led to the violent overthrow.
/r/MensRights12/11/09 12:30 AM
1

maybe, but where that does/has existed there was a cultural framework that still made women value marriage over celibacy. im not advocating male supremacy, but society would function better under that model than a female supremacist one. The lion pride model, for instance has male's sole function to protect the pride from other males.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 10:29 PM
1

the spirit of gender equality issues/laws is not one of female superiority laws. The movement towards female superiority damages society more than one of male superiority (even if that is objectionable too) because it makes women undesirable partners to men, or potential victimizers that men should fear.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 07:09 PM
1

The alternative is to ask the details that would prove sexual assault rather than accept vague implications of one, and follow up on inconsistencies and contradictory statements prior to bringing the matter to a trial. Its possible to politely listen and discuss a matter with a presumed liar.
/r/MensRights11/11/09 06:34 PM
1

There are legitimate reasons for a complainant not wanting a trial: she thinks its a personal matter, she forgives him, fears she might not be believed, the police/prosecutors are complete idiots who have severely exaggerated the incident, and the accused does not deserve the punishment. All of those are completely legitimate, and no one should dare impose their reasons for a trial above the alleged victim's reasons against it. Most importantly, the possibility that she lied or exaggerated a sto…
/r/MensRights11/11/09 06:25 PM
1

I'm not trying to excuse sexual assault. But in cases with young children there is by necessity some leading questions, and I've seen normal healthy play lead to arrest because of incidental chest contact, and presumptive belief by the interviewer that a crime occurred. That Children want to complain against someone they feel did something wrong, doesn't mean that the parts they complain about are a crime, and the parts they exaggerate and lie about are true. There can be lots of details in the …
/r/MensRights11/11/09 01:53 AM
1

I believe strongly that if an alleged victim does not want to cause the consequences of a trial to her alleged abuser, then it is a mistake to encourage her to. Even if you feel this pressure on her is supportive, it's not. Not to imply her case, her suffering, or your sympathy isn't genuine, but pushing her to cause a trial is pushing her to prove it happened (to you). No genuine mental healing occurs if successful, and risk of severe emotional hardship from the process alone, and from failure.…
/r/MensRights11/11/09 01:17 AM
1

I say all of this because, too many times, I see abused children who have given me detailed accounts, yet they end up in the same home because there was no 'clear cut evidence' of the abuse Knowing about the Rosenthal effect doesn't seem to affect the accuracy of these experts. I'm not sure about details being the magical ingredient that makes something true... Here's a weird case where someone was found guilty, http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2007/2007oncj495/2007oncj495.html Basically, 2 …
/r/MensRights11/11/09 12:54 AM
6

I see this as showing the danger that occurs when a police or social worker takes an attitude of presumptive belief in the complainant. The interview is distorted by both parties wanting to believe the same thing. from that book link I provided: An Interviewer who has strong feelings about what happened can influence a child to report events that did not occur. (Ceci and Bruck 1992) called Rosenthal Effect. Also shown that people: 1. form judgements extremely quickly, 2. attend and interpret inf…
/r/MensRights10/11/09 11:40 PM
4

this book has more details http://books.google.ca/books?id=BggJjhbBJzwC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=Allegations+of+Sexual+Abuse+When+Parents+Have+Separated&source=bl&ots=3ivQMMKP2p&sig=4xM5kBPV3oLqZsy40k2x4ZFBi8M&hl=en&ei=t9X4SvDtBZC1tgf3hfy1Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCEQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Allegations%20of%20Sexual%20Abuse%20When%20Parents%20Have%20Separated&f=false
/r/MensRights10/11/09 05:46 PM
6

He's explicitly not asking if its ok to get a "free retaliation rape" against a false accuser, but with bending the law to get evidence or lying about the existence of charges/convictions.
/r/MensRights10/11/09 05:22 PM
-4

I'd suspect it is indication of more false claims. This is a service made to encourage claims. All such services raise false claims. It appears that boys are now being encouraged to report, and children of both genders have high inclination to lie.
/r/MensRights09/11/09 07:20 PM
14

Mitchell, of Sebastopol in Ballarat, has pleaded guilty to one count of sexually penetrating a child under 16 over the incident wtf??? The only way that makes sense to me is if she shoved something in his butt.
/r/MensRights30/10/09 03:16 AM
2

don't you have a lot of child services referrals where the child is there because a parent told her to be there? The police approach in the Kanin study is the right one, IMO. I doubt it involved purposeful meanness. If a story is too shaky, to survive investigation, its a favour to the complainant to spare her the court process. if we discourage people from reporting crimes then we're essentially supporting those crimes That's almost the wrongheadedness that made me angry to begin with. But a la…
/r/MensRights29/10/09 11:40 PM
2

I'd like to make it so complainants can easily get restraining orders from alleged attackers: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9p4wi/on_the_necessity_to_increase_sentences_for_false/c0ds1ch Substantial harm is caused to the accused. Lengthy trials are expensive, interfere with employability, and surround the accused with a shroud of disgust. That councilors, police and prosecutors absolve themselves of that harm by putting the full responsibility for the decision on the judge is wrong…
/r/MensRights29/10/09 08:45 PM
1

I researched before post... no quick google hits. Defamation and IIED is what to sue for, afaik.
/r/MensRights29/10/09 12:26 AM
1

so stop being a fucking werewolf is that a reference to vampire and underworld? -- Aren't the werewolves the good guys? :P
/r/MensRights28/10/09 11:11 PM
2

Actually still way too strong. Fairly popular suggestion though is to send them to a prison for the same length of time the accused faced. <Ironic Prison Rape unfunny> ...with nightly gang rape happy hours</...>
/r/MensRights28/10/09 10:53 PM
2

I'm not saying sex crime complaints are all lies. The policy of encouraging complaints encourages lies, exaggerations and mistakes, because it encourages fringe complaints. If we set up support clinics aimed at curbing violence and theft from specific ethnic groups, and legal framework that implied credibility of complainants, there'd be a lot more complaints and charges. It would be encouraging lies though.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 08:51 PM
5

I don't see the implied incorrect ID.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 04:11 PM
2

A magistrate in the UK is a judge? In Canada trying to sue a complainant for malicious prosecution, has a similar hurdle, where the complainant blames the prosecutor (but complainant not completely immune i assume if lies outrageous but convincing.). You can sue the prosecutor. You can sue the complainant for defamation or intentional infliction of emotional distress (but you need expert psychiatric help to prove damages for IIED)
/r/MensRights28/10/09 04:00 PM
2

If your sister/girlfriend/whoever came to you and told you they'd been drugged and raped, would you presumptively disbelieve them? One thing I do, that is apparently too impolite for some people, is ask probing questions. This can be a favour to the complainant if they have answers that confirm believability or credibility. The best example of the harm caused by overly sympathetic and cajoling belief of complainants occurs in marriage breakups and child dv complaints. More such accusations are p…
/r/MensRights28/10/09 02:26 PM
1

even the ABA can be biased then :P The presentation on that page does indeed suggest an agenda. the 25% raped in lifetime statistic includes anyone who answered yes to "Have you ever had sex when you didn't want to due to alcohol or drugs?" The spouse abuse rates seem to be wildly different than those reported here recently, but I don't know that study.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 04:26 AM
0

Believe victims. Fuck you. Worthless vampire piece of shit. All you know is the stories fed to you. Believing complainants enables pure lies. or will confirm their speculations (or your suggestions) of rape or GHB. The article shows a tendency to imagine its use. Presumptive belief feeds those delusions.
/r/MensRights28/10/09 03:44 AM
0

and I understand that. What is puzzling is bringing up affirmative permission, when it had no bearing on their decision.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 07:35 PM
1

They had never had sex before. Even then, that doesn't matter. Evidence of a previous sexual relationship doesn't mean that a specific case isn't rape. The fact that it possibly could be rape should have no relevance. Previous sexual activity creates an aura of implied consent. "Get the fuck off me" is going to clarify ambiguities. Do you know what she did when she claims she woke up? Sounds from your above description she waiting till it was over before regretting it.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 02:40 PM
1

The prosecution should be forced to prove she wasn't awake before she claimed. She having previously consented to sex with him is huge. You can be half-asleep and make consenting or refusal actions. Its more difficult to take a sleeping person's clothes off than it is to mount them. Its BS that a claim of too drunk/blacked out/sleeping is never challenged, when its such an easy lie to claim.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 02:14 PM
1

Yes they backtracked from it, but still ruled there was no consent without explanation, and without saying there was force. By bringing it up, one could assume the complainant never said no. (just saw your case summary below, and so the ruling seems coule be reasonable, but still not obvious http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9xyk3/thought_you_all_would_find_this/c0eztde)
/r/MensRights27/10/09 01:59 PM
-2

What happens when you tell a woman to "whore up"?
/r/MensRights27/10/09 03:56 AM
5

I'm reminded of the fake hooker/pimp that busted Acorn. A social worker admitted killing her husband, and preparing for it by visiting shelters with a sob story beforehand.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 02:10 AM
6

iNotRape
/r/MensRights27/10/09 01:59 AM
5

affirmative permission means "yes you may fuck me" as opposed to not saying "you may not fuck me ..." This essentially is no longer "no means no" but a lack of yes means no. I don't know how it is possible to give affirmative permission in a non verbal manner.
/r/MensRights27/10/09 01:58 AM
1

My wife stole my children, again. were authorities involved the previous time? and did their involvment favour you or at least incriminate her (even if she wasn't convicted)? Mentioning that might make police more receptive to your problem.
/r/MensRights26/10/09 07:13 PM
1

Maybe they can remarry, but it is a horrendously stupid choice for the new husband. Worst in some coutries than others, but susceptible to dv allegations and child support, systemically encouraged and eagerly prosecuted without evidence. Its that politicized legal persecution of men that is destructive to society and family units.
/r/MensRights25/10/09 03:25 AM
1

the step before profit is sons of fatherless homes are more likely to be rapists. Which is supported by link in the article. I'm not so sure about how helpful community education programs are if they focus on encouraging/empowering women who are a lot less slutty or consenting in sober mode, with making police complaints. But I don't have first hand knowledge of the programs you speak of. Just skeptical.
/r/MensRights25/10/09 02:41 AM
7

Girls that age feel especially entitled. The culture politically entrenched by the sexual grievance industry, clearly empowers girls with to abuse justice with impunity. That such depravity stretches to falsly yelling rape to save a $13 cab ride, proves that no complaint should be credible by itself. Endangering the victim to mob violence, expensive time consuming trials, loss of employability, and jail is a far worst assault than knocking him on the head and taking his money, since he'd heal in…
/r/MensRights20/10/09 03:16 PM
8

This IS a war That's wrong. bye and good riddance. But start a reddit called masculinists because men should have the same rights as feminists to make it a war if they want. I'm for Men's rights as well as for Women's rights. I agree completely that the social balance as it is, makes men's rights the only advocacy position needing social organization at the moment. That feminists are treating this as a war, trying to oppress us, shouldn't be a wrong we also want to embrace. Male equality is a ri…
/r/MensRights07/10/09 03:49 AM
4

This is an excellent product for more casual sex that the article suggests. You simply don't want the financial liability of pregnancy with anyone you'd like to wet it in. The 2 month duration is long enough in relationship terms to re-evaluate later if you'd want, and testosterone as a hormone supplement has attractive benefits (steroid strength, sex drive boost) to most men. Needs a faq: Will the progesterone make my tits bigger?
/r/MensRights04/10/09 02:02 PM
7

Part of the rationale for this suggestion: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9p4wi/on_the_necessity_to_increase_sentences_for_false/c0ds1ch Its offensive that sexual assault experts are available to convince you you were raped. The thinking as espoused by the psychologist who was exposed for implanting false repressed memories of child abuse of "if you think something might of happened, then it did" is all too common. When a woman tells such a story, its normal for her to focus on the …
/r/MensRights30/09/09 05:37 PM
1

If you want grant money, you have to follow the rules from whoever you ask it from. I can understand being suspicious of the organization, and the organization spreading evil, but religious bodies should be allowed to vet your plans before they give you money to build a new church.
/r/MensRights30/09/09 02:19 PM
1

The word evidence as I'm using it means something more than an allegation. More than she said. Most rape/dv/sa cases are "fact based" as opposed to "evidence based". The Hoffstra case (without cel video) was certainly going to trial on just her testimony, and real risk it could have been believed.
/r/MensRights29/09/09 10:47 PM
1

re: 1. I'm not sure that is the case in Canada. It has inexplicably the highest number of per capita recorded rapes in the world, and double that of the US. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics ), and in the case of child abuse allegations, even though more of them are deliberate lies than those resulting in convictions ( http://qnc.queensu.ca/story_loader.php?id=3cd4d4cbb2fb0 ), the police and prosecutors have a mandate to persecute the accused, and the majority do go to trial.
/r/MensRights29/09/09 10:41 PM
0

replace the word rape with fuck, and "20 years in prison" with just "spending 20k-50k in legal fees, and worrying for the next 2 years whether or not you will be in prison for a few months (even with low probability), followed by sexual offender registry and 7 year wait for pardon before you are allowed to travel or have a high security clearance" and I'd still choose a 10 minute butt fuck even if I knew ahead of time there would be an acquittal. I think (not scientifically surveyed) that most w…
/r/MensRights29/09/09 10:18 PM
1

I'm going to just repeat my main proposal in case the original post was too long or misunderstood. The preferred remedy in complaints that involve no evidence or corroboration, should be to grant a restraining order to the complainant. Ideally, the accused should still be able to see the charges against him, and apply to court to show "clear and convincing" doubt as to their accuracy so that he may make that restraining order reciprocal (applies to her as well as him). If they show probable doub…
/r/MensRights29/09/09 10:00 PM
1

Good points of your and PH's approach: scare the living shit out of would be complainants from complaining by making an example of what should be done with lying bitches who put a man's quality of life at risk. I would applaud if the Hofstra complainant was given life in prison. My point considers that some complaints could be true even if unprovable. But the only reason these complaints cause harm in the first place is that they result in a trial. The justice system has currently no other optio…
/r/MensRights29/09/09 09:47 PM
1

Respectfully, we have been confronted with this argument many times at False Rape Society, and we think yours is exactly the wrong approach. I've read most of your blog that gets submitted to reddit, and I don't believe you've addressed my approach before. I'm not only suggesting simply permitting accusers to recant with little consequence. I'm suggesting making the original complaints have little consequence as well.
/r/MensRights29/09/09 07:33 PM
1

We both agree that false rape accusations cause substantial harm. Harm comes from arrest and having to appear at several court appointments prior to trial, the expense of defending a trial, and the risk and stress that a judge or jury might find the accuser believable enough. My proposal removes all of these harms, while continuing to protect real victims from ever being accosted by the accused. It is our belief that your approach would only perpetuate, indeed encourage, a vicious cycle of more …
/r/MensRights29/09/09 07:27 PM
1

I like my solution better. Reasons already stated. In Hofstra case, she recanted after seeing a video recorded by one of the men's cell phones. Consider for a moment, instead of/before recanting she says she'd like to speak to a lawyer before making further comment, then goes to the lawyer asking is there any way for a video of her flirting with the 4, or not actually being tied up, could still be rape? For one, feminists would like to convince her she was raped using evils of the patriarchy, an…
/r/MensRights29/09/09 04:45 PM
3

very good article, but there is a better solution. That corroboration has become unnecessary is the real problem. That this inevitably enhances women and girls knowledge of their own power to "assault" men through judicial system proxy (substantial harm caused by arrest alone) is actually only part of the problem. In my view, a greater problem is the empowerment given to police and prosecutors to get easy convictions for high jail time offenses. It encourages them to enhance a complaint rather t…
/r/MensRights29/09/09 03:44 PM
2

... and good comment. What tecniques did you use to search for it?
/r/MensRights28/09/09 08:17 PM
1

You're getting a waiver from the ex. This means she is giving up her rights to your money, which she of course is allowed to do. That doesn't contradict anything I said though.
/r/MensRights27/09/09 01:53 AM
1

Why not? I'd imagine most rapes are of the he-she variety and there's just not enough evidence to prove one way or the other. unsolved has to mean not knowing who committed a crime. Maybe, stretching a little, unable to locate the witnesses that could lend support to an allegation. If there is not enough evidence to determine a crime has occurred, and no reasonable possibility that more evidence will be found, it is still solved.
/r/MensRights26/09/09 02:01 PM
1

what is this waiver and who gives it to you? Do you mean you can petition court in case you are unable to pay?
/r/MensRights26/09/09 12:50 AM
-1

loco parentis means you acted as a parent to the child. No one can force it upon you. You did or you didn't. It doesn't matter whether you believed or not you were biological parent.
/r/MensRights25/09/09 10:15 PM
1

The rights to being the kid's father... Legally, this is custody or child support payments in case of a breakup, or death of mom. In most places, custody is given to mother if she wants it, and is fit. Even if you have a chance of winning custody for some warp in the universe, In Canada, the fact that you are not the biological father could be proved by the mom to both deny you custody, but still force you to pay child support. In Canada, all men who have acted in the position of parent are liab…
/r/MensRights25/09/09 09:31 PM
1

I've only read that synopsis as well. Actual rape cases are largely unsolved, and yeah, those would be in large part rapes by strangers. (But studies show most assaults and rapes are done by familiars.) That's the inconsistency that makes it unbelievable. Can't be most rapes are by familiars and most are unsolved. Its still fair not to include unknown stranger rapes in stats Why not? From one point of view, a large concern is that 1 in 4 or 5 women is raped or sexually assaulted in her lifetime …
/r/MensRights25/09/09 04:47 AM
1

iq of 50 proves you can't form criminal intent????
/r/MensRights24/09/09 03:50 PM
1

sorry for not realizing that most unsolved rapes would be complaints where some unidentified stranger attacked them and fled. For your 10%-30% figure to have any chance of being consistent with reality, it has to be 10-30% of unknown stranger rapes are solved (not 10% of all rapes). EDIT: you may be including unreportted rapes. Its still fair not to include unknown stranger rapes in stats, and no reason to believe there would be less likelyhood of a false allegation, since the accusation provide…
/r/MensRights23/09/09 02:05 PM
1

its 45`out of 109. So 41% out of 109. This is the first I hear about a "solved" cases, but if real its 109 solved cases. Since this was over a 9 year period, that is plenty of time for cases to take their natural course to being solved (finish trial processes). The only other way for these complaints to not get solved, is if they are so weak they're never even recorded. I suspect you are confused by how 10%-30% of cases might be soved within a year, with how this could have any relevance to this…
/r/MensRights22/09/09 01:38 PM
1

reproduced without polygraph in the college study which found 50% false/recantation rate. What is needed to find unfounded or false rape allegations is the will to do so. Police investigations that involve questioning the complainants story aggressively instead of cajoling and encouraging the complainant into making as many lies as possible. Programs that start off with the thesis that too many rape/SA claims go unreported as a bad thing, and aim to help complainants come forward, are destructiv…
/r/MensRights21/09/09 07:40 PM
1

recanting = complainant saying it was false. If the position is "I think I was raped, but I don't think there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, so I don't see why there should be a trial", that is not recanted, though it may be classified as unfounded. You can (try to) back out without recanting.
/r/MensRights21/09/09 07:17 PM
1

small metropolitan city = closer to 1million people than 10000. if 41% of rape cases are recanted at the investigation stage, and you accept that recantation means its false, then at least that number are false, as the remaining ones didn't all lead to a conviction.
/r/MensRights21/09/09 06:07 PM
3

There's been over the top attacks on aerik in this thread. To answer your question, there is an impulse to protect women in many men, and just as if you absorb selective information to become a republican, you can do the same and be feminist. After all, the oppressive patriarchy must have once existed.
/r/MensRights19/09/09 01:22 AM
1

broken?
/r/MensRights08/09/09 04:55 PM
1

There is a 5. Both parties would like to have custody of the child, but subsidized by the other. This can be resolved by whoever bids the lowest amount to have the other pay in support gets custody.
/r/MensRights08/09/09 03:26 PM
1

I found the last one hard to believe.. here's more detail on the story. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,163510,00.html very strange that she would not face the same penalty since she initiated the kidnapping.
/r/MensRights01/09/09 06:56 PM
2

in canada, the philosophy is purely what's best for the child. All men who ever acted in a parental position towards the child must pay according to their earning potential
/r/MensRights01/09/09 03:01 PM
1

If death penalty available and freely used in AZ, then yes unless she's found insane. I don't think being female saves you from this one. It could be a MR issue if it was domestic abuse torture, and after a soft sentence.
/r/MensRights31/08/09 10:54 PM
1

why is this in MR?
/r/MensRights31/08/09 09:58 PM
-5

stuff like this should go to main reddit. This is a useful situation for a murderer to make it look like suicide :(
/r/MensRights30/08/09 10:04 PM
-1

The 41% false rape figure is based on one police department that did proper investigation in that it bothered to investigate actively whether the allegation was unfounded. 41% of those reporting rape recanted their allegations I don't know what percentage of the false rape allegations were discovered after letting time pass for the perjurer to reconcile with the victim, but the success rate of the police department is attributed to them using lie detectors, and essentially giving them an opportu…
/r/MensRights30/08/09 05:06 PM
2

the conclusions from the reporting rates are pretty sensasionalist and absurd: 15 of 16 rapists go free because not all reported and unreported rapes result in conviction.
/r/MensRights30/08/09 04:53 PM
1

was an excellent post. I find posts that make many points are likely to get downvoted if one of those points is both contentious and not superbly supported. Been reading these stories for a few hours now, and a lot of feminist posts are being unfairly downvoted too.
/r/MensRights30/08/09 12:32 AM
-3

you made a good post there, but the thread wasn't that bad, and her errors not unsupportable. You're being too harsh again.
/r/MensRights29/08/09 11:01 PM
1

then the court decides custody on other grounds, but there is no child support due. The bids can be in % of salary not just $, btw.
/r/MensRights29/08/09 11:26 AM
1

A solution, in my view: Child custody and support should be decided based on whichever parent bids less as an amount to be received from the other parent in exchange for custody.
/r/MensRights29/08/09 12:04 AM
2

this could be a lawyer troll post, btw.
/r/MensRights18/08/09 08:47 PM
2

You only need a lawyer at trial, but if its combined with divorce, you may find spending money worth it. If police is calling to arrest you, then nothing you say can be used to help you, and so you don't have to say anything. Get all of the disclosure and videos, then see if its credible. Even if outcomes are often stacked against males in these situations, there's no reason to give up/run/panic. There's probably an obvious motive for her to lie, and children that young are very suggestible. Mak…
/r/MensRights18/08/09 08:38 PM
1

they probably have chat transcripts of simulating sex in chat. That doesn't mean sex was assured at meetup. To me, agreeing to sex with a starved over horny (undercover cop pretending) 13 year old, is different than rape, or making advances to a 13 year old too uncomfortable to refuse them. I understand how the law needs simple ways to determine who can and cannot consent, but common sense suggests that such an individual 13 year old is forming all of the elements necessary for consent. A meetup…
/r/MensRights16/08/09 06:58 PM
2

the problem is that meetup does not equal sex. You don' know its a meetup to flirt and enjoy friendlines but to talk her out of sex. Our lurid imaginations should not form the basis for the atrocities he may have intended to commit on her.
/r/MensRights16/08/09 05:32 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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