TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Gotovoat5342 Archive

View 0 posts and 218 comments by Gotovoat5342 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

The federal government doesn't acknowledge that marijuana has any medical use, so doctors who prescribe it can get in trouble. Also, places that sell to people with prescription get raided and the people working there arrested. Local police won't enforce it in states where it's legal, and Obama told the DEA to not enforce it there either against individuals so users haven't been arrested by the DEA. But now if the Trump DOJ will indeed start enforcing the law that means more doctors who prescrib…
/r/MensRights24/07/17 04:13 PM
2

What makes you so sure of that? It hasn't been so I'm the past...
/r/MensRights24/07/17 12:58 PM
4

get a measure on the ballot and vote for its legalization like the rest of the states that did. You completely missed the point. Even if the state legalizes it, it's still illegal in the federal level. The point is - the Trump DOJ will crackdown on marijuana in states where it's legal. Also, "if it's against the law, then don't do it" doesn't work for people who need it for medical reasons. And even if it's for personal reasons, the fact is that marijuana enforcement disproportionally affects me…
/r/MensRights24/07/17 04:51 AM
3

I get that he should tell her. Great! What I don't get is why is him lying automatically a lawsuit? Because he didn't tell her he was exposing her to a disease. He knew he was putting her at risk, but did it anyway without warning her first. That's actually assault, I believe. It doesn't even matter if she got it from him - he knowingly exposed her to an STD without warning her first - he's guilty. Why are we assuming she isn't lying about how she got herpes? I'm not assuming that. Who is assumi…
/r/MensRights23/07/17 11:41 AM
3

But shouldn't std infections be a risk people are willing to take? ACCIDENTAL infection. If he didn't know he had an STD and she got infected, then that's a risk she has to take. But if he knew and didn't tell her - that's different. In that case he's 100% at fault. Think of it like this: car accidents are a risk you take when driving. But if someone intentionally swerves their car into your lane and hits you - they are 100% at fault and legally responsible.
/r/MensRights23/07/17 11:11 AM
1

No, it's not. I've read it. It is full of conjecture and hand waving. The only thing it definitively shows is that there actually exists a wage gap. If your goal is to convince people the wage gap doesn't exist - showing a lot of information where the only clear part shows a wage gap is very bad way of going about it.
/r/MensRights23/07/17 12:56 AM
2

This is what a person seeing this infographic will think. The first part is very clear and intuitive, and it shows there is a wage Gap for the same jobs. Then there's some hand wavy graph with conjectures and it's very unclear and not intuitive. This won't convince anyone. This won't change anyone's mind. This is a bad infographic.
/r/MensRights22/07/17 10:42 PM
2

Bad graph. The first thing I see here is that men make more money than women doing the same jobs. Then there's a complicated graph I don't understand. Then something about women choosing different jobs. But I remember the first very clear and intuitive graph showing men make more than women doing the same job.
/r/MensRights22/07/17 10:35 PM
5

Well, yeah. It just shows that in addition to the rape epidemic we have a problem where women don't feel safe reporting their rape. /s because as stupid as what I said sounds - it actually very similar to what feminist claim.
/r/MensRights21/07/17 10:24 AM
3

And I actually read the article, and I still don't know what that hilarious fact is! Fuck this clickbait
/r/MensRights20/07/17 05:44 PM
1

Saying they were victims still puts the word "victim" out there. Like saying "don't think about elephants" - it makes you think about elephants even though it said "don't" So saying "were" doesn't change the fact that it makes you think of them as victims. And makes them think about themselves as victims. I has the word "victim" in it FFS - describing someone as "they were victims" defines them by their victimhood. Calling them "survivors" defines them by their overcoming the victimhood. Saying …
/r/MensRights20/07/17 03:42 AM
1

No, that's the whole point. I'm not currently a victim of bullying I'm a survivor of bullying. Because it's something that happened to me in the past and it's behind me now. Same with rape. They are not victims of rape anymore than I am a victim of bullying - they are survivors of rape just like I am a survivor of bullying. So you agree that I'm not currently a victim of bullying just because I was bullied in the past - then why do you want people who were raped in the past to be "victims" rathe…
/r/MensRights20/07/17 12:39 AM
1

"I am a victim" says someone about the present. When you present someone as"the victim" of rape, it's how you described them now. They are the victim. You call the victim to testify, not the ex victim. Survivor is specifically someone who got over something bad. Put it behind them. When the bad thing of over and no longer affects them. It's the opposite of what you claim: a victim is still there, a survivor has moved on.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 12:06 AM
1

The difference is between "I overcame it" (survivor) and "it changed me forever" (victim) We call victim people who died. There's no stop to that. We call survivor people who are no longer affected by it. "Plane crash survivor" is no longer in a crashing plane. "Plane crash victim" never got out of it. Survivor means it's behind you. You survived it. It's over. If you survive cancer, it means you no longer have cancer. A survivor is happy. Sad it happened, but now happy they survived. A victim i…
/r/MensRights20/07/17 12:02 AM
10

Calling yourself a "survivor" is a good way of ensuring you remain a perpetual victim in your own mind. And calling yourself a "victim" as you suggest is better?! If you call yourself a victim you'll remain a victim in your mind. If you call yourself a survivor you are not a victim, because you did something to overcome your trauma. How can you even write that sentence and not see how weird it is?! "You should call yourself a victim so you don't feel like a victim. If you call yourself a survivo…
/r/MensRights19/07/17 06:34 PM
8

the ones who needed saving Don't blame your mom. My parents have a perfect marriage and my mom is literally a "strong independent woman" (in the real, non SJW sense). Still, I dated all the crazies out there (some literally crazy, like diagnosed and stuff) because of a stupid idea that I can "save them". Like "I'll show them that men can be good" or "I'll give them the love they never got and that will cure them". Fuck that. Crazy girls are dangerous.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 04:12 PM
27

I think you missed the point - that's a FB post that SHE wrote. I'm not saying he's at fault, I'm pointing the irony (or is it "self awareness"?) of her FB post. But you know what? We SHOULD teach young men that crazy girlfriends may sound good on paper, but are actually extremely dangerous. We have to acknowledge that there is a real appeal in a "crazy girlfriend" for the people most at risk (inexperienced, young, idealistic men who "want to save them"), and try to explain to them why it's not …
/r/MensRights16/07/17 04:02 PM
88

You're saying that like it's rare. That's what "academic" feminists really claim: that women are bad at sports because society oppresses them by giving less money to women sports and not encouraging them. When that happens I point out how there used to be "Negro leagues" and that African Americans used to not be allowed in "white" teams or even to play against whites, and had almost no funding, yet because they were actually just as good if not better than whites - now all major leagues are most…
/r/MensRights16/07/17 02:44 PM
109

Everyone wants a crazy girlfriend until they get a crazy girlfriend Yup.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 02:40 PM
1

No, but you can reduce demand for other values by reducing the supply of those. But you decided to go the "insult" way, so goodbye!
/r/MensRights13/07/17 03:38 PM
2

Ah yes. There's not enough demand for a movie that is the best selling on one of the major companies that do vod. Right.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 03:13 PM
3

it's 100% a money and image scenario You don't know that. You just decided it's true because you want it to be.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 02:58 PM
21

The reason I'm asking is because there are tons of movies that Netflix doesn't have, but that doesn't mean they've banned all of them Most of them are either because the people with rights to the movies don't want netflix to have them, or those same people want netflix to pay such a high price that netflix doesn't think it can make money off of it (so financial decision). In this case Cassie does want netflix to have it and doesn't ask for a high price. Then why don't them want to show it? So th…
/r/MensRights13/07/17 04:34 AM
19

As far as I know, they just didn't want to show it. I have no idea what their reasoning is.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 02:55 AM
32

If the decision isn't a financial one.
/r/MensRights13/07/17 02:49 AM
6

Can confirm. Am married. Also, relevant Louis CK.
/r/MensRights27/06/17 09:57 PM
2

Yeah, most people in the US don't circumcize because if some "sky fairy".
/r/MensRights25/06/17 10:39 PM
3

Catherine McKinnon, law professor and feminist intellectual. Write and published the following in peer reviewed feminist journal: Compare victims' reports of rape with women's reports of sex. They look a lot alike the major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that the normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it. Male sexuality is apparently activated by violence against women and expresses itself in violence against women to a sign…
/r/MensRights21/06/17 05:53 PM
2

Rabbis have actually been interviewed on the purpose of it and they said that that was the point. No Rabbi (well, no non-reform Rabbi) will say that the purpose of some religious rule is anything but the reason religion gives for that rule. If you ask any (non-reform) Rabbi, they'll all tell you the same thing: the purpose of circumcision is to reaffirm the Covenant between the Jewish people and God. Even the Hebrew word for circumcision is "Covenant/Pact/Contract/Agreement" (Brit). Like literal…
/r/MensRights19/06/17 12:57 AM
9

Bullshit. Men are much more likely to be white knights than women are to be feminists. Women know that women lie, but men think women are perfect. That's why usually women judges will be harsher on women defendants than men judges. Especially if the defendant is pretty. No, my guess is that the jury went down race lives, with the black jurors more likely to know how the media demonizes black men, and they still have the history of linchings following false rape accusations in their minds.
/r/MensRights18/06/17 12:03 AM
2

Nothing is reliable indicators of Truth. But numbers are very good indicators. And stories about Cosby being a rapist have circulated long before the Constand thing. there are not 30 different accusers No, but the are 30 different people who all claim the same thing happened to them. They aren't accusers in the trial, but they are supporting evidence for the accuser. Is it possible he's innocent? Yes, it's possible. It's always possible in every case. But there's a shit ton of evidence against h…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 11:59 AM
1

Should anyone be tempted to argue that "numbers (of complainants) make the case", consideration should be given to: The number of people who once thought atheism deserving of death. This is bullshit, because you're comparing things that are not at all alike. "A lot of people once thought atheists deserved death" isn't comparable to "a lot of people say they were attacked by Cosby". One is a moral decision the other is a description of actions. It's be more fair to say "a lot of people claim that…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 04:14 AM
1

Feminists already acknowledge that men can be raped. By other men. This is nothing new. Notice how they say you need to explain to your son about alcohol and consent. Not your daughter... Feminists will gladly say men can be raped. Just not by women.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 02:41 AM
2

Does it matter that much to go to a screening which is 3 hours later, instead of the female only one? It has nothing to do with this. It's about segregation, not about convenience. Either segregation is wrong or it isn't. And we, as a society, decided that it's wrong. You force, for example, Christian bakers to bake cakes for Gay weddings, even though there are other bakers who would be happy to bake these cakes. Why? Because we don't allow businesses to discriminate. Not because it's inconvenie…
/r/MensRights08/06/17 01:32 AM
4

Male behavior tends to dominate spaces and intimidate women What is "male behavior"? It sounds like something a person with deep rooted prejudices would say. Are all men the same? Is there behaviors that all men share but no woman does? What it sounds like you're saying is that "many women are male-phobes. And instead of discouraging such closed mindedness, we should enable it". On the same token, many white people are intimidated by blacks. So is it ok to have white only spaces? Which makes sen…
/r/MensRights06/06/17 08:40 PM
1

Feminists are against sex. Extreme feminists see sex as rape. It makes no sense for them to push for more sex. So who is pushing?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 02:36 AM
2

(a) it's not a cuckold case. The husband's and wife were separated, weren't living together, estranged. That isn't being a cuckold. (b) you didn't say they only care because it's a cuckold, which is interesting or something like that. You said the media has a cuckold agenda. Meaning they deliberately push it for some goal. What is that agenda, and what is the goal / who is behind it?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 12:58 AM
2

because this is a cuckolding / paternity fraud situation But it isn't. The husband's and wife were estranged. Still married, but not living together and probably not having sex. She wasn't cheating with him, they were together for 6 months while she was estranged from her husband. Then she decided to return to her husband, and she and her husband decided to raise the child when everyone involved knew it wasn't the husband's child. There's no cuckolding. No paternity fraud. Just... Posted laws th…
/r/MensRights05/06/17 11:28 PM
1

I'm not sure what your doing in an MRA sub. You might be looking for the red pill sub, or maybe some white supremacist sub? Depending on who you think the media is and what's their agenda... Anyway, this is very simple. If we ignore your conspiracies: we have a man denied access to his child, and the media is upset about it and trying to change it. I call that a good thing.
/r/MensRights05/06/17 07:06 PM
7

I think that a man not being allowed to see his own child is a big problem. Why do you think it's ok to denie men access to their own children?
/r/MensRights05/06/17 06:49 PM
2

It's not gays. It's feminists coopting the gay name to push their agenda. Ever wonder about the LBGT name? You used it, was it always LBGT? No, until very recently it was LGBT, and before that it was GLBT. Why the change? To push gays away. Because fuck men. Remember, "gay" actually includes both men and women. So why add the L? Because that's women only... They need to exclude men. Add the L, then you can move the G away without affecting women... Because men are evil. Because the LBGT movement…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 11:37 PM
1

Most domestic violence is reciprocal. Meaning both sides hit each other. If she goes in hitting you, but is "a good person and rational", you will hit her back one day to show her that it hurts and is no joke. Then you will be in real trouble. Tell her it's not ok. Tell her you see it as domestic violence. And tell her you will not stand for it in the future. Don't threaten police, as that gives her to much power. If she ever does this again - leave. If not, well, probably she didn't understand …
/r/MensRights04/06/17 11:03 AM
8

Yes, which is why they want to go to barbers who cost less to get the hair style they want. It's kind of like the female product tax where the "same" product costs more in the woman's version.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 12:11 AM
2

You don't get to decide what other people think feminism stands for Nor do you. Their actions should be what speaks to what they stand for. and if you say "I'm against everything feminism stands for", regardless of your intentions, you give power to movements which oppose the core tenet of "Men and women should for the most part be treated equally by society". Which movements are those? And you know who gives these movements power? Feminism, that under the guise of "equality" actually fights for…
/r/MensRights03/06/17 10:20 PM
2

but I still have to actively combat misogyny in my community and legislation You say that as if feminism is there only way to equality. Feminism isn't for equality. It's there to promote women only. You can be against feminism and against these laws. Like most women are. Edit: remembered, women are still 41% pro life. This isn't a "patriarchy" or a gendered issue. There are many many women who are pro life and want these legislations. If women in general were really against it, it wouldn't happe…
/r/MensRights03/06/17 09:49 PM
2

You're making an assumption here that anti feminists are against feminism since its inception, or against equality. Instead we're against feminism as it is now. When people are saying "I hate feminism today", your reply is "why? It did many important things to women 50 years ago. You must hate women". Also (a) there were other organizations for equality at the time which you ignore. Organizations that were actually for equality rather than for women empowerment, and (b) many (girlswriteswhat com…
/r/MensRights03/06/17 09:12 PM
3

Well, this movement does have heavy overlap with antifeminism Sure. What does that have to do with misogyny though?
/r/MensRights03/06/17 07:54 PM
3

Here are some examples, there were more: http://m.metronews.ca/#/article/news/hamilton/2013/08/02/woman-denied-haircut-at-westdale-barbershop.html https://thetab.com/uk/liverpool/2014/11/21/barber-shop-says-women-16146
/r/MensRights03/06/17 07:05 PM
16

Like men only barbers shops! Remember the name like freakout about that?
/r/MensRights03/06/17 03:29 PM
14

They stated this shit by suing barbers who only accept men.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 03:21 PM
3

His parents would.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 12:30 PM
1

No not that at all. It made me paranoid that women don't like sex and are just faking it. It connects with a lot of other info I was exposed to, and it made a kind of sense that's hard to shake.
/r/MensRights02/06/17 04:35 PM
1

they mutually enjoyed. Well, you know, maybe she didn't? I knew a woman once that legitimately didn't know women were supposed to enjoy sex. She thought that sex was something women did to reward men for things, like being a good boyfriend, or I guess building her a deck... Was weird talking to her. Legit she didn't believe me when I said women usually enjoy sex - she thought the women I was with were just good at faking it. Like she (claimed that?) she was. Was weird. Got me very paranoid for a…
/r/MensRights02/06/17 06:06 AM
2

No, that's actually... that makes sense. It's a good field, with actual financial prospects, making her ready for the real world and a job... She's a "real" person (as opposed to a SJW taking "gender dance therapy" or something like that). Let's be honest - she isn't wrong. I mean about men buying stuff for women to have sex (like dinner, or more). No, had you said "theater" or "movie theory" or "gender studies" or anything that's completely impractical but "is what really interests her" - then …
/r/MensRights02/06/17 05:13 AM
1

Doctorate in what field, if I may ask?
/r/MensRights01/06/17 10:56 PM
67

Someone should just do a screening only for people who were excluded from that Wonder woman screening. Don't say men or women or anything - only that you can come is you were not allowed at the other screening. Same with safe spaces or that "black only" event in Paris: have an event or space that only allows people who were not allowed in the other one.
/r/MensRights31/05/17 09:38 PM
10

Oh my God! I thought these would be of topic or trolling or at least women hating / feminism blaming posts that were deleted, but they just deleted... Relevant ordinary stuff! What the hell?
/r/MensRights30/05/17 01:47 PM
1

I think my mother is great. Like the best person ever. I don't know anything about how my parents are in the bedroom (eww) but in everything else she's doing everything right both towards my father and us kids. But. But only after I got married (yes yes, I know, this is a MGTOW sub. I sometimes wish I'd found this sub a decade ago...) did I start seeing the signs: He's kinda miserable and defeated marriage/life wise. It doesn't matter how good a wife is - you're still giving up too much of yours…
/r/MGTOW30/05/17 10:12 AM
1

OTGH Heh :) now that's a reference I haven't heard in a long time...
/r/MensRights28/05/17 10:10 AM
9

Similar: I had some doubts about consent in some specific circumstances and what's the right way to make sure a partner is 100% ok with things, so I asked a feminist friend (and ex actually) assuming she'd know the "correct way to assure consent". She answered by giving me MacKinnon's Sexuality, Pornography, and Method: "Pleasure under Patriarchy" (1989) Ethics, Vol. 99, No. 2 pp. 314-346. Until this day, even married for almost a decade, I can't get that paper or if my head. It fucked me up goo…
/r/MensRights27/05/17 10:18 PM
2

Because it was wrong? Or because it wasn't effective?
/r/MensRights20/05/17 03:16 PM
1

Are you really trying to argue that a former housewife who most likely initiated the divorce can't find a job to put a roof over her head and get food to support HER decision? No. I'm not trying to argue that. I'm not even trying to argue something similar to that. U have no idea what the hell you're taking about, since this has nothing to do with what I wrote. Please explain to me how anything I said less you to believe that?
/r/MensRights20/05/17 03:23 AM
5

Because being a bread winner requires developing skills + career (school, experience, seniority, contacts). The home maker didn't develop these skills+career as they were busy supporting the bread winner allowing them to develop the skills + career. Being a home maker doesn't require any special skills though (or at least that's what the alimony system assumes) Basically, it's seen that like the money made during the marriage, the skills + career the bread winner developed while being supported …
/r/MensRights19/05/17 04:26 AM
2

I think most MRA come from feminism, so they have a real first hand experience with it. I know that I at least was a serious feminist and read and listened to many feminist sources, including academic papers etc. That is until I found that most of their data was lies... I mean, most MRA believe in equality, so it makes sense they'd try feminism first as that's what's generally believed to be the movement for equality. I don't think there's symmetry here. MRA know very well what feminism is. Non …
/r/MensRights18/05/17 03:03 PM
12

One of the organisers of the protest, Eleanor Morley, told me that “the film argues that struggles for women’s liberations have gone so far that women are now structurally oppressing men around the world. I think it’s quite laughable when you look at the serious disadvantages and discrimination face that women still face in society, such as the gender pay gap. What?! The film argues no such thing! They didn't even see it... They're just inventing content, and then get angry and go protesting the…
/r/MensRights12/05/17 04:37 PM
1

What do you mean? Why is it "nothing close"?
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:41 AM
3

You posted here, so you can't post there anymore. You are now branded an MRA and will be banned.
/r/MensRights25/04/17 05:33 PM
17

https://youtu.be/EEJPNiMCiPA The thing that bugs me the most is when he says "well I know you live in your own reality Brenda". Imagine a man saying it to a woman like that in a debate. They'd be railroaded as sexist and condescending. "Mansplaining" comes to mind. Yet no one, not even me, bat an eye when Clinton said it to Trump.
/r/MensRights21/04/17 09:56 PM
2

Citation Did you give a citation? No. So it's very bad form to ask for one for the same thing. Not to mention kinda dishonest... But that was a tangent anyway. We might disagree on what "society thinks" but that could just be a product of growing up in different locations. Created by patriarchy =/= Created by men. You yourself just wrote that the system was set up by men! So if men set up (created) the system, and the system created the problems, them men created / are responsible for the proble…
/r/MensRights20/04/17 01:42 AM
1

Set up by men. Fine. So they claim it's men's fault because it's set up by men. The point stands, they claim that men's problems are created by men. "Patriarchy hurts men too". It's still the same bullshit. The same victim blaming. though it excludes the fact there are many aspects of the system that benefit all men Like there are many aspects of the system that benefit all women. So? Btw, I disagree with your assertion that men are seen as smarter. In general, men are seen as dumber. In additio…
/r/MensRights20/04/17 01:27 AM
3

Patriarchy is. Or at least it's a system set up by men for their own benefit. So when you say "it's patriarchy that hurts men" you are saying "it's the system that men put in place and in which men have the power and men fight to keep that hurts men" In other words - it's men's actions that hurt men. If you disagree, tell me what you think the word "patriarchy" means.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 02:34 PM
5

This seems to be more of the "patriarchy hurts men too" bullshit. Nothing new, nothing lucid. Yes, men can be oppressed, but it's by other men, not by women. They are doing it to themselves.
/r/MensRights19/04/17 11:37 AM
3

Yes. Like a knife cutting your stomach open in one context is life saving and healthy (surgery) and in another is damaging and life ending (stabbing). It's like the same objects can be used for completely different things! Who would have thought?!
/r/MensRights30/03/17 03:09 AM
1

Oh, so being curious makes it ok? If I'm curious what a vagina feels like, so I grab one - that's ok then? Good to know. And saying "the child would not have been harmed" is hypocritical. If I were curious what a blow job feels like, so I'd consider putting​ my dick in a baby's mouth to try - according to you it's ok because the child would not have been harmed. That's bullshit reasoning. Has anyone just said that - not done it, just said they thought about it - no one would let them near any ba…
/r/MensRights30/03/17 01:19 AM
2

If you're doing it to feed the baby, it's not molesting. If you're doing it because you like the feeling on your nipples, then it is molesting. Just like if you cut open a baby with a knife with their parents' consent to fix something that's wrong inside of them, it's not assault. If you do it because you like the feeling of cutting flesh, then it is assault. The only reason you can't understand it, is you're trolling this sub for fun.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 01:15 AM
10

It's not her baby. She didn't have the parent's permission. And she wasn't lactating. Not lactating = not feeding, so calling it "breastfeeding" is a lie. It's "making a baby suck my nipples because I like how it feels". Don't downplay it - this is a serious thing.
/r/MensRights29/03/17 10:07 AM
5

Who searches Google for "hardly any" anything? That's not a search. What are you even looking for that you tried this phrase? What, did you just try things with "men's support groups" until you found the result you were looking for?
/r/MensRights28/03/17 05:39 PM
14

No. Feminism, at its core, is the belief in the "patriarchy" as the source of oppression. That's not "radical feminism", that's just feminism. Maybe you mean "people who believe you should be treated equally no matter your gender", but that's not feminism. Feminism is arguably for equality + "patriarchy is to blame"
/r/MensRights26/03/17 04:22 AM
7

Of course there is! The rate culture that exists in prisons. You know, the one for which the term "rape culture" was originally coined, before being appropriated by those who want all attention to be focused on them.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 10:48 AM
4

Stolen car? I missed that part completely! OP really is full of shit.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 01:09 PM
3

You're making unsubstantiated claims in all of those - saying that "OK these are different - but obviously the difference isn't only because of the crime it's also because of the gender". You claim it's also because of gender? Prove it. Because right now all we have is you inventing outrage out of two different sentences for different crimes. Oh, and I can spam links too! https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5zvhnn/man_kills_woman_11_years_jail_woman_kills_man_3/df1rxxk/ https://www.redd…
/r/MensRights17/03/17 01:04 PM
1

That's too great to be explained solely by the difference in culpability Is it? Prove it. Show me a man getting a harsher sentence when he wasn't drunk, didn't run, and it was his first accident. You made a claim? Prove it. What that first person did was an actual crime. Two crimes in fact: drunk driving, and running from an accident. Two counts of actual, premeditated, criminal acts. What she did was an accident. People often go with 0 jail time after car accidents even if people died. Because …
/r/MensRights17/03/17 12:59 PM
6

Show me a man who got as harsh a sentence without being drunk and running away afterwards. I dare you. This isn't a gendered issue. You think people aren't punished harshly enough for accidents if they weren't drunk and didn't run? OK, why is this an MRA issue though? You think women get lighter sentences - 44 times lighter as you said? Show me two similar cases with such a sentence difference.
/r/MensRights17/03/17 12:36 PM
3

Was she drunk? Did she run after the accident? Drunk-driving accidents are punished much more harshly than regular accidents. Hit-and-run is punished much more harshly than regular accidents. An accident is... an accident. People accept that. It's not illegal to have an accident because we can't criminalize something people didn't intend to do (except for sex with minors, but that's a different issue). You punish people for intentionally doing something illegal - like drinking and driving, or fl…
/r/MensRights17/03/17 12:33 PM
7

I don't get it. What's gender swapped here? This just looks to me to be a horrible article written by a horrible person. What am I missing?
/r/MensRights17/03/17 03:48 AM
2

Murder can sometimes be justified. And with murder sometimes there's no "residual danger to society" (as in, the circumstances of the murder are such that the chance of that person murdering again it's low) So with murder, it's not as simple. Rating children on the other hand...
/r/MensRights15/03/17 09:38 PM
2

do you honestly think the politicians that want to defund planned parenthood are doing so because they respect a women's right to make thier own choices? No, and I never claimed that they did. Are you actually trying to paint a picture of Republicans defunding planned parenthood SOLELY with the goal of respecting women's rights? Why do you find it necessary to lie about what I said? Where did I even insinuate something like that? They want the government to stay out of women's health. That's all…
/r/MensRights12/03/17 10:28 PM
2

They aren't removing the option, they just don't want to pay for it. You still have the option.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 10:22 PM
2

So when you say "the government should stay out of women's health" you actually mean to say "I'm angry that the government is staying out of women's health"? You're not angry the government isn't staying out of women's health, you're angry that they want to stay out of women's health (not fund it)
/r/MensRights12/03/17 04:54 PM
1

You said "abortion and birth control". I asked about birth control, you answer about abortion. So can I assume you were wrong when you said birth control?
/r/MensRights12/03/17 04:45 PM
1

Birth control? Is the government in any way preventing women from accessing birth control? Or making any birth control related medical decisions? Where is that?
/r/MensRights12/03/17 03:36 AM
1

Which medical decisions are you talking about specifically? That the government makes for adults.
/r/MensRights11/03/17 09:39 PM
10

No, you don't understand. She was in an abusive relationship, being assaulted on a daily basis, and had to defend herself! What, didn't you know that refusing to have sex with your spouse sexual abuse? Here, educate yourself: https://www.poweroftwomarriage.com/info/abusive-relationships/ See item 4 - sexual abuse - in the abusive relationship list. See? Every time he didn't have sex with her he was abusing her! Anyone whose spouse doesn't want to have sex with them is a victim of domestic violen…
/r/MensRights10/03/17 12:58 AM
25

Yet the first thing under the title on the main page specifically references women and girls as the ones mostly affected, and strongly hints at men being the villains. Not even women and children (we all know boys get raped) just women and girls. This isn't a "sanitation" awareness, or the first thing they would have mentioned is why no sanitation is bad ("billions of people at risk of disease" for example). Instead they say it's bad because "women and girls are raped". So it's about "rape aware…
/r/MensRights08/03/17 06:14 PM
30

YouTube you post per movie (unless it's free, which I assume it isn't). Netflix you pay per month. Not the same thing, and not as easily accessible for everyone.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 08:17 PM
42

It's a stick figure! It's genderless! FFS. Do women have arms, legs, a head, and a body to connect them all? Yes? Then it also represents women. If you think it only describes men because men are the default, then the problem is with you, not the sign.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 04:14 PM
8

Not suicide. Attempted suicide.
/r/MensRights06/03/17 03:18 AM
1

Who here" bashes" women's issues? We may criticize feminism, but that's not the same as bashing women's issues. Or are you one of the people who actually thinks feminism works for equality?
/r/MensRights05/03/17 08:41 AM
48

Other men just wouldn't get any matches at all. So you couldn't really compare anything. Except maybe the rich guy, but how do you know he's rich just from tinder? Because he says so? Maybe a pic of him in a Porsche..
/r/MensRights05/03/17 12:14 AM
3

Lies? That's the definition of favoring someone!
/r/MensRights26/02/17 11:20 PM
5

Favoring females over males - to address a gender imbalance - to meet a quota doesn't mean you get unqualified senior staff. By definition it does. Or at least, you get less qualified senior staff. Favoring females over males means taking a less qualified female over a more qualified male. If the female were more qualified, it wouldn't have been "favoring females over males" but rather "favoring more qualified applicant over the less qualified one".
/r/MensRights26/02/17 10:33 PM
10

Apparently, they think only white males voted for Trump, and that all women are against him. That's the only way I can imagine them thinking a "day without women" in protest is going to happen.
/r/MensRights26/02/17 08:39 PM
5

So I guess it's a wrestling specific rule? Actually, it makes sense I think. If a woman is competing in such a contact-heavy sport with men, there will be boob and crotch grabs (part of the sport) and that will create a whole mess. Especially with teens.
/r/MensRights26/02/17 02:31 PM
3

I know that in general they can't compete. Never knew they weren't allowed to compete.
/r/MensRights26/02/17 02:25 PM
2

I actually didn't know women were not allowed to compete in men's sports. I mean, if you find a woman that's better than all alternative men in, e.g., basketball - won't the NBA be able to let her play? How is it enforced? I know in women's sports they check that the competitors are indeed women... Do they check in men's sports that they are indeed men?
/r/MensRights26/02/17 02:21 PM
139

This is what bugs me SO much. Feminists say there are no false accusations because no woman would subject herself to the pain and humiliation of accusing someone of rape if it didn't actually happen. Yet, time and time again we see completely mundane and, frankly, stupid reasons for false accusations. Not even mental illness, just... Complete disregard to the consequences. She accused people of rape so a bit will sympathize with her and get closer to her. I remember one girl who claimed she was …
/r/MensRights23/02/17 05:53 PM
19

Remember, he was a minor who was raped and molested by adults. And as child victims often do - he blames himself and convinced himself that he was the predator. He was 13 when he was raped and molested. And notice that 13 is the age he chose to talk about. When you keep that in mind while reading the transcript you see this isn't victim blaming. It's self blaming. It's trauma, not malice.
/r/MensRights22/02/17 03:56 AM
1

Ok....? Woosh again?
/r/MensRights20/02/17 02:47 PM
2

Woosh?
/r/MensRights19/02/17 07:01 PM
3

there's no such thing as rape where consent is present. Of course there is! Children for example. Even if a 10 y.o. consented, it's still rape. Consent can't be given if the person giving consent doesn't have the abilities to make decisions for themselves. Like children. And apparently, women. I don't remember which feminist it was who said that, but it went something like "sex with a man is so degrading, that the act of consenting to it is proof enough that the woman was unable to give meaningf…
/r/MensRights19/02/17 02:18 PM
4

Its healthier and more hygienic. No it isn't, and no it isn't. How can you even claim it's more hygienic?! Sitting and actually touching the toilet which is full of germs! Standing I'm not touching anything! How can touching germ infested toilets be more hygienic than not touching them? What's your source on the hygiene thing?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 04:18 PM
1

Against white males? Yes, b that's men's rights issue. Against whites in general? No.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 08:06 PM
1

Yes, some of us are white. This is still a sub about men's rights and not a sub about white problems that have no relation to gender. If the problem is specific to white men, then sure. It's relevant. But that's not the case here.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 12:42 PM
18

It bothers me how often the text repeats that MGM is done in infancy as opposed to FGM which is done later in life. In most places were FGM is generally practiced, MGM is also done later in life and in much similar conditions, and not necessarily in infants or hospital.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 05:51 PM
1

No. It isn't. Feminism co-opted other causes because they won their original cause. They need new excuses to exist. Men's rights is far from "won". Co-opting the "white people" cause isn't part of the job.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 02:38 AM
2

It isn't the documentary, just a sneak preview.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 12:57 AM
-2

And.. how is that relevant to men's rights?
/r/MensRights10/02/17 12:53 AM
7

Well, if I'm being realistic here - you don't buy a new car every day. Probably only once ever few years if at all (most people buy used cars, and Audi doesn't get a dime of that). Will you still feel as strongly in 3 years when it's time to replace your car? If I'm being realistic here - I'll forget. I will. Or would have if I ever bought a non-used car...
/r/MensRights07/02/17 03:29 PM
8

I for one don't want equality, because men and women are not equal. I want fair treatment under the law. People are not equal. But we expect them to be treated equally under the law, and we expect society to only "care" about the attributes that matter in every instance. For example - men are on average stronger than women. So I don't expect an employer that needs strength to employ men and women equally. But I do expect them to prefer a stronger women over a weaker man if both happen to apply t…
/r/MensRights07/02/17 03:27 PM
18

If we’re serious about achieving gender equality, we need to ditch the divisive language like “feminist” and “men’s rights activist”, swallow our pride, and realise that everyone is on the same page. The problem is, we're NOT on the same page. Not by a long shot.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 12:45 PM
406

This is just random stick motion. 5 day graph? That's nothing to write home about. I'm sure it went back up right after this. This means nothing.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 12:38 PM
1

The law that teachers can't bang students.
/r/MensRights05/02/17 11:51 PM
2

Like "every man"? I could understand (although not accept) if it were "her male peers". But every man? She's valued less that the begger she meets in the street? Than the cashier at McDonald's where she goes with friends?
/r/MensRights02/02/17 03:06 PM
1

Though women don't want to do dirty, manual labor jobs themselves, they still want to control how men do them steal the credit FTFY
/r/MensRights25/01/17 02:53 AM
1

Even if prostituting yourself would become a right, you still wouldn't have access to "every pussy out there". From how you're talking, I suspect you didn't originally mean prostituting yourself... And that you aren't really an MRA but rather trying to make us look bad
/r/MensRights22/01/17 09:31 PM
2

Oh! Sorry! Yes then indeed both men and women should have that right.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 08:47 PM
5

Men do not have the right to prostitution, because prostitution isn't something you just do with your own body. Should it be legal? I think so. It's it a right? Noooooooo. Not by a long shot.
/r/MensRights22/01/17 09:25 AM
0

Well... The premiss of this movie is really bad. It deserves the criticism it gets.
/r/MensRights19/01/17 01:33 AM
-2

Because 50 shades is consentual? Because the woman there had a choice?
/r/MensRights19/01/17 01:31 AM
3

He himself said that he felt like what he did looked too much like stealing a car, and even said so to the person he was on the phone with at the time. I don't even mind the cops handcuffing him. What I DO mind is that they then arrested him after determining that the car was indeed his: They determine it’s his, but he was still arrested and charged with disobeying officers and resisting arrest. A judge later threw out the charges THAT is the real issue here. Everything other than that sounds li…
/r/MensRights16/01/17 02:10 AM
5

Physically penetrating someone's genitals is rape. I thought rape was "sex without consent", not "penetrating someone without consent". Are you saying that if a woman has sex with a man without his consent (called "forced to penetrate") this isn't rape? Is that what you're saying?
/r/MensRights14/01/17 10:14 AM
0

We both know that they would never make a movie where a woman kidnaps a man because she's lonely, destroys his life and career, manipulates and lies to him, only to have that man eventually forgive her and stay willingly because it's love.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 05:16 PM
1

Exactly - flip the genders and it's still coercive rape, rape culture and space rape. What you described by flipping the genders really is bad. So the original is bad too.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 03:36 PM
1

Well... It kinda is...
/r/MensRights13/01/17 01:11 PM
5

Actually, I have to disagree with you. Not on the post being fake - it's obviously fake. But about your ban. They are a subreddit with clear EULA, and one of them is "don't post saying it's fake. Message a mood instead.": I think a post is fake, a troll, or a bait post. What should I do? If you suspect something is fake, a troll, or a bait post please send a message to the moderators, or hit 'report' and leave your suspicions as a report reason. Do not post your suspicions as a comment. There ar…
/r/MensRights11/01/17 07:58 PM
1

, you misunderstood - ONLY women are human.
/r/MensRights10/01/17 03:04 AM
1

All in saying is that the complaints people have about this movie are for reasons that OP chose to... Misrepresent. Maybe they are bad reasons too, but they aren't as simple as op suggested.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 08:36 PM
0

I explained in a different reply. It's a huge spoiler though so if rather not repeat it so as not to ruin the movie.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 05:13 PM
-1

A huge spoiler. I wrote it down in another reply but I don't want to put more spoilers to the movie here.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 05:12 PM
0

If you're going to do spoilers: WARNING! SPOILERS!! this is AFTER he intentionally wakes her up, dooming her to 90 with only him around, (which is basically kidnapping, and in her own words - like murder) and he does it because she's pretty. But it's portrayed as something that ended up being a good thing because she fell in love with him. So basically kidnapping her and keeping her with him as her only human contact ended up working well for him. Yea... No.
/r/MensRights09/01/17 04:21 PM
-2

because the main characters are good and human to eachother and together they save the lives of all 5259 passengers at the end No, that's not why they claim it's misogynist. After seeing this post I went to look what their actual problem was, and to be honest - they're kinda right... I didn't see the movie, but given the plot they describe - yea, it's pretty bad. In any case, the reason they complain isn't the reason you claim. So your post is dishonest...
/r/MensRights09/01/17 04:05 PM
2

It's not just because we're tarring half the population with the same brush [...]. Nor is it because we risk offence. It's because this [...] ain't working, and we need to try a different tactic. Yea... Fuck her.
/r/MensRights01/01/17 03:04 PM
5

And it isn't about class either. Only gender. You can literally be a nobel laureate tenured professor, making a speech where you encourage women to go into science, and the accusation of one woman in the audience who misunderstood what you said and "felt unsafe" will ruin your career and force you to move to a different country for a job. Just the accusation of one woman. Even though the transcript and the word of all other women in the room are on your side showing she clearly and blatantly mis…
/r/MensRights13/12/16 11:21 AM
2

They'll just fix it so that only men accused by women would be in the transcript.
/r/MensRights12/12/16 10:54 PM
2

Of course they are different procedures! They are different organs. That's why one is called FGM and the other MGM. Still, it isn't a false equivalence.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 11:32 PM
3

False equivocation. The two circumcisions aren't equal You had me until this. But I assume it's just that you don't know the whole range of procedures that are called FGM. FGM includes, in both definition and statistics, benign procedures like a pin prick to the clit. A single pin prick, resulting in a single drop of blood, and no lingering effects past... Maybe an hour or a day after the procedure. That is also called and counted as FGM. So since the range of behaviors that count as FGM is so v…
/r/MensRights06/12/16 05:11 PM
1

and will be reinstated on appeal. Oh, will it? Can you see the future? Do you already know what the appeal judges will say? Or are you just confusing your wishful thinking with fact? And the faulty logic is the point! If there was good reason for it I wouldn't be angry. But that's the point - if the victims are meh then it doesn't matter.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 07:55 PM
1

But there is discrimination in the outcome. One was thrown out the other got $3mil. Maybe the supreme Court will change that, but even if it does there was still major discrimination, and i can still criticize a process that forces one to spend more time and money, and have less certainty.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 07:40 PM
1

Well, you won't see me celebrating theoretical future accomplishments. Right now my point stands: they weren't punished for the false require accusation, but they were punished in the tune of $3mil for saying a woman wasn't nice.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 05:20 PM
2

conform to Moses' Law, then women could not initiate divorce, which they plainly allow. But that's the whole point. She can't initiate the divorce. That's where the problem comes from. She wants a divorce but can't initiate one. Only he can, but he doesn't want to. That is exactly why they are pressuring him.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 05:17 PM
2

Agree. Just note that in this case the people involved are very religious. They are hasidic Jews.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 05:14 PM
0

I think that's wrong. The men got nothing. It's the woman faculty member that got compensated. It's disgusting, but that's how it is.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 01:35 PM
6

The consequences isn't for the false rape accusation though... It's for falsely accusing a WOMAN of not caring about rape victims... It's disgusting, but that's our world. "You falsely accused a ton of people of rape? Na, that's fine. Oh, you also said this woman isn't nice?! $3 million compensation for her!" As always, want to stop something bad that happens to men? Find how a woman is inconvenienced.
/r/MensRights09/11/16 01:30 PM
6

How did they say you were supposed to talk about it?
/r/MensRights07/11/16 01:52 PM
1

Right. Here's reuters: http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12Z2DV And there are many other sources, but I bet they all get the info from reuters
/r/MensRights05/11/16 01:35 AM
4

Notice how the 18-29 female group gave it significantly less than any other group? Fuckers.
/r/MensRights05/11/16 01:08 AM
6

Bad advice. She will not take him to court, she'll take him to a university tribunal, where he isn't allowed to present evidence or even prepare his defence.
/r/MensRights25/10/16 01:08 AM
2

Another question you forgot is - is this influence "positive" or "negative"? In other words, if we find that indeed as you say there is sole kind of influence, do we want to reduce the influence our increase it?
/r/MensRights24/10/16 03:21 PM
18

Here's something you might not have known: men also suffer when they lose their fathers or sons or friends to combat! Women do not have a monopoly on feelings. So even if you claim that surviving lived ones suffer more than the dead, it still doesn't make women the primary victims of war.
/r/MensRights23/10/16 04:10 AM
2

In most countries you cannot do that without consent beforehand Are you sure about that? I'm fairly certain that if the person didn't explicitly forbid it, then the next of kin can make the decision. Yup. The process explicitly states: If the patient had not documented his/her decision to donate, the patient’s next of kin will be asked to consent to donation. So... What's the problem here?
/r/MensRights19/10/16 01:13 AM
4

If he is guilty he'll end up in jail Not if the statute of limitation has passed...
/r/MensRights15/10/16 02:29 PM
15

No, he admitted to providing then drugs in exchange for sex. "Drugging them" implies he admitted to making them interest drugs without their knowledge, which as far as I know he never admitted.
/r/MensRights15/10/16 11:59 AM
3

Not only the press, Congress too. They won't let Trump do anything real. Hillary on the other hand...
/r/MensRights13/10/16 10:49 PM
1

Is it illegal though? Definitely? What law are they breaking specifically? How is this illegal but having "girls pay less for drinks / entry" in bars not illegal? And that has been determined to not be illegal multiple times in ny.
/r/MensRights12/10/16 01:17 PM
2

In the Muslim world it often is. In Turkey for example circumcision is often performed at ages 11-13. It's a whole "coming off age" ceremony.
/r/MensRights11/10/16 12:34 PM
1

Here's the study that is given from your own link: http://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/69119 The most common is Type 1 (at 51%) followed by Type 2 (49%). Sure, not a huge difference. Unfortunately that study doesn't look at whether the clit itself was removed or not (doesn't look at sub-types). Which in one of the reasons I'm really sore about the FGM classifications. More than a lack of data for us to understand - it completely removes the incentive to stop removing the clit! Why? Because if we c…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 04:28 PM
1

Type 1 includes both type 1a and type 1b. Type 1 is the most common one used throughout Egypt, but it's the subtype 1a and not the subtype 1b (well, some do 1b, but it's rare in Egypt). Unfortunately, the WHO decided to call it clitoridectomy even when the clit itself isn't touch at all. Why? I could only guess. I mean, the name suggests that you remove the clit, right? So why call a procedure where you don't touch the clit a "clitoridectomy"? But I'm not one to decide these things. I mean, why …
/r/MensRights08/10/16 03:52 PM
1

Type 1a is performed in Egypt - so they don't actually touch the clit. You can read about Type 1a FGM if you don't believe me. They "only" remove the clit hood (basically the foreskin) - the formal definition is "removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce only" Type 1a FGM is actually much less invasive and has less long-term effects than MGM. And if you read the message I was responding to, they claimed that FGM is a much worse than MGM. Since FGM includes pin pricks, and includes type 1a, then th…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 03:28 PM
0

Did I say all of type 4 was harmless? Did I say that it was common? I said that type 4 includes pin pricks and is counted as FGM for statistics. Is that false in any way? And if pin pricks are indeed considered FGM, then why isn't circumcision considered MGM? Also, any thoughts about the Egypt thing? Do you consider what they do in Egypt as FGM?
/r/MensRights08/10/16 03:02 PM
4

FGM has a well understood meaning among people who discuss the issue seriously: Clitoral resection. Not true. People who discuss the issue seriously, like for example the UN and the world health organization (WHO) consider pin pricks and other non clit removing operations as FGM. Remember that recently there was an big stink about Egyptian FGM? Well, in Egypt the FGM does not remove or even touch the clit. It just cuts a small piece of skin. Yet everyone on Reddit was taking about it as FGM. Her…
/r/MensRights08/10/16 08:45 AM
7

Read what type IV FGM is. Basically, even a small pin prick (that causes "damage" lasting a few minutes, and has no longer term effects) is called FGM (and counted as such for statistics) So... Pin prick to vagina is FGM, but completely removing an important part of the premiss isn't MGM. Great.
/r/MensRights08/10/16 12:53 AM
5

Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. She said that. In public. In a speech. That's all you need to know about Hillary Clinton and men's rights.
/r/MensRights07/10/16 06:05 AM
2

I don't have "male privileges", I have "me privileges". The concept of "male privileges" assumes all males are the same and want the same thing etc. Let's take a random example that often brought up (I don't care right now if it's true or false): Men are more likely to get a job than a woman Men make more money at the same job as a woman (false, but often brought up) Is that a privilege? I'm married and have kids, is it a privilege that I can make more money than my wife? Is it a privilege that …
/r/MensRights01/10/16 07:24 PM
2

Because the financial support is to the child / state. Not to the woman. So she can't forfeit it. What they could maybe do is a contract where she personally had to reimburse him for Anne child support he is told to pay.
/r/MensRights10/09/16 03:26 PM
3

Not the law. The agreement they signed with the fertility clinic when creating the embryos.
/r/MensRights10/09/16 03:21 PM
2

This is Sexism. It's Sexism against men.
/r/MensRights09/09/16 11:42 PM
10

Came to say exactly that. In what works is stem work low stress?!
/r/MensRights09/09/16 11:40 PM
1

Men don't even get time off work for being sick in most places. What are these people talking about! And what do men get that's tax free exactly?!
/r/MensRights07/09/16 02:52 AM
5

What?! That's a really modern country! I was expecting like India or something in the middle East...
/r/MensRights07/09/16 12:02 AM
8

In what country is this?
/r/MensRights06/09/16 11:53 PM
2

Is he really saying that he's such a mangina, white knight You are a moron. And apparently lack reading comprehension. Here's obviously saying that he thinks her crime is much worse than he is allowed in his position punish appropriately. How do you even interpret it differently...? This is actually standard procedure in the UK - paying a case to a higher court for sentencing. Here, learn something: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/magistrates-court/
/r/MensRights28/08/16 10:36 AM
1

two consenting adults, Then by definition, they consented. It's impossible to have sex with a consenting adult without consent. As, you know, they consented. Hence the name "consenting" adults. If someone can prove they did NOT give consent, on the other hand, then they are not a consenting adult, now are they?
/r/MensRights22/08/16 06:18 PM
1

The Olympics ARE sexist by design. They give less competent women the same honors and time and resources as men, just because they are women. They discriminate based on gender. By design.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 12:37 PM
2

"just tell me what you want me to say! I'll say anything"
/r/MensRights15/08/16 07:01 PM
7

No. In sorry, no. Do you have kids? I have kids, and I high then everywhere. Including in bed. And this is obviously his bed, he's on the phone and his daughter came and wants some father time. Happens all the time with kids (and cats). If they see you're busy with something other than then - they come and try to get in the middle of it. And what's with this "sexy pose" bullshit? That's not a "sexy pose". That's a girl sitting. That right there is a beautiful father/daughter moment. That's a pic…
/r/MensRights07/08/16 02:19 AM
3

What's creepy here? A father having a good relationship with his daughter? If a father hugging his daughter creepy now?
/r/MensRights06/08/16 11:12 PM
3

So would you say that he "was convicted in spite of evidence that she lied about being raped"? Would you say that was a fair way of putting it? Because according to your standards that's exactly what happened.
/r/MensRights24/07/16 09:59 PM
-9

Cosby was confident in his legacy, and has a wide and important legacy. Now his legacy is in the toilet.
/r/MensRights23/07/16 07:48 PM
30

Exactly! Tank girl, and Charlie's Angels too - action hero women and stupid+ evil men. "Misogynist male geeks" liked them well enough. The difference: these movies said that the men in the movie are all stupid and evil. Ghostbusters on the other hand said that the men in the audience are stupid and evil.
/r/MensRights19/07/16 02:19 PM
47

Edit: just noticed might come off as sarcastic. I'm not... :) I have no problem with casting women as heros. Of course you don't. No one does. That's why the 'alien' series wad such a success and is still a staple of American cinema. Even an all girl cast. Of course you don't. No one does. Just look at the 'Charlie's Angels' series: All girl cast of heroes, virtually all men are mumbling idiots. No one cares. It's fun, light hearted action/comedy movies - exactly the style this Ghostbusters movi…
/r/MensRights19/07/16 11:35 AM
1

all I did was cite that study and say a lot of women in the workforce would be happier at home. What is wrong with that? Well, for one thing: why is only women happiness important? I'm sure men would rather not have to work and would prefer instead to stay at home with the TV and kids and stuff I was a stay at home dad for 2 years, and those were the best years of my life. I'd love to continue with that. Fuck this gynocentrism. "Apparently work isn't fun. Who knew? We should let women opt out"
/r/MensRights13/07/16 10:21 AM
42

We were not consulted, I don’t know who was consulted or even if a consultation happened. But we should have been asked, as an organization that deals as a matter of course with victims of sexual violence. We would have said that we believe they should have kept the clinic ‘women-only,’ Maybe that's why you weren't consulted? Also, fuck you.
/r/MensRights28/06/16 12:36 AM
2

the major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that the normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it. Catherine MacKinnon
/r/MensRights26/06/16 02:04 AM
3

No, because even in marriage the husband only gets to sleep with the wife if she consents. Otherwise it's rape... and I hope you don't need to be taught not to rape, right...? Anyway, while married the husband gets to sleep with the wife whenever she consents, and after the divorce as well - he still gets to sleep with her whenever she consents. There's no change there (although she "might" consent less...)
/r/MensRights15/06/16 11:06 PM
2

Yes. I just started seeing the lies at the core of left wing ideology. Wasn't even a feminist thing (the first "big lie" I caught from the left). But once that was out of the bag, I just couldn't stop seeing the lies.
/r/MensRights15/06/16 01:06 PM
1

Why is it misogyny though? Why does this show a hatred of women rather than a wrong presumption based on gender (sexism)?
/r/MensRights15/06/16 10:44 AM
4

Yes, and?
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:18 PM
16

Not Hollywood, feminists. Remember - Hollywood created that poster to begin with. Hollywood thought the image was just as acceptable as one where the male protagonist was beaten. It's feminists who lost their shit and forced Sony to change the poster. Edit: make -> male, list->lost, shot->shit
/r/MensRights06/06/16 05:00 PM
3

Am I expected to give money to every woman on the street? No, but if you choose to do so, you can't later sue them to get the money back. Also, 450£ over 2 years? That's not that much.
/r/MensRights04/06/16 10:14 AM
1

Add a 'v' at the end of the link to get a gifv which loads much faster. Gifv link: http://i.imgur.com/xhfIsNC.gifv
/r/MensRights04/06/16 10:09 AM
1

She was called mentally challenged from the beginning. It was, from the start, "two Palestinians required a mentally challenged woman". The fucked up thing is that the police tried to clear them, and even made a statement to that effect, but was forced by 'the powers that be' to retract their statement. Probably for political reasons...
/r/MensRights03/06/16 10:34 PM
10

Notice what they were discussing: men and women were able to use shared swimming pools for decades with little problem. Then new men from more violent parts of the world arrived. These men caused problems. So... let's lump all men together with these new violent 'savages' and discuss whether ALL men should be banned from certain times slots. Even though the local men did nothing wrong. Why? Because they share genitalic with the violent people. I mean, banning just the new immigrants, that would …
/r/MensRights31/05/16 10:42 AM
4

We should go the gun control route, and declare bathrooms as 'rapist free zones'. That will surely stop rapes!
/r/MensRights15/05/16 05:47 PM
14

Not only that males are rapists, but that as long as they are raping boys it's ok.
/r/MensRights15/05/16 01:40 PM
19

doubling You underestimate how much a family costs.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 04:58 PM
4

I wouldn't want them charged with tax evasion eitger. Nor with armed robbery. I'd want them charged with the crime they actually committed. I know it's a hard concept for you to grasp, but how about you make the effort?
/r/MensRights07/05/16 03:19 AM
2

No, i just dont call it rape.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 02:50 AM
2

That's true for a 5 y.o., for a 3 y.o., maybe for a 6 month old. NOT for a new born. They need to eat (30-45 mins) every 2-3 hours, day and night. When they don't eat they have gas and cry until you help them pass it. And diapers obviously. You barely have time to breath first 3 months.
/r/MensRights03/05/16 06:49 AM
5

She... she really thinks caring for a newborn is a vacation / time for reflection? Wow.
/r/MensRights02/05/16 06:40 PM
12

This is about domestic violence and sexual abuse inside the family. For comparison, i recall a study that claimed that in rhe US, when taking complains brought in the context of divorce, the numbers are 75% false allegations.
/r/MensRights26/04/16 04:20 AM
15

Actual translation: Dann, I wish I was raped so I could win more arguments. Well, I have more than 5 friends, and everybody knows 1 in 5 women are raped, so obviously I have a friend who was raped. That's close enough right?"
/r/MensRights25/04/16 12:39 AM
2

Except for plan B
/r/MensRights19/03/16 06:41 PM
2

Oh my god. Now any man who proclaims he hates the Matrix sequals will be branded a transphobe sexist mysoginist. Great.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 09:40 AM
9

Meh. It's a joke. It actually makes fun of the crazy 'patriarchy!!!1!' feminists, not of men.
/r/MensRights12/03/16 09:37 AM
4

It isn't the same definition. The Tennessee one specifically says the penetrated one is the victime. The fbi does not.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 11:17 PM
9

No, it isn't gender neutral. Because if you think of rape as 'sex without consent' then this removes a whole class of rape: rape of men by women.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 11:14 PM
7

Bad example. This legislation was introduced as a protest against 'legislating women's vagina'. The point was to show how absurd it is.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 07:59 PM
46

It's actually even worse than that. You know why? because men also lose their fathers and their sons in combat (and a lot of their friends) So not only is she erasing the dead male victimes, she also erases the surviving men who suffer at least as much as women according to her metric.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 05:31 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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