TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Grasshopper21 Archive

View 0 posts and 393 comments by Grasshopper21 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)
9

This happened in the UK. jail times are shorter
/r/MensRights09/02/19 06:07 PM
3

The easy explanation is that this is based on self reporting. Men inflate their number and women deflate.
/r/MensRights04/02/19 08:39 PM
1

My guess is they classified this as assisted suicide and pushed this as murder 2 and the charge was down graded to manslaughter
/r/MensRights25/01/19 05:29 PM
2

They literally can't meet the same standards. we've already proven that.
/r/MensRights23/12/18 05:38 AM
3

regarding the instance in which the accuser should be convicted. The current system is screwed because too much emphasis is placed on accusation. Are there enough facts to convict on either end should be the only thing that matters.
/r/MensRights19/12/18 08:22 PM
24

The allegations being unsubstantiated and the allegations being provably false are extremely different.
/r/MensRights19/12/18 02:35 PM
15

Just like any woman can also beat her kids.....
/r/MensRights13/12/18 01:13 PM
3

Not even that. Look at the left collumn. This was in response to hitler and the nazis gaining power. You have to remember that the nazi attack on the Jewish people began long, long before the attack on Poland.
/r/MensRights02/12/18 05:39 PM
6

You're really bad at reading past headlines
/r/MensRights02/12/18 03:31 PM
1

Those uh. Those were words.
/r/MensRights04/08/18 11:13 AM
19

it gets waaaayyyy worse when you go up the scale though. This time around winners get 38 million. or still less than 1% of the revenue generated.
/r/MensRights10/07/18 06:59 PM
65

That math checks out completely, because this was a quarterfinal loser. top 8 gets 1/8th pay of the winner. I'm fine with that sliding scale.
/r/MensRights10/07/18 06:53 PM
117

Show me a woman that is as capable productively in a mine, day in and day out, as a man. guaranteed you can't. These jobs are physically demanding. the harassment women love to allege is themselves being asked to actually pull their own weight.
/r/MensRights02/06/18 11:22 PM
2

except dui girl wasn't charged with anything. despite overwhelming evidence. tie it to the registry and investigation becomes mandatory
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:05 PM
4

it wouldn't effect reporting at all, other than to discourage false reports. they still have to prove you lied which requires evidence
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:30 PM
3

proving a false accusation is different than someone just lying, but it would at least compel investigation when someone is caught blatantly lying, like that dui girl a few weeks ago.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:28 PM
5

Didn't read the post, just the title. Yes. You come before your game. if your mental health is shit, your game is probably gonna be shit too. Lifting helps. remember guys. get out and lift.
/r/TheRedPill21/05/18 04:04 PM
12

I've watched more than 1 friend go absolutely crazy after starting to take the pill in their 20s
/r/TheRedPill19/05/18 06:32 PM
1

you're funny. the Hague does 0 enforcement. and again. 0 chance that the US is going to extradite a US citizen to Germany because someone filed in Germany. it's not going to happen.
/r/MensRights04/05/18 04:20 PM
20

The US is not going to extradite someone to germany because germany says that person owes child support in germany.
/r/MensRights04/05/18 01:08 AM
18

no they can't
/r/MensRights03/05/18 10:04 PM
5

I lean left. just found out today one of my co-workers is a fiscally conservative liberal...
/r/MensRights01/05/18 10:01 PM
4

and I'm saying that shaving is just as gender neutral as bike fixing. but i would agree if you specified straight razor shaving.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 10:36 AM
19

I would say that these are the same examples. Most women shave their legs. Face shaving isn't significantly different unless she taught him to straight razor shave.
/r/MensRights23/04/18 04:17 AM
3

rape kit is only effective after like 72 hours and you can't shower.
/r/MensRights17/04/18 01:54 PM
3

not sure why this was downvoted to hell.
/r/MensRights14/04/18 01:19 AM
5

except that isn't a bob
/r/MensRights09/04/18 12:01 PM
42

the guy should not be forced to acquire skills he doesn't want
/r/MensRights09/04/18 12:00 PM
14

except the dude is obviously a decent person and not a scum bag
/r/MensRights09/04/18 11:55 AM
21

As a man who regularly gets haircuts. wtf is an undercut?
/r/MensRights09/04/18 11:52 AM
2

both flirtatious and provocative are sexual in nature......
/r/MensRights03/04/18 09:17 PM
10

Maybe you don't remember hs enough? I heard girls talk openly about wearing certain clothes to get the attention of certain guys. The clothing was invariably slutty. is it always the case? no. Is it still a likely case ? yes. Do women want to admit to "slut" behavior? absolutely not. Will women shame men for their own shameful behavior? ABSOLUTELY
/r/MensRights03/04/18 04:32 PM
10

I only want to show my balls.
/r/MensRights03/04/18 04:29 PM
-24

I work in family law. the courts dont work like this, provided you show up and have your papers in order. the problem is the people that don't show up and then get about it. Edit:The lack of understanding is unreal. Are any of you actual attorneys? Do you practice Family Law? No? Ok. I support single fathers in my practice all the time. The #1 cause of fathers getting fucked over is lack of appearance and default judgement being entered. It is extremely difficult to overturn a default judgement …
/r/MensRights29/03/18 05:48 PM
2

tbf, I am a family law attorney. sole custody is a unicorn, unless you put in 0 effort
/r/MensRights27/03/18 03:26 AM
52

I'd like to see the reverse
/r/MensRights16/03/18 01:08 PM
148

So those should be options given to the accuser though. Those would still be considered punishment by most and There should be no penalty for accusations alone.
/r/MensRights21/02/18 08:14 PM
1

It wasnt upvoted to r/all. I just checked.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 11:02 PM
5

Ah a brilliant ad hominem attack
/r/MensRights28/01/18 10:57 PM
6

Right. the problem is that most of these seats were designed 50-60 years ago when men were smaller. The average man in the 60s was 5'8 and 160lbs. now a days the average man is closer to 6' and 190 something pounds. a 5'8 can get his necessary 30 degree comfort spread and not be infringing on the person next to him.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 10:52 PM
1

So you're saying that manspreading is the sexual initiation of the west...
/r/MensRights28/01/18 10:44 PM
2

You clearly just hated the last Jedi because it gave women all of the good powerful roles. /s side note; since when can every ship with a warp drive be used as death star laser. also why does everyone suddenly just get force powers :/.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 10:23 PM
1

Totes?? And this post got brigaded to hell.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 10:11 PM
7

Ah. so that's why the top comments are trolly as fuck and most of the comments look like terrible brigading.
/r/MensRights28/01/18 05:49 PM
12

As someone who works in crim law. No. just no. You know what I'd be ok with rape cases being handled the way feminists want, if the punishment was a fine like a parking ticket. You can have your day in court, he can speedily admit to being a rapist, pay $500 and everyone can go home.
/r/MensRights22/01/18 12:52 PM
-10

your anecdote is irrelevant
/r/MensRights05/01/18 06:27 PM
10

I think the point is more along the lines of "even though we have the same job title, hers was earned under a lesser standard amd she is goig to do less work than me yet receive the same pay. wtf?"
/r/MensRights05/01/18 06:25 PM
4

every day you're toxic apparently
/r/MensRights28/12/17 08:09 PM
24

I like how "Proceed with caution" really means "I've been told by everyone why I'm wrong, but I don't like that, so it's their fault." You sound like a feminist mate.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 03:33 PM
0

wrong.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 10:34 PM
0

It appears that the only reason this child was circumcised was to prove that it is harmful. The child could not consent and the parent's ability to consent on their behalf for something this extreme is highly questionable. I reiterate, circumcision is legal in Canada under all circumstances. The circumcision isn't the part that the researchers were told was unethical. It was the god damn MRI. You can do the operation for whatever reason, you're just not allowed to learn from it. Fuck. That. Nois…
/r/MensRights08/11/17 12:52 PM
0

I don't buy it. This is a study that needs to be done. Outright banning it is highly problematic. I would understand if it was an experimental procedure or something. This was simply seeing what effect a highly prevalent procedure actually has by using an existing highly common test. I see nothing unethical with it after obtaining the parent's consent. If a parent can consent to having a portion of their child's dick chopped off, then why shouldn't they be allowed to consent to an MRI for their …
/r/MensRights08/11/17 05:10 AM
1

Except circumcision is legal in Canada, under all circumstances. Why should it be ok to cut off an infant's foreskin for mumbojumbo book reasons but not ok for research?
/r/MensRights08/11/17 04:33 AM
1

presumably with parental consent.....
/r/MensRights07/11/17 02:42 AM
5

Then allow for the research. Shit is just banned outright. I'm more ok with the docs doing research in the face of the blanket ban.
/r/MensRights06/11/17 10:32 PM
9

Right, but that is actual human experimentation. I understand the concern for oversight. However you are comparing actual experimenting to giving an infant a post operation and preoperation MRI. If we are going to argue about the consent in the matter, the circumcision should be the nonconsensual issue, not the MRI and the study is only relevant to the MRI results. Essentially, the operation was going to happen regardless (parents wishes or whatever). All these doctors did was monitor the infant…
/r/MensRights06/11/17 07:59 PM
0

the comment was written before you replied. I checked before commenting. It was written a full 15 minutes before you replied. Your ignorance was at that point inexusable. The fact that you feel so weak personally that you have to resort to name calling is rather sad. I pity you for your small mindedness. Please, do us all a favor and keep your mouth closed if you have nothing good to say. Its quite frankly embarrassing.
/r/MensRights06/11/17 07:51 PM
10

I don't see a key difference between ethical regulation and law. If you'd care to elaborate? They performed an MRI. That was the "research on human subjects" that you are taking such great issue with. You sound ridiculous.
/r/MensRights06/11/17 03:46 PM
4

The CDC does far more than their namesake would suggest. He commented a lengthier reply literally 1 comment up. The fact that you couldn't be bothered to read literally 1 line above tells me something about you. And its not good. You really should educate yourself before replying. Even if you google "What does the CDC do" the answer is pretty damn clear. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is a federal agency that conducts and supports health promotion, prevention and preparedne…
/r/MensRights06/11/17 03:16 PM
14

I think you missed the word "any" in that last paragraph. There is no proper procedure. All attempts to study the procedure are banned by law.
/r/MensRights06/11/17 03:10 PM
1

x = 5 miles
/r/MensRights19/09/17 10:02 PM
23

can we grey a misleading title tag on this post? the girl hasn't avoided jail at all. its 3 years in a psychiatric ward or 10 years in jail. Shes being punished for her crimes in an appropriate and judicious manner.
/r/MensRights17/09/17 01:39 PM
3

i wouldn't call engaging in risky politics like war a strength, but rather a poor resut due to labor being divided
/r/MensRights15/09/17 12:08 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/706n2s/cuz_only_men_can_declare_wars/dn1c3id/
/r/MensRights15/09/17 11:36 AM
10

Not when you look at it on a% scale. someone linked a study that states queens were 27% more likely to initiate war.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 11:34 AM
1

you forgot your pile of downvotes buddy.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 11:32 AM
4

I dont see how #2 is bad history. Its a factual truth.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 11:32 AM
9

Are we actually going to call going to war a strengthened reigning capacity?
/r/MensRights15/09/17 11:27 AM
3

The difference is whether or not men only is allowed. here in the US, men only things aren't allowed anymore.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 12:08 PM
0

ummmmmmmmmmmmmmm
/r/MensRights05/08/17 06:00 PM
6

They have all of these things. Whats there to fight for?
/r/MensRights05/08/17 04:46 PM
6

what if he/she shows up to work in a clan robe?
/r/MensRights05/08/17 02:21 PM
32

Feminism is misandry
/r/MensRights05/08/17 02:20 PM
1

because you're using a stat from the US?
/r/MensRights25/07/17 10:51 AM
1

Your main point is based off a totally irrelevant statistic......
/r/MensRights25/07/17 02:43 AM
5

Maybe you shouldn't have studied feminist issue in college? Its your own choices that have led to your own shit life lol.
/r/MensRights19/07/17 03:34 PM
3

They still made those choices and probably should feel bad about themselves for marrying someone for money.
/r/MensRights19/07/17 03:33 PM
18

Weird that you've gotten yourself downvoted into oblivion for being a trite cunt.
/r/MensRights19/07/17 03:31 PM
3

women in finance made 30% less when not controlling for job title, experience, or certification. Well shit I'm surprised its not greater when you have secretaries in finance compared against high end money managers
/r/MensRights12/07/17 02:55 PM
0

It is about name recognition man. A studio won't pay you a lot if people don't know you. And I can assure you while the Tudors probably earned him several mil over 38 episodes, his movie quote won't be based on that as actors are typically paid per episode. The immortals may have given him a base quote, but that was probably still very low because he didn't have anything but the Tudors as a reference.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:52 PM
0

Cool. A premium channel show that most people never even heard of, a shit movie, and 3 pieces of garbage. Yea, those are definitely going to draw tons of people in based on name recognition.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:28 PM
2

I'm not saying the tudors was bad show. But when you are only known for a premium channel show, you aren't drawing people in by your name. The tudors was certainly what jump started his movie career, but no one was going to pay him more than schedule F, because he had never starred in any major films before. He probably did make a large amount from BvS for the reasons you listed.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:25 PM
1

Yup. I don't even see the point of this main post. I mean ffs Vanity Fair came out against this lie. Like a very biased, feminist site said "Even we aren't dumb enough to report this as a gender pay gap issue"
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:16 PM
0

No. He really didn't.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:14 PM
0

1 TV show that a lot of people have never seen, where he isn't even the main star (Top billing went to Jonathan Rhys Meyers). Yea that totally makes him a prime celeb that will draw tons of people in based on his name alone...... Face it man, he was an unknown before the superman film.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 04:13 PM
0

or Cavill before Man of Steel lol.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 11:38 AM
1

pretty sure thats how negotiations work bro. this is exactly how RDJ made 50m on Avengers
/r/MensRights21/06/17 11:36 AM
2

Are you seriously mocking my use of the term bitch in reference to a murderous cunt?
/r/MensRights30/04/17 07:33 PM
2

Did you not read the rest of what I wrote? Pros has to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Her story casts some amount of doubt (I guess). But really, I'm fine with using a preponderance standard in my own opinion of her. I'll reiterate. You don't ride a motorcyclists rear tire for 300 ft, until he rolls, without intending the person harm. Would I go as far as to say she intended to kill him? No. But she intended to hit him.
/r/MensRights30/04/17 07:30 PM
6

The bitch ran some dude over intentionally. You don't ride down a motorcyclist's rear tire while going at least 80mph without intending them some kind of harm. Her excuse was he kicked her car and flipped her off so she chased after him for his insurance. Bullshit.
/r/MensRights30/04/17 06:59 PM
89

She faced 11 years, but the judge gave her six. this is the real story. She should have gotten the full 11 with parole at 6. not 6 with parole at like 3.
/r/MensRights30/04/17 02:13 PM
1

you are incorrectly correlating convictions and commissions.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 05:15 PM
1

i think absent actual evidence both should be treated with skepticism
/r/MensRights29/04/17 05:13 PM
1

it wasn't "mandatory " though until there was a threat behind the mandate
/r/MensRights29/04/17 05:11 PM
8

Sounds about right? I demand proof before I destroy someone's life on your word alone. Why is that a hard thing to grasp? And the difference is that children are afforded a different kind of status. Its not usually the child claiming to be molested, but a psychologist evaluating the child after a parent has made claims and then based on the professional evaluation, a rough determination is made.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 01:06 PM
3

Pure facts disagree. They are far more likely to be prosecuted and convicted for the exact same crimes as white men. I could go on, but that point by itself should suffice.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 01:02 PM
11

Obama made it worse by making the enforcement mandatory. Up until the letter, enforcement was definitely a rare beast. After the letter, usage of kangaroo courts sky rocketed, because god forbid the colleges lose their fed funding.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 01:00 PM
1

I think the best solution to this problem is to let the courts handle it and in the mean time issue both students a no-contact order.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 12:58 PM
1

so this was really just her being upset that he didnt also follow beyonce
/r/MensRights25/04/17 06:18 PM
1

mostly yelling at the boys for displaying a behavior and coddling the girls for displaying the same behavior.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 10:16 AM
1

She was not adjudicated not guilty. Also, we all know that charges for false accusations of rape, are at present, non-existent. The latter is far more important than the former. If false accusations were something that actually got charged, I'd be less willing to speculate. However, the current system directly refuses to institute charges in such matters.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 03:54 PM
1

The point is that you shouldn't go around assuming someone is still guilty even after they've been deemed not guilty. That is the assumption he is making.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 03:42 PM
1

You hyper cherry picked this statement with no context. Kudos on getting me to waste 15 minutes reading this case though and learning that a lot of why the evidence is deemed unreliable is because witnesses are providing false testimony........ Seems kinda familiar.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 10:17 AM
1

Actually. When an officer obtains a confession in violation of the individual's rights, the only thing that doesn't come in is the confession. If the case cannot be proven without the confession, then it was a sham of a case to begin with. Maybe if you actually knew how the law worked you'd know that. Maybe if you actually understood the concept of innocent until proven guilty as the commenter above suggested, you wouldn't be getting downvoted into oblivion.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 10:11 AM
2

You are assuming all over the damn place. And you are the one that has no idea how the law works lol. And check my previous comment. I never said the word innocent.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 05:11 AM
8

No. We shouldn't stay open to the possibility he might have done it. A court of law stated that as a matter of fact, he did not do it. After that, there is no more. Stop trying to assume he could still be guilty.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 03:41 AM
8

https://danceswithfat.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/jump-to-conclusions-mat.jpg
/r/MensRights17/04/17 02:44 AM
12

the possibility that he did actually sexually assault children
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:59 AM
23

well said 420weedscopes. i used to be a kindergarten aid and the way the 2 female teachers treated the male students compared to the female students was reprehensible.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:14 AM
27

Now you're making assumptions and indirect accusations without proof. And that is kinda the root of this entire issue.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 12:12 AM
3

in
/r/MensRights13/03/17 08:37 PM
23

My dick is so huge it prevents me from getting that close to the ground. I'd just balance on top of it like a table, stuck in the air at bed top height.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 06:14 PM
37

Yes. Sadly
/r/MensRights13/03/17 06:10 PM
1

As a matter of fact, they do.
/r/MensRights10/03/17 03:10 AM
6

I'm saying its obviously not parody
/r/MensRights09/03/17 06:05 PM
3

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Ive heard women mention mansplaining in casual conversation, the idea/view obviously isn't extreme. in fact this woman acts much like the women ive heard dicuss mansplaining, so its also not an exaggeration.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 05:32 PM
36

the original didnt feel like parody. maybe because it wasnt actually funny. but the guy commenting definitely didnt help. especially the last like minute or 2. weird ass rant for no real reason.
/r/MensRights09/03/17 04:32 PM
0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHFy3YWpRx8
/r/MensRights03/03/17 12:13 PM
2

i love that the bitch in the bottom reply is also white. lol.
/r/MensRights27/02/17 08:13 PM
5

I can honestly say I didn't think it from the title, but I did think it from the top comment. The quote makes the court of appeals judge the only subject in the sentence to which ex-wife could apply.
/r/MensRights13/02/17 09:16 PM
6

I completely disagree. I have a constitutional right to face my accuser and people have shown time and time again that they cannot be trusted with the power to anonymously destroy another person's life. People are petty and vindictive and shouldn't be able to even attempt to influence another's life without coming forward and putting their own face out there.
/r/MensRights01/02/17 06:43 PM
3

i think father's organizing in this fashion ate the minority group. i think her statement is a call for mass organization rather than fringe organization to achieve goals
/r/MensRights30/01/17 11:28 PM
1

You do realize that without the mother's consent, you can't sign the birth certificate right?
/r/MensRights08/11/16 02:27 AM
1

Your reply doesn't really address the issue, it just restates the problem. I know the problem, but what is the answer? And don't say don't have kids. The whole point is to have kids to carry on a legacy.
/r/MensRights08/11/16 02:27 AM
2

How are you going to have heirs? Most people with that much money want to leave a legacy to inherit.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 06:18 PM
2

I for one am laying down and fat.
/r/MensRights21/10/16 11:43 PM
1

Or is it?
/r/MensRights05/10/16 08:01 PM
0

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PTAXUYLbFYk
/r/MensRights05/10/16 01:41 PM
0

Forgot to include 90% of all rape victims are men
/r/MensRights18/07/16 11:01 AM
-23

It is presumed and implied coercion. You literally cant not have coercion between teacher and student.
/r/MensRights30/06/16 07:03 PM
-7

I think you missed the point.
/r/MensRights31/05/16 11:03 AM
34

You are assumed to be able to making minimum wage. Also it's % based. So enjoy losing 20% of your already sub-living wage every week.
/r/MensRights28/05/16 05:27 PM
6

The problem is that the American capitalism we have isn't really the way capitalism should be run. The current system has no community based returns and is only about profit to the exclusion of all else. Howe are we supposed to build a better workforce when everyone is referred to as a drone instead of a human being? What incentive is there to advance?
/r/TheRedPill21/05/16 08:52 PM
1

Tbf, true free market just wouldn't have those useless jobs
/r/TheRedPill21/05/16 08:44 PM
2

Does every other group constantly claim to be based on and work exclusively for the pursuit of equality?
/r/TheRedPill10/05/16 07:34 PM
10

Your symbols are backwards
/r/TheRedPill10/05/16 01:09 PM
42

This is the weirdest avocation of Islam
/r/TheRedPill10/05/16 12:22 PM
131

Feminism doesn't want equality. Never has, never will.
/r/TheRedPill10/05/16 12:19 PM
9

I'm torn about it. Because if the draft ever got used we'd be fucked. We would probably be fucked regardless due to obesity. Actually, why the shit do we even still have the draft. Can't we accomplish foot soldier effect with drones and robots?
/r/MensRights30/04/16 01:54 AM
4

I sincerely believe you'll never rape anyone
/r/MensRights29/04/16 04:49 AM
-2

Its basically rape
/r/MensRights07/03/16 08:17 AM
-11

Your info is outdated by almost a decade?
/r/MensRights07/03/16 08:14 AM
2

To be perfectly honest many women dont realize that men's razors are more effective. They see the higher price and think better quality
/r/MensRights05/03/16 06:19 PM
14

This is one that I've never understood. Women's razors are legitimately twice the price of men's, and I know my razor definitely works better than my gf's.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 04:36 AM
3

I personally find dead baby jokes distasteful. I will actively ask people to not tell dead baby jokes. Sometimes people listen when you ask them not to do something, sometimes they don't. What I'm not going to do is blast someone all over social media for making a joke I don't agree with.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 02:40 PM
1

The strat on the camels back?
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:36 PM
5

A significant number of men and women think it's unreasonable for a man to react negatively to being groped by a woman.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:35 PM
1

Screw that, ugly britches need to be told they're ugly
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:33 PM
2

Mind blown. This makes to much sense
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:32 PM
0

And thus you have ignored the entire point of the argument. Talking to you is pointless. You can reply, but I won't read it. Peace bitches.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 02:20 AM
0

Are you a necromancer? We are talking about the best interest of the child. If we are placing the interests of the child over the interests of one parent then we must do so for both parents. Either the child has both an interest in being born, superseding the mother's rights, and the support of the father, superseding the father's rights, OR you have no "best interest of the child" argument that I am willing to accept as you are placing the child's interests over one parent, but under the other.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 09:22 PM
0

Pregnancy = Child. The best interest of the child is in being born. On average even a really crappy parent that didn't want kids is better than a foster care situation.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 01:15 PM
5

Both. You can't allow one person to make a decision that ducks another
/r/MensRights07/02/16 09:54 PM
1

In order. Yes. No. No.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 07:42 PM
5

It would force women to be a lot more careful about who they have sex with, knowing that their partner doesn't have to have their back. Not necessarily a bad thing.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 07:40 PM
16

Then you have to make abortion / surrender illegal.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 07:39 PM
1

You're a cunt. And no amount of refuting is going to change that fact.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 04:11 AM
2

You're just flat out wrong lol.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 11:39 PM
3

I was going to say something, but /u/skee_ said everything I was going to.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 09:11 PM
1

Or the only solution left to you. If your ex is spanking the kids, you have to get the government involved or deal with the fact that someone is beating your kids.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 09:10 PM
1

I think CPS is the answer at that point
/r/MensRights01/02/16 05:43 PM
-8

Sorry, no kids.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 02:37 PM
9

My immediate thought was that they should make a death row exception here.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 02:36 PM
2

The households other than your own thing is a weird one though if it's also your kid.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 02:35 PM
15

I'll take door #3 Bob
/r/MensRights01/02/16 02:33 PM
135

No. His statement taken as a whole is very factual. Humans as a whole may be very cruel. But we have only legalized the cruelty of women. There are very few limits to the cruelty of women.
/r/MensRights01/02/16 02:32 PM
15

I've never understood the insistence that multiculturalism is a good thing. I'm perfectly fine in my predominantly Anglo European neighborhood and don't need other cultures mixing in. The amount of cultural tip toeing and foot stompin that occurs isn't worth the ability to say, yay we're multicultural.
/r/TheRedPill14/01/16 02:32 PM
1

I'm sickened by the fact that the article Starts with the words a mother. Bitch killed her kid. Ain't a mother no more.
/r/MensRights20/12/15 11:58 AM
4

No. That's not how consent works.
/r/MensRights17/12/15 01:54 PM
3

Or you're Ron Jeremy
/r/MensRights14/12/15 03:18 PM
-1

The government does exactly that. It defines the act itself. A lack of accusations cannot be factored into statistics. That is not ever evidence, its literally someone pulling a number out of their ass. For the purpose of statistics, whether or not a rape has occurred is determined by a court. Because absent a conviction, you have no other basis for a statistic. I've told you time and time again that you're wrong and clearly I'm right and you're just a moron. You have proved literally nothing an…
/r/MensRights10/12/15 07:07 AM
1

I mean the study basically admits to itself that its bullshit. It takes some EXTREME logical loopholes to actually believe that 80% of rapes go unreported.......
/r/MensRights10/12/15 06:59 AM
1

Determining what evidence is relevant as a matter of law is dictated by the law first, and the court second. I don't know why you're being thick about it. The FRE has even stripped the courts ability to admit some kinds of evidence in these proceedings. But regardless, the distinction I'm making is on a crime that's severity has been so diminished that it should no longer qualify as a violent crime. In our society the label "rapist" has become far too damaging, essential a minor conviction in it…
/r/MensRights10/12/15 06:52 AM
-1

Legal definition is the only definition cared about in relation to whether or not a crime has been committed.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 06:47 AM
-1

It does change the fact that the person raped you. That is the whole point of the innocent until proven guilty system. You don't get to just go around calling that person your rapist until there is a conviction. Without one you are slandering an innocent person.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 06:35 AM
1

You have the best linking skills, Tell me why is Rape: (an Old World herb (Brassica napus) of the mustard family grown as a forage crop and for its seeds which yield rapeseed oil and are a bird food) a crime? But seriously, without a conviction, you can't say that a rape has occurred, because legally it hasn't, and all you are doing is slandering the innocent when you do.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 04:20 AM
1

We have a system of innocent until proven guilty. You can hum and haw all you like, but the fact of the matter is that until a conviction is made, no one was raped and no one is a rapist and no one is a victim. Uh no. The states have been rewriting rape statutes. To make it so that there is less evidence needed to prove guilt. This comes from the removal of resistance requirements and the declassification of rape as a violent crime, though still with the same penalties which is absurd. States su…
/r/MensRights10/12/15 04:18 AM
1

You would be correct.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 04:12 AM
1

You are missing the point. absent a conviction, there are no actual rapes committed, merely accusations. And accusations are exactly that, accussations. I can accuse you of raping me, even get a police report made up, hell if I get creative with evidence tampering I could probably get you arrested. But until you are convicted, no crime has occurred. No actual rape.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 03:04 AM
1

I don't concede anything. Absent a conviction, no crime has been committed. To quote the old adage. Nothing is illegal until you get caught. Further, it is not a disagreement of case law. It is a difference of substantive law. State legislatures have been rewriting the rules.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 03:01 AM
2

It is THE exact number of rapes in the country. Everything else is hogwash and guesswork at best.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 02:22 AM
2

Because as far as we actually, legally know, people aren't getting away with heinous crimes. At best we have hearsay evidence, which is highly suspect and often not evidence at all, coupled with conflated and faked figures. We should require physical evidence for conviction when the only witnesses are the two consenting individuals. As far as I'm concerned you should have to disprove consent.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 02:21 AM
11

These aren't confirmed cases. They are reports. Something like 1/4 actually lead to arrest, usually lack of evidence (shocker). Convictions might be 1/3 of that. And convictions is the number we should be concerned about as it is the actual number of rapes committed. Everything but the convictions number is a figure blown grossly out of proportion.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:56 AM
2

Also be aware that this is reports. Not arrests. That figure is super low and certainly not convictions, which is the number of actual rapes occurring. Try something like .00001% of the population is raped each year.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:52 AM
2

Something something George Zimmerman
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:49 AM
2

I would posit that some evidence other than his testimony should be required.
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:46 AM
1

Also evidence. We should take evidence seriously
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:45 AM
1

Doesn't the info graphic do exactly that by claiming 1/5?
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:35 AM
2

My boot feels triggered by your ass
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:30 AM
1

If only women would stop attracting them
/r/MensRights10/12/15 01:28 AM
5

They are already knowledge raping people. Making up enough bullshit that people start to point to it and say see its fact.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 10:54 PM
1

Username checks out. but no one cares.
/r/MensRights06/12/15 10:52 PM
43

I feel like someone at the CDC just looked at the CB report and said "meh, not attention grabbing enough. I'll add a 0"
/r/MensRights06/12/15 10:51 PM
1

I don't either, but winning pro se has about the same odds as god answering your prayers.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 03:57 PM
8

If he was, then he really should be thanking god.
/r/MensRights07/11/15 03:06 AM
2

If the genders were reversed, there wouldn't have been a trial in the first place.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 05:24 PM
1

No. What I am saying is how do you treat the person that has had surgery that legally changes him from penis to tits and vagina?
/r/MensRights30/10/15 05:23 PM
5

| In our rush to push away violent men as 'other-than-us' we are often blinded to how our actions can facilitate a culture of violence against women I got that far in and noped out.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:33 PM
0

This title is really misleading. She is making that statement to put a kind of fear into the young man, whom she is sentencing with probation. Could she have been more eloquent? Yes. Would it have the same impact on the young man whose excuse for committing crime was "I was acting young and dumb"? probably not.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:31 PM
2

OK. So I'm only going off reading the article, but she is labeled as schizophrenic, I do believe that we should be geared towards treatment rather than imprisonment of said people, or do like that Scandinavian country and make a fake town for the mentals. That being said, false rape accusations need to have an actual punishment attached and pronation is bs. Idk how the UK works it, but I'd like to see her face US quality felony status for this, because that's what the guy would face. I'd also ad…
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:22 PM
3

TBH your wants at 11 don't trump the legal system.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:14 PM
0

I think we can all agree that the dad is a shitty person based on his testimony. That does not change the fact that the woman committed statutory rape. In the US atleast, being of infirm mind is no excuse to SR. There are cases of men with 65 and below IQ having sex with underage girls and being convicted.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:12 PM
0

If I'm not mistaken, the judge isn't supposed to extrapolate non existent facts INTO a statutory rape case.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:09 PM
-1

I like your argument, but would we be OK with different consent ages based on gender? And I am loathe to mention this, but where gender reassignment surgery is a reality, how do we treat the boys who become girls within that gap.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:07 PM
4

I just wrote a 2 paragraph epitaph on how we shouldn't be using the court of opinion or labeling, because that sort of system invariably hurts men. Didn't realize the woman was convicted but not sentenced. Fuck this bitch for raping a child.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 02:04 PM
3

Since men. Sadly BWS got legalized as a condition. That threw a giant wrench in equality.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 01:51 PM
1

Ah the almighty dollar.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 01:23 PM
1

Hey now. I personally long for the day when congestion and traffic jams are 90% eliminated due to cars that don't allow you to pump your breaks or rubber neck. Also an abolishment of DUI, DWI, and petty driving offenses
/r/MensRights30/10/15 01:21 PM
1

Ehh, it's statutory rape or the codified equivalent. This is probably the only form of SR that should be strict liability.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 01:11 PM
1

They're exactly the kind of women you meet drunk cycling aren't they?
/r/MensRights26/10/15 04:55 AM
-2

Directions unclear. Dick caught in her ass.
/r/MensRights26/10/15 04:54 AM
1

Do you need to talk?
/r/MensRights26/10/15 04:51 AM
1

I want to beat all of you with used tampons.
/r/MensRights22/10/15 12:21 AM
3

Which apparently you are to dumb to understand means correlative.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:36 PM
3

The two instances are not correlative in the slightest, because 1 The gender gap is a myth, where as Family Court bias against men is a proven fact. 2. Even if we are to suspend logic and take for granted the incorrect allegations of a gender pay gap, the LEAST appropriate person to advocate for its existence is someone who refutes every notion of a gender pay gap, by doing less work than her male colleagues and receiving greater pay for said less work.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 07:33 PM
3

You can, but can wasn't the issue. Should was the issue. And the should of the matter is she shouldn't, because her personal perspective is a direct refute to the position she is trying to support.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:40 PM
3

People making 5 million a year have no place to complain about wage gaps, especially when they are making more then their colleagues..... Its simple logic.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:28 PM
5

Its not that she made more than we are lead to believe. Its that she did less work and still made more than her colleagues. Its a full reversal on any notion of a gender pay gap. Making her a HORRENDOUS spokes person for feminists on this issue.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:14 PM
8

And you're going to get downvoted on insisting that people answer your imposed argument. We all know that your logic is flawed and we are refusing to play to your childish insistence. Have a nice life.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:12 PM
-3

No idea why you're getting downvoted. Both points are extremely accurate. Being a strong woman is a trait I would actually be more likely to associate with being a cunt.
/r/MensRights20/10/15 06:08 PM
1

Ditto
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:59 PM
1

White men.
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:58 PM
1

Coercion does not negate consent. Some one who "tricks" you info having sex with them does not make them a rapist anymore than a woman who demands favors of her husband in exchange for sex. Ie tricking him into doing something for sex. You have every right to nope out of either situation. Now if one party uses a legitimate threat of violence then you've got a claim. But that legitimate threar needs to be A. Provable beyond a reasonable doubt (like you better have an audio record or something equ…
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:53 PM
0

Or, according to our society., especially if it's fake
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:44 PM
0

Eh. Sometimes it feels really good to just put a person in their place
/r/MensRights17/10/15 09:41 PM
1

But what about ma feels argument?
/r/MensRights02/10/15 11:47 PM
3

Christina Hoff Sommers actually came and did a debate at my law school last year. Against her they had this nit wit feminist. In the debate, Sommers absolutely crushed the feminist. Sadly after the debate I heard multiple colleagues discussing Sommers, dismissing every one of her opinions as anti feminist........
/r/MensRights02/10/15 06:53 PM
20

to anyone who doesn't follow women's tennis, its the truth.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 08:57 AM
2

Do not follow this crap advice. Never talk to police.
/r/MensRights06/09/15 03:28 AM
8

I have a great appreciation for classic restorations because a lot of time goes into it. What I have 0 appreciation for is the douche that comes rolling around the neighborhood at 1 am reving his mustang / ricer.
/r/TheRedPill01/09/15 01:19 PM
2

I don't spout such opinions in the name of men's rights.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 02:17 AM
2

Or ice actually read up on the history of feminism and know that the movement has never actually been about equality and that the ones you say aren't really feminists ate just the ones showing their true colors
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:47 AM
1

Again. WalKS like a duck, talks like a duck, aND calls itself a duck makes it a duck. You can use all the words you want to insist it's note a duck, but is a deck
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:43 AM
0

You will never convince me that feminists is a legitimate movement
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:39 AM
-1

You're trying to state that there isn't a problem or that the people causing the problem aren't really the problem.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 01:18 AM
-3

Which would still be feminists........ just because you don't want to admit that the duck is a duck doesn't mean its not a duck. Every time this argument is made I equate the person making the argument to climate change deniers.
/r/MensRights26/08/15 12:23 AM
-1

No. No it doesn't make sense.
/r/MensRights25/08/15 12:22 AM
1

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/a-lot-of-people-misuse-the-word-chivalry.jpg
/r/MensRights19/08/15 04:24 PM
1

Hey now. I love medieval warfare.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 01:43 PM
11

I swear officer, the ax just suddenly grew out of her spine and she proceeded to promptly drop dead.
/r/TheRedPill19/08/15 02:08 AM
2

The real lesson to take from this is that men don't have any need of women outside of relationship / plate status. The faster you let them know this, the better off you'll be.
/r/TheRedPill12/08/15 01:33 PM
24

I mean they sound the same right?
/r/MensRights12/08/15 12:51 PM
1

If every soldier is a feminist I think that sounds pretty bueno
/r/MensRights31/07/15 03:44 PM
14

OMG please. can we turn the draft into a feminist only operation instead of men only and then actually utilize the draft. I would love to watch their collective hamster explosion.
/r/MensRights31/07/15 03:04 AM
4

So classify it as sexual assault. Make false accusers sign up for the registry. Because if some chick has false accused someone once of rape I really want nothing to do with her and would like to be able to steer clear.
/r/TheRedPill17/07/15 03:49 PM
5

"Before obama reclassified sexual harassment as discrimination" FTFY
/r/TheRedPill17/07/15 11:51 AM
6

What we should do. Is get false accusations into the category of sexual harassment!
/r/TheRedPill17/07/15 11:50 AM
1

I feel like this is semi relevant https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0-EpD_Udss
/r/TheRedPill15/07/15 11:32 AM
5

This is why I have no ambition to work in family court in any aspect. I would play wayyyyy too much hardball.
/r/TheRedPill14/07/15 02:59 PM
7

As someone with aspirations of becoming a judge, I can assure you that equal rights will be met with equal lefts.
/r/TheRedPill14/07/15 12:42 PM
1

I wouldnt agree with an after video, because that still gives the women the ability to change her mind after the fact and now there would be a recording of it.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 12:30 PM
9

I started to well up with respect at "something something vending machines" and how butt hurt everyone gets after that. This is fucking hilarious.
/r/TheRedPill02/07/15 05:29 PM
15

The thought that just went through my brain was that men should get uniform full body reptile tattoos so that they couldn't be identified from one another. Lizard Bros unite. I am Spartacus. It's been a long day...
/r/TheRedPill23/06/15 09:22 PM
1

Can we get condom tampering on the same level of offenses as pill tampering?
/r/MensRights19/06/15 08:13 PM
0

I'm gonna go with the number of women is wayyyy higher by default because they effectively get paid by the state to cap out kids where as guys are on the hook for a lot. Tons of incentives vs almost 0 incentive.
/r/MensRights19/06/15 08:11 PM
2

I think someone mentioned it an earlier post in TRP, but the fact that you had to even include a /s is really sad
/r/MensRights19/06/15 08:05 PM
1

The state won't make a woman keep and raise her rape baby. Why should a man have to pay for his rapist to raise the resulting child?
/r/MensRights19/06/15 11:30 AM
1

I'm sitting at the opposite end of the spectrum . My girl weighs 86lbs.
/r/TheRedPill16/06/15 06:26 PM
3

So it's not ironic, but hypocritical? You can't do something extremely hateful and then just say "haha jk" the real world doesn't work that way.
/r/MensRights28/05/15 09:26 PM
2

..........
/r/MensRights28/05/15 09:24 PM
0

So.... Yea..... You're still not solving world problems. "Know the futility of a life's work to be but nothing more than an over soliloquized phrase to be uttered by those who at great length profess their dearth of knowledge." - Grasshopper21
/r/MensRights11/05/15 09:48 PM
-1

The point is that philosophy and history are useless unless you want to teach. They lack real world application. You aren't going to solve any world issues with your history degree........
/r/MensRights11/05/15 07:46 PM
0

2 of those also don't do anything.....
/r/MensRights11/05/15 06:58 PM
1

Eh. In a society that removes people's ability to fend for themselves by placing a monetary standard on everything, without economic motility a person's biological traits of survival become inextricably linked to their parent's affluence.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 06:08 PM
0

Turn women back into legal property?
/r/TheRedPill09/05/15 08:34 AM
1

Not really. I fact not at all. Because under a Darwinism theory the state can't take my money and give it to other people.
/r/MensRights09/05/15 03:06 AM
1

No, but money is necessary to survive.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 07:59 PM
1

Darwinism at its finest.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 05:15 PM
8

The government does cost benefit analysis on social issues all the time. This isn't the government deciding who can and can't have children. This is the government actually stepping in for the best interest of the child. The woman is still making her reproductive rights choice. The government is choosing not to give her money for it. There is a huge difference between these two and quite frankly I'm tired of the gargantuan drain that single mothers are on state aid.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:52 PM
3

Option 4 sounds like the best option and anyone running under that platform would get my vote.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:38 PM
-3

You seemed to miss the part where saying the truth doesn't make me a misogynist
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:34 PM
-6

Fuck no I didn't.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:25 PM
14

How about we just stop giving any funding to single mothers. Period. See how fast the female population realizes they need the opposite sex then.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:13 PM
-9

But women by nature ARE less moral than men.
/r/MensRights08/05/15 01:11 PM
1

Not really. Most/All porno's that come out of Japan are still censored.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 06:14 PM
9

Yea, but no body wants to want it because japan also has super strict porn rules. Everything genital has to be blurred.
/r/MensRights07/05/15 01:26 PM
11

This type of thing would have to arise from a long term relationship to the extent that you were doing things like claiming the mother and child as dependents on your taxes.
/r/MensRights05/05/15 02:52 PM
6

I'm just happy that the entire comment section is calling her out for being a moron.
/r/MensRights04/05/15 02:56 PM
7

Right. So a joke. It didn't destroy your career or reputation.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 11:28 PM
19

You mean so that the next time she does something wrong they still won't throw her in jail. Lets be honest probation is a joke.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 10:26 PM
0

You misspelled 'dystopia'.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 07:13 PM
1

Didn't know Latvia had its own currency. TIL
/r/MensRights03/05/15 06:47 PM
2

And yet if we wanted to operate an all male workplace it wouldn't be allowed, because that would be sexist.
/r/MensRights03/05/15 06:46 PM
1

You're wrong. Just flat out wrong. Consent is not a critical component in most jurisdictions. Until you actually go look up statutes you won't see that. Come back after you realize I'm right. Until then don't reply. If you reply before then, I'm not answering. Correct your unintelligence man.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 06:49 PM
2

Yall Need to knock it off with the negativity in this thread. Op is trying to do a good thing by getting recognition of men's suffering. I don't care if you don't agree with his methods. To disparage his efforts is to undermine the men's rights movement. We need to be supporting one another.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 12:52 PM
1

Incapacitation is a part of the definition of physically helpless. No force is needed to achieve the ends of a rape against someone who is incapable of resistance. . You can be pretty darn smashed and still have sex. It's not about whether or not you could consent.Again, rape is about FORCE. I'm not cherry picking the law. I'm correcting your moronic as left and right because you clearly know nothing about it.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 02:50 AM
1

I believe that if one party is drunk to the point of incapacitation and the other is not, then yes, that's rape. If both parties are drunk to the point of incapacitation then no rape occurs because both parties are incapacitated. The key point is incapacitation to the point of being physically helpless. Merely Drunk sex is not rape. Black-out drunk sex would be.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 02:27 AM
1

sigh Statutory Rape is the definition given to the broad class of crimes otherwise defined as "strict liability sexual intercourse with a minor" Every state refers to it differently, but the legal word remains statutory rape. New York can call it 'in the nth degree' but it is still considered New York's Statutory Rape statute. When the law says something is a crime and codifies the crime, and defines the crime. Guess what. It's a crime. Just because you don't think its a crime doesn't mean you w…
/r/MensRights30/04/15 02:01 AM
1

You keep trying to muddle defenses to crimes and what constitutes a crime. Stop. You're making yourself look dumb. Non-consensual sex is not rape. Rape is sex by force. In a BDSM scenario you are still committing rape and can be charged with rape, regardless of whether or not the person consents. AT TRIAL you can use their consent to the BDSM as a defense to the rape charge, essentially claiming that it is not sex by force because they consented to the force. You could also claim any other numbe…
/r/MensRights30/04/15 01:16 AM
6

Except. You know. You're wrong legally. It's statutory rape by definition. There is no such thing as statutory sex. She is guilty of statutory rape because in the law a 16 year old can not consent to sex with an official of their school.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 01:05 AM
1

You clearly don't understand how legal defenses work, as much as I have tried to explain them to you. But Fine, I'll humor you. The crime of larceny is the trespassory taking of the property of another with intent to permanently deprive. It is a defense to the crime of larceny to say that you had a good faith belief the property was yours, regardless of how unreasonable that belief might be.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 12:25 AM
1

The age of consent isn't just 16 then. It's conditional.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 12:15 AM
1

Maryland’s age of consent law applies differently if the older partner is in a position of trust or authority over the younger partner. This might include teachers, coaches, employers, and clergy, among others.
/r/MensRights30/04/15 12:02 AM
1

What?!?! CONSENT = A DEFENSE, where the law recognizes consent as a defense. Here's South Carolina's lowest grade rape statute. They do not consider non-consensual sex a crime in SC. Further, so you understand, sexual battery is just sex. SECTION 16-3-654. Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree. (1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven: (a) The…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 11:17 PM
1

Age of consent laws are almost always limited to within 4 years.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 11:02 PM
1

When you signed your student loans, unless you were an emancipated minor, your parents also had to sign. Also, contracts are different.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 11:00 PM
3

So. Statutory rape is what's called a strict liability crime. It only cares about the act being performed, not your intent. If you have sex with a minor it is statutory rape. Consent doesn't matter, because in the eyes of the law the minor is INCAPABLE of consent.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 10:59 PM
6

Statutory rape is probably what she is charged with. Statutory rape is worse. It's a strict liability crime. The law doesn't care if you did or did not intend to fuck a minor. All that matters is sex with a minor occurred and you are guilty.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 10:56 PM
1

ARE YOU A FUCKING RETARD??????????????????????? A defense to something doesn't mean its an element of the crime. I could kill a man, be charged with murder, and claim self defense. By your logic self defense can't be claimed because it's irrelevant. Or that because I used self defense its not a crime in the first place. Both are completely wrong. Tying someone up + sex = Rape Consent to the typing up = Defense to crime of rape. Just because there is a defense does not make the first part not a c…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 10:52 PM
1

The tying up determines whether or not its rape. A DEFENSE to rape is consent. I don't know what is so hard to understand about that. PURE LACK OF CONSENT IS NOT RAPE. Also if you want evidence you can research statutes. It varies Heavily state to state. Most states have the crime of rape or the crime that would be rape as sex by force or threat of force. Consent is not an element of the crime, but a defense to it. In one instance you have to go to trial in the other you don't. Basically if you …
/r/MensRights29/04/15 08:40 PM
1

You really fail to understand how the justice system works. If your BDSM partner wanted to they could go down to the police station and say you raped them and Charges could be brought because binding some one is sufficient force for rape. You would then have to defend yourself in court on the allegation that she agreed. It can then turn into a he said she said game and the jury is essentially a coin toss as to whether or not you will be convicted.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 08:24 PM
1

Consent is not the difference of whether or not BDSM is rape. However it would be defense to the rape charge if your kink partner brought charges against you. Is that a clearer for you? Consent is not dispositive on whether or not a crime is committed, it is a defense to the crime. This is the way it is. I don't care about what should be, if you think it should be different then you need to argue for that. "If the person fully accepted they wanted", WHO THE FUCK IS BRINGING THE CHARGES THEN?????…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 04:09 PM
1

I'm telling you that if you tie up and gag someone that their consent doesn't matter. In both instances its rape because tieing up and gagging someone is sufficient force to constitute sex by force. The willingness of the participant is going to determine whether or not the crime gets reported. Physical incapacitation means that force isn't needed. And if some guy forced his dick up your ass you'd probably be able to show rectal tearing.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 03:41 PM
1

And I'm telling you that legally. no you're not.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 02:07 PM
1

Also in MG's case, she got to destroy an innocent man's life without any penalty her self. Does that really seem like how our justice system should work to you?
/r/MensRights29/04/15 03:12 AM
1

Ummm. Neither is physically helpless.... I really don't understand what you're trying to get at. You may be able to argue that being tied up was significant enough force to constitute "force" and then I guess you've got a willful participant in a crime issue. In either instance its a crime of rape. The legislature does not take care to protect the BDSM community. Sorry if that's upsetting to learn. They're called sex "dungeons" for a reason man.
/r/MensRights29/04/15 03:11 AM
1

Actually forcible compulsion generally is separated into force or threat of force. But yes, threat of force does apply because we don't want people to be able to hold a person at gun point and say that they did nothing wrong. By felonies I specifically meant crimes against the person felonies. I should have been clearer. Where the harm caused is physical in nature, so too should there need to be physical evidence. Our justice system at times (Some jurisdictions do have non-consent as a felony) a…
/r/MensRights29/04/15 03:07 AM
2

I don't even know how to answer that as it's not even close to what I said. I didn't talk about investigation or guilt. I'm saying that charges should not be brought absent physical evidence. Consent is irrelevant, because to charge someone with a felony level crime requires an actual physical harm. Rape is a brutal attack on someone in an intimate manner. Rape is not she said no. We need to stop trying to codify and justify female behavior into our laws. I don't know who thought it was ever a g…
/r/MensRights28/04/15 10:25 PM
1

It's not ignoring or supporting abuse. It's requiring that physical evidence of abuse occur. No he said she said. The encounter is intimate and the government needs to but the hell out absent real evidence.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 08:01 PM
1

The FBI does not under any circumstances create the definition of rape. You have to look at statutes by state. South Carolina and North Carolina just off the top of my head.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 08:00 PM
1

South Carolina and North Carolina both off the top of my head. EDIT: More research has shown that georgia, alabama, and Montana also don't require consent.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 07:20 PM
1

Good job using free dictionary for a statutory criminal definition. Consent is only an element of rape if a state legislature makes it so. A good number do not.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 07:18 PM
1

Physically helpless is defined as unconcious, asleep, or otherwise incapacitated.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 07:15 PM
-2

Rape is not non-consensual sex, despite what feminists want you to believe. Rape is sex by force or threat of force or with someone who is physically helpless.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 05:39 PM
0

Rape in a lot of jurisdictions is absent a consent element.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 05:38 PM
-2

Most jurisdictions define "rape" or the crime that would be called rape, as sex by force or threat of force, or when the other party is physically helpless or the actor has caused the victim to be physically helpless. Lack of consent is not a part of the crime.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 05:37 PM
-10

Until we all start wearing video cameras 24/7 and eliminate all privacy from our lives, non-consensual sex should not be a crime.
/r/MensRights28/04/15 03:50 PM
1

My argument would be to make admissions test / effort based. Do not allow the rich to buy their children into school or preclude poor geniuses for lack of finances. Make a degree actually matter on its merits not on wealth.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 07:11 PM
10

We don't want fairness we want equality. Women want fairness. There is a difference. One affords privilege, the other does not. Honestly no one should get gender based scholarships because college should be free.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 05:48 PM
4

I think it's totally appropriate. If we are going to let men claim they are mentally women and vice versa We should do away with all gender related everything. Shit. I'll take an extra 6k to say I'm a woman trapped in a man's body and the scrutiny is so low that I can change my name after filling out the form and say that was my belief at the time and there is nothing they can do.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 05:46 PM
2

This application process if it's through the college you are applying to, is quite clearly a violation of title IX.
/r/MensRights25/04/15 05:40 PM
1

Reddit can take down my post. They cannot stop me from writing it. These are two different things. Censorship is wrong, more so when you are purporting to be about open exchange of info. Censorship does not prevent the writing in the first place. Reddit can't stop the writing in the first place. Just as you can't stop me from talking shit in your house. You can ask me to leave, but you cannot stop me from talking. A websites censorship is the same as you asking me to leave.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 06:14 PM
7

Most likely not. It seems like he is awaiting trial and couldn't make bail.
/r/MensRights08/04/15 12:55 PM
1

I mean, you're just flat out wrong. My right to free speech still does not end at your door step. You can by all means ask me to leave, but nothing you do can stop me from talking. To do so would be a criminal offense. Reddit does have the right to censor anyone they want. But in alignment with their intention of being open it becomes not ok to censor, unless not censoring would put them in a legally precarious position. Your highlighting just makes you look like a retard. There are no laws proh…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 04:49 AM
1

Never have I heard something more blatantly incorrect. My freedom of speech doesn't end at your door. You can ask me to leave but you cannot stop me from talking, its a right protected nearly as thoroughly as the right to live because from the outset our nation recognized that the right to voice is fundamental and to deprive someone of it is an atrocity. Reddit is quickly losing its ability to call itself an open environment. I agree with revenge porn, your point of everyone agreeing is now offi…
/r/MensRights08/04/15 01:35 AM
1

I'm not talking about darkweb, because that would include illegal content. I'm saying that people shouldn't be censored. The fact that you support censorship based on majority values makes me realize that you don't understand the premise of free speech.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 05:32 PM
1

I'm saying censorship is wrong. And that Pao's personal values should never be the basis for what should or should not be censored. I personally don't find a legal objection for revenge porn. And absent a legal reason the content should be allowed to remain within justified subs.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 04:50 PM
1

You shouldn't be fine with banning revenge porn. When you disseminate a photo through distribution you lose the protected right to said image. I.e. It's criminal to hack someone's phone or pc and take the photos because the person has a protected right. However, sending that photo to someone makes you lose that right, provided the person is not profiting from the distribution.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 02:57 PM
1

Subs will now tell you "You're doing that too often" try posting again in 10 minutes. "In February, the company banned “revenge porn,” or explicit photos of people posted without their consent. “A big part of my job is to uphold those values,” Pao said. Now, if it was a legal issue, like when the site got a shit ton of flak for the whole cpish subreddit I'd understand. But this is blatant censorship based on Pao's value system.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 02:10 PM
2

Really? Because since Pao joined a number of different content have been banned from reddit. Moreover, if you haven't noticed, default subs now restrict your posting.
/r/MensRights07/04/15 12:11 PM
36

You don't even have to wait for that. Just offspring.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 05:00 PM
11

My only take away from this is that people need to stop using reddit. Pao is doing her damnedest to censor reddit users. This cannot be allowed. The best way to show Pao that censorship is immoral is to have everyone leave. Voat is looking more and more appealing.
/r/MensRights06/04/15 04:58 PM
1

State of Kansas still could have dropped the suit.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 05:11 PM
12

Hey everybody look at OP, He's a phony, a big fat phony.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 12:56 PM
3

And you're wrong, but whatever
/r/MensRights04/04/15 12:12 PM
3

Meh. It's a difference of opinion.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 03:41 AM
3

Sounds legit to me.
/r/MensRights04/04/15 02:52 AM
3

"Feminism" is a "single unified movement" in that it is used as a blanket justification. Just because feminists disagree with one another does not mean they don't still represent themselves as feminists. Further, every feminist purports that the movement is about gender equality, doing otherwise gets them denounced by feminists as a whole. Feminists may not be unified on all fronts, and I may have chosen better wording if I wasn't trying to take your own words to mock your use of limited options…
/r/MensRights31/03/15 03:04 PM
6

Option 3: The feminist movement is a single unified movement that has never been about equality (See 1930s-40s) however on its face it espouses equality while at the same time openly indoctrinating followers into their misandric ideologies. Anyone that subscribes to feminism is and forever will be either a) a misandrist or b) a sheeple.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 02:16 PM
3

Wrong.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 01:25 PM
1

The 12am BBC programming is still really spot on.
/r/MensRights31/03/15 01:22 PM
1

And I'm saying that what you want to do shouldn't require "marriage". Or at least not to the extent that it's required now. You shouldn't have to entangle your finances and things with someone to receive "partnership" exemptions. Though I think that spouses should have to pay inheritance tax on cash assests but that property and objects should not be taxed on a use basis. Like your house transfers tax free provided it becomes his primary residence, to prevent people from buying houses to avoid i…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 04:11 PM
4

In US prenups a) Are subject to the judge, he can throw it out if he wants. b) Usually can only affect assets from before the marriage. c) You make it sound like "marrying a decent human being" is something that is plannable. People change, they fall out of love, they get cheated on, they become vindictive. d) Its the dissolution of a marriage that leads to one-sided financial gains and alimony entitlement. Most men in my age bracket aren't getting married because it's not worth the cost on the …
/r/MensRights30/03/15 04:07 PM
1

I mean I guess yea. But still its the logical way to handle it.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 03:30 PM
1

Which can be solved by a will. Or in the event of intestacy, your partner/offspring have immediate rights - as is the case at common law. After that it goes to next of kin and then diverts to the state. A marriage really shouldn't be necessary to declare partnership was what I was really getting at. A declaratory form should be sufficient and dissolving the marriage should also be simple if you aren't required to combine all of your assets into a joint pool.
/r/MensRights30/03/15 02:07 PM
3

Wouldn't it be nice if the entanglement issues didn't exist? Like when you got married your property actually remained separated so that in event of divorce distribution was easier, also the dissolution of the alimony system would be ideal. The idea that if I start buying you things it suddenly entitles you to me continuing to buy you things is ridiculous, especially after I'm gone. If you didn't have things before we met then you can absolutely survive without things once I'm gone. The legal sy…
/r/MensRights30/03/15 01:09 PM
1

You are a cunt and I'm done with this discussion. Feel free to reply but I will not be responding.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 09:28 PM
2

I will always be a proponent of equalism. Never feminism.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 08:33 PM
5

See, feminism is not about gender equality its about pro-women's rights. Truly seeking equality makes you an equalist.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 03:34 PM
0

Feminists are like lysol. 99.9% of them have it out for men.
/r/MensRights26/03/15 03:31 PM
2

You are correct. My auto correct was not.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 06:19 PM
2

Weird, because every Target I've ever been in has had a changing table in the men's room.
/r/MensRights21/03/15 10:30 AM
40

It's a god damn marketing hook. It's not discrimination. It's stella's ad agency saying hey, lets get people to buy overpriced shitty looking glasses and then donate a small portion to getting clean water access to developing countries. Not for nothing, but its overplaying shit like this that makes me doubt MRA sometimes. Honestly, we need to be more tactical and methodical. Here, you're literally just trying to turn yourself into a victim. That's feminist behavior and I would kindly ask you to …
/r/MensRights21/03/15 10:12 AM
9

GetInTheKitchenAndMakeHimASammichDammit.gov FTFY
/r/MensRights21/03/15 10:04 AM
1

The difference between 2nd and 3rd isn't that big.
/r/TheRedPill23/02/15 07:19 PM
5

Asian men age. Asian women stay 18 then hit menopause and suddenly turn ancient.
/r/TheRedPill23/02/15 03:51 PM
3

I got 6 comments on people calling me troll and for trying to make the story a gender issue. I would have liked 1 real answer before I reported everyone in the thread for not adding to the question asked.
/r/TheRedPill23/02/15 06:45 AM
9

Actually I'm going to post the exact same story to /r/relationships (with reverse genders). I want to see what the reactions are like. http://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/2wt9q5/my_motherinlaw_45_accused_me_30_m_of_cheating_on/ Link, if I missed anything important to the gender switch let me know.
/r/TheRedPill22/02/15 11:12 PM
1

Nah nah bro. Go for the lye. Then she'll marry you.
/r/MensRights18/02/15 08:42 PM
1

Doesn't that standard of racism just perpetuate racism?
/r/TheRedPill12/02/15 06:01 PM
23

I wish that we could do a mandatory test on anyone that didn't believe that white people can't be the victims of racism by covering them in non-removable white body paint and releasing them back into their communities. Do the same to white people who say racism doesn't exist for the sake of equality.
/r/TheRedPill11/02/15 09:17 PM
2

A law which is not enforcedo is no law at all.
/r/TheRedPill10/02/15 10:42 AM
2

Nah that's when they get to take a 90 mile cab ride. Now pay me $300.
/r/MensRights10/02/15 10:28 AM
0

An ass slap in the club is not sexual assault.
/r/TheRedPill10/02/15 10:18 AM
20

By including normal human interaction, the ass slap at the club as you so kindly put it, in the definition of sexual assault feminists are trivializing their own position. I've got popcorn ready in preparation of the anticipated backfire.
/r/TheRedPill09/02/15 03:57 PM
4

Because you want to bang and your parents house is home. I've brought plenty of plates home over school breaks. Made the plate think I might be serious about her, she put out harder trying to win me over, when in reality I didn't give a fuck.
/r/TheRedPill05/02/15 01:47 PM
9

If you're too self conscious to buy a condom you probably shouldn't be having sex.
/r/TheRedPill05/02/15 01:41 PM
9

It's all about the frame when you say. You can't have a serious tone, you need to be relaxed, and smile. Like OP said in his post. Think about acting like a 6 year old boy teasing a girl in class. From your perspective this guy comes across arrogant because of the way you would imagine yourself speaking the lines he presented. now I want you to reimagine those same lines being said by someone who is cannonically funny, like Jim Carry, a man like that says that line and you know everyone is laugh…
/r/TheRedPill05/02/15 01:40 PM
-4

Well.... given that my sister is 8...... somebody Goin to jail lol.
/r/TheRedPill05/02/15 03:14 AM
0

I don't think it should put you on the set offender list. It should be a kind of permanent perjury list, where you are obligated to tell your neighbors you are not a trustworthy human being, stopped from holding any form of office, and registered as a felon.
/r/TheRedPill20/11/14 04:30 AM
1

In the sense that emails, texts, and other written confirmation won't hold up in court against a woman saying "I changed my mind and said no"
/r/TheRedPill20/11/14 04:27 AM
1

In some states both parties must consent to recordings. What then? You can't use emails and texts as proof of consent because consent can be revoked, at least in America.
/r/TheRedPill19/11/14 06:31 PM
29

The false accusation of rape should carry an equal penalty. A list of women that have falsely accused men, make it a felony because of the potential harm such accusations do. The trouble becomes how do we legally differentiate between a false accusation and a non conviction. Absent direct evidence of perjury, it is difficult to prove a false accusation vs. a dismissal due to lack of evidence. This is an easily solved problem in single party recorder states, record everything gentlemen. But in tw…
/r/TheRedPill19/11/14 03:32 PM
15

That she has been sentenced at all is a good start.
/r/TheRedPill19/11/14 03:21 PM
-2

You're missing the part where I don't care about you or what you think so stop talking and be done with it.
/r/TheRedPill24/10/14 06:56 PM
-3

You clearly care or you wouldn't have bothered to post a reply.
/r/TheRedPill24/10/14 06:08 PM
1

My point is unless it's a crime in your state, provided you don't doctor the footage, it should always be admissible in court. Some states do make it a felony to record without consent though, so do be aware. The comment about jail was for impact purposes.
/r/TheRedPill16/10/14 01:42 PM
6

"In the letter, the professors said Harvard is bowing to pressure from the federal government, which can deny funding to schools deemed not in compliance with the law, the professors said in the letter." I love the hack job writing. But really, there shouldn't be equality between victim and accused. The weight of evidence is always in the hands of the accuser. All things being completely equal you should never find against the accused.
/r/TheRedPill16/10/14 01:56 AM
5

Recording people is always admissible in court. Unless your state has a law making it a wiretapping crime. In which case you're going to jail.
/r/TheRedPill15/10/14 07:54 PM
131

I don't know why but you saying that just made the whole concept of frame click for me.
/r/TheRedPill25/08/14 06:12 AM
2

I think at this point we are arguing the same thing and it's becoming pointless.
/r/TheRedPill17/08/14 05:42 AM
1

My scenario assumes optimal responses. You don't get them at any point you walk, obviously.
/r/TheRedPill17/08/14 05:09 AM
2

There is no reason you can't do both.
/r/TheRedPill17/08/14 04:40 AM
6

I'd take the free game tickets. No reason to not get something enjoyable out of it. Yea, the guy got friend zoned. Take advantage of it. Let her buy him shit, fuck her friends, and eventually fuck her. Ya gotta go for the long game sometimes.
/r/TheRedPill16/08/14 01:59 PM
13

I feel proud that I defended your right to wreck her shit after she did all that shit to you. Keep promoting equality brother
/r/TheRedPill10/08/14 06:42 PM
14

I'm pretty sure no one here would consider a plate a gf.
/r/TheRedPill16/07/14 01:10 AM
3

African American seems more insulting. I can say with near certainty /u/momounchained has never set foot in Africa and it's likely no one in his family had for 4 generations. He's black the same as I'm white, if we are going by distinction of color. But we are both clearly Americans. No need for further labeling Screw political correctness on such things, they just don't properly express the situation
/r/TheRedPill25/06/14 10:59 PM
2

Dude 163-210 is huge depending on your height. I'm 5'11 and floating around 205 now, 163 would be rail thin for me. Congrats on dropping the extra weight though and hope you continue losing more
/r/TheRedPill25/06/14 10:43 PM
6

Your dad being a dead beat isn't really going to change because the state is suddenly demanding that he pay your mother a large % of his income every week. It varies pretty heavily from state to state how much you pay, mine is 17, but I've heard others are +30. The artificial system of a woman being able to leave a man for any reason and being able to AUTOMATICALLY demand money for it is extremely flawed. This percent does not even include the ever so likely alimony payments a man can expect to …
/r/TheRedPill29/05/14 01:52 PM
9

Upvote for being a responsible person and not taking the easy way out.
/r/TheRedPill24/05/14 04:33 PM
11

It seems largely that these guys don't realize the problem. Knowledge is power my brother
/r/TheRedPill10/05/14 12:38 PM
2

Your title and story do not match. You immediately state that "you have a good chance of getting primary custody of your kids". If you have actually won primary custody congratulations. If not, please come back with the final verdict. It's always great hearing how a man won in family court.
/r/TheRedPill18/04/14 05:56 PM
0

Conditions sir.
/r/TheRedPill24/03/14 12:36 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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