TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

GregoryPanic Archive

View 6 posts and 522 comments by GregoryPanic on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

it might be a strong academic interest she's taking
/r/TheRedPill31/01/17 06:03 AM
1

With proper training it can be utilized without damage, preferably for short amounts of time. Utilizing it every day to talk is a good way to do damage. It would be like screaming or whispering (which are basically the same) every day.
/r/MensRights29/07/15 03:19 AM
1

Actually it's quite bad for your vocal folds and can lead to damage.
/r/MensRights28/07/15 04:11 PM
1

Ok. I still don't understand the point. Wow, a person who requires a cane is utilizing space they need, anti-manspreading argument!. This post is as ridiculous as the whole manspreading thing in general.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 12:21 AM
4

I think it's likely the person who posted didn't give any thought to any of that shit, and you're just looking for reasons to justify it. Otherwise he/she would have provided more commentary.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 10:24 PM
8

This person has a cane. Is it likely that they are disabled and/or blind? This shit should be deleted.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 09:59 PM
3

People are wiling to give the drug/alcohol version money because the sign has entertainment value. I'm sad to say that i'm not surprised at all.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 09:55 PM
3

i love never messing up my kitchen. It's so nice. I think imma go get pho tonight.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 08:02 PM
5

and to really drive this home In 1970, to cite just one of many numbers proving the point, nearly seven in 10 25-year-olds were married; by 2000, only one-third had reached that milestone. I think this author is struggling with the fact that men don't want to marry. On that note... women ALSO are choosing not to marry. Only one of these is seen as a problem.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 05:09 PM
5

For today's pre-adults, "what you do" is almost synonymous with "who you are," and starting a family is seldom part of the picture. Yeah... no... I'm assuming "starting a family" means "having children". I'm an adult, and i'm making the adult decision to not have children, and instead maintain my freedom, money, and... fun. That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not i'm a "responsible adult", and this author's opinion betrays that fact. It shows she wants someone to have a kid with, a…
/r/MensRights22/07/15 05:06 PM
1

I love the irony of this statement. That sentence is literally sexist toward men.
/r/MensRights22/07/15 01:23 PM
3

That's terrible AND hilarious.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 08:58 PM
1

6 weeks is effectively meaningless as an absence from work unless your job is so niche that 6 weeks is significant (city trader for example). It's a massive difference to many employers. For example, losing a waitress/waiter. You have to find someone to fill that spot, not knowing when/if the other person is coming back. As a result, you now have someone on your hands that you might have to turn around and fire because the person came back after 6 weeks. In the meantime, you're paying double the…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:42 PM
3

He records the whole event too, in his memory. Thus there is no "privacy" anyway, This is NOT What privacy means in the court of law. You can have a conversation with someone with implicit or explicit expectations of privacy. explicit: "Are you recording this?" -> "No." - privacy achieved implicit: 2 people having a conversation. A 3rd party whose presence is unknown, may not intentionally record the conversation of those 2 people without informing at least one of them (federal law). e.g I canno…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:23 PM
3

Purging is what we do to perjurers.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:18 PM
3

"Chairman Pao" - have to admit i laughed. Only because i can't believe i didn't see this until now.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:12 PM
1

She was fired (edit: resigned - but lets be real, she was fired) because her boss threw her under the bus, not because she's a woman. Reddit sounds like a really fucked up place to work.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:11 PM
1

Actually i don't subscribe to the blank slate theory, that's the point of my last sentence. However, I do subscribe to the idea that biological differences requiring societal considerations. Examples: 1) Boys have been shown to be school-ready 1-2 years after girls. As a result, we end up treating boys as defective girls, because they just don't perform as well. All-boys-schools take this into account, and traditionally show better performance (overall) than their co-ed counterparts. Why? Becaus…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 07:06 PM
4

Being real about something, with the wage gap issue, it is an interesting topic to discuss why, when compared as a whole (without controls) it's still 77:100. With controls, of course, it shrinks quickly to ~5% (which can be accounted for in negotiation differences). The major controls are choice of work and time off. One of those, time off (primarily to start a family), is really something we SHOULD be talking about, but with regard to supplying it to everyone. If we cut that out completely, an…
/r/MensRights15/07/15 05:11 PM
5

You mean the 6.1 Trillion added largely as a result of the great recession caused by 20+ years of deregulation (Reagan->GWBush) and 10 years of a war put on a credit card? Also, remember, republicans controlled a majority of congress, and the House is responsible for building a budget. You can say what you want about tough negotiations, but republicans wrote the fucking budget. Republicans got us into this fucking mess. Democrats just let them do it.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 05:07 PM
1

I wonder if Natenyahu says that to get support he'd otherwise lose.
/r/MensRights15/07/15 05:01 PM
1

with both of them being drunk, no, the passenger is not liable. Were the man not drunk, like dead-sober, he'd potentially be liable for criminal negligence. She would still be criminally liable for DUI. (the holds if the sexes are reversed) In a civil suit, it'd likely be incredibly difficult to win a "he owes me money because he let me drive drunk" without a matching criminal negligence charge.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 06:29 PM
2

This is only the case in states where "intent to drive" qualifies you for a DUI, which is not every state.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:31 PM
2

This is not what I said. The woman would likely be charged with a DUI, and the person in the passenger seat could be held liable if they let her do it if she was visibly drunk and they were sober.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:29 PM
1

Unless you were the person serving the alcohol... in which case you do, in fact, have an obligation (in many states).
/r/MensRights12/07/15 03:28 PM
2

Actually incorrect. While it requires a much higher burden of proof, you can, indeed, be held criminally liable for feeding someone alcohol and allowing them to drive (as a bartender). Generally, though, it requires more proof "beyond a reasonable doubt". Which means it's got to be pretty damn definitive.
/r/MensRights12/07/15 05:51 AM
1

First of all, this is not the same. Bars are potentially criminally liable for allowing patrons to drive after getting them drunk. These boys, similarly, are bound by (pretty well know) bystander laws that say something similar to "If you stand there and do nothing, when you are physically and mentally capable, then you are negligent... (unless caveat caveat caveat)". It's a bit like watching someone murder someone, and then walking away and never telling anything. If someone can prove you did t…
/r/MensRights12/07/15 12:24 AM
–

No, this is not the same. It is illegal in almost every state for a bar to continue to serve a drunk person. If someone leaves a bar VISIBLY DRUNK, the bar DOES have an obligation to prevent that person from driving (in many states, within reason - such as the person is parked out front). However, a person who is with them is not liable in the same way a bar is for serving them - not even a little bit. It's not even arguable.
/r/MensRights11/07/15 11:48 PM
6

I thought it was n/2 + 7.
/r/MensRights04/02/15 09:47 AM
25

If today's media outlets have taught us anything, yes!
/r/MensRights04/02/15 09:21 AM
1

She says it pretty succinctly about 1/2 way down the first page: "Until innocence is proven". Absolute insanity.
/r/MensRights31/12/14 05:30 PM
1

martyrdom is a really really poor way of trying to enact change. All you really ensure is that you're dead.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:56 PM
2

yes edit: wait, no. she canceled because she couldn't enact what she would consider appropriate measures. No commentary on whether or not she wanted it done was mentioned.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 08:54 PM
10

Her concern was that the university could NOT legally prevent those with legal conceal permits from entering the building. She was concerned about the fact that state law prevented the university from keeping people with a legal concealed firearm permit from entering the event. tl;dr: She was scared someone would bring in a gun and shoot her. no worries though, it actually took me like 3 reads through that sentence before I actually got what it was saying.
/r/MensRights15/10/14 03:28 PM
10

She actually went a step further recently, and said she never felt assaulted, and realized why it was happening, and it wasn't about sexuality or anything. I'm paraphrazing, but I remember reading an interview w/ her where she said something to that affect.
/r/MensRights07/10/14 04:23 PM
4

If she had slept with a student at a different school, you'd be entirely correct. However, they slept with one of their students, who happens to be a minor. This falls into a "special category", in the same way that doctors cannot sleep with their patients.
/r/MensRights03/10/14 03:58 AM
2

side bar: Any advice found here IS NOT legal advice. Reddit is not a substitute for a real lawyer. i'd advise NOT going there
/r/MensRights02/10/14 08:05 PM
0

Step 1. Abuse boyfriend Step 2. Feel bad. Step 3. Post about it online and frame it in such a way that makes you a hero for having a "revelation". Step 4. ??? Step 5. Profit. Get help people. Seriously. It's great that you recognize what you did was wrong and destructive. Now it's time to get help, instead of just posting on the internet about how this has changed your opinion on some movement and expecting to be absolved your wrongs. Yeah, you should be charged, but you wouldn't have and you wo…
/r/MensRights02/10/14 07:57 PM
1

This is exactly why i unsubscribed. I visit back on occasion, but it's mostly just FUD fueled sarcasm here.
/r/MensRights02/10/14 07:27 PM
1

we would be saying that, was my point. And i'm not saying it's excusable, you're misreading my comment. I'm saying her punishment could be considered cruel since her quarters are in an all-male facility, and she was primarily abused by a male. It'd be like forcing a male offender who had been violently abused by his mother to serve out his days in an all-female facility. edit: to clarify, she needs to be locked up for a long, long, long time. I'm not suggesting special treatment... but i'm not a…
/r/MensRights09/09/14 03:02 PM
-2

To be fair here, if a man was violently abused by his mother as a child, and he was later convicted of these heinous crimes, and then forced to serve his time in an all-female prison... we'd probably all say his exposure to that situation would probably exacerbate his mental trauma. This woman is sick, and mentally unstable. Exacerbating her issues by not considering the details of her past while carrying out her punishment could certainly be considered cruel. tl;dr: She's got a good lawyer.
/r/MensRights08/09/14 01:52 AM
1

I am uncomfortable with equating statutory rape with rape. I think it's disgusting how we have such a double standard where an adult male with a female teen is shocking abuse, but an adult female with a teen male is his dreams come true. But that's because I suspect it's a dream come true for a lot of those girls too. Good god no, man. Even if the child is giving consent, relations between authority figures and their subordinates (parents & their children, teachers & their students, doctors & th…
/r/MensRights29/06/14 04:30 AM
1

He's trolling the fuck out of you man.
/r/MensRights29/06/14 04:23 AM
1

expectations and reality often butt heads that's all i'm saying here
/r/MensRights09/05/14 05:54 PM
2

Except they probably wouldn't check this and would just go ahead and arrest first and sort out later.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 02:40 PM
1

I just wanted to point out that the specific problem here isn't that he's being charged with desertion, it's that he felt the need to desert rather than report. That is relevant.
/r/MensRights08/05/14 02:38 PM
1

Military law is pretty similar overall, in that it's self-regulating and often views crime between fellow service members as exceptionally heinous. Though, that is not to say it views the same crime committed against a non-service member as LESS heinous, just that the social impacts within the service community is more impacted by blue-on-blue (as it were).
/r/MensRights08/05/14 12:13 AM
1

except the part where she calls the police and he gets arrested for kidnapping his sole custody kids because he doesn't have Alabama papers.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 11:59 PM
1

Navy*
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:12 PM
1

Absolutely he should have. Anyone who argues otherwise fundamentally misunderstands why the UCMJ works the way it does. That said, he may enter a plea of temporary insanity to explain his desertion, and I think that's a welcome discussion.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:12 PM
2

But being stabbed in the back by your own, those which you trust your life with might fuck you up. Exactly this. This is why blue-on-blue (as we call it in the navy) is seen as so heinous. It's equivalent to committing the same act against your sister or your brother.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:11 PM
3

I mean, the media would spin it that way, but she'd be charged and found guilty of desertion. That's all I'm saying.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 10:09 PM
10

I mean, if it had been a woman, and she deserted, she'd be charged with desertion too. Just to clarify here.
/r/MensRights07/05/14 04:29 PM
1

it's not like people run around doing this constantly. it's like a spur of the moment... ffwwip... just for funsies. It's not like... a coordinated game. Yeah, i'm pretty sure it stopped toward the end of high school though. I was joking when I said i'd go do it to my roommate, he's probably just punch me in the face lol.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 10:33 AM
2

The article actually says she's being accused of "child rape" later down. surprised by that. good.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 10:29 AM
0

white suburban middle-upper class areas
/r/MensRights06/04/14 10:15 AM
1

I answered your question already. Because stupid.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 10:03 AM
4

I have a lot of respect for Jon Stewart, primarily because while he leans (sometimes far) left, he's still very rational about the way he debates, and rarely (if ever) sinks low for an easy laugh (tl;dr: he's an amazing comedian). That said, watch some of his debates with Bill O'Reilly, or the time he went on Crossfire... you can disagree with the man, but it's difficult to dislike him after watching those moments. He's a respectful, rational, well informed guy.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:59 AM
1

He was laughing AS HE READ THE ARTICLE NAME. I think it's safe to say he found it funny.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:56 AM
7

This just in, people do stupid shit and find it fun.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:37 AM
5

Realistically, the "Yet this view ignores the fact that..." should be changed to "Likewise", and [citation needed] added, as the original editor provides no context for the statement. None of these are political edits or fall within the conflict of interest guidelines. They're basic English comprehension and citation rules. Primarily the preface "Yet this view ignores" alters "women experience the same thing" in such a way that MAKES this article political in nature (in such a context that there…
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:32 AM
1

What in the fuck diggity is that ignoring? What in the ever loving fuck does that follow-on sentence even have to do with male victims? What in the fucking fuck, son of a fuck. I mean, fuck.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:27 AM
3

"The average woman experiences this every day" from this one could logically conclude "The average man hits women every day" Extremely, and I mean EXTREMELY, poor caricature of domestic abuse. Whoever made this, while their intentions were in the right place (and I want to emphasize that, I do not believe their intention was to make light of the situation), really needs to educate themselves on how to effectively educate people. All this person has done is 1) Provide a completely unexpected punc…
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:23 AM
3

But wait, there's more! Your escapist entertainment doesn't cater to the whims of women and actively insults them (or at least they feel insulted, which is the same thing!), so you can't have that either!
/r/MensRights06/04/14 09:11 AM
2

Coming from a person who spent 6 years learning computer engineering skills in the Navy, primarily in an operational trial-by-fire "make it work, i don't care how" setting, who is now in college, working with world renowned PhD's... I had read and expanded upon the papers of the very PhD's i'm working with now as a novice programmer with access to data they could only dream of. I had not only fully comprehended it without so much as a calculus course to my name, but I had actually shown their wo…
/r/MensRights06/04/14 08:55 AM
4

you're posting on reddit, actively engaging in debate with a person you disagree with, who is holding you to your argument and rebuting it, inside a topic you are both passionate about. That doens't happen online. uh....
/r/MensRights06/04/14 08:48 AM
4

I think the single most effective tool with which we can explain how different men and women are is sack tapping. I can't imagine vag-tapping... or even why i might consider doing anything of the sort... but i might go sack tap my roommate in a few minutes because fuck it it'll be funny. (not looking forward to the repercussions... but it'll be worth it)
/r/MensRights06/04/14 08:16 AM
9

I like to call this the ultimate secret of modern society. It's the ultimate secret because everyone does it, and yet no one knows/realizes it until it's pointed out. Within a split second of meeting or seeing someone new, you have made a (cursory) judgment about whether or not you would sleep with them, simply based on the physical attractiveness and (perceived) gender. Everyone does this. TL;DR: Everyone is always checking everyone else out.
/r/MensRights06/04/14 08:10 AM
1

tl;dr: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3JzbWVDzac
/r/MensRights06/04/14 07:54 AM
3

enjoy you ridiculous slew of (well deserved) down votes. What the fuck even is this?
/r/MensRights04/04/14 11:01 PM
2

Yeah, and I can certainly understand how that happens, and I can sympathize with that. I've negotiated before (and just recently did, with good results), and it's always nerve racking. The part she forgot to do was consider her company's position, and whether or not her requests were unreasonable. Making an request for higher than normal salary? No big deal as long as you explain why. If it's an empty request, it's gonna get shot down and you run the risk of them seeing you as having an overinfl…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 07:52 PM
3

It's not that she asked for them that's the problem. It's her way of asking for them. Basically said "these are my demands", instead of "Here is what I need, and why you should consider giving them to me". The former suggests a person who will not be reasonable to work with in continued negotiations, leaving very little room for the business to wiggle in when declining all of her demands. Look at the options here: 1) They respond with "no", and she begrudging takes the job, already unhappy with …
/r/MensRights18/03/14 06:09 PM
2

This is not always true. The fact that they're offering you a job is leverage by itself. You are (one of) their top candidates, and they threw a number at you. Understanding just how much they want you is the tricky part, and must be gleaned from many conversations between you, other employees, and HR. I've had plenty of negotiations, some go south, some don't. She did a completely shit job of negotiating because she put the institution in a lose:win/win:lose scenario. Like a good business, they…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:52 PM
1

To be honest I was surprised at Nazareth's response, which was the polite version of "fuck off and go away". Why couldn't they respond with "I'm afraid most of that won't be possible for us to offer, maybe we could do ___ but that's all"? Plenty of other qualified candidates who won't make those demands. It's likely they wanted someone else just as much, and this girl won a coin toss. So when negotiates started off hard, they said pfft, fuck it.
/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:44 PM
3

She didn't ask for a raise. You have to have a job to ask for a raise. She tried negotiating, and negotiated poorly, and came across as "I care about myself more than this job", which is a sure fire way to get a job offer rescinded. She didn't even give reasons for why she was requesting more, other than why she deserves a higher starting salary. Additionally, she didn't prioritize any of these options, leaving the college with a view of "All or nothing", and granting all of those conditions wou…
/r/MensRights18/03/14 05:42 PM
2

that's.... a stretch
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:25 AM
2

to clarify, I get that this girl worked in an extremely toxic environment, and no one should have to put up with that (not even service members). But some of her reasoning nitpicks language, like use of the word "just". I get that's condescending, but... well... you are "just" that. Your job isn't to go around breaking every wall and building it back up. That causes a shitload of issues if you allow everyone to do that. just food for thought. not really relevant, sorry.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:21 AM
2

I dreaded going to work, because of the underlying friction and power struggles between executive staff. I dreaded going to work, for fear of being treated like a child by individuals who had children my age and couldn’t distinguish between an employee and their kids. I dreaded going to work, because I felt like others expected me to act a certain way based on my age, and when I didn’t, they would push or fish for some sort of negative emotion or reaction. ... Hell, I dreaded going to work for a…
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:11 AM
1

I like you, you get an upvote.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:06 AM
1

uh... try going outside and saying "White Pride! White Pride! White Pride!" It's not a matter of should in this thing we call reality, it's all a matter of what doesn't get you fucking shot.
/r/MensRights15/03/14 06:05 AM
6

So instead you just make a meta-comment about how you're not going to say it, and actually do what you say you didn't want to do in the first place. Just saying
/r/MensRights26/02/14 08:09 PM
1

Oh yeah, as I said, I don't think they're right, but it'd be interesting to see if there is anything to the idea that we feed girls less.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 04:23 PM
5

I mean, that's kind of interesting, and I'd like to see their actual data. I could actually buy that we have socialized each other to feed women less. I mean shit, there are plenty of studies that show TV advertisements have an effect on young women. There was the one about young women in some 3rd world country not having eating disorders until they received television broadcasts. So it's certainly plausible to suggest that might apply to parents as well. tl;dr: I want to see the data, this is i…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:40 AM
4

Women not in combat zones won't receive imminent danger pay, and won't receive combat-related classifications of disabilities upon separation. Your comment is just based in ignorance, which is fine, but please understand that military pay is regulated with a fine-toothed-comb. You can go calculate the exact compensation of every person in the military right now with a quick google search and a couple difference calculators on the web. So please shut the fuck up and take your vitriol elsewhere.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:36 AM
1

I'd like - for example - my gun to be VERY reliable, or my tank, or my brother in arms. Well of course YOU, the INDIVIDUAL, would like that. But that's really not how the military works. Believe me man, the only reliable thing about the military is the paycheck. Semper Gumby...
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:29 AM
1

I can later, but I remember reading multiple times where women were put on convoy duty because a body slot had to be filled, and those positions were considered combat jobs they were never officially trained to handle. They were fulfilling job slots that would otherwise be considered a combat job, because they needed a body. It sounds retarded, but the technicality there can affect compensation down the line when applying for veteran benefits through the VA, claiming disabilities and tying it to…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 11:14 AM
2

I don't see the value in me answering that question, because it actually seems a little biggoted. But ok, I'll bite. As I said previously this doesn't change the fact that women were already serving in combat jobs and not being compensated for it appropriately. Someone in the military decided to put women in roles overseas that already had them fighting in combat far prior to this change. In the military, it's not always about reliability. It's about putting a body in that slot and getting the j…
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:29 AM
11

Attending college as a 25 (going on 26) year old Freshman, it amazes me the number of things students put up with. On numerous occasions I have 1) gotten classes exempted that are far far far beneath me, even though everyone said they were 100% required. (lesson learned kids: everything is negotiable, they want your money) 2) told professors to their face they are wrong, and told professors and administrators that their policies are bullshit and get them changed. The only difference is I get to …
/r/MensRights26/02/14 09:04 AM
1

No, no, she did not make a mistake. One does not MISTAKENLY seduce an older man with a fake facebook account with the intent of destroying his life after getting dick pics from him. That is not a MISTAKE.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 08:49 AM
1

To be fair, I used to read this subreddit alot, but I had to unsubscribe because the amount of schadenfreude on the front page is really fucking toxic. I still follow serious issues though...
/r/MensRights26/02/14 08:47 AM
4

male vet who recently got out Uh, ok... this doesn't change the fact that women were already serving in combat jobs and not being compensated for it appropriately. Everything around women not being allowed to serve in combat just made things harder when it came to doing paperwork and getting people paid for what they were already doing. This has no place in MensRights, basically.
/r/MensRights26/02/14 07:44 AM
1

"in a 50 year old book some ridiculous was said" ok w/e
/r/MensRights28/12/13 05:01 AM
1

It just shows your facebook profile picture an a bunch of hashtags like #completef***ingjerk and #obsessedwithhismom (no lie that was a hashtag) It's something highschoolers would use, nothing serious. There are no super wordy reviews, and anyone who takes this seriously is someone to be laughed at. edit: you can't even make your own hashtag, it's that stupid. you have to select pre-made hashtags.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 03:27 AM
1

reporting back: it's retarded and nothing to worry about.
/r/MensRights30/11/13 02:58 AM
1

Call it DuDu... 1) sounds like Dude, 2) It's utter shit, just like LuLu
/r/MensRights28/11/13 04:09 AM
5

Girlfriend is gonna make a profile tonight and we're gonna see how terrible this is. Mostly for schadenfreude reasons though. She said "wow that's disgusting in incredibly sexist, guys could never get away with that". I fucking love her.
/r/MensRights27/11/13 10:26 PM
2

because it's most likely true
/r/MensRights18/11/13 04:09 AM
4

"That's not the intention of the show... and I apologize" "Thanks for speaking from your heart. Ok moving on..." audience applause Apparently when women do something insanely appalling on television, no one has to lose their jobs. Because vagina or something
/r/MensRights17/11/13 11:22 PM
6

because she's female. god that makes me sick
/r/MensRights17/11/13 11:16 PM
1

well I thought that the comments were part of the article, so that's my fault but it's still safe to be skeptical of any comments left on a site that markets itself as satire/parody/spoof. I wouldn't trust the legitimacy of comments on an Onion article, would you?
/r/MensRights13/11/13 10:07 PM
1

Saw that too. And I like it. But it's not the Lodge practice of 1915, and doesn't come with the same protections that the Lodge practice of yesteryear did (e.g. a guaranteed income if you get sick and can't work). I'm not saying our current system is best, just that the Lodge system has some serious failures to address other aspects of healthcare. It's only like Lodge practice in that they provide care for a standard "subscription fee". But that's all you get, is care. Much of what is being refe…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 09:25 PM
1

I did, let me pull out some points that support my statements from the very articles you post in support of yours Generally lodge practice plans did not extend beyond basic primary care and minor surgery, although a few provided hospitalization. In the Lower East Side of New York City, he noted, 500 physicians catered to Jewish societies alone. (my note: total population was aruond 1.2 million, and this was ONLY JEWISH SOCIETIES) By 1910, both organizations had over 2,000 doctors under contract …
/r/MensRights13/11/13 09:14 PM
0

The real solution is to get rid of the first solution: make health care affordable by creating price competition. Onus on you to prove your suggested solution is still applicable in today's world, when your source articles reference a system from when the medical association didn't even have a mature enough microscope to properly image transparent materials. I don't think you understand just how primitive healthcare was back then. This is the same system that oversaw the spanish flu pandemic in …
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:37 PM
-6

haha i get it because responding to violent jokes about castrating men with violent jokes about "neutralizing the enemy" makes you a better person. hahahahahahahahahaha
/r/MensRights13/11/13 05:34 PM
0

You're the one making the claim that the previous working system wouldn't have worked naturally, And you're making the claim that an organized system the predates common medicine such as antibiotics could handle the extraordinary amount of scrutiny required to do anything other than "yup, that arm's gotta go!". Basically I don't know enough about the Lodge system to continue this argument, so i'm just going to stop.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 05:27 PM
1

You want me to prove a theoretical situation? How does the Lodge system work when needing organized collective effort to attain wide-scale vaccination of a disease like polio, wherein you need the help of massive amounts of infrastructure that span multiple professions, and millions/billions of dollars to fund peer-reviewed research that does its best to ensure we're not doing more harm? The burden of proof is on you to show it can work, not for me to show it couldn't.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 05:14 PM
1

No, I'm saying this was a time when snake-oil salesmen and "oh look an infection, better chop your arm off" were still common things. Medicine was ridiculously primitive compared to today's workings.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 04:56 PM
1

Actually I see it as a win, are you kidding me? A year ago these people were straight up calling you a misogynist, now they're calling you a misogynist with "a few pretty good ideas". But what caused this change was not people like ThePigman calling the author a feminist scumbag. It was changed by people publicizing and advocating the real issues, and being loud about it. You don't have to buy into their movement, but you certainly can't deny the fact that any support from their movement on cert…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:47 AM
1

I find that when I have both work and money, I go through cycles of contentment and loneliness. Since starting my most recent relationship, I've found that a health relationship consists of an ebb-and-flow of individuality and togetherness. While you have to make an effort to be there for the other person, you also get that back in return when you need it. It's like investing in stocks for the long-run, is the best way I can think to put it. I'm not judging your lifestyle, I'm just giving you my…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:43 AM
2

I am going to buy and read this book... and I rarely buy non-fiction of my own accord.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:39 AM
0

Also to be clear, you're quoting articles that examine the state of medicine prior to the invention and use of antibiotics. Are you insane?
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:34 AM
0

What happened to health care is we put a price tag on human health and allowed pharmaceutical companies to focus on making drugs that treat symptoms instead of cure disease. Everything after that is a symptom of a shit decision in the first place.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:31 AM
2

Maybe that's something the MRM should advocate for in congress? You know, like a real movement that does real things...
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:28 AM
1

even if it means dismissing everything they claim to believe as men's rights activists. Please mister condescending wonka, explain to me how ACA relates at all to male rape victims, genital mutilation, fabricated rape claims, .... Your opinion != fact.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:27 AM
1

It's a shit bill that does one or two good things. It would do so much more if about 230-231 members of congress would do anything to try to alter it, other than straight up repeal it. The hardest part about establishing a new program is just getting it through congress the first time. The republican party has exactly ZERO chance to repeal the legislation, and they've done everything in their power to attempt to make it fail. In essence, everything you see failing today, is partially caused by t…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:23 AM
-1

The full quote Um. Right. That's what insurance is supposed to do — spread the risk. The goal of the individual mandate under the ACA is exactly that — to bring healthy people into the system so their premiums can offset the additional costs of the unhealthy people who will now also be covered. Which is entirely understandable when placed in that context. The obvious argument is "If i'm healthy, then I shouldn't have to pay!". The problem is really simple: you don't know if you'll be healthy tom…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:16 AM
2

To be clear, the poster's primary goal was to point out the painfully overreaching statement that "don't be that guy" tried to make. It does, in fact, suggest that women are basically default liars, but that was the point. It's such an absurd parody when the genders are flipped, but most people don't get it.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:09 AM
4

Did you read the whole article? What seems like a hit-piece actually ends up saying "Actually, outside the anonymous trolling nature of the internet, they've identified real issues that need to be addressed". And there are times on this sub where I wish people would stop with petty bullshit. The problem is the real lack of organization, which allows the hoard to popular vote caustic opinions toward the top because "I don't entirely agree with that, but it's funny!" Your post is one of them. It's…
/r/MensRights13/11/13 08:06 AM
2

Vet here. Your shitty interpretation of the facts in this case are just off point. The VA (and many military medical posts for that matter) has been known for not being as readily equipped to handle female patients as they are men. And this doesn't just affect service members/vets, it affects their families.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:56 AM
5

My girlfriend initiated 1) conversation, 2) first kiss, 3) first sex, etc... She definitely preyed on me. I said I loved her first though, so nyah. She's the best thing that's happened to me so far :3.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:50 AM
2

I thought about this the other day. I wonder if someone out there has had shoulder+ length hair, and their friends thought it would be a cool prank to shave their head while they were passed out. I feel like that might lead to homicide, not guilty of murder by reason of temporary insanity.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:48 AM
15

Blog of Champions, Satire/Parody/Spoof Dude, seriously, it's the first damn thing on the page.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:47 AM
24

This. Prior military here. Delete the shit out of this shit you idiot.
/r/MensRights13/11/13 07:42 AM
3

it's a great big reading comprehension problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor
/r/MensRights12/11/13 11:54 PM
3

Why does this thread have downvotes? I don't understand. This thread is magnificent.
/r/MensRights12/11/13 10:52 PM
15

Majority of the comments are completely misinterpreting the article. The article is about women who intentionally entrap their spouses/significant others into parenthood, whereas a majority of the responses are about "blah blah blah deadbeat dads blah blah blah i didn't entrap him and he still left". They just completely miss the point, which is calling out this insanity: http://imgur.com/a/kKpwa
/r/MensRights12/11/13 10:37 PM
2

every medical procedure that involves removing something from your body and open wounds is a risk to your life. That's why they make you sign fucking consent forms.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:31 PM
3

goddamn. just... god... damn.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 08:06 AM
1

not exactly at no risk... technically every woman who carries a pregnancy to term is risking her life. Small risk, but still a very real one. I like to stress that, because it's a good thing to keep in mind when talking about it with other people. edit: to clarify even further, even abortion is a risk to their lives. This is a very real thing.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 07:59 AM
4

my friend screwed up she did as well Guess which of them has the right to opt-out of parent-hood? And your example is a good example of how things should work in a good world. He wants to be there and take the responsibility, he should have the right to do so. The fact is, she could have aborted at any time. But there is no similar option for a man.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:35 AM
11

They already have this option via safe-haven laws.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:33 AM
5

prior-navy here can confirm
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:32 AM
4

Hmmm. So when a man kills an unborn baby it’s murder, but when women kill unborn babies it’s just “a reproductive right”. It’s not a baby anyways, right? Just a clump of annoying cells. A “fetus”. Except when it’s not. Abortion: it’s only a baby when she says it is. damn, this just changed my view completely. I really can't argue with this.
/r/MensRights11/11/13 04:30 AM
2

I agree with this post. I was contemplating this as well actually, but i settled on GM because of african countries forcibly doing it to 8-13 year olds.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 10:28 AM
1

When you are a baby, the foreskin is attached to the glans. It slowly detaches over time.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 08:26 AM
-3

so nitpicky this conversation accomplished literally nothing and you look like a child.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 03:54 AM
0

And if our tag line to our sub number read something like "X supporters of men first and foremost" The Men's Rights subreddit is a place for those who wish to discuss men's rights and the ways said rights are infringed upon. We claim to be a movement for equality, the subreddit says it's a place for discussing men's rights and the way they're infringed. Seems like a disconnect there. One that I don't particularly care about because... well... it really doesn't matter.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 03:40 AM
1

The Men's Rights subreddit is a place for those who wish to discuss men's rights and the ways said rights are infringed upon.
/r/MensRights10/11/13 03:12 AM
1

funny you should say that, because our sidebar basically does say that
/r/MensRights10/11/13 01:22 AM
1

lmao
/r/MensRights10/11/13 12:31 AM
1

really? Just say it out loud lmao
/r/MensRights10/11/13 12:20 AM
1

dayum
/r/MensRights09/11/13 11:56 PM
3

I simply have no clue how to respond to this we should do the thing that will fix the HIV problem... but also chop up penises to prevent it from spreading. how about the children have human rights to not have their body's forcibly modified by adults.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 11:54 PM
2

yes because nitpicking terminology has worked so well for feminists, we should try to beat them at their own game? It just makes us look petty. Beat them with logic, not grammar.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 10:54 PM
2

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 10:53 PM
5

its just not as bad as having you dick sown into your balls with a hole poked to pee. THIS IS NOT THE OPPRESSION OLYMPICS TRYING TO PAINT ONE FORM OF GENITAL MUTILATION AS WORSE OFFERS NOTHING OF VALUE TO THE CONVERSATION. IT DEVALUES THE VICTIMS WHO YOU BELIEVE "HAVE IT BETTER". THAT'S INSANE.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 10:27 PM
4

possible practical application. it's not only a weak argument, the only practicality it delivers is as an alternative to education. I don't call that practical
/r/MensRights09/11/13 10:24 PM
4

Yeah you know what else is even more useful? Education and condoms. edit: and no i didn't agree with you, i'm pointing out that your tidbit of information is based on a study that isn't representative of the whole population.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 10:11 PM
7

By the way, incase you didn't know, circumcision isn't just a snip snip toss. The doctors have to literally tear the foreskin off of the glans.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:23 PM
1

I know, but i just found it a relatively interesting factoid there.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:20 PM
22

Watt testified that O’Gorman has a temper and lashes out. She assaulted him for the first time, kicking him and giving him a black eye, in the basement apartment they shared with her stepsister on Ash Road on July 25, 2011, he said. O’Gorman also assaulted him in their second apartment on San Juan Road in February 2012, he said, batting him on the back of the head and choking him. The third alleged assault took place in May 2012 at their Pandora Street apartment. Watt testified that O’Gorman kic…
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:19 PM
8

As much as I hate /r/feminism 's shitty rules (i just got banned from it this morning), I actually think there are better things to be on the front page of mensrights.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:13 PM
4

oh i wanted to address something There are some practical applications in reducing your risk of catching HIV but like I said its a weak argument. This is only effective in cultures where condom use and hygiene are not widespread. Africa for example. There have been no studies done in first world countries that have made this determination.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:10 PM
2

The foreskin with it's 22,000 nerve endings. What is the most sensitive part of the external genitalia of the female? The glans clitoris, with it's 8,000 nerve endings. Reading this entire post was incredibly informative, but this fact is just eye opening.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:09 PM
1

It's funny how the only time men get included in the genital mutilation topic is when they might be girls. <_>
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:04 PM
3

I never said we should do it to infants and those who can't consent. What would you call it when it is done to infants and those who can't consent? I call it Genital Mutilation.
/r/MensRights09/11/13 07:50 PM
3

Male circumcision does have a benefit to sanitation. Only because we're too damn lazy to teach our kids good hygiene? Because of this, he had a lot of issues with bacteria in his foreskin that led to very painful infections on more than one occasion. Eventually he made the decision himself to get circumcised to prevent this issue and he never had another problem. wait a minute! Eventually he made the decision himself to get circumcised to prevent this issue and he never had another problem. gett…
/r/MensRights09/11/13 07:37 PM
0

You do realize that this equalizes risk pools, actually strengthens the entire healthcare system, and creates an environment where companies have to do new types of negotiations in order to compete right? All of those things are very very good...
/r/MensRights09/11/13 01:12 PM
13

Wait So if we cut up a little girl's genitals, it's genital mutilation. But if we cut up a little boy's genitals, it's a "practical application"? I want you to really think about this statement: "The human male remains the only species on earth who requires immediate surgical intervention to correct upon birth." and "no where near a horrific." Oh, I guess the part where we changed the glans from an internal to an external organ, and the removal of extremely sensitive portions of nerve-rich skin …
/r/MensRights09/11/13 12:57 PM
13

Welcome to the land of "lets treat everyone like people" and "hey that thing is objectively bad, we should come up with ways to address it without destroying civil liberties".
/r/MensRights09/11/13 09:42 AM
1

No dude, he has a point. I couldn't even readily identify this as being 20 years old, and was under the impression it was recent. If you actually believe this would fly today, you must be nuts.
/r/MensRights07/11/13 07:46 AM
1

He posted a sociopolitical argument to a linux mailing group? I'm sorry, he was asking for it. That's like Anita Sarkeesian going to 4chan and provoking the hoard.
/r/MensRights06/11/13 08:54 AM
1

I'd like to see this backfire by hoards of men filing for divorce. Good old Palmela Handerson to the rescue
/r/MensRights06/11/13 08:13 AM
2

Yeah, this is how I read it. However, when applied to today's atmosphere, it's a gross overstatement.
/r/MensRights30/10/13 04:43 PM
0

Condoms bro.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 01:13 PM
2

You're a bad person and you should feel bad n.n
/r/MensRights19/10/13 01:11 PM
1

K-12 Teaching?
/r/MensRights19/10/13 01:10 PM
5

yeah no, she clearly means nursing as in the profession
/r/MensRights18/10/13 11:41 PM
15

Nursing is one of the only really useful things that women do Author really could have done without this bit of bullshit. I literally don't care what the author has to say after reading this. Just soak that in. If you think this comment is innocuous, you're fucking disgusting. ~From an MRA who gives a shit.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 11:32 PM
1

While the article certainly puts a spin on the report, I'm going to walk into the show with a healthy skepticism but also no preconceptions of what it "may be". That's all I'm asking others to do. If it ends up being a hit piece, then revolt. Don't paint it red before you even see it though...
/r/MensRights17/10/13 03:53 PM
2

This sounds hilariously made up.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:32 AM
1

[citation needed] please.
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:12 AM
-16

Based on the video... i'm not really sure this is going to be as biased as some of you have knee-jerked. If you actually read past the first paragraph, it almost immediately gives a fair sided rebuttal to the introduction. It then follows up with fact, though maybe spun in such a way that suggests inadequate understanding of internet culture. Before you jump on ABC and start spewing obscenities and ridiculous accusation, maybe take the time to watch the full report on friday and respond critical…
/r/MensRights17/10/13 05:02 AM
5

I wish you people would stop posting shit like this. This isn't about men's rights at all.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 02:34 PM
3

http://memedad.com/memes/30494.jpg
/r/MensRights23/08/13 09:28 PM
10

act like men http://memedad.com/memes/30494.jpg
/r/MensRights23/08/13 08:47 PM
1

Eivind was obviously joking... Edward, under him... not so sure.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 08:44 PM
14

http://www.solidoodle.com/2013/07/solidoodler-3d-printing-car/
/r/MensRights13/08/13 03:47 PM
1

Mostly it's a reaction to the horrific things done in the name of religion. A clear example is the recent removal of "college level" sex education from some western Pennsylvanian counties. This college level sex education taught you everything you needed to know about contraception and safe sex. It taught information that could save lives. Now it's closer to abstinence only. Why did this happen? Because the districts were heavily Catholic. Everyone involved in that can take their religion and go…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 01:34 PM
-1

The estranged fathers paying child support of course.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 01:29 PM
3

There are plenty of non-PC skeptics/atheists out there. I think it's oxymoronic to suggest you can be Politically Correct and a "Good Atheist". The truth and science sometimes spits in the face of public discourse, dragging their preconceived notions through the mud by saying "The wage gap is actually around 98 cents on the dollar, not 77". On the face, there's nothing wrong with that statement. To the public, you're a holocaust denier. It's perspective. Being PC is self-defeatist.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 01:28 PM
6

Likewise, I think it'd be absurd to suggest your opinion doesn't matter simply because of your beliefs. That's simply dismissive of a whole lot of personality for one "fault" (I am an atheist). While I think we'd probably have different opinions on certain issues (like abortion), the conversations are certainly worth having. Silencing your opinion weakens our society, by definition, and so i will defend to the death your right to speak as well.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 01:23 PM
2

Just imagining the lumberjack carrying an axe saying this and then walking off into the wooded distance made me laugh. Thank you sir.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 07:41 AM
2

I dunno, I was walking around the Botanical Gardens right near the Sydney Opera House without shoes on. A local came up to me and told me that wasn't a good idea because of poisonous ants. Looked it up online later to find out the guy wasn't trolling me, there are at least 9 species of bull ants in sydney.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 07:29 AM
1

This is a big list of: "Everything I perceive is right and your side of things doesn't matter". Met one of these girls a few weeks ago. Attractive, and not my time. She thought I was gay.
/r/MensRights01/08/13 05:53 AM
1

So, just to be clear here, being attractive hurts unattractive people, and we should do our best to recognize attractive privilege instead of recognizing the hilarious folly that is fighting against basic human instinct to be more amicable toward anything visually pleasing. We can then say that the world is built on the privilege of attractive people. Attraherarchy! Or the idea of thin privilege. It's a Tenuarchy! All of the female privilege (which has been conveniently been renamed "benevolent …
/r/MensRights28/07/13 07:59 PM
2

Also pics or didn't happen. ;D
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:54 PM
2

Oh I wasn't really arguing against you, more-so just spelling it out further for everyone else. Mr. F is certainly a manipulative fuck who used "It's her choice" to say "If you don't choose to, you're being oppressed". The obvious hypocrisy there is that he's manipulating her, and therefore actually coercing her to choose the thing he wants, as opposed to actually giving her the choice.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:53 PM
2

I've given a number of girlfriends free pass to sleep around, especially while we are in any long-distance situation. Likewise, they let me know what they're comfortable with. If there's a mis-match in boundaries there, it either breaks the relationship or makes it even stronger when you both learn to compromise for each other. I've had girlfriends who find it weird that I don't get jealous when they dance with other guys when we're at the club, or that even if he'd kissed her I would just ask "…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:46 PM
5

The miscommunication here is the definition of "patriarchy" and the connotation it carries. More often than not patriarchy is used in such a way that suggest more than just "traditional gender roles", and more often in a way that suggests men oppress women. It's at that point that you have to jump through a metric fuckton of loops logically to suggest patriarchy hurts men, when the original statement suggests that patriarchy privileges men. "It privileges you but it actually hurts you so it's so…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:27 PM
2

I don't think his story indicates that his wife was "maneuvering" around him. If we give the relationship the benefit of the doubt and say there is good communication, it may just have been heat of the moment decisions that were acted upon poorly. I think it's perfectly reasonable and acceptable to have boundaries on how comfortable you are with "sharing" a partner, especially in sexually explicit situations. What matters though is that the couple works out what they are, and that the trust deve…
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:19 PM
3

The poster literally says "patriarchy is telling men what they are and what they should be. Feminism says they are (and should be) more than that." When broken down to their fundamentals, the poster says nothing of substance and simply suggests that feminism is awesome.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:12 PM
2

Patriarchy is a thing in where men are described as vile creatures in an attempt to socialize them into obedience. Feminism holds that men are (and should be) more than that. :] It's fun when you spell out what it's actually saying.
/r/MensRights28/07/13 05:10 PM
0

I think it absolutely does. Think of it this way. Men are already viewed as "creepy" and "abusers", and especially more-so when children are concerned. The recent video about a grandfather being harassed by police because he took his grandchild for a walk, or the stories of male teachers being terrified of their students for fear they lose their job over an abuse accusation. I would imagine this is twice as bad for gay men, who are not only stigmatized for being male, but also for being gay. Tha…
/r/MensRights24/07/13 03:09 PM
1

"Sexually assaulted" guys? What are you talking about, they got lucky. Why would a guy complain about getting lucky? What is he, gay?
/r/MensRights17/07/13 04:01 PM
1

Depends on how much of a realist you are. The fact is putting a female face on a message will make anything seem softer or more acceptable at face value. That's how society has trained a vast majority of people. So saying "this sub needs more women" is probably just echoing that exact concept. The more women who sign on, the more attractive it looks to everyone. I'm not saying you're incorrect, that's just reality and pragmatism.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 03:56 PM
1

Every right you get from marriage can be drawn up in legal documents separately. Getting married just subjects you to every single law in one big package that you sign when you say "I Do", without having to do all the extraneous paperwork.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 03:50 PM
4

The difference between /r/MensRights and /r/Feminism is that we won't censor you or ban you. Even the worst opinions get to have it out here, because then we get to discuss and debate them. We welcome everyone.
/r/MensRights17/07/13 07:30 AM
0

I'm also too lazy to care that much.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 05:42 PM
10

Thanks Obama.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:35 PM
0

So what you're saying is that the only difference between NAFALT and NAMRAALT is that feminists have power? You see, whatever extremism and corruption has infected feminism is partially caused by the idea of "It's ok to make this argument, because I don't have any real power". If you stop and take a second to think about it, if we don't actively denouncing extremists (on all sides) without excusing their existence, we open the possibility of 2nd, 3rd, 4th wave MRAs being just as destructive as c…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:18 PM
0

Cool, stop masturbating.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:12 PM
4

I mean, you could make the same argument about MRAs, but that wouldn't really help. I think if you take a moment to realize most of the responses here will be "NAMRAALT", similar to how faithiscoolshit has just made the "NAFALT" argument. It will simply always come down to "ignore the extremists... please please please"
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:40 AM
2

It's a very clear stretch that you cannot understand because you simply disagree vehemently with the idea of abortion not being murder. That's ok though. I'm not going to get into this debate with you because neither of us is going to convince the other of anything.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:36 AM
12

Some of the best leaders I've had in the military have been women, and some of the absolute worst have been men. I have zero tolerance for statements like his because he is the type of person that would have given me a shitty male boss instead of the amazing female boss "because hormones". Merit. Not biology.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:18 AM
14

A vast majority of society prefers women to be caretakers and teachers of children. Therefore it's perfectly acceptable to suggest men are shitty caretakers and teachers. You're really bad at this bro.
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:12 AM
9

"Women are bad at leading and being in a position of authority because of their hormones... I mean c'mon, you're like crazy 7 days of every month..." This is legitimate bigotry right here. Any reasonable person on this subreddit would tell him to fuck off. Tell him, if you agree with this of course, that it's ok to be interested in Men's Rights Activism, but that you don't want to hear about it. More specifically, tell him if he ever makes statements like "Women are bad x because hormones", then…
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:10 AM
7

I think likening abortion to a university shooter is a serious stretch, but I also think any argument we have could about why would ultimately hinge on whether or not we believe abortion should be legal. I'll just say that you will gain very little reasonable support if your argument is that women are baby murderers "because abortion".
/r/MensRights14/07/13 04:06 AM
1

So when he goes to do his rounds he should put on a TShirt that says "Security". This is probably a good idea.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 05:08 PM
1

Each state has subtle differences in the law when audio is involved, so it's safe to simply suggest he reviews the laws in his state to be sure.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 05:08 PM
5

Mental picture of rich white people crashing a boat into a bank while yelling "THIS IS MY COUNTRY!". Glorious.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 04:57 PM
3

Each President holds the power of one third of the federal government and the ability to talk directly to the american people about policy. This statement reeks of fundamental misunderstanding of how leadership works. He does not "hold the power of one third of the federal government", he has been "granted the power to lead one third of the federal government". If you cannot comprehend the very intricate differences between the two, it explains a lot about your simplistic qualification of "stron…
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:49 PM
3

I think it's extremely difficult to determine the effectiveness of a presidential cabinet until quite a while after it has passed. Most legislation has years of gap time before it has any effect, and that has years of trickling effects on markets. I'm not sure it's fair to sit here saying "Obama doesn't know how to wield the power!" when in reality a vast majority of his power is wielded away from public eyes. It takes time to judge a presidency.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 09:41 PM
4

She's not your friend.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:42 AM
6

Yup, I agree completely. I think we teach programming at FAR too late an age. I've taught about 10 colleagues how to program, and it's amazing to see their thought process (in general) change dramatically after having understood basic program execution.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 02:42 PM
5

The female staff are employed on conditions set out in a what is known as the Blue Book while their male counterparts have a Green Book. Seems like a pretty fair reason to question their payment practices in general.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 02:56 PM
1

No, it can apply to private conversations as well. It all depends on the state.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 12:34 AM
1

The big thing is "fairest" to whom? Remember, the court decides what is best for the child, which may not always match up perfectly with what one or both parents want. Obviously the best thing you can do is to actually maintain a cordial working relationship, because keeping OUT of court is always the best option, period.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:39 AM
2

Every time I see this type of suggestion I post this, so that anyone reading this can be clearly educated on the issue. Specifically in the United States (though this is applicable in other countries too) capturing audio unbeknownst to another party is against the law in some states. You have what is called "two party consent", "one party consent", or "all party consent". In the case of two/all, the participants in a conversation must be made aware of, and consent to, the recording of a conversa…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:33 AM
1

to clarify, it's run by people who are more interested in activism than the search for truth/doing good?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:35 AM
1

I mean, you either file a lawsuit with your fellow male workers that were fired, or this is an obvious false story. This reminds me of the story where a muslim man is given first-class seating because the woman next to him was an islamaphobe...
/r/MensRights18/06/13 01:26 AM
4

Honestly, from what I read here, the obvious advice is simple. If a woman is at all violent, in any way shape or form, leave. Do not attempt to calm her down. Do not attempt to restrain her. Just get your own cab and leave. Just. Leave.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 01:14 AM
2

stop touching my lower back, elbow or shoulders. Don't leave your sexuality at the door Wonder if she realizes it's difficult for guys to flirt without breaking the physical barrier in some way. This is two conflicting pieces of advice for the average man.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 12:54 AM
1

Sometimes I wonder if a trans person is convicted of a felony, would we send them to a Male or Female Federal Pound-you-in-the <depends> prison.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:36 AM
2

I don't see any discernable difference between many radical beliefs and mental illness.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:34 AM
5

i read this as "trying to curry flavor" and was reminded that curry is delicious.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:33 AM
2

I continued reading until she started describing how the UCLA and "lesbia sadomasochists" killed the feminist anti-pornography movement. I have found women I dated who were turned off by pornography are threatened of being replaced sexually. After watching a few friend's relationships over the past 2 years, and 2 of my own, it's eye opening to see how apparent some women are of their power to control men via sex, and use it vindictively. SOME women. I said SOME. Women are generally great :]
/r/MensRights14/06/13 02:31 AM
1

it'll pass
/r/MensRights10/06/13 01:50 AM
1

Is this in regards to image posts on /r/atheism? because if so, that shit was pretty fucking annoying, and it made reddit look like a huge pile of circle-jerking atheists, which is bad for everyone. I'm an atheist and I can see that. Wah wah wah free speech, whatever.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:53 PM
1

yes please.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:51 PM
2

That's not even close to what that means. You have completely defeated your own reading comprehension with bias against any sentence that includes the word patriarchy in a non-ironic way. What she said was "beauty" is a socially constructed value. For example, it was often considered beautiful to be overweight in some fashion during colonial and earlier times, as it was a sign of wealth and health. Her statement regarding the patriarchy simply refers to how beauty has been defined in the context…
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:25 AM
5

Thinnest kid at fat camp. Lol.
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:16 AM
7

Woman with a national audience and thousands of readers: "I HAVE NO POWER!" The rise of the self-depreciating politically correct ruling class...
/r/MensRights06/06/13 04:11 AM
1

Ah, UK, i'm in US. Not sure how that goes.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 09:06 PM
3

does it? Can you provide the reference for this?
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:58 AM
1

This video is so poorly informed on storytelling and "the market" it's not even funny.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:58 AM
3

notably inaccurate username
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:35 AM
5

the FBI's legal definition of rape does not include envelopment or made-to-penetrate, so i'm not sure this is entirely factual.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:34 AM
3

legally, it's called an oversight.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:33 AM
2

Pretty much insanity. Similarly insane to a friend of mine who suggested we lower the burden of proof to convict a rapist to less than "beyond reasonable doubt" because of how difficult it is to get a conviction because of the nature of the crime. suffice to say, i'm no longer this person's friend. The stupidity astounded me.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:32 AM
2

Can female-only rape support groups exist, or is it sexist to not let a man attend? Are there legitimate concerns as to whether or not the presence of a man to some rape victims might actually weaken the coherence of the group (who may now be afraid of men, because they were raped)? I know i'm using an extreme here, because this isn't a rape support group, but the fundamental reason to allow this is the same. Men and women are different, it's just a fact. If they want to facilitate women openly …
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:23 AM
2

That's just it, there is no forced segregation. It's a group of people making rules to support the function of the group. Forced segregation would be if the school told students men and women could not take classes together. This is freedom of expression, and freedom of congregation, not institutionalized sexism.
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:19 AM
1

It's one thing to institutionally segregate (i.e. a publicly funded school makes male-only/female-only classes, and doesn't provide an equivalent). It's another thing to prevent the creation of a gender-specific group. If the spaces are only reserved for portions of time, those times are posted, and there are no other reasonable uses of the space (like a gym, for example), it's no different than starting a club and not allowing non-dues paying members in. Otherwise it'd be safe to say sports tea…
/r/MensRights29/05/13 04:15 AM
–

basically this. If it was institutional segregation wherein women-only spaces were allowed, but men-only spaces disallowed, that's definitely not equality. On the flipside, if both spaces are allowed to exist, but there is no resource being denied either gender (i.e. one space gets a microwave because they're women, and the other doesn't because they're men), this is reasonably equal. If both spaces are allowed to exist, and are provided equal access to resources (or potential resources), then t…
/r/MensRights28/05/13 04:20 PM
9

I think alot of men are already neglecting their parenting duties to be CEOs and highly positioned leaders. So while there will be an increase in men as well, I do actually believe the majority of the people (if these hypothetical crazy-changes ever happened) would be women. edit: neglect is a loaded word, but what i mean is they're more likely to have like... a nanny... and not be butthurt that they aren't there to pick their kids up every day.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 10:05 PM
56

She's so blatantly blinded by a "women first, men second" attitude that she can't write what would be a truly compelling argument. But until we acknowledge honestly that the relentless demands on professional leaders discourage smart and talented women, we will fail to move the numbers significantly for women at the top. should read But until we acknowledge honestly that the relentless demands on professional leaders discourage smart and talented parents, we will fail to move the numbers signifi…
/r/MensRights27/05/13 05:24 PM
3

It may seem subtle to a layman laywoman, but boys commit their acts of patriarchal violence almost from birth. BLERUGHASDLJWD?! This is hilarious satire.
/r/MensRights27/05/13 05:06 PM
3

There was no punchline :[
/r/MensRights26/05/13 07:30 PM
11

Not just that, but claiming it's bullshit, and then quoting "countless studies" built on the very system you call bullshit is hilariously self-defeating.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 06:49 PM
2

At first i was like "This post is leading up to a good punchline" and then I was like "I hate this guy."
/r/MensRights26/05/13 06:47 PM
-3

Well, Elizabeth Warren i'm alright with because she's doing alot to fight serious problems (too big to fail banks / culture of selling students into slavery via crippling debt). I'm starting to see alot of politics is just everyone going GIMME GIMME GIMME. Democrats and Republicans are just two sides of the same coin :\
/r/MensRights26/05/13 06:11 PM
4

Don't fool yourself, Israeli women serve in special forces, and they're fucking terrifying.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 05:32 PM
10

Lots of sweeping generalizations in this, but... Given how they torture logic, who can credibly claim feminism is not violent? I couldn't help but laugh at this.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 04:14 PM
1

Ok, as long as you recognize you're choosing not to be the bigger man, perpetuating what you admit is not right in support of what is, essentially, vengeance. http://arolemodel.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Fear-Leaeds-To-Anger-Yoda-Quote-from-Star-Wars.jpg
/r/MensRights26/05/13 03:48 PM
2

Of course, their definition includes pretty much anything they dislike, claiming it reinforces "traditional" gender roles FTFY
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:23 PM
2

Of course it's wrong, that's why she's being charged with false reporting.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:20 PM
7

Calling the draft oppressive in nature is a little... reactionary to modern beliefs, and doesn't really take into mind the history of how and why it was implemented. I'll try to keep this short. Being a citizen, you received benefits from the government. In exchange you agreed to defend it, and were thus provided a say in how it was run (the right to vote) Land-owning white males were originally the only people allowed to vote, and to a certain point, men conscripted at 18 were not allowed to vo…
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:16 PM
1

This reminds me to read usernames more often. like /u/PhallusOfPeace
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:07 PM
3

Yes McCarthy, everyone is a communist.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:06 PM
1

We don't disagree with anything except whether or not this woman should get a harsh punishment. I believe no justice is served in putting another person behind bars for completely benign activities. You yourself obviously believe the actions are benign, but believe she SHOULD be behind bars for no better reason than "because men...". That's petty.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:42 PM
3

I'm not sure we should be looking to Polanski for... anything.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 02:11 AM
1

to clarify, i am saying people prosecuted for statutory rape, when the relationship started under the protection of R&J laws, and suddenly crossed the boundary into "woops, someone is 18 now" At no point am i suggesting adults having relations with minors is ok.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 08:40 AM
3

I think all the men prosecuted under similar circumstances are also victims of unjust prosecution. That we condemn any of our children to the pits of the sex offender list for shit children do is a fucking abomination. edit: to clarify, i am saying people prosecuted for statutory rape, when the relationship started under the protection of R&J laws, and suddenly crossed the boundary into "woops, someone is 18 now" At no point am i suggesting adults having relations with minors is ok. just to be c…
/r/MensRights25/05/13 08:35 AM
1

If i remember correctly, the plea still involved registering as a sex offender. That's the real punishment. Don't fool yourself on any other possible punishment. Registering as a sex offender will ruin a persons life.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 04:02 AM
1

Because this subreddit sometimes likes to point out the absurdity of some feminists, who are primarily the people calling us a hate group, misogynists, rape apologists, etc. Sometimes they can't even put together a coherent idea, but will turn back and say "RAPE APOLOGIST" the moment we start quoting statistics. TL;DR: Schadenfreude. It happens on every subreddit.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:57 AM
5

I'd like to point out that you should question whether or not you should even consider your biological father your "Father". You have a wonderful step-dad? Sounds like he has earned the title of "Father", whereas your biological father has not. Not to get all philosophical on you.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:50 AM
1

No one is suggesting she's saying "So i can accuse men of rape" She's literally saying "I need feminism because people are bad at interpersonal communication". It means absolutely nothing
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:45 AM
5

I understand why the picture set you off, but you have to at least understand that it wasn't meant for situations such as yours. It's difficult to talk about, because what happened to you is absolutely beyond reproach. No one would readily suggest that picture was meant for your father. Stay strong brother.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:36 AM
4

and ever since then he's gone back and forth with wanting to be my friend and straight up sending me hate messages over facebook and text. That alone is enough to file for a restraining order. If it's gotten to the point of harassment, harassment is harassment. Echoing though, if you want to take action, seek legal advice.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 03:27 AM
-1

thank you :3
/r/MensRights25/05/13 01:53 AM
14

I mean, you did basically shame her for her past. That's not something you can do and expect a healthy conversation out of. It is part of who she is. That said, if she basically didn't say she wouldn't be doing it again in her relationship with you, that's when you just get up and ask her to leave.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 01:52 AM
1

That made it to the top of the subreddit because is literally a sign that says no = no yes = no without any context as to when yes = no. It's like saying "I need feminism so i can say yes, but actually mean no"
/r/MensRights25/05/13 01:38 AM
2

Show me any such situations on this subreddit that wasn't called out. You're either seeing something I'm not, or you're categorizing any conversation about false allegations as inherently dismissive to victims.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 01:35 AM
1

That's kind of where we're at though, isn't it? We've already punished hundreds/thousands of people under this law, and they've all failed to change the law on appeal. The next step would be to fight a case that blatantly outraged the public, to try to change it.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 12:28 AM
1

Isn't that what they're trying to do, and what the public is trying to fight? I don't see your point.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 12:09 AM
2

I've never once seen someone here suggest that pressured sex is not a bad thing. It's the fact that extremely complicated interpersonal situations in which one party may have miscommunicated, or was unaware of any reluctance, many advocates are quick to suggest "Just to be safe, lets call that rape too". The problem is with the DOE/DOJ coming down with Title IX, basically stripping all students of due process the moment of accusation is so inherently wrong because it fails to apply the standard …
/r/MensRights25/05/13 12:07 AM
1

I'm not saying to let one go, I'm saying don't suggest she be punished the same, and then turn around and say "That law is unjust!" That would be fucking stupid. It makes more logical sense to do it in the other order, because otherwise someone we agree doesn't belong in prison, ends up in prison.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:49 PM
1

No, speaking as an experience public speaker and security professional, even if she was a man giving the same explanation I would want to kick him in the dick.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:37 PM
3

also i didn't really hear anything that supported cyber-bullying, just two people who don't understand what the fuck they were talking about. As a security professional, listening to her explain DNS on television was painful.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:23 PM
3

She... took screenshots of how to "exploit" a senator's website (doesn't matter if you're actually exploiting), posts it online, and then claims she did nothing wrong. I really hope she reported the misconfiguration to the web administrators first, and waited for proper handling (the site to be taken down), because otherwise she's liable for any access to those files as a result of her posting those pictures. It's called improper incident response, and people get sued out the fucking ass for it.…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:21 PM
5

Wow, every single primary bullet is basically "Shutup".
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:06 PM
1

should have said "bit my tongue until it's settled in court". I don't want gender politics to be responsible for this girl being labeled a sex offender.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:04 PM
2

It's partially she's impressionable, yes, but that's what predisposes her to being abused. If your wrap yourself up in conversations about gender politics and allow yourself to be bullied with shaming tactics, you have a fair chance at convincing yourself they're right. See victims of abuse who rationalize it, saying it's actually their fault. It's not the professors fault! She's unstable! Well no, it actually is the professors fault when she repeatedly asserts healthy sexual relationships are a…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 11:01 PM
2

These big vagina ladies are getting away with murder
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:45 PM
1

"Shit on me" ~ Dade Murphy in Hackers.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:36 PM
0

¬_¬ don't you dare
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:36 PM
3

House arrest... and still registered as a sex offender. Doesn't matter what the punishment is, if she's in that database.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:35 PM
1

You asked a child where his mother was? What, were you checking to see if she was nearby so you could abduct them? YOU PEDOPHILE, SOMEONE SAVE MY CHILDREN, HE TRIED TO ABDUCT THEM. And this is the reason I theoretically will never help a child in danger, but will ultimately go to jail when I save some child's life.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:33 PM
3

http://bit.ly/ZCT7lO
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:24 PM
1

Well, this goes on into an entirely different topic, but I think that society is way too overprotective these days. I went running all over my neighborhood when I was 4-10, with friends, riding bikes, playing hide and seek. To suggest bad parenting because no one is watching is a little blind. Now if they're playing next to highways and running in and out of traffic, totally agree. But if it's a small rural type town you're talking about, maybe you should put it in the perspective of "what exact…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:22 PM
3

Calling out the calling out of call out culture is so meta i can't even call it out because I feel dirty.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:17 PM
4

Totally agree, the outrage is pretty obviously because it's a woman/woman couple. It's disgusts me to know that hundreds of these cases have been brought against men, and no one is there to advocate for them in such the same way. All that being said, I can't bring myself to have the vitriol to damn this girl to being labeled as a sex offender, because it's so obviously wrong. What we should be doing here is parenting, not prosecuting.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:15 PM
2

Good to know then.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 09:11 PM
2

I disagree, I think she should fight it and have the chance at modifying R&J exemptions in such a way that actually ends up helping male/female couples. It's shitty to say, but if it takes a lesbian couple and the outrage of people to do so... I'll bite my tongue.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:57 PM
-3

Ok, this keeps popping up, but requesting harshness on the basis of "if it were a male..." is a little stupid. Any reasonable person can see they shouldn't be penalized for a relationship that was ok one day, and suddenly against the law the next.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:56 PM
1

Man, I really hate your piss poor decorum But i can't help laughing sometimes.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:54 PM
1

http://you-win-the-internet.com/?n=Amanda%20Marcotte
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:53 PM
1

I wasn't going to go down the road of actually fleshing out the fallacy of the argument I used as an example, but thank you for doing so. That said, I've never actually seen the argument used, and was simply using a very clear example of how the word "possible" and "plausible" are used interchangeably to manipulate thought.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:34 PM
4

Merit 1: He will work harder MGTOWs outbound, no wonder Japanese society has 39.7% of males saying "Fuck marriage". Edit: The entire article is one step below spousal financial abuse that so many women would suggest is a problem. Controlling the money = controlling the spouse = abusive. But only when the men do it, I guess.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:29 PM
4

Judging by your post history, you're a high school student, and a little too young to be oppressed at all. Unless your teacher decided to touch you, but I'm doubting it, teacher rape is a pretty rare event. Holy fucking shitballs, how presumptive can a person be. I don't even know where to start with this. How about ad hominem at its worst, to begin. Secondly, who in their right mind would say "You're in highschool, so unless you've been teacher raped, you have no idea what oppression is". How d…
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:13 PM
3

They don't shape public opinion, they reflect it, thats how they make money. That's not true, it's a two way street. The way events are covered definitely changes the way the public views it. The opinion of the Vietnam war, the first televised war, was primarily shaped by how the media chose to cover it. Society reacted to the coverage, and thus continued to drive the narrative. The way the media demonized soldiers lead the public to demonize the soldiers. Now we know better.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 08:10 PM
5

If anyone here actually doubts the effect of language on a debate, it's very easy to demonstrate. Plausible and possible. Two words that are very very different, but often used almost interchangeably. Plausible: Not only speaks to the possibility of something occurring, but also the likelihood of it occurring. Possible: Speaks to whether or not something can occur, but does not address the likelihood of it occurring. "By defining rape to include envelopment, it's very possible that we'll change …
/r/MensRights24/05/13 07:22 PM
1

Thanks for the kind words n_n
/r/MensRights24/05/13 07:10 PM
1

sex for pleasure*
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:24 PM
3

I've noticed this before when reading used reference books for actors, and used plays. It was always really funny to see single sentences underlined, mostly things that had some profound sound to it. 95% of the time the really useful knowledge hadn't a single mark to it.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 06:01 AM
2

About: I acknowledge my white male privilege, and accept that my voice should be secondary to those of women, people of color and all those who have been enslaved by the Patriarchy. This has to be a troll... my god.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 05:49 AM
6

Is there really a better description of politics? In theory yes. In application...
/r/MensRights24/05/13 05:30 AM
3

This is really what it boils down to in many arguments. Feminist: BUT MY FEELINGS... MRAs: ... have no bearing on my life.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 05:28 AM
2

You make alot of very good arguments here. Have an upvote
/r/MensRights24/05/13 04:52 AM
1

Well, there may be some subconscious logic going on, wherein people choose the less risky method of suicide (pills) to deal with the case in which they are unsuccessful. I.e., if I don't die, what is going to cause me the least immediate harm (pain) and least extended harm (disfigurement/disability). I believe otherwise, they'd just all find a really big building and go for one last thrill.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 04:33 AM
2

On the note of choosing methods that are less messy, I remember that one Maddox article where he suggested the coolest forms of suicide. If I ever take myself out, I'm totally going for the bathtub full of beans. Biggest mess possible. Take that world.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 04:27 AM
8

Patriarchy suggests that men having power is the cause of all that is wrong in the world. It completely removes the responsibility from society as a whole (50/50 male/female), and places everything on the common man, while depriving these same men the right to suggest "Well actually we've got it bad too...". It's completely devoid of merit when you realize a vast majority of society doesn't have power. The few who have managed to amass social and economic power are at the core of most problems, …
/r/MensRights24/05/13 04:21 AM
10

I wanted to make this comment first, but more bluntly "Women's Studies isn't a real degree, how does that factor in?" herp derp
/r/MensRights24/05/13 04:00 AM
-6

Rape is (almost) never about sexual pleasure. It's about power, revenge, or hatred, all of which feed on each other.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:54 AM
3

I personally believe she has been psychologically abused by her professor. There is no other word for it, it's just plain abuse.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:53 AM
2

note to self... stop... using... thesaurus...
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:48 AM
1

Or one might suggest you have poor comprehension. "socially acceptable" in the context of her narrative means "acceptable amongst peers" (e.g. the other people involved in the gang rape).
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:46 AM
2

Most ancient cultures held homosexuality to be perfectly acceptable. Even native americans had a name for it (spirit partners, basically).
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:16 AM
1

Of course there are other factors at play. Rape has nothing to do with sex, it's an act solely concerned with power. Doesn't matter if it's one-on-one or gang rape.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:14 AM
1

Oh? Come at me, sociologists. bwahahahaha, thank you for this. Made my night.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 03:03 AM
6

[Annie]: "While taking women's studies with a separatist teaching fellow there, I nearly had a nervous breakdown because I thought my boyfriend of five years was raping me every time he penetrated me." My god I feel so sad for this woman. It makes me depressed that academia has actually sponsored professors that teach a curriculum that could possibly convince someone of this.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:56 AM
2

some reddiquette* even
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:41 AM
1

The thing i hate most is... "Many young women feel so powerless" yeah well this should really be "Many people who have limited social or economic status feel so powerless". It pretty much has nothing to do with gender, but is an excellent excuse to claim victimhood where no oppression actually exists.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:40 AM
1

Sounds star-wars-esque.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:38 AM
1

No, logically speaking, you would hate being killed, and being killed is a product of meeting a tiger, and therefore you would be afraid of tigers. You're misusing the transitive property. You are afraid of tigers, and hate being killed, which is the product of meeting a tiger. You might "hate to meet a tiger", but might not say "I hate tigers" Now, post tiger-attack, having survived, you might hate tigers. But then, you might not.
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:37 AM
5

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:25 AM
4

read this as "scissoring a guy", after reading castration day, and I was like "BUT BUT BUT D:"
/r/MensRights24/05/13 02:25 AM
1

This says it better than I can.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 07:36 AM
0

Yes but i'm not telling that person their only way to make money is to let me shit in their mouth. They have the freedom to earn it however they want. To elaborate slightly... We now require our citizens to have health insurance, or they are penalized via fines. I think that's perfectly reasonable if we account for people unable to buy it, and either subsidize or provide it to them. I support the same adjustment being made for income levels.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 06:35 AM
1

That's actually a fairly potent argument, and is primarily the reason I do not believe it's 100% the mother's responsibility, though definitely believe she maintains the right to an abortion.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 06:31 AM
0

I'll say this. It doesn't sit well with me. Primarily because after the child is born, we're left with a child who is either under provided for, or taken on by the state. So we've either punished the child... or we're making EVERYONE pay for the child. I don't like either of those outcomes. But nor do I like not providing a man the ability to opt-out. So I will certainly state that there is merit in the idea, but stop short of supporting it.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 06:24 AM
29

Technically he DID dox her by releasing her full name and phone number. All things aside, that's grounds for banning from twitter.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:32 AM
0

as would be the case with the father opting out, the mother legally took all obligation She never signed that contract. that same logic applies to parents forced to take care of children Welp, never thought about it that way...
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:11 AM
9

I'd like to think I am.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:10 AM
1

See, i think that's completely fucked up, that a father who is left with a child and a run-off mother can't abandon the child under baby moses laws. I was under the impression they were gender neutral.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:07 AM
1

I obviously meant post-birth.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:06 AM
1

Nope. That's where I believe it's impossible to remove gender from this equation. It's a fact of biology that a mother has to carry a child for 9 months, and I believe it's her right not to subject herself to that. I do believe she consents to motherhood the second the child is born, but I also believe it's in the interest of the child to allow for abandonment/adoption, so as not to give parents an incentive to kill children they don't want.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:05 AM
2

Yeah, i kinda address this in the Fraudulent use of child support section. It's not enough to address one issue, you really have to address them all.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:03 AM
1

The question then is, how do you intend to pay for all the children we can't find parents? Furthermore, do you ever think the state will pass a law which basically says you need $X/yr to have a child?
/r/MensRights23/05/13 05:01 AM
2

See, now you've oversimplified the argument in an attempt to draw inconsistent answer for the sake of saying "I'm logically correct!". The act of prosecuting parents who are dodging child support payments should be limited to cases in which it can be proved the parent had intent to do so, and that an outstanding debt is not enough to prove such. Currently, in the case of parents who default, the outstanding debt it enough to send them to jail. That's wrong.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:59 AM
2

I'll have to take some time to consider this.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:56 AM
1

I'm also arguing that, but I don't concede that events prior to a child being viable has relevance in deciding what to do after it is. It's really not difficult to see where you're trying to go with this, I'm just choosing not to play your game.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:54 AM
3

Child support law very often determines paternal obligation based on potential earning. Totally agree this is wrong. It's absurd and needs to be addressed. But that doesn't really address what I said. If she cannot handle that, then she does not deserve custody of a child. In which case... the government decides to remove thousands upon thousands of children from their mothers/fathers? I don't see where this solves anything.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:53 AM
0

Take the case of a man who gets an unemployed, or underemployed, woman pregnant. If the mother DOESN'T want to opt out, but cannot support the child herself, are we to tell her "welp, sucks for you and the kid?", or do we provide some sort of assistance? Either way, someone is paying - on one side it's the innocent kid, on the otherside it's government. Someone suggested a form of support footed by the government as opposed to the father, which i don't think is a terrible idea, but ultimately me…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:50 AM
2

I got that... but... i still don't understand. I've defined both actions as wrong, saying we need to hold them accountable. In the "Debtor's Prison" section I address exactly what I think should be held accountable (namely contempt of court with proven intent).
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:43 AM
0

I think it's more fair to suggest a father can opt out of responsibility to pay for pre-natal care (beyond 1/2 the cost of an abortion) during a pregnancy, rather than suggest a parent has no obligation to a child post-birth. That's the humanitarian in me speaking...
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:40 AM
1

The comparison to SS is a little specious don't you think? The suggest you're making is that people will suddenly start bringing children to term for some ulterior motive, rather than some other moral decision. That situation is likely to be a lot more rare than people being terrible at managing their money. I wasn't aware a mother could abandon it without providing the father a chance at custody. What happens when the father finds the child, requests custody back, and then seeks child support? …
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:36 AM
2

Totally agree.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:30 AM
1

I'm not sure I understand the question here, can you elaborate?
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:30 AM
4

This is fair, I do like where you're going with it. However, much of this argument depends on the potential and not the actual earning of a woman who chooses to take a child to term. Would it be more acceptable to suggest a system in which a custodial parent who makes below a certain level of income should be provided child support to help make up for the gap? In this way, we could support financial abortion in cases where the custodial parent already makes above a certain level of income.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:28 AM
2

In the eyes of the law, the ability to request child support payments requires the child to have been born. Everything happening prior to the child being born has no relevance in discussing what should be done with the child after it is. I'm not clear on how prenatal care factors in, so I have to admit ignorance on that part. I'm saying he can't make the decision not to have a job simply to avoid paying child support. That's intent to be in contempt of court. Please read the "Debtor's Prison" se…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:23 AM
2

We also limit freedom by telling people they can't just walk out of jail because they committed a crime. You have to hold people accountable at some point, otherwise our societies would crumble. It's anarchistic to suggest otherwise.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:17 AM
1

Lets break it down this way single mother goes to term, father not in the picture has option of adoption/abandonment mother goes to term, father doesn't want it father pays child support mother goes to term, doesn't want it, father wants it father gets custody, mother pays child support, no option for adoption/abandonment mother goes to term, neither parent wants it adoption/abandonment
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:15 AM
3

You refuse to issue a birth certificate with the man's name on it. Some states already do this. And I do think you raise completely relevant concerns regarding the 4th Amendement. This was simply an idea.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:09 AM
3

The hoops a father has to jump through are immense even if he is married. Oh look you identified another problem that needs to be addressed. We should probably add that to the list. At any time a father is identified for child support he is granted the option of fifty-fifty custody instead of paying child support. And he should not be subject to any more indications of fitness than a mother is prior to her being granted custody of a child(which are currently none). I love it. How do you handle s…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:07 AM
2

that's simply being ignorant of the reality. No, that's be cognizant of the current legal landscape in regards to child support. You can't get child support for an unborn child, therefore in regards to child support, a woman does not have a child until it is born. do you think he should go to jail or be fined? If he doesn't have income, i don't think he should. I discussed this elsewhere in requiring proving intent. If he's doing it to explicitly dodge paying child support, then I think that's b…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 04:03 AM
2

Well first of all, the first opt-out is a question of bodily autonomy until the child is viable. Secondly, I'd like to see precedent that says mothers can decide to put up a child for adoption or abandonment, when there is a father who actually wants to keep the child, and that mother not being made to pay child support if the father wants it.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:54 AM
4

What? Can you re-read my statement? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe-haven_law
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:50 AM
2

do you think pregnant women should not be obligated to provide for their children? Pregnant women don't have a child yet. (until the viability mark) I think women who have given birth to a child who doesn't want custody should be legally obligated to provide support financially if the father wants to keep the child and she doesn't. In the case of neither parent wanting custody, we already provide safe haven/adoption. more specifically, do you believe that abortion should be legal? Yes, I do. I d…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:48 AM
3

See, you've just taken a practical argument (what do we do with a child that exists), to an extremely irrational place (why don't we stop those children from existing). We cannot control the physical freedom of people by telling them they cannot have children because they're poor. That's absurd. Single people actually do receive heavier scrutiny when attempting to adopt for exactly that reason.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:40 AM
6

You caught me there. I did my best to keep this gender neutral, but I let taking the context read elsewhere (that it's the subjugation of men) leak into my own argument. Good catch, thank you. I like your ideas to be honest. When it comes to childcare/medicine, some states already do this. Like Pennsylvania's CHIP. Difficult to sell this to the fiscally conservative though.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:36 AM
13

I'm sorry sir, we're here to arrest your penis for having a physical reaction to stimuli without the consent of someone you were physically engaged with consensually. No, you don't have to come with us, just your penis. Now hand it over.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:32 AM
3

Kidnapping AND child abuse! We're so good at this game.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:28 AM
4

Shit, rather than use that as a context in which to "slip it in", it's a legitimate fucking reason to do it in the first place.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:28 AM
3

It's not fathers opting out, it's parents. You cannot legally suggest that a father can opt out without providing the same right to a woman, that simply wouldn't make sense. The consequence of allowing a parent to opt out is (potential) hardship placed on the child. In the face of that we can either: 1) Turn a blind eye, or 2) Let government foot the bill (medicaid/care, food stamps, etc). In the case of both parents wanting to opt out, the government already provides options via safe haven/adop…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 03:27 AM
7

Visitation enforcement The problem: $1 is spent enforcing visitation for every $340 spent recovering child support. Criminally restricting visitation is not seen for what it actually is: child abuse. A solution: Consider it child abuse under the law, and let it be used as evidence to support fitness for custody.
/r/MensRights23/05/13 02:52 AM
2

Debtor's Prison - aka "Contempt of Court" The Problem: Men are jailed for what is functionally a debt owed to the child, but is classified as "Contempt of Court". The idiocy of this is apparent: How can criminalizing this behavior solve anything, when labeling these men as criminals functionally strips their ability to actually resolve the debt. Men who lose jobs or take pay cuts are in danger of not only being homeless because of strain on finances, but also in danger of being put into jail for…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 02:52 AM
2

Fraudulent expenditure of child support The problem: The usage of child support… to not actually support the child. A complication: Any effort to monitor expenditures of child support could be considered unconstitutional when standing against the fourth amendment. A solution: Segregation of funds awarded by child support into custodial accounts. Funds to be used for necessities (food, clothing) are awarded in cash. Anything above awards for necessities held in an account which must be accounted …
/r/MensRights23/05/13 02:52 AM
3

Income based awards This is something I struggle with, because as I understand each state's awarding structure is vastly different. Please pipe in with specifics, corrections, or concerns, as I am not nearly as educated on this as I would like to be. A problem: Income based awards that exceed reasonable levels of expense a custodial parent may incur while raising the child; and, difficulty or reluctance to adjust of these awards when level of income drops or income ceases, unconstitutionally cri…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 02:52 AM
5

False Paternity Claims The problem: Contested paternity does not absolve men who have been acting as the provider to children of child support obligations. This is huge, but extremely complicated. For example, a man who has been acting and providing as a father to children for years before discovering they are not his own… what is in the best interest of the child, and what avenues of recourse can we provide the man without harming said children? While I'm not sure completely abandoning the chil…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 02:52 AM
2

Consent to Fatherhood The Problem: When does a man consent to fatherhood? Legally, as it stands now, it's at conception. However, this doesn't take into account cases of rape or spermjacking. The Solution: Make exceptions for cases of rape and spermjacking. Other than that, there is the argument that women have the right to get an abortion, and therefore have the ability to opt-in or opt-out all the way up until they can no longer have an abortion. This is, to put it bluntly, legal inequity. I r…
/r/MensRights23/05/13 02:51 AM
1

Gat dayum
/r/MensRights23/05/13 12:01 AM
3

Your suggestions primarily vent frustration of the current situation and propose a 180 turn to the opposite. This is a really poor stance to take given that your false dichotomy basically says "What about the child? The fuck do i care?". The reality-based argument for post-birth child support is to examine the system and adjust it so that it accurately provides the benefits it was meant to without unjustly punishing one half of the gender and removing their rights to access. The abortion debate …
/r/MensRights21/05/13 10:30 PM
1

Eh, you'd muddying the waters here. The child support argument is about the rights of a born child, and the abortion argument is about the rights of an unborn child. You can make philosophical arguments about whether physical abortion is equivalent to financial abortion, but the two arguments are very different discussions, and they really can't be used against each other in a logical way that accurately reflects reality.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:58 PM
2

aha... ha... "the fault of men" You really have a very poor understanding of history and human freedom. War is a result of societies quarreling, not one gender. In the past, the constructs of the "traditional" family were actually needed. Note, I said "in the past". They were needed because paid work was grueling and dangerous, and women spent much of their life rearing their children. Men went off to die in the mines to give their wives and children the best life possible. This wasn't oppressiv…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:37 PM
2

I mean... that's life man. A child's life is seen as inherently more sacred than any adult's, man or woman. I think there are a lot of very confused people who talk about the idea of "financial abortion", which I think is pretty devoid of merit. So much of the conversation talks about the right of the mother vs. the right of the father. The child is born when child support takes effect, what about the right of the child? That's why these laws exist. The problem I have how child support is how it…
/r/MensRights21/05/13 09:06 PM
1

ABORTIONS FOR EVERYONE!
/r/MensRights21/05/13 08:55 PM
1

I always love the people who make fun of me for being pale. It's pretty easy to make them feel stupid now that i've thought about it. "Damn dude, get some sun" "I love when people suggest I raise my risk for cancer." Just a fun anecdote from the nerdy guy with white thighs and no muscles. :D
/r/MensRights21/05/13 05:38 AM
1

I'll agree with this. However, the one point i've had to really stick to is that while it's not "oppressive", it's not exactly "healthy" to market female-only gyms with the caveat of "providing a safe place for women". If the suggestion is that "normal" gyms are not a "safe place" for women, I'd assert that maybe those women should start reporting situations which cause them to feel unsafe to the gym staff and have people removed. This is what one might call civilized society.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 05:32 AM
3

Echoing this. The last place I want to meet a woman is at the gym. Everyone there is sweaty, smelly, and making weird noises. Including me.
/r/MensRights21/05/13 05:27 AM
1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5mLjKI968g
/r/MensRights21/05/13 05:21 AM
5

If your professor has said this, I would report her to the dean. That's blatant racism and sexism in the classroom, it's harmful, and should be dealt with appropriately. Don't get into petty arguments, make her do paperwork. It's much more effective.
/r/MensRights20/05/13 03:23 AM
1

On a serious note, sound's like she's already poisoned the water. You should tell her that. You're very capable of love, but not with someone who is incapable of receiving it.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 10:32 PM
1

I love my stuffed tiger, Cheddar. The only cuddle buddy i've ever had that doesn't turn into a furnace mid-way through the night.
/r/MensRights19/05/13 10:30 PM
37

This has nothing to do with mensrights, there are way too many other socioeconomic factors going on here.
/r/MensRights13/05/13 12:17 PM
1

You can already seek damages if you can prove the accusation is patently false. It's called "Defamation of Character".
/r/MensRights12/05/13 02:13 PM
1

Nah, I just wanted to diffuse the eye-for-an-eye talk.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 05:03 AM
0

Of course not... that's why the charge of Perjury exists lol.
/r/MensRights12/05/13 04:09 AM
3

Echoing what Abientmouse said. See if you can get a copy of the presentation they showed (Assuming it was slides/powerpoint), and bring whatever research/citations you need to show the inaccuracies.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 10:11 PM
1

Your solution is draconian at best, and the real solution to the problem is anonymity laws. The law is not "eye for an eye" for a reason.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 09:59 PM
6

As if white cis-males have "problems"... pfft
/r/MensRights11/05/13 07:22 PM
4

No, because lying and rape aren't the same crime and shouldn't be treated the same.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 07:06 PM
6

And perjury covers false accusations already. The idea that lying about rape is as bad as actually raping someone is absurdly out of whack. I'll note that someone accused and acquitted of rape does have the legal option of suing for defamation if the case is strong enough.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 05:07 PM
10

Or we could just provide anonymity rights to both parties and not scare victims away from accusing their attacker with a lingering threat of "if there's not enough proof, you're the one going to jail". The law is not a game, it's people's lives.
/r/MensRights11/05/13 03:25 PM
1

This is not entirely correct. If you report a sexual assault and were underage drinking, you WILL be charged via NJP. Frat and unprofessional conduct are discretionary punishments, but underage drinking falls under navy policy that has much more oversight. Not sure about other services.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:50 AM
2

To be fair, while all the training has guys targeting women, the advocates follow it up with "Basically whoever decides to call rape first is the victim" The logic involved in that blows my motherfucking mind.
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:42 AM
1

True, multiple people I know have done this and got things thrown away. The paperwork and the headache involved though, you can still be rest-assured that your career in the military will be over unless you do amazing fucking work. Also, in the case of DUI's, this may not always be the smartest route. Usually NJP is done WAAAAAAY before you're even arraigned in court. If you opt for court martial, go to court, get convicted... heh. You know that thing called "Double Jeopardy"? That only applies …
/r/MensRights09/05/13 12:41 AM
8

Echoing this, as it's what I do now. Brief after brief after brief, all I can stress over and over and over is 3 things: 1) Don't drive, even after 1 drink, 2) Don't Drink Underage, and 3) Don't have sex while drunk, or with someone who has had ANY alcohol. These are the 3 most dangerous things a person can do to put their career in danger. To help non-military people understand why, it's because of how the UCMJ and Non-Judicial Punishment (non-court martial) works. I can be CHARGED with a DUI, …
/r/MensRights08/05/13 07:08 AM
1

No everyone points to her because she's the most outspoken. I'd like to say the same can be said for MRAs, there are endless examples of people who are ill-informed that make us look like a bunch of hyper conservative misogynist pigs. Your labeling the entire gender as irrational is the very irrationality you despise in that gender.
/r/MensRights08/05/13 02:16 AM
3

Yes, but the way you highlighted it was not very good. You equated "No consent" to "Not Rape". In reality, the "No Consent" should apply to everyone, and in reality, it IS rape. You welcome a wealth of very valid argument against this. I understood what you meant, but that's because I can read between the lines. Make no such assumption for the average person, they will react as if you mean "This isn't actually rape" seriously.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 08:57 PM
6

Oh, notably there is one statement in the entire 3 pages that is potentially concerning. I feel it wise to address this instead of just adding to the hoard of outrage (but believe me, i am outraged) If consent when drunk is not considered consent, then rape when drunk shouldn't be considered rape. This is a very very very incorrect statement. Rape when drunk is still rape. The mistake you made here was opening the door to "Consent when drunk is still consent", and then equating it to essentially…
/r/MensRights07/05/13 08:33 PM
3

Based on his edits, i think it's clear it should be going this direction.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 08:20 PM
12

For an 8th grader, that's a really well put together presentation... damn. Good for you. Bring this up with you parents, and fight it. Being punished for this is wrong.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 04:50 PM
24

Glad to hear she's your now-ex. I hope you find someone worthwhile.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 04:34 PM
0

owningyourshit.blogspot.com She seems pretty rational and I'd love to have a debate with her. You can stop generalizing now.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 10:16 PM
1

The capstone on this article is SO painful. Summarized: "The only use for paternity tests are the uses in which women are helped." Must... resist... urge... to rage...
/r/MensRights06/05/13 07:17 PM
0

"FEMINISTS CAN STOP FEDORA SHAMING"
/r/MensRights06/05/13 04:49 PM
1

No, I used it to cap a comment with some humor, which was obviously "There's some serious issues here... like fedoras". She then proceeded to do the same thing. I think the whole fedora thing is as absurd as everyone else. I think that HATS making it onto the bingo card is so absurd it deserves to be made fun of.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 04:19 PM
1

giantbro is literally Bill O'Riley.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 04:17 PM
1

Absolutely nothing. Elsewhere in this thread people are getting a little too strung up on the idea that some people think their hats are indicative of creepiness.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 04:16 PM
1

That there post be filled with lots of big ol' generalizations.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 04:03 PM
1

Pretty much. That said, this girl has been through alot in her life, and she has helped me through alot. If we're all so willing to throw away relationships over differences in ideology, you'd be pretty hard pressed to find any friends. That's kind of how it works, we compromise and choose to blind ourselves to some "turn-offs" in order to maintain connection. But sometimes there comes a point at which you can't compromise. That decision isn't always easy to make.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 03:57 PM
1

I wish I were that tall...
/r/MensRights06/05/13 03:53 PM
1

No, I equated the square on the bingo chart to the following logic "MRAs are creeps, creeps wear fedoras, therefore MRAs are fedoras"
/r/MensRights06/05/13 03:33 PM
3

Read this as "British Prime Minister" and almost shit myself.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 03:32 PM
1

Objection, leading the witness.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 03:25 PM
0

Agreed. It's a very blunt way of putting it, but I like to say "There comes a point in every relationship where you have to ask yourself 'Is this person worth my time?'"
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:12 PM
1

By this point in the argument it was not only apparent she wasn't reading my posts, but it was blatantly obvious she was making shitup. Following this post she basically said "I'm done with this argument. Bye." It was also around 11pm so I was worn out myself. This conversation took place over the course of a whole weekend.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:33 PM
1

Because I believe it's a construct society should provide. I also believe paternaty leave should be provided as well, something I didn't bring up here. If it's good enough for the military to enstate it, it's good enough for the general public. Women in the military are given 6 weeks paid maternaty leave, men are given 10 days (it's relatively new, but may be expanded in the future). Now maternaty leave beyond the first few months, I think that's undue stress on businnesses, but i think there's …
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:28 PM
0

kay
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:25 PM
0

Oh god I feel dirty. Get it off get it off get it off!
/r/MensRights06/05/13 01:06 PM
0

Fair point.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:36 PM
1

a != the so yeah, i could see how people would end up having this argument.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:27 PM
0

Unfortunately I can no longer follow up with the conversation. Later on she called me a rape apologist, and that was the end of it.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:04 PM
-1

PEOPLE ARE HATS. ITS ABSURD, NOT INSULTING. GOOD GOD MAN.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 11:03 AM
0

Jesus guys, seriously? I made an a=b, b=c, therefore a=c joke with obviously terrible logic, and people get fucking butthurt. It's as much about Knights & Knaves as it is about Fedoras... shit. MRA's = Fedoras. I.e. People are hats. You people suck sometimes.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 04:18 AM
5

Her: seriously done with this argument. do you want to get rid of child support? let's raise taxes to pay for children in single house holds. that's how to get around ~forcing poor men~ to pay for a child they had a part in making i support men gaining custody of children if they are fit parents. the court system is based on outdated beliefs that women need to be mothers and men do not want to be fathers. go ahead. as long as we are not placing children in abusive or unfit homes, do your thing. …
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:50 AM
7

3rd Party: Gregory: you are seeing things from a position of male privilege. You're talking down to women. Please stop wasting our time. Me: Good refutation of statistics. When I use them it's privilege, when feminists use them it's science! Give me a fucking break. 3rd Party: I wasn't addressing your statistics post. I was addressing your mansplaining condescension. Mansplaining Condescension... heh
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:48 AM
4

Me: Now i'll address your points <name redacted>. I hope you're ready to read, cause this is a long one. Did you know in some states, in order for a single mother to apply for certain state funded aid, they must apply for child support? These states then takes it upon themselves to enforce child-support payment, because it's reimbursement for services provided. Sometimes the mother doesn't want to press charges, but the state views it as a criminal act because he's not paying appropriately. Howe…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:46 AM
3

Her: yes people are jailed for violating child custody orders. it is contempt of court, and it is a charge that can be brought to court and prosecuted. some states do not allow jail time for parents but many others do (texas for instance jailed a woman last year after violating the custody order and taking her children out of state without permission from the father, did not give him adequate notice, and kept them for longer than her allowed time). people who are jailed for not paying child supp…
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:45 AM
2

Yeah, I have a bad tendency with this. I should really try to keep it in check.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 02:40 AM
-1

Jokes bro, learn to chuckle at them.
/r/MensRights06/05/13 12:20 AM
4

I totally agree with you. Most radical ideas stem from some kernel of rationality. I've posted elsewhere that it's sometimes not enough to ignore the radical voices, and instead pick apart the argument to find those kernels of truth, and then condemn the obviously harmful rhetoric. I spent 3 years training as an actor, which I sometimes jokingly called "applied psychology", because you had to take the role of a murderer, actively justify and empathize with that person. It's unthinkable that you …
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:52 PM
8

I think I remember this guy. Some of the points he made were akin to "Men should be manly men, and now we've turned them into a bunch of failure to launch pussy whipped blah blah blah" It was almost comical. Like... literally comic-book-villain comical. edit: just noticed you're GWW. :D Thank you for all your videos.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:33 PM
9

She's my friend. If I'm not going to have this conversation with her, who will. While her actions and thoughts are not my responsibility, I feel it's my responsibility to try to educate those I choose to call my friends.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:30 PM
2

Did this guy have a pseudo-news style Youtube channel? I think I know who you're talking about.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:28 PM
6

Her: withholding awarded custody rights is criminal though, refusing to hand over children for allocated time can result in the police being called and the courts will side in favor of the parent seeking the custody, even if it's partial. women are also forced to pay child support in cases the father is awarded custody, and there is a sweeping issue of inability to make payments between the cost of child support and the cost of lawyers and court fees. that's probably what keeps the system from m…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:00 PM
5

Her:i might be pushed to believe a gender bias, but where is the evidence this has long term consequences? as you reach high school and college level, males make up over 40% of faculty. men still outnumber women in vocational schools and science programs in colleges. lower grades in kindergarten fine, but this is not seen in real world applications. the gender pay gap is real. the 70 cents on the dollar, which i never even mentioned, is for white women. black and latina women make less than that…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:59 PM
5

Her: the issue with pregnancy is that it's a woman who is pregnant. the fetus is in her body and if she does not want it, she should not need permission to get rid of it. there is no easy way to deal with desired (or undesired) paternal rights and any solutions would be bringing government into the bedroom. it's unequal because our anatomy is unequal. the best solution without bringing government or legislature into personal lives is to talk with your partner about your wants and feelings in ter…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:59 PM
6

HER: more women attempt suicide than men it's just that men are more likely to use a firearm where women are more likely to overdose which means men are more likely to die. men are abused too i never said they weren't but you're teetering on blaming partners as if suicide by a male victim is akin to abuse. what rights do i have to give a man? what rights do i have that men do not have? just because mens shelters do not exist does not mean they don't have a right to build them. i'm not in charge …
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:59 PM
10

Her: because gender roles are a majorly oppressive force in our society and explain why men are rarely seen as victims?? when talking about gender based violence bringing up gender is super important. you don't have to be a mental health professional to say that suicidal thoughts and actions are result of mental illness. ask any psychologist. if you attempt suicide (and fail) you are sent to a behavioral health facility. there's no way around that. blaming others for a person's suicide is danger…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:58 PM
18

More fun stuff Her: why are you personally offended when i bring up the reality of the patriarchy? you're having such a hard time believing that the modern world has been ruled by males for thousands of years through religious missionary work, conquest, and regular old monarchies. I SAID THERE SHOULD BE SOLUTIONS TO VIOLENCE AGAINST MALES and the explanation that there is no such network of services if because of PATRIARCHAL GENDER ROLES THAT SAY MEN ARE STRONG AND WOMEN ARE WEAK. we need to add…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:57 PM
81

They believe all mra's are creepers, and fedoras are creeper attire, therefore mra's are fedoras.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 05:30 PM
26

I really need to put them in a bookmark folder, as no i didn't quote specific sources. I should probably take an afternoon to do that.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 04:58 PM
17

How about nothing about a public space is sacred when there aren't any people in it, and we treat it that way.
/r/MensRights03/05/13 05:23 PM
1

It makes some decent points here and there, but then... so does Ayn Rand. Doesn't make the rest of it any more than the garbage it is.
/r/TheRedPill03/05/13 05:21 PM
40

This is dumb. REALLY fucking dumb. First of all - "(insert sex) Monitor at the door, is anyone in here? Announcing again, is anyone in here? I am entering" I'm in the navy, when we have to clean heads or make safety rounds, we do this. There's no fucking reason to prevent someone from entering a room if no one is in there. What do you think janitors do?
/r/MensRights03/05/13 01:39 PM
3

I would suggest the thought experiment idea. "Lets say i run a battered man shelter...", draw it out, and come to the conclusion of "... you would call me all sorts of nasty names for turning that woman away. Now, you ACTUALLY do this to men. You are a deplorable human being."
/r/MensRights02/05/13 09:41 PM
2

No, all posts on that subreddit are subject to approval i believe. So either it hasn't been approved, never will be approved, or hasn't been gotten around to yet.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 09:09 PM
2

I think we're just reiterating eachother at this point, we pretty much agree. Preach on brother! lol
/r/MensRights02/05/13 08:09 PM
4

The problem is... well the squeaky wheel conundrum. The rationalists need to start being louder than the irrationalists. We should be as active in fighting radical MRA's as we are in fighting radical feminists. It's apparent from the reactions to the mere mention of MRA's in the precense of feminists that the rationalist MRAs are NOT being loud enough, and NOT dissenting against the irrationals. Just because there's no threat of large scale harm CURRENTLY does not excuse letting it pass. That's …
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:24 PM
2

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/1dkdt0/can_you_see_the_irony_of_this_statement/ Well, lets try to discuss this with them.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 07:13 PM
7

You need to look harder at MHRM, because there are definitely people who identify with it and are ACTUALLY misogynistic. When you see these people, you shouldn't ignore it as "eh, w/e", but actively correct them. That's why parts of feminism have become so poisoned, no major feminist organization attempted to meter it, they simply let it run wild.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 05:36 PM
1

This thing is insane. I mean literally insane. It's as insane as the idea of "The Patriarchy" and doesn't actually have a basis in reality. It simply takes societal norms that have come about through hundreds of thousands of years of necessity, and rewords them to make it sound like woman have been manipulating us. The man this PDF describes is a highly intellectual fool incapable of recognizing manipulative behavior, while the woman described is an masterfully skilled con artist who is unaware …
/r/TheRedPill02/05/13 05:25 PM
2

That's fair
/r/MensRights02/05/13 12:10 PM
1

Couple of those people are also MRA's from this board, but you're not incorrect.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 05:55 AM
1

20 years ago 2 Gb was unfathomable. 20 years today is 20 years ago's 100 years. It's really never going to be used again though, there is upward of a FULL YEAR of waiting just to ENLIST in the the Navy and Air Force in some cases. Think about that.
/r/MensRights02/05/13 05:54 AM
3

Right... but you cast some doubt on the situation because of the circumstance. Just explaining that he can indeed have been as terrible as that, and still have turned around and sexed him up.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 07:52 PM
1

The problem is we don't often recognize bad situations until AFTER we've been in them. Our first reaction as humans to situations we create is "i have to justify why this happened", and to keep calm and carry on. The cycle goes: get in fights, then have makeup sex, then go back to hitting, then have makeup sex, rinse repeat.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 07:37 PM
2

Oh yeah, i'm not gonna say abolishing the draft isn't a good idea. I don't think we'll ever need a non-volunteer military because of the perks the military provides already. Nor do I think forced conscription would actually benefit the military, given the highly technical nature of today's battlefield. Reference: I'm a United States Sailor :P
/r/MensRights01/05/13 05:03 PM
1

In the case of a national emergency (such as global war), the government can conscript citizens to protect the national interest. That's national security in a nutshell. As far as it being a "big number", you mail in a post card on your 18th birthday and never hear from them again. There's probably a rack or two of computer equipment tracking it all, and the staff required to maintain it. 5-10 million dollars? Not alot of money in the big scheme of things. You're confusing abolishing the draft w…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 04:55 PM
1

I've never heard of it being a HUGE waste of taxpayer dollars. It's there for a reason (national security). Can you link me to data showing me how much money it burns?
/r/MensRights01/05/13 04:35 PM
-1

I would still consider bringing up the abortion subject. It doesn't sound like she's in the position to successfuly raise a child.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 04:34 PM
2

Might makes right, numbers make might, women make numbers. That's actually a very elegant way of explaining male disposability and why it occurs. I'm refraining from commenting on the rest, I prefer not to enter the conversation. Just wish to say thanks, I'm gonna use that.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 04:10 PM
8

The most difficult part about the Selective Service is the fact that it's not been used for so long, that people do their best to say "Oh we'll never use it again, so shush". There it is, lingering over every of-age man in the country.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 03:59 PM
-2

This is exactly why when radicalized anyone-ists say anything hateful toward another group expressly in the interest of getting what they want, I always respond "Actually you're part of the problem". Hate begets hate.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 03:57 PM
0

Has she taken drugs AT ANY TIME after she can be assumed to have gotten pregnant? I mean, this is a serious thing to think about. If she has, it's probably in the interest of everyone to abort. I'm refraining from making statements on the decision of whether or not to tell the man. It's a serious quandry, but I think I would land on the side of him needing to know.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 03:49 PM
5

ok dude, points 1 and 2, perfectly ok. Point 3, completely out of line. There are a million billion reasons people stay together and continue to have sex, even if they didn't enjoy eachothers company.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 03:43 PM
2

Ah, the good ol' "it's the interwebs" defense. Touche sir. truth.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 02:34 PM
2

That's a really good point too. It's just really hard to point and say "MENTALLY ILL!" without getting some serious backlash for a number of reasons (justified or unjustified)
/r/MensRights01/05/13 02:23 PM
15

To be fair he has a point. Abusiveness and mental illness are not the same, and you would be smart not to confuse the two.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 02:10 PM
11

You're right, there are a number of people there making good comments. But the highest voted comments all but ignore the fact he's being abused and some blame him. The one by PestiferousCrapkin had over 100+ upvotes and was the top comment at one point. This is the post that said: Eschewing all that, my advice to you is to suck it up. Yup. Suck it up.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 01:20 PM
18

There are at least 4-5 posts saying he shouldn't be violent with her, when all he did was shout. One person went so far as to say this. You do not ever do that to anyone, leave the house, and EXPECT THEM to be anything but enraged and terrified when you come home. After going around destroying objects when you got mad at her, you got in her face! She slapped you! She probably had the knife because she thought you wanted to kill her! First of all, he didn't hit her, nor did he ever destroy object…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:56 PM
55

It's incredibly common for men to feel isolated, alone, and helpless in these situations. This is because our society has basically taught people to tell me "Man Up." in response to their hardships. All I can say is please don't stop fighting. You are not alone, you are not isolated. Seek the guidance of friends and family. It even sounds like her family might be worth contacting, if your primary concern is safety and wellbeing of your child. (I say this not knowing much about them, but it sound…
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:41 PM
16

Goddamn this made me angry. Took my time picking some coments to respond to. The fact that people in there ASSUMED HE HIT HER FIRST made me fucking angry. That said, I still hate the jimmy rustling meme, it's dumb.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:20 PM
1

The last part was a joke mang.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:45 AM
1

You'd be hard pressed to find a single dog who probably hasn't eaten its own shit too.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 11:17 AM
0

To be fair, humans don't have the best record at recognizer their own hypocrisy. I'll bet you'd be hard pressed to find a single MRA who hasn't made a hypocritical statement without realizing it. (Whether or not either group acknowledges their hypocrisy is another story, but this is more an individual circumstance anyway).
/r/MensRights01/05/13 01:58 AM
0

I mean... that's pretty accurate.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 01:27 AM
38

Man you had such a good post going until you started using caps and spewing obscenities. You don't need to call them whores to shame them man, it's unbecoming.
/r/MensRights01/05/13 12:56 AM
2

What does this have to do with Men's Rights exactly?
/r/MensRights30/04/13 06:11 PM
1

blerp, sorry, i should read usernames more.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 04:17 PM
2

That would be far more appropriate.
/r/MensRights30/04/13 01:34 PM
1

That's all fine and dandy, but you took the time to post this thread which basically says "lets try to gotcha /r/rape", which draws suspicion as to whether or not the story is even true. Do you not understand that?
/r/MensRights30/04/13 11:34 AM
3

What's disgusting is *the motive for getting him to post wasn't to raise awareness, it was to utilize his story to "GOTCHA!" a subreddit. If he wishes to share his story to raise awareness, I applaud him, and I wish him the best. But *we shouldn't be playing petty gotcha schemes with something as serious as rape, it helps no one, and actually draws suspicion and discredit. *edited because i'm bad at reading usernames
/r/MensRights30/04/13 02:49 AM
1

Get you vasectomys here! Walk right up, a slice, a snip, a zip and you're a safe man. No accidents, No child support, no custody battles, no baby mama drama. Disclaimer: does not prevent STD's, have sex responsibly.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:57 PM
2

You didn't actually post the link.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 07:46 PM
3

Honestly, until I started reading stories here, I never thought about it like that. Now I'm about ready to get snipped and just go adoption/artificial insemination if I want to have kids. No accidents, I get to have a say in when we have kids and who gets to have them with me, and worry free sex. I don't see the downside.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 06:48 PM
2

;>.> i got it, i was complimenting your joke with an anti-joke
/r/MensRights29/04/13 06:40 PM
0

careful now, you might offend LGBT movements. They need squishies too
/r/MensRights29/04/13 06:00 PM
3

Please apply to do a TED talk. This was a wonderful read. Thank you for all that you do.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:56 PM
12

You're basically using his story to try to bait people / test the subreddit for disparity, as apposed to sharing the story in an effort to bring the very real occurance of male victims more credibility. That's pretty disgusting bro.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:49 PM
3

What I often try to do is remove gender from arguments in support of what would be a "gender equality" movement. I personally believe the ideas of "feminism" and "men's rights movements" are inherently stigmatizing to the opposite sex, which causes ingrained hatred for simply identifying with it. This being despite probably having extremely similar values in most cases. Like forced ultrasounds... anyone who enjoys physical privacy should be at odds with it, and it SHOULD be fought against from a…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:38 PM
3

And other countries have wiretapping/eavesdropping laws too.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:28 PM
1

Please don't ever give this advice again without caveating wiretapping laws, and please educate other people you see doing it. You are practically telling people to commit a felony in some states/countries. Wiretapping/eavesdropping laws often require "Two party consent" for recording audio of a conversation with "reasonable expectations of privacy". Not only will this audio not be admissable in court, it can be used against the victim to convict him/her of a felony. Some states only require "Si…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:25 PM
2

it's completely possible to rationalize pro-life (which would be summed up into "The Rights of an unborn child") and MRM. But abortion is one of those topics where both rights have a wrong, so...
/r/MensRights29/04/13 05:11 PM
-1

Your argument amounts to "NO TRUE SCOTSMAN!", so yeah dude, go fuck yourself. You can disagree with a single point of an overall ideology and still identify with it. *this isn't to say you don't actually have a valid argument, only that in your thread you've basically gone scotsman.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:29 PM
2

You realize unnecessary transvaginal ultrasounds, while affecting only women PHYSICALLY, sets a precedent to apply similar unnecessarily invasive proceedures on the entire population right? It's gendered because men don't have vaginas, but the precedent it sets is extremely ungendered, and it angers me profusely. *this was primarily to point out that many gendered issues argued in support of women completely ignore the consequences for men. It's unfathomable that forced ultrasounds affect men at…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:19 PM
2

One of the most difficult things to discuss is rape. It's always attached to very very very ugly feelings, and thus is ALWAYS heated. There isn't a single sentance you can say that won't be scrutinized. It's really difficult to have constructive conversations about what occurred, because any discussion of "what did the victim do that lead them into that bad situation" turns into "NO THAT'S VICTIM BLAMING!". In reality, sometimes walking down a dark alley at 3am PROBABLY was not the best idea, an…
/r/MensRights29/04/13 04:11 PM
6

Lightly describes what likely would have become of my relationship with an Ex-Fiancee. She gut checked me a few times when she was angry and was never verbally supportive, but i just turned it away as "eh, probably deserved that" or "need to try harder since i'm not good enough". So wrong. So glad she never ended up pregnant. What's sick is that i'm simultaneously relieved it's over, and somehow still miss her. Ugh.
/r/MensRights29/04/13 03:43 PM
-1

Pretty much what i tried to say in another post. I don't hate feminism, but that doesn't mean i've inherently at odds with it. There is so much ingrained hatred here that it's hard to look at the subreddit and say "yeah these people can help someone"
/r/MensRights27/04/13 09:26 AM
1

This is an obvious troll
/r/MensRights22/04/13 01:15 PM
0

D.A.M.N.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 10:20 PM
-1

I was about to just write this off as stupidity, and then I got down to "lets cut all breaks for veteran students... because warmongering" The hatred I have for this person is unspeakable. It's like stupid had sex with bigotry, had a kid, and that kid was raised by a womyn.
/r/MensRights21/04/13 10:19 PM
2

Fair point.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:44 AM
8

O___O what
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:43 AM
1

Ok, i'll just respond to the substantial amount of text he gave me to work with. He was the first response to the thread by the way.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:37 AM
1

How big is NOW? I just started thumbing through it in the past few days, and I did read the opposition to default custody thing. I was appalled.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:34 AM
0

I'd like to see the cracked article that did that, because I'll pretty much never read cracked again. That's pretty fucking horrible.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:30 AM
-2

You just said "I'm anti-feminist" and "Except not always". Do you have any idea how confusing that is to some people? They hear "anti-feminist" and say "MISOGYNIST!" because they think you don't want women to have birth control. I'm being serious here, that's how the world fucking works.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:19 AM
-1

I've met quite a few people who identify with feminism, but don't agree with the idea of "patriarchy". The believe the constructs we've used for millennia are obsolete now that we're not really that worried about going extinct or being murdered by our neighbor (generally). It's the loudest common denominator in this world that gets the attention. It helps to be able to weed through the noise. I won't get into specific debates in this thread, as child support is extremely complex, while alimony a…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:17 AM
-1

Because a woman advocating for rights to control her body is the same as racism. Of course you could (and will) turn this around to say women advocating hatred for men is. But from my understanding, and experience, the entirety of feminism is much larger than one cause. Reducing any movement to the advocacy of any one specific cause is a really poor approach to debate.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 02:11 AM
1

Because somehow both feminists and Men's right activists seem to believe they are inherently at odds, and then cause unnecessary conflict which leads to more hate in the world.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:58 AM
3

I've met enough intelligent ones to give me hope for the future. The day is young my friend.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:56 AM
-5

So you believe every last belief feminists have are invalid? Labeling yourself as anti-feminist comes with that immediate connotation.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:54 AM
-3

Actually, I'd say most MRA's disagree with Feminism, since Feminism is a movement which appears to be obsessed with pushing the idea that men have no legitimate grievances. This is a really loaded statement in which you've effectively blanketed an entire group and absolved yourself of any responsibility for your statement by saying "they appear to be". That is to say, in some cases, you are correct. In others, you are not. Utilizing blanketed statements like this is what puts you at odds (immedi…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:48 AM
0

I actually agree with you, that there is a number of legislative pushes that would restrict men's rights unfairly. Of course MRA and Feminism will be at odds sometimes, it comes with the territory. However, you cannot possibly state intelligent discourse with a feminist is impossible when addressing Men's Rights. That statement is no more valid than the opposite. But the blanket statement "Misinformed MRAs think the object is to work with feminists" is just silly. Sometimes it's in our interest,…
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:36 AM
0

Well now i understand why everyone thinks this subreddit is shit. Thanks for your constructive criticism (like Sigil1, who I can actually respond to)
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:31 AM
1

Your contempt is showing.
/r/MensRights18/04/13 01:21 AM
2

Mostly correct, there are cases where groups claiming attacks has been delayed in one way or another. For the most part, this is true though. As time has gone by, i'm becoming increasingly convinced this is a domestic actor but with unknown motivations. Whatever the motivation is, it must be stopped.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 10:24 PM
5

I guess all the work FBI does tracking and investigating domestic extremist groups (like white supremecists) doesn't count for anything.
/r/MensRights17/04/13 05:15 PM
10

"If recent history is any guide, if the bomber ends up being a white anti-government extremist, white privilege will likely mean the attack is portrayed as just an isolated incident — one that has no bearing on any larger policy debates. Put another way, white privilege will work to not only insulate whites from collective blame, but also to insulate the political debate from any fallout from the attack." This person is so determined that the race and faith of the attacker matters more than the …
/r/MensRights17/04/13 04:49 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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