TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Hach8 Archive

View 0 posts and 645 comments by Hach8 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
35

Assuming this is serious and not sarcastic, this is presumably because young boys have so little power. Girls are automatically believed. Boys are automatically disbelieved. Boys know this and girls know this. Children aren't stupid, and they learn what they can get away with very quickly. Boys learn they can't get away with anything. Boys learn quickly that attention from authority always works against them. Girls learn the opposite. That is likely why there is a disparity regarding false accus…
/r/MensRights13/12/12 02:13 AM
2

Particularly without adding the fact that it WILL fuck up your relationship even more...
/r/MensRights08/12/12 06:06 AM
1

Throw like a girl is a physiological difference. Women and Girls have less muscle in part due to less testosterone. In general women have significantly less upper body strength than men which is one of the reasons sports are generally segregated by sex. Look like a girl, in this instance, is about not actually looking like a girl, physically, but taking feminine social traits such as grooming and clothing choice. Such things have zero relation to physiology.
/r/MensRights07/12/12 06:16 PM
13

Actually 2 years and 3 months for stabbing and injuring Knock AND attacking a policeman with a shard of pottery. They didn't ignore the stabbing incident entirely, they just didn't sentence her for the false rape claim.
/r/MensRights07/12/12 06:06 PM
33

Throw like a girl is something else entirely. But in the case of the poster, and gender norms as applied to men hardwarequestions is right. It's not that being a girl is degrading that is why men aren't allowed to be feminine. It's that not being like a man is degrading. Think about it this way. Many feminine traits in women are extremely desirable when exhibited by women. They are definitely not degrading in that sense, and in many ways women who have those traits have a specific type of power …
/r/MensRights05/12/12 10:25 PM
1

There is little a judge can do to get rid of a case before something like the 4 month mark. And likely much of the delay was due to the defense attorney. Rushing through something which was air tight from his point of view would be un-necessarily risky. The criticism should be aimed at the DA, not the judge is all I'm saying. 4 months really isn't that long for a case to go from filed to dismissed in the district court.
/r/MensRights05/12/12 08:24 PM
1

I've been thinking a lot about this question. I think first and foremost Men's Rights has to be about equal treatment under the law for men and women. That would include both presumptions made by courts, categorizations in statutes, and other regulatory effects that weigh heavier on one gender than the other. Specifically, it would include opposition to Title IX (in all its incarnations), Opposition to at least the text of VAWA, opposition to things like the Duluth model, etc. Equal treatment wo…
/r/MensRights04/12/12 08:21 PM
2

That's the Miller test articulated by the Supreme Court for determining what is or is not obscenity. While it may dovetail with child pornography, i.e. answering whether a specific instance of child pornography[speech] may be restricted by the federal government, or determining the validity of the Child Pornography prohibiting statute, it would not generally be part of the calculus of whether someone is guilty of a specific statute as articulated by congress, unless that statute specifically sta…
/r/MensRights04/12/12 12:08 AM
1

You have to think about the realities of the situation. Four months is not a lot of time in terms of Judicial action. Most federal judges (Assuming this is federal because most Child Pornography prosecution is) have between 400-600 active cases at the district court level. While it sucks, four months is just sort of par for the course for a case like this to go from when it was first filed to when it is finished. We need a lot more judges if we want to get through criminal cases more quickly.
/r/MensRights04/12/12 12:04 AM
7

I don't think he wanted to put on an insanity defense. In fact I'm pretty sure he wouldn't let his attorney plead insanity. This is fairly common though, Ted Kaczynski also did his best to avoid an insanity plea.
/r/MensRights10/11/12 01:04 AM
1

Perhaps I should have said modern use of the term, i.e. use of it as a verb.
/r/MensRights09/11/12 01:22 AM
6

ASAP start documenting where you are at all times. Either via your phone, or credit card receipts... Something. Other than that the only advice I can offer is for you to make sure your lawyer is good and listen to his advice.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 03:47 AM
-13

Technically, I believe, Cuckold is a consensual act on the part of both (married) parties. This is just her getting pregnant by another man.
/r/MensRights08/11/12 02:44 AM
1

This is incredibly insulting. I don't think there could be a more offensive way of making such statements. How feminists expect support from people they actively treat like criminal scum is just beyond me.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 07:07 AM
6

If the SLPC, NOW, and feminist thinkers across the US are any barometer, any "pro man" stance is going to be seen as a mere hatred for women, sadly.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 07:05 AM
2

http://www.destructoid.com/halo-4-will-not-be-issuing-special-xbl-bans-for-sexism-238129.phtml Assuming it's that poster.
/r/MensRights07/11/12 01:48 AM
6

I've known men who were molested as a child. Two of them. Neither of them were proud of it. Both had a profound sense of shame. How anyone could say that and not realize that it's the worst brand of textbook victim blaming "*** wanted it anyway!" is just ridiculous.
/r/MensRights06/11/12 06:00 AM
9

Looks like what happened is something about Skepchick or whatever her name is was posted in men's rights, the Atheism Plus folks got wind of it, came here and didn't like what they read and downvoted... Pretty natural thing to happen. Happens with most subs, I think. I don't know what the point being made was either though.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:56 AM
15

Yeah you really dodged a bullet by not sleeping with her. Congrats. The facebook message while it made you shitty sounds more like she was just trying to justify her being apart from you, because she can't admit to herself that she was in the wrong so she's trying to convince herself that you were. It would be best to just ignore it, ignore her and get on with your life.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:50 AM
13

More like Atheist Plussed.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:45 AM
5

I didn't expect much from this thread, and I still came away disappointed.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:44 AM
2

Would make sense in China, I think.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 06:43 AM
1

Men should stay away from Tumblr, it seems.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:36 PM
17

It's just another example of why "creepshaming" is bullshit. Clearly using terms like "skeeving you out" is the functional equivalent of creeping you out. Yet, the requirements for being creepy in this caricature have nothing to do with any sort of malfeasance. In fact, with the caricature's attention directed primarily towards non-human objects, it is almost impossible for it to have any sort of negative impact on women or girls - in the form of being a "creep." It is an example of how narrow t…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:32 PM
9

Of all the things you post, I never would have imagined that you would be racist.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:31 PM
1

I dunno if it's fair to attribute the problems in black communities to the US war on the poor and the war on drugs. Honestly a lot of the problems are attributeable to the introduction of Cocaine and more importantly Crack. There have been some papers about it, and the subject was also covered in the freakonomics book. The trajectory of the black community was actually in great shape, but the introduction of Crack set them back probably 5 decades. The war on poverty and the war on drugs did noth…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 06:12 PM
1

There have been some posts about it on MRMeta.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 04:01 PM
4

Actually I think the writers were from a smaller gaming site called "the border house" which was games journalism with a LGBT / Feminist Friendly Spin. It was a "safe place" for those people to discuss games.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 03:58 PM
3

Sad thing is Kotaku used to be the best gaming blog around. Now it feels sort of like the gaming arm of Jezebel.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 03:57 PM
4

It's been linked to jezebel for about 3 or 4 years, or at least as long as I've been going there.
/r/MensRights11/10/12 03:57 PM
3

Dictionary definition? Those are just bastions of the way patriarchy is entrenched in our language. In fact, the Greek words, Andros - meaning male, and Mis - hatred, are also from a clearly patriarchal structure and must be discarded. The only thing that matters is what social justice feminists define words as, because they're the only unbiased source of information. /s
/r/MensRights10/10/12 11:04 PM
1

Oh I didn't realize that was just one of his sockpuppets.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 09:53 PM
0

No. It should be obvious what his previous account was, because the name is basically the same.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:44 PM
-3

No offense but, so what if they try to Doxx you? I mean, clearly it would be problematic for the mods of either of those subs to deal with because it would mean publicly associating their identity with what they were doing online, which was unsavory to say the least. But this sub is no reason to hide. There's nothing immoral going on, let alone illegal. And while the threat to doxx you might expose you to harassment from extremists, you would still have the law on your side. And theoretically th…
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:30 PM
5

These statistics seem to easily confuse cause and effect - and also general proportionality. Though I think there are a lot of good things to be said about making education available to girls and young women in third world (particularly Muslim) countries. To say that this poster was a ham-fisted attempt at the subject would be generous.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:13 PM
2

More than half are opposed. Things like equality in domestic violence, such as gender neutral laws and policies, paternal custody and father's rights, equality of education between girls and boys, and dealing with false rape accusations are all directly opposed to feminism. The things feminism is neutral on is things like workplace fatalities, suicide rates, homelessness, violent crime victimization, and other negative things that disproportionately affect men. On the other hand there are things…
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:09 PM
-1

The movement itself doesn't have a political standing, officially. There are some super conservative traditionalists that frequent r/mensrights who wish it would follow their personal ideology. They are typically the ones who post partisan political advocacy here. I wouldn't take it as any sort of bellwether or barometer as to the political leanings of the movement or this subreddit.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:05 PM
2

He's coming fresh off a ban (on his main acct) and made this acct. He's really just a super conservative fundamentalist / traditionalist who is 'butthurt' that this sub isn't his personal ideological and political sounding board.
/r/MensRights10/10/12 08:03 PM
2

I thought this had already been established a while ago in several observational studies. The fact of the matter is, it should raise some red flags that Circumcision decreases HIV infection rates for men, but does nothing for the transmission of the disease others, and has no impact for men who have sex with men. Also it's funny. These were stopped early due to "futility" because the intervention group had significantly higher infection rates (18% v. 12%). Yet the studies that show the effective…
/r/MensRights10/10/12 06:30 PM
3

If "if's" and "buts" were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas Indeed If feminism WERE in fact about equality, and were in fact as concerned with issues that are problematic for men of course MRA's wouldn't have a problem with it. The problem isn't just that some feminists don't act that way, it's that most of feminist ideology / theology essentially precludes an egalitarian approach to gender issues. That's completely aside from the practical problem of having a lobbying organization …
/r/MensRights10/10/12 06:23 PM
2

Yep. Relevant (posted this above too). It always makes me think of this passage: Anything you say or write may be used against you in a court of law. Yo, bunky, wake the fuck up. You’re now being told that talking to a police detective in an interrogation room can only hurt you. If it could help you, they would probably be pretty quick to say that, wouldn’t they? They’d stand up and say you have the right not to worry because what you say or write in this godforsaken cubicle is gonna be used to …
/r/MensRights09/10/12 09:05 PM
2

Well, it's better than him being "the guy who was convicted of rape and now has to go around to all his neighbors and tell them he is a sex offender."
/r/MensRights09/10/12 09:03 PM
2

"Anything you say or write may be used against you in a court of law." Yo, bunky, wake the fuck up. You're now being told that talking to a police detective in an interrogation room can only hurt you. If it could help you, they would probably be pretty quick to say that, wouldn't they? They'd stand up and say you have the right not to worry because what you say or write in this godforsaken cubicle is gonna be used to your benefit in a court of law. No, your best bet is to shut up. Shut up now.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 09:00 PM
11

It's actually an AOL article, not huffingtonpost, even if it is cross posted there.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 05:04 PM
3

Pretty reasonable. Maybe I'm biased as he's one of my favorite (fiction) authors.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:29 PM
2

That first quote was where I stopped reading. In what universe does this happen? The only men WELCOME in feminist circles are the self flagellating douches. And even those men receive no "praise" they just seem to do it in an effort to be accepted by women. I've never seen any "praise" for a man who had feminist ideals, and in fact I've seen much ridicule and derision for men who became more progressive, simply because feminism wasn't their starting point in the first place.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:17 PM
0

Feminists don't believe in gender equality.
/r/MensRights09/10/12 04:09 PM
1

He probably has tenure and can't be fired.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 05:27 PM
6

It seems like posting here is political suicide, but having potential political support is awesome.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 06:14 PM
1

Conspiracy theories abound...
/r/MensRights02/10/12 06:12 PM
1

You don't bring them up in the circles that would turn them into oppression olympics. Namely, avoid feminist places.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 10:28 PM
12

http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/10rlbg/on_the_way_home_from_the_courthouse_all_mine_now/ It looks like the OP is just a Karma whore trying to get link Karma by linking something he knew this sub would eat up. The guy that won the custody battle seems like a decent and reasonable guy based on his comments. /u/adamdeluxedition
/r/MensRights01/10/12 10:22 PM
14

Thanks for this link. This shit should be reportable/bannable - particularly without indicating that it's a crosspost.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 10:20 PM
2

It feels like we've had more downvotes lately. Is it just me? I'll go into a thread and everything will be around 2 to -2, which seems out of the ordinary...
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:55 PM
1

OP, the link links to a different Taranto article.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:54 PM
7

But he will have deserved it for battering her mentally until she so psychologically abused with battered woman syndrome! /s
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:53 PM
7

Freakin activist judges. Also this case is not accurate for California today. Cal. Penal Code 261.5 has been re-written to be gender neutral. Source: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=261-269
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:44 PM
6

Both terms come from greek roots that have specific meaning mis - hatred andros - male gyn - female
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:42 PM
1

They don't clearly lie with the data meaning their graphs don't disagree with the numbers. But the presentation is clearly deceptive. If they're willing to obscure the truth in the graphs, why should I trust that they haven't obscured the truth in their data? They didn't give the actual data, only the analyzed results. Etc.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:35 PM
1

Yeah I saw. Your comment was better than mine. I posted before reading all the comments because this is like the 5th time this has been posted to r/mr...
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:34 PM
-1

How can you call them unbiased when they present their statistics via graphs that start at 1 and 25 instead of zero, when trying to compare. Doing so blatantly manipulates the data in terms of presentation. The numbers are interesting, but their presentation clearly belies their bias - which calls the entire study into question.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:39 PM
1

If she's logical you can. But you also need to put out the data and the argument correctly. there IS a wage gap, but it is primarily due to the choices that women make, and those choices take the form of hours worked and employment sought by women. There is a slight gap that is not attributable to either of the factors, but it only accounts for roughly 2% of the gap. This data is all from the DOL paper that many women and feminists use to support the idea that a pay gap exists: http://www.gao.go…
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:38 PM
20

Yeah, how come we've never in the history of ever seen a "really sick of my unemployed wife" article? It's because the default state of "man" is working and "woman" is whatever they want to do. Homemaker women are "moms" and their services are worth 6 figures as we hear every year on mothers day. But men who stay at home are just lazy.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:28 PM
3

Very disappointed that there were no Breaking Bad references in the comments section... I was thinking of posting "Nice try, Skyler." but I couldn't be bothered.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:24 PM
-27

Couldn't get past the first sentence. Nonsense.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:15 PM
2

'Statutory' sex crimes have. But in general rape has not been shifted to a strict liability crime. It would be an aberration of law if it were, because rape is all about consent. And having strict liability based entirely on one party's declaration they didn't consent would be anathema to the very concept of justice.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 09:12 PM
1

"Brigades" have to be organized anyway. Cross posting is just cross posting.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 09:01 PM
0

I thought I've seen you cross post in a bunch of 2x threads... and also in other TIL / Ask threads. Am I misremembering?
/r/MensRights26/09/12 05:50 PM
6

I don't think that's what downvote brigading is. That's just linking to another sub. I was under the impression that downvote brigade was when something is organized with the purpose of downvoting something else. Which is something we do not do here.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 05:49 PM
5

The problem with this whole thing is that feminists keep trying to re-define consent required for sex to be non-rape. Interestingly as the poster articulates, it actually means that sex is presumably rape. This is in line with the feminist definitions of requiring "enthusiastic" consent for sex to be consensual are part of that. The other problem, though, is that the idea of rape is being torn from the legal definition and purpose of the criminal law. To punish those who do bad things with crimi…
/r/MensRights26/09/12 05:46 PM
1

There's a lot of bullshitty stuff about the study. Just go look at the graphs.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 05:31 PM
1

Just because you have copy right which allows you to distribute it does not mean that there is not some other law, tort or other legal principle which prevents you from doing so. Seriously is that no obvious enough?
/r/MensRights24/09/12 09:36 PM
3

That is a threat, which is enough to take legal action. She has done enough that you can reasonably expect her to do something which would justify injunctive relief. There is a common law tort, in most jurisdictions called "unreasonable publicity to another's private life." The elements are a) if the matter to be published would be highly offensive to a reasonable person; and b) if the matter is not of public interest or concern. You need to contact a lawyer. Do it fast. If you do so you may be …
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:52 PM
1

You're wrong. Copyright is only concerned with the "ownership" of the work or image. That is, the right to copy. Just because copyright gives you the right to "distribute" the work does not mean that you can do so (also note that the right to distribute is, essentially, the right to copy). Copyright is only concerned with ownership interests, not privacy interests. There are several torts which would be applicable in the case of the OP, which would not depend or be impacted in any way by copyrig…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:46 PM
10

No, it's not the blanket right to distribute. Here is an example, you write a song saying bad things about your neighbor. You hold the copyright of the song. You do not have the right to perform it, though. There's a reason when you are filmed for a TV show you have to sign a waiver. There's a reason shows like COPS blur people faces. They do this in spite of the fact that they clearly hold the copyright to whatever work they're creating. I suggest you go to law school and take some classes on c…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 06:19 PM
1

People don't read names? I'm surprised manboobz often gets upvotes when he's clearly only here to troll.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:53 PM
1

It's manboobz. Trolls should always be downvoted.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:50 PM
8

No. That's now how law works. Copyright is the right to copy. That's it. It doesn't give you the right to publish another person's image without their consent express or implied.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:46 PM
-4

Or it could actually be because men present themselves with more confidence and enthusiasm in science. There was recently a study that found women in science were usually not excited about their work. They attributed the cause to sexism. It could be the other way around, people who are not enthusiastic about their work seem less competent, which would not lead to the conclusion of sexism. It's just this is America, so any time women are at a "disadvantage" the answer is always sexism.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:37 PM
6

So real that they have to present their second graph from 31,000 to 25,000, to show the 3,500 gap. So, a gap of ~10% is displayed with two bars, one roughly 4 times the size of the other. This is a blatantly manipulative use of statistics. How the fuck is this getting posted in scientific American. (It's laughable how that issue was "addressed" though.)
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:34 PM
14

For purposes of Privacy / Publicity / Bullying it doesn't matter who holds the copyright. See, e.g. Douglass v. Hustler
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:17 PM
8

Personally, yes it is anathema to men's rights insofar as traditionalism means ascribing traditional roles to men and women. Men and women should have the freedom and rights to pick their own roles that work for their own lives, and both should have all the legal and social rights and responsibilities of a free person. Trying to push society into a direction where men and women don't have those rights to choose what they want from their own life does seem anathema to men's rights.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 08:05 PM
1

It's going to be dry by the time it is removed by a hospital whether or not it was placed on there by a hand or a vagina. All it would need is to have some of the woman's DNA on it, which I assure you is not in short supply.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 08:01 PM
20

http://www.amazon.com/The-End-Men-Rise-Women/dp/1594488045/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1348170752&sr=8-1&keywords=the+end+of+men http://www.amazon.com/Manning-Up-Rise-Women-Turned/dp/0465028365/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1348170839&sr=1-1&keywords=manning+up http://www.amazon.com/Man-Down-Reasonable-Gamblers-Everything/dp/0810998297/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1348171039&sr=8-1&keywords=man+down Etc. It hasn't been out of fashion. It's been in fashion. It's just been under the guise of "now that every…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:58 PM
2

Yeah they do recognize fathers, but I just felt part of their "masculinity" / "identity" sections should have tied "father" to more than just "provider". Akin to the last quote. It's a good report, I guess I just felt like it was a little too focused on money. Particularly the previous sections relating to identity.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:25 PM
1

For the Rapex, if a woman uses this and gets raped, there is no mistaking what went on. If a woman uses this against a legitimate sexual partner, there is no mistaking that she was trying to rape and sexually assault him. A woman knows full well what will happen to someone that tries to penetrate her. If it isn't a rapist, then that women is guilty of rape and assault with a weapon. You might want to rethink that. It would be very easy for a woman to place that on a man's penis without a man try…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:18 PM
2

Yeah it is curious to wonder what the implications would be from an HIV / Epidemiology standpoint would be.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:15 PM
4

I'm surprised there isn't a feminist outcry about this and victim blaming.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:15 PM
7

No one. This is "grassroots" to its core. I think the first step would be setting up some sort of nonprofit, 501(c)(4) for example. Because before we have money, there has to be somewhere accountable for the money to be (no one is going to give money to random guy advocating for men's rights.) The second step will be outlining clear goals of the social welfare nonprofit. And also having a staff to work on those goals. The third step is getting the money. There are some groups already. The innoce…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:37 PM
4

Some do want traditional roles back. I'm not sure why they consider themselves MRAs because traditional roles also strip most rights away from men, they just strip some away from women as well.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:33 PM
1

I think it was pretty on point but I found the use of hegemonic masculinity a little distressing, perhaps because it seems too close to patriarchy speak. On the other hand I think they missed the boat on a couple things, primarily men's (father's) identity as a role model. I think that is a pretty important aspect of masculinity for many in my and my previous generation. Many men viewed their fathers as role models, but changing societal structures (no fault divorce, etc.) have made it difficult…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:20 PM
3

I totally agree. It's become standard practice for me to find the study. I've had enough experiences with feminists and other media citing studies to support positions specifically NOT taken by the study that they are citing. This article treads the line, in saying "the loss of the breadwinner role driving rise in suicide . . ." This implies, in part, fault on the part of men who are no longer able to be the breadwinner. The current political zeitgeist man blaming and bullshit like "the end of m…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:45 PM
4

Thank you so much for this.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:31 PM
5

The problems is that any nonsense directed at her, e.g. rape threats, isn't coming from MRAs in general, and it probably is only tangentially related to "gamers". So much of what Jim says is good but man I hate it when he gets preachy abut feminism and women and Anita. The real problem with things like Anita's project is that anyone who disagrees with it, from the format of the subject to the subject matter, gets labeled as a privileged misogynist. Which is one of the reasons there's very little…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:13 PM
5

I think I've heard it all now. That may have been the last "thing": Women are more oppressed in prison. Wow.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:09 PM
54

And stop writing all those damn books about how men suck because there aren't any that want to marry your daughters.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:03 PM
3

It's easy to support "true" men's rights while talking down feminism though. When the big organizations like NOW oppose things like custody for fathers, etc. just pointing that out is "anti feminist."
/r/MensRights20/09/12 03:59 PM
5

This is sad. Isn't it always feminists who say things like male suicide has been falling while females have seen their suicide rates increase to justify their ignoring of the problem or only dealing with programs aimed at women?
/r/MensRights20/09/12 03:56 PM
2

That's why it's ironic. Because the A+ think of themselves as atheists first and foremost, so they SHOULD be about rejecting dogma. But now they're in this argument with people defending their own personal dogma against those who have rejected it. It was definitely inevitable. But still ironic.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 10:23 PM
3

It's ironic because atheists frequently argue that you don't need to follow a certain dogma to be moral. By them dividing, and saying that different groups of atheists who have different belief systems are wrong, or not moral - is just a microcosm of the secular / sectarian divide, but wholly contained with the atheism sphere. In short, the ironic thing is that atheism is about discarding religious dogma, yet they're now arguing about some other sort of dogma even if it is technically non religi…
/r/MensRights19/09/12 05:04 PM
6

Did you read the interview? She said she hasn't had sex with her husband in 4 years, and frequently has sex with other men without him knowing. They also claim it's a true story.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 04:50 PM
6

The story isn't about consensual stuff, though... She talks about how she cheats on her husband all the time, and he doesn't know but he's still super sweet to her because he loves her...
/r/MensRights19/09/12 04:49 PM
3

It doesn't mean anything, which is one of the problems when people use it. Or rather, it means everything, which is one of the other problems when people use it.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:50 PM
2

Sounds like you need a better lawyer.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:45 PM
7

The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Somers would probably be good.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:19 PM
3

how can surly amy be taken seriously by anyone when she posts like a petulant child in response to anything even slightly critical of her? How is A+ even a movement? Are there that many intellectually / developmentally challenged individuals who consider themselves skeptics? Also this is only tangentially related to MR at best.
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:17 PM
0

Makes an interesting case for an all male workplace. I wonder if this only applies to men who have not met / seen the woman yet. Also this is good science. It's nice that they don't come to some crazy conclusion like "sexism".
/r/MensRights18/09/12 04:10 PM
5

Yeah it's a huge double standard, but men aren't "objectified" in the media so there's nothing to talk about. It's something that would be interesting to research. I have a feeling most men don't feel like they are sexually attractive, and barring the extreme cases (Movie Stars) can't tell what makes a guy sexually attractive. It would be interesting to study the impact this has on men, and whether or not this is one of the reasons for (for example) different grooming habits between men and wome…
/r/MensRights17/09/12 11:06 PM
0

I don't really know how he was represented I guess I was just thinking: Strong, Assertive, Successful, etc.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 09:50 PM
3

First rule of thumb is to avoid the oppression olympics. That's a game for the intellectually challenged. There is no reason to go into why men or women have had it worse, because presumably there's very no preclusive effect of advocating for men's rights vis a vis women's rights. The fact that the person you were talking to couldn't get that through his thick skull indicates he isn't a person really worth engaging on the subject. It might have been useful to point out his lack of empathy for hi…
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:54 PM
3

I was reading http://www.huffingtonpost.com/petra-zebroff/50-shades_b_1878051.html I saw a headline about sex contract and thought it would be about things like rape and child rearing. I think it is ridiculous. And I think the whole premise of the book is laughable. The man is paying the women a ton of money for the right to sexually pleasure her... It seems like it takes the idea of prostitution and steps it two steps toward the absurd. The book itself seems to stand for the idea that men shoul…
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:43 PM
1

His suggestion that Lindy West is a "Journalist" is ridiculous. Good video though.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 06:28 PM
-1

I personally like: "Men's Rights are Human Rights." I think it works well to have a statistic that precedes the slogan.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 05:13 PM
1

Thanks for digging this up. Just looking at the methodology has me scratching my head. The fact is that while feminists were considerably less "hostile" towards men as defined by the study, they were also significantly less "benevolant" as well. In the end, it really is just whether or not you think the statements they chose were actually indicative of something. The fact that they played on gender stereotypes in both cases (hostility and benevolence) probably is more of the reason feminists sco…
/r/MensRights17/09/12 05:06 PM
0

"Men's Rights Activists APPROVED avoiceformen.com"
/r/MensRights17/09/12 04:44 PM
1

My biggest pet peeve with the feminist movement is the causation in all of their "research." They seem to take any correlation and then attribute a causation. The most classic example is the wage gap. Because women earn less than men in full time employment -> sexism. There is little to no examining what portion of the gap is even attributable to sexism. There was a recent one on victim blaming as well. A lot of their scientific methodology is extremely suspect.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 04:40 PM
4

Honestly there's something to learn here. These feminist posters are more effective than the men's rights ones. They are succinct. They are catchy. (Except for the wall of text one). Honestly, as a group we should be trying to devise better outreach strategies, campaigns and slogans.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 04:33 PM
1

A lot of people seem skeptical of the subject, but it's still useful. By at least thinking about it we can get a better understanding of whether these types of things may or may not cause negative body issues for men. And it also can give us a better understanding of where the feminist agenda is inconsistent. One of the biggest "issues" for third wave feminists is the "objectification" and "male gaze" nonsense which they imply impacts women only. If someone was so inclined to argue with feminist…
/r/MensRights17/09/12 04:27 PM
1

It would be really interesting if vasectomies were covered in the ACA and there were a campaign to encourage men to get them, but reversals were not covered. It would be a very inexpensive way to curb some problems. On the other hand, though, the birthrate is likely to become a serious problem for the US as there won't be enough tax payers to pay down the debt incurred by the SS obligations to the current baby boomer generation plus pay for the social programs to support the next generation. Cut…
/r/MensRights13/09/12 10:22 PM
-4

I still can't decide why you remain here. You walk the line between troll and something else pretty well. Though I'm not sure what that something else is.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 09:36 PM
-4

How does someone downvote rightsbot?!? what did he ever do to anyone?
/r/MensRights13/09/12 09:29 PM
2

It's not a "section" it's just a tag to search by. Jezebel believes that men's rights is just a front for misogyny and that anyone who believes in men's rights is misguided at best and a hateful sociopath/rapist at worst.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 08:02 PM
23

Honestly, you made 3 mistakes: You expected something unrealistic in posting to r/askfeminists. You engaged in a "who is more oppressed" type argument with feminists. You used shitty sources like blogs to back up your points. Not trying to be a dick, but you should refrain from doing any of those 3 things.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 06:51 PM
2

Gender Equity Feminist is like saying, Racist Egalitarian, or Violent Pacifist. Aside from that, the idea that there are social stereotypes and ideals that disadvantage men is nothing new to the MRM. Patriarchy theory would be fine, but there are a couple problems. First is psychological second is practical. The first problem is that patriarchy is a label applied to a male dominant culture, and it attributes everything negative a male gender, whether or not that is the case. There's a strong arg…
/r/MensRights13/09/12 05:20 PM
2

It's a little more nuanced than that. They want to be able to pander to a group. The largest group they can pander to is based on gender, men and women. Feminism has becomes such a powerful movement it's politically untennable to pander to men. So, everyone panders to women.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 05:07 PM
27

Don't know how it works in the UK, but swap the genders of that statement and you have every woman who has applied suing you for discrimination in hiring practices.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 05:04 PM
2

That's awesome. By the existing definition I am homeless! I'm also homeless under the "new" definition too. This is just silliness. Also I'm kind of grumpy knowing that the section 8 housing I live across the street from costs those "poor" people less, yet they have wayyyy more space than me. Sorry, /ot.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 04:57 PM
2

Wow. Talk about false equivalence. Talking about feminism's credibility because it's "widely accepted" in academia? Thus, it's basically Evolution. Except for the fact that there is nothing inherently scientific about feminism... These folks really fail at the whole skepticism part of atheism. When there's no proof of something, you don't jump to the conclusion that seems the best. Isn't that the whole point? So cute that they're trying to stalk us, though.
/r/MensRights13/09/12 04:52 PM
1

The fact that you would subjectively feel blamed does not mean the people suggestion that there are things you can do to reduce your risks of being raped they are actually blaming you, as the victim. Victim blaming comes from a book which described the proximate cause of a groups victimhood as their own fault. Causation is key when we are talking about victim blaming. If people say things like "stick to crowded areas, go drinking with friends you trust, don't dress overly provocatively, don't fl…
/r/MensRights13/09/12 04:40 PM
3

Some of those were truly mind boggling: Making her polish the soles of his shoes. Demanding Receipts for all her spending. Making her lick the dinner plates clean. Sending her Unwanted Gifts Withdrawing Affection Refusing to talk to her
/r/MensRights12/09/12 10:29 PM
3

The problem is any time you suggest anyone is capable of doing anything to reduce their risk of being raped you will hear cries of victim blaming, no matter how you word it.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:52 PM
2

I know. I've actually worked on a similar case for a judge. I can't remember how we got it, but one of the parties was asking our judge to re-consider a ruling of the previous judge. It was well accepted that doing so would only be done with not only additional but compelling evidence. This was a couple years ago and it was kind of a minor thing. But even if there is no actual rule against it, it seems to be very disrespectful among judges to do so.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:48 PM
6

As you haven't done anything other than make a post here the idea you are over-reacting is kind of absurd. You may be being a little sensitive to the issue, but I wouldn't say overly so. What your teacher was doing was reinforcing negative gender stereotypes. It might be worth it to talk to her about it. Men are already alienated and often stereotyped out of early childhood education. Also I don't think the joke is particularly funny, either, as children aren't likely to ever be confronted with …
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:45 PM
3

I really like your comment in general, but I don't think it's at all similar to saying "children need to be taught how to not be molested." There are two serious differences. The first of which is we actually DO teach children ways to mitigate risks - Stranger Danger was a very effective campaign in getting kids to avoid strangers. Some might say it's been too effective because now there is almost an assumption (by adults) that any man is a stranger and thus a threat to children they are with, b…
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:36 PM
7

A bone chilling tale. It's really, really, really surprising that a judge would reverse another judges order in the way she did. In my experience, judges see that as highly disrespectful and will only do so on significant new evidence. I believe there may even be some rule against that, seeing as the second judge was not an appellate judge. Though this may only apply to federal. It would be great to have access to the public case documents, also...
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:21 PM
30

You're not wrong. The issue of victim blaming is something I've been thinking about writing... something on. There are many problems with your mother's logic. Not the least of which is the assumption that you can simply "teach" people out of crime. If that worked, we could eliminate all instances of assault and murder very quickly. The problem is, this is simply not a realistic solution. No amount of education will eliminate crime entirely. It can reduce crime, but it will not likely ever elimin…
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:01 PM
3

Not to say "I told you so" but these types of discussions are the types of things those statements can get you dragged into! I hope you don't take it all the wrong way though, and sour your opinion of r/mr. In the end, it honestly isn't a matter of who is more oppressed now or historically who was more oppressed. What matters (For the MRM at least) is recognition that men have problems. Even if you decide those aren't the problems you want to fight for. But I trust you understand that as well.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 06:28 PM
1

Concern trolling at its finest. Everything from citing FTB, one of the most blatantly anti-men's rights blogs around, to being a throwaway. Might as well have ended with "I think we need to check our privilege."
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:41 PM
2

Please no. We don't need every gd concern troll polluting MRMeta with their bullshit.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:35 PM
10

It would be interesting to get some serious essays written about all the feminist buzzwords: Empowerment, Victim Blaming, Male Gaze, Rape Culture, etc.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:19 PM
2

Poe's law in action.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:11 PM
24

Thank you for giving r/mr a chance. I would caution you about things like "I believe women have been more oppressed" because they can seem like fighting words to some degree. Often because they are used in such a way to dismiss men's issues, like: "Sure men have problems, but we don't need to worry about them because women are more oppressed." Also, it tends to start silly "Oppression Olympics" discussions Again, thank you for giving the space and cause a fair shake, and for realizing that femin…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 09:02 PM
1

He courted them in 2008, which is why they came out in droves.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 07:31 PM
1

The fact that it's from more than a year ago is testament to how courted the demographic is. Aside from that, Obama in particular has been courting the student vote with things like student loan reform, and cutting the interest rate on federally guaranteed student loans. That's a pretty big deal for students who keep an eye on their debt load due to education.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 06:48 PM
1

Has to be satire... when Mrs. Romney talks so movingly to the women of America, she leaves out the childless gals, and there is a reason for that: they are not moms. Also, potentially going for Poe's law.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 06:29 PM
6

Felt that way to me. Also felt odd to leave it on a Jezebel quote. On the bright side, he didn't go into some anti-male rant himself.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 06:22 PM
2

You're kidding, right? You don't think the student vote is courted? Really? http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/president-obama-targets-student-vote-in-campaigns-first-major-public-event/ http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7420302n http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/02/nation/la-na-campaign-20120903 http://www.kunc.org/post/obama-returns-colorado-court-student-vote
/r/MensRights11/09/12 05:36 PM
2

Linking to Manboobz is almost as bad as linking to SRS. Also, I find it a little ironic that speaking hypothetically about doing such things is met with such amazing backlash. Yet, when women beat or kill accused sexists or rapists, it's met with cheers and support from the same people who would chastize /r/mensrights based on comments taken completely out of context. Bullshit.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 05:27 PM
-1

I don't know. I think there's a strong case to be made that disengaging is a better strategy. While men are voting, everyone just assumes by default that men vote. But if men stop voting, both parties will see men as a demographic that is "up for grabs" and will have more motivation to try to get the male vote.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 05:17 PM
2

But they never really talk about it. Child support gets a lot of "air time" but we rarely hear anything about alimony which is conceptually much worse.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 05:03 PM
10

God. Sometimes I like reading David Brooks, but man he misses the point. This is bullshit just like the book is bullshit. Of course, when women succeed it's never because we have a government and society that puts them first, in just about everything. It's not because there are federal programs which all but mandate women are hired. It's not because there is a huge social opposition to not hiring women. It's because women have better "traits" than men. That also has nothing to do with the fact t…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:12 PM
6

This subject, sort of, comes up from time to time. The problem is that sometimes these situations really are valuable to look at as examples of gender discrimination in the media or the courts. On the other hand it gets kind of old seeing a list of posts in MR about female paedos. I think it should be treated with the same proposal for a lot of questionable subject matter being posted: The post should be required to write, in the subject, why this is important to talk about for Men's Rights.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 11:28 PM
14

Disingenuous bullshit as usual. But it's hard to expect anything else from a self described feminist. As if anyone can fight for "men's rights" "within" feminism as she proposes. Try do that and you'll get laughed/antagonized out of the room, or off the board. If I could get the page to load I would ask her if she could give an example of how feminist action or lobbying has ever improved the status or rights, legal or social, of men in general. Or any feminist activism thereof other than lobbyin…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 10:02 PM
27

Honestly I'm wondering why more MRA's aren't up in arms over alimony.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:50 PM
7

We don't agree that a harasser should be called a creep. Because that's a label that will get applied to other men who are not harassers when the term creep is used for them. Labels are a dangerous thing, because they get applied broadly to mean different things to different people. Using the phrase "creepy" to alter peoples behavior is simply dangerous because how you deal with creeps is almost universal despite the subjective nature of what a "creep" is. What I'm trying to make a point of is t…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 08:12 PM
4

No. They self identify as feminists. Feminism is defined by its speakers and its groups. From Dworkin to Steinem, from NOW to the SPLC. Feminism is a force that opposes the MRM. If you don't think that popular feminism opposes the MRM, try bringing up any male centric issue on any feminist blog, subreddit, or any other feminist space online and see how you are treated. If you think feminism does not oppose the MRM look into NOW's stance on father's rights and proof requirements for rape allegati…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 07:40 PM
33

There are a lot of problems with creep shaming, but what creep shaming is, at its core is shaming men who are "creepy." Calling a man a creep is pretty damning and damaging to his reputation, not only sexually but in other ways socially and professionally as well. The problem with "creep shaming" is that it's completely subjective. While a man who follows around / stalks / harasses women could easily rightly be called a "creep" and should be ostracized, the merely socially awkward, introverted m…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 07:10 PM
2

There are actually just a few very vocal anti-liberal posters around here who like to post about their political ideology. The fact that the majority of the time people are talking politics on this board (which is generally discouraged) is either those vociferous right leaning individuals probably plays the part in the political leanings. The other is likely the fact that the Obama administration has done so many anti-male things and criticism of his administration can be misconstrued as conserv…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 05:50 PM
1

Chattel is the legal term used in property law to refer to property which is not "real property" (land). Things like Cows and bicycles are chattels. It's also sometimes used for "slave" also, but this isn't the typical or legal use of the term.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 05:45 PM
2

It's also not an accurate quote because the quote should have ended with an ellipsis to denote the fact that where the quote ended was not actually the end of the quoted sentence. IMO, paul should call the editor and make them print a retraction. That's aside from the fact that it was incredibly disingenuous.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 11:42 PM
24

This is a common argument, but its a very disingenuous one. The problem is this: Feminism and feminists will often say that the problems men face are the problems induced by patriarchy (which some of them may be, but most aren't). Feminists conclude that if there are any gender equity issues that disadvantage men, that feminism is the right vehicle to address those issues. The disconnect, however, comes when any of those issues are presented in feminist circles. Whenever a man goes into a femini…
/r/MensRights06/09/12 11:39 PM
7

You should have redirected her to the show's creator's comment about the appeal of the show to men.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 11:32 PM
21

I think the issue of female initiated domestic violence is very poignant. The idea that they paint it as "she was asking for it" when talking about female initiated domestic violence is silly. Yes, she was asking for it. The idea that a woman should be able to hit a man, and if he hits back he's a monster and she's a victim is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 10:23 PM
9

Indeed. Evidently "the best studies" is just code for "the studies with results that support my point."
/r/MensRights06/09/12 09:53 PM
10

So ridiculous. If we had 51% women in the senate we wouldn't be debating birth control. We'd be passing laws that strengthened Title IX, strengthened VAWA, and making initiatives to ensure that women have not only every opportunity but every legal advantage possible. If it isn't one thing, it's the other. and maybe it wouldn't be BC for women. But that doesn't mean issues would be so much better. It's hard for me to think about the fact that these people are well regarded in any circle.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 09:52 PM
5

So much crap in this makes it a horrible excuse for journalism. The best studies say rape cases are dismissed between two and 10 per cent of the time, and rarely because the accused was actually found innocent. So... the "best" studies huh? Who voted? Why no sources? So much crap in this. Trying to link Breivik to Men's Rights without a source also. Sigh.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 09:16 PM
2

Here is a report including a forward by the department of labor which includes how the wage gap is inappropriately used. here is another government report from the GAO. This one is often cited by feminists for selective quotes, but the important thing is to look at the conclusions. These are much more concrete sources than any silly articles on feminist blogs which actively twist statistics to feed their agenda. The common statistic, of women only making 77 cents for every dollar a man makes has…
/r/MensRights06/09/12 09:02 PM
6

That's not even with all appropriate controls. Women disproportionately choose degrees in social sciences and things like psychology whereas men are more likely to be in hard sciences and engineering. The fact that the gap is so close, given this fact, should be testament that women are actually paid more highly based on their gender rather than the demand for their skills.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 08:51 PM
41

If there's any take away from this story for me, it's that there have been some successful fathers rights groups on the local level, and that's something to celebrate.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 08:46 PM
1

They will matter legally. But socially just being accused will leave a mark probably forever even if you are exonerated.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 06:49 PM
2

So sick of this article popping up everywhere. There's no better sure fire way to get your written dribble published than to talk about how men are dbags and need to be more accommodating of women in all spaces.
/r/MensRights06/09/12 04:38 PM
2

So awesome to see a non-partisan take-apart of the wage gap myth by fact checkers. Sooo so awesome.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 08:54 PM
23

Your apology is appreciated, but your support is really what matters. You should never feel obligated to apologize on behalf of your gender or any other demographic you are or were a part of. Taking responsibility for your own actions is all anyone can ask for from a responsible person. And thank you for coming here with an open mind.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 08:42 PM
1

It will never end. Feminism has set it up in a statistically perfect way. Women have the rights and freedom to do anything they want without any social pressure for them to do anything rigid. They have the freedom to work full time, work more than full time, work flexible hours, or forego work at all. None of these decisions are stigmatized, though some of them are less well compensated than others. Men don't have those options, in general, and there is still a huge pressure on men to work in pa…
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:58 PM
-1

Feminism is more of a dogma than a community. The MRM has logic and reason. Feminism has religious fervor.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:51 PM
1

Its stories like this that make me want to start a non-profit to help men defend themselves in family court after they have lost everything else to the blatantly corrupt system. Unfortunately, I'm not well enough studied in family law to jump in.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:29 PM
4

Been thinking about this for a while. For one, I think the MRM doesn't really have the roots to make such a fund to pay for real attorneys. The MRM doesn't have the broad financial backing of a large constituency. That's my guess at least.
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:24 PM
2

I think the fact that r/MensRights is the least coherent is what makes it the center of the MRM. To me, anyway, it's one of the few places to see what Men's Rights means to a variety of different people. And while it's the least coherent or least focused, this makes it the most comprehensive. And from that comes the best platform to identify what the MRM truly needs to be. It helps identify what issues everyone can get on board with, and which issues are more "fringe" as well. I think it's a bit…
/r/MensRights05/09/12 07:14 PM
10

How do they get off calling this a "first hand account" when they clearly haven't spent any time actually talking to or engaging men's right's activists? Clearly they're just spouting typical stereotypes. What is worse is that there isn't even anything to back it up. No data, no studies, not even the weak ass links to PUA or MGTOW forum posts. And they have the nerve to label anything contrary to their position as "trolling"?
/r/MensRights04/09/12 06:56 PM
4

Yeah beyond bad taste. if this involved women the "rape joke" issue would have people in a furor.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 11:37 PM
3

Nothing, but I can't speak very authoritatively about the rest of the world.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 11:32 PM
4

The practical reality is that this wouldn't fix anything. It would provide little more security for those with the stomach to discuss and make agreements prior to ever having sex, but few couples would ever do such a thing. It would leave the vast majority of men in the status quo, which is not an acceptable situation. Enforcement would be from impractical to impossible as well, even if such contracts and agreements were accepted legally.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 08:35 PM
5

What a disturbing article. Arguing that men are no longer necessary is extremely unsettling... And this from the director of the Idaho innocence project, no less. This is sad.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 08:20 PM
1

It's not the same, at all really. In the first one, under the current system the guy is on the hook for child support regardless. Your proposition may or may not change that. Even though the woman was deceptive and dishonest, he is still on the hook. The second one you have 1) an accident, and 2) you have a man bailing on his promise. The fact is he would still need to support the child. So I don't know why you bring these up, or what your proposition solves that isn't the case under the current…
/r/MensRights31/08/12 08:05 PM
12

You should be terrified. This is the state of affairs of the US.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 07:54 PM
3

Oh feminists, always trying to strip the word rape away from the legal standards of being guilty of a crime. Criminal guilt can not depend on the subjective opinion of the individual who believes they are a victim. It is dependent in the mens rea of the accused. Why cant feminists understand this?
/r/MensRights31/08/12 07:15 PM
1

I disagree with him. I think the fact that feminism largely favors the democratic party is a huge disadvantage for the republicans, rather than the advantage he plays it as. While it's true that Sandra Fluke, and team Obama in general is not attracting any male votes particularly based on gender issues, the fact is that feminism has ensured that the male vote can not be pandered to. While politicians can say and do whatever they want to help women, they are much more restricted in what they can …
/r/MensRights31/08/12 07:09 PM
4

She probably just likes you and is using the "I don't feel safe" as an excuse to spend some time with you and get to know you better...
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:59 PM
2

What if a guy who told me that he shares my beliefs, and although he doesn't want kids now he would want to keep a baby and raise it, changes his mind once I'm pregnant? The point at which the discussion is important is when you are ACTUALLY pregnant. Yes, you are taking a risk when you have sex and that risk is higher for women. But that isn't a construct of society but a consequence of nature. The problem is that women get the CHOICE and men have to deal with the CONSEQUENCES of a choice they …
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:57 PM
2

But if it was a man and he was called any of the previous you would have had no problem, presumably.
/r/MensRights31/08/12 06:49 PM
9

He isn't rejoicing. He just doesn't have sympathy and doesn't care.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 10:05 PM
2

The general tort is Defamation. In some places the verbal / transitory statements are referred to as slander, while the written statements may be referred to as Libel - but generally the area of law is referred to as defamation. Often, Libel is defined as "written defamatory statements." Should also be noted that the standards for defamation per se are a 1) Defamatory statement, 2) published to a third party; and 3) that the speaker knew or should have known to be false. Normally you also have t…
/r/MensRights30/08/12 09:58 PM
7

Heh, "this lady" kind of made me laugh when I started watching the video. I should say, the title of this post is what made me laugh, not GWW.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 06:55 PM
12

1) Whenever Rape is mentioned, someone inevitably brings up prison statistics. How is feminism responsible for this when it's men who do the raping in the prisons? Using the same statistics it is very easy to say "Men rape more than women". Feminism isn't directly responsible for every problem men face culturally, socially or legally. This does not lessen their culpability as a group for either completely ignoring or being actively hostile to men in other situations. 2) Why do some feminists thi…
/r/MensRights30/08/12 06:35 PM
2

I try to not reply to clear bait posts, but I'm willfully failing here. People shouldn't be socialized in terms of any gender roles. People should just make the decisions which best fit their life. What they shouldn't do is rely on aggregate statistics to show oppression when the statistics actually only indicate differentiation in life preferences.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 06:01 PM
5

I've seen it all. I saw it as how women were oppressed because they were more likely to die alone. Never mind the fact that this is primarily because a man's life expectancy is so much shorter than woman's.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 05:18 PM
5

He needs to sue, post haste. Probably in PA. This is Defamation per se, and he shouldn't have to prove damages. It might be worth it to see one of the letters she is writing, but considering she has basically told him that she is committing this tort of of defamation per se in her email to him, it seems difficult for her to mount a defense. He should definitely contact a lawyer to discuss his other potential legal remedies.
/r/MensRights30/08/12 05:17 PM
6

Oh my favorite argument: Women do work less than men, but they should be paid the same because work shouldn't be based on how many hours you put in but how good of a job you do. And of course, women always do a better job in less time than men, which is why they work less hours and they are so punished for it!
/r/MensRights30/08/12 04:32 PM
2

My work friend *Sam is going through a divorce. ***** is no mangina. Name changed because he is a good friend, and he has been through enough Oversight?
/r/MensRights30/08/12 04:13 PM
1

Holy crap.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 09:11 PM
5

the trouble you have arguing against it is that feminists will not accept that women have any power, when in fact they have the majority of power in both legal and social systems. You can't argue with people who ignore facts, which is ultimately how much of feminism argues. In many personal interactions though, women have the power. Men are generally more concerned with pleasing women than the other way around, socially (see, e.g. dating). And legally, a woman's accusation is taken much more ser…
/r/MensRights29/08/12 08:02 PM
2

Yes. He's just a disingenuous douche trying to cash in on the fact that feminists have too much disposable income. He should be ignored.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:59 PM
7

If you think men's rights activists are "blindly" hostile to feminists you haven't been paying attention. It is impossible to be an MRA and a Feminist in anything other than label. Well, potentially you could be an equity feminist, but doing so you would have to admit that men and women are generally on equal status levels, society is now primarily gynocentric. As has been noted, once you advocate for any things like rights of the (falsely) accused, paternal custody / father's rights, and abolit…
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:56 PM
38

I think your language is messed up. Words like "domineering" and "assholes" obviously only apply to men. When discussing women they must be changed with their female equivalents: "confident" and "empowered women." Adding them into your sentence shows how clearly sexist it is.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:45 PM
3

Preponderance of the Evidence is the common standard for civil cases in the US. It is basically whether or not the evidence points toward guild more than it tends to point toward exculpation. Legally, it boils down to "more likely than not" and thus if there seems to be more than a 50% chance that the proposition is true (in this case, that he raped her) he must be expelled. This is not a university specific policy, but a result on the recent Dear Colleague letter based on the Administration's d…
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:38 PM
4

Legally speaking, no, you had consent assuming your story is true. That doesn't mean you could not be indicted / convicted, or punished by your school.
/r/MensRights29/08/12 06:25 PM
3

Oh right, this is the one that wasn't published by Gamasutra. I got confused because there has been a string of feminist tinged "women are oppressed in gaming" articles popping up. What sucks is I'm all for not being racist in games, and I'm all for better portrayals of both female and male characters (even if female ones have further to go). But the attitude of the discourse is ridiculous, and it's not about improving games for the sake of improving games, but for the benefit of women - which i…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 10:39 PM
4

This was bullshit when it was posted on gamasutra a few months ago, and it's still bullshit now.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 09:22 PM
0

She hardly counts as a feminist. Most feminists consider her anti-feminist, even though "equity feminism" does have feminism in its name.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 09:11 PM
4

And we've come full circle. You've demonstrated you are, in fact, just a garden variety feminist with no understand of political advocacy, and we've come back to my initial point: There is no purpose in trying to sway the hearts and minds of self proclaimed feminists. But the point is to show how feminism and feminist advocacy harms men. Also, NOW is the the most powerful women's lobbying group in the US, and is one of the most powerful feminist groups in the world. They are responsible for much…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 07:53 PM
5

So you have some anecdote of where fathers rights group staged a protest that wasn't decried by feminists and you think that proves... what exactly? And you were calling me out for using anecdotes. First off, it's very rare to take a stance against random protests. And second, if you don't think feminism in general is hostile to father's rights, you clearly haven't done your research. If you think feminism is just fine because they weren't out there yelling at the paternal activists you are miss…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 07:34 PM
9

Indeed. It's funny to see these books and the general media talk about how worthless / bad men are, and then see them baffled when men aren't marrying as frequently or achieving as highly as they "should" be. The sad thing is, it creates a feedback loop that just confirms their twisted bias in the first place.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 07:11 PM
6

You can't be for real. You're the one who began calling me names and calling me paranoid. You're the one that has to resort to calling me immature when you disagree with me. You're the one who hasn't made a single coherent argument in this little discourse and you're trying to pretend you have the intellectual or moral high ground? You're right, it is never going anywhere because you have a fundamental misunderstand of men's rights and the MRM in general. You came here with the attitude: feminis…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 07:05 PM
7

Wow you're calling me immature now and you don't even know what a concern troll is? Here's some education for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29#Concern_troll correctly identifying that feminism marginalizes men is not wearing a tinfoil hat. It's the objective truth. The fact that you come here acting like feminism is some boon to society that never has any impact on men is, frankly, insulting. Also, about your edit. Here is what you quoted me as saying: Every time a feminist…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 06:27 PM
5

Speechlessness suits you. If there's anything /r/mensrights needs less of its feminist concern trolling. You should have left your comment with the single first line only. You think it's tinfoil hat that /r/mensrights is labeled as a hate group by feminists? Are you that stupid? Did you not see the post above where feminists were trying to "google bomb" /r/mensrights as a hate group? Perhaps you don't actually read this sub, and just do your concern trolling here. Here is the link for you though…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 06:16 PM
6

I've only ever gotten two responses from feminists, having engaged them in several places: Men are privileged and should not speak of such things, and oppression of men is a joke; and OK, men have some problems, but those are mostly the fault of men and not feminism, and besides, women have it way worse anyway, look at [abortion/wage gap/second shift/objectification/rape culture/etc.]. I've never seen a feminist admit that feminism marginalizes and is harmful to men. It seems you're of the same …
/r/MensRights28/08/12 06:15 PM
8

I actually didn't ever speak of feminists as a whole. I said feminist advocacy, and I said feminism. Why would you support organizations which actively exclude and marginalize men? You are acting like it's only fringe feminist groups which are marginalizing men, which is absolutely not the case. Based on this response, I think this entire post is just concern trolling.
/r/MensRights28/08/12 06:09 PM
4

I feel like our generation of men grew up in the 80's and 90's with everything telling us that not only was it ok for men to have feelings, that's what women wanted. That being able to express oneself is some desireable quality. (In fact, I think that's the entire premise of Sleepless in Seattle, which my girlfriend watches frequently). Then we grew up, to find that this particular message held no water. That we would get no respect for having or showing emotion, from women or otherwise. And the…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:35 PM
13

Half the reasons they're "Better" is because socially he and most of society has identified the dominant traits of females as the more desireable ones. For example, being collaborative rather than competitive. Both sides of the coin have their place, but in our society we think being collaborative is more noble or better. Similarly, things like health are largely due to women receiving better care and not being stigmatized when it comes to seeing the doctor or eating healthy. Another purely soci…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:20 PM
11

Debating and/or reaching out to feminism is indeed a waste of effort. But I think you're a little wide of the mark on the opposition to feminism. Much of it has to do with feminist advocacy, from things like NOW to the US laws / regs being passed which are advocated for by feminists. We can't just ignore the problem. MRM suffers from a huge image problem as well, and that is primarily crafted by feminist groups. Aside from that, feminist groups are generally accepted as the "center" in most educ…
/r/MensRights28/08/12 05:15 PM
12

I hope you get less troll posts on it this time. Good luck!
/r/MensRights27/08/12 08:47 PM
0

Oh right, I suppose that makes sense. What makes it even worse is that there is a vaccine available for HPV now as well, so to use it as justification is increasingly disingenuous.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:56 PM
0

It actually doesn't benefit female health. All the studies on aids has shown that there is no impact on transmission to females, though it's somewhat harder to study.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:42 PM
2

I think it's funny that you are glad you're circumcised because you seek to please women, and they like it when mens penises are mutilated.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 06:23 PM
6

I think it's kind of ironic. Male Genital Mutilation has a long history in the US, so it's a cultural "thing." Yet female Genital Mutilation hasn't. So, what do we do? Ban all female genital mutilation, and look for reasons to continue performing male genital mutilation. It's just so ridiculous that this practice is so backed up, and even more ridiculous that it gets exported to other developing countries now based on poor research.
/r/MensRights27/08/12 04:36 PM
11

I don't think the logic is that EVERY one of them would become a crook. But the fact that women are more likely to have custody / be around their child is one of the driving reasons why women are more likely to abuse their child. To put it another way, men have less opportunity to abuse/kill their children because they have less access to them.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 09:59 PM
1

Seems like he should have had a better lawyer to sue for damages in the amount of the child support. Don't know how well it would work with issues like joinder and other statute of limitations problems. Also there may not be a tort that would work for this...
/r/MensRights24/08/12 09:42 PM
2

No point in arguing with people who disregard statistics as racist or sexist. People that rely on their gut and anecdotes can never be swayed.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 06:19 PM
5

Indeed. The reduction of all sex without consent to rape is damaging. Under the largely feminist movement to redefine rape, the intent requirement has gotten incredibly muddled. In other words, rape has become a strict liability crime - a crime where the intent of the accused does not matter. At least this is how it's treated. For example, a reasonable man could believe that a woman consented, and she could not think she did. This is where Feminists argue that sex without consent is rape. But it…
/r/MensRights24/08/12 05:26 PM
-1

So that's why you set up the /r/EMRA subreddit and why you're the only listed moderator of it? Seems to me like it's just political gerrymandering, so you can get the non-conservatives to go somewhere other than /r/MensRights, where they belong, to make it look like a more politically focused movement.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 04:26 PM
1

You should be a feminist hater, though. or at least, a feminism hater. Feminism is constantly hostile to the rights and tribulations men face, often encouraging extremely disparate treatment of men. Why would you even want to join that corp, other than to undermine it? Feminism also tends to be extremely closed minded, and very few feminists will consider anything outside their stupid "patriarchy / rape culture" narrative. This should be obvious from your discourse with fauxmosexual.
/r/MensRights24/08/12 04:08 PM
4

There's an argument to be made that the government's stance on abrogation of men's rights is influenced greatly by the social perception of men.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 08:08 PM
2

Really? In a non-married couple the father generally has no rights to visitation or access to his child without a court order. On the other hand in a married couple neither parent can legally deprive the other of access to the child.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 07:41 PM
7

You should consult a lawyer in your jurisdiction. They would know best.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 07:04 PM
0

Are you talking about common law marriage? Or just 2 people living together because those are different things. Common law marriage, is for all intents and purposes, marriage. Anyway, you have more rights to see your child if you stay married than if you aren't. You have a legal right to see your child, and that right can generally only be abrogated via court order. In a non-marital relationship the opposite is true, and in general you need a court order to ensure your access to your child, and …
/r/MensRights23/08/12 07:02 PM
1

Some people like the idea of having and raising a child. Being married can make it easier to be part of your child's life.
/r/MensRights23/08/12 06:37 PM
11

An amazing article. I wonder how much longer he will write for huff post.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 11:14 PM
-2

What do you mean "how would I feel" as if it was some hypothetical? That's what's said constantly by feminists. Actions speak louder than words. And while feminists may claim one way, the organizations they support do the other. That's all I'm saying.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:56 PM
3

There's only a slight shift, but it would be interesting to take a look at hoe people view the (male) poster. My guess is men would see it as giving them the "permission" to say no, because men aren't given that idea in our culture. I would guess that to women, they would see it as sometimes men say no, and they have to deal with it. Whereas I think both genders would look at the female poster and realize it's saying that a man should respect a woman and stop when she says to do so. This is just…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:36 PM
-1

Doesn't matter if they consider themselves anti-male or not. A lot of feminists think that any attention to how males are subject to the same problems takes the wind out of their sails in terms of female specific issues. They may not consider themselves "anti-male" but they support the same groups that exclude men from support programs because it would make the women uncomfortable and because it would divert funding away from women.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:30 PM
7

Wow this article is disingenuous. I'm surprised such ridiculous research has come out of Johns Hopkins. The push for circumcision has gained an international platform as a way to prevent the spread of HIV in Africa after several studies showed infection rates decreased rapidly. Wait what? There were what, 4 studies that showed a decline? And even those studies only showed a very small decline in actual numbers. (from 2.5% to 1.x% I believe.) Why even add the term "rapidly?" The studies that show…
/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:18 PM
6

The legal term for why she can't claim that now could Collateral Estoppel or Issue Preclusion. The idea that whether or not you are the father has already been litigated, and subject to a valid final judgment. If you fought her, legally, and have a judgment from some sort of court saying you lost, and saying the child is not yours, she is really (or should be) estopped from making an inconsistent claim. You need a lawyer to make this argument, though, because the only relief available to you is …
/r/MensRights22/08/12 07:39 PM
2

That's the same thing feminists say... There was a recent thread on Reddit about fathers who had their perspective of women change when they had girls. The comments and article on jezebel were basically spitting on them for not having the "right" mindset earlier. It sucks that people have to be "won over" but really, we should appreciate when they are, rather than condemning them for their past, imo.
/r/MensRights22/08/12 07:30 PM
9

Yeah Don't Call Me White. Not gender specific but: So go ahead and label me an asshole 'cause I can / accept responsibility for what I've done but not for who I am
/r/MensRights21/08/12 08:06 PM
12

It's not. But Feminism thinks it has a monopoly on acceptance and open mindedness.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 07:36 PM
3

You hate both women and gay men now? Or typo?
/r/MensRights21/08/12 07:01 PM
5

Hahaha they deleted your post. The most innocuous statement ever.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:59 PM
9

The second link proves the fact that women get 90% of the aggregate child support money. Women make up 82% of custodial parents, men make up 18%. When you look at JUST the due child support column, the number is 90%. How can you say it's not "near" 90%? Not only that, even though women were more likely to receive no payments, men were STILL likely to receive considerably less than women on average. The fact is, more than 90% of the child support money goes to women. Yes, some men get awarded chi…
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:49 PM
10

No one should have to apologize on behalf of their gender. Truer words are rarely spoken. Reminds me of that NOFX song.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:43 PM
9

They also said that the MRM is homo/trans phobic. Less extreme, but no less false.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:39 PM
5

That's not the right statistic. 54.9% of custodial mothers may be awarded child support, while only 30.4% of custodial fathers are awarded child suppert. But custodial mothers outnumber custodial fathers greatly. In fact, from your first link: Custodial Parents: 13,672 Custodial Fathers: 2,435 Custodial Mothers: 11,237 Additionally, the average due is less, the average received is less, and men were less likely to receive all payments (though women were more likely to receive no payments). So ev…
/r/MensRights21/08/12 06:29 PM
3

I don't have the statistics on hand, but if you look at child support statistics, something like 90% of it or more goes to mothers. Also, sometimes fathers pay alimony when they get custody, it's not called child support though.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:55 PM
1

They ban for xposting. Or just posting there if you're from here.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:39 PM
1

It may sound too "clubby" to say who can and who can not call themselves MRAs. But, people who advocate for the MRM have to believe in something specific: Men's Rights. Anyone who doesn't believe in the advancement of the rights of, or equal treatment of men is not an MRA imo. After all, MRA stands for Men's Rights Activist. A lot of people are trying to co-opt the movement for their own political purposes - to promote their specific political ideals out of no interest to the rights of men. I ha…
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:13 AM
2

Support. I fail to see how anyone advocating for the social or legal enforcement of specific gender roles can identify as an MRA. If you promote restictions of men based on some desire to return to traditionalism you actively aren't advocating for men's 'rights'. You're advocating for the exact opposite.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:06 AM
0

Which is ironic because all you do is come onto r/mr and bitch about liberals. Hypocrite.
/r/MensRights21/08/12 04:00 AM
-1

And their presence in this thread makes it easy to identify them.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 10:01 PM
2

You are wrong because you are an idiot who assumes anyone who is liberal assumes that the best solution to any problem is expansion of the government. But I will not be further dragged down your rabbit hole of bullshit politicization of the MRM.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 09:55 PM
25

To really understand Title IX you have to understand how Law and Administrative Law works in the United States. While the textual language of Title IX is merely about eliminating "discrimination" the fact is that the elimination of discrimination has to take some "form." The (pertinent) Text of Title IX is the following: No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education pr…
/r/MensRights20/08/12 09:50 PM
3

It's an amazing source and resource. It is a good source of statistics on Rape Allegations and false reporting, and it does a nice job in detailing the many issues with false reports. Thank you for posting it.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 09:08 PM
-2

You are wrong.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 09:06 PM
-2

I honestly think we should limit the MRM to what we agree on, and we should promote our other philosophies and ideologies elsewhere. But again, that's a personal preference.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:50 PM
3

It's a good term, but, IMO dividing MRAs up into a million different pie pieces like Feminism is a bad way to go. I'd personally prefer that the MRM just focuses on men's issues and equal treatment by the law and society, without falling into the trap of "conservative v. liberal" MRAs or trying to slice the pie up in different ways. Those who don't believe in equality, on either side, shouldn't be accepted as part of the MRM, imo, and for the MRM to mean anything I think it needs to retain broad…
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:09 PM
-4

But he's right that they aren't really MRA's. We need to do something about it, but people such as them don't deserve the label of MRA.
/r/MensRights20/08/12 07:07 PM
11

I actually applaud /b here because they're doing something good without realizing it. Putting this poll into an article that is titled that mothers are bearing the brunt of the recession is obviously designed to elicit a specific response. After reading 10 paragraphs about how women have it so hard, of course people are going to vote for women having it harder because the cognitive bias due to the accessibility of the information about women (which they had just read). It's stupid and propoganda…
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:16 PM
4

The primary problem is that most homeless data is collected from things like shelters. I would argue that this over-states the presence of female homeless, partially because I have a feeling shelters are less likely to turn away women than they are to turn away men, even if they are gender neutral. But that's just a suspicion. I don't know of where better sources might lie, unfortunately. It would be interesting to do a study based on things like soup kitchen attendance in a typical summer day, …
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:12 PM
18

People who don't understand that the Criminal Justice System / Legal System was set up with the purpose of protecting the accused should not be allowed to take part in it. There's a reason we have an amendment protecting individuals from un-warranted search and seizure (IV). That's why we have an amendment requiring an Indictment before a conviction (V). That's why we don't try people twice for the same crime (V). That's why we require Due Process before a criminal conviction is issued (V). That…
/r/MensRights17/08/12 08:08 PM
14

Of course, it's also because of discrimination! For women who fear they might be in danger of suffering from the motherhood penalty when looking for a new job. . . Right. The "motherhood penalty" of not being stigmatized for working part time or not working as an adult. That's the only "motherhood penalty" that's at work here. What a ridiculous article. And the argument that moms are bearing the brunt of the recession is ridiculous. Men's unemployment has been significantly higher than women's. …
/r/MensRights17/08/12 05:21 PM
16

Wow. 40% of your income in alimony?! I'm sorry man that is a raw deal.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:49 PM
3

If you're a man and you don't ask anyone out, you will probably never go out on any dates. I doubt this comports with your life experience because you are probably not a man, and if you're really as feminist as you seem maybe you have asked men out. I don't know. I personally have never been asked out on a date. If I had never asked anyone / taken the initiative, I would have been single my whole life. There may be outliers, but I guarantee many men will back me up with similar experiences.
/r/MensRights17/08/12 04:03 PM
15

Here's a Pubmed Article / Abstract. The study looks at 600 males and 300 females, and notes that females are universally the primary recipients of care and support programs, while men are not likely to have support programs specifically for them (in part because a large portion of the male homelessness is due to felony convictions). Here are some homeless statistics from the National Coalition for the Homeless Noting that among single homeless, males make up 67.5%, more than 2/3 of the homeless.…
/r/MensRights17/08/12 03:51 PM
3

You'll probably get banned for xposting.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 09:48 PM
24

Women never ask. They can almost universally rely on the fact that men will ask, so it obviates the need for them to ever pay, while having a convenient "I'm not sexist, I think whoever asks should pay. It's just coincidental that I never ask anyone."
/r/MensRights16/08/12 09:47 PM
1

I can't help but think this comment would have more impact if it were made on twitter, to Jeremy Leroux specifically...
/r/MensRights16/08/12 07:16 PM
1

Well they were basically asking whether or not reasonable MRAs existed... Also I thought in terms of reasonable "womans issue" spaces r/feminism and r/srs were the bad ones, and r/feminisms and r/2x were much more open and/or reasonable in discourse.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 07:14 PM
11

Then we need our own action committes and political presence. Stalwart feminists like those referenced here aren't likely to change their political message. You present your case, and if they wont treat you with respect or even act reasonable, there's no indication that they would become any sort of political ally down the road.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 07:13 PM
2

It's bullshit and hyperbole. Society also teaches us: Don't get robbed, and not Don't Rob. Anyone who thinks that people aren't taught rape is bad is is off their rocker.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 07:03 PM
1

Actually, I don't want to be part of it. The more I think about it, the more this just feels like flamebait and trying to cause infighting. It's good to show we have a diverse system of beliefs, but I don't really see what good can come from this exercise.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:45 PM
24

Best advice is to remove yourself from conversations when the other side is not listening or being unreasonable, imo. You can't force them to listen to you, but you can stop caring about what they say and / or think.
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:38 PM
1

I made a comment above. There are several ways feminism supports patriarchy, which makes it a valid criticism. The logic of the above statement is (I think): A) Patriarchy is any gendering of society that hurts women and men. B) Feminism is a societal movement based on gender issues. C) Feminism hurts men. D) Therefore, Feminism is patriarchy. Whether or not you buy the premise, I don't know. But feminists often argue that the gender based issues which harm men are because of the patriarchy. But…
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:17 PM
4

Been saying this for a while. When "the patriarchy" lines up with feminist messages, they actively do nothing to fight the patriarchy in those instances. Some examples: The idea that men are always the guilty party / criminals. This is something common in both feminism and the larger "patriarchal" culture. The idea that men are the perpetrators of basically all crime is one of the reasons men get harsher sentences and higher conviction rates than women. On the other hand, it feeds directly into …
/r/MensRights16/08/12 06:14 PM
2

Doesn't give her the right to, but it makes it all the more painful for him knowing it was the truth...
/r/MensRights16/08/12 05:57 PM
1

I understand your stance. I just wanted to know that the only purpose in going there wasn't picking a fight. From what I read there were some good responses from feminists, particularly from Teddy(something). So I don't think it was completely pointless. I think even the OP was at least a bit open minded on how feminism could be improved.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 11:56 PM
15

Did you finish the sentence? "for misrepresenting this subreddit and its users." There are many feminists who post here who do not get banned and participate in reasonable discourse. The ones that just come to troll get banned. It's not political, sorry.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 11:53 PM
11

Ok so I decided to look at the Jezebel post and the statistics they were throwing around (compiled by an organization that gets funding based on discrimination.) Here is the funniest thing I found. Here is the bullet point: Even when women make the same career choices as men, they are paid less: A 2003 GAO study concluded that even after accounting for "choices" such as work patterns and education, women are paid an average of 80 cents for every dollar paid to men. So I decided to look at the ci…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 11:48 PM
12

There's a difference between banning trolls and banning people based on their political beliefs.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 11:20 PM
5

God. So infuriating. It's like they just make up statistics or interpret them in any way that fits their agenda. Men with children make more money than women with children. Obviously it's SEXISM! It couldn't be at all that men have increased pressure to earn more money, while women have the option and opportunity to take extended amount of time off work to give birth / take care of the child, in addition to probably favoring a more flexible schedule to spend more time with the child.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 11:18 PM
7

Fantastic.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 10:41 PM
2

Well, it's more than is required but it also means much less work on their part. So it absolved them of liability while also reducing their workload and costs...
/r/MensRights15/08/12 10:30 PM
8

What gets me is that she is taken so seriously. Of course, feminists have an aura of untouchability. It just bothers me that they can outright lie, and there isn't a voice on the other side of the table to present a different viewpoint.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 10:20 PM
27

Nope. I'm serious. Do you have examples?
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:20 PM
6

This is about advocacy. This was essentially an opportunity to show someone that their preconceived notion of men's rights was incorrect, and to potentially raise awareness of men's issues as they indicated being sympathetic to the notion in general. This didn't raise attention (at least not mine) because something mean was said about us, but because something good was said about our cause.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:08 PM
30

No, they don't.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:05 PM
12

Seems kind of hypocritical as the comment was essentially asking for MRAs to respond. Also, how do you know what they banned you for. It just said I was banned and I can't find the message anymore.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:03 PM
2

Not in Education Employment or Training
/r/MensRights15/08/12 08:02 PM
26

WOW I got banned from there very quickly. For posting: Hi Teddy. I want to start off by saying that /r/mensrights is full of reasonable people and there is a lot of reasonable discussion that goes on there. Aside from that, there is very little 'hate' on the forum, aside from 'hate' for feminism which is generally well explained - even if you don't agree. Unfortunately, the entire concept of men's rights has been the subject of a high profile smear campaign through much of the femosphere. They s…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:31 PM
16

Wow. SLATE, Gawker, and Skepchick. Let's find 3 like minded reddit hating media outlets which clearly hate them in part because (2 of them) are in a competing position, and then ask them about how bad reddit is.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:07 PM
1

That's not because of feminism, it's because of traditionalism. Most of those things are deeply rooted in Japanese culture, everything from the racism to the sexism. Also, Chikan are a fairly serious problem in japan, which is why the pink cars were introduced. Not necessarily because of feminism, but because of the desire to protect women.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:04 PM
2

Because they have orgasms and if you have an orgasm it isn't rape?
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:02 PM
8

Probably started in the late 90's/early 00's. I lived there for a few years a while back. Really liked it, but the society is closer to traditionalist than the feminist oriented we have here. Men work long hours, etc. One of the primary reasons for men being "herbivores" is because employment is much harder to find after the bubble burst, and continues to be difficult for men to find employment that pays well. They feel that women have too high of an upkeep, and that they are not financially pre…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 07:02 PM
1

Feminism never took control in Japan.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:58 PM
3

The article has no way to be confirmed, and the fact that it's not from a reputable source such as the NYT or other large media organization makes it suspect. On the other hand, NYT, WP etc. don't generally run stories about a single person unless it has already grabbed the attention of the nation (e.g. trayvon martin). Also, it should be noted that in a case like this it would be very typical to change the name of all parties involved, though it did not expressly say the name of the man who com…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:56 PM
3

A) she would lose her online persona: GirlWritesWhat. That has value, because it's recognized and people realize who it stands for. Changing that to some other permutation, adding underscores etc. runs the risk of people not finding it when they're looking for her, or not realizing it's actually her and deciding to not watch or view the videos. B) she is likely to lose followers if she changes her account / channel. Some people don't go into the comments of any of her videos, particularly after …
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:52 PM
3

I don't see why that matters. It's a highly regarded mouthpiece of feminist thought. I don't see why it matters whether or not it's a news agency either. Feminist sources are almost by definition not news agencies. If you want, feel free to look at any other feminist blogs or sources for support for Men's Rights. If you do manage to find a feminist writer writing about male specific issues it will be tempered with how either men are still always the perpetrators or how women are still so disadva…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:47 PM
2

She is being legally attacked. The people are using a statute (the DMCA) as a club to silence her, and / or get her personal information to harass her. Yes, she has other options, but giving up her youtube channel isn't the same as random jackass having to change his channel. She has a significant following, and an established name and online persona. Trying to change that would be extremely disruptive in multiple ways, not to mention the actual inconvenience involved.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:42 PM
2

Yes. If he was getting legally attacked by feminists I definitely believe people would donate to him.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:34 PM
0

It doesn't. Demonspawn is just someone who wants the MRA to be a pillar of his pet conservative ideology.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:31 PM
5

http://jezebel.com/5873726/what-should-you-do-when-someone-you-love-becomes-a-mens-rights-activist http://jezebel.com/5397939/the-misguided-message-of-mens-rights-groups Feminists aren't interest in engaging MRAs or being sympathetic to male specific issues.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:25 PM
5

Not to mention a single anecdote does not indicate a willingness of feminism to engage men's rights. I could go onto jezebel and find a dozen articles with hundreds of hostile comments about how why men are whiney babies whenever they bring up their issues.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:19 PM
1

Sorry for the inane question, but I'm generally curious. Most people I've known who have considered suicide did so because of some catalyst event: being dumped, losing job, getting fucked in a divorce. On the other hand I have known of otherwise normal people who committed suicide but did not know why they did so. So I'm genuinely curious whether or not there is anything in your life which you enjoy/value. Also I'm curious whether you think there's anything in the world worth fighting for / agai…
/r/MensRights15/08/12 06:14 PM
3

Sexist article and a tragic tale. The idea that men aren't shamed for their bodies is a myth that needs to die. Penis shaming is so common, and it's alive and generally accepted. This article outlines two problems, suicide of men and the fact that there is no outlet for the body image shaming common in our society.
/r/MensRights15/08/12 05:49 PM
6

I have worries about your success in law school if this is the type of arguments you typically make.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 11:11 PM
1

Actually, I think MRA is about advocating on behalf of men's rights. It doesn't need a label or to be split up into conservative or liberal. If you're arguing for traditional gender roles, though, I have trouble seeing how you are for men's rights. You likely are not opposed to the fact that men get less health care. You are likely not opposed to the fact that men tend to have more dangerous jobs. You are likely not opposed to the fact that men traditionally never get custody of their children. …
/r/MensRights14/08/12 11:08 PM
6

Men should not have to live in a world where they are presumed guilty and treated as de-facto abusers, rapists, and pedophiles.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 10:48 PM
1

Well that makes sense, and I got that feeling but again I'm not super familiar with child custody disputes.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 09:19 PM
16

Doesn't matter. They're making a claim based on US copyright law they are submitting to jurisdiction in US courts.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 09:07 PM
5

I would too, but there are still options.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 09:07 PM
1

I actually don't know the rules for mediation that well. It's something to look into, but mediators get a lot of leeway in what they do. Answer would probably be in here somewhere. In general, negotiations / mediation for the purpose of settlement is not admissible at trial, and in some cases they are not allowed to tell anything to the judge. Again, I don't know that much about them though, particularly in terms of child custody.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:59 PM
2

I'm sorry to hear that man. Like I said the deck is stacked against you. I hope you still have an attorney. I know California has a lot of legal services for indigent and pro-se litigants. I would suggest you do everything you can to get yourself educated of at least the procedures you need to follow - things like filing deadlines and other requirements. Depending on where you live, there should be a law library. Go there and talk to the law librarian, they will probably know more and that would…
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:37 PM
45

What bothers me most about this is it's treating the man as if there's something wrong with HIM for not liking feminism. After he's been a victim, and actively and openly discriminated against, the presumption is that he's "wrong" about feminism or that something is wrong with him. It takes victim blaming to a whole new level.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:26 PM
7

What's interesting to me is that people are so quick to victim blame the man: he didn't use a condom, it's his fault. Even though it was a malicious act by the other party. This is no worse than saying it's a woman's fault if she is raped because she wore provocative clothing.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:15 PM
5

I believe California has a right to appeal in all cases. It looks like, from my limited research, there is a right to appeal in a custody hearing but there are strict limitations: you have to file an intent to appeal within 60 days of the ruling, and it also costs ~$700. Also, it can take a long time, and cost a lot in attorneys fees, but if it's your only option it's your only option. Next time you are talking to your lawyer, you should ask him about your options should it go the wrong way.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:13 PM
18

Agreeing to mediation and then having the mediator be so biased in favor of your ex wife leaves you with little recourse. Make sure you get ALL of your evidence introduced and on the record. That is critical because in the case of an adverse ruling you have to have everything present and set up for an appeal. Get everything in that list in terms of statements from the people at your kid's school, and their summer camp admitted into evidence. The best you can do is present your mountain of eviden…
/r/MensRights14/08/12 08:01 PM
2

It's very difficult to go to court without revealing real-life ID details. It looks like the identity used were just names and fake emails: [email protected]. Dunno if the names were real. Getting the information to sue them could be difficult, but it could also improve googles copyright infringement claim process, in general. It's ridiculous one can use it as a club without any credentials.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 07:52 PM
20

on second look, this might not apply. looking it up, the courts have held that there is no private cause of action conferred by 17 USC 506(c). Sorry. I was misreading this and thinking it was part of the DMCA. I think the rest could be an option, though. Just to add, if she does contact a lawyer she should focus her efforts on suing the people who made the claim of infringement. Also, she could potentially bring and ANTI SLAPP suit against them, depending on jurisdiction, as their threat of copy…
/r/MensRights14/08/12 07:33 PM
12

This is serious curiosity: are your comments worded so poorly because that's just how you speak, or is it a conscious effort to improve the rate at which your troll comments get responses?
/r/MensRights14/08/12 07:33 PM
2

And unfortunately there will never be any research done, because the "gender studies" program in every university is feminsm through and through. I guess we need to find a sociology faculty with tenure sympathetic to men's rights issues and willing to risk ostracization that will naturally come from criticizing feminism.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:27 PM
1

Where did you find anyone complaining about holding the door open? This seems like a troll post.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:25 PM
1

Yes, racism is illegal. See, e.g. Katzenbach v. McCLung (Ollies BBQ Case). The difference is both in the supreme court precedent, and the fact that race is a protected class, while sex is not (or is 'semi' protected).
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:21 PM
1

Yes it's legal.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:18 PM
1

Unfortunately, too many people buy the lie that "if you think men and women should be treated equally, you're a feminist." But that isn't true at all. If it was, a large portion of the MRM would be feminists, but the feminists would never accept them or let that happen. Feminism is based on a lie at its foundation, that it's about equality.
/r/MensRights14/08/12 05:16 PM
2

Indeed, neither majority political party is a friend to men's rights.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 11:41 PM
21

Best AVFM article in a while, imo.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 11:28 PM
5

Yes and no. Sentences would be more equal, but it wouldn't be because treatment was more fair. The problem is that people have a bias already - men get arrested, men commit crimes, men are generally guilty. Taking away the gender, people would just assign the most likely gender to the defendant - that of a man. The result would ultimately be that women might get more guilty verdicts in some cases, but it would not improve things for men in terms of bias. Aside from that, one of the biggest probl…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 11:12 PM
1

Seems like an effective troll
/r/MensRights13/08/12 08:27 PM
2

On the one hand, it's catchy and easy to remember. On the other, it sounds like a joke. I think MRA is a better label, personally.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 08:26 PM
1

I think when a woman tells you to man up, you should tell her to "woman up" first.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 08:25 PM
1

Gender Feminists and Equity Feminists are drastically different... Is gender-equity feminism a thing? I think equity feminists would fight against circumcision, in general but they have no political clout, or clout in feminism in general.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 08:24 PM
2

Thank you for understanding. Sorry to use you as "an example" but part of me is always genuinely curious. And thank you for responding in good faith.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 08:20 PM
0

This actually does relate to men's rights. Women are not taught that extreme violence is an unacceptable response to an argument. This is an example of domestic violence, female perpetrated domestic violence, something that is largely ignored by society to the detriment of both men and women.
/r/MensRights13/08/12 08:04 PM
10

And this is why there is a disconnect. Instead of action, men get platitudes like "equality is equality." Feminists have decided what the "big things" are, and they continue to do so. Today the "big things" are more support for women in terms of health care, access to social programs, STEM participation, media objectification, and the "wage gap." What will the big stuff be for 4th wave feminists? The problem is that while feminism comes in different stripes, there's really only one stripe that m…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 07:20 PM
21

The disconnect is the idea of "the patriarchy" in the first place. Feminists attribute most gendered societal problems that affect them to the patriarchy, and then say it's bad, and then by extension dismiss men and their opinions. Then they talk out of the other side of their mouths, supporting the patriarchy when it lines up with their message. For example, justifying the fact that women refuse to date unemployed men, Rape Violence / Primary Aggressor policies which assume men is the perpetrat…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 05:40 PM
12

Just curious, can you give an example where feminism has helped men, in terms of public or legal advocacy? The only place in which I can see any feminist ever arguing for something that increases men's rights is for paternity leave and "house husbands." Of course, neither of those have gained public traction, and both are pursued with the idea that if men get these things then women will have more freedom. Of course, we also have feminists talking out the other side of their mouths, writing book…
/r/MensRights13/08/12 05:36 PM
4

Not to mention things like legal policies which punish the woman who is the victim of rape, and sometimes forcing her to marry her rapist (in some muslim cultures, not sure about SA).
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:36 PM
2

Objectively masculinity is valued much less than femininity. This is at its peak when it comes to male disposability. Women also get far more attention, in everything from stories in magazines to medical research funding and public awareness of female specific conditions.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:27 PM
1

DA's will often offer plea deals simply for the sake of efficiency. It does seem pretty drastic, pleaing from such a premeditated murder down to manslaughter, but you have to remember we don't have the entire trial transcript, nor the evidence. We only have this bulletpoint version. There could be other things, for example, exclusionary rules in place which could keep some of the evidence out (for example, if it was obtained via illegal search and seizure, at least in the US) as well as other fa…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:21 PM
1

She probably was charged with murder, but it didn't go to trial.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:16 PM
2

You should probably leave the generalization to your office. I think some women get where they are based on sex and not on ability, and that can cause problems. On the other hand, the problem isn't that they're women, the problem is that they aren't qualified, yet they can exploit the system to get jobs that they wouldn't otherwise be able to get. This probably gives you a negative impression of women, which is one of the reasons people argue AA policies are bad, even for the groups they favor.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:14 PM
2

I don't think the problem is that he's a mormon. I mean, I have no real love for them, but I have plenty of other problems with Romney before his religion enters the picture. But all in all, I severely doubt he will be any friend to Men's Rights. Also, "deluded" idiot.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:10 PM
4

Saw a comment saying the lawsuit was misogyny, you know, because a man bringing a sexual discrimination suit against his superior just means he's buthurt about not getting his male privilege.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 11:07 PM
1

The only reason I wouldn't resubmit it is because I feel like it would just be "starting shit" and fodder for SRD and bait for SRS (which the original was already accused of). If it was resubmitted it would make sense to leave the shitty / unprofessional looking About.com page out, and just link directly to the studies / sciencedaily articles
/r/MensRights10/08/12 09:55 PM
2

And anabolic steroids...
/r/MensRights10/08/12 09:20 PM
1

That quote put me off too. Anyone who follows Haute Couture knows that the shit models model isn't intended to be worn off the rack by women in general anyway...
/r/MensRights10/08/12 09:19 PM
3

Where did you meet those women... Damn. I would have had a chance... I don't think it's "impossibly thin" though. I would say my body is very similar to his, though I'm a tad shorter at 5'10/5'11'... Actually it's something I've struggled with my whole life, because I've never gotten any positive feedback on my body, it's always been about how I'm too thin... If there's "bodysnarking" for men, it definitely happens to those who have low muscle mass and low body fat. Except no one cares because e…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 09:16 PM
1

Fair enough.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 09:06 PM
2

I understand, I didn't mean to be accusatory to you. It just rubbed me the wrong way, particularly after looking at the sources provided in that article.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 09:05 PM
1

It isn't an example of rape culture because such a thing doesn't exist, and is merely constructed by feminists to further the agenda and the biased statistics that prop them up. Then they rely on anecdotes such as this one to show it exists. The fact that his behavior is accepted by his friends means his friends are oblivious or fucked up. The fact that you, and the author, try to make it seem like "society" is ok with this type of behavior is ridiculous, which is my primary complaint with the a…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:20 PM
2

Sorry, I have a hard time dealing with people who suggest "reading" that didn't actually read the source article, or look at more than one link relied on. When you don't click on the links and then troll about how the assertions aren't supported by the one link you do click on, and then get 65 upvotes because no one else looks at the source material, I think it's a little fucked up.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:08 PM
3

You should re-raise it. The title is ABSOLUTELY supported by links in the about.com article. The about.com article referenced several studies and articles, two of which were studies of college students. But the title is supported in both the ScienceDaily article, and the Florida article. I don't see why the title should be re-worded when it's clearly supported by news sources which seem credible to me. What are the credibility requirements for TIL? Perhaps it needs to be an academic paper? But t…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:05 PM
3

It's when you make a deal with the prosecutor. You are basically saying "I won't contest the conviction, which means I'm acknowledging my crime, and saving the state a shit ton of time and money in exchange for a lower sentence for being cooperative."
/r/MensRights10/08/12 07:01 PM
7

Could you explain how it wasn't a good source? It was poorly written, and perhaps the National Family Violence Legislative Resource Center references being broken is grounds for it to be taken down. But most of the other points had working links, and the claim: women are twice as likely to perpetrate violence is supported by this ScienceDaily Article, and the assertion that females are more likely to stalk, attack and abuse was supported by this article. Both of which were directly referenced in…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 05:17 PM
2

Did you read the about.com article? The article references multiple studies. The 13,000 college students study across 32 nations is not intended to be the sole support of the entire article. It's supposed to support the bullet point: Men are More Likely Than Women to Be Victims in Dating Violence: And the paragraph which directly follows. It doesn't take that much reading comprehension to understand this point. For someone saying let's not forget to read, he has clearly forgotten to actually rea…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 05:07 PM
3

His complaint is bullshit. The about.com article references multiple studies, an index of studies and multiple articles. The statement about disadvantaging the child is supposed to be referenced by a link that was clearly broken. The next bullet point is the reference for the next paragraph, which correctly addresses both the text that is hyperlinked, and the paragraph that follows it.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 05:04 PM
1

You're an idiot if you can't understand that sentence, particularly without the previous sentence. You're a fool for trying to use the second reference to justify all the claims in the about.com article. Why you insist to do something so fucking stupid is beyond me. I don't know if you just have the analytical skills of a 13 year old, or if you are just being intentionally ignorant. But, you're wrong. I responded to everything you pointed out and brought up. Idiot. If you honestly can't be bothe…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 05:02 PM
1

People will believe anything that supports their beliefs. If an action doesn't comport with their current belief system, they will find a way to make it do so. There isn't much value in analyzing the stance / opinion of SRSers.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:56 PM
1

Perhaps your reading comprehension sucks. But he references more than one study in the article. In fact 2 are directly referenced, Articles are referenced, and a large index of studies showing violence on males is referenced. The citations are also in the HEADERS not the FOOTERS, which is a common way to write things on the internet, and the citation for the first paragraph with the sentence you're talking about seems to be a broken link, which would be valid criticism. What is not is to try to …
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:39 PM
2

You sure? Looks to me manslaughter generally tends to be 2 - 6 year sentence in AU.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:31 PM
2

You plead guilty.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:27 PM
6

Plea bargain. She plead guilty, this statement was only for the purpose of sentencing.
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:26 PM
7

The discussion on Male/White/Hetero/CIS privilege is largely meaningless. Ever since the bullshit invisible knapsack paper was written, feminists and others have used the idea of privilege in a completely ridiculous way. The idea of "privilege," is in general for people enjoying special rights and immunities. The problem is that these groups have turned "privilege" into the flip side of the discrimination coin. To use gay rights as an example, the right to get married is sometimes considered a "…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 04:23 PM
2

Your analysis of the data is poor. The author of the article didn't assert that the people in the studies had children who were hurt by DV. They asserted that ignoring DV hurts children, which is a pretty easy concept to get on board with. I'm not sure why you would dispute that fact. Aside from that, the survey of college aged people showing DV by the female which gets ignored has a larger implication that domestic violence against men is ignored in general. In other words, the survey offers su…
/r/MensRights10/08/12 03:50 PM
3

See if you can get another legal opinion. Try an indigent legal services options if you can get access to them (I don't know the financial cutoff).
/r/MensRights09/08/12 11:08 PM
2

None of those sources are actually statistical studies. None of them control for factors, and they all require you to come to the conclusion that any gap in pay is due to sexism and discrimination, rather than any one of the other innumerably possible factors. So not only are they based on extremely weak statistics, they also falsely attribute a cause to the difference.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 09:47 PM
1

Well, it seems to me that refusal to answer in the way they want you to answer is the problem. If they will not accept a non-answer, and they won't accept the wrong answer, I'm not sure there is any answer you can give such people to satisfy them. Egalitarian is your best bet, if you must have a label, but I don't see why that would really help, as these people are clearly more interested in whether or not you apply the correct label to yourself, which is either feminist, in the case of other fe…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 09:31 PM
-10

Totally agree. But I also think the response went off the handle in its discussion of rape and the like. These guys can safely be called creeps. What they have done is clearly sexual harassment. But it is disturbing to take the next step to call them "Proto-Rapists" or to talk about how this is an example of "rape culture."
/r/MensRights09/08/12 09:18 PM
18

It takes some intellectual gymnastics. The idea is that equally qualified women earn less than men, so, when women earn more than men it's not because they're slightly more qualified, it's that they're WAY more qualified which offsets the gender penalty for women. Of course, this would mean that, in general, men are severely underqualified compared to women, almost across the board - and this idea combined with the statistics presented also gives the impression that women are just plain better t…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 09:08 PM
2

Feminism has turned itself into the opponent of men. It isn't a man vs. woman issue, it's a feminism vs. men issue. Complaining about it is generally the only method we have to get the message out there that men being abused and demonized is not right, and needs to stop. Men don't have the political or academic clout to get their grievances addressed in the system, and they also have a very powerful opponent in feminism. The only thing men can do is get more men to understand the cause, and spre…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 09:02 PM
2

How well did just ignoring your abusive wife work for you?
/r/MensRights09/08/12 08:57 PM
24

I used to consider myself a feminist, but I also considered the idea of equality and collaboration critical to advancing society. I was constantly accused with claims of privilege and others when I would try to defend men and male produced and consumed media from being demonized. I would always argue that approaching the problem that isn't so hostile to men was a better approach, and would always be rebuked as an apologist who cared more about protecting the sensibilities of rape apologists than…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 08:54 PM
2

You should refuse to answer if you think either one puts you at risk of not being taken seriously. A coy answer like "I'll let you figure that one out" or "I work for causes, not labels" or "I help men and women, what does that make me?" might be a way to dodge the question, or let the person you're talking to come to a conclusion which you can then just leave at that. If you want to identify that you are for the equal treatment of men and women, and desperately want a label to tell people, you …
/r/MensRights09/08/12 06:31 PM
1

Just because we use our memory to form judgments, particularly fast ones, doesn't mean we always introduce bias. We may introduce error, and we may introduce bias, but there is a chance that neither of them are introduced. Unless your argument that any preconceived notion on an issue can never be objective and purely factual, I don't see how you can claim that bias is always introduced.
/r/MensRights09/08/12 04:30 PM
8

so sick of the peircing of ears being compared to circumcision. And to compare it to baptism is patently ridiculous. Circumcision has more in common with FGM than either, clearly. It's cutting of a infants genitals for non-therapeutic reasons, and changing the functionality of their sexual organ on a fundamental way. Earlobes, on the other hand, are not functional. Nothing is lost by piercing them, and earlobes work just as well with tiny holes in them as they do without them. The BBC did not sp…
/r/MensRights09/08/12 04:12 PM
2

You know, in some ways the struggles of the feminist movement have been somewhat adverse to the civil rights movement, particularly when it comes to Rape laws. An interesting paper could be written on the use of rape statutes in the post civil war south up until fairly recently as an essentially legal avenue to lynch black men. Legal history is full of precedent setting cases where white women have accused black men of rape, but there is a much larger body of cases out there (somewhere) where th…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 10:12 PM
14

Yes, Dress Codes are an example where men are significantly discriminated against, but women seem to dominate the discussion so heavily with their complaints about skirts, dresses and heels. This is demonstrated through all levels of male employment, as well, except for a few out there or extremely blue collar positions. In lower paid employment, men have to wear slacks and a uniform and have strict hair length requirements. At the top level men are required to wear the extremely limited busines…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 08:42 PM
1

I think the point was that it was written before those things appeared on male magazines in like, the mid 90's?
/r/MensRights08/08/12 08:38 PM
12

Spot on. It seems to me like maybe this list was written in like, 1970 or something. It certainly doesn't apply in today's world.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 08:36 PM
3

I would also say it's fucking horribly formatted, making it literally unreadable for me.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 08:29 PM
6

This seems touchy. It is good to advocate for women's participation in sports, but something that seems to be lost is this: What if the fact that a majority of the olympians being women isn't signifying a huge increase in female participation in athletics, but a combined indication that slightly more women are participating in athletics, and slightly fewer men are participating in athletics. With that said, the idea that the primary "test" for title IX being whether or not opportunities are offe…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 08:26 PM
4

Giving them traffic likely doesn't actually do much, because they aren't supported by ad revenue, and the kind of traffic from this site is unlikely to do things like donate to them, so I don't think it really causes any harm to visit.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 08:21 PM
2

Examples of institutional racism aren't really the same as examples of privilege, which is one of the reasons the whole thing bothers me, personally. To explain, just because white people can walk the streets and not be harassed by cops doesn't mean they're "privileged" over black people. It means there is serious racism going on, and black people should be able to not be harassed. In essence, what is almost always lost in discussions of privilege is that it can't be confused with what the base-…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 07:57 PM
2

Cows and Rape Culture are only a few degrees away from making rape yogurt, right?
/r/MensRights08/08/12 07:49 PM
1

While this is probably too late, the point is twofold: When the gender disparities in post secondary education were 43% women and 57% men, it was a tragic injustice. It prompted all sorts of things, not the least of which was Title IX and other education reforms. This, in addition to a huge majority of scholarships being available for women, and very few being available for men. So you have three points of policies that went into place to change the gender disparity in university level education…
/r/MensRights08/08/12 05:15 PM
1

Sounds like a diminished capacity argument. I thought most states got rid of those.
/r/MensRights08/08/12 04:50 PM
2

This is really old news. But Japan is a much different culture. The same way it's disingenuous for feminists in the US to talk about how women were oppressed over the soccer team flying coach while the male soccer team flew first class, it would be disingenuous to talk about this segregation with the same lens that we use for looking at gender discrimination in the US. Japan is a much much different culture, and they definitely have a plethora of gender and culture issues, but this is imo, the l…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 10:30 PM
6

Do you know if the reason he wasn't allowed to present the character evidence based on her previous actions was based on a rape shield law, or something? I mean, it's kind of shocking because under the FRE there seem to be very justified to impeach the witness' character for truthfulness as well as to impeach based on a prior inconsistent statement. The fact that the evidence of the sexual assault allegations were admitted is already highly prejudicial. Not allowing the accused to call police of…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 09:28 PM
2

He was actually kind of lucky to be in the 9th Circuit. Had he been in any of the other ones, it is very very unlikely his Habeas petition would have been granted. Of course, being in the 9th Circuit increases the chance the supreme court will reverse...
/r/MensRights07/08/12 09:19 PM
11

Now that you bring it up, actually, rape accusations have a pretty spotted history, particularly in the post slavery US south. Often, they were used as a means to intimidate African Americans. They were used as a tool to legally execute black men, because the nature of the case was always "he said she said" (particularly before DNA evidence) and because the bias of juries often saw the perps as guilty based on their race alone... It would be interesting to do a legal study on the history of rape…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 09:11 PM
1

There's a similar thing in the US, but it kind of only applies to women. In general, Defamation law in the US requires the plaintiff to show that there has been some injury or damage from the statement. So the elements of Defamation are: 1) A (false) statement made about another, 2) The statement must be heard/read by a third party, 3) The party must suffer some sort of injury or damage. It is going to be impossible to show damage from an insult, in general. There are a few per se categories, th…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 08:33 PM
17

I think men are told not to rape, repeatedly in their lives. There could be a little more in the high-school level sexual education course on what rape is, and obviously that it's bad. But that probably already exists in most schools I think. I remember when I was in highschool everyone understood what rape and date rape were. In fact, the sublime song Date Rape became quite popular while I was in high school... I'm honestly not sure where the idea that society promotes rape and rape culture. It…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 08:06 PM
12

It feels like this article was written by a feminist who didn't actually want to write about men's issues: women typically use state services and benefits more than men through pregnancy and maternity needs, women (on average) earn less than men, are poorer (particularly later on in life) and will often spend their final years alone. In addition, it is women who are more likely to be the primary carers for children, sick and elderly people. Furthermore, considering that women are far more likely…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 07:10 PM
16

County judges like this are elected. so hopefully next election cycle this video will be used in some way against him.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 06:51 PM
7

Seems like an isolated comment from an ignorant person. No group of people is immune to ignorance. Not feminism. Not the LBGT community. Not even MRM. At some point you just have to dismiss bigoted comments for what they are, coming from a bigot - not indicating some trend.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 06:04 PM
3

The solution is to give adequate protections to the accused, and in general to restore their due process rights and the actual legal standard of guild: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt This is a travesty of justice, but it should surprise no one. One of the problems is the feminist message that all men are potential rapists or abusers actually also hurts how people understand the BRD standard. Because of the feminist message, no one has any doubt that the accused is guilty, but that's the wrong kind of…
/r/MensRights07/08/12 03:52 PM
6

When "serious" authors use comments to bolster their argument, I can't help but wonder how they got a job. It's so ridiculous as to be unprofessional... Bill Pickle huh. Not only could the author anonymously post the comment themselves, but comments probably came in a broad spectrum. To point one out gives the wrong impression to everyone reading. So unprofessional.
/r/MensRights07/08/12 03:23 PM
9

My favorite part about that quote is that objectively, instruments are objects...
/r/MensRights07/08/12 03:20 PM
21

This is not legal advice, nor is it a solicitation. It is worth as much as you are paying for it. You have another option which is to see if the Sheriff can help you enforce the court orders you have. Otherwise, you may need to head back to court. Try to document as much evidence as you can that she is in violation of the court order. Once you have some evidence, consult an attorney if you can afford one. They will probably know what the best way to proceed is: negotiation, filing a contempt cas…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 11:44 PM
5

This is late in the game, but think of it this way: Feminism = An idea that promotes women's interests, often at the expense of men Egalitarianism = A movement concerned with the equal treatment of genders. MRM = A movement concerned with promoting the rights of men. MRA = An individual who is being an activist in support of men's rights. The fact is, many MRA's consider themselves to be egalitarian. However, they consider feminism to be distinctly not egalitarian. And aside from that, women don…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 11:31 PM
0

Can anyone explain to me the burning bras? Like, does anyone care about that anymore. I keep hearing people saying MRA's or Anti-Feminists think all feminists are man hating and bra burning. But... has anyone even brought up bra burning in, I don't know, the last 20 years? I mean, anyone other than a feminist trying to prove a very specific point?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 09:19 PM
0

I think that's the only valuable irony about it.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 08:38 PM
6

Perhaps it's the grammar 'nazi' in me, or perhaps it's the legal training, but this quote is problematic: “When you were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent, how many people ever had vaginal sex with you?” By having both conjunctions in the last term it can easily be confused by someone answering the survey. One easy interpretation is that if you had sex while drunk, high, drugged or passed out you were unable to consent. I suppose it didn't really matter if people thought …
/r/MensRights06/08/12 08:37 PM
3

I suppose I should have said, I don't understand how feminism can retain credibility, arguing that women are capable, while not simultaneously opposing policies which presume the exact opposite.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 08:28 PM
14

It's making fun of MRA's.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:50 PM
2

Indeed. I think too many people are missing the point and not realizing this coming is making fun of them.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:49 PM
2

One of the interesting instances of cognitive dissonance among feminists is circumcision. They will use anything to justify it - even the "it's gross looking" argument. Really though, the idea that men should amputate a functional part of their body to preserve the sensibilities of ignorant women who look at their penis is ridiculous. The flipped argument, that women should try to shape their appearance to appease men is something actively opposed by feminists. I don't know if the woman you were…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 07:06 PM
3

Didn't they? Weren't there several articles noting that many mass murderers were white males, including this one?
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:54 PM
17

Just another example of how feminism postures itself in a way that has no possible negatives: Sex crimes up - Feminism is justified and vindicated in how sex crimes oppress women. Sex crimes down - Feminism is justified and vindicated in their claim that sex crimes are under-reported. Either way, they can justify their advocacy of more zealous prosecution, and stripping more due process rights away from the accused.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:38 PM
8

It's a real study, there are a few. There were serious problems with the study though. Most notable was the methodology, the downplaying of negative consequences, not controlling for source of infection, lead time, early cancellation, and other ethical concerns about information.
/r/MensRights06/08/12 06:16 PM
10

The MRM should take a more pointed stance against alimony in the first place. In some cases it is justified, but in most it is a fairly questionable practice. It should be phased out, though, as it's based entirely on the idea that women are generally skill-less and can not support themselves without a man. Why feminism seems to not take a stance on this is beyond me. *Also I wanted to note, that it's increasingly ridiculous to have alimony when we live in a world where women, in large part, are…
/r/MensRights06/08/12 04:23 PM
0

Have some upvotes for actually knowing what Marxism is.
/r/MensRights05/08/12 06:33 AM
1

It's legal as long as they aren't discriminating. If you applied, were qualified and rejected, you could probably sue them. Though it probably wouldn't be worth it.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 09:05 PM
1

If she's willing to form opinions based entirely on hearsay, then I think you may give her level of intelligence too much credit.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:57 PM
2

That's not what I'm talking about, but reductionist arguments are neat. Women, almost uniquely and universally, have the power to withhold sex from the man for whatever reason with no stigma attached. If men do it, they face harsher scrutiny from their partner and society, risk being called gay, or accused of cheating. That is a privilege women have, and men do not.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:55 PM
4

Insulting.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 08:50 PM
8

It does us little good to try and fight gender stereotypes and generalizations on one side, and embrace them on the other. That would make us no better than feminists. I do not like this video, this message, or the man saying it.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 09:05 AM
5

Women, almost universally have the privilege of sexual refusal. This means they uniquely have the ability to define the type of the relationship, in general.
/r/MensRights04/08/12 02:06 AM
-4

In a sense it's scientifically write... if an XY doesn't produce enough testosterone, they will physically appear to be a woman, I think On the other hand it's a ridiculously sexist article and a ridiculously sexist way to put it.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:54 PM
2

What is the purpose of MRMeta anyway? Specifically?
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:42 PM
12

Awesome recap! I was wondering how it did, in the long run.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:31 PM
22

It's a tough situation you're in. I don't think many MRA's would consider this rape, though most Feminists would if the roles were reversed. Whether or not you do, I suppose is up to you. First off, I think you should be careful what you say to him. You don't want to make him feel worse, and by saying you raped him you might very well do that inadvertently, even if you apologize about it. So if you're going to apologize, apologize for pressuring him, etc. rather than apologizing for raping him. …
/r/MensRights03/08/12 09:29 PM
1

Man it sucks to have friends and acquaintances who dismiss you like that. From your post I can imagine you didn't have all of the right data to back yourself up, or your arguments rehearsed, and that's in large part because Men's Rights doesn't have a lot of academic thinkers in general. When you're having a discussion with someone, one of the best things to do is to point out when they are ignoring your arguments, and your viewpoint as well. There are a lot of studies that support you on the wa…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 08:17 PM
1

The whole thing is both sensitive and laughable. The fact that all the feminist / pro feminist writers out there have been putting forth two messages: * We don't need to go into the impact of gender roles on this tragedy * Good men die/should die for their significant others The Irony is that the opinion of both, the idea that good men sacrifice themselves, and the idea that in this instance we don't need to think about gender roles is inherently sexist, and even goes against the general message…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 08:08 PM
12

I'm a little late to the party, and I just wanted to mention something about prison rape, because it was covered when I was in law school and it's an interesting cultural phenomenon. Seeing as you're studying criminal justice, you might care. But by and large, the fact that rape happens in prison has become more of a joke than anything else. People comment on wanting different stripes of criminals to go to prison so they will be raped in many different types of media. But an interesting, if not …
/r/MensRights03/08/12 07:03 PM
5

I have a feeling that's why when I look at smaller population subreddits, they typically get upvotes anywhere from 50-200 on top comments, while ours generally cap at around 50. It's gotta be the fact that r/mr is trolled by so many different subreddits, right?
/r/MensRights03/08/12 06:57 PM
8

Hello again, PurpleVNeck, Thank you for returning to clarify your points of view. There are a couple other equity feminists who frequent this sub also, such as u/tmesispieces. I will let you know that the MRM and Equity feminism has much in common, but also diverges on some points, which will become clear. With that said I'd be happy to answer your questions. 1. How do you define feminism? I define "feminism" as a movement, and as a movement I ascribe the changes made to the social perception, a…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 06:23 PM
3

I'm getting really sick of these blatantly dishonest "Do you believe women are human beings? Then you're a feminist." or "Do you believe in equality? Then you're a feminist." There was also a recent article on jezebel in the same vein. It's just insanely disingenuous. What they aren't saying is "If you don't believe in rape culture, you don't believe women are human beings." "If you don't believe 1 in 4 women are raped/brutalized by their husband, you don't believe women are human beings." Etc. …
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:46 PM
3

Indeed, we're both more unified and more diverse. We're more accepting of dissenting opinions, which makes it easier for the MRM to act as a single "whole" despite having different viewpoints on different topics. Also you left off Equity or Libertarian feminism from your list, which is often considered Anti-Feminism by liberal or radical feminists.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:42 PM
5

Honestly, I didn't think you could lose any more credibility in my eyes (and I'm sure the eyes of the male community).
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:31 PM
2

Of course MRA's believe in "female privilege." There are a lot more benefits to being female than being male. The difference is that most of them are codified - so I don't see how anyone could not believe in female privilege.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:20 PM
4

Title IX is also a privilege women get that men don't, under legally granted privileges. At common law, also, the law of defamation specifically favors women in most jurisdictions, as attacking the chastity of a woman publicly is subject to claims of defamation, but there is no such analog for men.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:17 PM
10

How did Dan savage put it? "You build 100 bridges and you're still not an engineer. Suck one dick and you're a fag forever" (Sorry if using the F word offends, it's my attempt at a verbatim quote).
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:08 PM
2

No, I don't think that's quite the accurate reading. Under the patriarchal model espoused in feminist discourse, the "perfect" woman is still never going to be as good as the "perfect" man. The perspective holds that a woman is required to own up to everything that the ideal man is not, precisely because she stands zero chance of ever being that ideal man. I think this is where I simply can't follow the logic behind patriarchy, or the feminist application of patriarchy theory. To say that patria…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 04:53 PM
7

Hi again, tmesispieces, I think the pushback is that patriarchy is an inherently gendered term, while men aren't necessarily the platonic ideal, and I feel like the idea of traditional gender norms is often a better description as to the source of the problem. An example could be in how women are viewed. For example, women are generally viewed favorably the more time they put into looking nice, whereas that trait of worrying about how you look is a negative trait for men. Under the patriarchal m…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:58 AM
10

I got turned to the MRM after having many arguments with feminists over the whole "women in games" debacle which is currently dominating the dialogue. I was looking for somewhere that felt sexism was an issue, but that feminists take the wrong approach by constantly demonizing one side and tearing down men - turning it into an us vs. them fight but without acknowledging that's what is going on. I ended up watching a girlwriteswhat video, and the rest is history.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:34 AM
1

You don't seem like an equity feminist. MRA's don't acknowledge discrimination against women for a couple reasons: First, they reject the idea of rape culture, the 1 in 2 / 4 statistics feminism relies on, and in general the patriarchy. We also generally agree with the burgeouning economics research that finds the wage gap is within a couple percentage points when all elements are controlled for (time off, work life balance, title, experience, etc. etc., most feminist research on the subject has…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 05:25 AM
11

The conversation was tough to have as he asked questions of why I havent called him in so long, and why he has not been able to play with us anymore. Truly heart wrenching. I hope you can negotiate more custody of your child, best of luck.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 04:37 AM
4

Do we have a term for this type of language - the feminist objectification of women? The idea that women are always objects which are acted on rather than autonomous human beings with their own wills which are suppressed and imposed?
/r/MensRights03/08/12 04:35 AM
1

I don't think Briffault's law is a statutory law anywhere, so there's not much to "repeal" in the sense of Briffault's law. It would be more of a piecemeal re-writing of divorce, custody and child support law to get change... this would have to happen in each different state.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 04:30 AM
2

They already constantly troll here for things to post on shit like r/againstmensrights... they see this and this data. They would dismiss it. No point in reaching across the aisle, ever.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:11 AM
0

Wow. Going there was... infuriating.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 02:04 AM
3

No, it the jezebel article didn't say that, it said this: But it's pointless to analyze whether there were any gender stereotypes at play in the theater that night, or to ask why so many men died protecting their girlfriends — that's just what happened.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:22 AM
6

Have you like, avoiding articles about it? http://jezebel.com/5928306/the-shining-knights-of-the-aurora-movie-theater http://www.rolereboot.org/culture-and-politics/details/2012-07-why-men-should-be-willing-to-die-for-women I don't think you actually read the AVfM article. There was no mention of mangina, no mention of white knight, and no calling them suckers. It was about how how the femosphere and other mainstream media outlets are reinforcing the idea that men sacrificing themselves for wome…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 01:04 AM
13

You realize that none of that shit you posted has anything to do with the poster, right? And femenism has had zero impact on what the "role" of men is in our society. See, e.g. the feminist reflection on the aurora shootings. How many feminist articles called out the point that the fact that men were being called "good men" because they gave their lives for their significant others was an example of patriarchy? The fact is, feminism as a social movement supports the patriarchy, implicitly, on an…
/r/MensRights03/08/12 12:21 AM
13

You could call it meta victim blaming. It's pretty amazing.
/r/MensRights03/08/12 12:18 AM
2

I'm waiting for when they further reference this in a SRS or r/fem post, just to see the ridiculous circle of downvoting continue. Then we can make another thread linking back on r/mr... when does it go meta?
/r/MensRights02/08/12 11:46 PM
2

Lots of people are disturbed. But dads rarely get any credit, so they're probably used to being the truly unsung heroes of parenting.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 10:54 PM
6

Well that would matter if most of his posts were actually troll posts, but most of them were commenting on the role of men and the presumptions surrounding them with regards to gender roles, sexism, and other problematic stuff. I'm not sure why he thinks it's bad for someone to complain about being presumed to be a pedophile because they are a man, for example. What he is doing, is re-wording the post in a way that makes it sounds like the post is extremely sexist, and then citing it as an examp…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 10:52 PM
5

Laugh. Their downvoting of those posts is just further evidence of how impossible reasonable discourse with feminists is.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 10:45 PM
1

There is part of me that wants to jump in and explain why this is all so wrong, but the other part of me realizes it would be pointless to do that on r/feminism. His data is cherry picked, to say the least, he's looked at titles of articles, rather than their purpose or content, and overall he mischaracterizes the MRM quite a bit. The one thing he does get right is that the MRM is hostile to feminism. Which is why there is little common ground for the two movements. Where he is wrong is implying…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 08:40 PM
2

Well, I was referring to the beginning: “Oh, you just hate women”, you often see him respond with something like “being for equality doesn’t mean we hate women.” The idea from there on, to me, is the writer justifying why it's OK to do the former, and why we shouldn't need to do say latter. I'm actively for the MRM, and I think men do need to have a voice. If it was about hating the feminist systems, and the things that actively oppress men, then that's fine but I think it should have been put i…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 08:01 PM
2

Yes, I read what you wrote. But there really isn't a reason that a false rape accusation should be treated worse than a false robbery or burglary or assault accusation. The only reason people want to treat false rape accusations differently is because people accused of rape are treated so differently. The problem is the treatment of the accused, not the lack of accountability of the accuser. Proving it was a lie is going to be more difficult, but once you have a not guilty conviction it has a hi…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:29 PM
3

Man the comments on the article were really disturbing. My biggest fear is that men's rights gets co-opted as one side of a political movement, because that would be bad for the movement in general, not only would it alienate potential activists, but it would leave a political leaning on what the answers are. the article was pretty good, at least in pointing out the problem. Kind of lame that it missed the rest of the boat on how men are constantly discriminated against in real life. And the ide…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:15 PM
1

Indeed, It's nice that the write is recognizing the problem, but it's only one facet of it. It also starts to get kind of man blamey at the end too... not perfect, but at least in the right direction, sort of.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 06:12 PM
3

Primarily the issue is when there is disagreement. For example, man does not want the child, but the woman does. The man has no recourse because once conceived the choices of abortion, adoption, abandonment, and keeping the child are all 100% in the hands of the woman. It's a common argument, for MRA's, that there should be a window for "parental/paternal surrender." Where after conception the man declares he does not wand and will not support the child. This then leaves the woman able to make a…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:53 PM
1

You know. It actually makes sense. If the father wanted the baby, it makes sense for child support, or at least sharing the increased costs of conception. On the other hand, if the father doesn't want the baby, his support should be limited to sharing the costs of abortion and / or going through the adoption process.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:46 PM
1

I've never met a woman who had condoms... I've always been the one to pay for and provide them.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:40 PM
2

Probably going to get downvoted for this, but prosecutions for false claims would be problematic to say the least, because it would undoubtedly have a very chilling effect on actually true claims of rape. If you were at risk of going to jail for bringing your rape case forward, it would really make you consider whether or not it would be worth it to do so - likely keeping you out of court. In essence it increases the risk for the person bringing the claim of rape, which would undoubtedly discour…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:10 PM
-1

The fact that breast cancer screenings are covered, but prostate cancer is not, is also fairly sexist. The fact that condoms are covered for women, but not for men is also fairly sexist. There is nothing male specific about the act, and the male benefits (things required to be covered with no copay) list is much much shorter for men than it is for women, simply because there is nothing specific to men.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:54 PM
-1

And in that list there is nothing male specific. So I'm not sure why I was wrong. In fact, just by glancing at that list I don't even think that any of those are predominantly male problems.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:44 PM
7

The fact that men see doctors so infrequently is actually kind of a bad thing, and one of the reasons men's life expectancy is lower than women in general.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:43 PM
6

Hate isn't all that productive. Anger is OK, and to some extent Hate is too, but I think the article shoots wide in merely advocating (or making a case for) hate. The problem is I don't think the MRM gains anything when men hate women. In fact that's one of the more fair criticisms, that some in the MRM think it's just a place for men to hate women together. And I don't think that's good, it's fairly myopic and unproductive because honestly women aren't the problem. The problem is the 'system', …
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:38 PM
8

Oh, I'm sure being falsely accused of rape was great for them. I mean, everyone knows that false accusations are a good experience for men and boys. It gives them a chance to be introspective, to think "Could I have raped her? If I could have would I want to? Why would I do that?" /s
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:31 PM
1

It's not illegal because gender isn't a protected class, and even if it was discriminating against men sets the bar very low... well it's not unconstitutional anyway, which is what you mean when you say a law is illegal.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 05:12 AM
2

True. I guess the real answer should have been because there's no men's advocacy group lobbying in DC, and congress doesn't have committee on men and boys like it does on women and girls.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:40 AM
1

Kid probably copped a plea. 5 years in prison v. 3 weeks in jail is kind of a no brainer... No way he actually went to trial.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:31 AM
1

Get the evidence before you bring it forward. Try to get both sides of the story if you can. Get as much as you can, and if you can let the accused who did time in jail take the reigns... But do everything you can to make sure he's innocent first. Just make sure you aren't acting purely on hearsay. Then take it to who you need to. Also try to find some legal services for wrongly accused... I don't know how many there are or how common it is, but getting some legal advice in your jurisdiction tha…
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:30 AM
0

No. Well, there are if you didn't have any insurance before, or suffered from a pre-existing condition and had to worry about juggling insurance or paying out the nose. But there's nothing male specific in the act.
/r/MensRights02/08/12 04:22 AM
4

Well, it's not about looking to fix women's issues that's clear. On the other hand the MRM isn't about throwing women under the bus either (like the feminist movement is with respect to men) and it is about seeking equality for men, rather than actively trying to reduce the status of women. So in 2 senses it is about equality, even if it's only about equality for men.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 11:16 PM
3

Actually, everyone who is uncircumcised remains uncircumcised by choice...
/r/MensRights01/08/12 11:04 PM
6

Men's Rights are about achieving institutional and social equality where we do not have it. It's not about some myth that we're fighting for women's rights, but it's about achieving equality specifically focusing on male issues.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 10:46 PM
7

Bulletpoints? (LMK if you want more detail) Pertaining specifically to sexuality: False Rape Accusations - Impact and Due Process (particularly on the campus) Paternal reproduction rights / parental surrender Male sexual performance expectations (expectation of men to "provide" the orgasm for women, for example) Male Gender Roles in modern dating and sexuality Divorce and Male Suicide Circumcision for Sexual Aesthetic Reasons There are other important things but I don't think they are related to…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 10:23 PM
3

So. Do we want to go there and write things like : "Male privilege is being 30% more likely to drop out of high school than women." "Male privilege is having 15%[?] higher unemployment than women." "Male privilege is being 15% less likely to go to college." "Male privilege is being 9 times as likely to die in a work related fatality." "Male privilege is being 4-9 times more likely to be homeless without any support networks." "Male privilege is being arrested after being battered by your spouse.…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 10:11 PM
5

Holy crap. I don't think I've ever had an ad actually make me cry (or tear up at least) before. Setting it to the dead island theme didn't help but Jesus Christ that was hard.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 09:31 PM
2

Manboobz should be treated the same way SRS is treated here. Anything he, or SRS or r/feminism or Jezebel or pretty much any other "progressive" feminist minded outlet posts about MRA's is going to be about the most base comments that appear on r/mensrights. There's nothing we can do about that fact other than to flag the trolls for what they are.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 09:22 PM
1

This pissed me off so much I had to write a comment. How dare this jackass criticize MRA's for being unproductive by just sitting around talking about men's rights issues. What is productive about his excessively patronizing criticism? Nothing. And aside from that, he gets a lot of facts wrong. Everything from poverty - Men don't have the choice of not working and raising kids on really low paying jobs, because of a system that discriminates against single male fathers on an institutional and so…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 09:17 PM
2

Without any stake in the outcome, I don't see what motivation an MRA would have to argue Feminist points would be.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 08:42 PM
2

Honestly, I don't see the MRM as much of a standalone movement as a response to feminism or mainstream feminism. That makes it a little "immature" in my eyes, but it seems necessary to me as well as there has been no real concerted pushback (other than the populist misogynistic ideas which were more acceptable in the late 80's and early 90's). Unfortunately you are right that MRM is pretty fractured across all levels of extremism from completely misogynistic to completely egalitarian, and that i…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 08:18 PM
2

This is an interesting idea, and could help you learn about each side, (and why we, on the MRM side are right... yes bias, I know). I have a bit of a problem personally going into a debate with any actual feminist "sphere," let alone SRS, and that's that there has been so much vilification of MRA's in terms that are essentially name calling. (See, e.g. the Jezebel article about "what to do if your family member becomes an MRA"). I have some conceptual questions: Where would this debate occur? Ho…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:37 PM
21

Talk to a lawyer. There might be something you can do.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:14 PM
-2

I totally understand, and that's part of the frustration. In essence, by inviting questions from a hostile group you weren't giving yourself the opportunity to really hit on the salient points of the MRM. It was kind of like going into a warzone and opening your arms and saying "shoot me." It was predictable that everything would be attacks based on the most base comments posted here, which would give you little chance for advocacy or presentation of your side of the story. I'm not trying to be …
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:12 PM
14

I don't think that libertarian / equity feminists take that viewpoint. In fact, Hoff Sommers actually disputes the claim that the patriarchy injures men and boys, and argues that the struggles men and boys are facing now are primarily due to feminism. While Equity Feminists has the word feminist in it, it seems to have very little in common with the current/popular feminist movement. For example, she is also strongly opposed to the application of Title IX in STEM fields, and has been for some ti…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 07:07 PM
8

Thank you for the response. I'm not sure if the metrics I listed were "odd" as if you go to an popular feminist piece of writing about the female condition or role in society and it will come down to tying the writing into one of those 4 points, if not all of them. I suppose I am skeptical, because I don't see the feminist label as being anything other than gender supremacy with a thin veil of equality which is why I'm skeptical of anyone who labels themselves as feminists. I think Hoff Sommers …
/r/MensRights01/08/12 06:48 PM
13

Because there is no pharmaceutical contraceptive men can take which has been approved by the FDA.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:55 PM
5

NOW, for example.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:24 PM
15

I'm going to re-iterate something I recently wrote, to an MRA who was trying to reach out to Feminists: There is little common ground because the MRM is actively opposed to certain principles which are critical to the institutional credibility of feminism. I appreciate you (and any woman or feminist) who comes here to try to better understand or see if there is common ground, though, so don't take any of this as an insult, or me simply writing it off. The problem as I See it, and this is just on…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 05:24 PM
1

No. Which is to say there's no institutional punishment. I think the chilling effect on coming forward about crime would be pretty big, if you stood a risk of criminal punishment just for coming forward. The falsely accused has two options: Pursue malicious prosecution against the prosecutor, which is fairly difficult to show. To successfully maintain a malicious prosecution case, the plaintiff must show not only that the defendant is responsible for causing the criminal charges to be brought an…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:42 PM
8

So he is a bigot, or has a poor sense of humor. That doesn't give her the right to retaliation proof assault.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:26 PM
-6

I read what you were doing and understand you had good intentions, but I think a) it's a very 'dangerous' thing to do - because you were no doubt being baited and honestly there isn't much point in conversing with people who are more concerned in catching you in an inconsistency than listening to you, and b) you have to understand that you alone are not enough to counteract the hundreds of blogs and other popular media where MRA hate is constantly posted. It's good that you didn't straight up lo…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:21 PM
0

Some (a lot, probably) of MRA's are just as upset as the social problems as the legal ones. For example, when it comes to parental custody, many MRA's would prefer to see men get custody closer to 50% of the time than 5% of the time. This statistic doesn't come from law, or some systematic disadvantage, but from the idea that women are better caregivers. While custody determinations are often ruled in courts for women, they also rule in favor of men very frequently. The reason 95% of women get c…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:11 PM
-3

The problem is 90% of the subreddit (fem) sees him as that way regardless of how reasonable he is. The first thing said was basically attacking him based on some of the more extreme comments (not even posts) made by people who moderate or frequent this board... There is literally no point.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:08 PM
3

I don't know if Rape Industrialist has the right ring to it. It's confusing in who it is pointed at. The rape fear industry is HUGE though. It's almost enough to make one throw his hands in the air and give up. The whole idea of "rape culture" is just a ridiculous, non-plausible theory that has absolutely no science backing it up. I always like the idea of using rape culture to make rape yogurt, from whoever initially posted the idea r/menrights.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:59 PM
1

Correlation in observational studies such as this tend to prove the opposite of the assertion though: That circumcision is an effective way to reduce HIV acquisition in Africa.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:53 PM
3

There were a lot of problems with the initial study. First there was significant loss of trial participants. The uncircumcised group had 2 months "lead time" where they were having sex, but the newly circumcised men weren't. They didn't control for source of contracting HIV (Homosexual sex, IV drug use or other clinical sources of HIV, for example). There were ethical problems, in that they didn't tell individuals if they were HIV pos if they didn't want to know. And they ended the study very ea…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:51 PM
3

Lying to people about circumcision, while not quite as bad as involuntary neonatal circumcision, is still very bad.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:49 PM
1

You should see a lawyer experienced in custody and state insurance programs preferably. Presumably, if you have an agreement in writing regarding 50/50 split financial responsibilities anything the state charges you for her insurance you should be able to recover from her. That's theoretical, though, it might be difficult to collect in practice (and could take something annoying like a court order, which would probably waste both or your time and money.) Regardless, the smartest thing to do is t…
/r/MensRights01/08/12 04:47 AM
-8

Feminists won't admit there's any negative from feminism. According to feminists, when they get their way the system improves for everyone. If you bring up the extremist viewpoints they nafalt.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:51 AM
-1

I don't divide feminists between men and women. Both are equally daft. White Knight is a pointless term, imo, unless you're discussing men who aren't really feminists but are just doing it out of some weird misplaced chivalry to get the attention of women and / or feminists.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:40 AM
3

Indeed. There's no point in trying to be reasonable with feminists. They will only see MRM and MRA's being about hating women. Even if there's almost never a post about hating women on this reddit. We should be taking the higher ground. Let them troll us. They do it enough. Let them label us the same way we label them, and watch the irony. But don't try to engage them. There's no point.
/r/MensRights01/08/12 03:31 AM
3

Well, arrest / apprehension is a much earlier stage in the criminal justice process than conviction. It would have been very, very easy to arrest a guy, throw him in a lineup, and charge one with rape after she identifies which one "raped" her...
/r/MensRights31/07/12 11:26 PM
4

why would you bother?
/r/MensRights31/07/12 11:04 PM
3

The problem is that they do happen, and men generally have little to no recourse. And the fact that they happen at all means they happen too often. There are entities, such as http://www.innocenceproject.org/ which deal directly with rapes where DNA evidence is available to exonerate the accused. But the problem there is that not all accusations come with DNA. The Statute of limitations is available for much longer than DNA is available, and further consent can turn into a rape accusation as wel…
/r/MensRights31/07/12 10:33 PM
1

Well, I don't know how relevant it was to female privilege, but she said she lost all sexual interest in him because he wore women's clothes once.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 08:10 PM
1

All of them. But I don't understand how the link is relevant to female privilege, really.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 08:09 PM
8

Indeed. When women do it, it's admiration/attraction. When men do it, because of male gaze, patriarchy and the rape culture it's men trying to subjugate/own women as objects.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 07:01 PM
2

I'm not sure, but I think medicare works into this as well. It seems that Medicare covers 80% of prostate screenings every 12 months for Medicare eligible adults over the age of 50, which is where virtually 100% of prostate cancer occurs. It does seem weird / inequitable that other screenings for over 50 people have to be 100% covered, though, such as the colorectal cancer, and osteoperosis screenings. Though Prostate cancer is entirely ignored.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 04:51 PM
1

Additionally, because the long term costs are more likely to develop once the individual is old enough to be on medicare, the preventative care the individual has earlier in life can have a large impact on the price of later life care. This creates a moral hazard and negative externality, where the cost of the choice to not cover such screenings shifts the higher, later cost onto the public. In short, it's bad fiscally and it's bad from a public health perspective.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 04:47 PM
1

Not typically. Colon/Rectal Cancer and Prostate Cancer are two entirely different things. Though there are some options for prostate screening via endoscopy/sigmoidoscopy (The most common procedure for colon/rectal cancer screening) I think. But it's not common. See, e.g. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2695146/
/r/MensRights31/07/12 04:43 PM
2

Feminism isn't an ethnicity, gender or sexuality. You don't get to say "you can't generalize feminists!" because it's something 100% elective. Sometimes we're represented by the most unsavory elements of any group we're in. Feminists are no more immune to this than reddit is (on every feminist blog). Using weasel words like most, many is also pointless. The overall goal of feminism is to subvert the legal and social status of men. It's for women to gain status in the preferable aspects (highly p…
/r/MensRights31/07/12 07:12 AM
2

I think "mainstream feminists" are pretty accurate, actually.
/r/MensRights31/07/12 07:07 AM
2

I don't think it relied on every woman being the same. In fact part of her point was that there are extremely diverse desires by women who are "supposedly" equal. Some expect the man to open doors and buy dinner. Others expect the man to be completely honest and forward. Others expect men to "respect" their space, etc. The point is that all of these go against the idea of "women and men as equals" and go back to the traditional gender roles of men chasing, women choosing. I understand what you'r…
/r/MensRights31/07/12 07:05 AM
1

If anything, this will be a barometer for how "anti-woman" reddit actually is. If an MRA ad ends up with more down than upvotes, it seems like it would be hard to argue Reddit is to anti women... It would make it easier to argue reddit is very feminist and "knee-jerk" rather than intellectual though.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 11:40 PM
3

You can always get a consult for less than that, to explore your options. Aside from that, if you can't afford a lawyer the best thing you can do is look into your pro se options, representing yourself. Representing yourself with the help of volunteer lawyers / law librarians makes a huge difference as opposed to just trying to wing it.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 10:30 PM
1

But how do you mean it is conservative then? Is the MGTOW "conserving" themselves or something? I wasn't talking about political ideology, as much as I was talking about the dictionary definition - Of or predisposed to existing conditions, to restore traditional ones / limit change. I suppose you meant it as "cautious"?
/r/MensRights30/07/12 09:31 PM
5

girlwriteswhat definitely does not see a distinction in feminism. Not that I want to put words in her mouth, but when I said feminism used to be about equality, she replied saying it's never been about equality. I am very doubtful she would describe herself as a feminist in any way shape or form.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 09:14 PM
1

I think the problem is MGTOW is definitely not "conservative" because it's a very large paradigm shift from tradition and history - which is by nature progressive. I would describe your "traditionalism" description as conservative. MGTOW as being Progressive (perhaps radically progressive), and gender egalitarian as progressive as well.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 09:11 PM
3

It's all about framing. Telling someone they're "privileged," for example is supposedly not an "attack" but it's clear the response of 90% of people when you tell them they are privileged is indignation. So, do they MEAN to be attacking people? I don't know, maybe. But the fact of the matter is that the dialogue is framed in a way where one party is certain to feel as if they're being attacked. It's naive to pretend that because you don't think someone should be offended you aren't attacking the…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 08:56 PM
3

HAHA, the description was classic: My professor has refused my requested topic for an essay because he did not want to deal with an [sic] women’s issue.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 08:18 PM
5

One of the least effective ways to appeal to a group is to call them a bunch of privileged, stupid, rapists, which is incidentally what the article and feminism both do in general.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 07:26 PM
7

So fucking sick of the mentality If they win everyone benefits, and in an ideal world working- and middle-class men would be natural allies in the fight – one of the many reasons the “men’s rights” movement are so tragic. Idiot. Manages to be wrong about both feminism and men's rights in one fell swoop. Also, for someone being so "woeful" about how feminism defining the problem as "patriarchy" and how that makes it seem like "us vs. them" in a bad way, he (and she) certainly goes out of his way …
/r/MensRights30/07/12 06:58 PM
1

Considering the initial post was amended with: EDIT: If I have learned anything from this post today, it's that I feel like shedding my "feminism" label because it carries negative connotations and the movement has brought on negative things for men as a result. I will shed this label in the future and fight for equality for both men AND women. I know there is a lot of work to be done and most of you have very valid concerns. Thank you for the respectful and nice responses. I don't really see ho…
/r/MensRights30/07/12 06:54 PM
5

AND live in Brazil... I guess the comment would make sense if it was coming from a Brazilian woman. But then I would expect it to be in Portuguese.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 05:26 PM
1

Yes. Being white is sort of fetishized. You will be discriminated against, in some ways for sure, but the majority of attention you get for being white is extremely positive.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 05:23 PM
6

What is this a Jezebel writer?
/r/MensRights30/07/12 05:03 PM
14

But cognitively, the fact that OTHER people are dying aren't a reason YOU need feminism.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 05:02 PM
5

That's kind of what she implies. By women expecting so many things (often very different from woman to woman) they set up difficult standards. Men are taught that women are equal, but they have to treat them as the superior in terms of relationships, and that is making them angry because it puts men at a strict disadvantage.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 04:54 PM
3

Anonymity is really something that is more than justified in rape cases. Something most people don't understand is that the criminal justice system isn't there to protect the victims, it's there to protect the accused. A lot of people forget the US was founded by people who could easily be found guilty of treason. Rape has already become too close to a strict liability crime. The accused should be more protected for sure.
/r/MensRights30/07/12 04:31 PM
0

Yeah I get a little uncomfortable with the idea of this being in r/mensrights. It does us no good to be viewed as rape apologists, and there are reactions people are having to individuals self identifying as rapists. Being anti-false-accusation doesn't mean pro-rape. That's something everyone needs to remember, feminists and MRA's and everyone else. Threads like this walk the line a little too closely. Tread lightly, to say the least...
/r/MensRights27/07/12 08:54 PM
65

But what I can tell you is this: Getting my courage up to ask a partner that I trust for the sex that I wanted only to be turned down left me feeling hella disempowered. Wow. Irony, what is it? *The comments were reasonable and pretty good, imo.
/r/MensRights27/07/12 05:58 PM
13

We can't beat our children (or wives), even if the good book says it's ok to do so. Why should this "religious freedom" be any different?
/r/MensRights26/07/12 11:57 PM
3

Thanks for the source. It's good info.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 11:54 PM
6

Right, I guess I just don't want r/mensrights to become (anything close to) SRS.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 11:22 PM
1

I just think it waters down the content of /mensrights because it's just a random comment made on another (albeit popular) subreddit.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 10:01 PM
7

Pretty inflamatory language. Somewhat in conflict with the Blackstone principle that punishment of a guilty man is worth only a fraction of taking away the liberty of an innocent man. With that said, I'm not sure how useful linking to other comments on reddit is, as far as men's advocacy goes.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 09:48 PM
11

Quote is from Catherine Comins. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101910603-157165,00.html
/r/MensRights26/07/12 09:42 PM
3

Awesome statistic/dataset. Thank you.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 09:38 PM
5

The whole Circumcision prevents aids is a questionable conclusion but there is quite a bit of support for it in the African trials. On the other hand, because it's such a questionable issue it's difficult to get good trial data (all of the trials have been cut short). could you point me to an article (Preferably in JAMA or BMJ) which questions the validity of the conclusions? With that said, it seems like trying to use AIDS as a justification for circumcision is ridiculous. It really is a soluti…
/r/MensRights26/07/12 08:47 PM
3

I don't believe you have any legal rights or remedies which would help in your situation.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 07:38 PM
1

Not that ridiculous. It's clearly based on people's experiences and so many children of the current generations are kids of single parents. With most mothers being the primary custody parent, it's much easier to imagine life without every-other-weekend-dad than it is without mom.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 04:15 PM
3

That question is essentially where the 1 in 4 statistic comes from. The survey asked a question like: "Have you ever had sex with a man who provided you alcohol or drugs where you didn't want to have sex with him." or something like that, and then counted all the respondents who answered yes as "rapes" even though the respondents didn't consider themselves raped.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 04:08 PM
0

You aren't using the word "cliche" right. Cliche is intended to apply to artistic works, not to criticisms of statistics.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 04:03 PM
40

I thought chivalry was just closet misogyny.
/r/MensRights26/07/12 03:56 PM
1

I just took the survey I didnt design it. But he did give a couple other P- ratings. Unsurprisingly, feminists who took the survey felt that women were less privileged. Also it wasn't just posted to r/Mensrights, it was also posted on a couple feminist subreddits. I have a feeling there were not that many of each sub-category, but the creator of the survey said he would be happy to answer those questions: If people want other bits of specific data or filtered answers (e.g. how many native americ…
/r/MensRights19/07/12 10:17 PM
22

But it's the popular feminist message about sex that any time an advance is made on a woman too drunk to properly consent (whether the person is too drunk enough to realize that or not) it is rape or attempted rape. I mean, that's exactly where the one in four statistic comes from. And this equivalence, even in the popular feminist dialogue, is a confusing message to young men and women. As a note, I think this equivalence also cheapens the actual forcible rape victims who are rightfully traumat…
/r/MensRights19/07/12 07:38 PM
7

Could that be a weird voyeur/exhibitionist fetish? Notarized consent sex? Having a neutral observer watch for legal reasons?
/r/MensRights19/07/12 07:30 PM
1

It was a subjective measure of respondents: How privileged do you think [Men/Women/Transgener] are? The respondents were asked to rate each privilege individually on a scale of 1 to 7.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 07:23 PM
1

All we would have to do for that situation is to burn the constitution. The confrontation clause is a... well I wouldn't want to be sexist.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 04:51 PM
0

Brilliant.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 04:40 PM
3

Something you need to understand is that there are jabs towards feminists for two reasons: Feminists often attack MRA's simply for bringing up men's (very real) issues. Hang out on Jezebel for a week or so, you will end up finding a lot of man-bashing articles under the guise of "we're only bashing this specific type of man." And when someone says men don't have a life of honey and roses, the response is "Wut about teh menz?" In fact. Go to jezebel and search for MRA, you will find how feminism …
/r/MensRights19/07/12 04:35 PM
8

I don't know if she's a nutjob. More accurately she was indoctrinated and confused by the messages of current feminism of what is and is ok sexual conduct, and the "availability cascade" of rape that makes women think they are constantly having to protect themselves from rape - and if there is some aspect of their sex life that they don't particularly like it was rape and they should feel abused.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 04:20 PM
9

Came here to post the exact same quote. Epic indeed.
/r/MensRights19/07/12 04:18 PM
5

This is a poigniant quote, even if it's applicability is questionable. It's important to remember that just because white men are in positions of power frequently doesn't necessarily mean they rule. In many cases, men are ruling for the benefit of the historically disadvantaged, regardless of where / whether there is a current disadvantage. See, e.g. the white house committee on women and girls. Perhaps Voltaire's quote takes on a different meaning than it might have originally meant. But it is …
/r/MensRights19/07/12 04:12 PM
1

It's one of the reasons for the non-reporting of all things like Domestic Violence and Rape, in addition to the reason that men are less likely to seek medical care when they need it. Men are raised in a "walk it off" culture, where part of your manliness is directly related to your tolerance for pain. Men don't want to acknowledge they are hurt, physically or emotionally, so they will under-report and under-seek medical attention.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 11:55 PM
0

He will. Which is why he should be avoiding gender politics altogether.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 11:51 PM
3

Which is politically stupid. He's already dominating the woman vote. Where he's losing on gender lines is men. And he's doing nothing to court the male vote at all.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 11:07 PM
2

Good luck proceeding with your voluntary crucifixion. Issues not particularly connected to women: Education (K-12 and Post-secondary) Circumcision / mgm Suicide Rate Workplace fatalities I would also say gender stereotypes for men, but it's difficult to have a "statistic" on those to present, and they tend to be fairly accusatory (for example, the feminist acceptance and acquiescence to gender stereotypes which disadvantage men). As an edit, here are some sources: Education: http://nces.ed.gov/p…
/r/MensRights18/07/12 08:11 PM
3

That's not how it's administered. Title IX, while the STATUTE is about equality of the sexes it is administered by the Agency in charge of education. The problem is that how the statute is used and interpreted is entirely up to the agency, and currently they have interpreted it to mean that women need to be given equal representation as men (in terms of sports). The assumption that it will be the same interpretation for Science stuff. So, while the Dept of Ed. may (presumably) put a quota system…
/r/MensRights18/07/12 06:28 PM
13

Your experience is actually both that of rape and domestic violence. Sad thing is you couldn't even defend yourself because of the way domestic violence laws work.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 06:14 PM
7

Applying certain attributes from the "apex" of a group to all members of the group. So, for example, because White Males in the media are often successful, rich, not oppressed, successful, etc. the idea is that the argument of "white male privilege" stems from the apex fallacy that attaches that image to all members of the white male groups.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 04:40 PM
11

75% of students in veterinary medicine are women.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 04:38 PM
5

It's dishonest. This is one of the ways statistics are used to manipulate a message. The fact is, male suicide is about what, 4-5 times as high as female suicide. So for every 1 female suicide there are 4 male suicides. To put it another way. If there are 100 female suicides there are 400 male suicides. A 30% increase for girls and a 9% increase for males still leaves males at an absolute level WAY above where girls are, and also as an absolute increase 9% of 400 is almost exactly the same as 30…
/r/MensRights18/07/12 04:25 PM
13

I think the COTWA's primary problem is that the poster treats the issue in a ridiculous manner, which reduces the weight of the actual issue of those who are wrongly accused. They seem to be saying even though it is parody, it is still inappropriate because this is a subject that is already not taken seriously enough. And in addition it doesn't paint a particularly good picture of those who advocate for men's rights.
/r/MensRights18/07/12 04:17 PM
1

MRA's don't typically attack women, though. You might find fringe users, but most of them limit their attacks to feminists and feminism. I'm not sure why you think the goal of the MRM is to "punish women." The goal is to push back against policies and society that actively disadvantages men. The idea isn't to attack women at all, it's attacking the parts of the system that feminism actively supports which disadvantage men. I'm not saying every problem the MRM covers is because of feminism. But a…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 11:14 PM
8

Your response is exactly part of the problem. You fall back on justifying the gender disparity in terms of the criminal justice system as basically "men deserve it" as all the other people in your position do as well. You aren't stopping to consider why this is the case. And no, I agree with you that women need advocates in the legal system. On the other hand I think the legal system is greatly slanted toward them in a way that is antithetical to our constitution, and directly conflicts with the…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 09:46 PM
6

Your assertion that the justice system is male dominated is pretty ridiculous. While there are more high paid male lawyers, and more male judges, there is a large number of females of both, and women are gaining in the legal profession much faster than men. The legal system is uniquely slanted toward women, either due to feminism or due to the patriarchal status quo that simply is more lenient when it comes to women. Women are less likely to get pulled over, less likely to get searched, less lik…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 08:31 PM
8

The article has good and bad facets. Reading is something that probably should be encouraged. But it should be encouraged from the top down. We have an incredibly gynocentric education regimen, and in a way the article is accepting of that. But in another way it's trying to jam boys into that machine and hope they come out the other side. A better effort would be to examine why and when boys feel and do not feel engaged throughout school. And how to fix that. Instead of trying to find a way to m…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 07:50 PM
1

This is an interesting idea but would be difficult to execute. First is the argument that feminists will say male traits are traditionally the ones society values, while female traits are not valued, which implies that male traits are better. On the other hand, they also do support the idea that these traits are only good because of 'the patriarchy.' Perhaps an interesting infographic would be to take a "sample" of a bunch of feminist articles, and look at the traits applied to men in general, a…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 06:37 PM
2

Then you're in a sort of a tough spot. You probably need legal help. If you're too broke or not confident in an attorney you could try to educate yourself, but that would be an uphill battle. Since you're out of state (I think you said) one place you might go is the District Court (U.S. Federal Court). I know in the Northern District of California they have what is essentially a pro se resource center. A place where pro se litigants can go (ones representing themselves) to get help and have acce…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 06:01 PM
6

While there is likely sex based bias, something important to remember is that the woman here plead guilty for one, which means that the prosecutor probably suggested a more lenient sentence. In contrast, Sandusky plead not guilty. Traditionally, pleas get much sweeter deals than criminals who plead not but are found guilty. The other thing is that Sandusky was an incredibly high profile case, with constant media coverage. This creates much more pressure on the prosecutor and judge to seek a more…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 05:52 PM
10

One of the points of the MRM is as a pushback AGAINST the female supremacy of feminism, and how feminist dominated the media and popular narrative are. Feminism is, at its core, one of the huge issues for MRM because feminism is the source of much of the anti-male ideologies that are put forth. Everything from the "every man is a potential rapist" to Title IX expansion into SMET are all inextricably intertwined with feminism.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 05:34 PM
1

It looks like there's a pretty good resource in Travis County for visitation enforcement. If you have a court order giving you visitation from the divorce, you can actually potentially take them to the sheriff to have them enforced. Here is a resource to have your visitation enforced, potentially: http://www.co.travis.tx.us/dro/enforce_visit.asp They offer several services and options for a parent being denied visitation.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 08:05 AM
4

Calling people who disagree with you a "rape supporter" isn't the best way to demonstrate that you're down for a rational discussion or reasonable debate.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 11:32 PM
7

The thing I don't like about this most of all (and it took me a little while to realize it today) is that these types of statements - "Teach our boys to not rape" - makes the default state of being for men that of a rapist. As if the absence of someone teaching boys that rape is wrong means they will almost certainly grow up to be rapists. Treating men as if they are default rapists is not good for our culture.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 11:05 PM
2

This has to be parody / satire right?
/r/MensRights16/07/12 04:51 PM
5

This seems to be a dubious law for a couple reasons. First, because the obvious: While men are victims of domestic violence, women are rarely arrested and even more rarely prosecuted. Just as an example, in UK where this is appliccable, 4,000 women were prosecuted for domestic violence, while in 2009/2010 there were 74,000 total domestic violence prosecutions. While the law is gender neutral on its face, the administration of the law can not be gender neutral due to the fact that arrests and pro…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 04:39 PM
2

This is only available to the women. Women don't get arrested for domestic violence, so offering the opportunity to inquire about it is essentially a ploy to make it look even handed. As the old saying goes: Man hits woman, the man gets arrested. Woman hits man, the man gets arrested.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 04:13 PM
24

These articles and this new meme of "men aren't man enough" that is going around lately is fucking ridiculous. It's the blatant misandy of our culture coming through, the idea that even feminists are citing these things like, "Why aren't men living up to the ideal that 'the patriarchy' pushes onto them?!" Yet we live in a world where men are treated like shit, like criminals, denied support, ignored in school, and constantly derided by feminists and to a lesser extent, women. A famous feminist (…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 08:34 AM
12

The 1 in 4 statistic comes from a survey that had several questions, one of them was "Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?" This is akin to asking if someone ever had sex with someone they wouldn't have but for the drugs. All that answered affirmatively were counted as rapes. Even though the respondents to the survey did not consider themselves to have been raped. That's where the first 1 in 4 stat came from.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 08:10 AM
5

"Rape Culture" is one of my biggest pet peeves in terms of feminism, and IMO the idea of rape culture, and "schroedinger's rapist" are both sexist and misandric on their face. If feminism can find "misogyny" in preferential treatment of women, I'm not sure how they can fail to find misandry in assuming that all men are rapists. Aside from that, the idea of "rape culture" is based on some false statistics. See, for example, http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html. This paper notes how the…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 03:11 AM
8

Why would this be a surprise? Women are given more attention in school from k-12, and then are more prevalent in college. IQ tests are dubious tests of actual intelligence. But it's not like this should be much of a surprise. The sex that gets more attention in academics does better on the fairly arbitrary IQ tests doesn't seem "surprising."
/r/MensRights15/07/12 06:44 PM
1

It's one of the reasons. Men are more likely to be murder victims, more likely to die on the job, and less likely to seek medical care. These factors together likely lead to the significantly lower lifespan of men, on average. Anyone who claims it's "genetic" is full of shit.
/r/MensRights15/07/12 01:56 AM
1

Actually, I didn't generalize about anyone except MRA/MRM in stating that no one will take her olive branch and throw it back in her face. I implied that it could happen, with feminists, and then I gave an example of it happening. If you can't see the difference between that and generalizing that every feminist will be hostile to anyone simply for not accepting them sooner you need to stop practicing your mental gymnastics so much.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 11:45 PM
11

Welcome. And unlike feminists, no one will take your post and spit on you for making a more egalitarian realization. (see, e.g. http://jezebel.com/5923672/nerd-dads-discover-women-are-people-after-having-baby-girls)
/r/MensRights14/07/12 06:44 PM
5

Dan Savage is pretty great. He really does get it.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 08:59 AM
18

Seems like all the feminist vilifying of MRA's is having the opposite effect they might have hoped! This is really a great Reddit community, Grats to everyone involved and the people who started it.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 04:48 AM
3

Men have no feelings to hurt. We are totally cool with being mischaracterized, taunted, and insulted constantly because we're men, right?
/r/MensRights14/07/12 03:56 AM
8

My response.... wall of texted, but I felt it was important to cover a lot of bases and provide a lot of sources. (also I've been drinking and feeling a bit combative / argumentative.) Doubt I'll get a response: Interestingly, all these discussions of "male privilege" seem to actually omit the privilege males have. Aside from the "apex fallacy" this entire article seems to be based on, it's also a classic example that assumes the conclusion. The assumption is that men are privileged, because of …
/r/MensRights14/07/12 03:25 AM
8

I Think the irony is that men's health care costs are low because men are more likely to avoid seeking care when they truly need it. It's fair to say that women have more health care costs (babiez) but on the other hand, there needs to be more of an effort for men to get health care when they actually need it, which would increase the relative cost for men to women.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 02:41 AM
12

Didn't you know, rape shield laws only apply to girls...
/r/MensRights14/07/12 02:14 AM
6

I appreciate this information, but I would like to point out that the language of the post is inherently sexist. By saying the bus driver "gives oral sex" it is framed in a way that almost paints the bus driver as altruistic. I can't blame the poster from framing it this way because we've been taught that oral sex is a "gift" when men receive it. But let's call this what it is -> Bus driver rapes boy. If this was a story about a male busdriver "giving" oral sex on a girl it would 100% be describ…
/r/MensRights14/07/12 02:13 AM
1

While the court and legal team likely (appropriately) describe it as rape, it's been described in the media primarily as "molsetation." Source: Google news. Do a search for Sandusky Rape -> 21k entries. Do a search for Sandusky molset -> 35k entries. If it were girls, a grand majority would be describing what happened as rape. Another example is doing a search for Girl Molested v. Girl raped. Over twice as many entries for rape as molest. While doing a search for Boy molested v. raped leads to s…
/r/MensRights14/07/12 02:09 AM
3

Ironic, perhaps, but as women's enrollment has increased, the proportional enrollment in science / engineering / comp sci has decreased. In the past 10 years Engineering went from 10.5-6.5% Comp Sci went from 5.0-3.8%, and Phys Sciences / technologies went from .5-.4%. ' That's in the last 10 years. And this is all undergrad info. The biggest offset in terms of gain has primarily been in health care services, which is, surprise, dominated by women.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:58 AM
3

Libertarians aren't particularly reasonable either, based on their refusal to acknowledge negative externalities. Not to mention, they aren't actually a political party. Find me a Libertarian that throws their weight behind a Pigvoian tax system and that will be my candidate for all time.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:19 AM
2

/twox might come to that conclusion, but places like Jezebel and NPR blog where it showed up have had a much more supportive "well duh" reaction to it.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:16 AM
2

The article was written by a journalist, but the conclusions were made by a (social?) scientist. The description of "Stereotype Effect" isn't something the journalist made up, but was the "answer" generated by whoever did the study.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:14 AM
2

the technical education and sills need to do 21st Century jobs. Indeed
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:13 AM
5

Men are not a protected class, so there is no constitutionality issue here.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:11 AM
3

It's hard to say. Science, Computer, Math and Engineering make up around 10% of post secondary education (Source: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012045_5.pdf) Given the current numbers of male to female graduation 60% of all post secondary degrees being female, 40% being male. Based on that, probably around 35% at first based on a quota system only.
/r/MensRights14/07/12 01:07 AM
10

Confirmation Bias is a hell of a ... bias. This seemed like such a bullshit paper when I read about it. It's ironic that an article examining the rate of women in Science comes to such a non-scientific conclusion, and frames it as an answer rather than a theory or hypothesis. I don't see how what they're saying can really be true. Otherwise Female enrollment in medical post grad education, and veterinary post grad education wouldn't be equal to or exceeding men in both, as 3 decades ago female e…
/r/MensRights14/07/12 12:52 AM
26

This is the biggest deal in mens rights probably in the last decade. If this happens there could be serious problems in terms of graduation rates of men in colleges which are already 20% lower for men than women. Math and sciences are currently the only male dominated arenas in university, which not only are outnumbered by other majors, but have smaller enrollments. If this happens, male graduates from university will likely shrink to 35% or less. Do men have a legal advocacy group, can anyone p…
/r/MensRights13/07/12 07:34 PM
19

In fairness, the Chris Brown beating was pretty brutal, while the Mary J Blige beating was much less brutal. There's a certain hipocricy, that it's ok for women to hit their husbands because men are tough and can take it, but if a man puts a bruise on a woman (regardless of seriousness of the bruise) they're instantly villified. There was a recent example here in San Francisco, where the sheriff grabbed his wife's arm (I believe) hard enough to bruise it in an argument they were having. This has…
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:52 PM
2

Yeah this was a good read. The whole dialogue over the "why women still can't have it all" really upset me. It implied that men do and have always had it all, when in fact that's never been the case. To even argue that men have it better than women now is specious. Yes, men tend to work more demanding higher paying jobs, but they also tend to get to spend significantly less time with their families and children on average, and to make it worse it's seen as a non-option for a man to opt out of wo…
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:40 PM
1

The most interesting part about this is that Tosh's joke is taken out of context and everyone is quick to label him as a rape apologist / rape culture... person. When this Silverman joke is actually making fun of rape VICTIMS, not rapists. Not rape culture. The victims are the fucking but of the joke. This is even basically a contradiction of the recent Jezebel article slamming tosh... It's such a joke and such a ridiculous double standard. Fact is the story only got this far because "anonymous …
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:24 PM
7

Probably is implying that if it were little girls, someone would have actually stopped it instead of letting it go on for a decade plus. Also, "molested" is probably in quotes because if it was little girls they would be "raped" but if it's boys they're "molested." At least that's how I took it.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:20 PM
2

I agree. I think the music and the reverb distract from the message.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:17 PM
4

Eh, go to jezebel. read the 20-30something feminist thinking that is on there all the time. They spit on mens rights constantly, in addition to constantly promoting and supporting gender stereotypes that disadvantage men.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:16 PM
3

The video is the primary point... not the 2 paragraph description of the video.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:14 PM
8

It's very difficult to "fight back" in academia because academic freedom is so sacred, and she likely has tenure. The fact that JCU lost a quality, science based faculty, and is keeping a sexist, pseudo-intellectual non-science based faculty is probably bad for the university in general. The fact that this also brings her statements to a larger spotlight is also a way of fighting back. Would have been nice if more male faculty resigned though.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 05:03 PM
5

You know, I really like her work, but I did not like this video at all. I felt like the music and the reverb cheapened the message and it felt off kilter to me.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 04:52 PM
2

That was an awesome article. I really think Dan Savage is a genius. The fact that he's facing down feminism, and calling them on their hypocritical bullshit all throughout the article just increases my respect for him. Again, thanks for posting it.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 04:46 PM
4

Looks like it was at least in by 2010 (the citation cites to the 2010 edition), so it doesn't look like it was added that recently.
/r/MensRights13/07/12 08:09 AM
2

Unfortunately, even the medical journals have a sgnificant "bias" in all of them, either touting circumcision's reduction of HIV, or talking about how it reduces the sensitivity of the penis. This is probably the "best" article I've read in terms of just straight up Data and information, it's also the least biased: http://www.bmj.com/content/335/7631/1206 I also like this one, but it is clearly more biased: http://www.bmj.com/content/335/7631/1180 That isn't to say you can't find plenty of compe…
/r/MensRights12/07/12 11:33 PM
3

IMO it is a woman's "rights" issue, but not for the reason stated. Mothers have almost exclusive dominion over their infant sons, so it's incredibly important that women be educated about this issue, as they are often the ones directly making the decision whether or not to mutilate their child's penis. So, it is a female issue, but calling it a "right" is questionable.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 10:36 PM
6

Yeah it seems like whoever wrote it just wanted an excuse to bring up the wage gap... even though it's an incredibly easily manipulated statistic because it doesn't always take into account raises for things like working longer hours, willingness to relocate, etc... But this is preaching to the choir here I guess. The sad thing is that while it's become much more acceptable for women to be breadwinners (in fact, some would argue necessary for the middle class) it has not become any more acceptab…
/r/MensRights12/07/12 10:07 PM
4

I wonder if they really believe this or if it's just an assumption based on stereotypes that they are blindly following.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 08:43 PM
2

I didn't want to go on too long, but it definitely wasn't easy for me. It probably was 2 years we were together trying to work through this, and she had almost the same attitude "I just want you to take me without checking if I'm interested." Yet, on the other hand I knew from experience, like you, that she didn't mean that because if I didn't adequately "put her in the mood" it never worked out. It took us a LOT of fights to get through, and I had to explain it a LOT of times and in a lot of wa…
/r/MensRights12/07/12 08:37 PM
36

I recently had to work through the same issues with my SO of several years. It's a lot of pressure, and I think sex is an issue that the MRM should really consider as more serious. There's a huge pressure on men to want (and provide) sex all the time. The cultural narrative sort of implies that men are always down to have sex at the drop of a hat, which isn't always the case for a variety of reasons. And to make it worse, if a man isn't in the mood, he's often suspected of infidelity. Then there…
/r/MensRights12/07/12 07:10 PM
4

Of course it's the textbook example of sexist: Discriminatory on the basis of sex. The fact that the whole "idea" is perpetrated by the "rape culture" myth that came from the stupid Ms. survey that counted women as being raped who probably rightfully didn't think they were raped based on 1 bad question just makes it worse.
/r/MensRights12/07/12 04:36 PM
1

I suppose whether or not the rate of men drops would depend on whether a degree is a fungible good: Would men who want to go to school for math, science or engineering be satisfied with a liberal arts degree or social science degee? The further problem would be attrition for graduate studies, though. Because a man who would perhaps want to study science would not be able to (because of a filled male quote) and would have to instead study something more female dominated, but then would not have t…
/r/MensRights12/07/12 12:14 AM
7

Help your Dad find a good family lawyer is the first thing I would do. Avoid attacks against her (i.e. something malicious over facebook) which could be used against you or your dad in a custody determination. Try to document any outright lies / falsifications from her facebook or otherwise. There are some silly things you could do like potentially take out facebook ads or newspaper ads targeted at her, but those would cost money, and like smearing her on facebook could invite un-wanted controve…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 11:12 PM
13

It's not more socially acceptable to be a stay at home dad. That's one of the problems. Feminism says it "supports" this goal, but it does nothing actively to support it, it only supports it in words, not in advocacy or action. And that's reflected in the greater media and cultural outlook. For example: http://jezebel.com/5921642/cold+hearted-ladies-refuse-to-date-unemployed-men A jezebel article about how 75% of women would not date an unemployed man. And then comments all back it up. An exampl…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 09:42 PM
1

Actually it counts for a lot to all people, regardless of how critical they consider themselves. See Daniel Khaneman's research on behavioral economics for a more in depth discussion, or his recent book.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 08:54 PM
1

Perhaps the "spirit" of feminism is about equality not at the expense of men. But the reality of feminism is different. The fact of the matter is, men and women are treated different culturally. A woman attacks a man she is applauded, rationalized and justified (I bet the guy really deserved it). This occurs heavily on feminist blogs and woman centered arenas. A man attacks a woman and he is condemned and socially ostracized (men should never hit a women). Recognition of this difference, this ty…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 08:35 PM
17

In theory, feminism isn't misandric. In practice... well, isn't that the difference between theory and practice? Feminism, by defining itself as "equal rights for women" does not logically imply that men have equal rights to what women have. It implies two things: first, that women are primarily disadvantaged; and second, that in order for their to be equality women have to be raised from their disadvantaged position. Equal rights becomes => Equal rights where women are at a social or institutio…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 07:51 PM
14

This post is needlessly political and only tangentially related to the issue of MRM. Everyone labels anyone who disagrees with them as trolling. It happens on all blogs and message boards ever. It has nothing to do with the "liberal media."
/r/MensRights11/07/12 07:06 PM
3

I know I already replied to your other post, but just because I'm interested in this conversation I will address your 2) - that everyone will benefit from advances made by either side. I don't think this is true at all, and we're living in the evidence that it is not. One thing we have to recognize is in the last 40 years the feminist movement has been extremely successful in making advances. While there have been some residual benefits to men from the feminist movement (some support systems for…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 06:56 PM
4

As long as feminism paints MRA's as "wut about teh menz?" and refers to them in derogatory terms as men with small penises who think they deserve to get more sex and are just a bunch of woman hating trolls, then reconciliation is truly impossible. This article does the same thing. The frequency I see /r/MensRights as an example of the "misogyny" of the MRM is telling. When I come here I see very little attacking women. Most of the attacks occur with respect to feminist principles which actively …
/r/MensRights11/07/12 06:45 PM
7

Are there really examples of men, or even MRA's opposing the feminist issues / ideas of equality? To my knowledge, the only "issues" that MRA's oppose is the "wage gap" and the "second shift." Both are related, and imply that men work less than women while being paid more, and both have been fairly criticized (if not entirely debunked) with studies by economists. The thing is, when you go onto any contemporary feminist blog (e.g. Jezebel) you see a certain parody of itself. A large number of art…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 06:38 PM
17

It was good, until they started insulting MRM and men's issues, ironically. The cognitive shift on the 4th page, going from talking about men's issues, to talking about why men should be condemned for bringing them up in "feminist" spaces on the internet is a staggering amount of cognitive dissonance. They shift from men being the group that can solve the problem to the idea that women are needed to fix it because the MRM is a joke. In fact, the paragraph: "Underscoring this point is the fact th…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 06:03 PM
3

For anyone interested, I did some "napkin math" after reading another article talking about applying Title IX to the hard sciences, math and engineering. Currently men make up ~40% of the whole university graduates. Supposing that 30% of graduates are in these hard sciences which this would apply to (i think this is a generous estimate). Under current numbers women are represented 10-20% in these fields, and men 80-90%. Using that data, we can see that if this was turned into a quota system, whe…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 05:18 PM
23

The ironic thing about this is that you (or I) can say it is "female privilege" but Feminists would (potentially correctly) say this is the "patriarchy" at work and this kind of favoritism is just a subtle form of misogyny. On the other hand, it's a form of misogyny that actively benefits them.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 05:07 PM
9

This actually isn't good for Obama. He doesn't need to pander to women anymore, he already has their vote. Men is the demographic he needs to worry about. Not only is he behind among male voters, but male voters tend to be more "swing" than women, in that they don't overwhelmingly vote for one party. Further, the "male" vote is being completely ignored. While women are treated like a special interest group, despite making up more than 50% of the electorate, nothing is being said to men other tha…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 05:03 PM
2

Very few social scientists are either scientists or statisticians. But I did find it (googling the article title produces a full version) and it isn't particularly rigorous. In fact this might be downright wrong. He assumes that the 40.4% higher death rate in males due to hemorrhage and infection means that 40.4% of the in hospital deaths from hemorrhage and infection is due to circumcision. I suppose that assumption might be true, but then he multiplies it by a couple different factors, one of …
/r/MensRights10/07/12 11:31 PM
2

I was disappointed by this article. I was hoping for an analysis about why feminism is inherently hypocritical in using shaming tactics against men, when they themselves see shaming as a bad thing in general (i.e. against slut "shaming" or fat "shaming", and classifying any criticism of either as "shaming"). Seemed more like a "rah rah don't give up, MRA's!" speech, which isn't necessarily bad but perhaps just not what I wanted when I felt like educating myself.
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:59 PM
1

Title IX's text (in the U.S. Code) is indeed a balanced policy. However, Title IX's implementation and enforcement is primarily through the Department of Education (and in the Code of Federal Regulations). Ultimately the criticism is that in the application of Title IX, the end result has been partially what was intended - increased participation and opportunity to participate in sports by Women - as well as an unintended effect - universities cutting sports programs for men, to meet the quota s…
/r/MensRights10/07/12 09:46 PM
1

I was wondering the same thing. It seems... farcical. Slightly offensive to both men and women, with no real point. As far as I can tell, there is no "penalty" for men parking in "female" spaces, and women are encouraged to park in "male" spaces. So it doesn't seem like there is much "point." I think it's an interesting social commentary though. But I appreciate it when an entity can simultaneously take a position that can offend both sides in an argument, while pointing out some of the ridiculo…
/r/MensRights10/07/12 08:44 PM
7

I want to point out that the numbers don't look made up. The statistics about SIDS seem correct. You seem to be confusing the scope of the paper. The paper is concerned with Neonatal deaths of males due to circumcision. The Statistics I've seen have most SIDS deaths occuring in the Post-natal period (i.e. older than a month old). If there are 2500 SIDS deaths per year, and 88% occur (another estimate I've seen) in the post natal period. That would leave roughly 300 SIDS related neonate deaths. D…
/r/MensRights10/07/12 07:54 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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