TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

HardWorkinMerkin Archive

View 0 posts and 307 comments by HardWorkinMerkin 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)
0

Sounds like none of you were reading for comprehension
/r/MensRights24/02/23 07:49 PM
0

They didn’t need to tell him no. We’ll see is plenty. He asked, then asked again, then sought out another flight attendant to ask again. That was an unusual amount of attention and effort put into changing this kids seat when it mattered to no one but this man. These are red flags. The flight attendants job is to report red flags whether it’s a man or woman doing it. Plain and simple. You want so bad for this to be sexism when your only basis for it being sexism is your want for it to be.
/r/MensRights24/02/23 05:09 PM
1

FFS, did you even read the article? How are you saying I alone am assuming bad intent with no evidence when I wasn’t there. I didn’t report it. The flight attendants were the accusers and the witnesses. They saw red flags and reported it, as they should have. You keep trying to make this about me. Take off your men are always the victim glasses and read the article objectively. As far as what subreddit I’m in, are you saying to be in r/mensrights one has to ignore facts and suspend logic to main…
/r/MensRights24/02/23 04:53 PM
0

Prove it, otherwise that’s nothing more than a weak assumption.
/r/MensRights24/02/23 04:02 PM
1

Why do you keep saying only I know what’s best for the child when I was not there. The flight attendants reported it. Clearly I’m not the only person that saw the red flags. Your entire argument is based around you believing I’m (and apparently the flight attendants) are just misandrist. Have you considered taking me personally out of the equation and actually looking at this situation? Your trying real hard to make this a sexism problem but have nothing more than your weak assumptions curated f…
/r/MensRights24/02/23 04:02 PM
0

The child wasn’t in business class. They were in coach. It’s a child health and welfare trumping an adults feelings situation when you’re willing to disregard a child’s safety in favor of not making an adult feel discriminated against. That’s the scenario of our conversation here. You’re ignoring red flags and only concerning yourself with how this adult felt about the response. This man’s interest was in this child went as far as him asking multiple times and seeking out 2 flight attendant to c…
/r/MensRights24/02/23 07:10 AM
-3

It’s not assuming the worst. It’s recognizing red flags when you see them. Like it or not but the health and welfare of a child will always come before the feelings of adults in a situation like this. This persons actions were incredibly unusual. Ask yourself why you’re willing to ignore that. Edit: Flip the genders. Do you think that should have been ignored?
/r/MensRights24/02/23 05:54 AM
8

Which states?
/r/MensRights24/02/23 04:58 AM
-8

I disagree. The flight attendant did the right thing by bringing attention to it. This is a very strange situation and it is the job of the flight attendant to do just this. There was no benefit to anyone for this person to attempt to give his first class seat to this kid. How did he know the child was an unaccompanied minor? If the kid was actually an unaccompanied minor, why was it such a big deal to him that he would seek out multiple flight attendants to give this kid his seat? In the end he…
/r/MensRights24/02/23 03:57 AM
3

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/118yzpc/most_young_men_are_single_most_young_women_are_not/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
/r/MensRights23/02/23 03:48 PM
10

Actual Article Title: Male Birth Control Trial a “game-changer”, Here’s What You Need too Know. This sounds promising, much better then hormonal BC.
/r/MensRights15/02/23 12:44 AM
1

When did women do a sex strike?
/r/MensRights10/02/23 04:26 PM
1

What states?
/r/MensRights01/02/23 05:46 PM
0

What does this have to do with conversation you’re adding it to? I think you read my comment but skipped the comment I was commenting to.
/r/MensRights21/01/23 06:39 PM
1

What does this have to do with our discussion on Chris Christensen?
/r/MensRights21/01/23 06:36 PM
0

As far as I’m aware, she has never backed up his claim that they were false charges that she recanted on but was unable to. Neither of us have proof that he was arrested without evidence, his claim alone. Facts that we do have, he was accused of child endangerment and he jumped into a pavilion filled with children, knowingly. He planned it. He took the time, according to him, to call those special to him and then head over to a park known to children as the happiest place on earth to jump in fro…
/r/MensRights21/01/23 02:01 PM
-1

Was the article citing his suicide note or was the article quoting her? If your only sources are his suicide note and his estranged daughters statement than you’re statements are full of assumptions and judgments. Please quit making assumptions about me and stick to the case. If what you are saying is valid, you can say it and prove it without making this personal.
/r/MensRights21/01/23 05:02 AM
-1

Where is your information from this case coming from?
/r/MensRights21/01/23 03:52 AM
1

I didn’t say it was as bad. That wasn’t a comparative statement. I added to a meaningless reductive statement.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 07:45 PM
16

The average dick is 5 inches. You’re a lot closer to average than all the dicks you’re seeing in porn.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 04:18 PM
1

Chris Christensen committed suicide by jumping into a plaza filled with children after being charged with child endangerment. Choose a better martyr.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 04:02 PM
1

Source?
/r/MensRights20/01/23 03:55 PM
1

That wasn’t a comparative statement. That was adding to a reductive statement. I don’t think the two are comparative but I also see how meaningless reductive statements are.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 03:27 PM
2

The point is, they weren’t home just doing dishes. The experiences may not be comparable but the comment about women was reductive and meaningless.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 03:25 PM
1

Welcome sugartits
/r/MensRights20/01/23 03:22 PM
-3

Oh you again Greg. Last time all you did was manage to call me names. Do you want to go through all that again or try actually discussing a topic. Did women not take on these jobs while also raising their children?
/r/MensRights20/01/23 05:14 AM
-6

I see you gave it your all with that response. Great work!
/r/MensRights20/01/23 04:22 AM
-2

I’m curious how these would stand up during time of war. In Germany it appears to have been put on tax payers. Edit: after scrolling those, it doesn’t sound like it would hold up at all during a time of war.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 02:58 AM
2

Any source on these men being forced to pay child support for these kids? I’m assuming it’s different country to country but I’m not finding anything except US men did not have to pay child support for the children they left behind so the cost fell on tax payers.
/r/MensRights20/01/23 12:37 AM
-3

Commonly, those women would be shunned from society and their families, as would those children. It fell on tax payers. Men and women fucked, the children were the victims. Edit: https://amp.dw.com/en/sleeping-with-the-enemy/a-1569141 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_children
/r/MensRights20/01/23 12:08 AM
7

Agreed
/r/MensRights19/01/23 10:36 PM
-23

Men go to war, fuck women, and your saying this is how feminist treat us. Sounds like men and women are playing a role.
/r/MensRights19/01/23 10:04 PM
-42

While also still raising the children. War sucks for everyone.
/r/MensRights19/01/23 10:03 PM
4

This isn’t the way. Change minds through conversation, not intimidation.
/r/MensRights19/01/23 06:51 PM
-5

🏆
/r/MensRights18/01/23 03:33 AM
1

However you feel about me is irrelevant. Daily mail is still trash and you are here arguing for the continued spread of the source of trash. What does that say about you? Historically, the people pushing for the spread of false information are the baddies. Keep that in mind.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 07:37 PM
1

Are you saying a source with a know track record of being 40% factual can be redeemed by this story alone?
/r/MensRights17/01/23 04:34 PM
0

Oh shit, you get dumber. I wasn’t expecting that. I guess I should have though Edit: Bye njjb-1111 Commenting while simultaneously blocking making makes you a coward. Also, you’re wrong. No one here proved me wrong. A single story does not make an unreliable source reliable.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 04:32 PM
0

Dumbest comment in this thread. Congrats to you 🏆
/r/MensRights17/01/23 03:40 PM
1

The story doesn’t validate the source. Why would I attack the message when the messenger is the source of fault? I don’t have to have counter evidence to prove when we already know the source is faulty.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 03:37 PM
1

Well this is dumb. Misinformation is fine as long as the story has value here? The subject doesn’t give the source validation. Note that.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 03:35 PM
0

It is, and I made it clear what he was asking does not change the fact that OP’s source is consistently factually unreliable.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 04:26 AM
1

His exact words, “…you didn’t provide any evidence that the story in question, or the news source itself is unreliable.”
/r/MensRights17/01/23 04:12 AM
-5

No. No need to put words in my mouth. I would agree that this story most likely contains aspects of misinformation.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 01:24 AM
2

You don’t have to care about my track record at all to feel that averaging 40% on facts makes the daily mail unreliable.
/r/MensRights17/01/23 01:23 AM
2

I did provide evidence the source is unreliable. It was the first comment of mine you responded to.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 09:55 PM
1

I disagree. It does make it worthless because it’s spreading a source of known misinformation and it’s done knowing most will not vet the sources they are reading. OP could have posted from a more valid source but slipping these in every so often gives the impression that they are considered more valid than they should be making it easier to spread their misinformation.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 09:27 PM
-6

No it’s not. Venn Diagram it.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 09:06 PM
-1

No you’re a fucking arsehole Greg. You’re pushing for the spread of a known source for misinformation. Edit: I always appreciate the accounts who respond to me while simultaneously blocking me. You put your cowardice right out there. And you double down by doing it in support of spreading a known source if misinformation. So much here to pat yourself on the back for u/shitpostradamus.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 09:05 PM
-7

No. It’s logic.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:59 PM
1

We’d all be better off getting our information from vetted sources as opposed to known sources of misinformation that shouldn’t be promoted anywhere.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:51 PM
-5

How about you fuck off Greg. Grow up and learn to vet your sources.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:47 PM
2

It does sound a lot like the others. We should be viewing all the articles we see posted critically. Also 40%
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:46 PM
1

Not from this source, and thanks.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:45 PM
2

I read it. Them averaging 40% factual devalues everything they put out, not their name alone.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:44 PM
-16

Being able to find the same information with other sources doesn’t change the fact they are known to average 40% when it comes to facts.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:05 PM
-41

It’s not generalizing to say that the source is known and proven to be a poor source for factual information therefore this article should be expected to be a poor source for factual information.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 08:03 PM
-64

That doesn’t change this being a poor source. Edit: Spreading misinformation isn’t how you solve lack of information.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 07:25 PM
-23

It tells me, without reading the story, that the source of this story isn’t reliable. Averaging around 40% factual makes these posts worthless. Unfortunately, in this sub, they’ll still be upvoted and circlejerked without question.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 07:17 PM
-2

He’s not in jail for speaking against the narrative.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 06:42 PM
-84

Some bias? https://www.thefactual.com/blog/is-the-daily-mail-reliable/ The daily mail is trash but much loved in this sub.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 06:36 PM
0

The points you’re providing from the book goes against the court documents and her own words. We don’t know that his DNA under her fingernails would have been thrown out. The lab technicians would not have played a role. They did not find someone else’s DNA in her panties. She asked that he punished and was shocked when she learned of his sentencing. The EMT’s reported she was unresponsive. The court report says dumpster. The court report and her statements and better places to go for facts.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 10:03 AM
3

You should read the actual court documents. “Collateral Damage” sounds like a load of misinformation. There were witnesses, she was unconscious, it wasn’t a shed but it was a dumpster, her DNA was found under his fingernails, and she did not ask that he serve no time. I’m not even gonna bother looking into the other claims.
/r/MensRights16/01/23 05:45 AM
0

You spend more time calling me names than trying to prove your points valid. Instead of trying to push me out of this sub, why not just prove me wrong.
/r/MensRights05/01/23 09:24 PM
0

Calling me names doesn’t prove your point. Where did you see that she’s contributed ‘nil’ to the marital assets?
/r/MensRights05/01/23 09:21 PM
0

Hold both your arms out in front of you. If one is drooping, seek medical care.
/r/MensRights05/01/23 04:36 PM
1

You made a valid point here, good work. LMAO
/r/MensRights05/01/23 04:34 PM
0

She deserves half the marital assets. He made poor decisions. Where is your proof she a gold digging bitch, other than her having a vagina? Which, contrary to popular belief in this sub, doesn’t equal gold digging bitch.
/r/MensRights05/01/23 04:33 PM
1

It’s no more biased than OP’s article and it does discuss the shares being sold. The problem is the way he set the money up in an offshore account. He can’t prove it it either way and that was his own doing. Her inheritance is outside the marriage. The divorce includes their split marital assets. Why would she not deserve half of their jointly gained assets? Flipping the script is doing nothing more than adding assumptions and adds nothing to this discussion. Leaving the script as is, given the …
/r/MensRights05/01/23 04:29 PM
-12

Given what you’ve read in the articles, why do you believe the judgement for her was unreasonable?
/r/MensRights05/01/23 05:05 AM
-11

It says it’s part of the marital estate leading me to believe it was accrued during their marriage. It is less than half, probably due to her getting the house.
/r/MensRights05/01/23 01:16 AM
-13

This link fleshes out the story a bit better https://www.forbes.com/sites/jayadkisson/2022/07/14/settlor-of-belize-trust-who-would-not-turn-over-cboe-stock-to-ex-wife-sent-to-jail-in-marriage-of-harnack/amp/
/r/MensRights04/01/23 09:59 PM
-2

Still nothing valid to add, huh.
/r/MensRights03/01/23 05:08 PM
1

It’s very telling that your focus is still on taking me down personally and not my statement. You took my statement, dismissed it, and now are telling me I’ve dismissed a huge topic. You’ve yet to put an ounce of effort into looking into the topic yourself. Instead of having this conversation and moving it for forward in good faith you ended with shifting to disparities in education.
/r/MensRights03/01/23 04:35 PM
-2

You’re not very good at paraphrasing. You’ve also made it very clear that you either don’t know or don’t care about men’s place in medical science. Put a little effort into your own cause.
/r/MensRights03/01/23 03:53 PM
0

You’re still putting more effort into labeling me than considering the words I’m saying. Science has a long history of using men as default research subjects, meaning medical science was developed around the male body. Men’s bodies are less complicated and tend to function closely to one another where female hormones mean women’s bodies vary more even amongst each other. It’s only been in recent years that science is putting together that a lot of medical interventions don’t function the same in…
/r/MensRights03/01/23 03:46 PM
-1

So what your saying is you’re not bright enough to consider or debate my statement so I must be a feminist? LMAO, but seriously, people like you in this sub make me sad.
/r/MensRights03/01/23 02:54 PM
-19

Easily, by looking both at the history of the field of medicine and complexity of the female body.
/r/MensRights03/01/23 07:38 AM
-1

More invalid information from you. Why bother?
/r/MensRights01/01/23 06:50 PM
-1

Thanks, I’m a very pleasant person 😀 But no, I will not not take the advice of older men who consider anecdotes facts, even less so the ones who Push anecdotes as facts. Also, a vasectomy is not a serious risk to your health. The more bullshit that’s peddled here the less likely anyone will ever take anyone in this sub seriously.
/r/MensRights01/01/23 06:46 PM
-1

Spreading info knowing it’s completely anecdotal is dooming this sub
/r/MensRights01/01/23 05:30 PM
0

Source on the autoimmune disorders being caused by a vasectomy Edit: I’m also not finding anything that validates the 15% claim.
/r/MensRights01/01/23 05:03 PM
0

Source?
/r/MensRights01/01/23 04:54 PM
0

Source?
/r/MensRights01/01/23 04:51 PM
1

It says it in your very own post here. First page under note from the moderator, after the link. It says rule 1., followed by if you have questions…If you look up rule 1 it says no derailing. The moderator also says in thread that it’s why you’ve been blocked. You were told.
/r/MensRights31/12/22 06:51 PM
8

Definitely not easier. Tubal ligation is also more expensive and less reliable
/r/MensRights31/12/22 06:43 PM
1

Derailing
/r/MensRights31/12/22 06:38 PM
0

The moderator said your ban was for continually detailing the conversation, not this portion of the thread alone, which it appears you were intentionally doing.
/r/MensRights31/12/22 06:29 PM
33

I doubt these are the same bitches. The sub is r/childfree and we don’t get to see what led up to this point in the conversation.
/r/MensRights31/12/22 05:52 PM
0

And the Tate and Heard comments that you made? What did they have to do with the thread and why did you leave them out of this post?
/r/MensRights31/12/22 05:40 PM
1

I hate seeing posts like this. You went over there to stir shit so you can come over here and act like the victim. You intentionally left some of your comments out of this post. It’s disingenuous as fuck and only makes this sub look bad. They amount of posts in this sub with no other value than to be divisive is insane.
/r/MensRights31/12/22 05:31 PM
1

🏆
/r/MensRights31/12/22 05:42 AM
1

That’s surprising reasoning to hear, and see upvoted, given Epstein’s known history.
/r/MensRights30/12/22 05:50 AM
0

Bye sweet cheeks
/r/MensRights28/12/22 08:00 AM
0

You won’t get an apology for me calling you a liar. You’ve spent hours calling me whatever lame insult you could come up with to avoid acknowledging you were a dick from the start when I asked, “where are you getting your information”. Because you had no quality response, you went to name calling. If you don’t like being called names, don’t call names. Am I any of the names you called me? Not to a rational person but I’m not picking one to get hung up on because that would be deflecting.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 07:53 AM
0

You’re acknowledging it, it being where I said it was wrong, while also saying I can’t admit it. Do you hear yourself? And you think I’m stupid? Are you a moron?
/r/MensRights28/12/22 07:27 AM
1

So your going to continue to ignore where I said Reddit is showing us different things? That would make you a liar. Why don’t you head over there? You’re everything you say they are, femtard.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 06:59 AM
0

You want me to apologize for calling you a liar, then you lie. I’m gonna say no, bitch
/r/MensRights28/12/22 06:36 AM
0

So not for any of the names you called me from the get go, before the deleted comment even came up? You’ve been a dick from the start. Quit patting yourself on the back like you’re some good guy here. This is all been deflection from the fact your source is no fucking source. You’re the pathetic fucktard, femtroll, bitch, and/or whatever lame slur you feel like tacking in your next bullshit comment.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 04:19 AM
0

“I apologize for calling you names”…followed by bitch and femtard. That’s a fine example of the term disingenuous. If you’re even a percent in real life the person you are online, everyone who knows you thinks your a fucking idiot.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 03:45 AM
0

You didn’t call me a liar but you called me plenty of shit and I don’t hear you apologizing now that you know I wasn’t lying. You’re still full of shit though, as are most your comments. The comment showing deleted in my thread doesn’t change that. You spout bullshit here in your safe space and cry femtard and bitch if your called out. Try that in the world, good luck.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 03:21 AM
0

I was right as well. Can you admit that bitch? You seem to be glossing over where I said we’re being show different things. Was I wrong bitch? Why don’t you go away? Your the user treating assumptions as fact, demeaning the value of this sub.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 03:00 AM
0

Call me whatever you want. It doesn’t change my day. Everything you say is assumption after assumption. There’s no value there.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 02:42 AM
0

FFS. You posted it as I was typing. You saw mine. I’m not making shit up. So we’re being shown different things by Reddit. That aside, your feelings on this case are not factual information. The NY Times posting tells us nothing. Speaking as if you have some authority on this situation when all you’ve got is his daughters comments and his suicide note is embarrassing.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 02:34 AM
0

Please screen shot it. My comment thread shows deleted.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 02:16 AM
0

So you’re a liar and an idiot. We can all see the place holder that says “deleted” where your lame comment was. You’re probably going to delete most of this as well because you appear to be a disingenuous fuck. No one outside this sub will ever take you serious. I’ll sleep well knowing that.
/r/MensRights28/12/22 02:03 AM
0

That..that is your factual information and you’re calling me stupid? You really should have left it with the “your mum” comment that you deleted earlier. Are you a child? FFS. You have to be one of the dumbest people on the internet today.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 11:47 PM
2

Happy to help and glad to hear you looked into it more. Too many users in this sub want us all to take everything posted on here at face value and then run with our feelings on it without question.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 06:59 PM
2

I asked because from the comments, it sounds like more information has come out. I commented on child endangerment charges because listed in his charges are child endangerment and battery. Same as you, I’m not a legal expert but I am curious if more Information has come out on this. At one point I saw a statement from his daughter but that’s been it.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 04:42 PM
-17

I’m not asking about his surroundings. I’m asking the commentator if they have gotten more information than the suicide note. Edit: I see I should have ran with feeling over looking for facts.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 04:19 PM
-18

Your statement has nothing to do with my question.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 03:53 PM
-6

Of course not, and yet they were. Why are you bothered by my asking where the OG commenter is getting their information?
/r/MensRights27/12/22 03:32 PM
1

Thank you. Edit. After reading that, I don’t see where it says where he landed. Was that another comment or article?
/r/MensRights27/12/22 03:24 PM
0

Where are you getting your information? Also, child endangerment charges wouldn’t just be dropped by her walking back on anything.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 03:03 PM
-7

That’s pretty much what I expected.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 02:41 PM
5

An angry person.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 02:33 PM
-24

Where are you getting your information?
/r/MensRights27/12/22 02:33 PM
-3

Where are you getting the information that only one person happened to walk by and saw him? As far as I know that’s false. He jumped into the pavilion in front of many families during one of the busiest times possible.
/r/MensRights27/12/22 02:31 PM
1

I just put both in search and got nothing no child abuse for either.
/r/MensRights20/12/22 11:38 PM
9

Men’s rights! Where do we sign up for the march on this?
/r/MensRights15/12/22 02:14 PM
20

People like validation. All genders. It’s a human thing.
/r/MensRights13/12/22 06:40 PM
2

You’re right. I am making an assumption as well. I apologize for overreacting. It’s easy to forget how different our backgrounds and experiences can be sometimes. It may be common for kids to babysit at 10 where you’re from. Your dad may have had specific experiences that led him to tell you this. I’m not a troll but I can see why you would take what I said that way. Again, sorry.
/r/MensRights11/12/22 09:01 PM
1

This is not even your words. It’s an assumption on your dads part. Few people will let a 10 year old babysit their kids. It’s gross that he made you feel like it was because you’re male. It’s also a bit disingenuous that you’re equating my response here to not believing someone saying they’ve been falsely accused. If anyone has been bullying its been you attempting to bully me out of this subreddit. Twice you’ve attempted to make me feel like I don’t belong here. You can fuck off with that.
/r/MensRights11/12/22 08:28 PM
1

Why is that? Also, why do you think you should have any say over who comments in this subreddit or how they speak?
/r/MensRights11/12/22 07:17 PM
1

I think you’re missing the big picture here. Neither your dad or you have any proof that that’s why you weren’t chosen to babysit. Your dad put into your head that it’s because you’re seen as a possible molester. That’s toxic.
/r/MensRights11/12/22 06:45 PM
0

So, none?
/r/MensRights11/12/22 04:53 PM
0

Your dad is toxic. Plain and simple. Not one of those parents told your dad that.
/r/MensRights11/12/22 04:48 PM
1

Nice. It’s been removed.
/r/MensRights10/12/22 07:33 PM
-1

The post content has been removed
/r/MensRights10/12/22 07:33 PM
-4

Comments like this don’t help https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zhmsr1/article_advises_women_on_how_to_baby_trap_a_man/iznx7od/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
/r/MensRights10/12/22 05:37 PM
-7

From the responses you got, it sounds like your post contained much more than a simple question. Looks like you’re just rage baiting both sides.
/r/MensRights10/12/22 05:30 PM
2

Why not use this sub to start marches?
/r/MensRights10/12/22 04:22 PM
0

🏆
/r/MensRights10/12/22 03:38 PM
1

Lol! I lose no sleep over points lost in this sub. I’m not willing to fall in line for them. I see you jump out when you realize you’re wrong. It would have been easier for you to have just typed, I’m wrong.
/r/MensRights10/12/22 02:44 AM
-7

Damn dude, sorry to hear that. Also, I have no idea what you said 20 minutes ago. You might be mixing me up with someone you were talking to.
/r/MensRights09/12/22 06:04 PM
-5

Have you?
/r/MensRights09/12/22 04:48 PM
0

Nothing you’ve said proves you’re correct. Your argument is that it should be obvious. You’ve proven your own argument incorrect when complaining that others are seeing the same thing I am. Arguing it’s not obvious while complaining that others are seeing it is foolish. https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/zf11kf/times_2022_person_of_the_year/iz9xe3h/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
/r/MensRights09/12/22 02:54 PM
1

Are soldiers only soldiers when in uniform?
/r/MensRights08/12/22 03:46 PM
0

Are soldiers only soldiers when they’re in uniform?
/r/MensRights08/12/22 03:44 PM
3

Fuck Putin
/r/MensRights08/12/22 03:42 PM
1

Or it’s many soldiers and everyone is just bitching because they’re not in uniform.
/r/MensRights08/12/22 02:52 PM
0

Well, then yeah. It is a person of the year cover. We can all assume the intent of the artist would be to paint him in a positive light. I agree that adding soldiers in uniform would have been a thoughtful addition. I guess I can speak for the artist but only as much to say, you and the artist see him in a different light.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 09:41 PM
-4

I’m not sure why you think I’m going to be able to explain to you why the artist made the choices they did.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 09:02 PM
-5

I agree. I can’t speak for the artist. Combat or invoking thoughts about combat doesn’t appear to be part the story they were trying to tell. This piece appears to be a festival of success, showing a wide range of Ukrainians with the possibility of any of them having been soldiers.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 07:28 PM
1

Lol, no but beer gut is pretty common.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 07:18 PM
-18

I realize everyone is gonna see this differently but I think every person in that picture could potentially be a soldiers and that’s kind of the point of it.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 05:27 PM
1

He spent time planning what he was doing. He could have jumped off that building anywhere else. You’re right he did have a history there and knew it well. He knew exactly where he was jumping and that it would traumatize many. He didn’t have to say the words to make his actions known. His actions were blatantly deliberate.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 03:36 PM
2

Interesting. That’s what I would say about a person who would purposely jump in front of children.
/r/MensRights07/12/22 03:30 PM
2

The comments in general are pretty nasty all the way around.
/r/MensRights06/12/22 08:24 PM
4

We do know that he did it intentionally. I agree that saying someone should hide is a shitty response, I also didn’t say that. Him being dead doesn’t change that fact that his doing it purposefully in front of children was trauma he chose to inflict.
/r/MensRights06/12/22 07:55 PM
-11

He did knowingly jump directly into the pavilion filled with families and children. He could have jumped off that building anywhere else. He chose to traumatize people.
/r/MensRights06/12/22 05:59 PM
1

I don’t see it as a matter of “following peers and and the status quo”. Not only have the parties changed over the years but more women have become educated and we’ve seen a decline in religion.
/r/MensRights01/12/22 03:02 PM
2

It appears they were implying exactly what you are saying but as far as I know the conversation was as speaking on the equation, not on who custody is awarded to. If the comment is based on the assumption that the equation itself is gendered then my response is the same. I’m not a family law expert and google would be a better place to find the answer to those questions.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 09:02 PM
2

I think we can all agree on the amount being outrageous but this is the lifestyle they chose for these kids. If either want it maintained, they should both be providing. I took you saying, “even if she has the kids nearly 100% of the time, I’m not sure why he should pay support at all, given the discrepancy in wealth”, as suggesting he should be taken out of the equation. I’m not arguing that either way. I’m saying, him making less doesn’t take him out of the equation.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 08:31 PM
2

I was speaking directly on the equation. Him making less doesn’t take him out of the equation. The equation is not gendered. The commenter implied more.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 08:23 PM
0

The information I provided did not include my opinion. The information I provided also shouldn’t require a law degree to provide on the internet. I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove here other than you don’t like what I am saying.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 07:20 PM
-3

I’m not a family law expert. Google would be able to provide you better answers to your questions than I would.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 06:10 PM
27

According to him, she has the children at least 80% of the time.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 04:16 PM
0

In California, child support is based off a formula that considers income and percent of time the parents have the child. Per Kanye, she has them at least 80% of the time. Her making more doesn’t take him out of the equation. Gender doesn’t change any of this.
/r/MensRights30/11/22 04:14 PM
-1

Or you’re making shit up because you like to stir the pot.
/r/MensRights25/11/22 05:51 AM
0

I don’t see that in your post. Can you link it?
/r/MensRights25/11/22 05:43 AM
0

I didn’t see any personal attacks https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/z43q3n/cmv_the_claim_that_false_accusations_of_sex/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
/r/MensRights25/11/22 05:39 AM
-36

It’s apparent from the comments, very few in this sub read the articles they are commenting on and far to many of the few that do read are very comfortable being disingenuous about what they’ve read. It’s sad to see.
/r/MensRights18/11/22 11:39 PM
1

“The school told the BBC a number of its pupils had been "sanctioned" after an investigation following an incident during a speech by Nigel Farage. The former politician told the BBC the atmosphere was "riotous". The college said it had apologised "unreservedly" for the "totally unacceptable" behaviour. Claims made anonymously on social media, by a person who said they were a parent of one of the girls who attended the speech last week, said the students were also booed at the boys' public schoo…
/r/MensRights18/11/22 10:52 PM
0

I was never at a point of not buying because I had no idea what you were trying to say. Instead of clarifying, any of those 4 times, you chose to insult and make lame excuses. You’ve had hours now to explain and still haven’t bothered. Why? Because there’s no logic to what you were trying to say.
/r/MensRights16/11/22 07:10 AM
0

I’ve never seen someone put this much effort into avoiding clarifying their own statements. You must be really embarrassed by what you wrote. It was all truly nonsense, as are your recovery attempts. Moving on.
/r/MensRights16/11/22 06:27 AM
0

I never asked you to chase anything. I asked to you to clarify your own words. You’ve responded how many times now? You’ve yet to make even the smallest attempt. It should have been pretty simple for you but we both know why it’s not. You spouted nonsense and ran, and you’re still running.
/r/MensRights16/11/22 04:36 AM
0

Then you should have no problem debating me but we both know, what you meant to say is you don’t debate. You’re unable to. You just call names. Nothing to be patting yourself on the back for.
/r/MensRights16/11/22 03:58 AM
0

You’re running from your own words and calling it, setting healthy boundaries. All I asked for was clarification and you got scared. Why bother even throwing shit like that out if you can’t explain it? You are time wasted.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 11:33 PM
-1

I see you’re also unable to make to converse or make a valid argument so you attempt personal insults as well. Some of you truly make the future look bleak.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 11:18 PM
-1

Bullshit! You are completely unable to explain your own reasoning? Probably because it doesn’t make any sense. Calling me dense when it doesn’t even make any sense to you is a cherry on top. FFS
/r/MensRights15/11/22 10:50 PM
0

How are you equating not wanting children with having low standards? I’m also confused by women having children being able to achieve a high level of performance compared to a woman without.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 10:41 PM
-5

I’m not denying either. Your attempt to tear me down personally is only showing your weaknesses. Are you truly unable to hold a conversation or debate on the matter?
/r/MensRights15/11/22 10:31 PM
1

How are either of those two groups able to know? Happiness is relative. It’s very easy to be pleased with what you have when you have no idea what you are missing. Both groups of women are missing something the other one has. Which is better and who is happier really comes down to, who has what they want. If a woman doesn’t want kids, who’s to say that having them would have made her happier?
/r/MensRights15/11/22 10:29 PM
-4

Quite happy actually 😀
/r/MensRights15/11/22 10:20 PM
5

I’ve got an even better one. “Couple starts successful business together”. She’s not claiming to make all the money. Her claim is, she found an idea online, he was into it, it’s worked out for them both.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 10:19 PM
-8

That group doesn’t exist. Women, even around the same age, are not a hive mind. I easily know a dozen over 45 that do not cry when they see babies and are quite pleased with their choices.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 09:50 PM
2

https://www.world-today-news.com/leiden-university-painting-removed-very-narrow-says-creator/
/r/MensRights15/11/22 09:30 PM
-5

Lol, exactly. You’re on an echo chamber being to to go to another echo chamber to get the view of people in general. This sub is as ridiculous as it is entertaining.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 09:17 PM
0

Same for women. If this woman in the article hadn’t, we probably wouldn’t be hearing her side at all.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 08:34 PM
14

Your explanation of the article is incorrect. She reported to her superior who disregarded her claims, attempted to cover it up, then threatened her legally if she continued reporting the stalking. He’s now being charged with tampering as well as moral and psychological violence, which is valid. What you call him attempting to diffuse the situation was nothing more that him attempting to shut her down. This post is pretty disingenuous OP.
/r/MensRights15/11/22 08:32 PM
2

TY
/r/MensRights15/11/22 07:47 PM
2

Can you provide a link to the studies showing circumcising linked to aggression, psychological issue, and babies remembering?
/r/MensRights15/11/22 07:12 PM
1

If you weren’t wearing a condom she could be pregnant whether you came in her or not. Sperm can be in precum. If she’s pregnant, this isn’t something she did to you. You both made a poor choice.
/r/MensRights14/11/22 09:13 PM
23

2 hours ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/yv1e1b/tired_of_white_cis_men_campus_event_postponed_due/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
/r/MensRights14/11/22 05:36 PM
1

LMAO!
/r/MensRights14/11/22 06:05 AM
1

Of course they can, nothing is hidden. Take your poor reading comprehension for example, clear as day.
/r/MensRights14/11/22 05:29 AM
-7

Agreed. I think it’s impossible to not have some of it. What has surprised me is how many upvotes it gets and that those that claim they are here for equality don’t call it out.
/r/MensRights13/11/22 07:56 PM
-1

I think the false narrative is that there is a false feminist narrative that only men kill babies, much less that it has been successful enough to be accepted widespread. I myself have never heard anything remotely close to this so I decided to to do a search after reading your comment and can’t find anything that supports your claim.
/r/MensRights12/11/22 07:03 AM
-4

You really made a post for r/mensrights to discuss the the best way to insult single women? Wasn’t this circlejerked like 2 days ago? This sub is fucking joke.
/r/MensRights12/11/22 12:35 AM
-1

I think this would be the time and the place to discuss this case and the Duluth model. Can you tell me why it wouldn’t be?
/r/MensRights11/11/22 11:40 PM
1

Didn’t insinuate that it was.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 10:30 PM
0

Just to be clear, you think he was considered a suspect because of the Duluth method and that without the Duluth method, he would not have been?
/r/MensRights11/11/22 10:01 PM
1

You’re not really looking to create an echo chamber are you? If it’s hurts you so much to see that people that don’t agree with everything you want them to exist, the internet might be too much for you.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 09:56 PM
-2

Can you explain exactly how the Duluth model played out in this case?
/r/MensRights11/11/22 09:02 PM
-2

Wrong sub for a thoughtful discussion.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 08:58 PM
2

Yes. Also, he was checked by a paramedic before being given over for questioning. He was awake, alert, responding, and walking. His wounds were 72 hours old at the point they were found. He was not actively bleeding. He did not have raccoon eyes. He was found with the body of his girlfriend who had been decaying for days.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 05:17 PM
-8

Check out the facts on this case.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 04:44 PM
-10

It really is. It has nothing to do with mens rights. It would be more accurately name r/bashwomen.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 04:23 PM
-6

Him? This is the mens rights case you all are trying to make this into. It’s actually embarrassing that it’s trying to be pushed as one.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 04:03 PM
-4

Being next to one that’s been dead for a few days, even more so.
/r/MensRights11/11/22 04:01 PM
19

This discussion is already happening in this sub if anyone is interested https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/yrjsr8/man_accused_of_killing_his_girlfriend_is/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
/r/MensRights11/11/22 05:48 AM
12

They found this poor guy, though bloody and bruised, able to walk and talk. His girlfriends body was on the couch and she had been deceased for a couple days. It’s understandable that he would be the first person in question but still a bit shocking that the bullet wounds didn’t stand out more.
/r/MensRights10/11/22 10:27 PM
15

There’s a few posts going around on this today. I saw one that showed the initial picture of him. His left eye was swollen and it looks like there were scratches on his nose that I believe were bullet holes but he didn’t have the full raccoon eyes like one would expect.
/r/MensRights10/11/22 09:49 PM
3

The bullet holes were from up to 72 hours prior. He was awake, alert, and had no active bleeding when they were found. He was checked and cleared by a medic before being handed over for questioning.
/r/MensRights10/11/22 09:35 PM
5

Actual articles title, “Celebrate Womens suffrage but don’t whitewash it’s racism.”
/r/MensRights09/11/22 04:10 AM
24

A woman can get pregnant from precum. The pull out method is a very weak form of birth control.
/r/MensRights08/11/22 09:47 PM
1

The article doesn’t say anything about any of the 3 skipping ranks. Where is that information coming from?
/r/MensRights07/11/22 05:29 PM
1

Correct, which I why in my initial comment I asked OP where the information they are providing is coming from.
/r/MensRights07/11/22 04:46 PM
0

Sure but there’s nothing in the article that says that’s the case for any of these 3.
/r/MensRights07/11/22 03:56 PM
0

2 women and 1 man. It doesn’t say anything about them not being eligible for promotion. Where is that information coming from?
/r/MensRights07/11/22 03:43 PM
-5

You got me. It benefits no one.
/r/MensRights04/11/22 04:55 PM
-7

Welcome to r/mensrights. Most the post you’ll see here are only meant to divide. The mods allow blatant propaganda, harassment, and hate. This sub is truly worthless.
/r/MensRights04/11/22 04:07 PM
-1

Have you considered doing your own research?
/r/MensRights03/11/22 07:53 PM
-1

This post is incredibly inaccurate. Not a single article states that every person killed or wounded was a boy because that’s not true. She didn’t even have a son. 5 kids were shot, 3 boys and 2 girls. She was insane and had a noted problem with men but this excerpt is propaganda.
/r/MensRights03/11/22 04:31 PM
-3

This post still proves nothing. Better proof would be posting that same violence against men and then showing that it does not get removed.
/r/MensRights02/11/22 05:50 PM
-2

This does not prove that. Wouldn’t a rational recourse be turning it in and getting them banned?
/r/MensRights02/11/22 05:20 PM
-2

Hey guys look…I posted something that would get me banned and I got banned. Mens rights! What is the point of this?
/r/MensRights02/11/22 05:08 PM
1

Can you link the source? I tried looking it up but all I’m finding is that your source is considered propaganda and possibly banned.
/r/MensRights01/11/22 05:42 PM
4

Can you link the source? I tried looking it up but all I’m finding is that your source is considered propaganda and possibly banned.
/r/MensRights01/11/22 05:34 PM
0

There are men and women who say this. Polyamory is becoming more common.
/r/MensRights31/10/22 05:13 PM
10

Have you attempted reposting it with the content needed to be following the rules? It sounds like you just need to add a summary.
/r/MensRights28/10/22 03:21 PM
1

I see you’re unable to explain yourself. I also see that every time I make a comment in this sub you plan to jump in and attempt another failed gotcha. You’re terrible at this. Like I said last time, you are just a poor debater so you shift to harassing. Learn when to walk away.
/r/MensRights26/10/22 08:38 PM
0

No. I did not suggest that. This would be another fallacy on your part. You’ve been trying for 10 days now. Learn when to walk away.
/r/MensRights26/10/22 02:11 PM
3

If the roles were reversed we would see the same thing. We already know this. We also know that there would be little to no backlash in either because everyone expects there to always be some of these types in the comment sections.
/r/MensRights25/10/22 02:07 PM
1

I said “absolutely can be”. It can be both. You’re calling for people to upvote Dailymail, you’re drowning in the kool aid.
/r/MensRights25/10/22 12:46 AM
1

Both of those statements are false. Propaganda can absolutely be purposefully blatant. They are equally concerning.
/r/MensRights24/10/22 11:13 PM
0

So you need other users to come in and save this for you? FFS dude.
/r/MensRights23/10/22 04:47 PM
0

It was about your harassment of net. Remember? You tried to change it to fit your criteria because you feel you have more leverage in you force me to debate nets side of their arguments. You said if I wasn’t willing to do that then there was no point in continuing. I see no point in doing that, as I’ve said for days now, because that was never the basis of our discussion. You’re simply a poor debater so you shift to harassment.
/r/MensRights23/10/22 04:30 PM
0

You’re making an argument that I’m controlling now because I made a factual statement in regards a media bias. Preferring factual media agrees with most people sensibilities which is why I pointed out to the original OP that that’s probably the reason these post aren’t getting upvotes. No irony involved. You lost the debate in regards to the user net. You’ve been incorrect every time you’ve attempted to fault me. This is a good opportunity for you to learn when to walk away. Continuing is only p…
/r/MensRights23/10/22 03:03 PM
0

No it’s not. Irony, another word you don’t seem to understand the definition of. I thought you no longer wished to continue our discussion because you couldn’t win with the subject at hand. Are you going to follow me around daily with weak arguments now? Not surprising that the entire point of our conversation is your harassment and here you are, harassing.
/r/MensRights23/10/22 02:03 PM
0

Dailymail is known for clickbait and inaccuracies. I’d like to hear your defense for them and why we should be upvoting them. It looks to me like your just calling for people to upvote obvious propaganda.
/r/MensRights22/10/22 02:33 PM
5

Oof… Men and women who would’ve never considered themselves a feminist join the cause after listening to this guy.
/r/MensRights22/10/22 03:09 AM
11

Mens Rights! Oh wait, this has nothing to do with mens rights. Why is this posted here?
/r/MensRights21/10/22 11:37 PM
-1

Depends on approach. It looks like she’s having fun with it, not taking it too serious. I think a lot of people can appreciate that. If male or female is coming at me like a sales person in the mall, then yeah. Creepy all the way around.
/r/MensRights21/10/22 08:51 PM
20

I don’t see anything wrong with this, male or female. You don’t have to worry about being catfished this way.
/r/MensRights21/10/22 08:03 PM
9

They might get more support if they didn’t all primarily come from the Dailymail
/r/MensRights21/10/22 07:45 PM
-2

Your comment is mind boggling. I don’t even know where to start. I’m just gonna move on and hope that you put a little more thought into this.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 11:37 PM
0

And? How do you feel about the boys abused by the Catholic Church coming forward years later?
/r/MensRights20/10/22 11:33 PM
6

This post is blowing my mind. Should the boys abused by the Catholic Church not be allowed to testify or bring up charges if it was almost 20 years ago?
/r/MensRights20/10/22 11:31 PM
1

What?! Can you explain to us a little more your thought process in paragraph 3? I don’t want to jump to conclusions but saying no one has credibility due to the brainwashing capabilities of their religion is a bit fucked.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 11:03 PM
1

Based on OP’s headline alone. The post and comments paint a much different picture. I’m wondering if that’s why the link to the OG post seems to have disappeared.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 10:51 PM
2

The OP added a lot of context in the comments. He asked her what she wanted. She asked for friends and family to be part of it. He handed her the ring in her bedroom. It doesn’t sound like asking for the month off had solely to do with the proposal. It seems more like a step in ending it after a let down of a relationship. Given the OP’s post history, the entire situation sounds made up.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 10:16 PM
1

He didn’t need to read her mind. He asked her ahead of time what she wanted. She asked for friends and family to be there. He handed it to her in her bedroom. She could have proposed herself, may have even been considering it but then he asked her what she would like. Asking for her friends and family to be there is hardly gold digging. If this was his best, she definitely dodged a bullet.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 10:10 PM
6

OP said in the comments that he asked her what she wanted ahead of time. OP also apparently said she grew up without birthdays and celebrations so she wanted her family and friends at the proposal. OP asked, she told, OP did something else. Her reaction seems extreme given just the proposal but it sounds like her reaction has more to do with not seeing eye to eye in general. OP also posted he was a married millionaire just a couple months ago.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 08:43 PM
0

Whether or not net was lying or gaslighting has no play in this, never did. You keep trying to attach it because you feel it gives you leverage. This is an open sub on the internet. They can say things you consider lies or gaslighting, others may consider an opposing point of view. You can call them out it. Debate it. So can everyone else. The problem, and the reason I originally commented is when it doesn’t stop there. You don’t stop there. You turn it into harassing, or bullying if you prefer.…
/r/MensRights20/10/22 05:26 PM
0

Why did I need to link? Why do you feel the need to control everyone? I also find it weird that you think I need to go back through all of your links. I saw the conversations. How else do you think I saw your comments that I commented on? Your repeated comment was a call to attack. Plain and simple. It was a call to downvote, and bandwagon shit comment. You did it to shut down an opposer. Your playing innocent, or is this ignorant? And again, your attempting to end by moving the debate to a subj…
/r/MensRights20/10/22 04:33 PM
1

Here’s one
/r/MensRights20/10/22 03:44 PM
0

There’s 3. Again. I didn’t say you said attack. I said you basically did. Which you did with the repeated statement you made. Your reading comprehension is concerning. I did not contradict myself. It is cute that you think this conversation proves you can debate. For your last question, no need to move this debate. We haven’t finished this one yet. Why start another? I’m guessing this is an attempt to move to a subject you believe you can win at. It’s a weak move.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 03:35 PM
1

Here’s one
/r/MensRights20/10/22 03:30 PM
1

Here’s one
/r/MensRights20/10/22 03:30 PM
0

I saw 3 times, without looking very hard. May have been more. I didn’t say you said attack. I said you basically said attack. Which your comment did. You took it upon yourself to let everyone else know who to trust. You’re attempting to control the sub. No one here needs you to decide what is gaslighting and lying and what is not. Your actions are steps in creating an echo chamber. You want to shut down those who you don’t agree with or trust and call for everyone else to fall in line.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 03:06 PM
-1

You did it multiple times. You basically said “attack”. If you’re correct in your assessment of them, it wouldn’t have needed to be said. You or anyone else should be able to debate it, correct? It’s your opinion they wear gaslighting and lying, because you didn’t agree with them. Why should you get to choose which opinions this sub tolerates and which ones should be shut down?
/r/MensRights20/10/22 02:50 PM
-1

“NetNeutralitee is a habitual liar and gaslighter, who may well be utterly deluded if they think they're actually providing "real opinions" that are helpful.” You posted that multiple times. That’s called harassment. I’m surprised you didn’t get a 24 hour ban, at the least, for posting that.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 02:38 PM
0

Exactly. Let’s not make this sub one of those. That being said, I’m gonna assume you’re smart enough to know an echo chamber can also being created by attacks, bandwagons, And roadblocking. You knows those techniques pretty well, and their effects.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 02:16 PM
-1

Don’t contribute to turning this sub into an echo chamber. It benefits no one.
/r/MensRights20/10/22 03:19 AM
0

I’d assume it would vary based on location and beliefs but probably.
/r/MensRights18/10/22 10:48 PM
3

Historically witchcraft is based on science, not anti science. FFS
/r/MensRights18/10/22 08:29 PM
0

I’m not sorting back through the conversations you two had. I’m also not taking your word that you’re fairly representing their point here because I’ve seen you in action. You bandwagon, road block, and set up bullshit arguments. You call for others in the site to attack and disregard anyone questioning or presenting arguments against the narrative. You help create the echo chamber that makes this sub useless.
/r/MensRights16/10/22 04:38 PM
-1

Through your narrow lens, sure. These subjects are obviously are not so black and white. There’s a lot of different experiences everyone is bringing to the table and they deserve to be considered. Your response is an attack while telling everyone else why they should as well. Fall in line men. That’s the message you’re putting out.
/r/MensRights16/10/22 04:06 PM
-5

Netneutralitee is the only person in this sub that questions anything being said. That’s the only problem you have with them. You prefer this sub be a circle jerk where you all stroke each other while telling each other how right you are. It makes you no better than the feminist’s you whine about. This sub will never get widespread support because people like you.
/r/MensRights16/10/22 03:32 PM
9

I know which one you’re referring to. I haven’t read anything about a secret vasectomy or hate for him but I also haven’t been looking. The thing with this relationship in particular is that she made it very clear that she wanted to have children sooner rather than later because of her age. She also made it clear that if that’s not what he wanted that they shouldn’t marry and continue the relationship. She was fair and clear. He really shouldn’t have married her if that’s not what he wanted.
/r/MensRights16/10/22 03:21 PM
0

Since OP has no answer and I’m just off my rocker, lol, which rights are being violated?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 08:00 PM
1

So your complaint is, though everyone has their choice, mens rights are being violated because men are choosing to stream a hot girl? Which rights are being violated?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 07:53 PM
0

It’s called an echo chamber. It’s the reason you posted here. These votes are meaningful to you because you need validation so you posted where you knew whatever you posted would get support as long as it’s against women. I’ll concern myself with points when they have value. In the meantime,” expect to have people comment with different points of view. These people are fully aware they will get downvoted in this sub but will continue to comment because circlejerks are unhealthy. You come off no …
/r/MensRights12/10/22 07:52 PM
0

How do men not have equal viewership opportunities?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 07:40 PM
-2

I find it hilarious that you think me going to sleep at night is bailing. Do you really stay up at night waiting for a user to respond? That’s nuts. You’re intense. This is quite the comment coming from someone who spends all their Reddit time in mensrights stoking dudes for validation. I came to this sub to support mens rights. You’re here to support mens authority. Definitely not the same thing. The fact that so few of you in here can differentiate only hurts this cause. You definitely did not…
/r/MensRights12/10/22 05:21 PM
-1

Your comments have proven otherwise
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:34 PM
0

You’re just gonna spin in circles aren’t you? Your post has nothing to do with rights.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:26 PM
0

Also, can you explain what viewership has to do with gender rights?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:24 PM
-1

Can you point me to where I said that?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:23 PM
1

Nope. It would go something like this: I bet you would choose to watch a girl streaming just bc she is attractive. Feel free to google the definition of strawman.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:23 PM
0

Neither your comments or your post have anything to do with r/mensrights.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:18 PM
1

Low effort strawman.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:15 PM
-1

How does this post support that statement?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:11 PM
0

That means nothing in this sub. Your post is low effort.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:06 PM
0

Gave her shit? You came off sounding like a 12 year old. I’m sure she’s real scared of getting pulled over now.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 01:48 PM
1

Do you realize this is r/mensrights? WTF does this post have to do with mens rights?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 01:45 PM
-2

You didn’t answer my one question but think I should answer your five? LMAO! You’re quite full of yourself. You did exactly as expected.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 12:20 PM
-4

Are you kidding? Lol! You answered my question with 5 questions. It was completely unnecessary for you to ask those or for me to answer. We compromise so things work out as equally as things can. Marriage will never be 50/50. Not if it’s gonna last. Healthy communicative marriages shift as things change. No head of household needed. We’re both very happy.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 02:29 AM
4

I’m not sure what you’re saying. Some of those things will benefit me and some him.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 01:47 AM
5

How so?
/r/MensRights12/10/22 01:05 AM
2

15 years with mine. We’re happily equals.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 12:40 AM
-4

I’m with you. It sounds gross. My dad was my authority. My husband is not.
/r/MensRights12/10/22 12:39 AM
1

What’s to nitpick? Nothing was said, nothing was done, nothing has changed. You’re just patting yourself on the back for some weird reason.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 05:47 PM
1

So, what came?
/r/MensRights11/10/22 04:03 PM
2

Lol, no. Not even close.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 04:02 PM
1

You’re showing you didn’t read the article.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 03:41 PM
-1

FFS. Do any of you read the articles you comment on?
/r/MensRights11/10/22 03:37 PM
0

Also a false header. Read the article
/r/MensRights11/10/22 03:37 PM
2

What came? Tell us all what you read in the article.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 03:36 PM
1

FFS. He lost. Get over it.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 03:33 PM
2

He did nothing. You clearly didn’t read the article.
/r/MensRights11/10/22 03:32 PM
37

Agreed but it doesn’t sound like this is a new event. The headline makes it look like this is some new announcement but then goes on to say the policy is the same as previous administrations and nothing has changed. Toward the end it says the Biden administration has voiced support for including women in the draft.
/r/MensRights10/10/22 09:11 PM
0

Did you comment on the post?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:47 PM
5

Doesn’t female purity end with virginity loss?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:30 PM
3

Can you link us the post?
/r/MensRights10/10/22 08:29 PM
-1

I thought this sub was r/MensRights. This is just hate women bullshit. Everyone should be calling people out on this.
/r/MensRights09/10/22 10:06 PM
1

Can you describe some of these things to look for?
/r/MensRights09/10/22 10:03 PM
1

Why do you think any of these support “only women are capable of being sexist against children”?
/r/MensRights09/10/22 04:49 PM
-1

Lol! The irony of this comment in this sub.
/r/MensRights09/10/22 04:08 PM
0

I don’t think anything posted in this sub is actually expected to be read. It’s all rage bait
/r/MensRights09/10/22 04:04 PM
1

LMAO! What!?
/r/MensRights09/10/22 04:02 PM
1

Dumbest thing I’ve read today 🏆
/r/MensRights09/10/22 03:33 PM
-4

This sub doesn’t need to become any more of a circle jerk than it already is. If it’s nothing but dudes stroking each other, it’s meaningless.
/r/MensRights09/10/22 03:26 PM
0

Couldn’t have been because they treat these things differently two decades later?
/r/MensRights09/10/22 05:02 AM
1

This is the nastiest thing I’ve read in awhile. Anyone who thinks they should be allowed to control anyone else deserves nothing but a life of ridicule and loneliness. Enjoy
/r/MensRights08/10/22 04:34 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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