TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

HaryJReynolds Archive

View 1 posts and 258 comments by HaryJReynolds on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

In another case with facts that may be relevant to the Loeb-Vergara dispute, the U.S. Supreme Court recently declined a petition to hear a case of alleged “forced procreation.” The petition was brought by Jacob Szafranski, who was trying to stop his ex-girlfriend, Dr. Karla Dunston, from procreating with embryos formed jointly from their genetic material. In 2010, Szanfranski agreed to assist Dunston—at the time his girlfriend of only a few months—when she was suddenly diagnosed with cancer and …
/r/MensRights30/03/16 07:51 PM
2

People being reported for glancing in your direction raping you with their eyes? FIFY
/r/MensRights30/03/16 04:59 PM
1

No. Its fine. I am just very sensitive to that, as I represent a fair number of defendants.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 05:36 PM
1

which means he should have gotten off like he did. Fucking sick of people saying someone "got off" as it implies he was guilty of something and SHOULD have gone to jail. Same as the fucks who complain someone "got off on a technicality." Gomeshi did not "get off" (at the trial). The prosecution failed to prove he committed a crime.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 04:01 PM
1

" I want my pony!"
/r/MensRights29/03/16 03:59 PM
2

If any behavior or evidence undermining the credibility of the accuser (who often, as appears to be the case here, is the only witness suggesting the accused student did anything wrong) can be dismissed as typical conduct of a “victim,” then all behavior confirms the accusation, and the accused must be found guilty. People are finally getting it.
/r/MensRights29/03/16 02:16 PM
1

How does one "get raped by thoughts"?
/r/MensRights29/03/16 02:05 PM
7

But it turned out this didn't change much—students are still super confused about consent (in one study, half of MIT students said it's possible to "accidentally" rape someone). Therein lies the problem.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 06:03 PM
2

Doesn't that say something? Feminism has become so ridiculous, one cannot even distinguish their positions from satire
/r/MensRights28/03/16 03:11 PM
2

You still have the fog of left/right. Both "sides" are run by the same international banking cartel. They just use different propaganda to sell the same idea. Both "free trade" and "open borders" can be sold from a libertarian perspective--freedom of movement, labor, capital, competition--and a leftists perspective--human rights, multiculturalism, etc.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 03:10 PM
2

Right. And then they shame men on both sides of the equation for not doing what they want.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 02:33 PM
2

The worst are the guys being added for indecent exposure for pissing in an alley.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 04:35 AM
19

Awoman at a bar accused me of "literally raping her with my eyes".....because I glanced at her breastises that were falling out of the dental floss she thought was a dress
/r/MensRights27/03/16 02:41 PM
1

Guilty of what? Rough sex?
/r/MensRights25/03/16 07:51 PM
5

I use words precisely with their legal meaning when we are talking about trials and criminal liability.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 06:39 PM
17

Point of order, yes it does. Under the law you are PRESUMED INNOCENT until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt. A "not guilty" verdict means the presumption of innocence was not overcome. Source: I am a lawyer.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 05:21 PM
6

Looking creepy = racist rapist That old SNL sketch about avoiding workplace harassment claims by "being attractive" should be revised for criminal liability.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 05:19 PM
1

I disagree. Unless there is danger that the accuser will be subject to physical harm, there is no reason NOT to name them. That is part and parcel of making a public accusation of criminal conduct. It is serious shit. You damned right your name should be out there if you are going to accuse someone of a felony.
/r/MensRights25/03/16 02:08 PM
52

Really, this article reinforces that as far as the anti-rape advocates are concerned, the only "evidence" that matters is the accused statement that she did not consent at the precise moment in question. Any pre or post assault behavior, to them, should be legally irrelevant. They see no problem with the notion that a man sexually assaults a woman on date 2, and yet the women comes back for dates 3-5 and sleeps with him on those occasions. It simply defies logic that under the traditional defini…
/r/MensRights25/03/16 02:05 PM
10

my testimony may not have met the high burden of legal proof = my testimony was a bunch of lies and fantasy I concocted that fell apart under rational scrutiny.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 07:31 PM
8

That testimony is damning. Even more incredulous in the university's position that it is perfectly lawful to do this. The testimony in this case essentially proves that the job of the "investigator" is to be an advocate for the victim and the prosecutor of the accused. The only relevant evidence is that which supports the complainant's story. Any contrary evidence is ignored.
/r/MensRights24/03/16 07:29 PM
3

No, its not "like" that. It IS that.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 09:41 PM
3

I actually think the motivation is to fend off lawsuits and insurance claims. If schools are required by law to hold training, then it is much more difficult to prove they were negligent in failing to prevent the behavior.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 09:22 PM
7

"inappropriate sex."
/r/MensRights23/03/16 07:17 PM
3

Thats because articles never label female-teacher/male-student sex as rape, even though it is according to the law in almost every case. The media has a conscious bias against reporting that any female "raped" a boy or man.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 07:15 PM
12

It is also a good step in recognizing that male students who are abused by teachers are, in fact, victims and not "lucky" for getting with the "hot teacher."
/r/MensRights23/03/16 05:46 PM
19

Sure it does. Note that the legislation was prompted by numerous instances of female teacher rape of students. (By law, students cannot consent, so any sex with a teacher is rape).
/r/MensRights23/03/16 05:44 PM
54

Teach your teachers not to rape!
/r/MensRights23/03/16 04:31 PM
4

Well, things may have been different back in the day when a man came home to a clean house, folded laundry, a cooked meal, and a cocktail and cigarette waiting for him in his easy chair. Not so much the case anymore. Most married people I know, including myself, have have fucking disaster areas inside their homes. Even those couple with a stay-at-home-mom do not have the pristine domiciles of days of yore. The spend all day playing with the little tikes.
/r/MensRights23/03/16 04:07 PM
7

In the past this shit would be handled by a detention, stern talking to, forced apology, and good 'ole corporal punishment by the parents at home
/r/MensRights22/03/16 07:23 PM
1

You are misrepresenting my views. It is also apparent we have a very different notion of "rights." I follow the classical definition of "right" as the absence of a prior restraint. A "right" is not an entitlement or "functional ability." It means there is no law stopping me from pursuing it. I am not in favor of open borders, "free-trade" with third-world countries, crony capitalism, corporate subsidies, etc. All of which have gutted our economy. Philosophical libertarianism does not work in a w…
/r/MensRights22/03/16 07:04 PM
1

Is there no money spare for a the homeless guy or are you just cold hearted? Guess I am cold-hearted. And all those things you listed, are incompatible with this economic freedom, right libertarian movement. The lack of regulation/barriers to entry is not. Plus, depends which "branch" of thought you ask. Many, like me, believe that capitalism only works if you have laws that encourage atomistic competition. Without anti-trust laws, capital will eventually consolidate to a point where the remaini…
/r/MensRights22/03/16 06:55 PM
1

Wasn't rich....paid for college with scholarship and my own money and minimal loans. I was not interfering with their right to do anything.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 05:50 PM
1

Well the legal impediments of labour unions Don't get me started on fucking labor union. Damn thugs is all they are. I got run out of 3 factories when I was in college. The first, I refused to pay union dues. I did not want union representation, and my "benefits" would kick in long after the "probationary" period expired AFTER my suffer break. The second factory I was paid piece-rate and was working at 140% efficiency from the published "efficiency tables." Union thugs threatened to break my leg…
/r/MensRights22/03/16 05:31 PM
2

We need a new meme: "I am not responsible for your feelings."
/r/MensRights22/03/16 05:09 PM
1

Companies are free to pay you less, and not give you long term contracts. So? Thats how capitalism works. The value of domestic labor has declined. Nonetheless, I am free to sell my labor to the highest bidder. Now, I may agree that the economic situation were are operating under is more akin to corporate syndicalism/oligarchy than capitalism. I may also agree that the global "free trade" polices are harmful to workers in any western country. And, I may agree that due to corporate cronyism, corr…
/r/MensRights22/03/16 05:06 PM
3

Its a fact that right libertarianism and individual rights is incompatible with mens collective rights. In my opinion, a man's right is, first, and foremost, to be treated as an individual, based on his personal accomplishments, character, and views. IMHO, "Men's Rights," at its core, is the right to be treated as an individual and not part of some subgroup in identity politics. Indeed, that is my core opposition to feminism and any other *ism. I treat people as individuals, not as part of a gro…
/r/MensRights22/03/16 04:29 PM
3

Interesting that to one person this is "objectifying" women. To the dancers, however, this may be an "empowering" experience showing that they are "sex positive" and confident in their sexuality.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 02:19 PM
3

I cringe at the "mature" thing. All of the "mature" women I work with are still as gossipy and superficial as the packs of cheerleaders in high school. They talk incessantly about "the good wife" and the kardashians and other meaningless pop culture drivel. Try engaging one of them in a conversation about the Shakespearean play you saw on the weekend and you get the "ughhh, nerd" look.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 02:14 PM
4

And people wonder how the Salem witch trials were "allowed" to happen.
/r/MensRights22/03/16 02:03 PM
6

I am not talking about major physical difference like "short" vs "tall." And, I understand why someone wouldn't want to date someone with a massive height differential to themselves. I am talking about women who have a hard and fast "no guys under 6.0" rule to the point where they will not date someone who is 5'11" Everyone is entitled to their preferences tall, short, fat, skinny, big ass, skinny ass, etc. But I am talking about girls with completely arbitrary and ironclad dating requirements.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 06:10 PM
11

I dated girls of all body types before I got married. There is a difference between a woman with a naturally "thicker" build (which I actually prefer over the stick-thin type) and someone who is FAT because they cant exercise enough self-control to stop shoving chocolates in their face.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:28 PM
24

Listening to some single ladies talk, you feel as if you are in some Seinfeld episode. The real irony is in how superficial they are, yet at the same time, denounce men who are "superficial" because they want to date a nice, pleasant looking girl. Its fine to select based on general appearance or physical traits if they are indicate of personality or values (piercings, tattoos, slovenly, etc.), but you are correct in that many women self-select over utterly meaningless style things. My younger s…
/r/MensRights21/03/16 04:35 PM
32

Like height. Drove me nuts. I mean, we all have body preferences and select for overall beauty; but I can never remember thinking, jeez, this girl would be great, but her tits just are not big enough. Yet, I know and have personally experienced women who will self-select out of a perfectly good guy due to a couple of inches in height.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 04:16 PM
8

Who wants a man who doesn't have a job. Sure because a man has no value unless he can provide for a woman's every fucking need. Sorry. You need to get used to the reality that a man has absolutely ZERO "value" to society unless he can create or provide for someone else.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 03:49 PM
1

The "rape culture" hysteria is literally a modern-day witch hunt.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 03:46 PM
1

How utterly unremorseful she is.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 03:42 PM
55

See, that would violate one of their 200 dating requirements.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 03:14 PM
45

I thought these late 30s career ladies didn't need no man? What are they bitching about? They got exactly what they wanted. Indeed. How do you like them "independent" apples now? They also select for low-conflict behavior, kindness, etc. This is key. When I was dating in my early-mid thirties, SO many women were eliminated simply because they were disagreeable drama queens. Its like these women don;t understand that you have to be nice to men in order for them to like you.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 03:10 PM
39

What I find interesting is this notion that a successful man in his late 30s who wants to date a pretty, agreeable younger woman, or who stays single to pursue his hobbies is "juvenile." In other words, pursuing self-interest or following your biological imperative is part of "toxic masculinity." In contrast, the late-30s career women claims she spent her 20s and 30s "perfecting her adult personality" (no doubt into a "strong independent woman"). To most men that means she was a raging slut and …
/r/MensRights21/03/16 02:49 PM
22

The problem is the unrealistic expectations women have for a so-called "good marriage." Marriage is really, really tough. What makes a "good marriage" is two people committed to making it work, even though they may have varying degrees of happiness throughout. 20-30 years ago, if a man had a decent paying job, wasn't a drunk, didn't beat his wife, and led the family, people would have thought a woman was nuts for divorcing. Today, women demand that a "good marriage" include being married to a ri…
/r/MensRights21/03/16 02:09 PM
3

Thank you. Drives me nuts how many people think we are (or should be) a democracy {edit: I love how people downvote for saying something factually accurate. Article IV, Section 4, Us. Const: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” Federal Papers No. 10: [D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as sho…
/r/MensRights18/03/16 07:18 PM
3

You misunderstand me. I am not saying it isn't a problem. I am simply saying that when you sign an "informed consent" form--which no one reads--you are giving the hospital and docs discretion to perform any procedures they deem medically necessary to preserve the life of the baby/mother. Once a woman is in labor, a woman can say "no epidural" all she wants, but if there are complications and the pain is preventing her from pushing, the docs are going to administer it. Same with c-sections. And, …
/r/MensRights18/03/16 07:15 PM
7

Have you ever read the informed consent paperwork you sign at the hospital? You have a choice unless the doc thinks medical necessity overrides it. Don't tell me I don't understand if you do not read the legal terms.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 06:27 PM
-1

Docs dont care about your fee fees. The care about getting the child out in one piece and ensuring you dont bleed like a pig and die.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 04:43 PM
2

Ummmm....Yes.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 04:41 PM
29

Thats one of the first things they do is make you sign an informed consent form. Now, the docs may ask the woman if she wants an epidural, other drugs etc.,...but there reaches a point when they just have to do stuff to make the birth happen. My wife was not going to do an epidural, but she passed out due to the pain...they had to revive her, give her an epidural, and and then some other drug to further induce the birth. My wife was also a raving lunatic while she was giving birth, which, from t…
/r/MensRights18/03/16 02:46 PM
65

Too bad these morons don't understand that when you go in to give birth you sign a consent form allowing the docs to do what is necessary to delivery the baby and protect your health. At that point, you don't get a say as to "how" they do it----particularly when you are in the midst of labor, doped up on drugs, and screaming at everyone around you.
/r/MensRights18/03/16 02:12 PM
3

Perhaps things are different in North America Wearing a 'pink' or any other brightly colored (coloured) pastel shirt was generally seen as a sign that you were a fairy when I grew up. Later, it became "metrosexual" to wear such things That said, I do personally like the look of the pink dress shirt with white collar and cuffs, so long as you go full on douche and add braces.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 06:18 PM
2

Barrister Stephen Zillman suggested the former topless waitress was no “shrinking violet” and could have made up the rape claims because she started believing she’d acted like a “common slut”.
/r/MensRights17/03/16 02:14 PM
1

Guys say "I wish I got sexually harassed", or "I want to get groped by a random woman" Until that woman is the 50-year old alcohol skank at the bar.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 02:08 PM
1

Actually, it would have for the people I was dancing with...not the skank that jumped me later.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 04:50 AM
1

Right. I mean, that is the difference. What happened to me was shitty, but the girls were just as drunk, probably thought "i wanted it" and, aside from a treatment of antibiotics, I was no worse for wear except a bruised ego and lack of self-respect. I stopped getting so drunk after those incidents. You live and you learn. It never would have crossed my mind to ruin the lives of the 2 girls involved. But, according to modern feminist logic, the fact that I was wasted, stoned, half naked and dirt…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 01:37 AM
2

You are missing the point. A woman WILL report it. Cops are now trained to "listen and believe." Police are even being instructed to not question a "victim's story" so she is not 're-traumatized." You also ignore that under the affirmative consent laws, my accusation is enough to trigger my wife to have to prove I provided consent and that it was active and ongoing. Under the California law I cited earlier, the fact that I crawled into bed with her or that we are in a relationship cannot be used…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 01:11 AM
4

Sage wisdom when you are 40 years old. Not so much when you are 20.
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:42 AM
2

I quoted you the statute. The man has to PROVE he had a reasonable belief that she consented and the rest of the statute, in practice, makes that impossible absent proof that she verbally agreed. Your citation to the Mock case proves my point, as the student there was expelled because he could not prove he obtained consent under a similar affirmative consent policy. The circuit court ruled that the university violated his due process rights by the manner in which it applied its affirmative conse…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:40 AM
1

And then what? Collect the $2 she made from her porno? A civil judgment and $2.50 will get you a bus ticket.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 09:15 PM
5

Systematic oppression by the patriarchy made me sexually assault you. If it wasn't for your toxic masculinity, I wouldn't have yanked your chain.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 09:04 PM
7

Thats because men just deal with shit.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 09:03 PM
0

Why the fuck didn't Nungesser's lawyer consider this? Seriously, this sounds like one of the most incredibly incompetent mistakes that I've ever heard of. Why would you assert that sex-based discrimination happened, but not include how the opposite sex is treated differently when you're arguing that you were treated differently? Lack of evidence. Wanting to push a new theory of the law.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 09:00 PM
0

Typically, you can prove discrimination either using a disparate treatment (unequal rules or unequal application of the rules) or disparate impact (equal application that results in unequal results). To prove disparate treatment you either need a "smoking gun" to show that the person was targeted due to the protected characteristic [sex, race] at issue or you have to prove that they were not treated the same as similarly situated people without the protected characteristic and that there were no…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 09:00 PM
3

To date, states that have adopted these laws have done so in the context of higher education. There is a parallel movement to change the criminal law in a similar manner. Under the new ABA model penal code, you can be convicted of a sexual assault if you try to hold your date's hand without getting "affirmative consent" under a standard where "consent is not assumed." Its not just a "confidential civil procedure." In you are attending a publicly funded university, you have a constitutional right…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:49 PM
2

Legally, Nuessenger had a shitty argument. Title IX prohibits discrimination "because of sex", which, under all prior law means "because of THE PLAINTIFF's sex [attribute]." Nuessenger was trying to argue that "because of sex" meant that the harassment related to the ACT of sex, not the status of the plaintiff. Under standard legal principles, Nuessenger would need to prove that either: a) the school targeted him because he was a male; or 2) the school would not have taken the action it did agai…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:29 PM
22

And that is the key. Its not simply about redefining what constitutes consent, its who has to prove it. Old law: he said/she said: Prosecutor says, no way can I convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, case dropped. New law: he said/she said: Prosecutor says, no way he can prove he obtained consent; throw the book at him.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:23 PM
11

Affirmative consent laws place the burden on the defendant to show that consent was given, not on the state to prove that consent was not given Pretty much this
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:17 PM
3

the wide range of non-verbal behaviours which can indicate consent Its not just a matter of what counts as consent. Its who has to show its existence or non-existence. Before affirmative consent, we would assume that 2 people in the bedroom engaged in sex was a consensual affair and the accused would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was penetrated against her will. Now, UNLESS her partner can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she "affirmatively consented", it is rape.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:11 PM
3

I understand it all that has changed is that the wide range of non-verbal behaviours which can indicate consent will no longer include a "failure to resist" That is part of it. But it flips the burden of proof. The accused actually has to prove the key fact ("she consented") versus the state proving the actus reus (he did it against her will). This is a huge difference under the law.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:07 PM
6

See, this is a classic scenario where you are trying to solve one problem by changing the rules such that it sweeps up a much broader scope of behavior. What If my wife wakes me up in the middle of the night (genders should not matter), and starts giving me oral sex. I am very tired and groggy and don't want her to, so I just lay there. The next morning I tell her I did not want her to do that and she raped me. How does she prove that I "affirmatively consented"? She can't. She is now a rapist.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 08:04 PM
4

Lets use a silly example to illustrate the point. Lets say that it is illegal to force someone to watch a movie. You have a scenario where A & B are alone in a house and are watching a movie. Under normal circumstances, we would assume that by participating in the act of watching TV, B consented to it. If B were to accuse A of forcing her to watch a movie, under standard due process requirements, the state would need to prove that A actually forced B to watch TV against her will. A would be able…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 07:56 PM
8

LEts try it like this: Once an accusation is made, under affirmative consent laws, the sex is de facto assumed to be unlawful. YOU have to show you got consent to make it lawful. The only way to prove it was "lawful" is your word alone. Because in a he said/she said situation, one person's version is never enough to PROVE something, the male's version is, by default, never enough to prove his innocence. The other effect of "affirmative consent" is that it removes the centuries old concept of "im…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 07:34 PM
14

right. and the VD I got was just an added bonus
/r/MensRights15/03/16 05:24 PM
2

Having been to several counselors, I believe they are all shit. None of them actually held solve the underlying problem that has caused the emotions. The docs give you drugs to try and take the emotions away. The shrinks want you to "explore" those feelings but offer no real world solutions. I had a major problem with the female shrinks I saw as well. I mean, I was going to therapy to feel better, but by making me talk about everything I felt bad about, I just got more upset to the point where I…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 04:06 PM
11

This is a touchy subject for me as I had it happen twice in college. Both times I was pass-out drunk.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 03:10 PM
2

Hey now. They DID appropriate someone's culture. I am guessing the commons does not have taco tuesdays?
/r/MensRights15/03/16 12:07 AM
1

Hey... if you are going to stereotype at least be accurate and not insult other libertarians....That is gun nut with a cowboy hat, coke addiction, and proclivity to frequent houses of ill repute.
/r/MensRights15/03/16 12:06 AM
0

Funny. If you were to make the same observation due to race, you would be branded a racist. ("Hey guys, I just got back from SluttyMcSlutSlut's Bar and there were a bunch a black dudes in hoodies standing around. I was scared. I think they were waiting to rape someone")
/r/MensRights13/03/16 11:10 PM
3

You are surprised? You invaded their "safe space" and made them feel "invalidated" by questioning their views.
/r/MensRights08/03/16 03:38 PM
2

How does one "feel in literal danger" was there is no violence or threat of violence?
/r/MensRights05/03/16 08:43 PM
0

She was "frozen"
/r/MensRights05/03/16 08:41 PM
11

Who buys the "3 month salary" wedding ring? The dumb schmucks who are going to be divorced and bankrupt in 5 years.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 08:39 PM
1

Note also that they don't reveal name of the scorned mistress even though they know her identity.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 08:27 PM
4

In Wisconsin, 1st time drunk driving is a civil forfeiture
/r/MensRights05/03/16 08:19 PM
1

Karen Its always a Karen, isn't it.
/r/MensRights05/03/16 03:28 PM
1

Speaking of target. I go grocery shopping for the week...takes me 1/2 hour and ave $150. Wife goes grocery shopping....takes 1 hour and $250. But, she saw stuff she forgot she needed, so its all good /s
/r/MensRights05/03/16 03:24 PM
-2

ding ding ding ding ding. Tell 'em what 'es wonnn Jonhneeeey!
/r/MensRights05/03/16 03:22 PM
3

That is funny. I was in college in the late 90s, so no internet. I went and spent the time to dig up articles in the library or make clippings from the WSJ subscription (required by the econ prof), so i would usually have a bag full of "evidence" to back me up....not that it mattered. Got the same responses. I once gave a "greed" speech as well and people were just horrified when I asked how it could be greedy to want to provide a product for a price someone else was willing to pay? They also di…
/r/MensRights04/03/16 11:19 PM
1

Liberals are too stupid these days to realize their support for free trade in labour, is right wing and hurting the very groups the want to help. Isn't it telling that, in the end, both the "liberals" and "conservatives" wind up supporting the same policies that favor globalism, corporatism, and destroy the working class? I do not like trump...not one bit...personally. But, no one else is arguing for closed borders; no one else is objecting to the TPP; and no one else is seriously talking about …
/r/MensRights04/03/16 07:58 PM
58

The veneer covering the "we want free shit" aspect of feminism is slowly but surely coming off.
/r/MensRights04/03/16 07:46 PM
147

But, but, but, the wemyns dont have as much money because of patriarchy and oppression and....reasons. Its not a fair playing field, so they shouldn't have to pay as much.
/r/MensRights04/03/16 07:46 PM
179

How dare you suggest that people's choices have any bearing on how they should be treated. What I put in my mouth is my own damn business. Quit eat-shaming me.
/r/MensRights04/03/16 07:45 PM
10

Teach your teachers not to rape!
/r/MensRights04/03/16 06:20 PM
1

Jesus Christ that is fucking disgusting. Doesn't someone in the chain of command have an ounce of common sense?
/r/MensRights04/03/16 02:57 PM
2

I guess i just have a different mentality. If I see a dude "transitioning" in the mens room, I am not going to freak out, I am just going to think "weirdo" and co on about my day. I don't understand why people feel compelled to make special accommodations for a tiny minority of people that have a mental disorder (and I do not mean that in a derogatory manner, just that their brains think they are something different than their actual parts).
/r/MensRights04/03/16 02:45 PM
1

Quite
/r/MensRights04/03/16 02:37 PM
2

Nope. Legally speaking, what you have described is a battery. An "assault" occurs pre-touching: "An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm." I.e. if I swing a bat at your head with intent to cause harm I have assaulted you. If I hit you, I have battered you. Thus, when you batter someone, you are usually charged with BOTH assault and battery. But, i admit that colloquially, people (myself included) incorrectly use "assault" t…
/r/MensRights04/03/16 01:50 AM
2

In that case, i think you get a choice based on how you make your outward appearance.
/r/MensRights04/03/16 01:46 AM
2

Whats the problem? MAN UP buddy. You are the one that impregnated her and ruined her life.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 11:40 PM
3

quick sisters, SILENCE HIM! Blasphemer!
/r/MensRights03/03/16 11:37 PM
2

When a woman calls herself "strong woman" nowadays, she usually just means obnoxious, opinionated, slutty and entitled. FIFY
/r/MensRights03/03/16 11:35 PM
9

The problem here is that we cannot know, in advance, how someone subjectively "identifies" or their sexual orientation. Thus, our expectations of "privacy" are violated when something abnormal occurs. This and the bathroom thing should be simple. If you have a schlong, you use the mens room. If you have a vajayjay, use the women's. Thats a nice, objective standard that can easily be enforced. Its either that or just drop the "rules" altogether and let every shit, piss, and change in the same pla…
/r/MensRights03/03/16 11:33 PM
1

but its not really a "majority" but rather an objective ideal, although in practice, most jurors substitute their own notions of reasonable. That said, one of my favorite cases from law school was Fischer v. Carrousel Motor Hotel. A black patron walked into a hotel for a dinner buffet. The manager grabbed the plate out of his hand and threw it down, stating loudly "no negros." They did not have any discrimination laws back then, but the black guy was able to sue the manager for battery, under th…
/r/MensRights03/03/16 11:23 PM
2

In the law, we have a fictional "reasonable person" standard--kind of an "averaging" of mass knowledge and opinions. This is why juries can get hung up on these types of charges because what one juror views as reasonable another will not.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 10:12 PM
1

Well, if we are using legal terminology "battery would be more appropriate" as an "assault" is an incomplete battery. However a "battery" requires HARMFUL contact or contact that is OFFENSIVE under a reasonable person standard. But, that is why we really have a double standard: because society deems it "offensive" to grab a woman's ass, but not "offensive" to grab a man's ass.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 09:55 PM
1

Agreed. That used to be called "playing grab-ass" when I grew up.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 09:02 PM
0

Just because feminists would be going nuts if the gender would be reversed, does not mean everybody should go nuts about some casual butt groping. :) I am not "going nuts." Simply pointing out that under the current definition of "sexual assault" (and also many legal ones), this would qualify as sexual assault. NOT saying I agree with it. Hell, are you aware that the American Bar Association published a new Model Penal Code under which the definition of "sexual assault" is so broad, it includes …
/r/MensRights03/03/16 08:26 PM
0

Because a woman can't effectively assault most men. And you sir, have apparently never dated an Italian.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 08:23 PM
1

And therein lies the problem.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 08:22 PM
1

If you are interested in this period of history (transition of Rome from Republic to Empire) I would suggest starting with Tom Holland's Rubicon.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 05:41 PM
1

That statement in no way links Cleopatra to Caesar, it only mentions and implies no one except Cleopatra. Do you have a problem with transitive logical reasoning? Premise 1: Caesar and Cleopatra were alive at the same time. Premise 2: Cleopatra was emperor of the eastern roman empire Conclusion: There was an eastern roman empire at or around the time Julius Caesar was alive.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 05:27 PM
4

Dude, you said it: For some reason I thought she was the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire. That statement clearly implies you thought there WAS an eastern roman empire at the time of Julius Caesar. Bottom line is you made a post on a history sub that was historically inaccurate; you cited to a webpage that even people here view with disdain; you made comments implying that women weren't written about in history because they didn't do anything that was noteworthy; and now you are complaining y…
/r/MensRights03/03/16 05:14 PM
3

No dispute on that. But you can still have a "victim" for an objective crime. What I am suggesting is that the laws be re-written to define "sexual touching" as "touching of a person's genitalia for purposes of sexual gratification under circumstances that a reasonable person would view as unwanted or objectionable." Or, re-defining harassment as "unwelcome behavior that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety." While the victim's subjective intent may determine whether a crime …
/r/MensRights03/03/16 05:10 PM
5

My reading comprehension does not suck. I frequently post on r/history and read the thread yesterday. The linked article is about how Ms. Cleo was actually very ugly. My comment was in response to you stating: and Cleopatra was the only Roman emperor most people know. AND For some reason I thought she was the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire. Both of these statements are flat-out wrong. And now you are just trying to backtrack.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 04:59 PM
1

Basically, in 1939, women wanted a boyscout for a husband: trustworthy, loyal, forthright, upstanding, good character, etc. Unless you had a severe moral deficiency, most men could satisfy that. Now women want eye-candy, a status symbol, and someone who will "validate" their feelings and worldview.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:47 PM
2

Reposting this comment so it is up higher, as I feel a need to correct the historical record: There was no "eastern empire" at the time of Julius Caesar. The first, "division" of the empire into east and west administrative districts was under Marcus Aurelius, when he was a co-emperor with Licinus. Egypt wasn't even fully under Roman control at the time of Caesar, as there was still a dynastic dispute going on. Egypt wasn't officially "conquered" and made a province until 30 BC after the Battle …
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:39 PM
5

Sorry, but you are a moron. There was no "eastern empire" at the time of Julius Caesar. The first, "division" of the empire into east and west administrative districts was under Marcus Aurelius, when he was a co-emperor with Licinus. Egypt wasn't even fully under Roman control at the time of Caesar, as there was still a dynastic dispute going on. Egypt wasn't officially "conquered" until after the Battle of Pharsalous.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:35 PM
3

OH BOY!
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:32 PM
5

Like saying "my balls really itch because I shaved them this morning" during the middle of burgers while watching the game.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:28 PM
15

Well, I would say grabbing someone's ass without their consent is sexual assault.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:22 PM
7

Well, the way I see it, the male sexually assaulted her in this instance. I mean, he intentionally allowed his ass to come into contact with the hand of a female who was obviously incapable of consenting.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:20 PM
12

criminal offenses should not be defined based on the subjective reaction of the victim, but rather the intent (mens rea) of the perpetrator and the objective nature actions that were taken. Laws that criminalize behavior if it is "viewed as harassing by the victim" or "unwelcome" or "incites fear in the victim" should be struck down as unconstitutionally vague, and instead replaced by laws using a "reasonable person" standard.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:19 PM
33

but drunken sex is not illegal Well son, it is today, if she regrets it afterwards.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 11:39 PM
4

Translation: Prostitute Complains to Police She Was Not Paid For Her Services
/r/MensRights02/03/16 07:52 PM
10

I thought this was the mens rights sub; I appear to have wandered into a stormfront affiliate.
/r/MensRights02/03/16 05:51 PM
3

Having been involved in some of these disputes, the overarching theme I have seen is that the administrators have been taught to "believe" the victim and the result is predetermined. Even if students are allowed to present evidence, it is ignored. Even if they win, Deans of students overturn the disciplinary panel's decision, often for no other reason than they disagree with the result. The "reasoning" in such situations is atrocious. The people involved in these panels truthfully do not give a …
/r/MensRights02/03/16 05:48 PM
1

All I can tell you is from personal experience.my no one cares comment presupposes you act a certain way....work 60 hours a week, put work before family, don't take time off, pull all nighters, dress appropriately, etc......imo differences in race/gender often boil down to attitude and behavior. That said, I stand by my comment that no one cares so long as you put the firm first, get your shit done, get along with coworkers and leave your personal issues at the door
/r/MensRights02/03/16 02:44 PM
1

Good point, but I also believe that most police states ultimately collapse because they overeach and start taking away food, destroying a man's family, or stop protecting him (usually from other government agents). But, I suppose theoretically, you are correct. So long as a man has access to food, work, safety/security for his family, and women, he will not take up arms and simply be content with his lot in life. What I find disturbing is the current trend in both laws and social policy/attitude…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 02:06 AM
1

And I contend that the "eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" mentality is the one that has ruled human society forever, broken up sporadically by periods of abundance leading to great progress.Just because your books - written by the tippity-top of human society - say one thing about humanity's aspirations doesn't mean that's what the philosophy of life was like for most or even many people. I actually agree with you. But the ideas of those "tippy-top" people influence society, as they s…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:51 AM
3

Everything is on fire, let's roast some marshmallows fuck some sluts... The Red Pill FIFY
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:42 AM
2

Okay, then use of political terminology aside, we pretty much agree.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:39 AM
3

Uncle and GF died long ago. (I am in my 40s). No doubt that my uncle's neighbor was, in fact, hades (multiple illegitimate children, drunkard, criminal). The point is that even though that society was flawed and imperfect, people still strove for an ideal. On your broader point, I view the point of divergence as WW1--it destroyed most of the values that had built western civilization to that time...everything has been downhill since. Really, if the government can conscript you and force you to f…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:32 AM
0

A better institution would be limiting the right to vote to those who pay-in in federal income taxes--i.e. only those with "skin in the game", as the founders' fear of the mob voting themselves other people's property has come true.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:26 AM
0

The original quote is from Locke: "Life, liberty, and property." Also, according to Locke, 2nd treatise @ s. 94: "The sole purpose of government is the preservation of property." And, not all Enlightenment thinkers were "pro-democracy." Quite a few believed that individual liberty was attainable (and could be best preserved) under a constitutional monarchy. There was great fear of the masses "voting away" their natural rights in the heat of mob fervor. And, I will take 4 years of undergraduate a…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:15 AM
1

Dude. I was a pogo/political philo major. I am using "democracy" in its strict classical sense as a method of government....not in its broad modern sense as a euphemism for a free society
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:10 AM
2

Traditionalist values don't elevate a human being from a slavering ape into a polymath - not unless your definition of "traditional" is suspiciously convenient. I guess I was using "traditional values" to refer to a well-rounded classical education, hard work, self-sufficiency, personal responsibility, free-thought, respect and responsibility for family. Much progress has been made through the rejection of tradition and of "what my father taught me". To be clear, my father never taught me any of…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 01:06 AM
2

Yes, I constantly vacillate between "there is something worth still trying to save" vs "ship be sinking, every man for himself". I suppose a large part of it that I have a family. If I were single, I would probably be more in the "let it burn" camp.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:57 AM
1

Yes, we elect our letters under a voting system of representative democracy. However, I hotly dispute your contention that the country itself was founded on "democratic" ideals. It was founded on ideals of private property, self-determination of property owners, limitation on government power, and local political freedom. If you read the federalist papers, you would know that the founders were chiefly concerned with AVOIDING the mistakes of democracy, which they considered to be tyranny of the m…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:52 AM
1

Tradcon aka traditional social conservatives equals forced gender roles for everyone inside and outside marriage in work in every aspect of society. Dont romanticise the olden days. . . . .You obviously think trad marriage is the best. We are not on the same page. I am not against government "forcing" people to marry. I have no problem with the MGTOW crowd. Personally, I believe that if done for the right reasons and with the right person, marriage can be extremely fulfilling and enlightening. I…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:44 AM
6

That is the main reason many women will stay home. If you make 40K a year (pre tax) and you are paying 35K in daycare expenses (avg. is about 12-15K per kid per year), after taxes, it really is a no brainer.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:32 AM
-2

Democracy is an imperfect system. Not everyone is satisfied with the decisions of the majority, and many feel under served. Even Locke and Hobbes recognized that democracy has limitations. And yet, it is still the best we have. Disagree. That is why the founders of the USA set up the country as a republic. It is only in the last 30 years or so that everyone refers to the US as a democracy. It isn't and shouldn't be. Democracy means mob rule, confiscation of property, redistribution of wealth, an…
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:28 AM
7

Well, part of the "problem" is that, in general, aside from their immediate family, a man doesn't generally give a shit about the guy next to him. All sense of "community" and "brotherhood" has broken down in a society obsessed with individualistic hedonism.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:25 AM
2

So, to clarify, you are using the term "tradcon" to refer to a 1940s-1970s style marriage where women don't work and stay home with or without children? ...because I think we may be operating under a fundamental difference in use of terminology.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:22 AM
1

If it were financially feasible, I would have no problem with, and would actually prefer my wife to stay at home to raise our child in years 1-3.
/r/MensRights01/03/16 12:11 AM
1

WTF "version" of marriage are you talking about? Marriage is hardly "enslavement" when you have two working spouses that support each other personally, respect their marriage vows, and contribute in equal measure (money or homework) to the marriage/family. The problem today is the ease with which divorces are granted and that the government saddles men with an inequitable, unrealistic, and punitive financial obligation to his ex-spouse.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:57 PM
2

Why is that "cheesy"? Do you want a society of nitwits who can neither appreciate the works of classical civilization nor the philosophical values on which our civilization is based? You want to know WHY feminism has been so successful? It is because in the 80s-90s it was successful in tarnishing all classical works of history, literature, and philosophy as the "works of old white men." No respect for personal property. No respect for beauty. For rational thought. No respect for true individual …
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:48 PM
1

Male rights is anti tradcon. How can you say that when lots of men want the right to raise a family as a pater familia; the right to expect their marriage contract to be respected; to raise their children;the right to not have to be a slave to their ex-spouse?
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:43 PM
1

Yeah...thats one battle I am constantly having with my wife. She refuses to believe public schools are as bad as I say they are and views homeschooling as "religious nuts", which is odd because I am an agnostic. But finding a private school that engages in traditional education is extraordinarily difficult.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:37 PM
2

I agree its end-goal is the destruction of family in favor of cradle to grave welfare. Not sure about destroying the economy, as ultimately the tax dollars have to come from somewhere. As to your last comment, that was part of my "interview" process with potential wives was their desire to work, yet willingness to stay home if feasible. I made it very clear (and filtered out a lot of women) by stating that I was not going to support anyone; that I wanted an intellectual and professional equal; a…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:34 PM
2

Not sure what you mean by "tradcons." If you are referring to those of use who hold to the values our grandparents had, then color me guilty. Where I part ways with some here is the notion that marriage and family is inherently wrong and a bad deal. I disagree. I view the family as the nucleus of society. Atomic individualism causes social radiation that destroys a culture/society. I also find it very satisfying and self-fulfilling to raise a family. Now, are the rules now all stacked against me…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:29 PM
1

I don't think the women in the workplace had as much to do with feminism as it did with the government wanting to expand the tax base.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:19 PM
6

I was a kid in the 80s and grew up in the 90s, so I remember. I also remember many of my friends' dads were machinists, plumbers, welders, etc. and were able to support a wife, 3 kids, a mortgage payment, and 2 weeks of vacation.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:12 PM
5

i'm not surprised at all. children are very cute and i'm a man. Well, children stop being cute when they constantly throw tantrums, throw food, color on your floors, and chase the cat around. Here is the thing though.....most of that happens because mothers who stay at home "mother" their children...they do not RAISE them...i.e. they pander to them, try and be their best friend, etc. Being a stay-at-home mom is much easier today (in terms of work done) than it was 50 years ago, as stay at home m…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 11:01 PM
1

I will say though that most married women do not "choose" to work. It is impossible to have a basic middle-class lifestyle without 2 spouses working unless one is earning over 150G
/r/MensRights29/02/16 10:54 PM
4

Good comment on the article regarding dropping off the grid: And as all the traditional security offered to men (loyal wife, safe marriage, secure job, masculinity valued) are stripped away, it is becoming a viable option for more and more men.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 10:30 PM
1

Apparently, it is accepted that both husband and wife may take occasional "lovers", so long as it doesn't not affect the marriage.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 08:09 PM
6

Right? When I pointed out how economically unfeasible and inefficient this would be, I was told that economics was part of the patriarchy; that "culture values" were more important than money. I got better traction when I pointed out how much damage to the environment would be caused by building below ground and that we would wind up with far less "green space" available.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 06:50 PM
2

Well, there was that one study a couple years back about all the bot-written academic articles being published.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 06:07 PM
5

Well, France has such an ingrained culture of "dont-ask, don't tell adultery" that is common-place (and even expected) in marriages.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 05:53 PM
1

I have posted this before, but I had the cops called on me for taking pictures of my 2 year old son at the park.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 04:24 PM
3

Yeah, no shit. After 5 years of marriage my wife has finally figured out that if she asks me to do something, I am going to get it done HOW i get it done. So many fights over this. Finally pulled out a saying from my grandfather to my grandmother: You can either ask me, or you can do it the way you want.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 04:23 PM
1

To all of those saying that this is not a mens rights issue, I humbly disagree. This sub is great for pointing out existing legal inequalities and ways in which men get screwed over by the system. However, I do not see a lot of constructive and concrete ideas put forth as to how to FIX things. To be frank, a lot of posts here just seem like bitching about the way things are. Posts like this one start to scratch the surface of WHY things are they way they are because it addresses the underlying a…
/r/MensRights29/02/16 04:09 PM
1

It might not involve "rights" because there's no laws revolving around the issue, but the mentality that creates unfair laws is core to both those laws and this issue: Men are expendable, should pay more, and are worth less as human beings. +1 You can't change "rights" without first changing attitudes.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:59 PM
2

Speak for yourself. I had to dump a perfectly nice, pretty, caring woman i dated for 1 year because she was just not smart and couldn't hold a job. They money didn't so much concern me as the types of jobs she was bouncing around from....AND the fact she was just plain dumb. Like, nothing between the ears dumb. Saying shit like "its a mute point" instead of "moot" and then refusing to believe me when I correctly her, because, according to her " 'mute' means you cant speak about it."
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:48 PM
2

Yep...that is why 99% of the female rangers in that latest "experiment" flunked out
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:45 PM
7

Putting so much importance and analysis on phallic symbols is just another stupefying aspect our age. IIRC, in my first philo class we had to read some piece of feminist drivel that argued all architecture is sexist because multi-story buildings are all phallic symbols and that to be "gender neutral," we should switch to building under ground in concave bowl "vagina-buildings."
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:13 PM
3

At my college, every year the preppie frat would make a snow penis out of the Abe Lincoln statue; the jock frat would make a huge snow-woman on the ground with a huge hole at the bottom and branches around it.
/r/MensRights29/02/16 03:11 PM
1

No one cares. That is the thing. At least in corporate America, no one cares whether you are male, female, gay, straight, black, latino, or dress up as a stuffed animal of the weekend. All any good manager cares about is your ability to generate revenue. When I do reviews, I don't even look at the names. I just look at hours billed, receipts collected, and efficiency metrics. I don't care WHY you brought in less than the next person--maybe its because you had a kid, maybe its because your mother…
/r/MensRights27/02/16 05:50 PM
5

Other studies, which I do not have access to on my mobile right now explain the minimal resulting difference in terms of willingness to negotiate for wages and demand raises. I can't remember the name of the study of the top of my head, but it concluded that women are more apt to take the first offer they are given and wait for "automatic" raises, whereas, men are more aggressive in initially negotiating salaries and are more likely to threaten to leave if their pay demands are not met. Even if …
/r/MensRights27/02/16 12:58 AM
13

Show me the study that controls for sub-specialty, hours worked, and willingness to negotiate and still has a gap. The real gap isn't between men and women doing the same job. It's between the different jobs that men and women take. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-biggest-myth-about-the-gender-wage-gap/276367/ The AAUW has now joined ranks with serious economists who find that when you control for relevant differences between men and women (occupations, college majors, le…
/r/MensRights26/02/16 11:37 PM
44

But, but, but.....there are fewer womyns in engineering, math, and science classes because of Patriarchy and male oppression. After all, such classes require the use of facts, evidence, and proof, and, we all know that only rapists require facts, evidence, and proof. To be serious, what you have described is also very effective within a profession. When this comes up with regard to law, I ask people to go down to the legal aid clinic and see how many male attorneys are there. Then, I ask how man…
/r/MensRights26/02/16 10:02 PM
2

So Oregon just outlawed valentines day?
/r/MensRights26/02/16 04:54 PM
1

As a fellow attorney, I will echo his view that the justice system is broken. It is not about justice. It is about making money (the government, attorneys, prisons), and enforcing a political agenda.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 04:53 PM
1

This: Feminists simply refuse to acknowledge it, yet we all know it is true: And some women are outright malicious, and see a rape claim as a way to punish a boyfriend or a former spouse, especially if they are locked in a custody or support battle. Some are mentally ill.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 02:33 PM
3

Ontario-wide, about 5.7% of all sexual assault allegations are demonstrably false. In the approximately four and a half years since the province made record-keeping of violent crime mandatory, 2,233 women (this includes a small number of men) out of 39,223 sex-related complainants have lied, said Ontario Provincial Police Detective-Sergeant Darryl Doak. In the 33 months British Columbia has been keeping the same statistics using the same computer program -- police forces in all provinces use the…
/r/MensRights24/02/16 02:29 PM
4

The problem is it is impossible to "get rid of demand" for these types of services. Might as well pass an ordinance requiring all wives to put out on a daily basis....that would do more to solve the "demand" problem than this. The ordinance also likely raises some constitutional problems as to freedom of association and vagueness as applied to customers.
/r/MensRights24/02/16 02:20 PM
1

music is math
/r/MensRights23/02/16 07:23 PM
1

Math, writing, reading, basic civics, music, art are all essential. Students also need a rudimentary understanding of how money and credit works.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 07:10 PM
1

The notion that schools are supposed to be "caring" and "nurturing" is part of the underlying problem.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 06:55 PM
1

School is geared towards the "nice girl" stereotype. All you have to do is show up, shut up, and repeat what they tell you and you are golden. If you have energy, enthusiasm, a true "questioning mind," or hold different values/views then you are either removed from class, drugged, or failed.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 06:53 PM
1

Former adjunct college prof here. The frequency with which female students are willing to trade sexual favors for grades is disturbing. Their willingness to go to the administration with false claims even more so. "I'll blow you for a higher grade, but if you don't accept, then I will just accuse you of asking me for a blowjob in exchange for higher grades, as now you cannot dispute we had a conversation about blowjobs and grades."
/r/MensRights23/02/16 06:46 PM
1

But I thought doing porn was being "sex positive" and "girl power" and all that stuff?
/r/MensRights23/02/16 06:41 PM
1

If that were the case you'd expect gay men to earn more than straight men. False dichotomy, as men are expected to put work first, and significantly penalized for taking paternity leave or working 9-5 hours. Thus, for men, sexual orientation does not matter in terms of "wage gap." Indeed, the "wage gap" matters only with regard to willingness to work/take time off. It largely disappears regardless of sexual orientation or gender when you control for those variables.
/r/MensRights22/02/16 09:49 PM
2

Yes, we all know how it can end, with two out of every three marriages getting divorced. That is a BS statistic and represents ALL marriages, including 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. If you limit the sample size to 1st marriages of two college educated people, the divorce rate drops to under 25%
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:46 PM
2

This is a serious question...Are they now equating wanting consequence free sex as rape?
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:13 PM
3

Yes, but why do lesbians work longer hours, why are they more work orientated Because they are not trying to start families
/r/MensRights22/02/16 07:12 PM
1

Some women who get caught by their husbands and boyfriends cheating, decide to try to cover it up by screaming rape. Happened to me in college 20 years ago. Was at a great party. Met a girl, we fooled around. She said "I have a boyfriend" I said "Is he here"? She giggled and we proceeded to have great sex. Boyfriend (football player) came looking for her, someone saw her go into my room. We were sleeping at this point. He pounded on the door ans screamed, she grabbed her clothes and ran out half…
/r/MensRights19/02/16 05:56 PM
1

Men getting raped by women is hot! /s Until they steal your money and give you VD
/r/MensRights19/02/16 05:48 PM
1

Thats humPERSON
/r/MensRights19/02/16 05:47 PM
2

nd second, because the clearer we are able to express mens emotions, the more trouble feminists are going to have with the argument "Men cannot express their emotions". See, I disagree that a man expressing his emotions is a GOOD thing. I am certainly capable of expressing my emotions. I just chose not to do so.
/r/MensRights19/02/16 05:46 PM
2

So if you repeatedly tell your wife not to spend all your money and fuck other dudes then you are committing a crime?
/r/MensRights19/02/16 03:41 PM
3

And this is why society needs norms and standards of behavior to function. Either you have such norms, recognizing that the weirdos may have hurt feelings or you say fuck it and let it be a free-for-all with no standards whatsoever. Because there is no principled middle ground.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 04:44 AM
3

"Really, stop fucking kids. We mean it this time."
/r/MensRights18/02/16 04:19 AM
1

What is a "caution" on the other side of the pond? A warning? An monetary fine?
/r/MensRights18/02/16 04:02 AM
7

Interesting, but makes sense. In my upper-middle class neighborhood everyone keeps to themselves. No sense of community at all. I get weird looks when I try and talk to mothers at the playground or when I wave to people as I drive through the neighborhood. Everyone is so friggen uptight.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:58 AM
7

I had an encounter with the police for photographing my child at a park. It was friendly enough...but the fact that one of my neighbors would call the cops on me for something so innocent really pisses me off.
/r/MensRights18/02/16 03:55 AM
2

Bravo!
/r/MensRights17/02/16 10:39 PM
2

legal contracts between individuals There is a whole "contract marriage" movement, although it is mostly religious individuals involved. My personal opinion is that the state should not sanction any marriage. Individuals can agree to whatever living conditions they wish; they can even agree to be governed by the religious doctrines of a particular church as to when the contract can be voided. The only role left for the state is to ensure that children of the marriage are cared for.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 10:36 PM
4

"He'll do as a provider for the rest of my life." How true. The calculus is really "Does this guy have enough earning potential such that I can put up with all the things I dont like about him at this moment because I lack other options."
/r/MensRights17/02/16 10:34 PM
5

Be interesting to see how their tune changes when all these career women start divorcing their underachieving hipster husbands.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 09:07 PM
2

I am sick and tired of the "standard of living" b.s. The "standard" or "style" of living is part and parcel to the marriage. If you make a choice to end the marriage, one of the consequences is that standard changes. Now, I am not against some form of spousal support if one spouse put their life "on hold" to subsidize the career of the other.----but there has to be a stopping point. 5 years seems like a good maximum to me. Enough time to go back to school or renter the workforce. If you are an a…
/r/MensRights17/02/16 08:58 PM
3

The generation of "i didn't work and can't be bothered to get a job now" is dying out.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 08:54 PM
1

Unless you are at a public university in a city and the university police is an actual police force assigned to the university.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 08:13 PM
2

I do not truly understand what a "micro aggression" is. Dirty looks?
/r/MensRights16/02/16 02:53 PM
1

Seriously. If my prof's ideal socialistic work, we would all take turns doing everyone else's jobs, as that would eliminate inequality.
/r/MensRights16/02/16 02:52 PM
4

You had kids misrepresenting their aqe and joining up with they were 16 years old! (My grandfather included). Think about THAT! A 16 year old taking fire, watching his buddies die, being deprived of food, shelter, warm clothing, a clean place to piss and shit, and killing people.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 11:21 PM
2

..need some muscles over here.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 10:17 PM
6

Oh, you mean like the one that told me the world would be better off with me dead because I would refuse to comply with his proposed socialist forced rotating job program (literally: one year you are a janitor, the next a doctor).
/r/MensRights15/02/16 10:10 PM
2

Even "convincing" a women to have sex with you is now rape. Reluctant consent is not consent. It must be ENTHUSIASTIC consent.
/r/MensRights15/02/16 06:51 PM
2

Have you met a 20-30yr old lately?
/r/MensRights15/02/16 05:32 PM
16

According to some feminists, yes, it does. So does lying about your profession, earnings, desire for an LTR....According to their "logic", the misrepresentation invalidates any consent that was given, under the theory that consent would not have been given had the bamboozling not occurred. I wonder if it works the same way with fake breasts, hair removal, debt, number of sex partners, etc
/r/MensRights15/02/16 04:48 PM
1

Not when she says, "please stay," starts getting teary-eyed and then tries to get me clobbered for a "going away" party.
/r/MensRights13/02/16 12:34 AM
9

No shit. Just had that happen to me. I lived in 1 city and moved to another. When I was in the first city I worked with a former classmate of mine. She always was dating super rich guys who would take her on fancy trips, etc. Waaaaay out of my league. When I told her I had gotten engaged and was moving, she got so pissed as me and went on this rant about how could I not see that she liked me for all these years. Totally mind boggling.
/r/MensRights12/02/16 10:59 PM
12

Right. And, women are expected to feign disinterest to protect their virtue. Can't count the number of times I have had a woman say "We are absolutely not having sex tonight." I even had that said by a "friend" with a boyfriend who needed to come into my bed because my apartment was so cold.....In all cases vigorous sex ensued that was fully consensual. However, what if one had really meant no and I instigated? I would be guilty of sexual assault by todays standards instead of just misreading si…
/r/MensRights12/02/16 10:57 PM
8

Funny story. Had my 15 yr college reunion last year. Low turnout. Wound up hanging out/drinking with the lesbian man-hater, feminist group. We were stumbling back from the bars and everyone needed to piss. There were signs on all the restroom doors on campus indicating that the college was removing gender identifiers to "stop the perpetration of gender stereotypes and prevent discrimination regardless of sex assignment'. One of the women got real angry and said "What? I dont want to shit with so…
/r/MensRights12/02/16 10:52 PM
6

That being said, the style this article is written in, while fanciful, makes it difficult at times to understand what is being said. It should be reserved for an opinion piece or other sort of work, not on an article reporting the facts. Its mostly a summary of the closing argument with some color commentary thrown in between. I agree, however, that it times it is difficult to distinguish the two.,
/r/MensRights12/02/16 05:01 PM
8

“There is not an expert in the world that would come and testify that perjury is indicative of trauma,” Henein observed. “What the witness cannot do is . . . lie and conceal their conduct and then, when caught out, say, ‘oh gee, that’s just how victims of abuse behave.’ ”
/r/MensRights12/02/16 05:00 PM
1

Check out the ABA's new Model Penal Code and new definition of sexual assault. If you try and hold you date's hand with romantic intentions and she doesn't want to...that is sexual assault. Not. Fucking. Kidding./
/r/MensRights11/02/16 05:04 PM
1

Have you ever met a person who went to a shrink and there WEREN'T diagnosed with some form of mental or behavior disorder?
/r/MensRights11/02/16 05:02 PM
3

Make regular mental health check-ups compulsory and subsidized Except the mental health profession thinks everyone has some form of disorder and needs to be on meds. No thanks. 8 years in worthless "therapy" and being am medication Guinea pig did nothing for my depression and anxiety. Stopping drinking, working out, and meditating "cured" me in 1 year.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 04:46 PM
3

Imagine if a man demanded equal treatment and asked that she buy him a new bass boat, and a two-week bear hunt in Siberia as a condition of marriage
/r/MensRights11/02/16 04:27 PM
3

Count the number of women of marrying age that you know who subscribe to financial services magazines or newspapers. True dat
/r/MensRights11/02/16 04:26 PM
14

Only if a man you be
/r/MensRights11/02/16 04:23 PM
2

Why cant people understand that free speech only matters if it includes the offense?
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:56 PM
2

amazing, isnt it?
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:46 PM
5

Smartest thing he did was to insist that a friend was present the night he "consoled" her after the rape. Had a friend not been there, she would have undoubtedly made advances on him ('just hold me') and then cry rape if he didnt acquiesce.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:42 PM
3

Hey... are you serious or not? I am just not here as a fuck buddy. Whats wrong? Are you scare of commitment? Dammit you need to commit NOW!
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:39 PM
4

Screams "spoiled princess whose daddy got her everything she ever wanted." Probably the first time sometime told her no and didn't cave. I can just see the hamster wheel spinning....[he just doesn't know me. I will make him like me. He just has to see how desirable I am. If he thinks some intriguing foreign guy likes me, he will recognize my value........ok...that didn't work. if he sees that 5 members of the most popular frat wanted to fuck me, he will surely change his mind.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:38 PM
2

I am too scared to answer. You are raping me by continuing this conversation.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 11:31 PM
1

They literally believe that. Hence why "asking for evidence empowers the rape deniers."
/r/MensRights10/02/16 08:59 PM
3

yeeasssss
/r/MensRights10/02/16 07:58 PM
1

Serious question. Back when I was in HS, my girlfriend and I were trying anal sex for the first time. She did not find it pleasurable. I said I would stop; she responded: "Just hurry up and finish." So, she didn't care for it, but told me to proceed.....Rape?
/r/MensRights10/02/16 04:55 PM
2

Take the classical (and somewhat hyperbolic) examples of the early bond movies. That scene is basically in every pre 1990s movie. Girl and guy fight or argue. Guy forcefully kisses woman, pressing her into him; girls pushes off for a split second, but then swoons and relents.... "ohh James."
/r/MensRights10/02/16 04:53 PM
1

And they would agree with you
/r/MensRights10/02/16 04:50 PM
1

FTW
/r/MensRights10/02/16 04:48 PM
1

I wonder how much of her response is due to feeling ashamed after the fact, and not really that she didn't want to have sex in the first place? BINGO
/r/MensRights10/02/16 04:46 PM
4

This all boils down to the mantra that we should just take a woman's word for it that she was raped. Thats the only thing that matters--what happened at the exact moment of the encounter. And the only "evidence" is his word vs her word. Any attempts to introduce circumstantial evidence to cast doubt on the credibility of the accuser is now an affront to women's rights and slut shaming. We certainly live in an interesting world where a woman can cry rape, and the next day beg for sex, and then fe…
/r/MensRights10/02/16 03:23 PM
1

Here is the problem. Men and women are conditioned to respond differently to the same stimuli. The fact scenario is a drunken college hookup that perhaps was not pleasurable for either party and that both regret in the morning. The male psychological response is to brag to his friends that he got laid to feel better about it. The female response is to claim she was raped so she feels better about it.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 03:18 PM
10

The "immobilized" is just a post-hoc rationalization to justify poor decisionmaking on her part. Notice how in the article she is just casually discussing being "raped" by a fellow student with the friend and instead of the friend saying "we need to go to the police", she says..."oh, sorry for bringing it up."
/r/MensRights10/02/16 03:15 PM
4

Which is just more proof of patriarchy.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 03:13 PM
1

The headline of this article indicates what the problem is. These affirmative consent/rape policies are trying to equate "feelings" of being taken advantage of with the criminal offense of rape. Rape= unwanted FORCED sexual contact. To turn the tables around, consider the not uncommon scenario of two drunk college students after a party. The guy has had too much to drunk and is on the verge of passing out---conscious, able to talk/move, but wants nothing more than to pass out. His female acquain…
/r/MensRights10/02/16 03:12 PM
1

Do you all disagree that you should receive consent before engaging in sexual activity regardless of gender? The normal definition of "consent" is agreeing to/acquiescing. With that normal definition, the answer to your question is yes. However, under the law (and basic human interaction), consent can be both verbal (express) or nonverbal (implied). Two people can have sex without talking about it and not "rape" each other---indeed, that is how the best sex normally occurs--naturally, organicall…
/r/MensRights10/02/16 02:58 PM
1

Because words no longer have any meaning. Under their new definition of "rape", sex needs to be mutually fulfilling, happy, and orgasmic to be consensual. A female who gives a guy a blowjob is now being "raped" if she reluctantly agreed to it.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 02:53 PM
9

So, if you are inexperienced or bad in bed and the female is not "enthusiastic" then you are guilty of rape? Bad sex = rape now? "People don't understand what consent is" because you have redefined it to levels of absurdity that contradict the most basic forms of human interaction.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 04:01 PM
18

Why is it so hard for people to understand that if you accuse someone of assault or rape and they proposition them for sex the next day, it makes it more likely that your accusation is false? Normal, rational people do not behave that way.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 03:58 PM
3

Thank god in the US, we have probable cause hearings to prevent this shit from going to trial.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 03:08 PM
3

Not always true. I make a distinction between : A. 1-off, I got super drunk, fucked up, feel horrible, I told-you, and I am cutting off all contact with the other person and B. This shit where she hides it and uses it as leverage. All people are capable of mistakes. But, if it is premeditated and hidden, you can bet your ass it will happen again. The sex part can be gotten over. The broken trust due to lying cannot.
/r/MensRights08/02/16 10:15 PM
3

I was a standard "nice guy" for most of my life. I am now married, but these discussions still interest me. IME, the biggest problems "nice guys" have is coming off being too needy (expressly or implicitly). The best success I had dating was after college when I just acted aloof, cocky, didn't give a fuck, and was, at times, an inconsiderate asshole. The woman whom I married saw past all that...but I am of the opinion that aloofness, confidence, mysteriousness, and making a woman put in effort t…
/r/MensRights08/02/16 10:07 PM
42

When I was in school as "safe place" was a place to express your ideas, however controversial without fear of retaliation.
/r/MensRights03/02/16 10:40 PM
3

Phoenix Matthews, who is transidentified and gender-nonconforming, has heard the same objections. The fuck????
/r/MensRights29/01/16 05:56 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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