Hybrid23 Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
0	Connecticut Supreme Court: "A court cannot order someone to provide their former spouse with a better standard of living than they enjoyed during the marriage." ---> Wow how kind of them. It's not about the significance of her contributions during marriage. It's about the impact of her contributions on her ability to work.	/r/MensRights	15/10/15 12:57 AM
0	Connecticut Supreme Court: "A court cannot order someone to provide their former spouse with a better standard of living than they enjoyed during the marriage." ---> Wow how kind of them. And, functionally, he is going to be worse off. This is only true if the rule is improperly enforced. There is a larger issue of too much alimony. The concept is not flawed, since you're only right if it's already wrong.	/r/MensRights	14/10/15 09:37 AM
1	Connecticut Supreme Court: "A court cannot order someone to provide their former spouse with a better standard of living than they enjoyed during the marriage." ---> Wow how kind of them. Isnt the real problem where the spouse maintains a standard of living that is higher than the one paying support? This seems like the real issue.	/r/MensRights	14/10/15 06:14 AM
3	Connecticut Supreme Court: "A court cannot order someone to provide their former spouse with a better standard of living than they enjoyed during the marriage." ---> Wow how kind of them. Because, functionally, she is going to be worse off. She hasn't worked in 20 years and getting a decent job is difficult. This is a sacrifice she has made, like all women, for the marriage, the family, and the man.	/r/MensRights	14/10/15 06:13 AM
1	'Kind, funny and bright' student, 17, hanged himself after being falsely accused of rape and finding it 'difficult to cope with the investigation' She made no sense, and neither do you	/r/MensRights	02/10/15 12:25 AM
-1	'Kind, funny and bright' student, 17, hanged himself after being falsely accused of rape and finding it 'difficult to cope with the investigation' Yeah, this would be muder in australia, too, i think (though im no lawyer)	/r/MensRights	02/10/15 12:24 AM
1	Rapist gets 30 days, community service Its about as morally bankrupt as want to wear nice clothes instead of rags	/r/MensRights	18/09/15 05:53 AM
1	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: Good point on the both drunk part. However in that analogy getting arrested makes sense since shooting someone isn't something you can just consent to. More to the point, feminists would argue that more accurately the analogy would read: "The cop and I were both drunk. He decided it would be fun to shoot at each other, and I was too drunk to say no. I got shot, and now I'm not happy that I got shot and the cop should be arrested."	/r/MensRights	24/07/14 03:27 AM
1	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: What about situations where the drunk person is so drunk they are just kind of going along with anything that happens? I'm sure we've all seen in, someone (usually a girl, but can be a guy too) just so drunk that if someone starts kissing them they just kiss back. If sex happens in that situation, is consented? I mean, the person can barely walk. At what point do we think that someone is in such an altered/decreased state of consciousness that we think they can no longer give consent? Is there a…	/r/MensRights	24/07/14 03:23 AM
1	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: Probably a more accurate analogy (depending on the situation) would be between: "I was walking home from a bar and a police officer shot me" and "I was walking home from a bar, notably drunk, and when the police officer asked to see my hands and I didn't show them, so he shot me".	/r/MensRights	23/07/14 03:56 PM
11	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: Yep, this hits the nail on the head. If someone is raped, then drunk or not that's bad. But if you choose to have sex and regret it, that's not rape. You are drunk, but you are still responsible for your actions. If this wasn't the case, drunk driving wouldn't be a crime, because anyone caught drunk driving would get off with the 'I was drunk, so it's okay'. As I understand it, many feminists argue that while drunk, people are often 'coerced' into sex, through things like verbal manipulation, pu…	/r/MensRights	23/07/14 03:54 PM
3	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: Not sure if you are directing that at me or not. For clarity: I'm saying the drunken analogy provided is not good. I'm also not necessarily agreeing with everything I said, I'm saying that's what most feminists will say. I am also from Australia.	/r/MensRights	23/07/14 02:13 PM
13	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: and the officer assaulted me That is still different.	/r/MensRights	23/07/14 11:15 AM
26	Continuing my University/city's excellent sexual violence campaign is this: They will say the difference is that in the rape, someone else is imposing their will on you, whereas shooting the cop is an action you are taking. I rape, you are the victim, but in a shooting your aren't the victim, the cop is. And since they since any victim blaming is wrong, the discussion from there becomes pointless.	/r/MensRights	23/07/14 10:08 AM