TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Incident-Pit Archive

View 1 posts and 584 comments by Incident-Pit 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)
192

FeminismIncident-Pit/r/MensRights23/11/17 04:35 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
10

Fatherless =\= not married.
/r/MensRights10/12/18 09:47 AM
1

Well, if you are gonna be that prescriptivist about it, gender is actually a purely grammatical concept. But that changed, and not terribly long ago.
/r/MensRights10/12/18 09:43 AM
1

1800kcals a day tops. 6'0. 210lbs. Gym 1.5hrs 5 times a week + cardio. And I can't even begin to lose weight on that diet.
/r/MensRights02/11/18 12:42 PM
0

I'm really sorry to say this, but that definitely says more about you than any other factor.
/r/MensRights02/11/18 12:29 PM
2

You read wrong.
/r/MensRights25/10/18 05:40 PM
1

All things being equal, their irresponsibly begotten children will be covered under their health insurance, an thus influence the premiums on yours, so you're going to pay either way. One way is a hell of a lot cheaper than the other way though.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 07:59 PM
2

Not even close to true. Maybe 30% of EU countries have free higher education.
/r/MensRights17/10/18 07:55 PM
1

Top tip: if you can schedule your sleep into 1.5hr increments (give or take 5mins for your personal circadian rhythm) then you'll wake up a lot more refreshed afterwords. It's an old army trick to deal with shortened sleeping times in the field but it works regardless of total sleep time. Try it, it's bloody revolutionary.
/r/MensRights16/09/18 11:01 PM
2

If we accept the concept of hate crimes at all then we accept that misogyny should be a hate crime, because it would be. I'll let other, smarter, people come to their own conclusions beyond that.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 10:50 PM
1

Ok mate. Cool story.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 08:55 PM
1

Yet it might as well be if you are intersex. Also learn what revealed preference means. Duh.
/r/MensRights02/09/18 10:57 PM
1

I think you are confusing p values with percentages. A 5% gap can be an alarmingly high one in some fields of study.
/r/MensRights02/09/18 08:47 AM
6

Sure, and that can be done when there is more information on the individuals' revealed preferences than a coin flip.
/r/MensRights30/08/18 08:39 AM
1

They definitely don't weigh food in pounds and ounces in eastern Europe though.
/r/MensRights29/07/18 07:28 PM
4

Good for you buddy!
/r/MensRights29/07/18 06:17 PM
1

There's been more than one Queen Elizabeth.
/r/MensRights29/07/18 06:12 PM
2

In what world is the invasion of your territory and subsequent subjugation of the citizens living in your territory not a declaration of war?
/r/MensRights29/07/18 06:10 PM
4

Actually it's a hell of a lot less sexual than a handshake. You can do a lot of seriously creepy feeling stuff with a handshake that's just impossible with a fist bump. How crazy is this?
/r/MensRights29/07/18 05:40 PM
6

That has to be one of the wildest uses of the term Incel I have ever read. Like, your examples are the exact opposite of actual Incel talking points. They aren't sympathetic to women ffs.
/r/MensRights29/07/18 05:34 PM
3

Actually, at the height of the fighting in Afghanistan the British Army was over recruited, a few thousand soldiers above establishment strength. This state of affairs only stopped when the government decided to institute a massive redundancy campaign, slashing troop numbers by over 20%, combined with a disasterous recruitment organisation privatisation.
/r/MensRights29/07/18 05:04 PM
12

It wouldn't surprise me if a large proportion of men leave stem for the exact same reason. Most stem careers are actually pretty routine, boring, data entry and collection jobs. Well paid because they require specialist skills 10% of the time but not qualitively different from, low level, drudgery grade office work for the other 90%.
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:41 AM
1

Noice.
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:32 AM
4

Come on buddy, be more charitable. I know you have it in you. It's not laziness to not ask questions about things if you don't even know there are questions to be asked. It takes time to build up enough anecdotal evidence before the media halo starts to crack at its edges. That may happen much sooner for some, far too late for others, but it's mostly not laziness.
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:30 AM
14

It's worse than that even. 10 days paid leave is nowhere near enough to help out true victims of serious DV but it is damn sure more than enough to put a significant dent in a small businesses' bottom line that month. Who does this actually help?
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:23 AM
1

If they become orthodontists, then they really won't need your loan anyway, just time and patients. See the difference?
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:12 AM
2

On these issues? NPR/CNN are actually on the same level as bloggers from tumblr.... The only real difference between them is that one side are exceptionally well funded.
/r/MensRights27/07/18 12:05 AM
2

I'm shocked. Absolutely shocked! Won't she think of the women and children?
/r/MensRights24/07/18 07:39 AM
1

You realise that the clitoris is almost as large as an "entire" normal sized penis.... You do know that, don't you? And you of course also know that most of the penis is relatively insensate, unlike the clitoris, leading to a dramatic discrepancy in total erogenous tissue area. So your thread title, with the most charitable interpretation possible, is just saying an apple is like an functionally similar apple. So what?
/r/MensRights24/07/18 12:12 AM
1

That guy is like a strawman of all the most stereotypical autistic traits rolled into one.
/r/MensRights23/07/18 11:32 PM
3

I was thinking the same thing. There must be something really spectacular happening behind the scenes that isn't being mentioned for it to play out this way.
/r/MensRights18/07/18 06:17 PM
2

My favourite part of the reporting pay gaps fiasco was the revelation that the Tories have a 12% pay gap in favour of women and Labour had a 5% pay gap against women. Cue much wailing and gnashing of teeth how that didn't count from Labour.
/r/MensRights14/07/18 04:28 PM
1

I hate that you are probably correct saying this. The left as a hole needs to catch a grip. Use of hole is intentional.
/r/MensRights14/07/18 04:25 PM
24

That's almost funnier than the intended joke.
/r/MensRights01/07/18 09:44 AM
1

Good wilreadit.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 06:38 PM
1

Survey responses are still data. The gender pay gap being between 10-20% is not a lie. The lie is in how it is presented by feminists as the result of prejudice.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 12:27 AM
2

Woof. Someone is salty.
/r/MensRights28/06/18 12:20 AM
3

Why can't you lie? What possible situation would clue them in on it?
/r/MensRights22/06/18 04:10 PM
7

Be the change you want to see, don't just whine about other people's choices...
/r/MensRights22/06/18 04:00 PM
1

They actually are. because there are so few very, very, old Russian men it pulls the male life expectancy figures down dramatically. You can see it where I live too, cities that had the highest conscription rates in WWII still have deflated life expectancies compared to less affected areas, those with large amounts of protected industries, even when controlling for wealth and healthcare provision.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 04:21 AM
1

They are definitely using it generically. That said it's almost certainly specifically referring to broaderline in this instance, based on actions and demographic.
/r/MensRights19/06/18 04:15 AM
1

Look up the DSM-IV & 5.
/r/MensRights18/06/18 05:45 PM
1

That's not quite how life expectancy works. I mean, can we think of anything that happened around 77 years ago what would have severely compromised the number of elderly male Russians but left the numbers of elderly female Russians, relatively, unscathed?
/r/MensRights18/06/18 05:31 PM
-3

Nah.
/r/MensRights16/06/18 04:20 AM
1

If her friend's husband is buying her diamonds then her being pissy at you for not buying her diamonds is the least of your worries.
/r/MensRights15/06/18 08:51 PM
1

I use mine to cut open tin cans if I'm too lazy to find out where the can opener is hiding. Your damn right that they're serious business in the right circumstances.
/r/MensRights10/06/18 05:08 AM
1

Is there any kind of knife that you would agree that the sentence would be reasonable for? A Breadknife is a pretty serious bit of kit. You'd be better off slashed by a combat knife, at least the wound would be neat.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 06:25 PM
2

Breadknife. That's a very different beast than a butter knife. 12 inches of razorsharp serrated difference.
/r/MensRights09/06/18 06:15 PM
3

Do the Republicans represent the entire right wing of the political spectrum with no room to spare for any other parties? From the very slightest shift to right of centre to the most extreme ancap fringes? No? Then you understand that a party can be to the left of the republicans and still be very right wing.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 11:10 PM
3

They are pretty right wing, and with plenty of room to spare.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 10:25 PM
0

But it's not though. Feminists "say" that it is, and people very often believe them, but they are lying.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 03:09 PM
-2

I don't think gender flips work on things like this article. It's not misandrist to ask questions like these; not because there isn't a double standard but because the way men are treated in this case should be the norm. You know it, I know it, we all know it. Women are given an insane amount of epistemic charity in general with these things that is really not warranted by any measure. Men would be all the poorer for it if we gave them the same treatment we currently give women. I don't want to …
/r/MensRights03/06/18 02:56 PM
3

Democrats.... Left.... Ok mate.
/r/MensRights03/06/18 02:46 PM
6

Someone is super sensitive, almost as if you know it's mutilation but don't want to confront it. It's a super weird way to look at it too, do you feel as if the victims of any other barbaric institutionalised practice are lesser human beings because of the act that was inflicted upon them? Are they lesser because other people feel empathy towards their, often unselfexamined plight? No? I certainly hope not. There are women out there whom have suffered full cliterodectomies as infants or as prepu…
/r/MensRights03/06/18 02:45 PM
1

Tanks and planes aren't much use against a civilian uprising if you can't use them in a targeted manner because those civilians are invisible, hiding amongst the general population, until they decide to act. Even in the best case scenario, they are of extremely limited use, more often than not counterproductive, if you can't afford to indescriminately destroy the infrastructure that the uprising hides amongst. That leaves boots on the ground as your only effective option; boots on the ground tha…
/r/MensRights01/06/18 03:42 PM
1

It couldn't be a facetious term used by the press to subtly mock them for over 25 years could it? No of course not.
/r/MensRights29/05/18 08:08 PM
4

Never been in the military have you? 90% of your team bonding is done in the barrack block.
/r/MensRights28/05/18 02:45 PM
6

Obviously true, not relevant though.
/r/MensRights26/05/18 10:57 PM
2

It's like the portmanteau version of ATM machine.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:35 PM
1

Femogynists... I would love to know what you think that means.
/r/MensRights20/05/18 09:20 PM
1

Archive it bro.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 09:58 PM
0

Nothing you say is proving him wrong. The department of defence isn't a military organisation. It's the civilian organisation that oversees the military as a whole. The department of the navy isn't the navy. Most obviously shown in the fact that there is a separate organisation called the navy.
/r/MensRights15/05/18 09:45 PM
1

That's because the term man, a gender neutral term meaning all humans, predates man, meaning biological males, by hundreds and hundreds of years. It turns out people are lazy and the male prefix "were-" was linguistically hard to keep static whereas the female prefix "wif-" lent itself to transitioning into the simpler "wo-". Also the actual term for an unmarried male is Master. In common usage it has devolved to mean only juvenile males but the fact remains that that is the correct term. It's b…
/r/MensRights12/05/18 01:20 PM
1

Filming it and posting it on the Internet. Like a tool.
/r/MensRights10/05/18 01:36 AM
2

He should be court martialed.
/r/MensRights06/05/18 11:47 PM
0

Keep mad bro.
/r/MensRights25/04/18 08:10 AM
-1

You are so salty about this....
/r/MensRights22/04/18 11:52 AM
1

That's quite ironic considering the way the French handle both those areas. I wonder what makes the Québecois different.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 05:54 AM
1

Nonsense.
/r/MensRights18/04/18 10:39 PM
1

See, that's the thing... It wasn't though.
/r/MensRights18/04/18 08:22 PM
1

Yeah, that's just been me and all my alts so I could make it look like you had a point though at the time though, rather than significantly after the fact.
/r/MensRights18/04/18 05:57 AM
0

Prostitution has never, ever, been illegal in the UK.
/r/MensRights17/04/18 07:29 PM
3

10 up votes.... Highly up voted... Ok then.
/r/MensRights17/04/18 03:43 AM
2

If men suffer in silence then they aren't taking time off, so they are doing productive work which makes them more valuable to the employer. This is true even if the absolute quality of their work declines due to migraine issues since the counter factual woman would be getting paid for 0 accomplished workload. How could you miss that? Like, for real, what was the point in this comment?
/r/MensRights12/04/18 11:32 AM
1

Good for you!
/r/MensRights11/04/18 08:09 PM
1

I have never heard about this but it is pretty obviously true once pointed out.
/r/MensRights10/04/18 10:24 PM
3

That's really not in anyway reflective of reality though is it? That's almost "MGM is in no way comparable to FGM" levels of wrong.
/r/MensRights10/04/18 08:58 PM
-7

Good. Bye!
/r/MensRights10/04/18 08:53 PM
1

Did I say anything about any of that? No. Did I say any of it was a good thing? No. Do I even seem to care about any of that? No. So why act like I did? Edit: A remarkably large number of illegal immigrants pay taxes. You agree, glad we are on the same page!
/r/MensRights03/04/18 09:00 PM
1

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/pdf_notes/note151.pdf
/r/MensRights03/04/18 05:27 PM
1

A frankly unbelievable number of illegal immigrants do, in fact, pay income taxes.
/r/MensRights02/04/18 10:05 PM
1

I have a farmer mate that can help you get some straw for that man you got there!
/r/MensRights02/04/18 02:44 PM
1

You sure showed me pal!
/r/MensRights01/04/18 05:56 AM
1

Because Incels are almost by definition in the omega category. They are not full members of the group under discussion, they are tolerated fringe members at best... At worst actively ostracised. Most people are betas, my friend, again by definition. If you aren't the leader in any given group, but you are still accepted as a full member of that group, then you are a beta. Some advice though, aggressive bluster doesn't actually make me think you know what you are talking about buddy. It's quite c…
/r/MensRights30/03/18 11:44 AM
0

Beta doesn't mean what you think it means. It's not even a perjoritive in its human hierarchical sense. Almost everybody would fall into the beta category including most "Alphas".
/r/MensRights29/03/18 03:16 PM
2

I didn't even get the chance to see what they said. Doubtless a good thing.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 09:12 PM
2

It isn't that high actually. It only looks high, compared to society at large, because the demographics of the military trend so far male. The age ranges involved also affects the stats badly. Once you factor them in I've found that prior military service has a, possibly statistically insignificant, protective effect. Current military service has a definite protective effect. This is true in the UK, Aus and the US, I've not looked into it elsewhere though.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 06:32 PM
4

You know what I like about Bill Burr? He just talks and it's like a stream of consciousness. Most of the time he doesn't even know what he's saying before he says it and you can watch in real time as he figures out how he feels about stuff. He doesn't hold anything back either. It's refreshing.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 06:08 PM
3

Yikes... that is a hot take my dude.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 06:03 PM
3

Soy boy is a pretty good insult though. I always thought it referred to vegans until recently... The more you know.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 05:58 PM
1

Man, I love it when retards accuse normal people of thinking they're geniuses, because those people are smarter than retards like them. Pure comedy gold. Have a like.
/r/MensRights24/03/18 11:00 PM
0

Then be a good little boy, have some humility, and don't call people meatballs. You're response is causing you to slip from merely mediocre to sub par.
/r/MensRights22/03/18 12:48 AM
7

I can't believe the fact that they are comfortable using the word mutilation at all. Usually they would use a euphemism...
/r/MensRights22/03/18 12:06 AM
1

Who are you talking to? It can't be me since it is irrelevant to what I said.
/r/MensRights21/03/18 10:12 PM
1

Your performance there was mediocre. Hollow point bullets are also banned by the Geneva Conventions, and essentially every police officer in the U.S. is issued them, civilians aren't bound by the law of armed conflict you absolute crotch goblin.
/r/MensRights21/03/18 10:09 PM
0

Thank god that every single fighting age male, and every woman in some jurisdictions, is included in the militia by definition then eh?
/r/MensRights21/03/18 03:59 PM
1

I'll be honest, call out videos are just so far below Karen it's not even funny. The JBP one was ok, this recent one was meh at best. I watched all of Karen's video and a bit of the metokur response. I had to turn that one off after the dude with the squeaky voice kept going off about he was a super tough heap big former soldier who'd been bombed and all that. I get sympathetic embarrassment something awful and that little tirade made me cringe so hard that I thought I'd pass out.
/r/MensRights21/03/18 01:54 PM
2

That's not a very effective arguementation strategy. I suggest you drop dead weight like that before you waste too much more of your life being counter productive like this.
/r/MensRights18/03/18 08:55 PM
1

If they were captured enemy combatants then the Geneva conventions would be relevant. As it is though, they aren't.
/r/MensRights18/03/18 08:36 PM
173

Hormonal birth control is a complete dumpster fire, women are broadly waking up to this fact, men shouldn't even bother going down this route. Vasigel is the future.
/r/MensRights18/03/18 08:33 PM
2

Ok buddy. You can parrot that all you want but, because I've defeated in detail your every point, you'd be wrong.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 11:45 AM
2

Irrelevant variable to the topic at hand. Spent money providing services isn't profit.
/r/MensRights15/03/18 01:03 AM
1

Which changes nothing.
/r/MensRights14/03/18 10:18 PM
1

No, limited scope charities are a thing. For example, a regional autism support charity with clearly defined and regulated support programmes and events schedule. It only ever needs to expand its cash flow when a new cost, usually in the form of a service user, is introduced.
/r/MensRights14/03/18 04:04 PM
1

So... Presumably you are conceding both points in their totality then? Our hypothetical charity doesn't have to expand to fulfil a useful or important purpose and its motives don't have to be realised with the profits that are obviously not needed to expand.
/r/MensRights13/03/18 07:26 AM
1

I'm definitely not misreading it. Results suggest no significant changes in language based on speaker gender. This refers to the subject under observation and states their gender was found to not be relevant to testing. However, when speaking with a female, participants interrupted more and used more dependent clauses than when speaking with a male. The subjects, previously established to not vary their behaviour based on their gender, universally tended to interrupt female conversation partners…
/r/MensRights13/03/18 07:04 AM
1

Fun fact: until the 1832 Reform Act women had the right to vote in the U.K. In practice it was rare but it did happen.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 07:20 PM
1

I admit I'm only going by the abstract, since it's behind a paywall, but that's not what it says at all. It says that regardless of gender of the speaker, people will interrupt female conversation partners more.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 06:00 PM
1

I know they are being sarcastic but that might actually be the case. Think about it, most accused white rapists and murderers, for example, would get trials whilst blacks accused of committing the same crimes were liable to get extra-judicially killed instead.
/r/MensRights10/03/18 06:20 PM
1

That is a very good point...
/r/MensRights09/03/18 11:33 PM
16

Has crowder ever actually had his mind changed at these events?
/r/MensRights07/03/18 09:00 PM
5

Icelandic tourism can ge summed up in two words. Hot springs. More hot springs than you could shake a stick at if you were in orbit.
/r/MensRights07/03/18 12:05 PM
7

You're just a little off there. If a guy hits a girl he's an obvious bad guy... If a girl hits a guy he's probably a bad guy, and even if he isn't he still deserved it... Regardless, good point, well presented!
/r/MensRights07/03/18 12:00 PM
1

Not a great example when it's the sporting authority that is forcing them to fight against girls if they want to compete at all. As far as I can tell they'd be much happier getting their ass handed to them in the boys league than absolutely dominating the girls.
/r/MensRights06/03/18 03:35 PM
1

No, you don't. You can absolutely run a charity on a zero sum balance. Obviously in the short term it can be very hard to achieve but over a long enough timeframe it's almost trivially easy. Hell, it's absolutely acceptable to operate a charity at a negative profit margin,typically to achieve significant and acute short term goals, as long as you can balance the books at a later date. Regardless, the mere having of a profit margin is explicitly different from having that profit as a motive.
/r/MensRights03/03/18 02:44 PM
1

Serbia is a post second-world country, it can't be third world since it post dates the fall of Russian Communism.
/r/MensRights03/03/18 02:23 PM
1

Not really. Profit in this instance is the surplus value created in the course of an organisations operation. Unless you subscribe to the notion that the acquisition of donations is the charity's primary goal, rather than a simple operational necessity, then donations don't count as profit as there is no created value for them.
/r/MensRights03/03/18 01:26 PM
3

The UK has had mass shootings since Dunblane. What a daft thing to say.
/r/MensRights03/03/18 12:26 PM
2

I don't get it...
/r/MensRights02/03/18 09:21 PM
1

Hello Majid my old friend... Lol
/r/MensRights28/02/18 01:51 PM
28

No one throws grenades, like you do in that test, in combat anyway. Too many factors can go wrong for it to pass even the most liberal cost benefit analysis. It's simply waaaaaay too risky. In reality they get posted through doorways, windows, firing ports, etc or underhandedly rolled into trenches and over buntlines. The reason they are taking it out is that too few recruits actually have the throwing skills, that in the past would have been developed in childhood, to progress without extensive…
/r/MensRights15/02/18 02:19 PM
1

That is a much, much, better idea. Pity it will never happen though.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 02:40 PM
2

I hope you only have, and only ever have, daughters, at least then they'll maintain their bodily integrity.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 02:08 PM
3

Meh, even with an incredibly broad religious exemption you'd still reduce the U.S. circumcision rate 90%. That would be a, admittedly incomplete, victory condition in my book.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 02:05 PM
1

It doesn't matter in this case. You would be explicitly protecting 90% of potential victims in one fell swoop. The fact that rich people can still victimise their children doesn't mean we shouldn't make changes to protect everyone else. After all, if those rich people don't like ANY given law badly enough then they could just move somewhere it doesn't apply.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 01:51 PM
2

In doc Kellogg's day the lubricants on offer were significantly less effective and affordable. It definitely deterred a good number of young uns back then.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 01:29 PM
1

If you want to use a term that automatically generates backlash, then have at it, but don't be surprised when people lash back. A "paper abortion" is also not an abortion in any meaningful sense, the term is hyperbolic in the extreme. It's almost like comparing being thrown out of a bar to being sent to a gulag, it's pure apples to stairs logic. Just call it what it is, the waiving of your parental rights, and it has a nice easy and accurate term already. Who knew...
/r/MensRights11/02/18 05:32 PM
11

Well, you could use the more accurate and less loaded term "Legal Paternal Surrender." The use of the term abortion is just gonna trigger, near enough, every group on every point of the political spectrum. Triggers Trad-Cons because abortion, regardless of context. Triggers feminists because you are "forcing" abortion on women, regardless of context.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 08:32 PM
1

Every single sentence you write is a vindication of your Recruiters' choice to deny you entry... You do know that they had to pass up a nice little monetary incentive because you couldn't meet the absolute lowest bar of the psych standards. You should really go down to the their office to apologise to them, and to the nearest tree for stealing all that oxygen it has to work hard to create all day.
/r/MensRights11/01/18 08:19 PM
0

I'm not the person that is spewing hate towards the military with no provocation. The fact that you are clearly projecting attitudes that you personally hold onto others, is extremely transparent. You honestly come across as slightly mentally ill, seek treatment for your issues. You are a sad, pitiful, little person and your attitude towards others needs a lot of work. Hopefully, you'll eventually get better. Of course, it might take the combined efforts of heaven and earth to do it. Remember th…
/r/MensRights11/01/18 03:17 AM
3

If you want the report read then include that in the post rather than a comment then.
/r/MensRights11/01/18 03:02 AM
1

Uh huh, not salty at ALL...
/r/MensRights09/01/18 06:27 PM
2

That's pretty magnanimous, dude. Positive discourse is positive!
/r/MensRights06/01/18 09:45 AM
5

Damn, son, you should be called buffy cause you just slayed.
/r/MensRights06/01/18 09:38 AM
1

Wow, looks like someone got rejected at the recruiting office.
/r/MensRights06/01/18 06:43 AM
1

The Queen isn't ruling when the King is the embodiment of the Crown. King George the V was the ruler, she was his wife. If the Queen is the ruler then her husband isn't a King. Regardless, the monarchy lacks any functional executive power and has lacked said power since well before the reign of Queen Victoria. The actual executive function of the British state resides solely in the institution of the Parliament. Even if the Royal family had any real executive power, and let me reiterate that the…
/r/MensRights06/01/18 05:10 AM
1

I didn't know King George V was a queen! The more you know.
/r/MensRights05/01/18 02:48 AM
5

What are you trying to imply was in that conversation? Regardless, invoking comparisons to species that it is perfectly acceptable to castrate at birth is probably not going to help you make any points about circumcision.
/r/MensRights05/01/18 01:54 AM
12

That's the whole point of the 1 in 3 stat, man. It's to conflate wildly disproportionate things. Well done for stating the obvious.
/r/MensRights31/12/17 08:20 PM
8

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11343380/Sexually-assault-1-in-3-UK-female-students-victim-on-campus.html If you can't find those kind stats then you aren't looking hard enough. This is the first link on the first page of a Google search filled with them.
/r/MensRights31/12/17 07:20 PM
12

It's Julie Bindel, of course that's what she is saying.
/r/MensRights31/12/17 04:25 PM
2

Can't help you other than to express my sympathies... That is unfathomably fucked.
/r/MensRights28/12/17 12:29 AM
2

Photographic evidence has nothing to do with the fact that the UCMJ can get service members convicted for committing adultery. But fair enough, on closer reading, I take it you were taking issue with the rumour that it requires photo/video evidence and not the fact that you can get convicted for adultery in the first instance.
/r/MensRights26/12/17 01:33 PM
2

Even lazier, tsk tsk.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 11:02 PM
-1

What does that have to do with jaegerbombs? I can ask random tangential questions too buddy.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 10:07 PM
1

Lazy, lazy, lazy.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 11:37 AM
-1

Do you know anything about how military law works? Clause two, "all conduct of a nature to bring discredit on the armed forces..."
/r/MensRights25/12/17 10:19 AM
3

Adultery is fertile grounds for a foreign power to subvert the service member to their own cause by threatening to ruin the service members marriage. That's why it is illegal, just like extensive debt etc. The UCMJ has only the most limited hold over service members families, which makes sense since they aren't in the military and didn't agree to be bound by supplementary laws..
/r/MensRights25/12/17 10:13 AM
-6

You are a hermit in the Hindu kush that hasn't seen another soul since you were a child! Glad we solved that mystery.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 09:52 AM
1

If Bob earns 50k and you earn 45k, you earn less than Bob. If Bobs earn 50k on average and Alices earn under 45k on average then Alices earn less than bobs on average. Pretty simple math, since it accounts for nothing other than raw pay.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 09:48 AM
3

Fourth full paragraph is half finished. I'd like to hear the rest if you have the time.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 09:43 AM
1

Amazing how much unsubstantiated shit you can pull out your own ass, we should call it the TURDIS.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 09:38 AM
1

Wow, someone is unreasonably angry over the Internet, huh? Someone shit (or forgot to, no judgement buddy, you do you) in your cereal or what?
/r/MensRights22/12/17 11:44 PM
5

Unfit for service is a technical term in British military parlance for those whom are deemed unfit to ever serve in the military in the first instance, not those that have been rendered medically unfit through their service. That depicts a cripple, which actually makes the suffragettes look worse you think about it, not a wounded veteran.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 09:20 PM
11

I mean, effectively, crimes against men would translate as simply crimes. Men being victims of crime is, for the most part, the rule rather than the exception.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 09:09 PM
2

"Men are 90% of all suicides" is nowhere near as strong a claim as "men are the majority of all suicides." One is universally true the other is only true in a very select subset of countries.
/r/MensRights21/12/17 03:00 PM
2

Nah buddy, I'd be an advocate for free speech. You know, the cornerstone of a free society. Christ, vigilante hero fantasists these days.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:25 PM
2

Which of your nurses let you access the Internet? Unrestricted access to reddit in mental hospitals these days, what is the world coming to?
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:22 PM
1

Do we really think catholic clergymen were randomly fucking little boys left right and centre in the 1950s? I don't believe that. Such behaviour at the time would essentially be suicide! I really don't think something like that would have been kept under wraps all that well at that time. That's exactly how silly you sound.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:17 PM
4

An I'll willingly gut you with a chainsaw if you try that.... See, two can play at implausible, anonymous, keyboard badass.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:11 PM
0

I would love to see you cite anything to prove that, who's stats are you looking at? Russia?
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:09 PM
3

attempts being higher is simply that they try more than once before killing themselves, then we would see a similar death rate with more attempts. That's not what we see. We see that women want to end their lives at about 1/4 the rate that men do. This is exactly my issue too. It is clear as day that this is what's happening.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:06 PM
15

Twenty bloody years (23 at this point) is not short notice. I knew about the changes as a primary school child... Adults have no excuse.
/r/MensRights20/12/17 10:01 PM
1

Having your territory invaded and your people and soldiers captured, and in many cases taken hostage, by a hostile military force is no threat. How many British towns and citizens is an enemy allowed to annex before your definition of threat is reached? Step lively and apologise to the nearest tree for the oxygen you stole whilst writing that!
/r/MensRights20/12/17 07:52 PM
3

The we wuz kangs comic is riffing the vibe of the original, which was about ip ownership. Look into things before sounding off like you know what you are talking about.
/r/MensRights19/12/17 11:57 AM
14

Because she probably felt that the status quo against checking "victims" sexual histories would preclude them checking her text history with him. She was very nearly bang on the money too.
/r/MensRights17/12/17 11:54 AM
10

Expecting people to have actually read the article, you absolute madman!
/r/MensRights17/12/17 11:46 AM
2

After all, this is the society that gynocentrism built. Can't argue there.
/r/MensRights17/12/17 11:15 AM
2

Let's review the facts. The government knew she was a child rapist, sufficiently bad to actually jail her for a spell, and let her keep him. The government refused to grant the father custody of his child when he realised the mother was batshit, knowing full well she was a convicted child predator. At that point his options for dealing with this all involve him going to jail for a significant stretch, since the government clearly don't want to know. Even just trying to gather evidence of her act…
/r/MensRights17/12/17 08:40 AM
8

His dad was a child. That's where he was.
/r/MensRights17/12/17 12:47 AM
10

You like pulling definitions out your ass don't you?
/r/MensRights16/12/17 11:05 PM
3

Wow, an isolated demand for greater moral courage from men., and only men.. Imagine my shock!
/r/MensRights16/12/17 05:55 PM
1

It's actually look and believe. What, pray tell, is the difference between groping the outside of a sleeping woman's breasts through her Kevlar and groping a sleeping womans padded bra through her shirt?
/r/MensRights13/12/17 07:00 PM
1

male feminists use feminism as a cover for their misogyny... Fixed that for you, free of charge.
/r/MensRights13/12/17 06:52 PM
1

Go on...
/r/MensRights10/12/17 11:13 PM
7

It is on trollX though.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 11:11 PM
3

By Jove, you're absolutely right! It's a good thing no one in this thread did that then.
/r/MensRights10/12/17 11:00 PM
5

Are social conservatives well known for being sympathetic to black criminals? The more you know...
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:51 PM
25

It's not on 2XChromosomes though, is it?
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:18 PM
0

Go on...
/r/MensRights10/12/17 06:14 PM
3

The downplaying of "circumcision" as "absolutely nothing at all comparible to FGM" is almost all down to feminism and their inability to share the tiniest sliver of attention on their pet issues. Comparing the absolute worst cases of FGM to the absolute least destructive forms of MGM and saying they are nothing alike has been catastrophic to the intactivist cause because it works on Joe Public. The fact is that most of those girls go through a form of mutilation that is equally or, far more ofte…
/r/MensRights04/12/17 07:26 AM
8

Can someone archive this? BETs page coding is a shiteshow that's causing havoc with both my devices the moment I so much as sniff it.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 05:47 AM
2

0% overlap between this headline and the study PR piece linked. Women that are attracted to the most physically robust men are more afraid of crime, in general, than other women means women shouldn't be paranoid? Ok mate, pass over that green mate, your seeing things.
/r/MensRights04/12/17 05:09 AM
4

Whew, it's a bloody good thing that I didn't once mention either of those men then, eh? Really dodged a bullet when I accidentally forgot to mention the fact that I believe that every single person on earth holds true to the innocent until proven guilty standard in all situations with precisely zero exceptions. By Jove it's almost like your comment has an intersection with what I said of 0%. Really makes you think. But really is it all people? I seem to recall a huge number of people calling Moo…
/r/MensRights04/12/17 04:47 AM
7

You would have to be dense to not see that this isn't a binary. Just because one man is innocent until proven guilty doesn't mean an accuser is guilty until proven innocent. The standard applies across the board, because that is fair. The accuser could be mistaken as to the identity of their rapist, could have false memories from the trauma of the incident, they could be operating on the basis of faulty assumptions in completely good faith. None of these imply guilt, none of these are prosecutab…
/r/MensRights03/12/17 11:30 PM
7

Any chance you could provide a source on that school thing? Cause that answers a whole lot of questions I have about the "boys will be boys" nontroversy.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 08:34 PM
1

Sure, I can't disagree, but to be honest the laws in much of the U.S. regularly trend towards the draconian if the Constitution neglects to moderate it.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 05:27 PM
1

Well, I'm glad we sorted that out. You don't know what left wing means. At all. Left wing means state control of the economy, and usually by extension further state intervention in public life. Everything else is tacked on to that. Equality isn't a necessary condition for being left. Your grasp on politics is tangential at best. What do you think the political compass numbers mean? I'm sure your explanation, if you ever proffer one, will be a roller coaster of hilarity.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 04:51 PM
1

If you think that fascists had no left wing elements to their ideology and practice then you have either been grossly misinformed about what constitutes left wing or you are deliberately being obtuse.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 01:26 AM
1

Did I say they were left? No, not even remotely. Reread and then reshow your sloppy working. What I said was they were centrist, and they absolutely were.
/r/MensRights01/12/17 10:01 PM
1

Fascism (in the looser sense of the word, incorporating the nazis, the flangists, and the fascists proper) is ultra-authoritarian centrism. Ideologically it's significantly to the left of the modern day Democrats. The last thing it was was right-wing.
/r/MensRights01/12/17 08:02 PM
3

I don't know what your point is but I do know you're failing to express it.
/r/MensRights01/12/17 07:39 PM
1

Hereditary accidents resulting in transitional ruling periods. Just because being part of the royal bloodline was seen as more important than the ruler being male doesn't mean it wasn't a patriarchy. They would rather put a male toddler on the throne than a adult woman.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 08:31 PM
1

Liberal doesn't mean left.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 08:15 PM
1

To be fair, with sufficient time and motivation, that's about all the background knowledge you need to make a primitive electrical generator.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 08:07 PM
1

That is a complete non sequitur. Sheriff has no connection beyond syllable sound to "she", just like history has no connection beyond sound to "his". Sheriff is a contraction of shire reeve in archaic modern English, and history is an anglicisation of the Greek word historia Fireman is a simple compound noun, it is literally the words "fire" and "man" combined. You almost couldn't have picked a worse example.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 08:02 PM
1

I mean, yes, historically "man" is completely gender neutral. But it definitely isn't gender neutral now and hasn't been for a long time.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 07:42 PM
4

Even more interesting is the fact that the amount of privilege a demographic experiences can vary according to its place along other axis. A white male elite is super privileged but a white male redneck is regularly less priviliged than a black male comparable on every other axis because of his skin colour. These axis of privilige don't uniformly increase or decrease either, they regularly follow a sine wave style distribution increasing or decreasing according to other factors. For example; edu…
/r/MensRights30/11/17 07:32 PM
1

I haven't watched it, I find his smarmy soyboy attitude of judgement, towards everything, viscerally offensive. He has his own little, surprisingly popular, channel now.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 02:13 AM
1

It doesn't touch the clit at all.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 12:55 AM
1

You do understand that third wave intersectional feminists are by definition radical feminists... Don't you? Radical doesn't mean fringe, or extreme, it has a technical definition.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 12:44 AM
2

Macintosh has been out of the picture for a good long while at this point.
/r/MensRights30/11/17 12:35 AM
1

Not to put too fine a point on it but I'm sure it would be considered even funnier. That was kinda the whole plot of Shallow Hal, one step removed.
/r/MensRights29/11/17 10:55 PM
2

Bingpot! Exactly.
/r/MensRights29/11/17 10:41 PM
9

Angela Lansbury is a bloody gem. She is easily one of my favourite celebrities, she displays consistently high standards of moral courage, and fuck anyone who wants to slander her.
/r/MensRights29/11/17 10:36 PM
2

By their own stats it's still a around a 30% non-compliance rate... Even if we accept that half of those have a genuinely good reason for doing so, that's not telling me that deadbeat dads are a myth. Quite the opposite.
/r/MensRights29/11/17 03:03 AM
4

Well... There are a bunch of misrepresentations, some of which amount to out and out lies, in this article but it avoids the real question. Why would any responsible adult send their daughter to the shitty Girl Guides when they could join the infinitely superior Scouts? I have never met a woman who looks back on the Girl Guides as anything other than a waste of their free time; plenty of happy campers come out of the Scouts though.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 04:58 PM
1

This infographic aught to help somewhat Then you have to remember that most cases in the U.S. are dealt with on plea deals. A large number of reported "rapists" do go to jail for raping people it's just they plead their time down by admitting to something more minor. This is especially true in the more credible half of he said/she said style reports. So the went to jail category should actually be much bigger than is shown.
/r/MensRights28/11/17 12:42 PM
-2

That's not the feminist take on it at all. You could not be more wrong on that if you tried. And for clarification, I don't mean that's not the way they present it, I mean that there is no possible way you could reach that conclusion from any set of stats ever collated.
/r/MensRights27/11/17 05:39 PM
6

Janet was well ahead of the game there. I wonder what she is doing now?
/r/MensRights26/11/17 05:08 AM
0

I like you, but sometimes you talk some amount of pish.
/r/MensRights26/11/17 04:23 AM
1

So boys (i.e. Little men) getting raped on an institutional level has nothing to do with men's rights...? Okay then...
/r/MensRights25/11/17 08:40 PM
2

In practice they intervene when safe to do so, but frequently they will be in a location where they are outnumbered by afghan security forces 4+ to 1. If the corruption in a location is sufficiently widespread then any confrontation there and then will ensure they get their entire unit wiped out. So yes it makes sense to punish service personnel that intervene in such a way as to endanger the lives of their colleagues and subordinates, just like there would be for any action that recklessly risk…
/r/MensRights25/11/17 08:38 PM
2

Feminism is a movement focused on advocating for women's rights. That's it. It can be egalitarian in its dealings with the issues within its scope but it doesn't have to be, and most frequently isn't. I wouldn't consider myself a feminist, way too much baggage, but I am more than willing to support feminist initiatives that serve the egalitarian goal of equality for all.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 08:13 PM
1

I can't figure out why machist is a bad thing...
/r/MensRights25/11/17 07:45 PM
2

That's a great article.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 07:24 PM
1

I assume you are willing to concede the issue to feminists every time they say that men are 95% of domestic batterers and rapists without evidence too.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 07:16 PM
15

Once you have been in a relationship with an abusive person it becomes insanely more likely that you'll be in another abusive relationship... And another, ad nausea. I think this is what creates MGTOW for the most part. You are lucky in that you had this experience one step removed from a relationship. Good prep for later life.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 06:47 PM
1

Lol. The ones I'm talking about are almost all the "kill all men" type in my experience! Feminists are complicated at the best of times.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 06:31 PM
2

Murphy is a feminist. Lots and lots and lots of feminists would disagree that anyone can be a women, biology required; and we aren't talking small potatoes feminists either.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 05:45 PM
4

I can guarantee that Megan Murphy has never, ever, said anyone can be a wamen in her entire life.
/r/MensRights25/11/17 05:32 PM
1

feminism doesn't have to be egalitarian. It has many parts that share no common thread of activities or concepts beyond advocating for women's rights. You are literate so you should know that.
/r/MensRights24/11/17 10:57 PM
9

It's ok, I feel you son, I can give you tips on how you can make friends too if you want.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 06:23 PM
2

I get what you are saying here, especially about non-white dissenters, but internalised misogyny has to be internalised from an outside source... And who creates "externalised" misogyny? Men, one step removed. Turtles Men, all the way down, man.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 05:24 PM
26

I hope you managed to point out that it's still just blaming men one step removed! Weird how slutshaming is right back on the cards the moment they disagree with someone.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 05:16 PM
8

That's very egalitarian of you, my friend is the same, but there is a vast array of academic, political and practical evidence to suggest you are not in the impactful sector of feminism. Which is truly a shame.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 05:14 PM
-1

Dunno, man. You ever told a joke only to receive crickets in response then a minute later a louder guy says the exact, word for word, same joke to thunderous laughter? I'm regularly that louder guy and I often do it without noticing until it's pointed out to me. The exact same thing applies here, only as usual feminists blame men rather than confident outgoing people. Men are more likely to be those confident and outgoing people in the workplace just as they are more likely to be socially inept …
/r/MensRights23/11/17 04:45 PM
6

Good point, well presented.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 02:16 PM
3

It definitely wasn't. That was a side benefit that was quickly brought to their attention after they had developed it.
/r/MensRights23/11/17 02:40 AM
1

Burnam served on the shenzhou for about seven years as of the battle of the binaries. At least that was my take based on the info in the series so far. I can't think of anything that would suggest they had just recently met. Georgiou even included Burnam in her will, that's not something you do for a sproggy newly appointed crew member You don't know well.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 09:33 PM
0

Stupid bullshit like this makes me question my free speech absolutism sometimes.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 09:15 PM
1

She literally used her position of power as a prosecutor to threaten a man with fraudulent criminal convictions that he had no reason to believe she wouldn't follow though on. She additionally threatened him with false accusations of kidnapping for when the police came and she rightly pointed out that as a public official she would be much more credible in the eyes of the authorities. She had all the power in that situation and she abused it repeatedly. To make matters worse she is now trying to…
/r/MensRights17/11/17 09:10 PM
4

I dropped my grades in uni from straight firsts to thirds over the course of a semester due to mildly criticising a few feminist concepts. Are you sure this is a good idea? By the time I comprehended that this was a complete shibboleth in the politics department the damage was done and returning to top grades every assignment only yielded a 2:1 degree. I'd suggest it's better to toe the party line as a student and consider the time spent as reconnaissance for when you get a little more academic …
/r/MensRights17/11/17 07:33 PM
1

I think you misunderstand their point. It's not, "be equal with men," it's, "get even with men," I.e. achieve righteous retribution and redress for perceived historic injustices. It's quite a common talking point in feminist circles if you get them going.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 07:19 PM
14

The ones with the red fingers were the designated rape victim within their unit.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 06:58 PM
1

Let's be honest here, even if they had a law on the books saying that the draft was over forever it would mean nothing. At all. They want to draft you badly enough then the can and will.
/r/MensRights17/11/17 04:48 AM
1

I am perfectly happy reading your thoughts on the matter. And equally happy responding to them. You kinda walked into that one, don't tu quopue where it's not appropriate.
/r/MensRights16/11/17 06:35 PM
6

Just don't read it then...? It really is that simple. I can go days without reading anything I don't want to. Choicerol, ask your physician for a free trial today!
/r/MensRights16/11/17 04:29 PM
1

Wait, so you think that sexism against men, newly built into the very fabric of state law, is ok as long as there is some minor policy in place, liable to reversal at any time, that gives them a fraction of the coverage the other gender gets? Okay then.
/r/MensRights16/11/17 12:07 PM
1

Context matters, mate. If you were calling him a good cunt, an interesting cunt, or a funny cunt, all would be well. But you aren't. Are you? Don't pull the Ozzie card you bullshitter.
/r/MensRights16/11/17 11:59 AM
1

I don't know, I think Milo is a good foil to Clementine. He is deliberately offensive, and goes as far as possible without crossing too many red lines, whilst she is accidentally offensive as a function of her sincerely held beliefs. The fact that they both end up occupying similar niches in their opponents regard is quite something, especially since Milo really has to try to get there with carefully crafted provocation. Anyway, not being an atheist would be a pretty valid reason to invite him. …
/r/MensRights14/11/17 08:24 AM
2

What European socialist countries are doing well? I can't think of any country in Europe that would meet the definition of socialist.
/r/MensRights14/11/17 07:35 AM
3

British rule catagorically ended in 1947. The time period he mentions starts in 1950. I don't care either way but you'll have to try better than that to disprove whatever they are saying.
/r/MensRights14/11/17 07:30 AM
1

The simple arguement against that view is that most domestic violence, and domestic murders, are committed by otherwise law abiding people and most gun murders are committed by lifestyle criminals. You restrict access to poisons and otherwise law abiding people stop there and either give up or find another means to enact their desire, criminals have free access to guns regardless of legality.
/r/MensRights13/11/17 12:05 PM
7

The relevant factor being that the nonconsential use of ones genitals, whether they be a vagina or a penis, is rape mate. It's trivially obvious why made to penetrate needs to be counted.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:23 PM
8

They are deliberately ignoring the made to penetrate category. They even say as much.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:19 PM
2

When was VAWA modified to include that in it? I'm astounded.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:18 PM
1

Exactly as hard for a woman to get her tubes tied, for exactly the same reasons.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 12:27 PM
0

That's as far from the truth as you could get. There are zero exoskeletons in operational military service anywhere, same score with "robots." Everyone that has read this comment has become slightly less intelligent because of it.
/r/MensRights31/10/17 11:59 AM
1

Vasogel can't come soon enough.
/r/MensRights30/10/17 04:20 PM
3

So basically you condescend someone else, agree that I'm completely correct with what I say, and then call me condescending. I mean, okay. If that's what floats your boat I guess?
/r/MensRights28/10/17 05:07 PM
5

If gay men could get pregnant we would be drowning in babies. You know it, I know it, we all know it. Let's not be so judgemental, yah?
/r/MensRights28/10/17 01:29 PM
1

It's actually at an all time low dude. With the fertility rate in the Western world at record breaking low levels, and that's with immigration boosting the stats, by first principles it can't be rising.
/r/MensRights28/10/17 01:20 PM
1

Zombie thread! Where the hell did I put that shotgun?
/r/MensRights27/10/17 12:52 AM
2

Lrellok is almost certainly referring to the fact that females initiate 70% of all non-reciprocal intimate partner violence, they just haven't worded it well. Beyond that it gets pretty fuzzy since data on reciprocal violence can be manipulated to show whatever you want due to lack of observational controls. Regardless, yeah, it averages out to close to 50/50. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
/r/MensRights23/10/17 06:55 PM
6

Dunno man, the federal government already spends more on healthcare as a % of GDP than the British government. You just don't get anything for it.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 05:39 PM
7

Counterpoint: criminals are probably more likely to try non lethal solutions when dealing with female cops. Lets think about it like a rational criminal. If you are a foot shorter and 50 pounds lighter than me, there's a good chance I can take you out without becoming a cop-killer, then maybe I'll chance it that you can't reach your weapon in time before I'm on you and knocking you out. If you are in my weight class and a hefty enough prison sentence looms, or I'm just in the mood for some havoc…
/r/MensRights20/10/17 02:42 AM
5

What exactly in the memo do you disagree with? I gave it a cursory once over when it dropped and it basically said, once you take out the preamble and stats, that the tech industry isn't optimised for both genders at the present time. It then went on to list a bunch of ways it could be made more accommodating to women without changing the underlying culture too negatively or lowering recruitment standards. Excluding poor word choice, and undiplomatic phrasing probably related to Damore being a c…
/r/MensRights19/10/17 05:21 PM
1

Not quite. Say you have a polygenic trait that consists of forty discrete subgenes. Each of those subgenes creates a positive effect on IQ in the order of 0.1 points with an individually imperceptible negative effect. However when all of them are combined they cause severe mental retardation by overloading the various metabolic pathways that they influence. Now, we can easily see the genes that need to be eradicated to wipe out the defects from the population but what we can't see are the tiny p…
/r/MensRights19/10/17 04:16 AM
1

I think it's very much a case of "Chestertons Fence."* We can't see the advantages that certain disabilities might add to the gene pool unless they are absolutely massive like sickle cell. If we eradicate the genes that cause them we could lose massive amounts of incremental positive adaption in the general population. Cures for stuff like that should only be given on an individual and voluntary level, to avoid unintended consequences for the population down the line. *interesting stuff, you sho…
/r/MensRights17/10/17 06:39 PM
2

Gotta agree here, I couldn't work in a dementia, or secure psych, ward for a 100 grand a year.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 03:01 PM
1

I struggling to see the "mad" aspect to what I wrote. Regardless, the goalposts weren't moved twice. The ultimate goal was always the harmonisation of the male and female retirement ages.
/r/MensRights17/10/17 12:25 AM
1

They have known that the pension age was going to be increased for women since the mid 90s. The fact that the politicians kept pushing back the changes and committed to nothing specific until they had to take drastic action shouldn't have come as a surprise to any of these women. At all.
/r/MensRights16/10/17 10:03 PM
1

I think it's more likely that women have increased lifespans due to the twin factors of average smaller size (generally healthy but smaller animals of the same species tend to live longer than large ones) and being immunologically stronger to account for the huge stresses of childbirth. In the past discrepancy this would have evened out due to pregnancy being vastly more dangerous to the mother than it is today. Just my 2¢ though.
/r/MensRights16/10/17 09:57 PM
3

Current etiquette is to place a "/s" at the end of sarcastic comments.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 10:37 AM
1

No they aren't. The moment they bring up a belief in radical social reordering in order to challenge patriarchy they are a radical feminist. Most mainstream feminists believe in this to some degree ergo they are radical feminists. To clarify my position though, I'm not talking about random calls their self a feminist #15764329alpha, I mean feminists that actually mean something.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 07:12 PM
1

Almost every single mainstream feminist you can think of is a radical feminist. Very, very, few are terfs. Radical doesn't mean extreme or anything, it essentially just means you believe in patriarchy theory. There are brands of feminism that don't put much stock in the patriarchal boogeyman, though they are fringe groups at best.
/r/MensRights11/10/17 06:38 PM
2

Death cult? Care to elaborate? I fully admit I may be speaking from a place of perfect ignorance but are you sure you aren't referring to PETA?
/r/MensRights10/10/17 04:05 PM
28

Well, a stopped clock is right twice a day. Male feminists usually cannot be trusted. That's almost axiomatic. Not because they are male, though, but because they are feminists.
/r/MensRights10/10/17 03:41 PM
1

To be fair they probably couldn't figure out what you were trying to say if your English was as good as in the title. If in doubt it's victim blaming.
/r/MensRights09/10/17 06:41 PM
5

As opposed to the more usual sentence of zero months? Yes. Good on the judge.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 03:02 PM
1

No relevance to the question at hand, no one stated it had to be a unilateral right to contract out of responsibility. Regardless it's defacto the case that babies can be unilaterally abandoned by mothers without the consent of fathers within many U.S. States and even many other countries.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 12:49 PM
3

Giving your kid up for adoption makes for a pretty water tight case of avoiding child support with the stroke of a pen. Edit: actually, surrogacy and legally sanctioned sperm donation also count in this regard.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:21 PM
28

Woman doesn't seem to realise that male and female ballet roles are vastly different. He's more likely to come out the other side of this a bronzed Adonis than an effeminate feminist type.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 01:07 PM
2

It's almost as if Australia and France are different countries, with their very own laws and shit, completely separate from the UK's!
/r/MensRights30/09/17 12:42 PM
1

Horny teenagers would probably eagerly want a lubed up sock, all things considered... I'm not sure in what world that constitutes a compliment.
/r/MensRights15/09/17 05:22 PM
1

The answer to that is simple. Almost everything that feminists complain that men do, minority men do more often. As a case in point remember that hollaback video a few years ago? 10hrs in New York? Practically every single man shown in that video was a minority. All their solutions to these problems target minorities more often too, even stupid issues like manspreading regulations, and fines thereof, hit minorities harder because they are on public transport more often than whites. Feminism is t…
/r/MensRights13/09/17 04:15 PM
-13

How many men are at real risk of dying in war? It's one of the most annoying things about this sub when you guys try and steal veterans issues as if they are yours. Most of you are civvies. Get over it.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 01:55 PM
2

I'm morbidly obese. BMI 31, but you would be hard pressed to grab a handful of fat anywhere.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 05:19 PM
1

I can guarantee more women are actively bullied out of taking an English/fine art/religious studies major, and still go for it, than are bullied away from any and all STEM subjects combined.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 05:04 PM
1

Random guys are not known for doing vast amounts of data analysis when going out to pull. The businesses they frequent on the other hand...
/r/MensRights04/07/17 10:11 AM
1

Sounds like an even greater disparity then. Right now it's, girls free, guys pay. Under your system it would be guys pay, girls get paid. Worse, it would be legitimate workplace harassment to hit on any of them, which defeats the purpose. Didn't think that through did ya?
/r/MensRights04/07/17 10:02 AM
9

Grammar nazi-bot gets it wrong again.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 10:47 AM
9

Shit troll is shit. Such low energy.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 10:46 AM
0

Suuuure they are.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 08:17 AM
1

You keep jabbering on but you still don't know what post scarcity means. As long as we require large amounts of labour to do things, and rely on scarce resources to create stuff, we are not post scarcity. You are clearly a smart person but you are coming across as autistic as fuck when you miss the blatantly obvious point being made here. It has nothing to do with food. Say it with me now!
/r/MensRights03/07/17 08:16 AM
1

He literally did say that that was why he did it. That's why it was called sexist.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 08:10 AM
6

Sorry buddy, I don't think you understand what post-scarcity means. It has nothing to do with food in and of itself. How do you think we make all that food? The oil, fertiliser, machines and man hours don't just happen through magic. The fact is each step in the chain of events that leads to food on your plate required huge effort, and risk to life and limb, from millions of individuals that you will never give so much as a thought to. And that's just food. Now multiply that by every other objec…
/r/MensRights02/07/17 08:59 AM
4

Almost every resource that we use. That's why I'm being vague.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 08:39 AM
5

No... we are not. Not even remotely. We rely on incredibly scarce resources, and they are getting more scarce by the day, with no viable replacements in sight. Each of those resources takes Herculean effort to extract and, until general automation rears its ugly head, will continue to take Herculean effort long into the future.
/r/MensRights02/07/17 07:45 AM
6

Still a better candidate than Hillary. Really makes you think.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 11:07 PM
5

Is your argument that as long as something is on slightly more solid ground than feminism, it's good to go? Cause in that case you are gonna be getting very wet, very often.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 10:55 PM
6

Absolute shite. You sound like Deepak Chopra droning on about quantum mechanics. If capitalism has been working perfectly fine for the past 200 years it clearly isn't against the laws of physics. Have a word with yourself. Until we reach post-scarcity communism can't work, and when we reach post scarcity it will be completely irrelevant.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 10:51 PM
2

Good segment.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 10:47 PM
2

Zero outrage on that article at all. Why say there is? There isn't even an outraged comment in the comment section.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 08:01 PM
4

In my experience loads of women cheat but the far smaller number of men that do it do it so often, and so brazenly, that it's scarcely believable. Stranger still is the fact that the women that they cheat on always know that that's what they are like before getting involved but are so delusional that they think it won't happen to them. It's really something to see.
/r/MensRights26/06/17 07:50 PM
3

Away back to /pol/. Begone!
/r/MensRights24/06/17 04:27 PM
3

"Tu quo que" is a bad look on anyone. You're projecting so hard you could set up your own multiplex. It's clear you don't know what you are talking about, you even admit it yourself before trying in vain to dial it back. Kids aren't adults, puberty an start as much as half a decade earlier in girls than boys. If you don't immediately recognise the non applicability of your sample then there is nothing I can do. I'm out of this discussion; enjoy ignorance, I've been assured it's bliss.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 08:45 PM
8

Dissonex get it from your local pharmiscist today!
/r/MensRights22/06/17 07:46 PM
1

We've been using tools since modern humans first existed. That's probably why human testes are allowed to be more exposed than any other primate; when your real danger in a fight is being stabbed by a long sharp pointy stick there is little real advantage in protecting your junk from blows.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 07:29 PM
7

If males can lift more weight per unit body weight then they are stronger from a comparative body weight perspective. They are also more capable in that arena. I don't think you understand the point you're making. I don't think you understand the difference between leg and core strength either. Nor the difference between strength and muscular endurance. And it's very, very, obvious.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 05:00 PM
9

Counter, At every body weight beginner males can squat more than females. A 60kg male can easily be expected to squat 45kg first go. That's safely without any real training. For the same to be said of females you would have to have at least a 100kg woman. Anyone who has ever gone to a unisex gym regularly could tell you that. Furthermore, this disparity only increases with intensive training. This isn't the hill you want to die on.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 04:04 PM
16

They have stronger core muscle groups comparatively to their size. They don't have stronger legs. That's trivially easy to see.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 03:10 PM
1

So, you deny that the single biggest point of failure in any society is super important. Ok buddy you have converted me! I'm a believer... Where the koolaid at?
/r/MensRights22/06/17 03:07 PM
2

And making the people happen that make stuff happen is more important still. come on buddy, you can't possibly have missed that.
/r/MensRights22/06/17 02:59 PM
2

The funny thing is that the male paedophile stereotype is downright intersectional when you consider its amplification when combined with the gay characteristic in any given male. Feminists response to this? Crickets or, at best, deflection.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 01:06 PM
2

I don't get it. Did you mean to post a different link?
/r/MensRights18/06/17 07:53 AM
1

Not all feminism has Patriarchy Theory as its base. A bit of a simplification but only Radical Feminism and its offshoots, which admittedly make up 90%+ of all feminism in any form, uses it.
/r/MensRights17/06/17 09:59 PM
1

Losing the war, obviously.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 03:50 PM
1

The issue with this is the spectrum within each group would be very very wide. You would need hundreds of micro events within each separate event and huge amounts of pre event vetting to ensure that males didn't deliberately let their fitness drop to below the margin required then in the time left before the competion hit the training hard. Way too easy to game that system. And it wouldn't be very interesting to watch.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 02:34 PM
2

I get where you are going here and I know you've almost hashed this out but I have to say: That would be a good arguement for a separate period of maternal recovery leave, possibly two or three weeks on top of the normal parental leave, not separate leave entitlement altogether.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 03:18 PM
1

Deterrence, in almost all cases, has nothing to do with severity of punishment and everything to do with likelyhood of detection and conviction. You don't tend to do things if you know with reasonable certainty you'll get caught. 6 months in prison is a long time to a non career criminal. Now, really short sentences may not be ideal but they help establish the groundwork for a cultural shift from these women committing fraud because courts will be more likely to impose them if nothing else. Once…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 03:12 PM
2

I think it's mansplaining even if a woman does it to another woman these days! Don't think that makes any sense? Must be because you are a fedora tipping meninist bigot that's what! /s
/r/MensRights13/06/17 12:49 PM
2

Lol, mansplaining Swiss culture to a Swiss person... I really walked into that one!
/r/MensRights12/06/17 09:48 PM
2

Baring a huge translation error that I can't catch, it's definitely the second. Can't expect the Swiss, as opposed to their huge international worker community, to be at the forefront of any social issues though. They are a staggeringly conformist society. Being a nail that sticks out of the social consensus is not recommended
/r/MensRights12/06/17 05:42 PM
1

.............wait, what?
/r/MensRights12/06/17 11:38 AM
0

I think your issue here is you think sexual intercourse requires the involvement of a vagina. It doesn't. It's any penetration of any orifice. Translation issues aside, it may be a mistranslation of a similar but distinct legal word. Unless you are referring to women as vaginas, then please carry on normal jogging.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 11:35 AM
1

So persons of the female sex don't have arses now. Everydays a school day.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 07:46 AM
1

Follow up on my last. That's an iteresting link, thanks for providing it.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 10:50 PM
1

That would be appreciated mate. As far as I can tell it started going mainstream in the last quarter of the 1800s.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:08 PM
2

Actually you can sell your children. Surrogate parenthood is a thing and many women have legally sold their biological children, for monetary or other gain, using that route. The fact that it's a time sensitive thing not withstanding it's still a thing that happens.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 08:06 PM
3

You do essentially own your kids. In every way that matters. It's a horrible truth but it is the truth. I can't think of a single thing that is totally legal to do with pets, other than neutering them and having them live outside, that isn't legal to do with kids.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 07:43 PM
2

The U.S. wasn't involved in trench warfare long enough for that to have been a consideration. I mean, it wasn't a thing in countries that fought in the trenches non-stop for 4 years, you'd expect they would have taken it up if it was helpful, so I can't see it being a thing. Where did you hear that anyway? Genuinely curious.
/r/MensRights11/06/17 07:37 PM
1

What is the context behind those timings? Winners? Losers? Male last place, female first place? What?
/r/MensRights11/06/17 02:59 AM
6

Get back under the bridge where you belong!
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:12 PM
2

Bingpot!
/r/MensRights10/06/17 09:06 PM
1

Someone else does something to another child in your vicinity, when you are a child, and it's you that's the child molester. Logic checks out.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 11:02 PM
1

Had they ran a candidate in every single seat the would have most likely increased that 3,500 by a factor of nearly 100. Is approx 350,000 votes in a population of 70 million not a reasonable number?
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:26 PM
1

Right, and a "serious" party still got their asses handed to them by a party whose sole purpose is to not be voted for. The successors of Screaming Lord Sutch could have fielded 100 candidates and it would still be embarrassing.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:22 PM
1

They don't know anything about her though. They literally just see Labour next to her name and tick the box then never think about their choice for the next X years. Hell, I can guarantee some people who hate her, and voted for her, don't even know she is their MP.
/r/MensRights09/06/17 10:16 PM
1

That's super cringe worthy. We're not radical revolutionaries.
/r/MensRights08/06/17 05:06 PM
2

It's completely rational, depending on what the given feminist wants. Logically consistent? Rarely. Rational? Absolutely.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 10:52 PM
2

Critical mass is a core tenet of feminist action, they absolutely do this, in the past and the present. Say what you want about the feminist intellect, they have a keen eye for political tactics.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 07:38 PM
3

Well, the first thing we need to do is increase numbers until we get enough critical mass to actually be listened to. There is no way to achieve anything until we do that.
/r/MensRights04/06/17 06:30 PM
1

She isn't the first programmer. She literally couldn't be the first programmer. There is room for an arguement that she could be the first programmer that used a conceptual computer that they did not actually invent but it's absolutely preposterous to suggest that she was the first. There is no criteria she fits that could make it so. Babbage had written dozens of programmes by the time she wrote her translation of Menabrea's study of the analytical engine in which she wrote her one and only, mo…
/r/MensRights04/06/17 06:22 PM
15

You mean she was the first programmer, even before the creator of the first conceptual computer? You are saying that Charles Babbage just threw together the concept of a computing machine but simply couldn't fathom how to programme it? Never even thought about it once before Ada Lovelace, programmer extrordinaire, came along and showed him how? Or Luigi Menabrea, whose programming notes Lovelace translated, clearly didn't know how to programme before Lovelace got involved in translating his work…
/r/MensRights03/06/17 12:57 PM
1

I honestly though it referred to getting jacked on steroids. It made sense to me, bins are heavy.
/r/MensRights29/05/17 05:30 AM
1

Indeed. Now hop away to the simplified English wiki, you get along great there!
/r/MensRights28/05/17 09:47 AM
2

It's a weird perception too because farming is scientific as fuck these days. Dozens of semi explosive chemicals, in your shed, that need used at the exact right times in the germination cycle. Not to mention you have to figure out exactly when that is based on weather patterns, type of soil and crop species.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 02:46 AM
2

That reads like a mirror universe socially conscious trump tweet.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 02:40 AM
3

That is not what I assumed getting juiced meant, at all. That's vile.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 02:38 AM
0

For real though, learn the meaning of the word bigot before you use it again. Lots of high quality dictionaries online. For most Miriam Webster or the Oxford dictionary should suffice, for your needs I'd highly recommend the simplified English entry on Wikipedia.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 02:34 AM
0

And yet you don't understand fractions. That's fine, I'm sure you spent all that freed up time broadening your understanding of vocabulary. Wait no, that's my mistake, you don't know what bigot means either.
/r/MensRights28/05/17 02:31 AM
1

Your fine grasp of context is astounding. If you can understand 0/3, 0/4, 0/5 etc. but can't parse 1/7 then I'm in awe. Were you never taught fractions in school? I can see I'm in dialogue with a true wonder of the world!
/r/MensRights27/05/17 10:55 AM
1

If you can't even parse basic English, then who am I to correct you. I suppose a pat on the head is in order. There's a clever chap!
/r/MensRights26/05/17 11:36 PM
1

Is this 1/7? Hey, now you are getting the hang of it! I am mostly apolitical! Well done and good show. Oh, wait... you don't actually know what the word idiot means do you... Shame. 0/7
/r/MensRights26/05/17 08:35 PM
4

Not much. All the anti-male attitudes and laws we currently have are just evolutions on previous established doctrine. At some point an equilibrium will be reached in all areas that women are making inroads into. Example: Co-ed Collages that expand the student body in exess of around 68% female suffer a massive drop in enrolment. Many that have experienced this in the past offer incentives to male students to keep the male percentage around +40%.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 11:25 AM
4

The dreaded "hoverer!"
/r/MensRights26/05/17 11:04 AM
1

That pink puffballs of understanding article smell suspicious. Only 1% of students reported violent victimisation in 2011. That is so unbelievable to me that it calls the whole article into question. I admittedly went to a pretty sketchy high school, so my priors may be off, but still. I can't see it being any less than 15%, at the absolute lowest and that just being the obvious teacher detected stuff.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 11:00 AM
2

Let's not forget, it provokes the fright and flight response in women. Those thrillers cover all the audiences bases.
/r/MensRights26/05/17 10:42 AM
1

0/5 for not knowing that the Major/Minor system of degrees is primarily a North American thing. 0/6 for building on that mistake with a false accusation of contradiction. We're playing the assumption game and, oh boy, are you losing. Keep it up champ! Only need to get the next four right to get a D-!
/r/MensRights26/05/17 06:29 AM
0

Alas no, until the late 60s we had more universities per head of population than any other nation on earth. 0/4 please try again.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 06:22 AM
0

Cool story bro. Sadly, I'm not American, not right wing, and we don't even have major/minors over here. 0/3 you've got a bad track record so far but, by all means do keep up the assumptions, you'll get one correct eventually! I have faith in you!
/r/MensRights24/05/17 10:37 PM
2

Literally the only sensible comment you have made in this entire thread. I've even up voted it.
/r/MensRights24/05/17 03:52 PM
1

Yeah, in the UK, most male prisoners can be allowed to wear their own clothes as a reward for continued good behaviour but women are never required to wear a uniform.
/r/MensRights23/05/17 11:36 PM
0

You are remarkably obtuse.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 11:30 PM
1

Well, yeah, they are wearing different clothes for sure.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 07:44 PM
1

A tight black tee shirt, jeans and a backpack is not typical prostitute garb. You must be high.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 05:46 PM
3

Woman prisoners don't wear uniforms in the UK.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 05:34 PM
5

Huge numbers of tens just screams brigading to me... I'm sure it's an absolutely great film but a ten? Same with the relatively large number of ones, that screams far less effective brigading. I'd be sorely tempted to completely ignore those two scores to get at the true average score.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 05:23 PM
1

Is that a templeOS reference?
/r/MensRights22/05/17 05:14 PM
1

One woman disagrees and has a huge, and very specific, reason to disagree. We're not looking a peer review standards here. I'd consider being forced by the government to adhere to the minutiae of the dominant religion, that I'm not a part of, to be hellhole material. Typical mind fallacy aside, I'm still comfortable generalising that.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 05:06 PM
1

I'm willing to concede that point straight away, with the minor caveat that societies with big gendered rights issues affect both genders negatively to a degree unheard of in western society. I'm also comfortable conceding that you probably agree with me there, so it's likely a moot point.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 04:54 PM
1

Shadilay brother! There is no way you aren't high on kekism right now.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 01:26 AM
1

Come on buddy, don't be a knob.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 11:18 PM
1

"Advocacy for women's rights on the grounds of equality between the sexes," doesn't actually mean what you think it means. It means they use equality between the sexes as a justification to advocate for women's rights. That's a huge difference. Essentially, under that definition, a feminist is one who only needs to advocate for women's rights and consider it to be furthering a cause of equality in that specific sphere. It gets murkier when you consider what equality between the sexes means and h…
/r/MensRights21/05/17 11:10 PM
1

Still no answer.... Really makes you think.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:52 PM
2

Oh my sweet summer child! If you don't think there is a huge market for young, pretty, male students you got another thing coming. You gotta understand that the gay/bi market for sex workers is way disproportionate to the straight male market for sex workers compared to their relative proponderance in society. 50 squids is 50 squids after all!
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:51 PM
1

Come on. "That's not feminist because I don't think it is," isn't an arguement. You have to see that you and your subjective opinion doesnt matter when it comes to who the real feminists are. You can easily say that you are part of a subset of feminism that isn't like this but you cannot say no feminist is like this.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:24 PM
2

It was my understanding that the women involved didn't even make the claim themselves they accidentally implicated him whilst trying to access other sexual health services. Bizarre indeed.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 10:00 PM
1

So you are a menist, eh? I'll ask you again then, since you haven't answered. What exactly is that? But really, you meant meninist didn't you? It's a much better look to just admit your mistake and move on.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:51 PM
1

Your quote literally changes nothing... What is your point? We have a sample of 11 Iranian women. And?
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:48 PM
1

Is this meant to be a complaint? This is just Reddit being Reddit, churning up old shit as brand new people discover it for the first time. Sucks to see it for the umpteenth time but for literally thousands of people on this subreddit this is a brand new piece of info.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:39 PM
1

You must be new here. Hopefully the blinkers fall off soon enough.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:34 PM
0

You must be new here. Hopefully the blinkers fall off soon enough.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:34 PM
1

Washington post received a glowing review from the neo-nazi website the Daily Stormer. Make if that what you will.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:32 PM
1

What is a menist? It's not a good look when you can't even correctly cite the title of a satirical gender swapped version of feminist activist.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 09:28 PM
1

Ok, sure, eleven then. Ten Iranian women say it isn't a hellhole. An additional woman, who is an exception to that rule, is brought up by the next poster. There is only one verified variable between her and the others. Go fish.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 05:35 PM
1

21 women.
/r/MensRights21/05/17 06:21 AM
1

Really? He is on tape sexually assaulting at least four women is he? Thought not.
/r/MensRights20/05/17 08:38 AM
1

Terrible, terrible, summary. Bad bot!
/r/MensRights16/05/17 12:49 PM
2

No you won't.
/r/MensRights16/05/17 12:26 PM
1

Islamic theocracy/non-Muslim. I think we have identified the key variable there.
/r/MensRights16/05/17 12:16 PM
2

That's Tankies for you. Place is full of them when you dig deep. Anyone who thinks Stalin/Mao was actually a good guy on balance probably doesn't deserve a second look at.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 10:55 AM
1

The IDF have an intelligence corps unit composed of 90%+ autistic soldiers. Minor accommodations needed made but they seemed to take to the job like fish to water. Last I heard it was a roaring success at its core competency of photographic "pattern of life" analysis. That's important and intricate task that can't be done by just anyone. I personally think if autism support and research groups could spend more time positively identifying job roles that autistic traits are a good fit for that wou…
/r/MensRights15/05/17 10:53 AM
2

The whole niceguy phenomenon is really a thinly veiled attack on aspie guys in my opinion. Prosocial autistic spectrum guys really need truthful and actionable feedback on what girls like, in order to have any measure of dating success at all, and all they get is delusional bullshit from society at large. That they then don't understand what they are doing wrong is hardly surprising. It takes a pretty self aware person to realise that "creepiness" is generally more attributable to their mental s…
/r/MensRights15/05/17 10:34 AM
3

Don't you realise? Black women are the primary victims of unarmed black men being shot by police. Obviously. Hilary Clinton approves of this message.
/r/MensRights15/05/17 10:17 AM
3

Sure, and it also offers incentives for employers to disregard those discriminatory attitudes if you can demonstrate value that those factors don't interfere with. Of course you could alternatively stick with the people on latestagecapitalism that want to silence you because you are a man. That will treat you like a token that has to agree with them because you are black. The side that will shit talk about you behind your back because you are an aspie and thus probably creepy to women. I don't t…
/r/MensRights13/05/17 11:03 PM
6

They really don't. They actually have rules that you can't say anything positive about capitalism at all or you are banned as a reactionary. If they were all about truth that insanely censorious attitude wouldn't be there. I mean tradcons and feminists post here all the time, they usually get laughed at, but we don't ban them.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 09:56 PM
7

For real, why would you want to participate in a subreddit filled with bloody Tankies? This ban is actually a public service to yourself. Dodged a bullet there bhoyo!
/r/MensRights13/05/17 09:25 PM
1

Bills. The linen used in the manufacture of paper currency offers a remarkable amount of impact protection.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 08:52 PM
10

That would be a relevant point if the system wasn't redesigned every few years anyway and is constantly refined in a way that benefits girls over boys. Sometimes even at the expense of girls absolute performance as long as they come out on top relatively. You realise you are asking children, that are being let down before they can even tie their shoelaces, that they need to step up and take responsibility for their adult lives. Ok mate...
/r/MensRights13/05/17 06:45 PM
3

Are you implying that there are no men that would get a kick purely out of the control aspect? Cause if you are implying that then I have a tremendous deal on a lovely little used Ferrari that would be just perfect for you.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:57 PM
1

The only way to stop people who support censorship is to show them that censorship can be turned on them at a moments notice. Just look at how pro free speech TERFs, as opposed to all other radfems, tend to be. It's because they know that's the only way they can continue to operate.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:50 PM
1

Colourism is a legitimate thing. Honest to god.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:46 PM
1

But guys! It was twenty-fifteen over a year ago! I heard Trudeau say it!
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:41 PM
10

yeah, well... What did you expect?
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:35 PM
1

A Money stuffed suit would make pretty good armour against most weapons... Up to lower caliber pistol rounds depending on how you did it. Safety first!
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:31 PM
3

Welcome to the sub. That's a high quality comment.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:25 PM
2

That guy isn't actually a troll he just has a very hard to get used to sense of humour.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:22 PM
34

It's not trolling... It's stand point theory... The oppressed can view a situation from both the oppressed and the oppressors point of view as a matter of survival in the system. The oppressor is locked into only considering their own. That's why men can understand nothing about women's experience but women supposedly have men's totally pegged out. I'm not making that up.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 05:15 PM
2

That image up there does tend to support your case, yeah.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 04:25 PM
4

I don't think you are being too cynical at all. Im happy to say that these baby steps do need celebrated, uncritically even, but I'm perfectly content to see people like yourself putting them into perspective on this subreddit. That's kinda what this place is for after all.
/r/MensRights13/05/17 01:08 AM
14

You complaint there is almost a non sequitur. He didn't even say that it was their primary endstate, never mind their only one, just that it was a major goal.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 11:07 PM
2

I can see that being the case, I'm not sure if it is, but it's certainly plausible. Good take on it.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 11:03 PM
2

White skin is irrelevant in that context, you only have to prove a desire for a preference for slightly lighter than than contemporary baseline skin for that to be a perfectly reasonable evolutionary claim.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 10:44 PM
1

Fuck off back to /pol/
/r/MensRights12/05/17 10:19 AM
6

Check mate atheists! Amirite?
/r/MensRights12/05/17 10:13 AM
2

I think it's important to realise that at least 50% of the undergraduate experience is learning to cater to other, more senior, people's biases. It's actually a great resource for learning how to deal with people, blind to their own failings, by learning the techniques required to slip in hard truths coated in sweet sweet sugar coated innocuous Marxist thought. The first time I received a 3rd class grade for an essay in politics, guess what the topic was, taught me all I needed to know about tha…
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:38 PM
4

I have a few feminist friends but those are the ones that: 1. don't pull that "if you believe in equality you are a feminist" crap at all, and, 2. will argue with me in good faith if I pull them up on something they say that's wrong. Anyone else just gets kicked to the kerb, if they don't respect you enough to let you apply your own damn labels then they probably just label you a pure vitriolic misogynist in less public spaces anyway. I mean your friend tattle tailed to his wife so she could ber…
/r/MensRights11/05/17 08:06 PM
1

I suppose I feel it's reasonable to generalise that "women don't do things" when at least 99%+ of a job is filled with men. It's kinda like saying straight men don't become fashion designers or make up artists. Sure, it's not strictly true but the outliers are really just an almost meaningless blip on the statistical radar.
/r/MensRights11/05/17 07:55 PM
4

I don't know if that's actually legit, in any case it only reinforces the equality paradox of low human development index countries having more women in relatively well paying but boring/dangerous/unpleasant jobs. Women in high HDI countries have the choice to go for decent paying comfortable jobs, or even to not work at all, because ultimately society at large will help them out more.
/r/MensRights10/05/17 03:04 PM
3

Which doesn't mean very much when you consider that most attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan are: Indirect fire against, easily targeted, large fixed base locations (those have a far higher than average number of female personnel) Improvised Explosive Devices along main supply routes (most likely to be used against non combat, mostly logistics, units) Shoot and scoot ambushes on same. Care to try again? P.S. Most non combat units receive hugely disproportionate rates of male casualties too.
/r/MensRights10/05/17 01:02 PM
2

I believe you, but that attitude makes you sound like you are full of shit. Don't argue with people unless you are willing to cite evidence for your case.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 04:09 PM
33

No, they don't... But M->F trans do, albeit they are put on a special list that wouldn't in reality ever get called up.
/r/MensRights06/05/17 02:20 AM
2

What a shitlord, taking a strong independent woman's job!
/r/MensRights06/05/17 02:18 AM
2

Still, at least the feminist involved has a keen interest in STEM! Well done them!
/r/MensRights05/05/17 11:09 PM
13

That certainly explains why she hasn't done up her chinstrap!
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:47 PM
67

Actually, she shouldn't have an opinion cause the picture is clearly depicting a British soldier.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:35 PM
2

All these expert opinions on the red pill subreddit's MRA credentials and not one of them mentions this place. Convenient.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 10:26 PM
1

I am absolutely shocked he managed to get that, or indeed anything else he has posted there, published. Assuming the starts are good though it's an interesting finding. Why are taller people more intelligent?
/r/MensRights05/05/17 08:44 PM
1

Sure, I can totally and without reservation agree it's not all that useful, maybe even actively and wilfully counterproductive sometimes. At the end of the day though, it's not feminists that coined the term and spawned the concept even if they are more than happy to use it as a slur.
/r/MensRights05/05/17 06:05 PM
1

I get it. You are jealous you weren't decendant from the glorious Scots. It's natural that you would feel that way. Just let all this unresolved anger out, I'm here for you! Wooosah!
/r/MensRights05/05/17 05:59 PM
1

We essentially founded your country for you, colonised the entire midwest too. You don't have to say thank you, you're welcome, little ignorant buddy!
/r/MensRights04/05/17 07:42 PM
1

The manosphere is an actual thing.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 07:32 PM
1

Some of those articles only read like satire from a modern lens, from a contemporary one they probably looked a lot more serious.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 01:29 AM
1

Not sure how this applies to me. I don't actually care whether small businesses discriminate against me, it's a legal/cultural issue of double standards that I can't abide.
/r/MensRights04/05/17 01:24 AM
1

It definitely is sexist and/or racist on those issues. It's discrimination based on race/sex In other words, to the layperson if not via whatever technical definition floats your boat, it's a textbook example of racism/sexism. Now is that racism/sexism a real problem? On its own, I don't think so in the slightest. The problem is that we can't have a society where it's perfectly ok to discriminate against some groups that fall within protected characteristics but illegal to do so against others. …
/r/MensRights04/05/17 01:19 AM
1

I'm not sure you can legally force a paternity test on a random woman's child. It obviously wouldn't be a random woman but, without having been in an actual relationship or her claiming that you are the father, to a court that's what you are talking about. Obviously different laws apply in different countries though so I suppose we could both be right on this point... Multiple times over in fact.
/r/MensRights02/05/17 10:45 AM
1

A woman doesn't even need to tell you you are the father. She never has needed to and never will need to. Many couldn't do it even if they desperately wanted to. That's the actual default state of the law. Ergo, the arguement doesn't quite stand.
/r/MensRights01/05/17 01:34 PM
1

I think you answered your own point there. The de facto state of things is that it doesn't take the courts to grant women that right, or even consider it at all, women have it regardless. Men having the option to financially abort responsibility for the child changes absolutely nothing in that regard.
/r/MensRights01/05/17 10:44 AM
1

Don't know about that. You could argue, quite legitimately in fact, that it's not normal for kids to reach puberty when they do these days. Something in the modern environment is causing puberty to happen years earlier than it used to, under those circumstances it could be seen as perfectly reasonable to medically delay puberty. I know that's not quite a parallel to your point but it is reasonable. Plus that's still a reversible process.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 11:39 PM
1

That's such a big thing to happen though that I'd mention it in the article. The enormity of that doesn't really fit comfortably into the "previous relationship" category, even if that would be technically true. I accept I could be the one with a wierd take on this but I don't think so.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 06:45 PM
3

It could be it's just been proofread by an idiot. Changing one digit of that number makes the whole story plausible again. Edit: 0 and 9 are right next to one another.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 05:49 PM
6

No mention of the other kids' father at all in the article either... Not even so much as a whiff of he was a bad dude floating around. Sounds like he wasn't a going concern at the time in that family which really should have been a mile wide red flag.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 10:31 AM
7

Met in 2009 then started having relationship problems in 2018, eh? Ok then.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 10:24 AM
6

No one read all that on Facebook mate. Even on reddit that's a big ask. You should start a blog though, that's quite a high quality post.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 03:21 AM
2

Maybe. Men with more testosterone are far more likely to be aggressive but there is absolutely no evidence that testosterone is what makes those men more aggressive. Seems to me that it gives a whole slew of other physical and psychological advantages, strength and assertiveness primarily, that make acting aggressive a viable course of action in most circumstances.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 11:37 PM
1

So if something is legal it's a non issue then. Ok, I'm so glad paternity fraud, circumcision, and selective service are finally settled as non issues too then. Weight off my shoulders!
/r/MensRights28/04/17 07:58 AM
1

She clearly had to pad out that word count in the abstract.
/r/MensRights28/04/17 07:54 AM
2

Well, if you absolutely have to be played by someone, you could do worse than William Defoe
/r/MensRights27/04/17 06:29 PM
1

Holy crap that link is so full of straw I thought I'd stumbled across a cattle ranch.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 11:58 AM
1

Can a man be condescending to a woman in any way that would not be possible to characterise as mansplaining? If no then that's a huge issue. People are condescending to other people all the time but in de facto terms mansplaining just means disagreeing with a feminist (occasionally a generic woman too, though that's far less common) on any topic. Regardless of the recipients knowledge or lack thereof.
/r/MensRights27/04/17 11:51 AM
5

Huge self selection bias here though. People who will voluntarily go to watch this are overwhelmingly going to be either MRAs or MRA sympathetic. I would be very surprised if even 5% of the people that watch this would be feminist or feminist sympathetic since they are pushing hard to blockade this at all levels. So the level of statistical noise present in this comparison makes it useless at best. This could be feminist propaganda from the journos or it could be MRAs flooding the audience revie…
/r/MensRights27/04/17 11:34 AM
1

You have just ruined my day by reminding me he exists. Cheers mate.
/r/MensRights26/04/17 05:09 AM
1

Kind of wild that your Anti-Imperialists never bring this widespread western social engineering up when they rail against the spectre on neo-colonialist interventions in Africa. As if genitally mutilating 10% of a countries population with no conclusive evidence as to its effectiveness isn't a horrific idea?
/r/MensRights24/04/17 05:43 PM
1

That example really only applies to Saudi Arabia within the aforementioned list afaik.
/r/MensRights24/04/17 05:35 PM
1

The collar is lower than wrapped completely round your neck and held in place with a slip knot. That's very low in comparison, like logic I/O levels of difference... Is it a pencil skirt? No. Fish tail skirt? No. I'm not calling it a mini but it falls comfortably within the expected length of a pair of shorts, so I feel comfortable characterising it as so. The worst thing you can say about a skirt like that is that it forces you to walk a little slower, ironically keeping you even cooler still o…
/r/MensRights23/04/17 02:52 PM
2

Now that's a humble bundle.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 08:17 PM
1

Loose low neckline top with short or no sleeves, short open bottomed unrestrictive skirt, no tights and a light jacket that I guarantee can be taken off at your workspace... Seems nice and practical for warm weather to me.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 08:12 PM
2

Well, that's me stumped then!
/r/MensRights22/04/17 07:50 PM
2

Not an expert on Canadian law, obviously, but in the UK it's 100% illegal to send a sexually explicit text to anyone under antiquated broadcast rules from the 60s. I would hazard a guess that a similar standard exists in Canada.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 07:17 PM
6

Yeah, that just about covers it. Any feminist that talks about big-P Patriarchy, without numerous caveats, is by definition a Radical Feminist. It's strange how so few feminists acknowledge that fact.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 07:12 PM
7

Just donate money to a mosquito net charity and be done with it. Everyone benefits from mosquito nets. Let's face it, nothing you could reasonably do over there will be more than a hinderance unless you are a doctor or an engineer or have another suitiably exotic skill set.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 07:06 PM
2

You know, I can't think of a distinctly left wing paper in the Daily Mail tier. I think they all died out in the early 90s.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 10:45 PM
3

You are honestly expecting people in your highschool to be on the right side of any political debate? Even when they are on the correct side of things they will still be substantively wrong. You might a well ask a stopped clock for the time. Just keep low, move fast and drive on! It'll be over soon.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 12:19 PM
8

That's because the Guardian is a different level of crazy. The Daily Mail is super obviously sensational traditional angry tabloid paper click bait in everything they do; the Guardian is a lot more cerebral in the bullshit it pushes, much harder to mount a cohesive criticism of something that may or may not be true. A lot of pretty advanced rhetoric in the Graunaid rather than simple Daily Mail polemics.
/r/MensRights20/04/17 12:07 PM
1

I know, right? I think these Norwegian SF are probably special in the colloquial sense of we don't want to hurt their feelings.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 11:07 PM
1

Only the white female demographic went up 2.5 points. The Native American demographic went up by 3.7 points. Same score for the males, 5 points and approx 7.4 respectively. I can't understand why you merged those ethnic groups when they were clearly distinct in the graph. Other than that carry on.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 06:51 PM
7

And you can think of no reasons that may be the case other than outright discrimination? Some quick ones. For clothing women have so many more choices than men that economies of scale, just in production equipment itself, must be pretty difficult to achieve. Just six items; T-shirts, shirts, trousers, shorts, socks and underwear, must cover at least 90% of all male clothing purchases with minimal differences between items. Women must have at least three times that number of distinct items within…
/r/MensRights18/04/17 06:43 PM
1

I can't handle Thunderfoot's anti-feminism stuff. He actually made me more sympathetic to Anita Sarkeesian almost every time he mentioned her. That was a Herculean task on its own. I mean I'm sitting here all primed to agree with him and his arguments just seem to fall flat consistently.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 06:08 PM
2

Well, that book looks shite. That is all.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 05:45 PM
5

Or it's that papers/researchers that whiff of obvious ideological propaganda need to be handled with extreme care and can't be taken on good faith. Of course you could just say that AWALT and be done with it.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 05:30 PM
3

Bingpot!
/r/MensRights18/04/17 05:13 PM
374

She did. She brought in loads of pink and purple lego to encourage the girls to join in. Turns out, by her own words, that girls still didn't care about Lego and the boys were even happier because they had more colours to choose from! Life lesson right there.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 12:53 PM
1

I'm totally happy with the commonly accepted claim that women attempt suicide more than men. Fits my experience down to a tee. I don't feel the need to prove that. Of course, I would love it if you were right. I am totally sure, if you are right, that you can find the evidence if you just try a little. It will have been studied. There will be stats out there on numbers of suicide attempts sorted by gender. Then you'll have performed a valuable public service and will be able to help correct the …
/r/MensRights18/04/17 12:23 AM
5

Well, I didn't express that as an opinion, just something I'd heard. But... Here you go. I've only given it a 5 minute once over but the methodology seems pretty sound. P.S. A lot of psychology effects previously considered meaningful have failed replication recently, it's a pretty big thing.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 10:41 PM
1

I'm not trying to convince you or prove you wrong. I don't really care what your opinion is but what I would like is for you to present your case as strongly as you can. Right now I'm happy to accept the original claim at face value, both from first principles and personal experience, but I'd be equally happy to hear evidence otherwise to challenge my thought process on this. You have no evidence either way by your own admission, you have no reason to doubt the original claim by your own admissi…
/r/MensRights17/04/17 10:25 PM
1

I'm pretty sure the backfire effect is one of the major victims of the replication crisis in psychology.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 06:30 PM
2

I don't. I think that gender segregated washrooms tend to turn to shit because no one really cares what their own gender thinks of them. Men are just as bad as women in my opinion. If a hot girl might use the stall immediately after you, you are waaay less likely to piss all over the seat in the toilet. Same deal with women, no one wants to blow it by being a grot bag in front of a potential partner.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 06:12 PM
3

So wait. They have to "run" 4 miles in 52 minutes carrying 60 pounds? UK reservist infanteers have to "run" 4 miles that carrying 55 pounds in 56 minutes including two water breaks along the way So that's a stones throw away from our absolute minimum second-rate infantry standard. That's a fast walking speed. I'm not impressed.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 06:02 PM
2

Yeah, that's the issue isn't it? All attempts at equality in the military sphere are really just band aids that will ultimately mean nothing when the chips are down. This won't get fixed in any meaningful way until load bearing exo skeletons or gene therapy ala scifi become a routine thing.
/r/MensRights17/04/17 05:41 PM
1

The best way to prove its an urban myth is to show that it is, indeed, a myth. Presumably you saw something that led you to believe it was a myth, what was that? You don't say the wage gap is a myth without backing it up otherwise cultural inertia steamrollers you and the only people that take you seriously are those that accept unconventional ideas without evidence. That's fine, but it's an incredibly low effectiveness strategy and you need all the help you can get to change minds. Same score a…
/r/MensRights17/04/17 02:19 PM
1

This is all your fault for not using a handle that explicitly genders you like u/ leredditprincess. If there is one thing that feminist Twitter harassment research has taught me is that women on the internet always explicitly mention their gender in their usernames... /s
/r/MensRights17/04/17 02:08 PM
1

Well if you aren't gonna back that up with even a hypothetical explanation then you aren't gonna convince anyone that you are right. Good chat.
/r/MensRights16/04/17 12:52 PM
3

Ok. You clearly know more than me about this issue then. So where's your evidence it's an urban myth? I'll happily make the effort to source some prevalence data once you substantiate your, currently baseless, claim.
/r/MensRights14/04/17 10:47 AM
2

It's absolutely a true stat. It's common sense in fact. In general a man that attempts to commit suicide succeeds first time. No more attempts for him. In general a woman that attempts to commit suicide doesn't succeed and is free to try again... And again... And again. Now, you could argue that for the most part they aren't seriously attempting to suicide at all and I would tend to agree. The stats still hold.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 08:59 PM
2

Just pronounce it out loud.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 05:19 PM
2

Well, she fled the scene before the cops showed up but other than that yeah. Crazy. "Stop doing that, that's Assault!" Captain obvious pulling her away gave me a little giggle.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 04:45 PM
3

That is exactly what it is. I have a hypothetical example written above, up as a reply to another comment, that you might want to check out.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 01:02 PM
3

Nah. As an example take 100 men and 100 women that are all suicidal. For the first iteration in your suicidal population you have a 100/100 M/F attempt ratio across both genders. But that isn't where it ends. Next iteration is leads to 120/180, third iteration is 124/244 and the fourth is 125/296. By the fifth iteration there are no more men left to continue but there are still 41 women and the cumulative attempts skew wildly in their side. Of course this assumes that every individual attempt is…
/r/MensRights13/04/17 12:59 PM
10

Well, I mean there were two corroborating witnesses that saw him doing something that could legitimately be seen as extremely wierd with his phone and bag. Great proof that sexual harassment is violently intolerable to wider society though. I'm gonna have to save this as evidence for the next time I ague with "someone of indeterminate political leanings" about this.
/r/MensRights13/04/17 12:33 PM
1

To be honest, Roman history can be a bit of a pain to learn given that it technically spans 1700 years and covers three separate empires, one of which changed its name half way through. Course the real pain to be right on anything about is Egypt. How many dynasties!!?!
/r/MensRights13/04/17 09:42 AM
1

It didn't start slowly falling after it became a monarchy. Most of the Roman civilisation's accomplishments happened in the 200 years after the transition. The post republican Pax Romana was a golden age by all accounts.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 09:32 PM
1

Bing-pot!
/r/MensRights12/04/17 03:33 PM
1

Sort of. I mean there are a fair few special Olympics runners that would disagree with you.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 10:43 AM
17

I like when feminists do silent protests. Makes a change.
/r/MensRights08/04/17 05:00 PM
6

Shocking, who knew that people that stand around doing nothing in constant, never ending, organised protests have the money to stand around and do nothing in constant, ever ending, organised protests.
/r/MensRights07/04/17 11:18 AM
2

I don't think that's a fair assessment of the article. What they are saying is that they (the aid organisations) assume that men don't actually have unique problems separate from wider society, unlike women, and so they have never even bothered to ask the questions needed to address them. It's likely that this is one of Donald rumsfelds "Unknown Unknowns" to these people. They are ignorant of their own ignorance beyond the minimum amount of virtue signalling needed. The author is remarkably self…
/r/MensRights07/04/17 11:12 AM
1

"Sensible" - That's kinda the issue isn't it?
/r/MensRights07/04/17 10:50 AM
1

I actually see this as a good thing. In my town there are a few bars where the female toilets are exceptionally well decorated and appointed while the male toilets are strictly functional cinder block style affairs. We're talking they have couches and stuff in there... It's crazy. So with an influx of perpetually offended snowflakes into the "gender neutral" room men will end up benefiting when the tears start flowing over the non binary oppression inherent in these Spartan toilets. Id call that…
/r/MensRights07/04/17 10:35 AM
10

Toysoldier is a trooper for sure. Consistant high level content can't be easy to achieve.
/r/MensRights04/04/17 05:45 PM
12

The point he was making was that previous generations of feminists always campaigned for equal rights but completely and utterly rejected the very concept of equal responsibilities that came with those very rights. The absolute best amongst those prior feminists accepted that these responsibilities were a fair price for increased rights but their voices were quietly and efficiently silenced by the majority. The rest, as they say, is history.
/r/MensRights02/04/17 06:40 PM
2

Honestly, I'm fine with this. Nobody wins from a bunch of pictures of ugly asses plastered everywhere so the salt that will flow over this in the intermediate term will be hilarious. Anyone willing to bet on how long it takes a feminist to claim this project is sexist against women once they realise men don't even care?
/r/MensRights01/04/17 05:50 PM
0

Salty
/r/MensRights30/03/17 12:26 AM
2

It's explaining a conceptual framework, it's not supposed to be factual, and thus doesn't need sources or citations. It functions well on that level If you can think of a way to link this conceptual framework to a series of concrete citations, without cluttering the images too much, then please share it with the OP. That would be some really high quality feedback they could focus upon.
/r/MensRights29/03/17 10:00 PM
14

Just a couple of formatting points: You need to switch the exaggerations and fabrications so it flows more logically. Exaggerations are real issues, just over emphasised, but fabrications aren't. Because the fabrications in the first defogger panel are still labeled under "real issues" it's less self consistantly true than if they were switched. I'd keep a few more feminist balls in the last defogging panels coloured "real issue blue" since I'm a bit more charitable to feminists. I suppose it's …
/r/MensRights29/03/17 09:53 PM
2

Yeah, it just seems like turtles all the way down on the insultingness of this word. Like it just degrades everybody in the vicinity of its use, even the person saying it.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 07:58 PM
1

I don't think it would do much in the immediate term, no arguments seem to work here. If we could get it into the cultural memory of the younger generation, however, then we would be cooking with charcoal. Definitely true at the end of the day though.
/r/MensRights23/03/17 07:47 PM
1

But posting there would ban me from r/feminism! Whatever would I do then?
/r/MensRights21/03/17 01:39 PM
6

"Winning" is a pretty bold claim. "Not actively losing anymore" is a lot more accurate.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 01:36 PM
3

The longer hours is way more important than it seems at first glance because it increases the likelihood that a man will receive overtime pay too.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 01:02 PM
13

Disgusting! Disgusting!!!!?!
/r/MensRights21/03/17 11:09 AM
3

I mean in a crowded, noisy, bar I'd probably slap some random that threw water in my face just on instinct. It's quite a shocking thing to happen to you.
/r/MensRights21/03/17 11:06 AM
2

Holy crap, this is some Veronica Mars tier shit right there. Looks like she has her bang to rights.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 10:42 PM
11

Well, if this hurts the bar's business then she probably could get taken to court for libel in a civil case.
/r/MensRights20/03/17 10:40 PM
2

Im pretty sure the person you are replying to is referring to the organised "New Atheist" movement that started in the early 2000s. It imploded, from all the SJW infiltration, after the elevator-gate incident. Now the only people that are left running conferences and stuff are the SJW types and they are all assholes.
/r/MensRights19/03/17 03:22 PM
1

The women's auxiliary of the patriarchy indeed!
/r/MensRights19/03/17 03:14 PM
6

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlord.
/r/MensRights16/03/17 07:44 PM
8

People deserve common courtesy, respect is a step far and beyond that. If you give everyone respect then respect becomes worthless.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 02:00 PM
2

Glad we agree it's your responsibility to clean your baby. Presumably you will expect to have to help your kid bathe when they are a toddler? Well, hot dog! No hygiene issue there either then. Concurrently, whilst you are doing that you can impress upon him the need to clean himself and after that lesson eventually sinks in he'll never have a substantive hygiene issue around it at all! Absolute minimum parenting standards for the win!
/r/MensRights13/03/17 06:35 PM
2

How are you planning on dealing with diaper duty, my dude? Seems like you need a refresher course in how being a parent works.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:08 PM
3

Wow, some of that stuff really tests my commitment to free speech.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 05:06 PM
2

So because you are too lazy to wash your kid properly you are gonna cut bits off of him... Dad of the year material right before my own eyes! I salute you sir!
/r/MensRights13/03/17 04:27 PM
2

You are right, of course, but it is just such a wild idea to non Americans. People think I'm joking when I bring it up how common it is in the U.S. Like, I have never seen a fully circumcised penis in real life.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 04:18 PM
1

Can't say fairer than that my dude.
/r/MensRights13/03/17 04:09 PM
4

The point they are trying to make is that in order to circumcise a baby they have to physically rip the foreskin away from the glans to which it is completely fused. The closest analogous structure in the body is the adhesive tissue between your finger and fingernail. It's almost implausibly painful to try pull back the foreskin until you are like 10 years old. I may have given it a shot once when I was little, nightmare fuel. Being circumcised as an adult, with a fully developed penis, are way …
/r/MensRights13/03/17 03:52 PM
1

I think they read stuff like "your BMI score (weight) doesn't measure health well on an individual basis" and just leave it at that without further thought. In an overarching sense that's perfectly true, I'm class one morbidly obese on the BMI chart but I look like a lower tier athlete. The unfortunate part is they take that information to mean there is no possible correlation between weight, by extension size, and health.
/r/MensRights12/03/17 04:23 PM
36

I feel the same. Some really good comics interspersed with the occasional spewing forth of a bunch of white nationalist apologetics. It's a weird mix to be sure.
/r/MensRights11/03/17 06:06 PM
1

Now that's what I call a good comment.
/r/MensRights08/03/17 10:24 AM
10

Nonsense. The exact same feminists that were against page 3 were against Lads Mags for example before Lads Mags lost any cultural relevance. Arguments abounded about the poor exploited page 3 models! How could you miss them?
/r/MensRights06/03/17 01:59 PM
2

Cannot argue there.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 11:47 PM
1

You know, I have never seen any evidence that soldiers actually have a higher chance of mental disorders, suicide, or homelessness than the comparable (i.e. Controlled for sex, age, economic background) wider public. My experience tends to skew that there is, in fact, a significant protective effect in play. This effect is even more pronounced in veterans that have been on operations, since those with any serious issues tend to be filtered out during basic training and the first few months of ba…
/r/MensRights05/03/17 10:47 PM
4

Legally the exact same thing though.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 10:25 PM
1

Nah, it's talking about the gestalt figure of all men and women's wages. The fact that more men's than women's jobs are more dangerous affects that gestalt figure. In that conceptual framework it's very useful information. The poster isn't dealing with individuals on a per hour basis because the claim isn't about individuals on a per hour basis at all.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 10:09 AM
2

Honestly, how can you not follow the logical flow of a comment thread you are a part of? I keep forgetting its you, and only you, that does this all the damn time. My bad though, expecting you to explain why you thought the guy above you was joking rather than pretend you don't understand the contextual use of pronouns.
/r/MensRights03/03/17 08:57 PM
2

You don't do context well do you?
/r/MensRights03/03/17 08:43 PM
2

In California maybe (presumably, it's the only state mentioned after a quick search on the formula). Not everyone lives there. One of my mates worked for the UK child support agency a few years ago who did the calculations that even if you literally had childcare responsibilities split 50/50 you would still be on the hook for 400+ a month. That was on a £20,000 yearly wage and it was calculated before tax! Wild.
/r/MensRights03/03/17 08:42 PM
1

Presumably there is an effect from the mortality rate of a given vocation on overall compensation therein. Its just another component that explains the overarching 77¢ figure.
/r/MensRights03/03/17 08:31 PM
2

I mean, they're not wrong. I don't see the joke.
/r/MensRights03/03/17 08:20 PM
1

Bingo!
/r/MensRights28/02/17 07:01 PM
2

I have a horrible suspicion that the feminist obsession with inflating rape stats is actually a form of rape culture too. They try very hard to convince people that rape, even though they say it is super horrible, is a normal facet of life. You know, the whole "it's not just monsters; normal people can be rapists too." I know why a lot of them do this and I can totally see their reasoning but I can't help but wonder if it pushes some people with borderline attitudes to rape to consider it not to…
/r/MensRights26/02/17 07:14 PM
10

Because he doesn't know any better.
/r/MensRights24/02/17 05:00 AM
3

Meh, it was outlawed under the Taliban too. Never stopped anyone then and those dudes knew how to punish people.
/r/MensRights23/02/17 02:03 AM
4

He's talking about why Christians randomly started circumcising their children in the mid to late 1800s after over a millennia and a half of explicitly and deliberately not doing so. Was a complete fad everywhere else bar the U.S. though.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 02:31 PM
1

Getting any of your arteries cut will kill you in minutes. Good joke.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 02:59 AM
2

You think that's sick? In the UK anyone can perform circumcisions. No restrictions whatsoever. Using whatever implements they want too, scissors, knives, rubber bands, sharp sticks, anything. Crazy, right?
/r/MensRights21/02/17 02:51 AM
1

Like a guy above said, unlike whites, black people in the U.S. can only guess at their ancestry. They are black, that's all they've usually got ethnographically.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 02:01 AM
6

The major company that uses foreskins is Skinmedica. They have scrubbed their site of all explicit mentions of it since the Oprah scandal; of course if you know what the $10 words, and jargon, they use mean it's fairly blatant. The myth is that a foreskin is worth $100,000 or whatever ridiculous sum is being bandied about. Based on other similar items prices I doubt it could cost any more than $500.
/r/MensRights21/02/17 01:57 AM
19

They are though
/r/MensRights21/02/17 01:34 AM
3

Can women have toxic masculinity? I've never heard a feminist claim that.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:15 PM
3

Obvious hyperbole aside, it's true that human touch isn't just desirable it's an actual need to remain psychologically healthy. Read up on "Touch Starvation", it's a pretty important men's issue since it affects men vastly disproportionately.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:12 PM
1

Read your comment that I replied to. Suddenly all will make sense!
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:06 PM
1

That is very, very, weird.
/r/MensRights19/02/17 06:00 PM
3

So you've never, ever, heard a man strongly criticising their partner, deserved or not. You've never met a man who, even briefly, needed to let off steam about how his partner did something exaspiratingly stupid that he'll need to fix? Even made a joke at his partners expense? You are astronomically lucky. I'd rather talk about green slime mold, that shit is crazy. More importantly you apparently don't have any male friends that you would trust enough to tell you, without you retaliating with ph…
/r/MensRights19/02/17 05:38 PM
3

OP, are you Scottish?
/r/MensRights19/02/17 04:47 PM
8

If a man shit talks about his partner I very much doubt he would get his ass kicked buy anyone other than her close family. You've switched the variables entirely here. I've seen women get into slugging matches with each other over an uninvited negative comment about one of their partners. I'm not saying women don't shit talk about their partners waaay more often than men do but it's just a matter of degree. I personally would get bored really quickly of someone that (moaned about/praised/just t…
/r/MensRights19/02/17 04:45 PM
8

Feminism is in the water supply! You are right in principle, of course, but this general trend has been a theme in human existence since long before feminism was even a glimmer in it's mother's eye.
/r/MensRights17/02/17 10:32 PM
3

Just the first example to pop into my head would be napoleonic firing line tactics in the military. Totally against human instinct, or even common sense, still used routinely for nearly a 100 years. I'm sure you could come up with less extreme examples but there we are.
/r/MensRights17/02/17 10:29 PM
1

Away back to stormfront.
/r/MensRights17/02/17 02:16 PM
1

Someone doesn't know what false flag refers to.
/r/MensRights16/02/17 06:36 PM
6

Found the false flag feminist!
/r/MensRights16/02/17 03:36 PM
2

Preach.
/r/MensRights16/02/17 03:23 PM
1

What exactly is your point here?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 03:38 AM
1

That's a massive ask, as far as I'm aware there is no requirement for schools to report on enforcement action under the Clary Act and no requirement under the 2013 Dear Colleague letter, only the incidents reported to the college authorities need be mentioned. Thus I doubt the stats actually exist. I certainly can't find anything from my usual sources. I could make an educated guess based on other statistics I'm familiar, like the BJS NCVS, but I wouldn't bet on the possible accuracy being withi…
/r/MensRights13/02/17 12:58 PM
3

There are way, way, better ways to get your point across than this. I mean "The Swarthworld", really? Really?
/r/MensRights13/02/17 12:30 PM
8

Well, no, not really. Kidnapping would be what my Mother did to me when she moved us 20,000km away, telling my Father that we were just going on holiday. That's legalised kidnapping. Least she gets Tuesdays.
/r/MensRights12/02/17 09:40 AM
19

Just say yes.
/r/MensRights11/02/17 06:32 PM
4

Amen.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 04:14 PM
1

Well, yeah, sure but you could say that about anything. Hell, you could say that about any point on that poster. At the end of the day, its the nature of the beast that most young guys don't consider threats to their future livelyhood as seriously as they should. Any student that maintains even a casual interest in the state of current events on campus knows men are being targeted. Whether they think it's justified or not is a matter for another discussion.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 05:28 AM
10

It's a good article but then again I would think that since it caters practically to all my biases. Waaaay down the list of best ever articles though. It's actually got some pretty crazy parts where it tries to say x follows y with no explained link at all. I'm putting that down to the fun to read conversational style rather than anything untoward.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 05:14 AM
1

I think the boys are already fully aware of their predicament. Frankly a no nonsense reassurance that my life prospects wouldn't get summarily thrown away, without any thought, would make me feel more secure if I were one of them. But by all means, remove the centre portion of the comment. Point still stands.
/r/MensRights08/02/17 11:02 PM
1

Women aren't definitively defenceless. Look at the YPJ. Men are no more able to survive the barrel bombing of their suburb, or getting shot by a trigger happy militia, than women. The sole difference is that men have to actively search for resources in the hell that is a civil war or be decried as cowards by everyone around them. That's the very definition of male disposability.
/r/MensRights08/02/17 11:48 AM
12

Dear male students, You won't automatically be assumed to be a potential rapist. We will give all students due process. That would be a start.
/r/MensRights08/02/17 11:37 AM
2

This is literally the most jarring. Men aren't people deserving of mention, even though they are cut down like wheat before the reaper as they try to look after their families. Of course that doesn't matter, Women (capital W) are the primary victims of war though after all, haven't you heard?
/r/MensRights08/02/17 11:30 AM
5

Given that the percentage certainty of being caught is the biggest factor in deterring crime... Probably. You think a high speed police chase for god knows how many miles would have been safer?
/r/MensRights07/02/17 03:31 PM
9

No. These are specifically civilian deaths. Even if you assume a 25% chance of a false positive that's still like 5-1 adult male-adult female death rate.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 01:01 PM
2

No mate. It's stuff like why people tend to build cities alongside rivers. Or why the east end of cities tend to be poorer than the west end. Or why rural areas tend to have lower morality rates inspite of lower healthcare provision. Or why certain areas of a country experiance population explosions but other areas that seem very similar never urbanise.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 11:23 AM
8

Not quite, that's the issue though. The whole pay gap thing is one big God of the gaps argument. 10% unaccounted for? Must all be sexism. Narrowed it down to 5%? Well that's clearly the sexism. 2.1%? Sexism. Rinse and repeat.
/r/MensRights07/02/17 11:09 AM
1

Which doesn't really fit into a gendered dynamic that well. Men have always been as over represented at the very bottom of society as at the top and those men at the bottom are marginalised specifically because of their gender.
/r/MensRights03/02/17 11:23 AM
1

Not really. She made a big deal, just like Justin Trudeau did, about this being all about gender equality. She had an end goal in mind and then decided that coin flip selection of candidates was better than playing at real politics. This is guaranteed to majorly bite her in the ass in the mid-long term. It's lucky for her that the SNP are a pretty single-minded and disciplined party these days, that's the only reason it hasn't backfired yet.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 04:45 PM
1

I would have thought making a randomly selected female SNP MSP 500% more likely to hold a cabinet position than a randomly selected male SNP MSP, and sacking many qualified men in the process, would count as crazy feminist bullshit. You have an exceptionally high tolerance for it bud.
/r/MensRights26/01/17 04:01 PM
0

You mean the Nicola Sturgeon that created a gender equal cabinet in Holyrood? The cabinet that female SNP MSPs have a 1/2 chance of being included in? As opposed to the 1/10 chance that male SNP MSPs get? Not pulling feminist shit eh? Ok mate.
/r/MensRights25/01/17 06:14 PM
3

Plenty of opportunities to do so. What are you waiting for?
/r/MensRights24/01/17 09:42 AM
1

"Equal punishment for paternity fraud." De facto that would mean no punishment for paternity fraud. I mean I doubt many women have ever been prosecuted for it, even in places it may be an actual crime on the books, and I'd be willing to bet good money no man has ever been. Weird thing to say really.
/r/MensRights23/01/17 02:16 AM
6

It wouldn't be gross for the women of a majority intact generation though, moot point. I mean, some cougars might need to take a hit but otherwise...
/r/MensRights20/01/17 03:50 PM
19

No one gonna point out the fact that one of them actually recognises how sensitive the foreskin is though? "It's basically like a little male clit," or words to that effect. Maybe I just look at things a different way but it seems to me that it's the little perceptual changes like that that will win the war in the end.
/r/MensRights20/01/17 03:40 PM
3

That's very close to the truth.
/r/MensRights18/01/17 09:20 PM
450

Thought catalogue is basically a snazzier version of blogspot. Not "the Media" by any stretch. Your point still stands but this isn't evidence of it.
/r/MensRights18/01/17 04:29 PM
1

The part where she says "white males", obviously.
/r/MensRights05/01/17 02:09 PM
3

That's an interesting question. I'd like to see some stats on that, most victimisation stats I've seen tend to be too low granularity for this kind of query though. All things being equal though I'd imagine it's gonna be women. Sole reasons being that handbags are super easy to snatch away in a flash and any form of heel would make pursuit pretty impractical.
/r/MensRights27/12/16 05:03 PM
3

The shorter and lighter you are the easier it will be. I can only do 5, at best, but that said I weigh 102kgs.
/r/MensRights25/12/16 07:45 PM
-3

Right... And exactly how many of those 20 odd years since the WRAC integrated with the rest of the Field Army had seen major combat operations before 2008? Not terribly many. Regardless, the basic fact that women only make up circa 10% of the Army, combined with the blanket Dismounted Close Combat Role restriction, can account for that. How many male clerks have seen any form of combat? Not many. How many female clerks have? Not a whole lot but they're many, many, times more likely to than the m…
/r/MensRights25/12/16 06:56 PM
-5

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1089545/British-soldier-woman-lose-limb-Afghanistan.html Well then, you weren't looking. Here's your first. Plenty more where that came from.
/r/MensRights25/12/16 06:10 PM
-8

That's a crock and you know it. Women in the British Army have obviously had their limbs blown off in the Middle East. In fact, when compared to their male peers within the non combat arms and services, they have a very slight increase in the likelihood of that happening to them per capita. Mostly due to being double hatted between female engagement tasks on the ground in addition to their normal tasks I.e. Combat Med Tech etc. Seriously, that's not the hill you wanna die on.
/r/MensRights25/12/16 05:05 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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