TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Irrelevant_Tosser Archive

View 4 posts and 167 comments by Irrelevant_Tosser on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Thanks, from that I got http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8dYxtv7IBc. It is in Spanish, though, so the above link may give you more info on the story behind it.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 07:19 AM
6

Is there a mirror? Youtube removed it for violating terms of service.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 03:29 AM
1

I don't mind the word "creep" so much as the usage of it. I don't like it when words such as "creep" are often applied to men as a whole. How is that any different from calling someone lazy simply because they are black or Mexican?
/r/MensRights01/11/13 12:09 AM
1

Then the "problem" is further "exacerbated" by people putting those same terms in to Google to see if it is true. You don't even necessarily have to have something as a top search result, if you have a large enough audience, you can simply tell them that there is a particular search term in Google and they will make it so through their action of searching for it. Edit: Oops, other people already said the same thing.
/r/MensRights31/10/13 11:33 PM
1

I say let women run the world, so that when they also claim that women are no different from men intellectually, and they fail just as badly as men have so far, that at least that claim will be proven true. (Disclaimer: Yes, I am partially joking here.)
/r/MensRights28/10/13 05:45 AM
1

Well, I guess I spoke too soon on this one. I was under the impression that chemical castration was a permanent thing. Your comment prompted me to look up information on Depo Provera, and though I stand by my sentiment if my misinformed premise was correct, it certainly does not fit this particular situation. Honestly, now that I look at her statement with a less bias viewpoint, it does not seem radical as it had earlier. I am going to chalk this up an example where I believed that I had thought…
/r/MensRights21/10/13 11:19 AM
7

It surprises me when people cannot see that chemical castration is sexual assault. While she is not committing a crime for merely advocating it, it should be pointed out to her that it is every bit as bad as advocating for sterilization of women who are mentally disabled. And why would you advocate for sterilizing males with a higher probability for intelligence or success that may pass on those qualities, benefiting society as a whole?
/r/MensRights21/10/13 06:34 AM
3

I think that being MGTOW is a natural result of the sexual competitive environment. Men see their lack of choice to bodily autonomy, either within the context of relationships or the lack of being able to even enter a relationship in the first place. It is the lack of choice within the game that makes them realize that the only way that they truly have a choice is to withdraw from it completely. The reason that so many feminists shame them for withdrawing is because they see it as a potential lo…
/r/MensRights18/10/13 05:06 PM
3

I am also glad to see examples for both sexes. Sexual harassment is any unwanted remark, behaviour, or touch that has sexual content. I think that it would be better defined as "Sexual harassment is when a person continuing to make sexual advances when it is clear that those advances are unwanted, and especially when the person making the advances pressures or intimidates the the person receiving them because of their choice to reject those advances. A sexual advance is any remark, behaviour, or…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 11:30 AM
4

I find it puzzling also, because if Sinead O'Connor really wanted women to be empowered, she would have stuck up for Miley's choice to show her body. I don't understand how people don't see that the source of disempowerment of women's sexuality is not when women are "prostituted" out, but when people go out of their way to attack their decision. Sinead is the one trying to disempower Miley. Of course, Sinead probably really thinks that she is helping Miley here, and I won't fault her for that. B…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 08:10 AM
1

I do too, but as it was uploaded 6 years ago I doubt that is a possibility.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 07:39 AM
1

What really struck me was in part 1, where she directly attacked Ron as a person, and then when an audience member makes a statement (Like /u/Lurker_IV also pointed out, I wish I could understand what the person says) she immediately chides him for it. If she cannot see logic well enough to see the cognitive dissonance in her actions, I cannot trust her ability to be logical when she makes the rest of her arguments. I almost feel sorry for her, because she is trapped in a mindset that does not a…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 07:38 AM
7

That was actually a past debate, the uploader put that video up about 6 years ago.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 06:45 AM
2

Here are the other parts: (Part 2)[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0ti6DDvz6s] (Part 3)[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPggdiGrWj0] (Part 4)[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC72GD1PpCY] (Part 5)[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWQyXeBJSPo] (Part 6)[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWrOzZeXcqY] (Part 7)[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z5tbEhAp1w] Ron Jeremy starts talking in pert 3, but I would recommend watching the whole thing.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 03:56 AM
8

What about does he ever feel like less of a human by being objectified? Isn't that what he is getting paid for? Is there anything wrong with objectification in and of itself?
/r/MensRights03/10/13 12:39 AM
4

Ask him how much women in the industry have a shame over their job choice vs. how much that outsiders want to make women feel shamed over their job choice. Essentially, is the job choice itself shameful, or is it just outsiders trying to project their own sexual shame on the workers?
/r/MensRights03/10/13 12:29 AM
17

You would think that calling for the castration of men, or saying that men should have their penis cut off, or that they should die, is violent. But it is not, because only men can be violent. Only womyn can be reduced to mere objects. /s I only want to point that out because there are so many articles out there where the author talks about how only men can be violent, and then immediately demonstrate the opposite by calling for harm on males with impunity (This article is not one of them).
/r/MensRights01/10/13 12:57 AM
2

Ahh, the world we live in where our children's sex ed courses come out of the outrage over phallic shaped objects. And then we wonder why we grow up with an imbalanced view of sexuality.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 06:06 PM
10

There are many flowers that are similar to the vulva and vagina, and even more shocking is that they are all basically female genitalia; flopping in the wind like that and offending the sensibilities. Where is /u/Everything_Is_Rape to help us understand how bees shame their nakedness very day by raping flowers? I mean, those flowers did not give consent for the bees to insert themselves in there and steal their pollen. It doesn't matter if the bees exchange it, they always take more than they le…
/r/MensRights27/09/13 06:04 PM
3

I really would have preferred that you linked to the original, but I found it easily enough in the description on the one you linked. It really is a well put together song, and very catchy, and I like the lyrics. Thank you for at least bringing it my attention. Upvote for that.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 04:27 AM
14

The detractors obviously care very little about their relationship, except to see if they can ruin it. It has nothing to do with gender roles. They are so caught up on the resemblance to the joke where women are told to "go into the kitchen and make me a sandwich" that they forgot that a solid relationship is centered around giving. A woman making some food for a man is not subjugation if it her choice to do so. They are certainly trying to subjugate him to their belief system. I think that many…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 04:53 PM
0

If you notice, I said that I also believe that Facebook should enforce their policy equally. I disagree with Facebook that their policy should be one of censorship. Of course they are a business that can set up their policy as they see fit. But it is still a double standard if you speak out against feminists censoring your content, and then turn around and censor feminist content. Do you think that I am wrong in this assertion? Look at many comment that are made in this subreddit where people ar…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 02:25 PM
1

My argument on that one point is a little shaky, I will give you that. Does that render everything in my argument invalid? I have a few other questions, even though they are not related to MensRights, they lead to an interesting line of thought. Do you think it would be better if we allowed people to come in as non-citizen immigrants, or keep the current system where they are under the status of illegal immigrants? Do you think it would be better to force employers to pay immigrants at least the…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 06:20 AM
1

Thank you. I now wish I had spoken up earlier on your behalf when you were talking about it in the other threads.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 06:07 AM
1

I find it disappointing how many people here rant about how feminists and other groups, and yet cheer on the censorship of these Facebook pages. Like it or not, anyone who tries to censor Facebook pages because Facebook has a double standard now is faced with the double standard where they say that censorship is wrong and yet openly advocate for it when it is something that they do not like. It is far better to let the page stand, so that the speech can be discussed, hateful or not. If you truly…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 05:47 AM
1

Yes, why would they want it taken down? It's not even that "this is what feminism is now." If you censor the page, than no one can look at it and discuss how hateful it is.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:38 AM
5

If you think of downvoting as a gauge for what other people think, then downvotes no longer matter. I do wish that people would tell me what part of my statement that they did not like. Any amount of voting also indicates how many people may have read it, so even if I am wrong, at least I know that someone has seen my statement, and maybe I have gotten someone to think about it. My goal is not to get people to agree, so much as get more people to see more sides to a situation.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 06:19 AM
2

I don't have anything relevant to add for the topic of the paper, but here is my advice. Whatever the topic that she picks, the most effective argument comes from getting the audience to see it from a perspective where it is beneficial to them.
/r/MensRights25/09/13 03:06 AM
0

Perhaps you know more about her than I do. I admit that I don't remember ever watching an interview by this particular reporter. But I guess we will have to agree to disagree here, if that is ok with you. that a Journalist, whose job it is to research a topic as thoroughly as possible (crudulity is NOT a virtue in Journalism, and like lawyers, Journalists try to never ask a question they don't already know the answer to), would be 'ignorant' innocently is laughable. I am not saying that journali…
/r/MensRights25/09/13 01:24 AM
8

The article is basically saying the same thing that I have said in the past: Honestly, the people who object to this song are telling women to hide their sexuality, because they are being told they are not allowed to dance around in front of men. The only people who are doing the slut shaming are the people wanting to stop the women in the video from expressing their sexuality. Also, healthy sexual behavior includes the ability to separate what you do in the bedroom from how you treat your partn…
/r/MensRights24/09/13 10:26 PM
4

Ok, so I am not going to out-rightly dismiss you for your statement, because I can see that you are being sarcastic. I will, rather, help you dismiss the idea behind it. Most hate speech comes from people when they feel like there is a loss of power. When a white supremacist hates Mexicans, he/she does so because they feel as though Mexicans have somehow lowered their opportunity for employment. When someone makes racist comments against black people, it is because they feel that black people ar…
/r/MensRights24/09/13 09:51 PM
1

Honestly, journalists are there to be the devil's advocate on a subject when it leads to an interesting discussion. Just because the reporter repeats what an opposing group says, does not mean that reporter believes the opposing group's ideas. It is just a way of eliciting more information on the subject out of the person that they are interviewing. I would be willing to bet there are plenty of topics that you have never heard both sides of. I know that I have. I know from experience that I do n…
/r/MensRights23/09/13 02:29 AM
1

You have to realize that may not be a product of being openly hostile to the idea, rather that the reporters that you talked to only had come across the arguments from the other side of the story. It is a natural human reaction to appear a little incredulous at a new argument or different side than thay are accustomed to. Just because they resist a new angle to an argument, does not mean that they will not go home and think about your side in more depth. They may very well go home and do more re…
/r/MensRights22/09/13 09:22 PM
2

The reason that they are part of Atheism+ is because they don't believe in God. I mean, He is the highest point of the patriarchy, and the oppression that it represents. Oh, most atheists don't even believe god exists? That's what I meant, yea... Though I was being sarcastic above, I wouldn't put it past the Atheism+ community to define a belief in god like this.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 07:57 PM
4

So, it is click bait, and you want me to be a part of it by taking the bait and clicking on the link? That makes no sense, let it die in obscurity if you are actually glad that it is dropping off of it's Alexis ranking.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 06:40 PM
-3

Let's examine what harassment actually is from another situation. If you get stopped by police one day, even if they question you for a very long time on the side of the road, that is not harassment. It becomes harassment if it becomes a pattern where you are stopped by the police nearly every day. I argue that a large portion of /r/creepyPMS[1] isn't "complaining", but rather, bragging Whether or not this is true, I think that the main motivation is attention and validation from other posters i…
/r/MensRights11/09/13 04:33 PM
0

Ever had "workplace harassment" training at a job? The first thing they tell you is YOUR intentions don't matter, if your behavior makes someone else uncomfortable, you're to blame. Unless their behavior makes them look like a slut, then you are slut shaming and that is bad. By which I mean, it does not matter what their intention is when they wear a particular outfit, if they become self-aware when you start feeling uncomfortable about their outfit choices, than it is your fault for judging the…
/r/MensRights04/09/13 12:35 PM
1

I was a bit quick to post (I would rather admit that I was wrong and get downvoted, than not to admit it here. Go ahead and hit that down arrow, you know you want to.). After reading some of your comment history, I realized that you were not hating TYT just for the sake of hating it, like I had assumed from your title. I agree with your reply here. My problem was the title, which I ironically forgot to mention the problem had after ranting about people not mentioning the actual problems they hav…
/r/MensRights02/09/13 02:35 AM
1

This video is fairly old, and they have changed their beliefs over the years. I agree that the way they handled the story in this situation is anger-inducing at first, because they laughed about the situation. If you watch further in, they do say that it was wrong for the woman to rape the man. It seems like the kind of laughter that happens when you have never really considered the possibility that something could happen, which in this case is male rape. At least they accepted the possibility a…
/r/MensRights02/09/13 01:41 AM
1

I am not going to deny it, that may be the case. But we are both entitled to our opinions, and it looks to me like a parody about feminists. We really won't know unless the people who made the video come out and say what their intention was.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 08:25 AM
9

If you want to take Weird Al at his word, he himself has said that he does not need permission to do a parody, but that he does it out of respect for the original artist. Parodies are protected under the fair use doctrine. That does not mean that the original artist cannot make an attempt to sue, but that winning in court is unlikely as long as the song is clearly a parody. That is because parodies are generally considered not to have a negatively effect on the sale of the original work.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 08:05 AM
6

There are so many comments here, along with the video's own comment section, that indicate people believe it is a song from a feminist perspective. I did not think it was the case when I first saw it, and there are several hints that indicate this. The wording in the title is [feminist parody], which could either mean it is a parody by feminists of the Robin Thicke song "Blurred Lines", but it could also mean that it is a parody about feminists using "Blurred Lines." What makes me believe it is …
/r/MensRights01/09/13 07:40 AM
1

Did she assume that, you assumed she did not know something based on her gender, when her own assumption was based on your gender? I mean, we could go around in circles like that forever, and not get anywhere useful.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 01:56 PM
2

What about how they see no problem with women showing their breasts, but the anchor is certainly quick to point out that the mayor did not look down much. I certainly think it should be just as acceptable for women to show their breasts, but it won't be acceptable until it is also acceptable for men to look down at the exposed breasts. This whole thing is just an example of how breasts are used as a power play device. You can't just ask "why aren't breasts any different then ears?" and then bera…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:38 PM
1

What I dislike is that the term is used to bring others down, when the goal should be to elevate the privileges of people who are not treated better. Let's say that group B has rights that group A does not. It may not be in the best interest for group A to remove the "extra" privileges of group B, because that only encourages group B to remove "extra" privileges of group A. It becomes a vicious cyclic game, where each side tries to look like they have it worse off, until everyone is worse.
/r/MensRights26/08/13 10:13 PM
49

They would certainly get rid of the commands that sound a bit rapey, such as mount, ram, touch, and many others. Oh, and 'man' and 'chown' would be declared as part of the patriarchy. All users should get all the privileges of root.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:13 PM
2

You can already block people on an individual basis with Twitter. But that is not what such a button will be used for. It will be used to remove Twitter accounts of people who are making legitimate and non-threatening points. You can call almost anything threatening if you twist it just right. It will suffer the same abuse that the equivalent button on YouTube does. If you want to censor the outside world on your end, you are perfectly in your rights to do that. Censoring other people on their e…
/r/MensRights05/08/13 03:33 PM
2

It is funny how Viggo Hanson says that his whole reason for trying to pass the law to force men to pee sitting down was because he did not like his son being forced to stand while peeing at school. Maybe I am missing something here, but that makes no sense to me whatsoever. The bigger injustice is forcing people to do things one way or the other.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 07:15 PM
5

It is not because she is a woman that she is being trolled on twitter. When someone "tweeted that he would only watch that evening’s news if she went topless," it is obvious that person knew that she was not going to get her boobs out. The twitter troll was trying to get people angry, and her passive-aggressive reaction was re-tweeting the message instead of handling it in a joking manner. She should have responded by tweeting back something to the effect of "If I don't show boobs you stop watch…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 12:16 PM
6

You should have just said,"Oh, you mean the entrance over here at this other bar down the street," and walked to another bar.
/r/MensRights20/07/13 08:46 AM
1

What I saw on that post was some huge meta-circlejerk where everyone seemed to be circlejerking about how they hate the misogynistic circlejerk on reddit. Oh no, what have I done? I have used the word "circlejerk" so many times that I just become part of the problem.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:06 AM
2

If you put women on pedestals, you can also be labeled as a misogynist. Basically, you can't win, because the label can be applied to you regardless of what you say.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 01:28 AM
36

I think the biggest problem that people have with the word "privileged" is not that men and women each have their own set of privileges, but how the word is used. The word "privilege" is often used to excuse oppressive behavior. It is hypocritical to oppress people on the basis that they are seen as the oppressor; when someone does that, their behavior is no better than the behaviors that they are trying to change in other people. The word "privilege" often amounts to just using the perceived st…
/r/MensRights17/07/13 05:47 AM
1

It would be funny if the posters were actually made by the same people as the originals, then put up by feminists with the goal of discrediting what MRA's arguments. How close are the posters to each other? If they were somehow scanned and copied off of originals, it seems like there would be expected distortions. If they used the same images, but were recreated, it would be very hard to get the alignment the same. What about the paper used, is it the same as the originals?
/r/MensRights11/07/13 09:29 PM
7

Lol, while males and females are busy discussing their rights, bots have no say except when it serves their masters.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 12:14 AM
0

I am not going to give you the ammunition to fire back here, because I don't think it was the correct situation to bring up the topic. The joke does not have anything to do with sexual assault, so the response does not seem appropriate. I may be wrong, but her response of "OK" might have been because she was confused about your response. I don't want to discourage you from making these kinds of comments, I am saying that there is a time and place for everything.
/r/MensRights30/06/13 12:12 AM
2

Essentially they said, "you are not disposable, and if you don't believe us we are throwing you out of our group."
/r/MensRights29/06/13 02:09 AM
1

No problem. I might have sounded harsh, but that was on purpose. I only did it because your reply came across to me as if you had not read the entire statement that I made. If I had merely said "FGM is worse," than your argument would have been valid. I bet many of my downvoters got so focused on those three words that they were blinded to the context. If you had stated, "FGM is just as bad as MGM," I would not have been able to argue that as easily. I did not think it was an ugly debate, I just…
/r/MensRights24/06/13 02:03 AM
1

No, I said it was my opinion. That means that your opinion may vary. It is an acknowledgement that I formed that opinion out of a subjective viewpoint where: I cannot know the effect of FGM because I am not a woman who has had it happen to me; I am a male who has been circumcised, but as it was done to me at a very young age, I don't even know the effect that MGM has had on me. The facts are that clitoral amputation is an analogue to amputation of the glans. To your point, it seems that there is…
/r/MensRights23/06/13 03:18 PM
1

Your statement is ambiguous. "No it's not my opinion", or "no it's not worse?" Do you mean it is the same, or do you mean that MGM is worse?
/r/MensRights23/06/13 02:55 PM
2

There are plenty of men that I have seen getting off of drug distribution charges as well. I don't know the number of males who get lighter sentences vs. females, so I don't know if your point is valid or not. This might not be the right place to post this, but drugs should be legal anyway. There are many users who are called addicts, when they are simply users. By the time someone becomes an addict, they have usually been around the court system enough times to learn how to avoid harsher punish…
/r/MensRights22/06/13 07:45 PM
-4

FGM is worse in my opinion, but it does not matter which is worse if both should not be done. Shooting someone in the head is worse than shooting them in the leg, but that does not mean that it is OK to shoot someone in the leg.
/r/MensRights22/06/13 06:32 PM
4

My favorite one is: I like my women like my coffee: black and bitter. A buddy of mine likes to say this: I like my women like I like my coffee: smooth, light and creamy, with lots of sugar. All in all, you just have to spend your seriousness coins wisely.
/r/MensRights20/06/13 04:56 AM
29

I pointed out that it was just a joke when I talked about the Adria Richards donglegate situation, so I feel like I would be a hypocrite if I got mad about this joke. It is a bit sexist, but that does not mean it is wrong. I even got a bit of a chuckle out of it. Honestly, I feel that being open to jokes that are directed toward men allows me to make jokes directed toward women. I would much prefer allowing jokes to go both directions than to shut them down both directions.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 11:28 PM
2

I dislike the idea of splitting the bill. I think it is far better for one person to pay per date, but that you should take turns. If I pay this time, you pay next time. It still comes out roughly even, but the act of taking turns makes more sense to human nature. I will usually mention I prefer taking turns during conversation at some point, even if it is in passing, as I think first dates are the time that you should set up what ground rules you want in a relationship (and of course to find ou…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 10:02 PM
7

Explaining something to another person is a great way to gauge how much they know on a subject. I conversely have no problem with other people explaining things to me, as every piece of knowledge that I know was explained to me in one form or another. Hell, I have buddies that I regularly explain things to that I think that they already know, and they do the same to me. Sometimes you get in a rut working on a problem, and that is the only way to get yourself out of it. At least if someone gets m…
/r/MensRights19/06/13 09:22 PM
1

You should also post this in /r/NeutralPolitics or somewhere where it will get more visiblity.
/r/MensRights19/06/13 03:00 PM
5

Check his/her username, the person is probably doing it on purpose. I would normally downvote people for insulting others, but I wouldn't give them the satisfaction this time.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 08:55 PM
5

I would seriously consider trolling her with the argument: "Do you see how easy it is to oppress people? All you have to do is tell them to 'sit the fuck down and listen.' Maybe I will talk to you when you want to stop using abusive language like that."
/r/MensRights18/06/13 08:44 PM
21

Good example on how to beat the "not all feminists are like that" argument, by not being like that.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:22 PM
2

I will try to make a brief synopsis of some of my thoughts. This is by no means a compete list. Patriarchy is a label that is not very useful. You may believe in it, and I may not, but that does not get us anywhere except in the same circle we were already in. It is certainly not a theory by any scientific standards, because there is so many arguments against it. It is a hypothesis, at best. Strength: Saying that a woman is just as strong as a man is misleading, because it is both true and false…
/r/MensRights18/06/13 04:24 PM
7

On the second page does "irreligious" mean "believer in a deity, but not an organized religion," or "complete non-believer?" Stemming from this "other" is just as ambiguous.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 03:09 PM
5

Do we really need to offer tax incentives for marriage?
/r/MensRights16/06/13 05:35 AM
1

I might not agree with your arguments, but I can see that they are coherent. I only upvote you because so many are downvoting you based merely on disagreeing with your opinion, without taking into context that you seem to be at least looking for disagreements to your worldview.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 01:08 PM
6

There is a possibility that they were trying to appear non-racist by including black people in the photo, and ended up appearing racist. I take this from being the kind of person who goes through the following process when I pass a random black person on the street: I look at the black person with no particular care about their race. Suddenly I believe that the random black person may think I am racist for looking at them. I don't want to offend them, so I look away. I realize that I have looked…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 11:20 AM
11

And everyone else, apparently, because oppressive random eyeballs need to stop appreciating the result of all the time she spent on working on her appearance that morning. Edit: To clarify, I am joking along with /u/mountainmansOG. I wanted to put a /s tag at the end, but I thought that maybe people would take it as sarcasm against what he said. That is not the case here.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 10:41 AM
5

US Law relied on arresting and restraining criminals I fail to see how the result of breaking the law has anything with to do with it. It is a result, not the law itself. As far as that goes, arresting and restraining criminals is a way of taking away the rights of an individual to be autonomous only because they infringed on the rights of other first. If someone murders someone, than they are jailed because they took the right to life away from another human. If they rape someone, they are jail…
/r/MensRights14/06/13 10:22 AM
43

What about a person's right to do what they want with their eyes? Whether the behavior is rude or not is beside the point. Trying to control another person's body is exactly what the Constitution protects against.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 07:49 AM
6

I want to analyse this for a second. For men: The lyrics seem to say that men are incapable of being anything but cowards if they are raised by women. They also hint that men can never overcome that cowardly behavior. For women: The lyrics would seem to indicate that women are incapable of raising men who are anything except for cowards. Despite the song using the word "coward" to describe men, it then goes on to tell women to "grow a backbone." I'm amazed that women cheer this shit on, and yet …
/r/MensRights13/06/13 11:45 AM
1

The irony is that when we think of other human beings as animals, it gives us an excuse to be animals in our treatment of them.
/r/MensRights11/06/13 01:14 AM
0

I guess this is what I get for going to sleep after posting. Where I wrote: Downvoting is still censorship. Only personal attacks should be unwelcome here, in my opinion. Maybe I should have wrote: Downvote personal attacks instead. I figured the context here was clear enough to point out what I meant: I wrote: downvote the people who are obviously here to bash us, not just because you disagree with some part of their opinion. meaning: Don't downvote disagreements, downvote personal attacks. You…
/r/MensRights10/06/13 03:11 AM
2

That's why you argue each idea on its own merit. I don't think there are very many atheists who are really on board with the whole Atheism+ "movement," especially since Atheism+ has tossed out the whole scientific method. They've basically latched on to the atheist community like a massive parasite.
/r/MensRights09/06/13 08:54 PM
-4

I also hope that people stop downvoting other people simply because they identify as a feminist. I don't think it helps our cause. I say downvote the people who are obviously here to bash us, not just because you disagree with some part of their opinion. If you disagree with part of their statement, then tell them what part you disagree with and why. Downvoting is still censorship. Only personal attacks should be unwelcome here, in my opinion. As a side note, I might be harsh in some of my opini…
/r/MensRights09/06/13 07:52 PM
3

He should try to tell one of his female feminist friends to "Stop talking. Smile and nod, and listen. And maybe you will learn something." He will see those cheers that he gets quickly turn into angry words directed at him. I want to point out those are extremely rude words. I also want to point out the double standard of those people who are cheering on his false bravery, because he is only being brave as long as his feminist allies are there to support him, not because his ideology is correct.
/r/MensRights08/06/13 10:39 PM
5

What frustrates me the most is that prostitution should be also a women's rights issue, or even a simple human rights issue. If you really want protection for women, or to get rid of abusive pimps, then you would legalize prostitution so that women are able to practice their profession of choice within the safety that legalized brothels provide. That way it can be regulated for the control of diseases, along with other protections for both the client and the service provider. In the end, isn't i…
/r/MensRights07/06/13 12:55 PM
1

I strongly suspect that her dating problem does not stem from being a strong woman with strong beliefs, rather that she is a controlling person. One does not have to control the behaviors of others in order to be a strong person. Contrary to other men here, I find her physically attractive, and she is within the weight range that I prefer. I also like strong women, but being a controlling bitch is no better than being a controlling asshole. I would probably not date her because of what I have re…
/r/MensRights04/06/13 09:25 AM
2

That's true. I was just offering a viewpoint that I had not seen yet. To go along with your statement about wrong perceptions, I offer an example. A guy asks a girl out who he has been friends with for a while. The girl laughs at the situation, because she had never considered the possibility before, and it quite surprised her. The guy thinks that she is laughing at him, and cuts off the friendship. And yes, all of my examples can apply to any relationship, regardless of the genders involved.
/r/MensRights01/06/13 05:49 AM
1

There is a big difference between men who get friendzoned by women who genuinely did not send off any signals of sexual interest, and the men who get friendzoned by women who intentionally lead men on until they reciprocate, and react by deliberately shaming those men into submission. I think that much of the anger is from men who got friendzoned by the latter category, so I want to discuss the women who intentionally lead men on. These women will tell these men that they are not interested. Thi…
/r/MensRights01/06/13 02:48 AM
2

You could take it two ways: 1. The underlying ideology of feminism is purposefully ill-defined, so that the proponents can apply the rules as they see fit. The following is a slightly ridiculous, but useful example. Let's say that you have a gymnasium, where there are basketball nets, and there are soccer nets. You are given a ball, and told that to win, all you have to do is get the ball into any net. If you toss it into the nearest basketball net, your opponent tells you that it is clearly a s…
/r/MensRights30/05/13 06:22 AM
2

Ok, so you have a point there, I'll give you that.
/r/MensRights26/05/13 01:48 AM
7

That was exactly what I was thinking. She talks about homophobia, which is defined as an irrational fear of homosexuality and homosexuals, yet she proudly declares her irrational fear of heterosexual interaction. I don't think she is even aware of what she is doing, and I doubt that it would be easy to point out to her what she is doing.
/r/MensRights25/05/13 07:37 AM
13

I was also in the Navy. The thing I took away was the amount of power that females have. Fewer females means far more competition among males for their attention. Because there are fewer women, the women have more power. Most of the females did not take advantage of it, but a few of them do. The competition makes people want to agree with false allegations. Some males want to agree out of either fear of not conforming to the group, or because they want to get on the good side of the limited fema…
/r/MensRights13/05/13 10:41 PM
12

All along it was mailed privilege. It got lost in translation a long time ago.
/r/MensRights16/04/13 04:24 PM
12

Is that what they mean by "check your privilege," all along they were telling me to cash in on it and I had no idea. I will send in for my privilege check right now. /sarcasm
/r/MensRights16/04/13 03:07 PM
8

On one hand, I have an extreme dislike for Gordon Ramsey. She has every right to be angry because he often treats people like shit. He acts like a drill instructor, and I wonder if that is necessary in this kind of a kitchen environment. On the other hand, he acts that way on purpose. He is pushing them to the limit for a reason. Being a strong person can mean being able to take a lot of shit and know when to brush it off. If she cannot handle him yelling at her, then she might not be able to ha…
/r/MensRights15/04/13 06:16 PM
7

Every time I hear about the "Patriarchy," I can't help but be reminded of such ridiculous concepts as "black men are stealing our white women," "the Jews are in control of the media," or the countless list of things that are "destroying America." Whether or not the Patriarchy exists, or if it ever existed, isn't what I am talking about. The matter of fact is that the concept of the Patriarchy has risen to the status of a religious dogma that must be taught to the unwilling heathens. Where religi…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 09:26 AM
5

I want to point out that Rebecca Watson is not a skeptic, despite whatever claims she makes to the contrary. The definition for skeptic is "someone who is inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions," the word "all" indicating that you include your own accepted opinions. She does nothing of the sort, she has re-purposed the word to mean "I question all of your opinions that I do not agree with in order to change your opinions to line up with what I want them to." That is a bit like being…
/r/MensRights05/04/13 11:45 AM
3

Just because you "have to do" something, does not mean you are forced to do it. If you are a plumber, you might "have to" work with shit and fix several toilets; or if you are a surgeon, you might "have to do" several surgeries. The difference is that you still have a choice not to do your job. You still have the choice not to, there isn't a threat of violence if you do not do your job, and you get monetary compensation from it. Also, porn workers say in their resume which acts that they are wil…
/r/MensRights04/04/13 01:59 PM
10

Let's discuss also how a legal porn/prostitution industry is actually better for the women involved. 1) The workers are able to work in a safe environment with access to legal services, preventing victimization and giving them redress in the case they are victimized. 2) Men and women who would do not otherwise have access to sex can find an outlet for their sexual frustrations. This can include the disabled, among others. 3) Fewer rapes occur when people have easy access to sex. 4) Workers are r…
/r/MensRights03/04/13 10:43 PM
11

Girls under 16 are not considered emotionally mature enough to cope with being sexually active. That statement stuck out at me, because I remember girls (along with adults) constantly talking about how they were more mature than boys when I was clear back in grade school. Maybe I am remembering wrong, because it was so long ago? /sarcasm
/r/MensRights02/04/13 03:56 PM
1

Furthermore, I don't know why someone who identifies as a "libertarian feminism" (the "sane type of feminism") doesn't drop the obviously damaged label of "feminism" altogether and embrace an entirely new descriptor. I would imagine that it is out of a desire to "reclaim the term," as it were.
/r/MensRights02/04/13 09:40 AM
1

Thank you for that. I had always thought that biblical circumcision was a full removal of the foreskin. I guess that part of the reason I am here is to learn.
/r/MensRights01/04/13 03:56 AM
1

As a circumcised male, I don't have a problem that my foreskin has already been removed. I do have a big issue with the process of circumcision, that is not what I am saying. I am basically pointing out that because I only ever remember not having a foreskin, I have no frame of reference to say what the difference in feeling is. I think that is why the practice continues to propagate through the generations, because people don't remember what that lost part felt like. Sure, if it was done at an …
/r/MensRights01/04/13 02:35 AM
1

How have you heard patriarchy defined? Do you believe patriarchy exists? Why or why not? Patriarchy is defined basically as "men hold the power, and women are excluded from it." The definition is misleading though. Just because men have historically held the positions of power, does not mean that women had no power at all. Just because women were excluded from the positions of power, does not mean that women were excluded from having a say. The old saying goes that "behind every successful man, …
/r/MensRights30/03/13 03:44 PM
18

One thing I can think of is where a woman somehow cannot give consent when she is under the influence of alcohol. On the surface, it is used as an argument to help women so that they are not victimized, which is a lofty goal. But it is faulty if you delve into it, and it not only discriminates against men, but also the women that it is meant to protect. It also goes against other principals of the feminist movement. Saying that a woman cannot give consent while under the influence says that wome…
/r/MensRights30/03/13 11:47 AM
-2

I often wonder if the whole reason that women came into what we now think of as "traditional female roles" because of what women in the past found more appealing. It is possible that women did not want to do as much of the harder labor, and therefor convinced men that they should go ahead and do it instead. They may have chosen as their share of the work to do such things as housework and taking care of the children, because it was less labor intensive. In this scenario, I think it then backfire…
/r/MensRights29/03/13 09:40 AM
1

Sorry, I got distracted by other comments, and had both your comment and the original post in my head when I replied. I had already clicked the box to reply to you, and did not reread your statement. Hence, when I came back, what I had in my mind no longer matched your statement. I had forgotten what you actually wrote. I still hope you think it is sound advice.
/r/MensRights29/03/13 12:50 AM
2

I, for one, would be interested in some of those old studies. Maybe you could dig them up and repost them. As you said, if a large number of the subscribers are new, maybe they have not seen that information. Perhaps if some of the older subscribers could deal with having some of the older information reposted for the newer ones, you might be surprised by the new posts that are dug up. Lead by example to show how you want the sub to be. It might take a bit of work on your part, but the reward fo…
/r/MensRights28/03/13 11:50 PM
2

The statements "take control" and "live your life exactly how I want you to" are in direct contradiction to each other. Ask her "which one do you want? I can either take charge, or I can be your slave, I can't do both. In fact, if all you want is for me to be your slave, than we're both going to have a problem with how I do things." She probably actually wants you to take charge, and makes the other statements to test if you will do it. But the possibility exists that she is just being abusive, …
/r/MensRights28/03/13 10:45 PM
1

I reordered the wording to mean more along the lines of what I was trying to actually say.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 11:29 PM
11

Actually, the word "man" used to mean something like "a person of unspecified gender." So even the common meaning of that word differs from its origin. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word)
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:40 PM
1

Rape is about power. But it is not about the rapist trying to get power for themselves, it is about causing someone else to lose power. False rape accusations are also about power. But they are not about the false accuser trying to gain power for themselves, it about causing the falsely accused to lose power. That how I see it. I would also argue that the false accusations lead to people doubting the actual rape victims, which makes the actual victims more afraid to come forward. Edit: OK, so I …
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:21 PM
20

KiteTales video basically points out the glaring irony that Anita had to reduce the female characters Princess Zelda and Princess Peach to simplistic character types, in order to prove her point that the "Damsel in Distress" trope reduces these same female characters to simplistic character types. She made many other good points.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 10:06 PM
1

I meant it as in you were seemed to give them too many controversial topics to think about. I cannot divine the context of your conversation from a self reported post, but it seems from my heavily blinded perspective that is what happened. You basically told them that the rights of men may be in jeopardy, contrary to their previously held beliefs. Which was fine by itself. I am not arguing that you should not have given other examples of where the pendulum swings from one ideology to another, I …
/r/MensRights26/03/13 06:23 PM
5

I don't know if it is right or not, but I often feel that the louder complaints about the "glass ceiling" are from woman who are a) insecure about their ability to rise to the top b) they fully realize that they will never reach the top of their company c) they have no desire to actually put in the work to reach the top and they realize is so much quicker to gain status by telling everyone how unfair everything is for them. As long as they are loud enough, other people will come to their rescue …
/r/MensRights26/03/13 02:04 PM
1

It is now up to them, but if they don't wish to associate with you based on your statements, then you are probably better off without them. About all you can do is to prepare to feel the loss at the relationship, but still keep hope that it continues. Maybe you gave them some things to think about that shocked their long held beliefs. If they were mostly silent but telling you simple statements like "you're wrong" and "that's stupid," that could be a sign that you gave them something to think ab…
/r/MensRights26/03/13 01:32 PM
1

Just because you do not support a feminists overall ideas, you can still support the particular ideals that make sense. I think it is a far more dangerous sentiment to disregard every statement that someone makes simply because you dislike the person behind it. That does not change anyone's mind, because you are immediately seen in their eyes as unreasonable to the same extent that you see them as being unreasonable.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 05:21 AM
3

She is womquestioning (maybe questymeng?) him a lot, which means she is asking a large number of questions without letting him answer. /sarcasm I only wanted to put this down because I think the concept of mansplaining is hilarious.
/r/MensRights26/03/13 04:30 AM
1

Why, thank you! Edit: I only make cents when I want two. :)
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:37 PM
1

Perhaps that is true. I did not mean it in that context, perhaps I could have worded it better. I really wish that you had said something to the effect of "therefore your entire post is wrong" so that I could call you out for "argumentum ad logicam."
/r/MensRights22/03/13 05:07 PM
2

Thank you. I hope that you see the good intention in this post as well. You treat people with respect and hope that they do the same; if they don't, move on. I will totally agree with this statement, as this is how I live my life. But I disagree that it is not a transaction. All relationships are transactions. You put something in, and if you get something back then you continue. It is the unhealthy relationships where one side gets far more out of it than the other. It may simply be a result of…
/r/MensRights22/03/13 04:24 PM
5

She will probably be fine, she can now transition into full victim status and make more money from home making "feminist" blogs about it.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:44 AM
1

Except that it could be shown that she has a history that would indicate that she would not stay quiet about that sort of thing, even if it was all made up. I hope she gets a judge that thinks like Judge Judy.
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:41 AM
3

Coffee is rape, want some?
/r/MensRights22/03/13 03:37 AM
3

https://www.facebook.com/SendGrid Though there is still a bit of doubt because there is also suspicion that they may have been hacked. I don't know if this is true either, it was just something I came across by quickly Googling.
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:35 PM
9

A part of me thinks that neither the developers nor Adria should have been fired, but another part of me thinks that the punishment fits the crime. What really irritates me about the situation is that people keep equating sexual jokes with sexist behavior. They are not the same thing. I also wish that people would get it out of their head that they have a right to ruin other people's lives when they are simply offended. You have a right to be offended, you do not have a right to use the idea tha…
/r/MensRights21/03/13 06:31 PM
0

What amazes me is that she never once stopped to think that the reason that his father was a "massive shitlord" to her, was because he saw how bad her control issues were. Sometimes people outside of a relationship can see things that the people inside one do not see. Yes, family members are not always right when they don't agree with a relationship, but judging by her attitude in the way she wrote it, I would say that I would have to agree with his father in this case.
/r/MensRights18/03/13 07:41 PM
40

Anita tells me a few things by disabling her comments: 1) She is not being scientific, because she is so attached to her ideas that she equates an attack on her ideas as an attack on her. She is unwilling to acknowledge that she is not her opinions, just like her opinions are not her, a problem which is rampant on the internet. 2) She wants to speak out against the "Damsel in Distress Trope" even while acting like a damsel in distress. She wants other people to come in and rescue her from the na…
/r/MensRights15/03/13 08:21 AM
1

I just watched a TotalBiscuit video that talks about sexism in video games, and he has an interesting perspective on it. He basically talks about how having sexism in video games may not necessarily be bad. When you do not allow issues to be discussed in media, you are shutting down any discussion of them, which ends up being far worse for everyone. He also used the term "brigade of video game taliban," which I found to be both funny and a fairly good description. For anyone who is interested, h…
/r/MensRights12/03/13 04:35 PM
1

This assumes that objectification is wrong, even though objectification is unavoidable. It makes about as much sense as calling sex wrong, even though nearly all life comes about from sex. I would even put forth that objectification is less avoidable than sex, because the individuals within a species do not all have to have sex in order for the species to continue. Objectification is a product of existing itself. No one can avoid objectifying another. You might change the way that you objectify,…
/r/MensRights10/03/13 04:07 AM
2

Honestly, her primary tactic is trolling, but in a way that makes her a profit. She is not trying to improve the discussion for anyone. I wonder if Anita ever intended making the videos, but after seeing the opportunity provided by the outrage, she would be stupid not to go ahead and make the videos for further profit. Her claims to abuse are nothing more than stirring up more controversy, which only leads to further gains for her. I highly doubt she gives a fuck about the comments, I even doubt…
/r/MensRights09/03/13 07:17 PM
1

Yes, but men are more violent than women. /s (I'll add my own if you don't mind)
/r/MensRights08/03/13 11:37 PM
1

It seems to me that the far better reaction would be if the actresses had stood up in triumph as they were mentioned in the song. That would show women's pride in their own sexuality. Why is it such a big deal to show boobs, or to see them? Showing shame is what gives power to the shame, the actual act of showing your boobs in a movie has no shame in itself.
/r/MensRights26/02/13 12:13 PM
1

I agree there is a difference. If I stick up for a girl, I try my best to do it in the same manner as I would another guy. I will sit back and let the other person handle the situation, unless it becomes clear that they need someone to stand along side them. That is the difference. While it may also be true that there are quite a few sexist remarks in particular online gaming communities, those remarks are an extension of behaviors that were already there, or are a reaction to how many female ga…
/r/MensRights22/02/13 09:52 AM
8

Portmanteau of man and explaining. Also has connotations of complaining. If you are a man and you are explaining something, it may be perceived as a threat to the feminist who is busy trying to win an argument. If she cannot win by finding a logical counterargument, she may take the threat against her previous arguments as a threat upon her. Using the word mansplaining allows the feminist to move past the man's logical argument by changing the rules of the game itself. The man who was playing a …
/r/MensRights22/02/13 08:47 AM
5

To these particular type of feminists, having a penis means an opportunity to use it against the penis bearer in an accusation of rape, if at any time it becomes in the best interest of the feminist to do so. <sarcasm> Wait, that does not sound like a power structure is in place for women to use sex against men at all! </sarcasm>
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:36 PM
28

That was the same thing that I wanted to say. I suspect the writer of this piece is so used to using sex on men, that when her tactics are rejected she perceives it as if the man who rejects them is using sex to keep her down. Parable time: Person A has a big stick. Person A beats persons B and C with that stick every day. When person B takes the stick from person A, person A says that person B is using the stick to oppress them, trying to get person C to take the stick from person B and return …
/r/MensRights21/02/13 11:24 PM
4

I believe the term is derived from classic ideology of a paladin. In the mind of the white knight, he is a "shining example of all that is good in this world." He sees himself as the defender of the weak, and steps in to correct what he perceives to be an injustice, without regard to the accuracy of his perception or the effectiveness of the solution that he provides. As others have mentioned, a woman usually doesn't like the white knight for defending her, because his actions demonstrate an ass…
/r/MensRights21/02/13 06:59 AM
7

It is a good indicator that we are a threat to the feminist's power structure.
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:19 AM
4

Castration is violent, does that even need to be pointed out?
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:17 AM
5

I always find it funny how these "feminists" act as if they have absolutely no power whatsoever, and yet their actions prove otherwise. The only way that boycotts and other tactics work are dependent on the power of the group using them. Boycotts, etc., are used to demonstrate that you have reached a certain level of power and wish to gain privileges out of it. In fact, the very notion that they can declare their lack of power, and be suddenly catered to by large numbers of other people, is the …
/r/MensRights13/02/13 06:14 AM
1

It may or may not be in the wrong thread, but that does not really matter now. I may as well leave it here. Besides, my username excuses it if it is irrelevant? :P I like the way you said it far better than the way I said it. It will probably result in downvotes for my post above, but I will upvote yours anyway. Fickle Redditors don't always realize that you can debate points of an argument and still be on the same side of the overall argument.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 08:45 PM
1

I'm a bisexual male, I have had sex with other guys, but I cannot get into watching gay male porn. In fact, I enjoy watching lesbians more than anything else. It just goes to show that what turns you on visually does not always match with what gets you off in real sexual situations.
/r/MensRights12/02/13 01:06 PM
3

I honestly think we need to have a discussion about objectification, and if it is really wrong or actually avoidable in the first place. Whenever we see another person for the first time, there is no way that we can see them for more than what we see from them. We cannot know anything about their personality except what we perceive, which is constrained by the amount of time that we have spent with them. If I think a girl or guy is cute, and start a conversation with them based on that, how is t…
/r/MensRights12/02/13 12:22 PM
2

This is the problem with statements like this, such as when someone puts forth men or women's physical appearance in games. It is so easy for a person to change the framing to suit their target argument. I could just as easily say that the display of women in video games are also power fantasies. In fact, a character could be both a power fantasy and a body image problem for someone. Chances are that those body image issues did not occur because of the game, rather they were already there. Hones…
/r/MensRights12/02/13 11:30 AM
3

This is what I would suggest: "First I want to congratulate you for funding your 'Tropes vs. Women' kickstarter." After she soaks it up, "After you are done studying how women are portrayed in video games, with bodies that cannot possibly exist in real life, do you plan on continuing this research for men as well?" Make sure that you stay friendly and innocently serious. Don't blink or let her see fear. EDIT: If she asks how men are portrayed in such a way, you could list such things as how male…
/r/MensRights12/02/13 09:04 AM
1

Funny thing is, that they can't even always agree as to what kind of "shit reddiit says" is bad. I have seen contradictory posts there before, and I don't even look at it very often. (Honestly the only time I look at it is if I can't find some entertaining content elsewhere. I wonder if they realize that they are only helping me by ranting about supposedly horrible comments.)
/r/MensRights06/02/13 10:36 PM
1

Or they will reply with something like "you must be a socialist because you are adhering to the accepted definition made up by the patriarchy." It is at this point you realize that you are not going to win a game of logic with a person who changes the rules of the game to suit their needs without any concern for such "nonsense."
/r/MensRights06/02/13 10:09 PM
5

I got ya. My comment was meant to go alongside to yours rather than a true reply.
/r/MensRights06/02/13 04:58 PM
68

Every time I see a feminist who calls people who disagree with them fascists, and then immediately tries to give those people orders, I wonder how the irony is lost on the feminist. Fascism is marked with an intolerant and authoritative governing system, using violence, the threat of violence, or threat of social status loss to force its people to act in whatever way that the system deems acceptable. She does everything except actual violence, which is probably attributed to not actually knowing…
/r/MensRights06/02/13 03:58 PM
0

By the very fact that so many of us do not believe this happened, should be a wake-up call to all of us. Maybe we do need to stand up against this kind of shitty behavior.
/r/MensRights05/02/13 10:29 PM
4

It strikes me as odd that most definitions I can find of sexism include the caveat that it is somehow "especially against women," which is in fact sexist (well, not under the current definition if it includes that caveat, but that is a technicality that needs to be changed).
/r/MensRights01/02/13 07:17 PM
2

That is an excellent example that pisses me off too. I hate it when women act like they are the victim in order to basically tell the man, "now it's your turn to be the victim." Plot twist, she was never the victim in the first place. I can imagine what ran through her head, "Oh well, we can just chalk it up to a competition that you lost." I am not saying that he is innocent in all of it, but I would bet that she sent him to jail in order to prove her dominance. She wanted him to know that she …
/r/MensRights01/02/13 06:13 PM
2

I don't know why you got downvoted for an honest opinion, other than the majority felt different. While I am still going to be bothered by them as well, I guess I can't really tell the people who post this stuff to "get a stiff upper lip" as it were, if I can't personally handle my irritation when I see them.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 05:07 PM
1

I'll agree with that.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:42 PM
2

I admit that I am biased toward people toughening up, male or female. But it is true that people are told to not play the victim at times when they actually are a victim, which is also wrong. I actually like your point about it being OK that they are anecdotes, because they show an underlying issue. I might still feel annoyed when I read them, but you have certainly added a perspective that I had not considered.
/r/MensRights01/02/13 04:36 PM
2

Ahh, I did not even think about it being on the iPhone. I mean, Apple is a corporation (on second thought I must add that I did not mean this as sarcasm, only as a qualifier). Corporations are amoral entities that only take morality into account when it matters to their bottom line. I can see what you mean, where the perception affected their decision to accept it. The risk of backlash was obviously considered minimal.
/r/MensRights31/01/13 05:38 PM
3

I agree with you that there is a double standard, and that if there was a "wife beating" app, that the outrage would be strong enough for it to be immediately removed. I don't even think it would go up in the first place, honestly. I understand how people might see the act of shutting it down as a way to demonstrate that the actions in the app are unacceptable. That said, I am simply stating that I cannot find it in me to have a problem with the app's existence. I see it as an opportunity to tal…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 05:12 PM
5

I am going to play devil's advocate here, mostly because I don't actually have that much of a problem with it. Please bear with me while I tell you why. First off, I don't believe that video game violence in games causes violence in real life. I personally believe that it actually reduces violence because people get it out of their system with a game. Secondly, I think that fighting against it only helps to advertise the game. So if you are someone who does not agree with my first point, than yo…
/r/MensRights31/01/13 03:43 PM
1

While overall I agree with what she is saying, I do disagree with her on one count. I do not think that objectification is wrong, in fact i think that more harm comes out of trying to stop objectification. When a woman gets mad at a man for staring at her tits, she thinks it is because he is objectifying her. It may be true that he is objectifying her, but she is also objectifying him a as a creep. The direction of his eyes do not give a true indication of what kind of person he is. I would argu…
/r/MensRights16/01/13 01:25 AM
0

Sometimes it is hard to tell if a woman is truly disinterested or if she is acting that way because she wants to see if you will chase. Often a disinterested woman does not make it clear. In the eyes of most men, when she says that she has a boyfriend, it is clear that she is not available so we move on.
/r/MensRights16/01/13 12:28 AM
3

Someone really needs to do a comparison video between feminist activists and how many white people treated black people during the civil rights movement. These people have become what the original feminist movement was fighting against. EDIT: I don't believe that we men are oppressed anywhere near the level that black people endured, I hope no one takes it that way because that is not my intention.
/r/MensRights15/01/13 06:14 AM
9

May be advertising for the blog.
/r/MensRights14/01/13 01:58 PM
1

I am not firm on the evolutionary angle either, but I included it as a possibility. Also, I meant that women think that they cannot live up to the standards of porn, I edited it since it caused a confusion.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 04:29 PM
2

I want to say that removing the strength of your oppressors does not necessarily correlate to an increase in your own strength. I think that the feminist movement originated as a way to strengthen women, but it has evolved to "preventing abuse by becoming the abuser." If you can stand up to their chastising of your beliefs, and you stick by what you believe, that is a true sign of strength. Let them live in their own misery of angry mob mentality. Thank them for proving your point.
/r/MensRights13/01/13 02:28 PM
0

I don't care if you are a guy or girl, I will hold the door open for you if you are within a certain range. So just because you are a woman and I hold the door open, does not mean that I automatically want to have sex with you, so don't stare at me with your angry eyes like it is the case. Just say thanks and move on, I would do the same if you hold the door for me. I have also stopped for people who are trying to cross the road, and I have received thank you waves from guys or uglier women far …
/r/MensRights13/01/13 02:07 PM
7

It all has to do with power and how we misunderstand who holds dominance in our society. While men may be physically dominant, I have come to the firm belief that it is women who are socially dominant. Look at any interaction between a male and his female partner, and look at their body language objectively; mentally compare them to any animal social structure. The male puts up a good show, but when push comes to shove he will concede to the female. If you still don't believe me, then I would pr…
/r/MensRights13/01/13 01:57 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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